IMPOSTORAMA: The Fake Two-Faces! No. 2: Paul Sloane (Part Two)

As we saw in the last post, Paul Sloane was notable as an impostor Two-Face because he was the only one who was genuinely scarred, genuinely nuts, and genuinely thought he was Two-Face, while the others were just pretenders trying to frame poor Harvey Dent.

Once Sloane was defeated, he sank into obscurity until 1987, when Mike W. Barr brought him back for this story, which also throws Harvey into the mix in a reversal of the typical Impostor story. As this cover might indicate:





The following are excerpts Detective Comics #580 an #581, by Mike W. Barr (who writes one of the corniest Two-Faces ever, full of terrible, smackable puns) with art by Jim Baikie.


( Two-Face vs. Two-Face behind the cut! )

The idea of a new Two-Face is an intriguing prospect that should have been utilized while Harvey was "healed" in the years between Hush and Face the Face. A new Two-Face shouldn't be a carbon copy of the original, but should rather be used to explore themes of duality, fate, and justice in ways that Harvey Dent can't (or shouldn't), while Harvey himself could have gone on to have much more interesting character development as a wild card antihero.

That was the last appearance of this Paul Sloane, but thanks to a wonderful gem by Ed Brubaker, we're not done with the character just yet.

"Dead Reckoning: The Charlatan"

Alternate title: IMPOSTORAMA: The Fake Two-Faces! No. 6: Paul Sloan (No "e" at the end)!

I wanted to give the subject line to the actual title, because it deserves more attention than simply as the focus on an "impostor Two-Face" story.

In early 2003, while "Hush" was well underway in BATMAN, DETECTIVE COMICS writer Ed Brubaker penned his own six-part murder mystery that tied together all of Batman's rogues in a secret conspiracy to kill the caped crusader. And unlike "Hush," which brought in a brand-new character to fulfill the double-cliches of being "long lost childhood best friend" and "totally obvious red herring," Brubaker dusted off the concept of Paul Sloane for "Dead Reckoning," but with a modern twist.

In doing so, he created a far more interesting original villain than Hush himself, one with tons of potential who, of course, hasn't been seen nor mentioned since. For that and many other reasons, I lament that this story was utterly ignored in favor of "Hush." Not that this story isn't without its flaws--oh my, it has them--but we'll get to those inside.





( If anyone actually still uses dial-up, then beware! 42 pages behind the cut! )

It kind of boggles my mind that no one's done anything with the Charlatan since this story, back in July 2003. He hasn't even gotten so much as a cameo in an Arkham cell! Such a shame. Just think of the potential for an insane method actor and master of disguise with the inability to feel fear!

Plus, just imagine: he could have an in-Arkham romance with Jane Doe... assuming the two could find one another. And maybe since he's a lover of Lon Chaney and Boris Karloff, perhaps Sloan's an admirer of Basil Karlo! I could totally see the Charlatan and Clayface putting on a grand theatrical production of crime and horror. But then, maybe that's just the ham actor in me.

Alas, it's not to be until this story gets better recognized for the Bat-Classic it is, and deservedly collected in trade. You'd think they would, now that Brubaker is Ed Fucking Brubaker, and they've been mining pretty much all the rest of his Bat-stuff, but they've still ignored his best story.

If this story had a more appropriate artist (ohhh, could you imagine Sean Phillips drawing this?), or a superstar on par with Tim Sale or Jim Lee, I can't help but wonder if it might have gotten far more attention. For all its flaws, it's still one of the very best Batman stories of the aughts

I believe in... sitting down and having a nice cup of tea.

I spent an inordinate amount of today dedicated to an upcoming post wherein I look at Two-Face: Year One, the first major look at Harvey's origin since The Long Halloween. Did I say "look at"? I meant "tear the frell apart."

Then, I tracked down an interview with the author to promote the book's imminent release. And damn it, my heart's just not in it anymore. The guy just seemed to have such high hopes for the series, y'know? So I'm gonna try to be a bit more measured and considerate in my eventual post.

I'm also weighing the options on whether or not I should post about Long Halloween. I mean, is there anyone here who hasn't already read it? It's such an overexposed, overvalued story that the most I could really do with it is focus on what it does with Harvey and Gilda's relationship, and why the ending doesn't make one goddamn lick of sense.

But in both cases, I'd rather devote my time on this blog to celebrating the character's greatness and showcasing odd and obscure stories that receive little to no recognition. That's the real fun of doing this. After so many years of being a fanboy, I have so little energy devoted to negativity and harsh criticism nowadays.

Eh, no wonder I'm exhausted. Here, have this tidbit by Evan Dorkin:





Discuss. Whatever you'd like to discuss.