Awesome Two-Face fancomic: "The Silver Dollar" by Deptford. But first, ranting!
Something awesome was brought to my attention this past weekend, and boy, I needed it.
These past few days have been kinda frustrating for me as a Batman fan on the internet.
Considering some of the infuriating crap going on in the real world right about now, not to mention feeling generally exhausted and stressed thanks to The Baby Who Would Not Sleep, I haven't been in the best headspace to deal with the usual rounds of People Who Are WRONG On The Internet, such as with this annoying list on Newsarama that "Best Batman Villains Ever" that includes Hush and Dr. Hurt. I can grudgingly understand the logic of including of the latter, but god, not the former. Why the hell isn't Hugo Strange on that list instead? Oh right, because the people who made that list probably haven't read a non-Loeb, non-Miller Batman comic that's older than Knightfall, gotcha. Christ. At least the list includes the Penguin, whom I've seen on two "worst Batman villains" ever lists so far, but still... feh!
And then there's the infuriating Cracked article on "The 7 Stupidest Attempts to Reinvent Batman", which not only misunderstands what "reinvent" means since they're all Elseworlds, but they also trash the brilliant Batman: Holy Terror because... um... well, the author doesn't actually say WHY it's "stupid." Instead, he just tells a synopsis in a snide tone and posts pictures, because it's like, well, um... look at it! He's a priest and, like, crying and stuff! Duh!
Pisses me off, man. Way to piss all over a fantastic story which few have read, and will now be even less inclined to check out. Bloody awesome, that's just swell. It probably goes without saying that I shouldn't have read the comments either, but there you go. Between that and the scans_daily debacle of two weeks ago, I've had a harder time enjoying fandom and comic sites lately. More often than not, the internet's been a depressing and discouraging place, to the point that it's been hard to even write new entries here, at the one Batman community where I truly AM happy!
So thank god for a guy named DeptFord, artist for the webcomic Surrealist Obituaries who sent me a PM a couple of days ago. Deptford is a Two-Face fan who read a bunch of my Two-Face Tuesday entries over at scans_daily (the series of posts that led me to creating About_Faces in the first place), which had subsequently inspired to dedicate a whole strip to Harvey.
I was intrigued but apprehensive, as I've seen a LOT of sub-so-so fan fic/art out there, and even some of the truly GOOD stuff can frustrate me because it doesn't fit my own criteria of what makes a good Two-Face story. Case in point: the best Two-Face fanfic I've ever read is firmly set in the Nolanverse, with "RAY-CHULL" motivation fully intact. So, feeling that I wasn't in the right mood to critically appreciate (read: JUDGE) an examination of a character for whom I have very strong and particular opinions, I put off reading Deptford's comic for a couple of days.
Now I feel a bit like a fool. Not only did I have nothing to worry about, but this comic is... well, I'll just let it speak for itself, and discuss it at the end. But read it. Read it read it read it.
Wow.
WOW.
Okay, at first, I admit that I was a bit put off by Harvey's tone, never considering that maybe there was a reason for him seeming so upbeat and forthcoming. I should have seen that coming from the quiet "heads..." right at the start! Even still, the way it was set up for that ending was just brilliant. In a subtle way that doesn't beat you over the head (at least, not metaphorically), it shows the best and worst of Harvey's nature, allowing a Two-Face who can at one moment be forthcoming, eloquent, contemplative, even charming, and then suddenly turn violent, furious, and dangerous the next.
More importantly, would-be comics philosophers such as Denny O'Neil, take note: THIS is how you explore Harvey Dent's personal philosophy. That's not to say that this is the last word on the subject matter, but it's by far the most compelling one I've seen so far, partially because it's so hard to pull off. When most writers try to give Harvey a philosophy, he comes out like a raving cartoon (as in the case of Batman Forever) or as a cruel sadist who is forcing others to see his way in the manner of the worst religious fanatics (such as in Joker's Asylum: Two-Face).
