Originally Posted by
Beware138
First, thank you for the welcome. And thank you also for this thread! King's Batman run has been a favorite since issue 10. It's been a nuanced, emotional, (sometimes frustrating) roller coaster ride that hasn't had me this excited for Batman comics since Snyder's Black Mirror run. Trying to argue with people about why it's such a good run (and why issue 50 was f'ing exciting) has been a major frustration for me. So I'm glad to be here.
Now, to explain my point. In 77, Bruce is still bed-ridden and still has his head up his ass regarding having to get back to Gotham and with where he stands with Selina. It's an arc started in 75, brought to conclusion with the takedown of Magpie. So 78 and 79 can't possibly take place before 77 because Damian infiltrates Gotham (after discussing with Tim their lack of options in 76) while Bruce is still bed-ridden.
King is uses "Now" and "Then" pretty well, so if Bruce/Selina moments were supposed to take place prior to the events occurring in Gotham, I feel like he'd say so. Also, I feel that if the Bruce/Selina stuff happened before 75 but after 74, which is totally feasible, they'd say so, despite that being a bit arbitrary.
As I see it, if that Alfred is a fake (and what a helluva twist that would be!), it makes this whole scenario a bit more digestible, but that's a pretty dick thing to do to Damian. If that is the real Alfred, which I fear is most probable, it's just inherently irresponsible for Bruce to do, because he should damn well know better. If they tug on the plot thread of this being Bruce's fault, then it will be about as frustrating as Bruce failing to stop Kite-Man's son from dying, teaming up with the Riddler subsequently and rather than helping Kite-Man out going forward, continues to beat him to a pulp. It's also about as frustrating as Heroes In Crisis from a plot perspective.
My point is, by making that editor's note and adding in those two lines of dialogue, they've so arbitrarily made a thing out of something that very much did NOT need to be a thing. Editorially, it was just a bad move. The issues read very well as is. Obviously, the next 6 issues will determine if this is a "thing" or not but the fact that we're even talking about it kind of insists that it will be.