Book Club: JLA: Tower of Babel (2/2)
And to the second part of this edition of the book club, with this time focusing on the end of the story, which was extremely significant. Not only for the rest of the Waid's run, but also for the future dynamics within the League itself. While Morrison is largely, and rightfully, credited as the creator of the League, but his League was more of the spectacle nature, of the greatest heroes coming together. Waid and Kelly, instead, brought more focus on the team dynamics and individual roles in the team. This storyline brought out the notion that there could be strong divisions within the team and that their personalities might not always be able to coexist without problems. Thus it is worthy of a whole separate discussion.
At the end Tower of Babel, Ra's Al Ghul has been defeated and the only thing left for the Justice League is what to do regarding Batman. It was his plans towards the Justice League that Ra's used, plans that the JLA didn't even know existed. There was a question of trust in the League now and thus they decided to vote whetever or not Batman could continue as a part of them. As the scene is pivotal to this scene and it is important to see it within context, so I posted it in on our sister site scans_daily. I hope it isn't against the rules and the link is below:
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/1018226.html#cutid1
As the scene is to see, I won't detail it here. I will however simply ask those willing to discuss what is your opinion of the situation? Was Batman justified in creating those plans to disable the League or did he betray the League? What of the other members of the League? What did you think of their votes on the situation and what it told about them?
To me, personally, I liked the scene because it didn't portray the situation as black-and-white. Both sides of the argument had valid points and the whole theme was played as morally ambigious concerning Batman. This was continued in later issues, especially in the argument between Clark and Bruce, but that is no longer a part of this storyarc, so I shall leave it for another discussion. My own thought on the arguments below, as I really love them.
First those for kicking out Batman from the League:
Aquaman: With him I would almost argue that it is a matter of pride. With Diana, to be covered soon, it is about her not being able to trust Batman, but to Arthur is more about there being any question about his loyalty and actions from the rest of the League.
Plastic Man: With Plastic Man it is less about trust, in my opinion, and more about the pain. Whetever or not Batman intended it, due to his plan Plas was shattered in to hundres of pieces, which kind of had to hurt a lot. So even though there is that supposed gratitude for Batman for pushing Plas's membership in the JLA, he is unable to look past the pain caused by the plan.
Wonder Woman: Diana's argument is the most rational of those wanting Batman gone. With her it is not about the plans, she says she understands humanity's need for those. It is about someone fighting side-by-side with her making those plans in secret, looking at his allies in search of weaknesses. How can you trust in someone like that, so your vulnerable side to them while wondering, no pun intended, if they are making a mental note of how to exploit that. Her position was also rather interesting considering JLA: League of One, where Diana actively exploited the weaknesses of the other League members to protect them in her mind, and Batman was the one League member to actively judge her because of that.
Superman: His reasoning for firing Batman was the most interesting, but it is covered in the future issues, so it can't truly be touched here.
Then those who voted for Batman:
Flash/Wally: With him it's actually about respect. Wally's willing to consider the fact that what if Batman was right because he has been right before. What if there was a chance one of them might turn evil or be mindcontrolled? Where as others are seeing the situation as haven't they earned the right to be trusted by Batman, Wally's actually approaching it through the view point that hasn't Batman earned the right to be considered possibly right here.
Martian Manhunter: With J'Onn the reaction is contradictory. Between the lines it is clear that he would want to kick out Batman, but he can't because he has been guilty of the same thing. Acting in secret and collecting information, and that too was exploited by an enemy. So while he wants to act emotionally, he wants to have Batman removed from the League because of the betrayal, he feels that it would make him a hypocrite, as from his own point of view he has no right to judge what Batman did.
Green Lantern/Kyle Rayner: With Kyle it is actually about experience. He was just a regular joe who suddenly got thrusted with the most powerful weapon in the universe. Additionally, the reason he got that weapon was that his predecessor, who went insane, was a big respected hero. So to him it isn't about trusting Batman, but rather realizing that situations where such plans would be needful do happen. Or well did happen, before giant space bugs came along. Sorry about that.
As said, these are just my opinions of the matter and I would love to hear how others felt after reading the story.
At the end Tower of Babel, Ra's Al Ghul has been defeated and the only thing left for the Justice League is what to do regarding Batman. It was his plans towards the Justice League that Ra's used, plans that the JLA didn't even know existed. There was a question of trust in the League now and thus they decided to vote whetever or not Batman could continue as a part of them. As the scene is pivotal to this scene and it is important to see it within context, so I posted it in on our sister site scans_daily. I hope it isn't against the rules and the link is below:
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/scans_daily/1018226.html#cutid1
As the scene is to see, I won't detail it here. I will however simply ask those willing to discuss what is your opinion of the situation? Was Batman justified in creating those plans to disable the League or did he betray the League? What of the other members of the League? What did you think of their votes on the situation and what it told about them?
To me, personally, I liked the scene because it didn't portray the situation as black-and-white. Both sides of the argument had valid points and the whole theme was played as morally ambigious concerning Batman. This was continued in later issues, especially in the argument between Clark and Bruce, but that is no longer a part of this storyarc, so I shall leave it for another discussion. My own thought on the arguments below, as I really love them.
First those for kicking out Batman from the League:
Aquaman: With him I would almost argue that it is a matter of pride. With Diana, to be covered soon, it is about her not being able to trust Batman, but to Arthur is more about there being any question about his loyalty and actions from the rest of the League.
Plastic Man: With Plastic Man it is less about trust, in my opinion, and more about the pain. Whetever or not Batman intended it, due to his plan Plas was shattered in to hundres of pieces, which kind of had to hurt a lot. So even though there is that supposed gratitude for Batman for pushing Plas's membership in the JLA, he is unable to look past the pain caused by the plan.
Wonder Woman: Diana's argument is the most rational of those wanting Batman gone. With her it is not about the plans, she says she understands humanity's need for those. It is about someone fighting side-by-side with her making those plans in secret, looking at his allies in search of weaknesses. How can you trust in someone like that, so your vulnerable side to them while wondering, no pun intended, if they are making a mental note of how to exploit that. Her position was also rather interesting considering JLA: League of One, where Diana actively exploited the weaknesses of the other League members to protect them in her mind, and Batman was the one League member to actively judge her because of that.
Superman: His reasoning for firing Batman was the most interesting, but it is covered in the future issues, so it can't truly be touched here.
Then those who voted for Batman:
Flash/Wally: With him it's actually about respect. Wally's willing to consider the fact that what if Batman was right because he has been right before. What if there was a chance one of them might turn evil or be mindcontrolled? Where as others are seeing the situation as haven't they earned the right to be trusted by Batman, Wally's actually approaching it through the view point that hasn't Batman earned the right to be considered possibly right here.
Martian Manhunter: With J'Onn the reaction is contradictory. Between the lines it is clear that he would want to kick out Batman, but he can't because he has been guilty of the same thing. Acting in secret and collecting information, and that too was exploited by an enemy. So while he wants to act emotionally, he wants to have Batman removed from the League because of the betrayal, he feels that it would make him a hypocrite, as from his own point of view he has no right to judge what Batman did.
Green Lantern/Kyle Rayner: With Kyle it is actually about experience. He was just a regular joe who suddenly got thrusted with the most powerful weapon in the universe. Additionally, the reason he got that weapon was that his predecessor, who went insane, was a big respected hero. So to him it isn't about trusting Batman, but rather realizing that situations where such plans would be needful do happen. Or well did happen, before giant space bugs came along. Sorry about that.
As said, these are just my opinions of the matter and I would love to hear how others felt after reading the story.