Red Hood & The Outlaws #23 Preview/Eventual Discussion

[Aioros22]

Make no mistake, it`s dark but Wills is not without serious flaws as a person. And in his own way, being Solitaire would likely fall into keeping an eye on his son or make sure he gets to be what he never could.

Maybe. Who knows.

[Sergard]

I love the standard cover with Jason and his shovel attack, especially since you can see Batman on the Detective Comics cover in a similar fashion with an axe. This gives me father-son-vibes.
The whole issue gives me father-son-vibes. Jason is so heartbroken at the end. And Penguin casually calling him "son" isn't helping. Very thin ice, Penguin, very, very thin. I am totally expecting Jason to lash out at Penguin, probably even thinking that the whole mess is Penguin's fault since he was the reason that his father was sent to prison.

Catherine's parents look rich. They seem to live in a big mansion. But maybe this was more of an interpretation of the artist. Altough the irony of Jason living a horrible poor live as kid under a criminal father and a drug-addicted mother while his grandparents lived a rich life wouldn't be losed. I'd like to see a Jason meeting his grandparents one day. I wonder if he is named after his paternal or maternal grandfather. Probably the first since the contact to the other was broken off completely. But I could imagine that his maternal grandfather is named Peter.

I liked the reference to the annual with the circus and the reference to the zero issue with Jason sitting under the table with his dog (so cute - Jason should get a dog in RHatO) and Willis bragging about his batarang scar. And also Willis wearing the same jacket in the past as Jason in the presence. Seems like Jason inherited his clothing style from his father. That's definitely not a "bad gene".

One of my favorite scenes is after Willis' "I'm gonna keep you save. [...]Guess you know how that promise turned out.". You see Jason staring at the fireplace, but the perspective gives the illusion that Jason is sitting in a burning room. As I interpret it, this is a reference to Jason dying in an explosion. So much to Willis wanting to keep his son save.

[EMarie]

Catherine's parents look rich. They seem to live in a big mansion. But maybe this was more of an interpretation of the artist. Altough the irony of Jason living a horrible poor live as kid under a criminal father and a drug-addicted mother while his grandparents lived a rich life wouldn't be losed. I'd like to see a Jason meeting his grandparents one day. I wonder if he is named after his paternal or maternal grandfather. Probably the first since the contact to the other was broken off completely. But I could imagine that his maternal grandfather is named Peter.

I kept looking over that section and I think that was the artist idea. Willis calls it the 'burbs. I'd like Jason to meet his grandparents too. I also wondered about the naming. Dick has his dad's name for his middle name. I think Tim does too, if Jack is short for Jackson. Either way it seems to be a nod to his dad. Jason's middle name is Peter.

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

The book was definitely meant to highlight the father-son connections both between Jason and Willis and Jason and Bruce. In fact, the story itself serves as the perfect companion for RHATO V1 #0 was pretty much the same story is told from Jason's perspective. The details differening between the two even adds another layer of complexity to the whole thing since it highlights the fact both men are telling their own versions of the events and not an objective truth. The story closing with Willis admiting he wasn't a good parent to his jailer is the sign not everything we read might've been true.

[Sergard]

In fact, the story itself serves as the perfect companion for RHATO V1 #0 was pretty much the same story is told from Jason's perspective. The details differening between the two even adds another layer of complexity to the whole thing since it highlights the fact both men are telling their own versions of the events and not an objective truth. The story closing with Willis admiting he wasn't a good parent to his jailer is the sign not everything we read might've been true.

In #0 you could really feel how bitter Jason was when it came to Willis, how Willis treated his family and how much Catherine had to suffer. Jason deeply loved his mother. That's probably why he hated his very distant-seeming, criminal father even more. Willis' letters give the story a new perspective. Willis is very emotional since he is maybe going to die in the near future. He refers to his good motives and his love for his son but also admits that he and Catherine were "the worst parents in the world".

Both versions aren't objective, that's true, but some things seem like Lobdell is changing the story in some details. In #0 Jason's parents lived for a short period of time with Catherine's parents. Now the young couple left immediately after the parents met Willis for the first time and weren't happy with Catherine's choice of a boyfriend. It also seems like Willis' rather big family (as seen in #0) was removed. Which kinda makes sense since Jason had to live on the streets after his mother "died". If there had been some paternal relatives he probably could have lived with them. But from this perspective it looks like there hadn't been anyone. In #0 Jason was born in a hospital and in #23 at home in a bathtub - but this sounds more like Jason being an unreliable narrator when it comes to his toddler age. His parents probably never told him about the exact details of his birth and his health at that time.

There is also a difference at how Willis was arrested. Now he was arrested at the crime scene while in #0 the police caught him at home. This could be due to the artistic work only, since the text itself doesn't elaborate on the detail where Willis was arrested. Or it is a hint that the arrest panel form #0 is nullified (it showed Catherine pregnant with a second child). Which would be sad. I liked the idea of Jason having a younger sibling, a potential little sister like it was mentioned earlier in this thread.

