Is Stephanie Brown a True Robin?

[millernumber1]

Yes some more than others.

Then go away.

[Assam]

Then go away.

Seriously.

You want to explain why you feel Steph isn't a Robin? Go right ahead. It's part of what the thread is for.

Clearly though, even just looking at that poll, a LOT of us don't see the idea of this being worth discussion as "ridiculous."

[btmarine23]

I don't think its ridiculous and no is forcing anyone to post or comment. I think Steph would make the best true Robin so argue my opinion away because I don't base it on fact or history.

[Lady Nightwing]

Azrael was a true Batman, appointed by Bruce himself.

Huh, that's a strange one. Usually when a character is given a mantle by the original or eventually given the ok by the original it helps me accept the new character in their new role. Azrael is an exception to that, I guess. I in no way, shape or form accept Azrael as a true Batman. To me the only true Batman is Bruce Wayne.

[Adam Allen]

I don't know if it has been mentioned already, but when we consider the question with Dick, Jason, Tim and Damien being considered as "true" Robins ... I did not actually vote myself, but wasn't Jason killed off way back when, because they put it to a vote with the fans, and the majority of the fans wanted him dead?

The vote in favor of killing him did not win by any great margin, and really I would guess probably the greatest of the animosity towards him was just that there was "only one true Robin," so you need to kill off the poseur. I would have loved if they'd just let Steph fill the role of Robin for years ... but, even if they had, I don't think we should kid ourselves that some folks would have been super resistant to the idea, regardless.

Also yeah, I forgot that Earth-2 Huntress and Power Girl eventually got back to their own world. It's too bad, because I liked the dynamic with her and Damien, the one time I saw them work together. It was actually the first time I liked him.

[darkseidpwns]

Steph wasn't created to be a Tim character. She was created to be a one-off character for a Cluemaster story, and Dixon liked her so much he brought her back and put her where he thought she made the most sense. Writing her in Robin was about writing her, not about using her for Tim's development. And after Dixon left Lewis made her the full-fledged co-star of the book and just as much the main protagonist as Tim was.

Harley wasn't created to be a Batman character, she was created to be a one off in an episode of a cartoon...
Joker wasn't created to be a Batman character, he was created to be a one off in a Batman story...
Bane wasn't created to be a Batman character, he was created to be a one off in a Batman event...

I'm not even sure what your logic even is.

[darkseidpwns]

You were the one indicating that they were screwed by editorial. I agreed that you could look at it that way, but 1) Steph's not a villain, and 2) Azrael, the only really non-villain of the bunch you shotgunned into the thread, got an ongoing for 8 years.

Steph started as a Tim character. Doesn't mean she can't evolve past that. Dick started as a Bruce character. I don't think people would say the same now.

Arguing over stealing vs. being given/earning is hardly pointless. Arguing over whether Steph was a hero or a villain is crucial, since villains are heroes are given very different treatment.

I've never claimed that editorial didn't view Steph as Robin as a temporary stunt. My claim is that fans have valid arguments for viewing it as more than that. The author's not dead, but they do take naps.

But honestly, you're bringing four examples that have much less connection to the question at hand, three of whom are villains, and don't see why that's important at all. So clearly, you have nothing to add to the discussion other than your assertion that Steph never grew out of a supporting role.

Lastly, Robin was Tim's title, but War Games was a Bruce/Batfamily/Steph story, in that order. Each of those perspectives shaped the way we viewed that story. Steph was not serving Tim's story in War Games - she was serving Bruce's and her own.

I was not indicating, I was being sarcastic. Characters are objects in a story and all these characters mentioned originated to serve someone elses story. Its not screwing up at all, Eradicator and Azrael were not screwed up, they served their purpose in a Superman/Batman story. Now if they were written horribly then sure you can say that the writing was crappy but the basic role doesn't change regardless of the type of writing.

Azrael got an ongoing only because he was created by the head editor and made part of big events and his book was immediately cancelled after he left. How you feel Steph got treated has no nothing to do with this thread or the question it poses.

Which still has nothing to do with this thread, she didn't evolve did she? not as Robin certainly, nor was her stint as Robin intended to be some evolutionary step in moving her away from Tim. Even in the current Tec she is defined by Tim.

Fans claims are irrelevant, desperate and worthless. Fans dont make these decisions, the company does and its clear what their intent was when it comes to Steph. They didn't even reverse them or anything.

