Some thoughts about people's reactions to Batman #639 [SPOILERS]

[Lorendiac]

[NOTE: Since I haven't actually been buying Winick's work on Batman, I apparently got the number wrong and referred to 639 in the title when 638 would have been fine. That's the one that just came out last week, I think? Sorry about that.]

I just wrote this earlier today in response to a thread on DC's own boards where someone was asking politely, "Why do people hate Jason?" His basic point was that although he's read lots and lots of TPB collections relating to Batman, he only really got interested a few years ago, and he doesn't understand why the return of Jason Todd is getting such a venomous response from many old-timers. He's willing to listen to their point of view, however, if they can explain it with good solid reasons. I admire that open-minded attitude on his part.

Here's what I said in response:

I don't think I hate Jason. I hate the fact that he's being brought back, but that's not the same thing.

However . . . although I haven't read them in years, I have copies of the issues of Batman that had lettercols published shortly after "A Death in the Family" in reaction to the death of Jason Todd, and I remember one letter fairly well. The writer of the letter correctly pointed out that there had really been several different Jason Todds to like, dislike, or feel neutral about. Because of course, each writer who had dealt with the character in any detail in "Batman" or "Detective Comics" or "The New Teen Titans" or whatever had his own take on the subject of just what Jason Todd was all about and what differences (if any) there were between him as Robin and Dick Grayson as Robin at the same age, pre- or post-Crisis.

So we had the Doug Moench Jason Todd, the Marv Wolfman Jason Todd, the Max Allan Collins Jason Todd, the Mike Barr Jason Todd, and the Jim Starlin Jason Todd. The author of the letter provided capsule summaries of what he saw as the basic personalities of "each different Jason Todd" and how he had felt about it when reading the relevant issues by each writer.

I can't remember every detail of what he said, but I believe his fundamental point probably was that different fans were probably clapping and cheering, or sobbing and screaming, or shrugging because they really didn't care much one way or the other, depending upon which Jason Todd they had read the most about and/or had developed the strongest opinions about.

This suggests - though the letter-writer may not have said this - that it would be almost impossible for these people to talk to each other meaningfully, because their reasons for thinking Jason Todd deserved much better, or deserved what he got, would be based on different evidence from different stories by different writers.

At the time I first read that comment (back around 1989?), I was most familiar with the pre-Crisis mid-80s Jason Todd/Robin written by Doug Moench, and had only read a couple of stories about the post-Crisis Jason as written by Starlin or Collins. I had not read "A Death in the Family" yet. I had not heard about the time the Jim Starlin Jason Todd might have killed a rapist who had diplomatic immunity. I knew practically nothing about the Wolfman or Barr versions of Jason Todd, for that matter. Since then, I've caught up on my reading of back issues from the late 80s about Jason Todd. And I've really come to appreciate that letter-writer's point.

I think the point is still valid, only it's going to be a lot worse now, 17 years or so after Jason Todd died. Because there's going to be some modern readers who have seen very little (if anything) of the Jason Todd stories of the 1980s by various writers, and thus won't understand what all the fuss is about anyway. They've probably already picked up on the idea that there used to be a Robin named Jason Todd, but except for occasional flashback scenes or whatever, they don't really "know" who Jason Todd "really was" as a distinct character; they just know that in modern continuity he's been the corpse whose memory allegedly still has Batman in such a bad mood, since forever!

Since they never "experienced" the old stories about Jason Todd, what do they care if those stories are now being retconned or made irrelevant or whatever? All they really need to care about is whether or not the New Stories about him will have any entertainment value "here and now." Whatever was done with him in the 1980s, pre-Crisis, post-Crisis, by Collins, by Barr, by whoever, is just dusty old "ancient history" that has no relevance to their buying habits today, right?

