Did you "hate" the 2nd Robin (Jason Todd)?

[shaxper]

One of my biggest soapbox topics that gets me riled up in the world of classic comics is the conception that Jason Todd can easily be summarized and thus written off as that second Robin that no one really liked.

In fact, Jason was written with six entirely different characterizations at various points throughout his 6 year stint as Robin.

Here's my brief run-down of the various incarnations of Jason Todd. I really don't think someone can judge "Jason Todd" without first understanding this:

All You Need to Know About Jason Todd (Pre-Death)

[Roquefort Raider]

I liked the pre-crisis Jason Todd. He wasn't that different from Dick, but that was kind of acknowledged in the series... and I really liked how Bruce and Jason tried different names and a different costume before realizing that "Robin" was pretty much the only thing that makes sense in "Batman and ...".

I also liked how the mantle was passed from Dick to his successor, with all the characters recognizing that time passes. I liked the feeling of Batman as a dad seeing his kid truly leaving the nest.

Let's compare that with what happened post-crisis, when Batman first fires an adult Robin on account that the sidekick job is too dangerous, and then immediately replaces him with a petulant brat. It made no sense. I also didn't care for Bruce and Dick being angry at each other for no other reason that editorial-mandated conflict builds character.

[shaxper]

I NEVER had a problem with Jason Todd. I'm beginning to suspect that has become one of these "myths" that for some reason, thrives in this industry!

Agreed. I think a lot of people's memories of stories they didn't like often stems from that single issue they bought before losing interest and dismissing the whole thing. Thus we remember Pre-Crisis Jason as being that Red Headed carbon copy of Dick Grayson (because that's how he appeared in his VERY FIRST appearances), and the Post-Crisis Jason as being a troubled street urchin (because that's how he appeared in his VERY FIRST appearances), in much the same way that some complain about Superman in jeans.

[shaxper]

I also liked how the mantle was passed from Dick to his successor, with all the characters recognizing that time passes. I liked the feeling of Batman as a dad seeing his kid truly leaving the nest.

Let's compare that with what happened post-crisis, when Batman first fires an adult Robin on account that the sidekick job is too dangerous, and then immediately replaces him with a petulant brat. It made no sense. I also didn't care for Bruce and Dick being angry at each other for no other reason that editorial-mandated conflict builds character.

Agreed on both of these.

[Scott Harris]

I do think the idea of Jason Todd being universally reviled is an urban myth for sure. According to wiki (and other places), the final margin was just 72 votes out of over 10,000 cast. And O'Neil has claimed that there was one guy who really hated Jason and set up a device to robo call the number over and over, personally accounting for roughly 200 votes. So at best it seems readership was split on the subject.

[thwhtGuardian]

I liked the pre-crisis Jason Todd. He wasn't that different from Dick, but that was kind of acknowledged in the series... and I really liked how Bruce and Jason tried different names and a different costume before realizing that "Robin" was pretty much the only thing that makes sense in "Batman and ...".

I also liked how the mantle was passed from Dick to his successor, with all the characters recognizing that time passes. I liked the feeling of Batman as a dad seeing his kid truly leaving the nest.

Let's compare that with what happened post-crisis, when Batman first fires an adult Robin on account that the sidekick job is too dangerous, and then immediately replaces him with a petulant brat. It made no sense. I also didn't care for Bruce and Dick being angry at each other for no other reason that editorial-mandated conflict builds character.

The mandates behind the post-crisis origins are annoying, the mantle passing in pre-crisis was a much better solution, but I really like the post crisis stories that followed the Todd origin much better than the Batman/Todd stories being told pre-crisis.

[thwhtGuardian]

Agreed. I think a lot of people's memories of stories they didn't like often stems from that single issue they bought before losing interest and dismissing the whole thing. Thus we remember Pre-Crisis Jason as being that Red Headed carbon copy of Dick Grayson (because that's how he appeared in his VERY FIRST appearances), and the Post-Crisis Jason as being a troubled street urchin (because that's how he appeared in his VERY FIRST appearances), in much the same way that some complain about Superman in jeans.

True, perhaps I've been a little unfair in my description of the pre-crisis characterization of Jason Todd, there are some issues by Moench that I do enjoy and I do like how peacefully the mantle was passed down.

[AdamYJ]

One of my biggest soapbox topics that gets me riled up in the world of classic comics is the conception that Jason Todd can easily be summarized and thus written off as that second Robin that no one really liked.

In fact, Jason was written with six entirely different characterizations at various points throughout his 6 year stint as Robin.