I guess the difference is that he's not using his philosophy to justify his actions to his victims. Rather, he seems to have come to this philosophy after a lot of careful consideration, weighing the options (even if he, of course, only sees two), and sincerely seeing no other way he can maintain some semblance of balance and humanity, much less even function.
I mean, of course he's torn between Batman (extreme order) and the Joker (extreme chaos). Of course. But I've just never seen it laid out so well as Deptford does here. I think it helps that it's Harvey himself who's making this observation, because it also speaks to what he thinks about Batman and the Joker themselves. We already know that he holds the Joker in utter contempt, but I like that Harvey Dent--of all people!--sees Batman as a victim of the crusade for justice, someone who lost his humanity in the process. That is so great. It's not just a twist on how Batman has always seen Harvey, but depending on your own opinions about Batman, Harvey could well be the more human character!
Then again, there's the question of how human a person can be if he gives up a core concept of humanity: choice. But that's the thing, he still chooses to give up that choice, because he's convinced that if he chooses for himself, either path will lead to his own internal destruction, but he nonetheless refuses to just give up and resign himself to fate. In effect, he's ironically found a third option through the coin. He's freed from the torment that could destroy him either in part or in whole, and in doing so, has found a way to take control while simultaneously giving it up. Love it!
Now, that said, I have to wonder how applicable this can be to any given take on Two-Face we've seen. Take Eye of the Beholder, for instance, which gives a very specific idea of what the coin means to Harvey. What would it say about Harvey if he held this philosophy using the instrument his father used for years of physical and psychological abuse? What about DeMatteis' Two-Face: Crime and Punishment, which greatly emphasized the adversarial conflict between Harvey's two halves? Is there a way to reconcile that tormented Harvey Dent with the one who seems to have found the best answer available to him?
I welcome your ideas, although I fear that there's no simple answer. Then again, there never is when it comes to trying to reconcile all or even some takes on Two-Face, no matter how great each may be. That said, speaking as someone who really resonates on a personal level with the "abusive alcoholic parent" origin, the idea of Harvey giving himself up to a non-religious "higher power" takes on a WHOLE new resonance for those us who know our Twelve Steps.
These past few days have been kinda frustrating for me as a Batman fan on the internet.
Considering some of the infuriating crap going on in the real world right about now, not to mention feeling generally exhausted and stressed thanks to The Baby Who Would Not Sleep, I haven't been in the best headspace to deal with the usual rounds of People Who Are WRONG On The Internet, such as with this annoying list on Newsarama that "Best Batman Villains Ever" that includes Hush and Dr. Hurt. I can grudgingly understand the logic of including of the latter, but god, not the former. Why the hell isn't Hugo Strange on that list instead? Oh right, because the people who made that list probably haven't read a non-Loeb, non-Miller Batman comic that's older than Knightfall, gotcha. Christ. At least the list includes the Penguin, whom I've seen on two "worst Batman villains" ever lists so far, but still... feh!
And then there's the infuriating Cracked article on "The 7 Stupidest Attempts to Reinvent Batman", which not only misunderstands what "reinvent" means since they're all Elseworlds, but they also trash the brilliant Batman: Holy Terror because... um... well, the author doesn't actually say WHY it's "stupid." Instead, he just tells a synopsis in a snide tone and posts pictures, because it's like, well, um... look at it! He's a priest and, like, crying and stuff! Duh!
Pisses me off, man. Way to piss all over a fantastic story which few have read, and will now be even less inclined to check out. Bloody awesome, that's just swell. It probably goes without saying that I shouldn't have read the comments either, but there you go. Between that and the scans_daily debacle of two weeks ago, I've had a harder time enjoying fandom and comic sites lately. More often than not, the internet's been a depressing and discouraging place, to the point that it's been hard to even write new entries here, at the one Batman community where I truly AM happy!
So thank god for a guy named DeptFord, artist for the webcomic Surrealist Obituaries who sent me a PM a couple of days ago. Deptford is a Two-Face fan who read a bunch of my Two-Face Tuesday entries over at scans_daily (the series of posts that led me to creating About_Faces in the first place), which had subsequently inspired to dedicate a whole strip to Harvey.