Then, among readers who have read a lot of the old Bat-stories from the 1980s and who do think they "know" who Jason Todd "really was," we're going to have further problems and disagreements based on whatever attitudes they have developed about Jason over the years. Some readers will think Starlin treated him unfairly but the best thing to do is to let sleeping dogs lie, others will think Starlin gave him exactly what he deserved, other readers will be saying, "After all these years, can't we just forget about the incredibly badly-written stories Starlin cranked out about him, and give him a fresh chance as an older, changed character, in stories written by people who might have a bold new take on him and be able to make him more interesting, whatever he does with his life from now on?" Meanwhile, other people will be saying, "I don't really care if Starlin's stories about him were good or bad - he's been dead for so long that his memory is a keystone in modern Batman continuity, and it ought to be left that way, even if I may have felt in 1988 that killing him that was a horrible idea! After all this time, his 'proper place' in continuity is in the grave!"

And so on and so forth, with many other variations in points of view, emotional involvement on the issue, degrees of knowledge (or of ignorance) regarding just how this all started, and further arguments regarding whether or not the results of a telephone poll in the 1980s ought to mean anything at all in the 21st Century.

Heck, if it hasn't already happened, someone will probably start up a club about this. They could give it some nifty acronym such as K.O.J.A.K., meaning they are the Kill Off Jason Again Krewe! Or some such thing

[Guts/Batman]

i jus got back into so i didnt know what jason todd looked like so i go like "Nightwing?!? what?"

then only after i realized it, was jason i go like "ohhh"

[Mia]

The people who seem to be having a real hissy fit about all of this are continuity junkies. It's the very same kind of people who had a huge stink about Indentity Crisis.

I love continuity as well, but I came to the realisation a long time ago that comic books are a lot like soap operas. No one stays dead. And ever since Hush when it was whispered that Hush was really JT, I suspected that he would be resurected. The problem I have with this story, is that it seems that Judd Winnick only did it to schock people and to make a big stir. It wasn't a well thought out story. I really hope that he's off Batman very soon.

[JuanD]

and just to add my P-O-V on jason todd,
I had never read a jason todd story until i read "a death in the family"
and even to this day I have only read post-death, flash back stories like
the one in gotham knights with batgirl, and the very good Nightwing year one.
other than that, i only know what others have said, Jason's a dick, he deserved to die, so foth and so forth...........


but to tell the truth i really like the little bastard.
I like dick grayson as nightwing
I like tim drake as the modern robin
and now that jason todd seems to be back
there's a smart mouthed, villan-like Robin/RedHood
running around causing ruckus.

that gives me an idea!
Nightwing & Robin vs. the red hood!

screw hush, give this guy gotham knights.

[Forsaken_One]

I just wish that in the bat stories death would be death. I don't really expect it in any comic book but until Jason came back I could put hope his death was in the same category as Uncle Ben or Bucky (Yes, both Marvel but in that list nonetheless) of people who are dead and will stay dead. And with him in that category I could think that Batman was a more realistic world where people didn't come back to life willy nilly, at least not deaths that had emotional impact and where we saw the body.

Alas, my self-delusion is shattered.

[1HELLBOY]

it doesn't bother me in the least. I think the story is awesome and i can't wait to see where it goes

[muimi]

I'm one of the fans who never experienced Jason Todd first hand; all I've read of him has been thru flashbacks but mostly, through how his death has affected Bruce. I think that's why I dislike the fact that he's been brought back; it cheapens the impact of his death.

But I'm over the initial disappointment -- though I dislike Winick's writing as a whole -- and will be interested to see how the character of Jason is reaclimated into the Batverse and in turn, the DCU. And I agree... Nightwing & Robin vs. Red Hood would be awesome :D "Sibling" rivalry, anyone?

[Forsaken_One]

I wouldn't mind seeing Nightwing vs. Jason or Robin vs. Jason but I'd like to see whoever writes that come up with a better reason that the standard (and probably most likely) line of "You took my place!" I know someone will make Jason use that line in regards to Tim Drake, and it really doesn't work when you're assumed to be dead.

Unless they're going to retcon that and make it so that Batman knew he was alive the whole time. *shudders*

[palaeomerus]

While Jason seems hostile to the Bat family(he fired on Nightwing to get a shot at Freeze and his goons) and he is killing bad guys if you look at what he did here he:

1. took some bad stuff off of the market(kryptonite and other stuff) and thus disrupted some super villainy.

