View Single Post
Old November 13 2010, 11:21 PM   #119
Rear Admiral
Myasishchev's Avatar
Location: America after the rain
Re: The Dark Knight to have a female villain?

Admiral_Young wrote: View Post
I would argue again that Talia is the way she is through conditioning and breeding along with training. Talia is meant to be nothing more than a desirable object for men since Ra's means for her to mate with a suitable candidate to be his heir. He would have much preferred a son but got Talia instead and has treated her as such. I don't get what is so hard to contemplate about her. Her entire purpose is to serve the means of her father and that is what generates the conflict between her. She is incapable of having a destiny or life of her own. Every time she has attempted to do so she's been either manipulated by Ra's or forces belonging to Ra or has come back on her own whim. This is the tragedy of Talia al Ghul.
Couldn't Ra's just go, like, have some more sex? Or do Lazarus Pits mess up the twin gentlemen?

In any event, it's not really the in-universe character's problem. Talia's reasons for being weak are not of great concern to me, living as I do on an Earth-Prime not threatened by an antimatter wave. But that writers have continually conceived her as weak, however, is a bother.

Also, I don't get the breeding part. It's not like Talia is the end result of a carefully orchestrated eugenic program. She came about like the rest of us.

Lapis Exilis wrote:
For a brief period they crossed her over into Superman and she took over LexCorp and she got interesting for about half a minute -
Yeah, I generally agree, although it didn't t make a lot of sense. I mean, Osama bin Laden is/was pretty good recruiter, organizer and leader of men, but I wouldn't put him in charge of General Electric. Aside from the obvious reasons, I'm not really sure the skill set that permits one to run a global criminal-terrorist conspiracy is exactly the same skill set required to be a legitimate CEO.

Plus, it's pretty clear she's never even heard the phrase "fiduciary duty."

Anyway, Talia's LexCorp gig was sort of weird, from a continuity standpoint. Like, this was pretty much right before Infinite Crisis, right, and the creation of Alex Luthor's Secret Society of Supervillains, and Alex Luthor is pretending to be Lex, even to his closest non-Kryptonian associates, and Talia just royally screwed over the real Lex and sold as many LexCorp assets as she could to Bruce Wayne.*

So my question is, how does Alex plausibly say, "Hey, Ms. Ghul, you did a great job with my company, you wanna help me run my supervillain army?" When she should be telling this guy, "I just helped Superman and Batman ruin your life. Also, you're a lazily-written madman and a junkie. I'm pretty sure you're going to murder me as soon as my back is turned." I mean, does he come back with a "Pish-tosh! Water under the bridge, old top!" and everything's just cool?

Maybe I missed a middle part.

*I'm sort of wondering about the legal aspects of that. If I recall, those sales would probably be void, since Wayne or the responsible decisionmaker there would have cause to know that the sales, if done substantially under market, were not authorized by her principal. I think the agency principle is that if one knows or should know that an agent is actively working against the principal, any obligations the agent attempts to create on behalf of her principal are not binding. But I'd have to go look that up and bleahhh.

Last edited by Myasishchev; November 13 2010 at 11:35 PM.
Myasishchev is offline   Reply With Quote