Kate Kane: Batwoman Appreciation 2018

[Caivu]

By Michael W. Kus:

IMG_20180825_013046.jpg

[Caivu]

By Otto Schmidt:

IMG_20180825_165350.jpg

[Twice-named]

So, I’ve been thinking about Kate and Renee and I don’t think these two should be in a relationship. Here’s why. In 52, Kate punches Renee in the face after Renee says Kate’s dress is not concealing anything she hasn’t already seen. That’s domestic violence. Then there’s the time in Go when Renee grabs Kate aggressively by the arm and tries to slut-shame her. That’s emotional abuse. Thoughts, Caivu?

[Powertool]

Nothing "destined" about it. Complaining about her going back to the Kane building is... weird, frankly. That's where her apartment is. Of course she's going to go back there. That's like complaining Bruce still lives in Wayne Manor. Plus Beth's living there now, in her own specialized room, so that's a major change.

The only change that would ever deserve the adjective "major" happened in Batwoman #16, written and drawn by J.H. Williams III, where the entire building was turned to rubble and the sequoia to toothpicks by a colossal Hydra. And that change brought forward the issue where Kate and Maggie moved to their new apartment, which was one of the best stories of that cycle, with the reunion of the whole family.

But now -- surprise! -- the building and the sequoia are back to their place like nothing ever happened, meaning that at least two great issues of a run that I loved were retconned for absolutely no reason aside from "oh, yeah, that building is easily recognizable!". And that's the kind of attitude that's been killing serialized comics for two decades or more: periodically cycling back to what is arbitrarily considered "iconic" for a character with no regards for any actual growth of a character. The whole of Bennett's run has been an act of worship towards the superficial aspects of the character of Batwoman.

At least when Wayne Manor was wiped out in Cataclysm the writers had the decency to respect the readers' intelligence and show the trouble the Bat-family went to rebuild it while keeping the Bat-Cave a secret. But that's the problem, after all: respect is a rare commodity these days.

Similar with Renee. She and Kate are both at way different points in their life now than when they first dated.

No. Renée definitely isn't. In fact, since the whole thing of her leaving the GCPD, meeting Vic Sage and becoming the new Question was, with 99% probability, completely wiped out from the continuity, that means that her history can be summarized this way: "she broke up with Kate after an argument that turned gratuitously violent and then spent years off-screen doing nothing of importance until the conscience of the Universe decided that Kate Kane needed a girlfriend again".

On the other hand, Kate probably is a different person now, since the one I remember from a few years ago would have been smart enough to think twice before hooking up again with the woman who gave her help when she was at her lowest point due to alcohol abuse in the form of a hook to her face. Of course she'd try her best to keep everything civil, but nothing more.

Yes, she did move on from her past ghosts. She accepted and came to terms with what she did on the island, something she had been suppressing in her mind for years, and did so by going through some of the worst stuff she has ever been through. Those aren't "interesting turns"? What do you want, then?

You're misreading what's being said. It's not "stay anchored in the past", it's "stay anchored" full stop. Stay grounded, so that you can move forward.

I want a character that doesn't take eighteen issues to move on from the demons that were introduced out of the blue in the first one and were the only thing the narrative focused on month after month after month (Bennett may not be Claremont, but is it possible that so few modern writers have any consideration for those brilliant things that are subplots?). Because if this is the way DC wants to waste a whole volume of Batwoman after the mess that plagued the previous one, then it's quite clear that the writing will forever be on the wall for any future writer approaching the character. And that writing spells out "Batwoman has to suffer".

[Caivu]

The only change that would ever deserve the adjective "major" happened in Batwoman #16, written and drawn by J.H. Williams III, where the entire building was turned to rubble and the sequoia to toothpicks by a colossal Hydra. And that change brought forward the issue where Kate and Maggie moved to their new apartment, which was one of the best stories of that cycle, with the reunion of the whole family.

But now -- surprise! -- the building and the sequoia are back to their place like nothing ever happened, meaning that at least two great issues of a run that I loved were retconned for absolutely no reason aside from "oh, yeah, that building is easily recognizable!". And that's the kind of attitude that's been killing serialized comics for two decades or more: periodically cycling back to what is arbitrarily considered "iconic" for a character with no regards for any actual growth of a character. The whole of Bennett's run has been an act of worship towards the superficial aspects of the character of Batwoman.

At least when Wayne Manor was wiped out in Cataclysm the writers had the decency to respect the readers' intelligence and show the trouble the Bat-family went to rebuild it while keeping the Bat-Cave a secret. But that's the problem, after all: respect is a rare commodity these days.

If you're going to blame someone for bringing back that building (for whatever reason), at least blame the right person. That building's been back since the very start of Rebirth, in 'Tec, so it's Tynion's "fault".