2. used it as bait to try and score some more hits on the thugs that he knew would be sent take him out. This was partly to build his rep as someone dangerous and thus grow his side of the "tamed" crime syndicates and partly to de-scumify Gotham's streets a little more.

3. turned it over to Batman when he showed up and the goons had split implying that it wasn't really about the money so much as testing himself against the local criminal powers.

So I don't think he's evil in the super villain sense of the word. He'll obviously have to clash with Batman and the Family over his methods but he'll fight when Batman is in his way rather than just to fight with Batman. He seems to want to demoralize Batman more than to kill him.

[Captain Jim]

First of all, let me say that recent stories that have flashbacked to Jason are portraying him in a lot more negative fashion than he really was written at the time. Even in the Collins revamped version (which I was never particuarly fond of), he was never as bad as he's being made to look now.

Secondly, let me point out that at the time Death in the Family came out, I was running a comics shop. My experience may not have been identical to everywhere else in the country, but I'm going to generalize from it anyway.

That particular issue of DITF (the third, I believe) sold many, many times more copies than the typical issue of Batman back then. Which is to say, a lot more people read that story than typically followed Batman & Robin in a given month. Many of these people knew next to nothing about Jason.

My take, as I asked a lot of my customers if and how they were voting, is this: Most said they were voting for him to die. And most, I firmly believe, were voting for ROBIN to die, not specifically Jason. When I asked why, the most common answer was, "Cause he's a wimp!" I'm not entirely sure what that meant (maybe they weren't either), but I think it had a lot more to do with the notion of kid sidekicks in general (particularly ones wearing short shorts and elf boots) than it did anything with Jason in particular.

[The Shadow]

My first Jason Todd comic was his 2nd Batman appearance (3rd overall I think) and my Batman and Detective runs are uninterupted so I have all the Todd appearances both pre and post Crisis.

I was a phone in voter to the 900 number years ago and voted to kill him... not because he was Robin but because I didn't like the character and this was MY voice to DC saying get rid of him. It's (other than dropping a book) one of the only interactive ways (I've seen) for fans to get what they wanted!
I know what Captain Jim is saying too... I know many people that didn't know Todd was a new Robin. All they knew was Robin died.

My problem with his return (echoed by Forsaken_One) is that Batman lives in a more realistic world where people don't and shouldn't come back to life... especially deaths that had emotional impact and where we saw the body.

There really isn't a GREAT reason for bringing back a character that was VOTED to die by the FANS... other than controversy and the almighty dollar. But even that isn't a good reason because the emotional attachment fans felt towards Jason (they hated him, hence the vote to die) isn't anywhere NEAR someone like Hal Jordan or Ollie Queens (who should have both stayed dead too)... to necessitate bringing him back.

I think it sucks and hope Winnick is off Batman soon. I don't usually say "OFF WITH CREATOR X"... but this time I truely hope he gets booted and the new writer shows Bruce in a shower with Victoria Principal looking on! Now THAT was a great retcon!

[Jake V]

Doesn't it entirely depend on how he's brought back?

I mean, despite the bat-books being more "realistic" than others, they come with the concept of the Lazerous Pit. If Jason was brought back via a Laserous Pit, you can't really blame the writer for using a plot devise that had existed long before he was on the book.

Personally, I like the idea of Jason being back as a villain, I just wish he was Hush and not the Red Hood.

[The Shadow]

Doesn't it entirely depend on how he's brought back?
Not to me personally. Jasons death had a HUGE impact on Bruce... now it's moot.

I mean, despite the bat-books being more "realistic" than others, they come with the concept of the Lazerous Pit. If Jason was brought back via a Laserous Pit, you can't really blame the writer for using a plot devise that had existed long before he was on the book.
Sort of... but the pits have generally been used by Ras exclusivly and the Death and the Maiden series established that all the pits were gone. Now it's quite possible that A) they are mistaken and there is a pit or 2 out there or B) that Todd was put in before the pits were all gone.

