Chip Zdarsky canonized Geoff John’s Three Jokers in his recent “Bat-Man of Gotham” arc. And then, he made another clearcut reference to Three Jokers in Batman/Catwoman: The Gotham War – Scorched Earth #1. In today’s Batman Vol. 3 #139 (Batman #904), the start of his new “Mindbomb” arc, Zdarsky once again references Three Jokers directly, except there’s a problem.
Like Nicholas J Levi above, I was a bit confused too. After all, two of the three Jokers were killed in Three Jokers. However, upon closer look, all of Zdarsky’s references haven’t actually been references to Three Jokers the story-arc. They’ve been references to the concept of three Jokers, which was first introduced by Johns in Justice League Vol. 2 #50 (“Darkseid War”).
All of Zdarsky’s references to three Jokers (emphasis on lowercase three), if you examine them closely, speak merely to the existence of the three Jokers—not necessarily to the canonicity of the Three Jokers series. Zdarsky even gives the origin of the three Jokers in “Bat-Man of Gotham”—the whole Halliday thing—but even with that, he has yet to actually mention anything about the Three Jokers series itself. And the recent nods have Riddler and Batman saying that the three Jokers are still around. What does this mean?
It could mean that Zdarsky is treating Three Jokers the series as non-canon (as others have wanted to do), or that he’s retconning Three Jokers the series to make it so that the two killed Jokers weren’t killed, survived, or were revived. It’s also possible that Death Metal/Infinite Frontier brought them back from the dead. Or more likely, when Halliday was reviving all dead Jokers across the multiverse in “Bat-Man of Gotham”, the two dead Jokers from Three Jokers might have been among those resurrected.
In the case that Zdarsky is simply ignoring Three Jokers the series as non-canon while regarding the existence of the three Jokers as introduced in Justice League Vol. 2 #50 as canon, this is possible too. However, it would be very strange. Johns introduced the idea in Justice League Vol. 2 #50, and he continued it in other stories that culminated in Three Jokers the series. And when Zdarsky referenced three Jokers in “Bat-Man of Gotham,” he was referencing the whole shebang, not anything piecemeal. (At least, with that reference, Zdarsky wasn’t being specific, so it could only be read as a reference to/canonization of all things pertaining to three Jokers, up to and including the Three Jokers series itself.)
Some that will say that this proves Johns’ Three Jokers series is non-canon while the existence of the three Jokers (as introduced and referenced by Johns in other titles) is canon. That sounds insane to me. Seriously, read that line back, and contemplate it. It’s bizarre to do a story about Johns’ three Jokers concept while completely ignoring Johns’ Three Jokers series. Zdarsky is doing something either very deliberate here or very odd. Either way, it’s strange. And even if it is deliberate (could Zdarsky be replacing the Three Jokers series with his own version in “Mindbomb”?), I think it’ll be open to interpretation when the dust settles. However, I believe the explanation of Halliday’s resurrected Jokers is the key to solving any potential continuity issues. Moving forward, I’ll be keeping a close eye on Zdarsky’s run. Unless I see any undeniable contradictions/cancellations of the Three Jokers series, then the latter surely must remain canon.
_________________________________________________________________
2 Responses to Zdarsky’s Mindbomb: Three Jokers Replacement or Resurrection?