Jason Todd: Robin, Red Hood, Arkham Knight Appreciation 2020

[Zaresh]

I hate the word "damaged", as much as I hate the word "broken". Nah, maybe more.

See, writers: characters are people, and people are "hurt". Things are "damaged" or "broken"; people are "hurt".

Goddammit.
Sometimes I wonder if people don't look into sensible speech for traumatised people when they deal with these subjects or what?

I'm not being whinny here; I'm just amazed that they keep describing characters in such terms when they're actually writing about people with these backgrounds.

Someone who has to deal with similar stuff may read these words, and think: "Oh, so I'm damaged." Christ.

I don't mean to sound hard or even criticise, just in case. But.... But...

[Konja7]

So much for "the incredible layers" that Johns is giving to Jason




See, this is precisely why seeing Jason wearing an oversized Robin costume in Three Jokers raised red flags for me. It makes evident Fabok and Johns don't see Jason as someone able to grow and move forward from the tragic events of DOTF, but only as someone that is stuck there being defined and possibly obsessed by it.

Unfortunately, I think that's the idea DC has for Jason.

It doesn't matter if he grows and moves forwarrd from DTOF in a story (or his solo), DC and new writers will always return to this situation.

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

I guess we should count ourselves lucky that Three Jokers went from "it will shape the Batman corner universe from years to come" to "it's a self contained story that we hope will inspire others to pick up the seeds we planted on it"

[Sergard]

Jason Fabok

"Red Hood has become a standout character for me while going through this journey with him. Ive come to really like him as a character. We go on a very deep dive into his past, his scars and his relationship with Batman. Here's a sneak peek from Batman: Three Jokers Book 1."

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

Fabok also said that the series wouldn't have any variant covers because they wanted to be able to stand on its own, so I'm going to take anything he says with a truckload of salt.

[TheCape]

I wasn't expecting much anyway, Johns take on Batman has always been unremarkable.

[Zaresh]

I think it still could be a good read. We all know how these promos are usually dealt with, and what kind of words make for impacting headlines. And much like with solicits, the final product can be different than what's been told.

I'm still wary, kinda expecting, that Jason is going to be "the one who healed wrong" (rolling eyes) because, eh, you're not going to show under a bad light royals (primary, mainstream characters) like Babs or Bruce (specially Barbara). But, I dunno.

Despite that... And despite "damaged" characters (rolls eyes).

Johns, for me, has so far been a nice read, so I'm waiting for the actual book to arrive and see how it turns out.

[TheCape]

I think it still could be a good read. We all know how these promos are usually dealt with, and what kind of words make for impacting headlines. And much like with solicits, the final product can be different than what's been told.

I'm still wary, kinda expecting, that Jason is going to be "the one who healed wrong" (rolling eyes) because, eh, you're not going to show under a bad light royals (primary, mainstream characters) like Babs or Bruce (specially Barbara). But, I dunno.

Despite that... And despite "damaged" characters (rolls eyes).

Johns, for me, has so far been a nice read, so I'm waiting for the actual book to arrive and see how it turns out.

Johns is fine most of the time, he knows how to make an entertaining and epic story, and is good enougth in the emotional pathos deparment to make you care about what is happening, so i expect some cool moments (plus Fabok artwork is gonna help a lot there), but his charactherization of the bat-clan is not that great, is not exactly awfull but it never has impressed me.

[Jackalope89]

Yeah. I've enjoyed most of Johns' stuff (and the Stargirl series is making me want to look into his run on the comics), but this doesn't excite me that much. I'll still check it out, as I have enjoyed most of what Johns did during Rebirth (Justice League just never clicked right, beyond the one shots back then).

[Sergard]

Finalized version of the Red Hood: Outlaw #47 cover

[Sergard]

Batman: The Adventures Continue (2020-) #9
Digital Release date: July 30 2020

"Batman is hot on the trail of the man who's been watching him for months, and he can't believe who it is. Meanwhile, someone launches an assault on the clown prince of crime, the Joker!"

[Zaresh]

Batman: The Adventures Continue (2020-) #9
Digital Release date: July 30 2020

"Batman is hot on the trail of the man who's been watching him for months, and he can't believe who it is. Meanwhile, someone launches an assault on the clown prince of crime, the Joker!"

Going by the cover, I guess Jason ends the story as an ally, even if he's somewhat antagonistic. Or straight antagonistic for a while. Kind of like in AK, but softer, I guess.
Also, red batarangs. I like them.

[Rise]

So, Lobdell describing Jason as ""a tragically flawed man in search of redemption" is fine and dandy, but Johns saying that Jason was damaged from his past and suddenly there's a problem? I'm admittedly confused, but whatever.

Anyway, I'm curious to see what Johns and Dini are planning for Jason in their books. If they end up being good, good for me. If not, it's not the end of the world

[Swallowtail]

So, Lobdell describing Jason as ""a tragically flawed man in search of redemption" is fine and dandy, but Johns saying that Jason was damaged from his past and suddenly there's a problem? I'm admittedly confused, but whatever.

Anyway, I'm curious to see what Johns and Dini are planning for Jason in their books. If they end up being good, good for me. If not, it's not the end of the world

I would say that Lobdell saying that was profoundly more awful because he was trying to use it to equate his own real world behaviours with the crimes of a fictional teenage superhero who was resurrected by retcon punch.

Arguing that Red Hood isn’t damaged does seem a bit of a quibble. ‘This is my/your/his damage’ is pretty benign vernacular. Nevertheless, would Johns be my usual first pick for a nuanced depiction of trauma...probably not.

[Zaresh]

So, Lobdell describing Jason as ""a tragically flawed man in search of redemption" is fine and dandy, but Johns saying that Jason was damaged from his past and suddenly there's a problem? I'm admittedly confused, but whatever.

Anyway, I'm curious to see what Johns and Dini are planning for Jason in their books. If they end up being good, good for me. If not, it's not the end of the world

My problem isn't with the statement of Jason having issues and problems, as much as what the word choice implies.
An example of what I mean. This is a personal issue, but it feels like when someone tells me that I'm a "minusválida" and not a "discapacitada". The first one means that I'm less worthy, the second one, that I have some disability. Both were and are used here regularly by our speakers; but one has certain connotations that, even when the speaker isn't aware, leave a trail behind and a weight to it ("discapacitada" too, but it weighs less. It's part of the reason why they're using "diversidad funcional" so much nowadays).
This is a personal view of me, but I wouldn't say that someone who has suffered and still suffers heavy trauma (and has problems and behaves in a certain way because ofhis life experiences) is "damaged". First, because like I said, we're talking about a character meant to be a human being. This use of that word puts him to the same level of a thing. Secondly, because it implies that he's not whole, or it needs a "fix" to be right. You don't fix people either. People can heal (or not), can bear scars (which is something they use in other tweets, I think); but they can't be fixed. Thinks are fixed, not people. People aren't a thing that need to be "a certain way" to be "alright".
I don't have a problem with Jason being "tragically flawed" because people are flawed. A flaw can be applied to a character, unlike damage. A flaw is an imperfection or weakness that, yeah, may imply that there's such a think as perfection there; but not as a natural, usual state of things. And he's tragically flawed, I guess, because those flaws work against Jason himself (eh, Lobdell, much too dramatic here, but whatever).

I don't know if it's because I'm not a native and my own background, but it didn't sound nice. I guess it doesn't sound wrong for native ears.

There's the chance that I AM being whinny, too. Not the most important issue to change or complain about out there. And I'm going to read this book anyways because I expect it to be a nice read.