The story of Jason's parents feels a little bit like Romeo and Julia. Very dramatic, no support from the family. She "dies", he dies (or maybe not), then Robin Jason finds out she is still alive - and then both die (or maybe she didn't). I actually hope that Willis is dead. It would give Jason a lesson about misjudgment of parents and that a distant-seeming parent could still love you very much and wants you to be save but maybe is not able to convey these feelings. And although Jason lost his chance with Willis there is still his other father figure Bruce with whom he has a rather complicated relationship that he should work on before it is too late.

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

Both versions aren't objective, that's true, but some things seem like Lobdell is changing the story in some details. In #0 Jason's parents lived for a short period of time with Catherine's parents. Now the young couple left immediately after the parents met Willis for the first time and weren't happy with Catherine's choice of a boyfriend. It also seems like Willis' rather big family (as seen in #0) was removed. Which kinda makes sense since Jason had to live on the streets after his mother "died". If there had been some paternal relatives he probably could have lived with them. But from this perspective it looks like there hadn't been anyone. In #0 Jason was born in a hospital and in #23 at home in a bathtub - but this sounds more like Jason being an unreliable narrator when it comes to his toddler age. His parents probably never told him about the exact details of his birth and his health at that time.

Willis still has a family and if Lobdell's plans pan out, some members will show up eventually. And as you point out, elements on issue 0 shouldn't be taken at face value since it shows events Jason would have no way to know how exactly happened.

There is also a difference at how Willis was arrested. Now he was arrested at the crime scene while in #0 the police caught him at home. This could be due to the artistic work only, since the text itself doesn't elaborate on the detail where Willis was arrested. Or it is a hint that the arrest panel form #0 is nullified (it showed Catherine pregnant with a second child). Which would be sad. I liked the idea of Jason having a younger sibling, a potential little sister like it was mentioned earlier in this thread.

The writing of that scene is vague enough that is still possible to fit the whole thing with the Joker being the reason for Willis imprisonment.

The story of Jason's parents feels a little bit like Romeo and Julia. Very dramatic, no support from the family. She "dies", he dies (or maybe not), then Robin Jason finds out she is still alive - and then both die (or maybe she didn't). I actually hope that Willis is dead. It would give Jason a lesson about misjudgment of parents and that a distant-seeming parent could still love you very much and wants you to be save but maybe is not able to convey these feelings. And although Jason lost his chance with Willis there is still his other father figure Bruce with whom he has a rather complicated relationship that he should work on before it is too late.

That drama is precisely the reason I also don't consider Willis' letters to be accurate. In fact, the only scene I truly consider what actually happened is the end, where the scene isn't being told by Willis and where he admits he was a lousy father.

[JasonTodd428]

Honestly, I'd rather the whole nonsense of Joker being a big influence in Jason's life was dropped completely. I don't feel it adds anything to Jason's backstory and frankly it takes agency away from Jason. It makes all of the events of his life merely a set up pushing someone else's agenda instead of being something that happened in a natural progression through the choices that Jason makes throughout his life. Joker isn't really known for playing the long game so this set up really never worked for me. It felt more like an editorial mandate to make things in accordance with the whole "dark and edgy" theme DC had at the time to me.

[Sergard]

Honestly, I'd rather the whole nonsense of Joker being a big influence in Jason's life was dropped completely. I don't feel it adds anything to Jason's backstory and frankly it takes agency away from Jason. It makes all of the events of his life merely a set up pushing someone else's agenda instead of being something that happened in a natural progression through the choices that Jason makes throughout his life. Joker isn't really known for playing the long game so this set up really never worked for me. It felt more like an editorial mandate to make things in accordance with the whole "dark and edgy" theme DC had at the time to me.

I don't like the idea of Joker actively scheming to turn Jason into Robin either. That does not really sound like the Joker. You can argue that Joker is an unreliable narrator too, but concerning Jason's past we have three unreliable narrators now: Jason, Willis and Joker. And that is a little bit annoying. I hope Jason will do some detective work in the future to clarify some points. There should be at least some paper work about his health problems and therapy as a baby if this was really the case.

I wouldn't really mind Joker being the reason why Jason lost his parents. You know, Joker being bored, seeing the batarang scar on Willis, getting curious and casually deciding to have fun and ruin this man's life. Willis gets sent away as some kind of guinea pig for something dangerous, his wife overdoses and his child has to survive alone on the streets of Gotham. What a punchline. Joke delivered. The work is done. (But in the end Jason meets Batman, becomes the second Robin and Joker has to realize that the joke is on him. Which is not very funny. That's why he has to make an even better joke. Ethiopia, living mother, warehouse, crowbar and all the rest.)

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

Since the start of the N52, The Joker has turned into pretty much the Devil, able to do whatever the hell he pleases just to screw with Batman so there's no more "this is not something the Joker would do" as far as editorial is concerned. With that in mind, I actually like the whole thing because Lobdell managed to make something interesting out the whole thing. That is, that Jason grew to be who he is despite the Joker (and Bruce) influences, not because of them. I really like it because it speaks volumes of Jason's willpower.

