#no idea what's going on in Joker: Year One. I only saw the Batjokes crumbs but

[distort-opia]

Do you think giving rise to the Joker would ruin his character?Honestly, in my opinion, it would completely ruin his character. I think the Joker not having a definitive origin is what makes me love the villain. The aspect of him being mysterious, and an unstoppable chaos is absolutely amazing. I honestly lose all desire to read any Joker comics when they create a definitive origin for him. And honestly, I hated that the three jokers were canon.

Myeah, I feel you. There's a reason I haven't kept up with comics recently (besides real life sucking out my soul with the amount of work I have to do). I just don't like what they're doing with Joker, ever since the idea of multiple Jokers resurfaced. Zdarsky and Rosenberg are good writers, but not even them could overcome my utter dislike at the idea of multiple canonical Jokers... I mean it's not their fault, it's fucking Geoff Johns' fault, but still.

I do agree that delving into Joker's backstory so much takes away from his character, although I can't say I am entirely opposed to stories hinting at it or exploring it. It's such an interesting aspect of him, the way he rebuilds himself and his past and his whole personality-- so I don't think this should be left untouched. It should just be done well. The thing about Joker is that he's Batman's narrative foil and parallel; if Batman is human, Joker is human. They both want to be more than that, but at the end of the day they're two human beings, and that's the appeal. If Joker is honestly depicted as an almost supernaturally evil monster whom Bruce cannot defeat... it completely undermines the dynamic. What's interesting is to have Bruce believe these things, and even Joker himself desperately try to leave humanity behind, but then have the story point out that it's just not possible (like Snyder did, God bless). That Joker is still a person, who despite the mystery and the subterfuge, does have a past. But turning that past into a certainty traps the character into a box, when versatility is one of his core traits. Not to mention how badly it fucks him up to imply he never had agency in his becoming as Joker (like in the Multiverse arc with Darwin Halliday).

To sum up, I don't think stories touching on Joker's past entirely ruin him as a villain. I think it very much depends on the capacity of the writer, to handle a character of Joker's complexity.