But that brings up an important timeline question. When you go into the pit you come back at the same age you were when your body went in... meaning Jason should still be Tims age, but he's not. He's much older now, meaning Jason has been out for YEARS.

THEN you have to assume that someone KNEW Bruce was Jason's guardian, knew Bruce was Batman and knew where Bruce secretly buried Jason and THEN assume they would know Bruce wasn't smart enough to notice a freshly dug up grave of someone he cared about. Even if Bruce didn't go because of guilt, Alfred would visit. How often did he go see Sasha while she was in prison? Daily? I'm sure he dropped fresh flowers off to Jason's grave fairly consistently and he would have noticed the big empty hole...
I don't think Winnickh is a good enough writer to pen a believable story or fix it and he's said he's not going to delve into the HOW's for a while... so we're shit outa luck

[Buried Alien]

My take, as I asked a lot of my customers if and how they were voting, is this: Most said they were voting for him to die. And most, I firmly believe, were voting for ROBIN to die, not specifically Jason. When I asked why, the most common answer was, "Cause he's a wimp!" I'm not entirely sure what that meant (maybe they weren't either), but I think it had a lot more to do with the notion of kid sidekicks in general (particularly ones wearing short shorts and elf boots) than it did anything with Jason in particular.

And yet, when Tim Drake debuted as Robin just a little over a year later, he was very well-received and went on to become a highly successful character. Go figure.


Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)

[Buried Alien]

Not to me personally. Jasons death had a HUGE impact on Bruce... now it's moot.

Not really. Just because Jason has somehow been revived doesn't mean that he didn't get brutally murdered by the Joker. It still happened.





Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)

[pureclint]

I think we have some revisionist history here. Jason was only voted to die by what 79 (or .72% of the 11 thousand voters) poeple more then he was voted to live. It was far from a strong outcry of hate.

And Batman does not live in a realistic world. We have frozen zombie like men, chemically enchaned super soldiers and maniacs, mutated Manbats, 500 year old ecoterrorists and a guy made of freaking CLAY. Let alone that all the worlds finest tales, which started in the golden age.

So many people here are so quick to run around with arms waving about how this and this is a travesty. Wait untilt he tale is over then judge it as being a good or bad story. Sure you have every right to complain about aspects of the tale, like JTs return, but if the story is good then the return is worth it. And as EBA said above these new stories do not erase the impact or the meaning of the old, the continue them.

[EDmanwalking]

I definitely think everyone should see how this plays out before they make a final judgement. For all we know it may just be a hoax again.

We should at least wait for a decent explanation as to why or how jason is back, and then we can decide whether it's a "travesty" or not.

[EDmanwalking]

I definitely think everyone should see how this plays out before they make a final judgement. For all we know it may just be a hoax again.

We should at least wait for a decent explanation as to why or how jason is back, and then we can decide whether it's a "travesty" or not.

[The Shadow]

Not really. Just because Jason has somehow been revived doesn't mean that he didn't get brutally murdered by the Joker. It still happened.[/COLOR]
No, but the impact is non-existant now. Instead of Bruce's failure he gets to focus on a 2nd chance and the whole "I failed him" will fade away because the story will now be "I have to help him"

[The Shadow]

We should at least wait for a decent explanation as to why or how jason is back, and then we can decide whether it's a "travesty" or not.
Yeah that's a grand plan if it was going to be revealed anytime soon. Judd said that it was a story for down the line and he has no intentions of revealing the "how's" anytime soon.

[TJ Shoun]

Good call, Lorendiac.

This is me exactly:

Meanwhile, other people will be saying, "I don't really care if Starlin's stories about him were good or bad - he's been dead for so long that his memory is a keystone in modern Batman continuity, and it ought to be left that way, even if I may have felt in 1988 that killing him that was a horrible idea! After all this time, his 'proper place' in continuity is in the grave!"



The people who seem to be having a real hissy fit about all of this are continuity junkies. It's the very same kind of people who had a huge stink about Indentity Crisis.

I completely disagree.

I loved Identity Crisis. But I hate the fact that DC is nonchalantly wiping away the effects of A Death in the Family which is one of its most emotionally resonating events ever.