And Bennett understands much more about Kate than just the superficial. That's why this run worked so well, because she understands the sorts of things that would throw Kate off. And if a character's growth is so important, and it is, then their accoutrements returning shouldn't necessarily matter so much if their character stays true, and that's the case with Kate.

No. Renée definitely isn't. In fact, since the whole thing of her leaving the GCPD, meeting Vic Sage and becoming the new Question was, with 99% probability, completely wiped out from the continuity, that means that her history can be summarized this way: "she broke up with Kate after an argument that turned gratuitously violent and then spent years off-screen doing nothing of importance until the conscience of the Universe decided that Kate Kane needed a girlfriend again".

Yes, she definitely is, even with the Question portion of her history gone. She's openly gay now, which is part of her and Kate's original argument (that you're wrongly describing as "gratuitously violent") that caused their breakup.

On the other hand, Kate probably is a different person now, since the one I remember from a few years ago would have been smart enough to think twice before hooking up again with the woman who gave her help when she was at her lowest point due to alcohol abuse in the form of a hook to her face. Of course she'd try her best to keep everything civil, but nothing more.

What are you talking about? If Renee has ever punched Kate, it was in 52 or Five Books of Blood, both of which are not really canon anymore, and neither situation involved alcohol.

I want a character that doesn't take eighteen issues to move on from the demons that were introduced out of the blue in the first one and were the only thing the narrative focused on month after month after month (Bennett may not be Claremont, but is it possible that so few modern writers have any consideration for those brilliant things that are subplots?).

Did you have a similar problem when the Williams/Blackman run took exactly the same number of issues to tell their first story? Or that Kate struggling with the "out-of-the-blue" reveal of Beth as Alice took even longer?

I disagree that this series doesn't have subplots, but I think they're more like A and B plots: one is the fight against the Many Arms, one is Kate's internal struggle.

Because if this is the way DC wants to waste a whole volume of Batwoman after the mess that plagued the previous one, then it's quite clear that the writing will forever be on the wall for any future writer approaching the character. And that writing spells out "Batwoman has to suffer".

Oh, heaven forbid characters not suffer.

[Caivu]

So, I’ve been thinking about Kate and Renee and I don’t think these two should be in a relationship. Here’s why. In 52, Kate punches Renee in the face after Renee says Kate’s dress is not concealing anything she hasn’t already seen. That’s domestic violence. Then there’s the time in Go when Renee grabs Kate aggressively by the arm and tries to slut-shame her. That’s emotional abuse. Thoughts, Caivu?

1. Most of Kate and Renee's parts of 52 have been retconned and can be pretty safely excised. The scene you're talking about has the exact opposite situation from Elegy onward: that Renee came out before Kate. Also, Kate was Batwoman at that time, so that's two contradictions to the present. Ignore them.

2. The larger context is that Renee is worried about Kate being in a dangerous dump of a bar. From her perspective, Kate has only gotten worse since their breakup, and she's scared for her.

Even assuming both those things are still canon and can be taken only at face value, there's none of that sort of stuff between them since the New 52 started.

I mean, going by the original logic, Bruce and Selina shouldn't be together, since she's robbed him and they've fought each other multiple times. Dick and Barbara shouldn't be a couple because they've beaten each other up. Etc.

[Twice-named]

1. Most of Kate and Renee's parts of 52 have been retconned and can be pretty safely excised. The scene you're talking about has the exact opposite situation from Elegy onward: that Renee came out before Kate. Also, Kate was Batwoman at that time, so that's two contradictions to the present. Ignore them.

Yes, some parts of 52 were retconned (e.g. the length of time since Kate and Renee last saw each other going from 10 years to 2 years) but I don’t recall anything pointing to the punch in the face being retconned out. With Rebirth, the question is whether Renee is not the Question because of Dr. Manhattan.

2. The larger context is that Renee is worried about Kate being in a dangerous dump of a bar. From her perspective, Kate has only gotten worse since their breakup, and she's scared for her.

Concern for someone doesn’t excuse emotional abuse.

Even assuming both those things are still canon and can be taken only at face value, there's none of that sort of stuff between them since the New 52 started.

It’s only a matter of time until the next instance of abuse.

I mean, going by the original logic, Bruce and Selina shouldn't be together, since she's robbed him and they've fought each other multiple times. Dick and Barbara shouldn't be a couple because they've beaten each other up. Etc.

No, they shouldn’t be together.

[Caivu]

Yes, some parts of 52 were retconned (e.g. the length of time since Kate and Renee last saw each other going from 10 years to 2 years) but I don’t recall anything pointing to the punch in the face being retconned out. With Rebirth, the question is whether Renee is not the Question because of Dr. Manhattan.

