#meta: characterization

[lysical]

Expanding my thoughts: 

One of the most significant reasons that Under the Red Hood was so compelling was the conflict and moral stances taken by Bruce and Jason, which were even more emphasized by the story really going for Jason as a foil to Bruce (particularly drilled home by all the lines drilling home both that Jason as Bruce’s son and also that Bruce thought he’d surpassed him and the quiet fear he had that he couldn’t stop him because of it). 

DC isn’t very good at exploring the moral complexities, and Winick himself was surprised by just how sympathetic and relatable Jason ended up being for a lot of readers. This coupled with the very vehicle of comics and its long-running villains, which works in opposition to half the rhetoric they push as ‘right’, undermined and continues to undermine certain aspects of that conflict. They think in the end it’s clear cut that Bruce is in the right and frame a lot of stories--not just his conflict with Jason--in this same way (he’s right because he’s Batman happens a lot, and you can see non-Batman comic fans get annoyed at it all the time). 

Yes, Jason asking someone who is morally against killing for their own mental health to murder as proof of love is not a reasonable demand, but Bruce actively going out of his way to preserve the Joker’s life, when the Joker is an irredeemable murderer who has killed many and will go on to kill more because they can’t hold him permanently and know this through experience, is a tier above and beyond understandable moral quandaries straight into a special kind of moral absolutism that, imho, goes too far. 

In the end, it’s comics they do half these things not even for in-story or character reasons (the no-kill rule started as a mandate from the comics code authority and it was much looser until the mid-90s where it became a huge Thing), but there’s a reason people react the way they do and it’s not as simple as ‘Batman should or shouldn’t kill the Joker’. 

[lysical]

Opinion question: do you think if Jason hadn't died, that he would become a character like Red Hood? If so, do you think Bruce would feel as responsible as he does in canon because Jason died?

There are two aspects to this.Meta level: Everything surrounding Jason's death and the characterization that Starlin wrote shortly before Death in the Family where Jason was more violent (in contrast with other Post-crisis books at the same time even, due to it being Starlin's kill Robin agenda) was designed to make him unlikable and justify killing him off. This isn't speculation as the parties involves like to gleefully recount it in interviews and commentary. This means that on a meta level if that hadn't been a thing, Jason would have remained mainly characterized by his other characteristics from the 80s Post-Crisis books, which was basically 'sweet nerd'. It would change everything, as the darker Bruce spiralled out of the grittier and darker tones post-Death in the Family. In universe level: Taking into account what did happen and those aspects of Jason that have become fundamental since (And made him accidentally sympathetic and compelling for so many in retrospect despite Starlin and DC's best efforts and remaining dismissal of him), I think it would hinge on how Bruce deals with increasing conflict between them regarding ethics and morals and dealing with people that set Jason off (rapists and murderers, particularly those that hurt women and children). Jason becoming Red Hood is so entwined with his death and resurrection that it's entirely likely he would never go so far with that taken away. I'm sure he and Bruce would fight, and one might even end with him leaving the Robin mantle, but without those key events the extent to which he went is unlikely to eventuate. That's not to say that he might not loosen his adherence to a no kill rule, but there are other vigilantes who are prepared to kill that arent cast as and do not act as villains or work against other heroes. The Red Hood as he first appeared relies on those events from Jason's death on to exist. A Bruce in such a scenario would react quite differently, if only because Jason's death was something that changed him fundamentally going forward. He might feel responsible of course, it's his son, but he would be in a much better place himself to deal with and have those needed conversations, which might mitigate a lot of things. Or, it would end with estrangement like his relationship with Dick if he bungles the whole thing. Jason's death had such a monumental impact on the Batfamily that by not happening, it leaves a lot of possibilities for what might result.

[lysical]

new talent showcase: role call

I really liked the Role Call story because it wasn’t just good bonding, it had some great character exploration. 

From Jason identifying that he and Duke are of similar backgrounds and setting up a special training, playing at mentor in a ‘you know how the real world works, don’t always follow Batman’s rule or you’ll die’ way, to just waiting out the fake Joker’s attack to see if Duke would go for the kill shot like he wanted, to Duke going for the kill shot and what that might imply-- it was full of interesting exploration of these two characters and their parallels. 

They have a natural, organic chemistry as well which makes me hope that DC does more with them together. 

Linking Selina in at the end was also interesting, which might show that DC is really committing to keeping her close to the Batfam with this wedding thing.

[lysical]

Do you think Jason is a patient person?

He can be, but it doesn’t mix well with his temper. He’s put together a lot of intricate plans that required patience and time investment to pull off, but when things derail it’s often because he got angry. His temper isn’t quite like Dick’s, but it can impair his judgement enough that he’ll sacrifice his long-term goal for a short-term one or, honestly, a whim. 

[lysical]

Do you think dick is a playboy? Everyone says he is but what is your opinion?

No.

It’s a gross misunderstanding of his character and his relationships and tinged with victim-blaming about his sexual assaults.

Dick is attractive, yes. That doesn’t make him inherently lustful. People really need to stop connecting how someone looks with their behavior. I’ve seen a few meta things over the last few days about Dick and lust because he’s attractive, which is quite disconnected from his actual behavior and personality. 

For a long time he was borderline demisexual, stating in comics that he needed to love first before he could move forward with someone. Devin Grayson was the one to begin characterizing Dick away from that, but he’s never been a playboy. 

