The sad thing about this, though, is that it was almost certainly the story that immediately preceded A Death in the Family in continuity.

And Batman let the Joker get away.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

. . .

You do realize A Death In The Family BEGINS with the Joker escaping from Arkham.

In fact, it and Killing Joke occurring so close together probably jump-started the revolving door idea of Arkham in a lot of writer's minds.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Oh, really? I thought it opened up with him on the loose. (In retrospect, I suppose that it's possible that I'm mixing it up with the annual where Bats breaks Two-Face out of Arkham for some reason, and at the end he's still on the loose, and Gordon gives Bats a what the hell hero speech.)

Anyway, given that this one involved him acting as a mercenary for a Qadaffi-stand-in, and Death in the Family involved what it did, it's hard not to see a connection here.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I thought it opened up with him on the loose.

. . . Yes. Having just escaped from Arkham!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Since you've clearly read the book more recently than I, who states that he's just escaped from Arkham? If it's the Joker himself ... does the expression unreliable source mean anything to you?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Commissioner Gordon.

And it's not a matter of having read it more recently--I haven't, in fact, read it in at least 8 years. I just have a pretty good memory for pointless details.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Ah, but, see, then you have read it more recently than I, as I have not read it since it was originally published.

Would you like to play some more?

In any event, I submit that it makes very little sense for him to have just broken out of Arkham "right before" A Death in The Family when he was still on the loose at the end of this annual. (He shows up to annoy Harjavti at the end.) That would do far more to suggest Arkham as easily escapable, since he would have been recaptured and then escaped again after only a few weeks, in comic book time.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Seriously, WTF? He passed up an easy Joker-arrest because he wasn't "in the mood" for dealing with him? I get that this is supposed to be a humourous story, not SRS BSNS, but still. What exactly would be the right mood for capturing deranged homicidal tricksters? Cheerful? Pensive? Sardonic?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Joker wasn't really that homicidal at this point. No more than most supervillains, anyway. Then suddenly, Alan Moore and dead Robin.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Ever heard of "The Joker's Five-Way Revenge," "The Laughing Fish/Sign of the Joker," "Happy Birthday, Dear Joker!", the short-lived Joker series where he commits murder in 7 out of the 9 issues? Yes, he was about much more than the killing (before lesser grimdark writers had a go at him), but a killer he definitely was.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Yeah, he was a mad killer pretty consistently from O'Neil/Adams onward. The degree of flamboyance varied, all the way up to a huge cake with explosive candles, but murder was always the intent.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

The earliest Joker stories in the 40s were mysteries where the plot revolved around Joker announcing someone would die, and the authorities and Batman attempting to protect them while the Joker found a way to get to them anyhow. The character has been a murderer from day one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

His body count was still imaginable. Nowadays, how many grains of sand in the beach?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

If one leaves out imaginary stories (like TDKR, where he kills all those boy scouts) I think it would be well within countability, and probably not higher than low triple digits. Consider that in The Killing Joke, I believe that he only kills one person in the whole book.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Last Laugh alone probably gave him a kill-count in the millions considering some of the things he was doing.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

And also limiting the count to things that he does personally, rather than causing to be done. (So nothing done by his minions or Harley, nothing done by the Jokerized villains.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Cutting out deaths caused by his minions while they're executing his schemes seems rather arbitrary. They're still dead as a direct result of Joker's actions.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Then suddenly, Alan Moore and dead Robin.

If you're saying that, say, TKJ had an exceptionally, remarkably vicious Joker--shooting Babs as an unimportant-that-it's-her sidebar to hurt the male protags Batman and Gordon, photographing her naked after the shooting, showing said pictures to her father, forcing her father to wear leather fetish shorts and ride roller coaster in them? Does he photograph Jim in them and send them to Batman? I can't remember--I am in total agreement with you.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Also, the Robin killing was highly unimaginative. Lazy, even. I find him much more interesting when he's not all about the killing, but instead the suspense. Will he or won't he?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

In all fairness, there are a dozen other heroes present. Mr. Miracle and Barda have access to boom-tube tech. Anyone of them could safely deliver Joker to the proper authorities.

Batman's just saving himself a head ache ;)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Let's see--Robin died Batman 427-28, around December 1988...this issue was summer 1988...oh shit.

Giffen has a habit of doing this: see also Sue Dibny, Super-Buddies, and why Brad Meltzer should be tortured. Like Starlin is the guy who kills superheroes, Giffen is the guy who inadvertently marks them for death.

(Reply to this) (Parent)