I was intrigued but apprehensive, as I've seen a LOT of sub-so-so fan fic/art out there, and even some of the truly GOOD stuff can frustrate me because it doesn't fit my own criteria of what makes a good Two-Face story. Case in point: the best Two-Face fanfic I've ever read is firmly set in the Nolanverse, with "RAY-CHULL" motivation fully intact. So, feeling that I wasn't in the right mood to critically appreciate (read: JUDGE) an examination of a character for whom I have very strong and particular opinions, I put off reading Deptford's comic for a couple of days.
Now I feel a bit like a fool. Not only did I have nothing to worry about, but this comic is... well, I'll just let it speak for itself, and discuss it at the end. But read it. Read it read it read it.
Wow.
WOW.
Okay, at first, I admit that I was a bit put off by Harvey's tone, never considering that maybe there was a reason for him seeming so upbeat and forthcoming. I should have seen that coming from the quiet "heads..." right at the start! Even still, the way it was set up for that ending was just brilliant. In a subtle way that doesn't beat you over the head (at least, not metaphorically), it shows the best and worst of Harvey's nature, allowing a Two-Face who can at one moment be forthcoming, eloquent, contemplative, even charming, and then suddenly turn violent, furious, and dangerous the next.
More importantly, would-be comics philosophers such as Denny O'Neil, take note: THIS is how you explore Harvey Dent's personal philosophy. That's not to say that this is the last word on the subject matter, but it's by far the most compelling one I've seen so far, partially because it's so hard to pull off. When most writers try to give Harvey a philosophy, he comes out like a raving cartoon (as in the case of Batman Forever) or as a cruel sadist who is forcing others to see his way in the manner of the worst religious fanatics (such as in Joker's Asylum: Two-Face).
I guess the difference is that he's not using his philosophy to justify his actions to his victims. Rather, he seems to have come to this philosophy after a lot of careful consideration, weighing the options (even if he, of course, only sees two), and sincerely seeing no other way he can maintain some semblance of balance and humanity, much less even function.
I mean, of course he's torn between Batman (extreme order) and the Joker (extreme chaos). Of course. But I've just never seen it laid out so well as Deptford does here. I think it helps that it's Harvey himself who's making this observation, because it also speaks to what he thinks about Batman and the Joker themselves. We already know that he holds the Joker in utter contempt, but I like that Harvey Dent--of all people!--sees Batman as a victim of the crusade for justice, someone who lost his humanity in the process. That is so great. It's not just a twist on how Batman has always seen Harvey, but depending on your own opinions about Batman, Harvey could well be the more human character!
Then again, there's the question of how human a person can be if he gives up a core concept of humanity: choice. But that's the thing, he still chooses to give up that choice, because he's convinced that if he chooses for himself, either path will lead to his own internal destruction, but he nonetheless refuses to just give up and resign himself to fate. In effect, he's ironically found a third option through the coin. He's freed from the torment that could destroy him either in part or in whole, and in doing so, has found a way to take control while simultaneously giving it up. Love it!
Now, that said, I have to wonder how applicable this can be to any given take on Two-Face we've seen. Take Eye of the Beholder, for instance, which gives a very specific idea of what the coin means to Harvey. What would it say about Harvey if he held this philosophy using the instrument his father used for years of physical and psychological abuse? What about DeMatteis' Two-Face: Crime and Punishment, which greatly emphasized the adversarial conflict between Harvey's two halves? Is there a way to reconcile that tormented Harvey Dent with the one who seems to have found the best answer available to him?
I welcome your ideas, although I fear that there's no simple answer. Then again, there never is when it comes to trying to reconcile all or even some takes on Two-Face, no matter how great each may be. That said, speaking as someone who really resonates on a personal level with the "abusive alcoholic parent" origin, the idea of Harvey giving himself up to a non-religious "higher power" takes on a WHOLE new resonance for those us who know our Twelve Steps.