My examples were fine, those characters were given the mantle to prove that they were NOT Batman/Superman. They even lasted longer than Steph in those roles but at no point were they ever intended to be Batman and Superman.

War Games was about Bruce and Black Mask, Bruce had a desire to get Tim back, it was part of Bruce's arc. This is like calling Forever Evil a Nightwing arc. Steph served her function in that story and then she died.

[millernumber1]

I was not indicating, I was being sarcastic. Characters are objects in a story and all these characters mentioned originated to serve someone elses story. Its not screwing up at all, Eradicator and Azrael were not screwed up, they served their purpose in a Superman/Batman story. Now if they were written horribly then sure you can say that the writing was crappy but the basic role doesn't change regardless of the type of writing.

Azrael got an ongoing only because he was created by the head editor and made part of big events and his book was immediately cancelled after he left. How you feel Steph got treated has no nothing to do with this thread or the question it poses.

Which still has nothing to do with this thread, she didn't evolve did she? not as Robin certainly, nor was her stint as Robin intended to be some evolutionary step in moving her away from Tim. Even in the current Tec she is defined by Tim.

Fans claims are irrelevant, desperate and worthless. Fans dont make these decisions, the company does and its clear what their intent was when it comes to Steph. They didn't even reverse them or anything.

My examples were fine, those characters were given the mantle to prove that they were NOT Batman/Superman. They even lasted longer than Steph in those roles but at no point were they ever intended to be Batman and Superman.

War Games was about Bruce and Black Mask, Bruce had a desire to get Tim back, it was part of Bruce's arc. This is like calling Forever Evil a Nightwing arc. Steph served her function in that story and then she died.

How I feel Steph got treated has nothing to do with a thread about Steph and her relationship to the role of Robin, which is an issue precisely because of how she was treated...honestly, this assertion is beyond illogical.

She did evolve as part of Robin - unfortunately, the evolution took her directly to her death.

Your examples are not fine. They were, as you say, given the mantle to make a statement about the role they were taking. Steph was not given the role of Robin to say something about the role of Robin - she was given it as a cheap ploy to gain sympathy when she died. What is DC saying about the role of Robin through her taking it? That only obedient Robins are worthy? Untrue. That only boys can be Robin? Untrue. That only Tim could be Robin? Untrue. If you try to make War Games say something about Robin in the same way that War of the Supermen or Knightfall say something about Superman or Batman, you make it say something obviously untrue.

War Games starts with Steph's perspective, making her a protagonist, and her actions drive the entire plot, and her death serves as the conclusion - and epilogue, in War Crimes. I have zero doubt that you will simply repeat your assertions, since you've already done so twice in this thread. But they are factually incorrect assertions.

[darkseidpwns]

How I feel Steph got treated has nothing to do with a thread about Steph and her relationship to the role of Robin, which is an issue precisely because of how she was treated...honestly, this assertion is beyond illogical.

She did evolve as part of Robin - unfortunately, the evolution took her directly to her death.

Your examples are not fine. They were, as you say, given the mantle to make a statement about the role they were taking. Steph was not given the role of Robin to say something about the role of Robin - she was given it as a cheap ploy to gain sympathy when she died. What is DC saying about the role of Robin through her taking it? That only obedient Robins are worthy? Untrue. That only boys can be Robin? Untrue. That only Tim could be Robin? Untrue. If you try to make War Games say something about Robin in the same way that War of the Supermen or Knightfall say something about Superman or Batman, you make it say something obviously untrue.

War Games starts with Steph's perspective, making her a protagonist, and her actions drive the entire plot, and her death serves as the conclusion - and epilogue, in War Crimes. I have zero doubt that you will simply repeat your assertions, since you've already done so twice in this thread. But they are factually incorrect assertions.

You need to divorce your personal feelings from this matter, that's what I'm saying. The mantle of Robin has a large history and legacy, larger than one stunt storyline.

It wasn't evolution, she just died and then years later her death was retconned and then Cass and Bruce disappeared and she became Batgirl. This isn't evolution.

They were saying that Tim needs to be Robin and Steph wasn't on his level. She wasn't the partner that could cope with Batman, all that is certainly true. I mean it was the whole point of the story, her trying to win the mantle back...and failing in the process.

War Games purpose was to destroy Steph and build up Black Mask as the next level villain. Yeah it failed in doing either long term because it was crap but that was the point.

[millernumber1]

You need to divorce your personal feelings from this matter, that's what I'm saying. The mantle of Robin has a large history and legacy, larger than one stunt storyline.

