How would you feel about Mantle Duplicates?

[Bat-Meal]

I keep seeing suggestions and speculations about multiple characters being called Batgirl, Robin, or Batwoman come up. This is especially true in reference to there being multiple Spider-Men - so it was time to make a thread.

Personally, I'm not into it, it just makes me think of the Power Rangers for some reason. I also think it dilutes the purpose of each character using the same mantle, but I'm open to being convinced I suppose. Does seem destined to cause confusion IMO.

How do you feel about it? Would you be happy to see multiple characters called Robin or Batgirl or Batwoman all existing simultaneously?

[Tzigone]

Against, but then I'm not even fond of legacies, in principle. I think it makes far more sense for each hero to (in-universe) make their own names just as great. I think Superman is a specific person, not a title (the same is true for various other characters). It's a negative comment to the characters to the characters that their superhero own identities aren't worth creating/keeping.

I do think it indicates a lack of faith in getting the new character popular without the name boost (probably not unjustified, given how hard they are to launch in existing continuity, but not really an obstacle if they'd go with single-universe and new characters in OGNs). With existing heroes, it's kind of an insult to their existing identities - the roles/identities they made aren't important enough to keep. Or at least are of less value than someone else's. It's kind of "stolen valor" ish. Well, not stolen. But using someone else's work in establishing the identity to give themselves credit. I guess some will call it standing on the shoulders of giants, but I don't perceive it that way.

I think it is bound to create fandom infighting, making discussion less pleasant for me (already, you see it with Green Lanterns, Robins, etc.). Only one is going to star in a solo book by that name at a time. And likely only one used at a time in other media. Another thing for fans to fight over. And for the well-known ones (Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne, etc. the newbies are likely to never be perceived as the "real" Superman/Batman - and they aren't as likely to get used in big budget works because the originals are somewhat known to a general audience). Also makes it more frustrating to search tags on fan fiction, Tumblr, etc.

I know, I know, DC cares about IP. I care about the characters. So if I'm reading Batman, I'm reading Bruce Wayne. I'm not going to magically care about some other character more because they get the mantle "Batman" - it's more likely to irritate me. And if I already like the other character, them being called "Batman" is also going to irritate me, because I liked them as who they were before.

And lastly, it's just a complete lack of originality for the copycat characters to have them copy others that way, instead of having them forging their own paths. Lack of originality from the publisher, too.

[Bat-Meal]

Well, the 2 main alternatives that come to mind, when a company is determined to give a mantle to a replacement are:

1. Kill the predecessor
2. Move the predecessor onto a new mantle

I hate the former, and I'm okay with the latter depending on how it is done. Nightwing and Red Hood worked-out pretty well. But I absolutely do not want either of those characters separated from their (new) mantles (no one but Dick can be Nightwing for example). But Red Robin and then Drake weren't so great for Tim, and going back to Robin seems like a reversion. With Oracle, I think it was a pretty cool role, but the way Babs became Oracle was awful. I'm also not a fan of how Cass was moved on from Batgirl - making a loved character a villain is rude and attacks their fanbase.

[Fergus]

I don't mind multiple characters sharing a mantle but like was said before it creates in-fighting but so does moving a character on. Tim was moved on but that didn't stop his fans attacking Damian fans and calling for Damian to be killed off [which they still do to this day]

So there is no easy way. It's best if the previous mantle holder is moved on. However we know that sometimes that isn't always successful.

The better question should be what to do with those characters who are unable to move on even after DC has given them multiple chances.
Those characters that DC has invested in multiple times, given numerous chances but they fail.

[Restingvoice]

I don't care about dilution, I'm against it for marketing purpose. We know these characters are gonna be around forever, so every single one of them if they want to survive time, should have their own brand and niche so they don't topple over each other and create fan war because someone is playing favorites.

I guess it is against dilution, but my concern is out of the story, not in the story. In the story, I don't care if there are 50 Batman and 100 Robin at the same time as long as you can handle them.

[Aahz]

I think it is usually better to create a new character to take over a mantle, some time after the previous character died, moved on or fell otherwise into obscurity.

Killing of or taking away the mantle of a popular character, just to give it to a new one, will usually cause backlash.

To the original question, the only case where I wouldn't see much of a problem is having Steph and Cass share the identity of Batgirl and forming a team.

But Red Robin and then Drake weren't so great for Tim, and going back to Robin seems like a reversion.

Red Robin was kind of still Robin, especially in the new 52 that erased most of Tims character development and history, and Drake was just dumb and didn't look cool.

[PurpleGlovez]

In the grand scheme of the Batman mythos, it's pretty bizarre to think that Tim Drake and Damian Wayne were both Robin at the same time and all the Batman comics basically ignored it. I feel like the mantle of Robin has been diluted for some reason and that sucks.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

I'm not a fan. I rather everyone get their own id/gimmick etc

[Bat-Meal]

In the grand scheme of the Batman mythos, it's pretty bizarre to think that Tim Drake and Damian Wayne were both Robin at the same time and all the Batman comics basically ignored it. I feel like the mantle of Robin has been diluted for some reason and that sucks.

Well I haven't read it yet, but the 'We Are Robin' series had a hole bunch of unofficial Robins running around at once, didn't it? Which I think, in combination with the number of past official Robins, has turned the mantle from what was originally a character, and then a term for a Batman apprentice - potentially into a term for a Gotham vigilante in training. Or that's how it seems to me.

I only know of official Batgirls so far, and cannon-wise Babs is the only one since Cass and Steph's time was retconned for now. It's also gender specific, but if there were multiples I'd say it would still mean: Batman's (female) Apprentice.