I'm still surprised that people managed to miss this interpretation despite Lobdell going so far to state his intention as bluntly as possible, on page, twice.

[EMarie]

I got his message that doesn't mean I like it being canon or the idea that Catherine is still alive. Especially if Willis is alive then Catherine being alive and somewhere else really doesn't work for me.

This still means Joker was obsessed with Jason. The "I made him and I can break him" idea takes away from tragedy of it being a random encounter. It takes away from Jason happening to be in the right place when Bruce finds him and the wrong place when Joker kills him. It'd mean Joker still manipulated Jason to lure him to his death, which has to take A LOT of things into account to work. And I have a hard time believing Bruce didn't make the connections of how Jason was lead to Catherine and realize Joker knew who he was.

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

I got his message that doesn't mean I like it being canon or the idea that Catherine is still alive. Especially if Willis is alive then Catherine being alive and somewhere else really doesn't work for me.

Why it doesn't work for you? If anything, having both of his parents alive opens the door for interesting stories if editorial decides to explore those options, and having family alive is rare enough to make Jason stand out among his peers.

This still means Joker was obsessed with Jason. The "I made him and I can break him" idea takes away from tragedy of it being a random encounter. It takes away from Jason happening to be in the right place when Bruce finds him and the wrong place when Joker kills him. It'd mean Joker still manipulated Jason to lure him to his death, which has to take A LOT of things into account to work. And I have a hard time believing Bruce didn't make the connections of how Jason was lead to Catherine and realize Joker knew who he was.

No, it means the Joker is still obssesed with Batman and that he used Jason as means for an end...that is how it has always been used anyways.

Joker never intended to "break" Jason, everything he did was always to screw with Batman. And I don't see how it takes away from Jason happening to be in the right place when it still happened like that especially now, that we know the whole thing with the tires still happened. The animated movie and Last Crusade, two of the most praised stories dealing with Joker killing Jason have him luring Jason away to killing him so again, I don't understand how people can be fine with those but not Lobdell's.
And lastly, we're talking of a Joker that has strolled on the Batcave at least twice now and who openly admitted knowing who Batman is at least once, making your point moot.

[Aioros22]

Joker is obessessed with Batman and always will but some writers have detailed that he too grows interested into Jason`s character in a way he doesn`t really do with the others. It`s a similar love and hate relationship vibe but not as construed over the decades or with the importance of the main relationship but. Hence why in AU he gets to play father to Jason not only to piss Batman but to imprint a legacy of his in him.

As for both Jason`s parents still being alive, that`s assuming that the current arc will give us that realization for Wills Tood and that Catherine surviving - if that was even her because it was left vague - is something that still counts for Rebirth.

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

Joker is obessessed with Batman and always will but some writers have detailed that he too grows interested into Jason`s character in a way he doesn`t really do with the others. It`s a similar love and hate relationship vibe but not as construed over the decades or with the importance of the main relationship but. Hence why in AU he gets to play father to Jason not only to piss Batman but to imprint a legacy of his in him.

What writers? Winnick treated the dynamic Joker-Jason completely secondary to the Jason-Batman one, Morrison didn't even touch it, AK be the game or the comic treated the whole thing as Joker grooming Jason to hate Jason as the ultiate eff you to the guy, Snyder only use the dynamic as an excuse to throw quips around, Tynion was more interested on tying Jason with R'as for some reason. Lobdell is the only writer to actually delve into their relationship even if he didn't used the Joker himself to do it.

As for both Jason`s parents still being alive, that`s assuming that the current arc will give us that realization for Wills Tood and that Catherine surviving - if that was even her because it was left vague - is something that still counts for Rebirth.

Oh it will.

[JasonTodd428]

No, it means that Joker was obsessed with both Batman and Jason regardless of what Joker's intentions were. Why the heck would Joker even bother with some random Crime Alley kid not even on the Bats radar (only Willis was on his radar not his family) when there are literally hundreds of other ways to get at the Bat including going after Robin/Dick Grayson. I really found the whole thing to be to full of random coincidences to make it plausible even under the "comic book logic" idea so that's why it doesn't work for me. Like I said it adds literally nothing and takes away to much that already was working. It's far more believable to me that Jason and Batman would cross paths in Crime Alley, while the former was jacking the tires from the Batmobile and that he would later get on Joker's radar by becoming Robin. Lobdell's idea here is utter nonsense and remains one of the few missteps I his work with the character IMO.

[Rise]

Not only it doesn't make sense, it makes Jason dangerously close to Donna Troy level of having multiple origins because of this pointless "unreliable narrator" angle which not only a waste of our time as a readers and a lazy plot device, but also complicate Jason's history unnecessary just because someone can't accept that the previous books being canon doesn't mean every detail is.

I'm not going to judge Lobdell over this just because Dark taking the role of him being his "unofficial spokesman" until I see what's Lobdell is planning with my own eyes. If he is going the route that Dark stubbornly convinced of, then I might consider dropping the book.