not to once again make another post on aditf but it’s amazing how bruce’s internal narration was an unfaithful retelling about his and jason’s history together. the whitewashing began the very issue jason died. all panels from batman #428 under the cut unless referenced otherwise.
the first of the flashback scene of this issue and when you compare how bruce remembers and frames it vs how it happened originally - you’ll see that bruce had two very different reactions. originally, it was one of amusement— after all it was a moment of great incredulity. but suddenly, in his memory, he was positioned as an angry, looming figure over jason. when they were literally eye to eye.
yes, there’s a different artist but aparo truly drew jason much older than he actually was. jason was small but suddenly his legs are almost as long as bruce’s? but that aside - jason’s early appearances do not feature bruce mentioning anything about “a rebellious streak”; there were concerns about him arguably reckless. but it was never about him being rebellious.
in fact, on jason’s very first night out, his “foolhardy” plan was praised. just inserting the definition of foolhardy here: brave in a silly way, taking unnecessary risks. … synonyms: rash, reckless.
so even if jason displayed “recklessness” as many characters famously claimed he did post-death and pre-resurrection, it was not a trait that bruce saw as negative. it was something bruce observed that jason shared with dick, that it was something to be complimented and rewarded with. it is not a trait unique to him, and it was not a trait that he should have been punished with death for. but i digress, back to the unfaithful retelling of jason’s story in aditf.
1) the order of things: their top priority already was “busting two-face’s gang”, they were already in the midst of things hence the above panel of #410. jason was only looking into two-face because of an ongoing case, thus him coming across information about his father having been killed. it was not because of jason that two-face became the villain of the week. the original sequence of things was confused to imply that jason had more influence over their investigations, but also to minimise the role bruce played here. because well.
2) identifying what exactly is his mistake. in #428, bruce says his ‘blunder’ was putting it on the batcave computer. rather, the issue is that bruce had known willis was dead for some time now, and not only kept it from jason, but withheld this knowledge from him even as jason was made to handle two-face face to face (pun not intended). jason also did not immediately confront bruce about it, but rather bruce confronted jason for threatening to kill dent in a fit of rage the next time they met.
bruce originally acknowledged that it was his fault for keeping willis’ death from jason, and that his “protection” inadvertently brought jason emotional distress because jason was not allowed to find out in a safe, open environment and process it properly. bruce acknowledged that jason’s earlier actions that night was him “losing it” and that it was a natural reaction - and if bruce had any concerns about jason wanting “more than justice”, then it was not made known to jason or the readers at this point in time.
in fact, if bruce had any concerns, this was the most pertinent time to address it with jason. instead the takeaway from this was that jason should keep a cool head, lest they both ‘lose’ to two-face.
and the unfaithful retellings continue! bruce frames this moment where his fears of jason being too vengeful as them cornering two-face into an alleyway, with jason walking away from authorities. instead, we look back to what originally happen in #410 and see that, actually! jason saves two-face, from a badly thought out plan of bruce’s (because contrary to popular belief, batman is not infallible and has the capacity to make bad calls).
stormborns
dailybridgerton
yousharknotpass
andulkaphoto
turnnoffyourmind
romaincrisis
prguitarman
gamechangershow