As for multiple Batwomen, it starts to get tricky because it isn't an apprentice role and assumes a certain level of competence and independence. At a guess the title would mean: a bunch of adult women operating as vigilantes in Gotham, possibly all wearing wigs.

This is my interpretation of what the mantles could then mean:

Robin = a Gotham vigilante in training
Batgirl = Batman's (female) Apprentice/s
Batwoman = a woman operating as a vigilante in Gotham

Which is indeed a dilution, and no longer a specific character per say.

[Restingvoice]

Well I haven't read it yet, but the 'We Are Robin' series had a hole bunch of unofficial Robins running around at once, didn't it? Which I think, in combination with the number of past official Robins, has turned the mantle from what was originally a character, and then a term for a Batman apprentice - potentially into a term for a Gotham vigilante in training. Or that's how it seems to me.

I only know of official Batgirls so far, and cannon-wise Babs is the only one since Cass and Steph's time was retconned for now. It's also gender specific, but if there were multiples I'd say it would still mean: Batman's (female) Apprentice.

As for multiple Batwomen, it starts to get tricky because it isn't an apprentice role and assumes a certain level of competence and independence. At a guess the title would mean: a bunch of adult women operating as vigilantes in Gotham, possibly all wearing wigs.

This is my interpretation of what the mantles could then mean:

Robin = a Gotham vigilante in training
Batgirl = Batman's (female) Apprentice/s
Batwoman = an adult woman operating as a vigilante in Gotham

Which is indeed a dilution, and no longer a specific character per say.

I'll add that now Kate is a family and partner, Batwoman is an adult woman operating as a vigilante in Gotham and a member of Batman's army.

No, none of those identities are specific characters in a sense that they're a character. They're all offshoots, spin-off brands of the Batman brand. Subsidiaries.

Except maybe Batgirl since DCWB insists that Babs is the only one who matters, so... congrats? Even then she's still Batman's subsidiary.

Katana and Black Lightning are already counted, as far as DC's concern, as part of Batman's army just because they're in The Outsiders

[lemonpeace]

I'm not unilaterally against it but I do see it being harder to sell. With Spider-Man it more or less work because both are distinct enough, approach the identity narratively from very different angles due to age and each have a strong enough respective following to support them; the characters bounce off each other well and don't feel like they are competing. However with the likes of Tim Drake and Damian, or even Barry and Wally, it feels more like writer in-fighting with each character stepping over each others toes whenever they appear. I think it CAN work, Steph and Cass as the Batgirl team seems like a great move imo, but I think it shouldn't be anywhere near the norm. i think it most cases it's better to just nut up and replace the person with the mantle (ideally after a compelling conclusion to the character's tenure) and keep it pushing.

relates but unrelated: Damian should be the last new Robin, Tim Drake's more toxic fans' inability to let him move on have ruined that mantle. the title should die if DC can ever pry it away from Tim Drake's grip again.

[Bat-Meal]

No, none of those identities are specific characters in a sense that they're a character. They're all offshoots, spin-off brands of the Batman brand. Subsidiaries.

What would you say of Batwing, technically there were 2, but it feels like the first one has been erased from existence. Unless he is still in cannon to have been the first one? Most people just associate the mantle with Luke and forget that David existed.

[Restingvoice]

What would you say of Batwing, technically there were 2, but it feels like the first one has been erased from existence. Unless he is still in cannon to have been the first one? Most people just associate the mantle with Luke and forget that David existed.

Batwings even more so. The first one is a representative for Batman Inc in Congo, the second one was a field tester for future battle suits (I don't know what he's doing these days but that's how he started).

David quits when he realized that Congo is not Gotham and you can't fix the problem and corruption there by donning a costume. Batman Inc is still canon so he's still canon, but DC as usual just use the more well-known one. Maybe eventually it will become just Luke Fox's brand once it's been long enough and they rewrite the backstory to be less... employee.

Oh, I like to clarify that me calling it a subsidiary is because that's how DC views it, they're still their character in the story. It just that doesn't matter to DC from what I've seen.

[godisawesome]

Eh, to me, it’s really 100% a question of how good your stable of writers is, and how copacetic they are with each other’s plans.

We had two Batmen for a while with Dick and Bruce, but Morrison and Snyder didn’t step on each other’s toes, and the overall experience was richer and better overall than arguably any point after wards fro both characters, and that period also saw Tim in his first version of Red Robin running around with Damian as well, and even that seemed to work well without any issue, and Black Bat Cass and Batgirl Steph were working towards something where both could be used at the same time.

I mena, that was my favorite time to be reading comics, and I wasn’t even reading Black Mirror or Inc.

The thing is, that requires a very cooperative and positive atmosphere among all creators and a lot of respect as well. And DC hasn’t been that cooperative for a long time now.

I mean, we’ve all heard about how the Rick Grayson idea blindsided that book’s creators, and of how even Babs Batgirl’s writer was closed out fo the loop on Batfamily book discussions, and we’ve all seen various Batfamily members get fed to limbo so that DC can pursue some nominally “perfect” status quo.

You’d either need a stern and controlling editor who respected all the characters and would force all writers to do the same, or an editor perfectly willing to let everyone be ambitious and just manage the chaos to make sure no one’s getting fed to anyone else.

[Blue22]

It depends on the title. I'm okay with Batgirl being shared between Steph and Cass. In fact, I really like that idea. But Robin always felt like "one at a time" role. And definitely not something any of the past Robins should return to (looking at you, Tim)