It wasn't evolution, she just died and then years later her death was retconned and then Cass and Bruce disappeared and she became Batgirl. This isn't evolution.

They were saying that Tim needs to be Robin and Steph wasn't on his level. She wasn't the partner that could cope with Batman, all that is certainly true. I mean it was the whole point of the story, her trying to win the mantle back...and failing in the process.

War Games purpose was to destroy Steph and build up Black Mask as the next level villain. Yeah it failed in doing either long term because it was crap but that was the point.

The point of talking about comic book characters on a forum is that we have personal feelings about them. This isn't real history, where the facts are unalterable. This is creative history, subject to retcon and reinterpretation - and in a large part fan reaction and consensus. These reactions and consenses are only reached because people care about it.

It was evolution - the writers were clearly trying to show Steph growing from an independent hero to one who had to function as part of a larger community, with hierarchy and codes of conduct. Who is a character you think has evolved, if this isn't evolution?

There's a difference between "destroy Steph and build up Black Mask (and kick the Batfamily out of Gotham)" and "Make a statement about who Robin is." You're claiming the latter with the extremely tendentious interpretation of the facts that Steph was killed and Tim became Robin again. What about Steph was not able to handle being Bruce's partner? Disobedience? Sure...because she's the only Robin who ever disobeyed. Skills? At no point were Steph's skills ever questioned seriously, and several times she was shown to be very capable and much improved from her previous skill level (especially in Catwoman). Sexism? Um...sure, if you wanna say that DC was saying "Batman is sexist, and that's the way it should be."

But to come back to your first statement: why do any of us talk about things like the made up legacy of made up characters if we have no personal feelings? And we know that these things can be changed if the fan community produces people like Tynion, who resurrect Steph with a modern fan's sensibility. Without fans like Tynion, all we get is erased Steph again. But with Tynion, we get Steph active and on interesting journeys - and it's because he has personal feelings.

[darkseidpwns]

The point of talking about comic book characters on a forum is that we have personal feelings about them. This isn't real history, where the facts are unalterable. This is creative history, subject to retcon and reinterpretation - and in a large part fan reaction and consensus. These reactions and consenses are only reached because people care about it.

It was evolution - the writers were clearly trying to show Steph growing from an independent hero to one who had to function as part of a larger community, with hierarchy and codes of conduct. Who is a character you think has evolved, if this isn't evolution?

There's a difference between "destroy Steph and build up Black Mask (and kick the Batfamily out of Gotham)" and "Make a statement about who Robin is." You're claiming the latter with the extremely tendentious interpretation of the facts that Steph was killed and Tim became Robin again. What about Steph was not able to handle being Bruce's partner? Disobedience? Sure...because she's the only Robin who ever disobeyed. Skills? At no point were Steph's skills ever questioned seriously, and several times she was shown to be very capable and much improved from her previous skill level (especially in Catwoman). Sexism? Um...sure, if you wanna say that DC was saying "Batman is sexist, and that's the way it should be."

But to come back to your first statement: why do any of us talk about things like the made up legacy of made up characters if we have no personal feelings? And we know that these things can be changed if the fan community produces people like Tynion, who resurrect Steph with a modern fan's sensibility. Without fans like Tynion, all we get is erased Steph again. But with Tynion, we get Steph active and on interesting journeys - and it's because he has personal feelings.

It is real history, sure the events INSIDE the comic can be changed but what happened outside cannot be changed. Steph was never intended to be Robin, you know it, I know it so what's the debate here? should Deathstroke be considered Batman due to the one time he masqueraded as Bruce to dupe the Outsiders.

Its not evolution, evolution is Dick becoming Nightwing. Heck even Jason becoming Red Hood, no matter what crappy writing either may be subjected to we both know what there is a certain point in history they WONT go back to. Steph evolved from being Spoiler ...to back to being Spoiler, how is this evolution?

Whatever the reasons but DC made it clear that Tim was Robin. It could be sexism, it could be something else but the overall point remains the same. War Games was one huge screw up on Steph's part and then she died.

Honestly it feels to me that you just want her to be considered Robin as some sort of apology/consolation prize for what DC did to the character in War Games. What else is there to even gain from this entire tedious discussion? what does Steph even contribute to the Robin legacy? she wasn't even the first female Robin and as someone mentioned previously make a thread with the same question about Carrie and the poll will swing in the opposite direction.