He’s always been in committed, monogamous relationships, and when he had a one night stand with Helena Bertinelli he got upset she called it that because he ‘didn’t do that’. 

He has at times flirted and charmed undercover because he is aware of his own charm and looks, but he’s not lustful and he’s not a playboy and he doesn’t sleep around. 

[lysical]

Tbh about the tactile/touchy Dick it probs came about in comparison to the others. He's normal but like… Damian and Cass and Jason and Tim and especially Bruce (not Duke bc he's fairly new) are all pretty touch-averse. Like there are compilations of the incredibly rare Bruce hugs; when the bar is set really low, average seems like extra. Plus he's (become? Idk how it was before) the emotional support for the family… it seems to just be taken a step further into physicality. Idk I'm not an expert

…no? It’s a headcanon, and the rest of them being touch-averse is also a headcanon. I’m not sure where you’re getting that from for them, tbh? 

Bruce is emotionally uncommunicative, but he has way more problems expressing himself verbally than physically. Of those listed, I could maybe see him as the one least comfortable with touch, but…not really? He’s distant in general and I wouldn’t consider him actually averse to touch. Often, he’s the one actually reaching out to the kids when they need the physical reassurance. 

Jason is…pretty touch-orientated, tbh, he’s quite free with it. It’s emphasized in his fighting style, even. 

Cass initially defaults to violence but is much more comfortable expressing herself physically than verbally. She’ll casually scuffle and I’ve seen no evidence of her avoiding casual touches. 

Tim throughout Post-Crisis is casual with touch. He’s hugged his dad, his friends, roughhouses with Dick. If we’re going by his isolation in something like Red Robin, he was totally withdrawing from his friends and family because of his grief and other issues, any reluctance with touch would be a symptom of that, not his feelings towards touch in general. 

Maybe an argument could be made for Damian, but again I think it would be more of headcanon than an actual canon fact. In Supersons he grows comfortably extremely quickly with how affectionate Jon is, and any initial reluctance he’s expressed has, to me, seemed to be more linked to his aloof personality and attempts to hold himself above others, especially in his initial appearances where he was characterized as a horrendously awful brat. 

And, again, Dick as the emotional support of the family just…isn’t really supported by canon, really. It’s another headcanon and extrapolation fanon has made, exaggerating and inventing things to support a characterization of Dick as this ‘cuddly mother bear’. Dick is a huge support for Damian, yes, but even when Dick was acting as Damian’s guardian and the Batman to his Robin, he wasn’t hugely physically affectionate like canon makes out, or particularly soft towards him. 

For the rest of the family…for the majority of his time since he left the Robin mantle behind, from before the family was really a family, Dick hasn’t even been in Gotham. Fandom exaggerates how much time the batfamily even spends together. He did offer support to Tim when he was Robin, occasionally to others, but his function was not to be there, picking up Bruce’s slack. He was off doing his own thing and frankly, Dick Grayson would be bad at being the emotional support the way that the extremes of these headcanons imply. 

[lysical]

Hey! Okay so when Damian died and Bruce acted like a complete piece of shit to Jason. I.... was that bad writing or just? Bruce being a piece of shit. Bc honestly that was going past the point of being a desperate mourning father. I'm really bitter....

i would love to say it’s unequivocally bad writing and only bad writing and we can all just dismiss it as that but it’s more like bad writing + bad characterization and...unfortunately intentional and not just in that book? 

i mean, people can choose to dismiss that entire thing (i dismiss the new 52 pretty much entirely tbh) but the fact remains that i believe bruce did similar things to other characters in other books (tim, i think, got some kind of similar treatment), and it was all part of DC showing how damian’s death impacted bruce so.

yes it’s bad writing (horrendous, horrendous writing) but yes he was also terrible and it was largely intentional (it was bad characterization and bad writing in the sense that i don’t believe the writers of any of that period really thought through the implications tbh). it’s up to the reader to navigate how to feel and react to that, like many other aspects of comics that are similarly awful. 

[lysical]

when do you think jason's characterization started going downhill in late pc like is the a specific issue or issues or run?

I mean, I do have problems with Winick (very serious ones), but where Jason went off the rails is basically when any other writer but Winick and the Countdown to Final Crisis writers wrote him in Post-Crisis. Jason was reintroduced during late Post-Crisis which doesn’t help.

It was just bad and very clear that no plans for the character beyond the original Under the Hood arc, and while Countdown was a messed it touched on some interesting things and also respected the characters.

The bat writers who got him after that? Demolished him in favor of their own weird shit, in some books widely regarded as absolute trash (Battle for the Cowl) or full of OOC and problematic nonsense (Morrison). 

Basically Winick had him for Under the Hood, some brief stuff in his Outsiders and Green Arrow stuff (which was YIKES but for a different reason), then Countdown was a messy fun time but decent and had some interesting points. After that? He shows up in Robin for the most out of character propping up of Tim Drake (Jason willing to sacrifice kids is...no, please read Under the Red Hood and Lost Days before writing him) and then that was used as establishment for Tony Daniel’s awful decision to go from morally grey and complex anti-hero to ‘full irredeemable villain’ (while pushing some really gross victim blaming tropes and bull at the same time) and then Morrison just went all chaotic evil on the Bat mythos because he had Ideas and thought he was a lot more brilliant than he was. By the time Winick got him again at the end there wasn’t much left to be salvaged. 

Anyway Convergence: Batman and Robin was actually fairly good as a final Post-Crisis send off, considering it was written in New 52 era and all.