That scene has been retconned because it directly contradicts newer stuff. Not just in Batwoman, but Gotham Central, as well. It doesn't apply any more.

Concern for someone doesn’t excuse emotional abuse.

Explain how she was emotionally abusive? Grabbing someone by the arm and asking what the hell they're doing in a bad situation? Sounds like a reach to me.

It’s only a matter of time until the next instance of abuse.

No, it's not. They don't have any examples of being abusive to each other currently, unless you strain things past the point of being reasonable.

No, they shouldn’t be together.

Well, at least you're consistent.

[Twice-named]

That scene has been retconned because it directly contradicts newer stuff. Not just in Batwoman, but Gotham Central, as well. It doesn't apply any more.

I don’t know what newer stuff contradicts the punch in the face. Unless we’re saying that, since Renee is not the Question, her story in 52 never happened (though it’s more likely Dr. Manhattan messed with her mind). Gotham Central was pre-52.

Explain how she was emotionally abusive? Grabbing someone by the arm and asking what the hell they're doing in a bad situation? Sounds like a reach to me.

I’ve never slut-shamed my partner. Calling a current or former lover a slut is abusive. Renee’s actions in the bar were also controlling.

No, it's not. They don't have any examples of being abusive to each other currently, unless you strain things past the point of being reasonable.

People who abuse have a high chance of abusing again. Statistics bear it out.




Well, at least you're consistent.[/QUOTE]

BTW, I’m not looking to argue. Just wanted to get your thoughts on it. Thanks for replying.

[Caivu]

I don’t know what newer stuff contradicts the punch in the face. Unless we’re saying that, since Renee is not the Question, her story in 52 never happened (though it’s more likely Dr. Manhattan messed with her mind). Gotham Central was pre-52.

I'm talking about the fact that in the punch scene, Kate is still in the closet and Renee is out. In everything after 52, the exact opposite is true. That obviously contradicts, making that scene retconned away.

I’ve never slut-shamed my partner. Calling a current or former lover a slut is abusive. Renee’s actions in the bar were also controlling.

Renee is partially acting in her capacity as a cop, so, uh, yes she's being a bit controlling. If I was a cop and saw a friend or ex in a bad situation, especially while on the job, then absolutely I'd want to know what the hell they're doing there.

As for Renee's "slut-shaming", I think it has a different purpose. Renee broke up with Kate because she saw her as irresponsible and flightly and naive. And the bar scene does absolutely nothing to remove that idea. So she's trying to get through to Kate that she's in a dangerous situation. She's not actually calling her a slut.

BTW, I’m not looking to argue. Just wanted to get your thoughts on it. Thanks for replying.

Well... okay, but forgive me for being a tiny bit suspicious about that.

[Caivu]

By Nelson A. Vega:

Kate_Kane_by_nelsonavega.jpg

[Caivu]

By Jenn St-Onge:

IMG_20180825_010802.jpg

[Powertool]

If you're going to blame someone for bringing back that building (for whatever reason), at least blame the right person. That building's been back since the very start of Rebirth, in 'Tec, so it's Tynion's "fault".

And Bennett understands much more about Kate than just the superficial. That's why this run worked so well, because she understands the sorts of things that would throw Kate off. And if a character's growth is so important, and it is, then their accoutrements returning shouldn't necessarily matter so much if their character stays true, and that's the case with Kate.

Criticizing Tynion's work is so easy that it's more or less impossible to take any satisfaction from it. And I luckily removed almost everything I read on the pages of Detective Comics as soon as I stopped buying it, so I genuinely didn't remember that detail. But the matter stands that this doesn't invalidate my point since it's an issue that doesn't involve a single writer in the industry (I wish it was only one writer!) and given that it was Bennett who wrote this Batwoman volume, not Tynion, I'm still blaming her. And the editor, of course.

And define "worked so well", please, since I extensively explained why I think it was a continuous 'meh' from issue 1 to issue 18 and I've not been convinced by any of your counter-arguments. It's a shallow understanding because it's a shallow use of the character. Rather than building on what had come before her, Bennett once again resorted to the "a ghost from her past comes back to torment her" plot that was the very same plot of Batwoman's first six-issue arc on Detective Comics. Recycling, recycling, recycling...

Yes, she definitely is, even with the Question portion of her history gone. She's openly gay now, which is part of her and Kate's original argument (that you're wrongly describing as "gratuitously violent") that caused their breakup.

What are you talking about? If Renee has ever punched Kate, it was in 52 or Five Books of Blood, both of which are not really canon anymore, and neither situation involved alcohol.

