"A Death in the Family" - appropriate?

[DisneyBoy]

I while ago I looked through the collected trade paperback edition of the controversial Batman storyline "A Death in the Family". Even though I knew how the story was supposed to end, thanks to having read a book on the History of DC Comics, I still found myself in total horror upon seeing what happened to Jason Todd. I was in shock.

Now, I've seen ROTJ edited, and let me tell you that was completely freaky for me, but my real question is whether or not Jason should have been killed. Do you think it was appropriate? Do you think that they should take more polls like that one to find out what readers really want? Do you think the outcome was a no-brainer? Could it be that the main reason the character was killed off was because readers never really saw that sort of thing in their comics, and wanted to? Did Jason really truely merit such an end?

Share your thoughts, my friends...Happy New Year!

[Calhoun07]

I think the voting turned out the way it did because comic book fans are fed up with comic book characters being "killed" then brought back to life. To have a chance to vote a character out of the pages of a book, how could they resist? I think it was quite appropriate for people to vote the way they did.

[James Harvey]

Jason Todd was a poor character, and this was a way for the fans to simply get rid of him. While I consider this mostly a promotonal stunt, I thought it was well done. The only thing I found shocking about this was how close the margin was between votes. The difference was literally hundreds of votes, which is very interesting I think. Plus - this character is one of the few DC characters who will always stay dead. Granted, there can be flashback tales of this Robin, but he won't be resurrected. DCis infamous for resurrecting dead heroes (like the upcoming Aquaman) and this is a great move - providing some means ofstability.

[Stupendous Man]

I thought "A Death in the Family " worked on a number of
levels.

"A Death in the Family" is probably one of the most
important storylines in the Batman Mythology.

Its impact is probably longer lasting than its creators even
intended.

In my humble opinion .. here are some of the concepts that
a "Death In the Family" introduces to the Batman Legend:


1. Solidifies the concept of Danger & Death to the Batman
Universe.

Batman's world is a dark and dangerous one.

It could be tough to remember that in a world where men
wear tights and fight each other with fists as opposed to
weapons ...and its acceptable to dress up children in colorfull
outfits and capes and take them with you off into battle.

Robin II 's death introduced the concept that both Batman and Robin are both human ... that death is always a possibility every
time they leave the cave.

2. You cant just put anybody in a yellow cape and call
him Robin.

The death of Jason Todd establishes exactly how competent
and skilled Dick Grayson really was.

That Dick Grayson survived his career as Robin is a credit to how much natural talent , skill and maturity he had even as a young
crimefighter.

Jason Todd had the skills but not the mindset to live in Batman's world.

3. Established the Joker as a villan to be feared.

Again it could be very easy to dismiss the Joker as a villan
given his appearance .. and the publics perception of him
as that villain from the Adam West Batman show.

Batman from the first has always considered the Joker his most
dangerous foe. For years fans wondered why this should be so .

With "A Death in the Family " and " The Killing Joke" - Jokers role
as a homicidal maniac was firmly established.


4. Introduced the concept of Responsibility to the Batman
myth and the first casualty in Batman's War on Crime.

In any war , there are casualties.
In Batman's war on crime Jason Todd was the first victim.

It introduced the concept of the cost of Batman's campaign.
It also introduced the idea of the tremendous responsibility
that Batman incurrs when he takes on a partner.

I've always thought that the memorial in the Batcave, the
glass case with the Robin uniform, is one of the most
striking images in the Batman universe.

5. Established what Robins role is supposed to be.

Robins role is not to be the hero , but to provide support
for Batman.

Tim Drake knew this from the first.

Its been debated often , and on the boards as well -
who is the best Robin?

I will defer to Dick Grayson / Nitewing on this issue.

In one of the earlier issues of Nitewing , Robin(Tim Drake)
is worried about Dick's state of mind and his move to Bludhaven. He goes on patrol with Nitewing.

Nitewing suspects that Robin is there as an agent of Batman to
check up on him and to report to Bruce on his progress in
Bludhaven.

They begin to discuss the legacy of Robin ..
and Dick tells Tim that he thinks Tim is a much better Robin to
Bruce than he and Jason ever were .
Because Tim knows his role and is comfortable in it .

I agree.

I almost fear this important aspect of Tim Drake is bieng forgotten
as DC expands Tim Drakes role ..in Young Justice and alienates
Tim farther and farther away from Bruce.

[The Guitar Slayer]

Excellent, Spirit. Extremely well thought out. I agree with everything you said. I read very few comic books, but I did get a chance to read A Death in the Family in a book store out of town.

DC gave the fans exactly what they wanted. They wanted a character that would not come back from the dead. No miracles, nothing.

If you think about the way Jason Todd was written, DC made him the prime candidate to go. Obnoxious, disrespectful, the works. By the time the poll came into existence, what they asked the readers was more or less "Do you want this brat to die?" DC already had turned the audience against Jason Todd. It was a set up. I don't want to use that word, but call a spade a spade.

[DisneyBoy]

Ok, I may just be totally uncomfortable with death altogether, but...