Here's my brief run-down of the various incarnations of Jason Todd. I really don't think someone can judge "Jason Todd" without first understanding this:

All You Need to Know About Jason Todd (Pre-Death)

Looking at that, it seems much more like they just didn't know what to do with the character.

[shaxper]

Looking at that, it seems much more like they just didn't know what to do with the character.

Well, I think Jason's characterization was pretty well established and rounded prior to the Crisis. But then, no one was sure when the Post-Crisis would begin, and everyone seemed to have a different idea of who Jason should be in the post-Crisis. It was really bad management, not bad writing, that devastated an otherwise amazing character.

I say "devastated" because what they did was far worse than ruin the character -- they ruined him so thoroughly through mass confusion/mismanagement that even our collective memory of the character three decades later is a grossly warped one. Few people out there seem to actually know who Jason Todd was when he was written well. Somehow, Jim Starlin, Max Collins, and Gerry Conway have had almost complete influence over how the character is remembered, and yet they're the three writers who spent the least amount of time on the character and demonstrated the least understanding of what he was about.

If you want to see what Jason Todd was like when written well, check out Doug Moench or Mike W. Barr's stories. They were the ones who truly had plans for the character.

[Captain Jim]

I quite liked the pre-crisis version of Jason (I guess I'm one of the few) and didn't care much for retconned, post-crisis version. Still, I did indeed vote (once) for him to live.

I was running a comic shop when DITF came out and it was my perception that most of my customers wanted him dead. Here's the thing though: Batman wasn't really selling all that great before this. This brought a lot of attention to the book, with a lot of people wanting the opportunity to vote for him to die. Interestingly, many of them weren't even aware of the fact that this was a "new" Robin. As far as they were concerned, they were voting for Robin to die (not Jason Todd). When I asked why they wanted him to die, the comment I remember hearing the most was, "Cause Robin's a wimp." I had the distinct impression that people were voting for him to die because they thought it would be cool to do so.

[shaxper]

I had the distinct impression that people were voting for him to die because they thought it would be cool to do so.

That was my impression, as well. It was the spectacle aspect of the whole thing. I recall a lot of media coverage, and most of it was that "Robin would die," not that the second Robin could die if people voted that way. Granted, I was eight at the time and therefore not the most reliable of primary sources, but it seemed to me that Jason's fate was sealed the moment death was offered as a possibility. I wouldn't be surprised if that one voter who utilized a computer to effectively kill Jason with multiple votes was a news outlet looking to ensure a good story.

[dupersuper]

He was no Grayson, but I never hated him.

[destro]

How do you feel about THE RIFLEMAN? As far as I'm concerned, that's Batman and Robin in the Old West!

I don't really agree, I've been watching the Rifleman a lot recently and Lucas seems to mainly try and keep Mark out of the action. Usually an outside force is putting him in danger, it's not like Batman where Robin is always in the thick of the action and encouraged to put himself in dangerous situation by his elder.

[berk]

I don't really agree, I've been watching the Rifleman a lot recently and Lucas seems to mainly try and keep Mark out of the action. Usually an outside force is putting him in danger, it's not like Batman where Robin is always in the thick of the action and encouraged to put himself in dangerous situation by his elder.

I haven't seen the Rifleman - it must have been either that I was too young or that we didn't get it on tv where I grew up. But yeah, it always seemed weird that batman would take this kid along with him to fight adult criminals. And that costume!

Mind you, I'm the kind of guy who suspects that Lone Wolf and Cub might be even better if they dropped the Cub.

[Phil Maurice]

I quite liked the pre-crisis version of Jason (I guess I'm one of the few) and didn't care much for retconned, post-crisis version. Still, I did indeed vote (once) for him to live.

In my few encounters with the character, I quite liked him as well. It seemed to me an attempt to harken back to the Golden Age, at least as far as things like "Fear For Sale" went, with a tearful Robin fretting the outcome of a typical Batman tale. I hope your vote counted, Sir.

I was running a comic shop when DITF came out and it was my perception that most of my customers wanted him dead. Here's the thing though: Batman wasn't really selling all that great before this. This brought a lot of attention to the book, with a lot of people wanting the opportunity to vote for him to die. Interestingly, many of them weren't even aware of the fact that this was a "new" Robin. As far as they were concerned, they were voting for Robin to die (not Jason Todd). When I asked why they wanted him to die, the comment I remember hearing the most was, "Cause Robin's a wimp." I had the distinct impression that people were voting for him to die because they thought it would be cool to do so.

You've almost certainly hit on the critical factor here. A vocal majority of readers had outgrown the Robin character, identifying more with Batman, or even more troubling, wiith the creators of the Batman stories, and decided Robin was fair game!