Sorry, I misremembered a passage of Rucka's run on Detective Comics, but aside from the lack of the hook to Kate's face, Ms. Kane already had issues with alcohol consumption at the time the two got together. She even met Renée because she was stopped while driving over the speed limit with a little too much booze in her body. The whole sequence (life after the Army + meeting Renée + leaving Renée) was clearly framed as Kate seriously letting herself go after she was discharged and the cop's reaction to her sweetheart being slowly consumed by her apathy was a "screw this, I'm outta here".

And what was the straw that broke the camel's back (which was never shown as being overloaded until that time)? Kate replying to Monotoya's preachment about her lack of purpose by mentioning that at least she was honest with herself and the people surrounding her. And nothing else. Truly the epitome of a relationship with a rock-solid foundation. To me, that would be a perfect starting point to explore Renée's personality as being ill-fitted for long-lasting romantic relationships, as shown by how much she cared for (one would say "loved") Vic Sage in 52, a person she couldn't feel any kind of physical attraction for. To heck with it being declared out of continuity or whatever, since history has shown time and time again that what ultimately matters is if a story is good or not, not what an editor says afterwards. For others (including Bennett and you) it's just a way to take the shallowest approach possible to the situation and merrily announcing "she's out of the closet now! Let's throw a party for this rekindled paragon of true love!".

Did you have a similar problem when the Williams/Blackman run took exactly the same number of issues to tell their first story? Or that Kate struggling with the "out-of-the-blue" reveal of Beth as Alice took even longer?

I disagree that this series doesn't have subplots, but I think they're more like A and B plots: one is the fight against the Many Arms, one is Kate's internal struggle.

No, because in both cases the narrative flowed much, much better since the timing of each step in the way to the conclusion was managed in a much wiser way. In Bennett's run the flashbacks were a veritable drag, the variety of situations was restricted to the different geographic locations of the action without anything else feeling actually different and there was no sense of what the story ultimately wanted to accomplish, since what you call A plot and B plot kept obstructing each other in a confused jumble rather than running parallel or suggesting an eventual intersection.

Handling a double narrative (not main plot + subplots, that's a different system) is something that not everybody can accomplish and Bennett unfortunately fell short.

Oh, heaven forbid characters not suffer.

In this contrived and completely sterile way? Yes. Heaven forbid.

[Caivu]

But the matter stands that this doesn't invalidate my point since it's an issue that doesn't involve a single writer in the industry (I wish it was only one writer!) and given that it was Bennett who wrote this Batwoman volume, not Tynion, I'm still blaming her. And the editor, of course.

I don't understand why you're still nitpicking this point.

And define "worked so well", please, since I extensively explained why I think it was a continuous 'meh' from issue 1 to issue 18 and I've not been convinced by any of your counter-arguments. It's a shallow understanding because it's a shallow use of the character. Rather than building on what had come before her, Bennett once again resorted to the "a ghost from her past comes back to torment her" plot that was the very same plot of Batwoman's first six-issue arc on Detective Comics. Recycling, recycling, recycling...

It's neither a shallow use nor a shallow understanding. This series threw Kate through the worst set of experiences she's ever been through, and brought her to some of the lowest points she's ever been emotionally, and to do that, Bennett had to understand Kate's character at a deep level, which she did. She not only understood what it would plausibly take to throw Kate off to start with (that is, "bad thing I did coming back into my life by surprise"), she also understood what Kate would struggle with only after being compromised first (falling back into addicton, basically). She took Kate's existing fears and pushed them. It's great.

For others (including Bennett and you) it's just a way to take the shallowest approach possible to the situation and merrily announcing "she's out of the closet now! Let's throw a party for this rekindled paragon of true love!".

Oh, pssssh. Stop it. That's not what I meant. All I was getting at was that Renee has changed since she and Kate last dated. They've both considerably matured since, and both of the reasons for their breakup argument no longer apply. So it's reasonable to expect that things would work out this time. That doesn't mean there can't be struggles in that relationship or that it's some sort of paragon. Heck, they can use the idea you mentioned here, whatever. But now wasn't the place.

In Bennett's run the flashbacks were a veritable drag, the variety of situations was restricted to the different geographic locations of the action without anything else feeling actually different and there was no sense of what the story ultimately wanted to accomplish, since what you call A plot and B plot kept obstructing each other in a confused jumble rather than running parallel or suggesting an eventual intersection.

I seriously don't see what's confused or jumbled about it. I had no trouble following it apart from sections where it seemed like confusion was the intent, which is fine. Never had a sense it was directionless.

In this contrived and completely sterile way? Yes. Heaven forbid.

What is contrived or sterile here?

[Caivu]

By Ahnanano on DA:

Power_Girl-Batwoman_by_Ahnanano.jpg