Comments on: Batman’s Corporate Origins

By: Patrick Zircher

Patrick Zircher — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 08:57:10 +0000

The logo appears on page 118 of French Trademarks The Art Deco Era by John Mendenhall (1991, Chronicle Books). Diabol is written above the logo and the entry at the bottom of the page reads “Industrial Chemicals, Pierre & Leon Blanchoud, Paris, 1931″. I’m certain “Industrial Chemicals” is descriptive and not part of the name of the company. It isn’t clear if Blanchoud is the name of the company, the logo designer, or what.
The image’s similarity to Batman was striking, as was the date. And it was also surprising how a couple of quick googles regarding Kane’s bio and Fleischer studios made for a conjectural link.
It’s amusing, but probably not Batman’s true source.

By: eltiburo

eltiburo — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:17:36 +0000

People making money off of Batman…Preposterous!

The shitty thing about Bat Man is that he was always a rich kid.

By: Chris S.

Chris S. — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:49:52 +0000

Diabol-IC? Sounds more fishy than batty to me.

By: Squid

Squid — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:51:30 +0000

If this is true, I don’t think it really takes away from what makes Batman great. People like Spiderman because he’s got spider powers, but no one cares that Batman dresses like a bat. They like him because he’s unique – he has no superpowers, he has a good back story, he’s more of a detective than an ass-kicker, he has cool gadgets, and the villains he fights are interesting.

In short: The bat motif isn’t what matters.

By: Fortyseven

Fortyseven — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:44:24 +0000

I poked around for a little bit, but I can’t seem to find a reference to this “Diabol” company outside of links that all trace back to that dudes forum thread. Shenanigans?