As part of their excellent Comics Season, BBC 4 are screening the notorious nineteen-sixties William Dozier Batman tv series.
Like most comicbook types, my opinion of the show has followed a curve starting with childhood enjoyment, going to adolescent disgust back to- in adulthood- a kind of rueful ambivalence. The show itself is an artefact of its time, and harmless enough in its own way. However its legacy of campery dominated the layman's view of comics- and Batman in particular- for long, too long, after the show itself had died and faded from memory. Four decades after a show that lasted barely two years, journalists remain compelled, as if by some unwritten law, to preface any article about comics with "Biff! Pow! Zap!" It could be argued that the inevitable back-lash (Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns comics and Tim Burton's movies in the eighties) took the character too far in the other direction, but that "grim and gritty" version is more in keeping with Bob Kane's original vision than the pop art, Dutch Tilt-addled world of King Tut and Egghead. The murder of Bruce Wayne's parents- the defining incident that precipitates everything in Batman's world- is mentioned a couple of times in the first episode and then excised from the rest of all three seasons. Hardly a faithful adaptation.

So, because it's my party and I'm in the mood, here's my top three arguments for and against the show.

AGAINST!

3)The assertion that Robin is named after a garden bird.
Pish. Robin takes his name from Robin Hood, as is obvious if you just look at the design of his friggin' costume, or better yet the lettering on the cover of the first comic he appeared in. However the tv show repeated this connection so often (along with old "flying rodent" saw) that it's now taken as read that the nocturnal adventurer styled himself after a diminutive thrush. Even today's comics writers have given up trying to fight this misnomer, and today's Robin is as ornithologically-themed as you like (in the recent Teen Titans kids' cartoon, the character throws "Bird-a-rangs".

2)Campery.
Doctor Frederick Wertham's theory, as expressed in his 1953 book Seduction of the Innocent, that Batman, Robin and Alfred's household was a homosexual idyll was hardly dispelled by the tone of the sixties tv show. Never mind that Wertham had willfully mis-read the comics to suit his preconceived ideas (In practical terms Robin is someone for Batman to talk to and therefore a useful storytelling device; beyond that he's a reader-surrogate, just like all the young sidekicks that flourished in comicbooks at the time. Therefore young readers where getting a taste of a paternal relationship that- perhaps- they were denied in real life, not instructions on pederasty.); his anti-comics crusade had led to publishers tying themselves in knots to avoid accusations of leading the youth of America astray. This meant no sex (or suggestion of sex), no violence, nothing but wholesome fun. On Batman, desperate writers were forced to introduce new characters to balance the gender mix (Alfred was out, Aunt Harriet was in, as where a whole Bat-family of Bat-Woman, Girl, Hound and Mite)and villains ceased to be credible criminals, prefering clownish pranks and elaborate, non-sequitier mischief to staright-forward larceny, idnap or murder. It was these increasingly lunatic story-lines that informed Dozier's programme (it's notebale that important but horrific villains such as Two-Face or Scarecrow are absent from the tv show's millieu), combined with the older Batman movie-serials from the forties (hence the booming voiceover and end-of-episode cliff-hangers). Enshrined by the tv show, DC were compelled to emulate this camp tone in the comics for fear of confusing new readers who cam expecting more of the same. Hence it wasn't until well in to the mid-seventies before anyone dared suggest that Batman might be better served by stories wherein he operated at night, faced genuine threats or stopped actual crimes from happening. Meanwhile countless shitty stand-up comedians where given license to make lewd observations about the goings-on at "stately Wayne manor".

1) Joel Schumacher and Akiva Goldsman's Batman movies.
For all his claims to have been inspired by Tim Burton and Bruce Timm's Batmen, his assertion that the word "comic" in comic books is important, and that Warner Brothers pushed him to make films "for children", Schumacher's greasy, unpleasant, nonsensical love letters to fetish wear- Batman Forever and Batman & Robin- are,irrefutably, big-screen versions of the Dozier show. Certainly the dramatis personae differ, the scale is bigger, and double entendre is dropped in favour of staright-forward butt and nipple shots, but the latter in particular has precisely the same tone as a Dozier show. Goldsman has Mr. Freeze, a character who is supposedly incapable of emotion, pause to crack lines like "Ice to see you". Need further proof? Check out Pat Hingle's performance as Commissioner Gordon... He spends all his screen time in a Chief O'Hara costume.

FOR!

3) Neil Hefti's music.
Hefti's minimalist, insanely memorable theme tune is a master stroke, and remains one of the most enduring and recognisable compositions ever broadcast. In conjunction with the animated opening titles, and the twirling, looming bat symbol that linked scenes, an audio visual grammar was established that's still in use by today's programme makers.

2) Adam West's performance.
Once you come to the realisation that the show was intended as a lark, so ironic it hurts your teeth, and- as outlined above- if Batman's here at all it's the neutered, post-Wertham and Comics Code Authority-approved Batman, then there's enjoyment to be had in the comedy touches. Nowhere more so than in West's performance as Bruce Wayne, having been cast on the basis of a chocolate dronk commercial in which he spoofed James Bond. His restless, fidgety body language may be due more to an itchy costume than any conscious decision-making, and his physique might be best described as "Shatner-like", but it's the voice and delivery that get you. Personal favourite is the "poor, deluded child" refrain that crops up whenever the totty-of-the-week comes to a sticky end.

1) (And this is the trump card)The Riddler.
Without the Dozier show, I wouldn't have my favoutite baddie. Before the tv show, the Prince of Puzzlers had made scant appearances in the comics. It was his role as "special guest villain" in the very first two-parter and inclusion as one of the "big four" antagonists in the 1966 movie that elevated a near-forgotten character to DC's A-list, and the afore-mentioned prevalence of the show in the public's consciousness and the influence it asserted over subsequent publication ensured his continued use. Clearly, had he been played by anyone other than Frank Gorshin he'd never have cut such a dash. Gorshin's Riddler- hyperactive, giggling maniac and stone-cold sociopath by turns- is a tour-de-force. Combine that with his often retina-searing wardrobe and you've got a character that's hard to beat. Never mind that he's a perennial head-ache for writers (It's they who have to come up with the riddles, after all!), what's not to love to hate about a villain who's all ego, an utter vulgarian who can no more contain his glee over being the (second)smartest guy in the room than he can stop himself from laying the foundations of his own downfall?

For bequething us Eddie Nygma, all other sins are forgiven. Even this.