Steph has no defining legacy or contribution as Robin, there was no interest in making her Robin and even then it was just an exercise in indirectly showing you that Tim was Robin. She gets rejected, then screws up and dies. At best she's a Robin intern.
If I remember correctly there was a character in the Blind Justice arc from the 80's that became Batman and then he died in the line of duty. Nobody clamors for him to be considered a true Batman.

[Godlike13]

War Games is Steph's Robin legacy is it not?

[millernumber1]

It is real history, sure the events INSIDE the comic can be changed but what happened outside cannot be changed. Steph was never intended to be Robin, you know it, I know it so what's the debate here? should Deathstroke be considered Batman due to the one time he masqueraded as Bruce to dupe the Outsiders.

Its not evolution, evolution is Dick becoming Nightwing. Heck even Jason becoming Red Hood, no matter what crappy writing either may be subjected to we both know what there is a certain point in history they WONT go back to. Steph evolved from being Spoiler ...to back to being Spoiler, how is this evolution?

Whatever the reasons but DC made it clear that Tim was Robin. It could be sexism, it could be something else but the overall point remains the same. War Games was one huge screw up on Steph's part and then she died.

Honestly it feels to me that you just want her to be considered Robin as some sort of apology/consolation prize for what DC did to the character in War Games. What else is there to even gain from this entire tedious discussion? what does Steph even contribute to the Robin legacy? she wasn't even the first female Robin and as someone mentioned previously make a thread with the same question about Carrie and the poll will swing in the opposite direction.

Steph has no defining legacy or contribution as Robin, there was no interest in making her Robin and even then it was just an exercise in indirectly showing you that Tim was Robin. She gets rejected, then screws up and dies. At best she's a Robin intern.
If I remember correctly there was a character in the Blind Justice arc from the 80's that became Batman and then he died in the line of duty. Nobody clamors for him to be considered a true Batman.

Yup. I want her to be remembered as Robin because I want the good to be remember as well as the bad. If we can't have Batman honoring her effort and sacrifice with a memorial in the cave, then at least people remembering that she was Robin. Because, as I've said before in this thread and elsewhere, I love her as Robin.

Steph's evolution while she is Robin is her learning to work together with Bruce, gaining skills, and absorbing more of Batman's moral and ethical code. It's handled excruciatingly badly, but it's absolutely there.

Also, to regard War Games as solely Steph's fault is ridiculous. Bruce deliberately screwed with her head, held her to a standard he didn't hold any of his previous Robins to, and then fired her - acknowledging to Oracle that he was being unfair. Knowing her entire history, especially her attempts to get positive attention by spoiling the plans of her father figures, Batman bears a significant chunk of responsibility for not training or treating her in any way fairly.

Why Steph and not Carrie? 1) Because Steph is in mainstream continuity (at the time), and 2) Steph received way, way more page time as Robin than Carrie.

What is Steph's legacy as Robin? 1) At the time, the big thing people noticed was her more lighthearted approach - at the time, Dick and Tim were both overly serious, not providing much counterpoint to Bruce's tone. Tim explicitly learned this from her after she was fired. 2) Her design by Damion Scott is very striking, and it's stuck around, both in the iconic Robin 125 cover, and the (horrifying) War Crimes cover by Jock. 3) Her mistakes (and Batman's) shape her choices when she returns and inherits the Batgirl mantle.

If you think it's so tedious, why join? It very much feels like you came in the thread to express a perfectly valid opinion, but then stayed to troll fans of Steph as Robin.

[Godlike13]

Eeh, im not sure Steph is actually remembered as the light hearted Robin. And when Steph was Batgirl they kind of swept War Games and her time and Robin under the rug. Not actually sure if they ever even brought up that she was Robin, if they did it was not often, or how she started a horrible gang war. In fact when Steph explained the history of Batman and Robin in Batgirl she even left herself out.

[Adam Allen]

You need to divorce your personal feelings from this matter, that's what I'm saying. The mantle of Robin has a large history and legacy, larger than one stunt storyline.

It wasn't evolution, she just died and then years later her death was retconned and then Cass and Bruce disappeared and she became Batgirl. This isn't evolution.

They were saying that Tim needs to be Robin and Steph wasn't on his level. She wasn't the partner that could cope with Batman, all that is certainly true. I mean it was the whole point of the story, her trying to win the mantle back...and failing in the process.

War Games purpose was to destroy Steph and build up Black Mask as the next level villain. Yeah it failed in doing either long term because it was crap but that was the point.

Seems like you feel pretty strongly about it, too?