Sure Jason may not have been perfect, but as far comics go, they introduce characters into our lives, make us care about them and perhaps even help us to learn from their experiences. How is it that readers would be so intolerant to a character that they would wish him dead?

Yes, I understand and agree with all the reasons listed above pertaining to why it made sense and was a good idea to follow through on "A Death in the Family", but I how can anyone condone the killing of a character?

This isn't a personal attack! I greatly respect everything that's been said, but part of me just finds the whole thing downright disturbing. I was very glad to learn that the voting was very close. Truth be told, if Jason hadn't died, I probably would be complaining about him on TNBA or something! Even so, I don't get over deaths, real or not, easily, and since I only read it/saw it a few weeks ago, I'm not sure how long this will bother me. the way he died even..he tried to save the mother that had just betrayed him to Joker.."He took the brunt of the blast"... :( :( :(

No human being is without faults. In saying that Jason was rude or obnoxtious, how many of us can truthfully say that we haven't been that way too? I haven't read many older Batman tales, and subsequently don't truely know what everyone is referring too, but I do have an issue in which Jason learns that Two-Face killed his father and he tries to strangle him (though he doesn't succeed - the little runt!) He then explodes at Bruce for not having told him, but who can deny that his reaction was indeed realistic?

In saying that we don't like overly flawed characters, aren't we only supporting the sort of stereotyped typicall characters that comics are famous for? Maybe was he too "human" or "real" for the readers to appreciate him? I never had to "deal" with Jason's existance, but I think he deserved the benefit of the doubt here. He could have grown into a character we'd come to love. Instead, he was robbed of any second chance and will only be remember as the Robin nobody liked that died. It shocks me that the readers were so unforgiving and supportive..and still are...of the events in "A Death in the Family"...

At least Jason was noble at the bitter end..and died like a hero...I'm glad that the writers at least gave him that much..although it hardly changes things...the fact that he's gone...

[Stupendous Man]

I respect your opinion greatly DisneyBoy.

I understand were you coming from.

However death is a part of life and I think worthy
of bieng explored in the comic book universe.

Also bieng a hero is about self sacrifice , and their is
no greater sacrifice than giving up ones life for a just
cause. In that respect Jason Todd was the ultimate hero.

Personally , I never disliked Jason Todd.
I was one of those who voted to keep Todd alive.
Not because I cared about Todd , or was disturbed about
having a death in the Batman books though.
Instead I was concerned about "Robin".

At the time DC committed this vote - the issue was about
more than just Jason Todd - it was about the concept of Robin
and the direction the Batman books were going to take.

There were no plans to replace Jason with another Robin.

The vote was about wether Batman needed a Robin to begin with.

At the time the industry was moving towards darker harder edged heroes. DC didnt think they could have a hard edged Batman with a Robin on hanging on his cape.

You have to realize how monumental this decision was at the
time ... they werent killing Jason Todd - the were killing
Batman & Robin - killing the Dynamic Duo. Making Batman a solitary figure.

It was a long long while before someone thought of creating
a new Robin.

And when they slowly introduced Tim Drake, the fanboys were none to eager to accept a new Robin into their hearts.

Chuck Dixon deserves a lot of credit for his meticulous planning and creation of the Tim Drake character. I dont think any other
comic book character was ever as skillfully constructed.

DC had to be sure the fans were going to love Tim Drake.

And thats why today , Tim Drake is one of the strongest , best developed character in the Batman supporting cast.

[DisneyBoy]

I just wanted to say that I loved your response! You've soothed my heart and made me smile! Thanks!

[The Mad Hatter]

I think I remember from reading the intro to the "Death in the Family" trade paperback that DC never expected Robin to be killed off. They thought it would be a nice publicity stunt that Robin would survive, and all would go back to the status quo afterwards. But the fans surprised DC.

Not that I read much about Jason, or even the aftermath of his death, that's just my tidbit of info for the day...

[FLIPMODE]

What's this about Aquaman being ressurected. Or did you mean Green Arrow?

[Barb Gordon]

i don't really know enough of Jason Todd to comment on. I just know that most fans that he wasn't much of a character and were glad that he was killed off. But, he still does pop up in flashbacks and such, thanks to, in part, Nightwing. They writers are still able to keep Jason in the comics here and there when Dick "talks" to him, which he does normally when he's knocked out, or having a nightmare of sorts. I think that's great, and I love seeing this imaginery interaction between Dick and Jason.

Barb^-^

[Joe Tully]

Originally posted by FLIPMODE
What's this about Aquaman being ressurected. Or did you mean Green Arrow?

To capitalize on the appearance of Aquaman in JL, he's being resurrected.

[Poison Carley]

Look people its like this people die in the real world doing dangerous things and this keeps it real.

[Naraht]

Whoa...whoa...wait...

When did Aquaman...Die?

ARG!

[JLU Dude]

Aquaman was presumed dead during DC's Our Worlds at War arc that ran Summer of 2001. There's was never a body found, though.

