On Batgirl

[eleanorjane]

This WebSnark post perfectly sums up the problems with Barbara Gordon's reversion from Oracle into Batgirl, for me.

... Barbara Gordon was put in that wheelchair in 1988. She had debuted in comic books in 1967, so she had a twenty one year run as Batgirl. She debuted as Oracle in 1989, so at this point she’s had a twenty-two year run as Oracle. That’s an important point — she’s been Oracle (and disabled) longer than she was Batgirl.

So the brand argument, to me, is somewhat specious. That brings us to their earlier statement — the one on diversity and how they’re chock full of it.

Well, they’re not. They’re just not. The ‘new’ DC Universe has put more white men in the forefront, not less.

And Barbara Gordon has gone from an extremely powerful role — and role model — to a weak one.

Oh, I have confidence in Gail Simone to write a strong Batgirl. I really do. But Barbara Gordon is Batgirl again. Some other character is Batwoman, defined as being entirely independent from Batman. Barbara Gordon is back to the role of being passive and scared (look at that cover I’ve reprinted above) as Batgirl, where she was strong, confident, independent and distinctive as Oracle.

Right on.

Comments

[lilacsigil]

I've been reading comics since 1987, and I knew Oracle before I ever knew Batgirl. That's an entire generation back - I'm old enough to be the mother of a current reader! To me, and everyone after, Oracle IS the brand.

[plasmoids]

This totally dates me (backwards-like), but Babs has been Oracle as long as I've been alive. I fall within the groups they now want to appeal to (18 to 34, though not male) and I just cannot believe her as Batgirl anymore. Even I know she quit before she was put in the chair. It just doesn't make any good goddamn sense on DC's part.