It's not about continuity. I couldn't give a damn less about continuity for its own sake.

It's about relevance. Major events that are retroactively pissed on induce apathy, emotional detachment and ultimately disinterest.

I just want to see an industry that produces comics that don't put readers to sleep. There must be at least the illusion of real consequences and emotional investment in what's happening. Constant retconning and resurrecting and resetbutton-pushing has already driven off most normal readers and what we've got left is a wank-fest of superhero fandom that only wants its comfort food every month.

Sorry, not going off on you in particular, Mia. :) But more permanence in mainstream comics is something I feel strongly about.


My take, as I asked a lot of my customers if and how they were voting, is this: Most said they were voting for him to die. And most, I firmly believe, were voting for ROBIN to die, not specifically Jason. When I asked why, the most common answer was, "Cause he's a wimp!" I'm not entirely sure what that meant (maybe they weren't either), but I think it had a lot more to do with the notion of kid sidekicks in general (particularly ones wearing short shorts and elf boots) than it did anything with Jason in particular.

Jim, I was about 11 at the time, but I remember the same general attitude. This was amidst the beginnings of the "dark n' gritty" age and Jason was thankfully a victim of it. What place was there for a goofy-looking kid sidekick wearing bright primary colors with the Batman in a world where the Punisher, Wolverine, and Ghost Rider are the cool kids on the block?

I voted for Jason to die. Why? Because I didn't like Jason personally and I thought it was time for Bats to go solo for a while... but yeah, that anti-Robin sentiment was certainly there and I'm sure it played a huge role with how people voted, regardless of who was under the mask.

The Shadow: well put. :)

[bannermanonemillion]

Before we debate anymore on how Jason came back, something to remember:

In a GK issue (around the time "Hush" was going on in the batbooks) we get a flashback as to what happened after Jason died. Jason's body was taken back to Gotham and we learn that the corpse was badly decomposed due to the fact that the country Jason died in didn't have the best mortuary storage and decay set in. I can't see anyone dumping that into a Pit and having a healthy live person pop out again.

[DMike]

I think part of the problem is that they allowed readers to vote on the death at all. Aside from the closeness of the vote, you also have to take into account the changing fanbase. The readers who voted back in the late 80s don't represent the readers now, so the idea of saying Jason was killed off by the fanbase is rather dated. At least with the writer he at least has the creative license to kill someone or bring him/her back.

Death in the Family was a nice story but the voting never should have happened. If they were going to kill him, the writer should have just done it himself.

IMO, it doesn't bother me to bring him back. I wasn't reading the stories back then, and I never got to vote on it. I also agree that it's not the death itself that impacts Batman so much, but that Jason was killed in the first place and Bruce couldn't save him.

[TJ Shoun]

Death in the Family was a nice story but the voting never should have happened. If they were going to kill him, the writer should have just done it himself.


I don't think that those of us who are against bringing Jason back are using the vote as a reason. In fact, I had almost forgotten about the poll - furthermore, the vote was so damn close, I don't see how anyone could use that to backup their argument either way.

No, Jason's resurrection is indicative of a bigger problem in comics - that of zero story significance and reader detachment.

Yes, comics have always had a heavy soap-opera feel where things could be done and undone.

But undoing the emotional relevance of certain events is dangerous because it only futher numbs the readership to the fact that nothing really important or significantly different will ever happen. And, if and when it does, it will only be undone sooner or later down the road.

I can remember a time when deaths were actually taken half-ass seriously in comics. Fans would ask, "You think he/she's really gone for good?" Now we just laugh and start making bets as to how soon they'll be back - Hawkeye in Avengers Disassembled ring any bells?

Do we really want our stories that glazed over? Do we want them taken that seriously? shouldn't there be at least some sense of permanence, danger, and sacrifice as to mirror real life?

Hell, y'know I might be making a big deal out of nothing. This may be related to Infinite Crisis and he may end up back in the grave before it's over - or it may not even be truly Jason.

