I'm guessing our version wouldn't have a story that hasn't even finished yet on it. ("Zero Year" if your curious.)

And maybe the ludicrously overblown, underplotted and, at times, downright nonsensical "Court of Owls" would not be regarded as some kind of masterpiece.

Byrne seems to still be the darling of the groups I belong to on Facebook.

As mentioned above, I skipped the last 120 issues and rejoined the world of Batman with issue #455. I knew that Dick had graduated to Nightwing and that Jason had come and gone. When I picked up this issue this was on the shelf next to it.



All five issues in glorious newsprint for only #3.95.

I liked Tim right from the beginning. He was smart and a good kid. He seemed like someone who would grow up and become his own smart kind of hero and hang out talking science with Barry and Ray in the JLA satellite.

I had come across the new Batman in the Dark Knight Over Metropolis crossover that brought me back into comics in April as well as the classic World's Finest mini series by Dave Gibbons and Steve Rude. He was a little less civil than I remembered, but the Dark Knight act hadn't wore thin with me at this point.

As for #455, it was a satisfactory story. Alan Grant is kind of all over the map for me. I did know one thing after this issue, I loves me some Norm Breyfogle!

I flipped through Detective #622 and put it back on the shelf. I rejoined Detective with #625. I picked up my first Legends of the Dark Knight arc at issue #16 with Venom. Rounding out my return to Gotham was the Robin mini series. (with only ONE cover!!!)

Funny, you'd think his creator-owned stuff would get some traction (at least somewhere) with all that, but it really doesn't.

Tim Drake: The Robin Nobody Wanted?




This sounds like a ludicrous thing to say today when there are countless hoards of Tim Drake fans out there who are, perhaps, overly prepared to tell you why he was the best Robin ever. From his solo adventures to his time spent with Young Justice and Teen Titans, Tim has had plenty of time to develop into a character that has taken hold of large parts of the comic fandom, but in 1990, the climate was very different, and Tim Drake may well have been the most negatively anticipated Robin in Batman history.

First, the background.

In 1988, writer Jim Starlin felt that the idea of a kid-sidekick was outdated and illogical and, thus sought to prove this to readers. After much protesting on his part, editor Denny O'Neil permitted the famous phone-in poll to determine whether or not the (then) current Robin would be killed off. The vote went in Starlin's favor (though the unpublished version of Batman #428, where Jason survives, also indicated that Bruce would no longer work with a Robin in the aftermath--Starlin wins either way), and thus Starlin managed to persuade readers that kid side-kicks simply did not make sense in modern comic books, and especially not working beside Batman.

However, when Warner Bros learned of this, all Hell allegedly broke loose, as "Batman and Robin" still had commercial viability to DC's parent company, even if the concept didn't make much sense anymore. So DC pushed Denny O'Neil to introduce a new Robin to replace the old one, and thus Marv Wolfman was brought in to introduce Tim Drake, the third Robin.

Warner Bros. was pushing for this new Robin, but was anyone else?


The Creative Teams Perspective:

As I've explained here, once Warner made it clear that they wanted an indistinguishable replacement Robin and not a unique take on the character, creator Marv Wolfman quickly dropped off writing the Batman title and did his best to avoid the character when he returned to writing for the Batman franchise a short time later.

Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle ended up depicting Tim Drake's evolution into Robin, but Tim had never been the horse they'd been betting on. A year earlier, they'd introduced Lonnie Machin (then Anarky) with the intent of making him the next Robin, but that idea was ignored by O'Neil while he supported Wolfman's Tim Drake (actually "Jeff Drake" at the time) pitch instead. They ended up doing the story, of course, but you'll notice that Robin largely stays out of their Batman title afterward, given emphasis only when Chuck Dixon is writing instead.

And Denny O'Neil, after all, made his mark on Batman while writing him as a solo character. He ultimately supported Jim Starlin's move to permanently rid Batman of a kid sidekick, and even promised fans that "it would be a really sleazy stunt" to undo this move. Perhaps most telling of all, over a year elapsed between Tim being introduced and his finally becoming Robin. Denny didn't exactly seem like he was in a rush to get those pointy green shoes filled.


The Adult Fan Perspective:

The most popular and continuously reprinted Batman stories during this time were Dark Knight Returns, Year One, The Killing Joke, and Death in the Family, Thus, the most prevalent, iconic version of Batman in most mature readers' minds at this point didn't have a Robin (Year One, Killing Joke), downplayed the importance of a Robin (DKR), or explicitly made the argument that having a kid sidekick didn't make any sense and might even be morally wrong (Death in the Family).

This was when we started hearing talk across comic shops nationwide that Batman was darker without a Robin, and that he was somehow more pure/true to his roots without a partner (but I get into all of this more in my Does Batman Need a Robin? article).

The adult fan base was favoring stories that didn't feature Robin at this point and, thus, likely wasn't excited for a new boy wonder.


The Younger Fan Perspective:



I was an 11 year old at the time who grew up on the West/Ward reruns, Super Friends cartoon, and Super Powers figures, so I was waiting on baited breath for the next Robin (I was making my own comics at the time and already had Tim mature into his own solo character by the time he FINALLY got the go-ahead from Bruce), but I was in the vast minority. Kids wanted what they saw in the 1989 movie and what was being perpetuated in the action figures and licensed merchandise on store shelves, also stemming from that film. The kids I knew were emulating their sagely older siblings and shop owners in espousing the ideas that Batman was darker without a kid sidekick and that the concept of a Robin was passe and silly.



We know this all changed.  Somehow, O'Neil managed to give Tim Drake a distinct identity independent of both the previous Robins (a new Neal Adams designed costume) and of Batman (three mini series and a later solo title) without Warner bringing the hammer down upon him, and Chuck Dixon instilled in the character a working personality that gave fans a reason to latch on to him.

But, in 1990, before any of this took hold, was anyone other than Warner Bros. Merchandising (and the eleven year old version of the person writing this article) rooting for Tim Drake?

Perhaps Tim Drake is the Robin Batman fans deserve, but not the one they need?