[Naraht]

Originally posted by Justice League Dude
Aquaman was presumed dead during DC's Our Worlds at War arc that ran Summer of 2001. There's was never a body found, though.

oh, ok....so it wasn't a "See Aquaman die a horible grissley death, just like superman did" thing...

that's ok then...



Maybe he had amnesia! There's a plot device rarely used!

[Pulpman]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson
Jason Todd was a poor character, and this was a way for the fans to simply get rid of him.
Jason was a fine character pre-Crisis, but the post-Crisis "Batman:The New Adventures" revision of him into a street punk ruined him. Now, of course, we have Tim Drake, who is, essentially, a return to Jason Mark I.

[James Harvey]

Aquaman will be back sometime in 2002 in the pages (likely) of JLA. Writer Joe Kelly as already heavily hinted that Aquaman, as well a couple other characters, will be returning to DC in that title.

As for Todd....well...I just wan't a fan of him. He did have some good appearances before his untimely demise. Batman #400 comes to mind.

[MattL.]

I hated Jason Todd, but the vote to this today strikes me as both one of the scumiest and nihlistic things ever done in comics both in that DC did this stunt and how the fans voted.

Its a shameful stain on the industry and its fandom.

[TheScarecrow]

Originally posted by MattL.
I hated Jason Todd, but the vote to this today strikes me as both one of the scumiest and nihlistic things ever done in comics both in that DC did this stunt and how the fans voted.

Its a shameful stain on the industry and its fandom.

Why's that?

All they did was kill off a comic book character. It added to the Joker/Batman fued and both of these characters got better because of it.

Plus, Jason died trying to save his mother (even after she turned on him). I can't think of a better way for a true hero to go out, so it's not like he died in vain.

Why do you have such a problem with it?

[DisneyBoy]

Well Scarecrow,

I, for one, do think he died in vain. His mother ended up dying anyways, and though his death did advance the Joker/Batman feud, surely there were other ways for the writers to do it without killing off a character with whom we had some level of emotional attachement.

I guess I have a problem with passively allowing our society to become even further dessensitized to violence and death, especially. I once read the mainstream Batman comics when I was younger, but I dropped it like a hot potato once the stories and covers started to become too extreme. Anyone remember that cover with John Paul Valley dressed as Batman, a stick with nails in it in hand, beating a criminal as a horrified Robin looks on? I read comics for entertainment, not to be horrified, which is why stories like "The Killing Joke" and "A Death in the Family" bother me so greatly. Sure, death is a part of our existance which we need to explore, but there definately more appropriate ways to integrate it into a comic than as a stunt. "Hey, maybe if we kill somebody, people will pay more attention to us!"

Isn't that the biggest problem in the world today? Human life not being taken seriously or respected, just because some one wants to have some attention or make a point? Sure, what happened with DC isn't quite on the same scale, but doesn't it boil down to the same thing?

I do realize how hypocritical I must sound, as a part of the Batman mythos is the "action" that I too enjoy reading. My point is that I feel a line is crossed when stories are written simply for shock value. Not to say that the folks behind "A Death in the Family" didn't give it serious thought, cause I'm sure they did. I guess it's the end result that bothers me. That DC would, as a publicity stunt, offer to kill a character, and that readers wanted to see it happen, really doesn't give me too much confidance that things will improve. It feels too much like a public stoning. The powers that be offer people a chance to kill and they accept with eager arms...

Not to badmouth anyone here who disagrees with me, though! I'm just trying to figure out for myself if what happened should be acceptable to me, but I guess it isn't. Well, at least we aren't for televised death-penalty sentences or public stonings anymore...

And, as DG pointed out, the margin between the number of votes was very small....

[James Harvey]

Death in the Family was supposed to be a tragedy. In the end, whether he Robin lived or died, his mother was slated to die. And that would have still made his effort to save her "in vein". And you have to realize that stories don't always turn out happy - same with real life. Things happen. People die. I accept it. Sure - it's a horrible thing when someone dies, but that is apart of life, and it sucks. And comic books are about life, in a skewed perspective. People die in life, and people die in comics. I don't think it's bad when a character dies in a comic book becuase it's just that - a comic book. A fictional character. Not real.

No offense here, but just becuase you don't handle death well doesn't mean that it should be ignored. And you have to remember this is fiction. It's not real. It's not happening. It's a book. Just becuase a character dies in a book doesn't make the book bad, or the story to "extreme", or that the company crossed the line. It's a plot point. Sometimes it is an event (like the pasts summer Our World At War). Some deaths are used to sell (Death of Superman) but some are done to tell a story and furthur it...like...say the death of Robin's friend in Robin #25. That wasn't publicized like mad, and it was a spectacular, heart wrenching emotional story. One of the best Robin stories ever told...

This is another one of those things that boil down to personnel preference. Some people can't handle intense comic stories that show real consequences to actions. Others can.

And with the votes so close, I always wondered what happened if Tod dlived. I saw a peice of artwork by Aparo showing a Batman exclaiming "He's alive!". I would have loved to see DC print an "Elseworlds" of those events.