But for some reason, I ain't getting those vibes. :mad:

[The Shadow]

Jason's resurrection is indicative of a bigger problem in comics - that of zero story significance and reader detachment.
I think it is even bigger than that... to me a ressurection story means the writer has nothing else to do or say with the character. Judd can't write Batman with any originality so he resorts to the "bring back the dead" cliche. I think Johns' GL Rebirth is HORRIBLE (awesome art though) but it's basically a "get out of jail free" card because "IT WAS THE YELLOW MONSTER!" (yellow monster? Cummon Geoff!)

Create some new rogues, or do what Johns did over in Flash and amp up the existing ones... write a damn fine mystery (Bats is the worlds greatest detective after all)... do a flashback story if you NEED Jason... but to me this is a sales ploy and Judd shouldn't be writing Batman if he can't do better than a tired cliche.

[Captain Jim]

I think it sucks and hope Winnick is off Batman soon. I don't usually say "OFF WITH CREATOR X"... but this time I truely hope he gets booted and the new writer shows Bruce in a shower with Victoria Principal looking on! Now THAT was a great retcon!

Well, most everybody knows I wasn't in favor of bringing Jason back. I'm one to leave the deceased dead, period. (Well, I'll make an exception for Hal Jordan because of extenuating circumstances, but that's all. ;) )

But I would never say Winnick should be removed from Batman because of this because 1) it may even have been the editor's idea and 2) IMO, he's producing the best Batman stories of anybody right now.

Since the deed is done, I'm willing to give him a chance and see what comes of it. I can see that potentially, yes, this *could* be Batman's greatest nightmare.

[Captain Jim]

And yet, when Tim Drake debuted as Robin just a little over a year later, he was very well-received and went on to become a highly successful character. Go figure.

Well, yeah, but he didn't wear short-shorts and elf boots. ;)

No, I'm serious! I think this played a part anyway. Add to that the fact that Tim's character went on to be much better developed that either Jason's or Dick's had been while they were in that role (IMO anyway).

[Captain Jim]

No, but the impact is non-existant now. Instead of Bruce's failure he gets to focus on a 2nd chance and the whole "I failed him" will fade away because the story will now be "I have to help him"

Well, if he's back as a killer, I'd still say that Bruce failed him. Besides, it's not like he hasn't failed anyone else. Spoiler anyone?

[Buried Alien]

No, but the impact is non-existant now. Instead of Bruce's failure he gets to focus on a 2nd chance and the whole "I failed him" will fade away because the story will now be "I have to help him"

I don't think Jason's revival extenuates the tragedy at all: he still died brutally at the hands of the Joker, and Batman still had to deal with the consequences of that for years. It'd be one thing if Jason had been resurrected to a happy life with no memory of his demise, but that isn't what happened: Jason might be back, but he's turned into the vengeful monster that Batman always feared Jason would become. Not exactly something that will rest lightly on Batman.

The nature of Jason Todd's tragedy will have changed if this is indeed Jason returned from the dead (and frankly, we don't know that yet), but Jason's story is still tragic. For years, Jason's death has meant only a costume in the Batcave and a brooding Batman...and the story potential there was played out years ago. There really isn't much to be gained in keeping Jason dead just so Batman can brood about it in front of Jason's old costume for the 5000th time.

Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)

[The Shadow]

the story potential there was played out years ago. There really isn't much to be gained in keeping Jason dead just so Batman can brood about it in front of Jason's old costume for the 5000th time.

Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)
... so why not stick Thomas and Martha in a Pit and revive them? I mean... how many more times are we gonna be inundated with Bruce's dreams about his dead parents? Talk about played out!!! (Sarcasm, not insult is intended!)

[Buried Alien]

... so why not stick Thomas and Martha in a Pit and revive them? I mean... how many more times are we gonna be inundated with Bruce's dreams about his dead parents? Talk about played out!!! (Sarcasm, not insult is intended!)

That's different: Thomas and Martha's deaths were essential to the creation of Batman. No Thomas/Martha death, no Batman. Moreover, neither Thomas nor Martha were people whom Bruce was responsible for...and neither was on the way to becoming a sociopath based on anything that Bruce did or did not do prior to the time of their deaths. If Thomas and/or Martha were revived, it would be a terrible shock to Bruce, but it would not cause him any new agony beyond the fact that he was unable to save them when they were killed.

