“An act of translation is an act of betrayal” (quote by r.f. kuang which is paraphrased from roland barthes) is so interesting when considering mythological retellings.
obviously ancient texts have to be translated which is to be considered in distorting meaning, but also many retellings can be seen as a more liberal translation of the original stories.
probably the two biggest examples i could use for this in homer’s works is miller’s ‘the song of achilles’ and rivera-herrans’ ‘epic the musical.’
tsoa covers a wider range of time from patroclus’ birth to achilles’ death rather than the small period of the 9th year of the trojan war like the iliad which means stretching the iliad and other myths to fit into a cohesive story. also in order to prioritise the clarity of the love story between patroclus and achilles she may have decided to cut out some of achilles’ more irredeemable actions such as the raping of his slave, briseis. it’s a betrayal to the events of the original texts, the complexity of achilles’ moral character interacting with his relationship with patroclus, and of the suffering that briseis should be seen as having gone through. however in order to fit the romanticised idea of patroclus and achilles’ love and stay more faithful to what the story would have been if told in the modern day, the shifting of the truth can be seen to some as necessary.
epic on the other hand changes also in making the story fit over a longer period of time by being chronological rather than odysseus’ tale in phaeasia telling the decade between the war and his homecoming, but more importantly it has to change its form altogether from the remains of epic poetry we have. which is almost a translation from the performances of homer played by lyre, to a written translation into english, and then finally to the adapted story back in the form of music. perhaps it may be a betrayal of homers actual words but it is arguably more faithful to how people in ancient times would have perceived the story. it captures the spirit of the tale, retaining the themes of fantasy, family, heroism, and leadership, all to the background of music. however some of the themes can’t be carried across because cultural values and practices like ‘xenia’ (hospitality) would not be understood by a modern audience. it’s a reduction of all that the odyssey considers but it’s almost impossible for us to understand or truly translate because we don’t live in their society. this can be said on a lesser level about odysseus heroism and fidelity to where his actual actions must be twisted to retain an impression close to original one intended.
translation may be betrayal, but that’s not always a bad thing. the closest way i can consider it is a cruel inevitability.
Abandon all hope ye who enter here - warning you should heed before becoming a JT fan
post-crisis jason loves creating situations that mirror his life and death. in under the hood and brothers in blood he imitates his life as robin, with him sending what looks like a rare book to the manor, making bruce meet him in crime alley where they first met, and stealing another one of dick’s vigilante identities after he’s stopped using it. you can maybe see these as a way to remind alfred, bruce, and dick respectively of who jason truly is- to make them uncomfortably aware of who they are fighting and how much he’s changed. the final confrontation in under the hood, the titans tower incident, and seeing red all recreate the circumstances of his death in differing ways that tries to prove his points to the people he puts in the senario. in uth he recreates the trio of himself, batman (or perhaps a parent with bruce substituting shelia), and the joker with a bomb and tries to get an answer from bruce on if jason’s life is valued more than his murderers, if a parents sense of self is more valuable than their child. in titans tower he catches a robin off guard and beats him until he’s unconscious, having every opportunity to kill him to show how jason wasn’t uniquely a ‘failure’ of the robin mantle or of batman and how although jason was good at combat, it still did not stop him from being uncared for and erased. in seeing red it’s to serve a more general point on child vigilantes and how the dangers they can become victim to are not up to their personal competence, but just a matter of luck and how their mentors refuse to see this and continue to endanger them (with the solution being killing as a means of prevention of these dangers). these parallels with the most extreme focusing on aditf comparisons can show that jason is constantly stuck on his death, trying to contrive meaning in it when it was ultimately meaningless. he’s a spirit that can not rest, constantly stuck in the less than an hour it took for his life to suddenly end and his worldview to completely change. he’s a lawyer trying to constantly prove his innocence in the part of his own victimhood and demand his own justice, trying to erase the blame that everyone puts on him, therefore forcing them to confront the cracks in the worldview that they demeaned him to avoid seeing. it’s only fitting he gets silenced with a blade to the throat and killed by a bomb detonated by the man that destroyed him the first time when his only weapons are his voice and death.
starlin’s batman, the one that died with jason, would have walked away as jason pulled the trigger on the joker
making it so that tim is in jason’s shadow in any major way is a disservice to both of their characters
considering jason’s relationship with vengeance, its apparent that bruce just made it worse at every stage.
when bruce first found jason, he didn’t have any inclination towards vengeance because he didn’t know about the death of his father by the hands of two face, and he may never have found out if bruce had not investigated and put it in the batcomputer.
and jason’s first reaction to finding out about the death of his father was NOT to sneak out and find two face, it was to sleep all day and give an attitude to bruce. the reason why jason wasn’t open to talking to bruce about the death of willis was because bruce hid it from him!! for 6 months!! also when jason did go out and attempt to kill two face he did so with batman and as robin. bruce facilitated his vengeance by giving him the means to try through robin when jason probably wouldn’t otherwise. and by the end of #411 jason proves that he isn’t driven by revenge and won’t be in the future because he’s easily snapped out of it (it’s later shown to be not that simple in the detective comics but overall it’s not the main motivator for jason). you can give bruce credit here and say it’s because jason had robin and bruce’s influence but jason changed his mind after bruce said it was very difficult to ‘temper revenge into justice’ which i don’t think was the greatest inspiration speech.
there’s batman #425 where jason is blamed for the revenge of felipe garzonas father which implies that vengeance of the father is an unavoidable reaction to the death of a son (which yeah you can see that lesson was learnt by jason later on).
then comes death in the family which is not about vengeance but leads to jason wanting it in its aftermath. whilst death in the family is a contrived series of coincidences for quite a bit of its plot, bruce definitely caused the set up of it. if bruce wasn’t an insufficient parent jason wouldn’t have been so eager to find his mother or would have at least talked to bruce about it first. but because bruce took away robin without actually discussing it with jason first, jason obviously acted like he didn’t have anyone to emotionally support him, especially considering that bruce is shown to rely on batman and robin to parent his children and he just took that away. bruce continues to give more evidence in jason’s belief that he can’t be relied on by prioritising stopping the joker over helping jason when first finding him, he later fixes this by deciding to help and giving robin back but that was only after first deciding the joker was more important twice before.
and all of this leads to hush and under the hood where jason is forged by vengeance, even finding the only meaning in his life to be it as said in lost days. he lives and even dies by the hand of bruce for ‘vengeance.’
when seeing the purpose of batman and robin as a way to transform the desire for revenge into justice, it’s a devastating subversion to see what happened to jason because bruce needed to justify adopting the next child he saw who looked a little bit like the son he drove away by firing him.
being doomed by the narrative is cool and all but i like when a character is doomed just by being a fucking idiot. sorry that happened to you but it is entirely your own fault and you could have just chosen to not do all that
The body of a post is where Hamlet talks to Claudius. The tags is where Hamlet talks to the audience
“Jason’s approach to justice is right wing” we need to force people to actually read.
Claiming Jason is more right wing than Bruce the actual fucking billionaire is crazy.