Conversely, Batman existed for decades in realtime and years in continuity time without even knowing of Jason Todd, so changing the circumstances of his death (and perhaps rebirth) is not going to undermine the entire Batman character. Jason died, and Batman felt that he failed to save him. Jason might be reborn, but he still died and Batman still felt (and will continue to feel) that he failed to save him...and now there's one more twist...Jason lives, but he's become the monster that Batman feared Jason would become before the boy was killed.


Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)

[Kramer4262]

Right on! That's why this whole Jason Todd thing was created for. To show Batman not only did you not save him, now he's your worst nightmare! He knows who Batman is, has the training, the smarts, and NO REMORSE! You saw what he did to Joker. He doesn't care if Supe gets wasted by Krypto. He is Batman villanified. (is that a word?)

[Jaye]

He doesn't care if Supe gets wasted by Krypto.


I know you meant Kryptonite, but I couldn't help but picture Superman getting mauled by his dog.

[The Shadow]

That's different: Thomas and Martha's deaths were essential to the creation of Batman. No Thomas/Martha death, no Batman. Moreover, neither Thomas nor Martha were people whom Bruce was responsible for...and neither was on the way to becoming a sociopath based on anything that Bruce did or did not do prior to the time of their deaths. If Thomas and/or Martha were revived, it would be a terrible shock to Bruce, but it would not cause him any new agony beyond the fact that he was unable to save them when they were killed.

Conversely, Batman existed for decades in realtime and years in continuity time without even knowing of Jason Todd, so changing the circumstances of his death (and perhaps rebirth) is not going to undermine the entire Batman character. Jason died, and Batman felt that he failed to save him. Jason might be reborn, but he still died and Batman still felt (and will continue to feel) that he failed to save him...and now there's one more twist...Jason lives, but he's become the monster that Batman feared Jason would become before the boy was killed.


Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)
But as you pointed out in an earlier response, returning Thomas and Martha wouldn't ruin WHO Batman is. He's still Batman, with the same drive... only now (STORY IDEA!) he stays Batman to ensure his parents protection!

Bruce would still feel his sense of loss and nothing would be undermined in the creation of Batman, now there's one more twist... T and M live, but now Bats has to pstop crime in the city to stop it from happening again.

[TJ Shoun]

But..but... a huge part of Batman's character (post 1989) is due to the events in A Death in the Family.

It may not carry quite as much importance as his parents' death in determining his character, but I can't think of too many other occurances that've had such a profound and defining affect of Bats, can you?

Now all that requires re-examination. Why can't we just leave it alone?

Whether the original story sucked or was great is irrelevant to my point. :)

And I have zero problems with most resurrections because the death usually means nothing. Psylocke was killed in Extreme X-Men a few years ago and was just recently brought back in Uncanny. But nobody cares because 1) there was no real emotional or thematic relevance to her death and therefore 2) everyone expected her back eventually.

I think Jason's case is 100% different.

But I ain't gonna argue this anymore. You guys think it's cool because it'll make for a good story and they'll be new angles to play with now. I think some things should just be respected and left alone. :)

[Buried Alien]

But as you pointed out in an earlier response, returning Thomas and Martha wouldn't ruin WHO Batman is. He's still Batman, with the same drive... only now (STORY IDEA!) he stays Batman to ensure his parents protection!

Bruce would still feel his sense of loss and nothing would be undermined in the creation of Batman, now there's one more twist... T and M live, but now Bats has to pstop crime in the city to stop it from happening again.

In theory, it is possible. At least one Pre-CRISIS story set on an alternate Earth tried to explore something like this, and we almost saw it again during ZERO HOUR (no Lazarus Pit or resurrections, however...just alternate Earth/timeline stuff).

The Waynes' remains (it rhymes!) have been stolen before and *nearly* got the Lazarus treatment.


Buried Alien (The Most Evil Post Alive!)

[EDmanwalking]

Ok, most of you may have seen this already, but it's an interview with Judd Winnick I found, where he admits that the return of Jason Todd is definitely tied to Countdown and Infinite Crisis. But here's an interesting part:

"I'll put it up as a possibility - there's an excellent chance that the Jason Todd you saw in Hush is the one you're looking at now. I'm not saying this definitively - it's only a possibility. But I'd urge people to go back and look at 'Hush' and figure out if there's any point in the fight between Batman and Jason where there could have been a switch - where Batman could have been fighting Jason, and then, a moment or two where he could have been fighting someone else."

Sorry if anyone else has mentioned this, but that's kinda interesting.

[Lorendiac]

My problem with his return (echoed by Forsaken_One) is that Batman lives in a more realistic world where people don't and shouldn't come back to life... especially deaths that had emotional impact and where we saw the body.

I strongly sympathize with you on that basic attitude. When Batman or one of his supporting cast gets in bad trouble, I don't want them to borrow a Purple Healing Ray from Wonder Woman continuity in order to get a miracle cure. I don't want the Gods of Olympus performing a miracle either, or super-duper extraterrestrial technology being used to cause missing body parts to regenerate, or cloning and downloading copied memories to produce an Exact Replica of someone who's already dead. I may tolerate such things in the more high-powered, science fiction-style stories about Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, etc., but they should be tactfully absent in the Batman titles. (Unfortunately, Denny O'Neil managed to shoehorn the Lazarus Pits into Batman continuity - not just the continuity of some other DC title - back in the 70s and they've been there ever since.)

[Mycroft1]

Since this (Jason's return) is tied in some way to the Countdown I'm hoping it will end with that storyline. It's just a bad idea. Jason is worth more dead than alive. He's the lost Robin.

[Lorendiac]

I think it is even bigger than that... to me a ressurection story means the writer has nothing else to do or say with the character. Judd can't write Batman with any originality so he resorts to the "bring back the dead" cliche. I think Johns' GL Rebirth is HORRIBLE (awesome art though) but it's basically a "get out of jail free" card because "IT WAS THE YELLOW MONSTER!" (yellow monster? Cummon Geoff!)

Create some new rogues, or do what Johns did over in Flash and amp up the existing ones... write a damn fine mystery (Bats is the worlds greatest detective after all)... do a flashback story if you NEED Jason... but to me this is a sales ploy and Judd shouldn't be writing Batman if he can't do better than a tired cliche.

Sometimes I feel a dead character is being brought back to get a hero (and the fans) all confused and worried because a writer doesn't know what else to do in order to really "make his mark" on that monthly title, so he goes for shock value by resurrecting a corpse.

And sometimes I feel a live character is being sent to an early grave in order to get a hero (and the fans) all shocked and grieving because a writer doesn't know what else to do in order to really "make his mark" on that monthly title, so he goes for shock value by burying a member of the supporting cast.

Or the writer may even feel helpless with the Main Hero of the book, so he gives up on him entirely, kills the guy off, and replaces him with someone else who is more the type of character the writer (and/or his editor) would prefer to write about and hope will be more popular with the fans. Remember how Barry Allen and Hal Jordan and Ollie Queen were killed off and promptly replaced with younger men?

Bad writing can flow in either direction, killing off characters another writer could have put to good use, or bringing back characters a good writer already killed off in a way that "should" have been respected.

On the "Rebirth" thing - as I basically said in a recent post about different types of retcons, I've been waiting, ever since 1993, for someone to give Hal Jordan a "get out of jail free card" as you put it. The Emerald Twilight thing was so badly conceived that I never wanted or expected it to stick as part of the "modern continuity" without being heavily retconned in one way or another eventually. It took a lot longer than I expected, but I don't blame Johns for the oddities of "The Yellow Fear Demon Made Me Do It!" I blame the editor who decided Emerald Twilight would be a good idea in the first place. When you give the green light to an awful story, you are basically pulling on a T-Shirt that says, "Retcon this story! Retcon this story! In the name of all that's good and holy, will a GOOD writer please find a way to Retcon this story someday?"