Grant Morrison / Wonder Woman

[kingsyn]

I was just reading a newsarama interview with Grant Morrison, and he says some pretty "interesting" things about WW.
He said that he always found something bogus and troubling at the heart of her and found her to be quite "artificial" as he put it.
Now, i'm a massive fan of Superman, not WW (in fact i have some problems with her myself!) but even i thorght that some of the things he said were (maybe) harsh.

Would anyone like to guess what he meant by artificial or troubling?
Or if you agree with him, why? Please share your thorghts. :biggrin:

[Arksy]

He at least apologised to the legions of fans of hers and promised to do somethnig in the future with her a bit more meaningful if given the chance.

[Thok]

Morrison seems to be basing his comments on the Marston era original Wonder Woman, which does seem to be fueled partially by Marston's fetishes. (There's bondage with the lasso, midgets with Dr. Psycho [yes, he does date that far back], weight issues with old school Etta Candy, lesbianism with Paradise Island and bestiality with Cheetah.) Marston himself was a bit of weirdo, who was in an open three way marriage.

That said, that ignores everything after the Silver Age or so.

[kingsyn]

He at least apologised to the legions of fans of hers and promised to do somethnig in the future with her a bit more meaningful if given the chance.

Yeah. That was nice of him.
Can't wait to see what he comes up with.

[CaptainCanada]

Substantially lowered my opinion of Grant Morrison. Not because he doesn't like Diana; most creators don't, including most of DC's big guns (Morrison, Geoff Johns, etc.); but instead of just leaving her be he admits to writing a story that purposefully denigrates her because he doesn't like her (which is a theme in DC's events; Johns did the same thing; though maybe we should have seen this coming, since Morrison wrote that horribly insulting scene in 52 with her in Nanda Parbat). Hack.

Keep his grubby little unprofessional hands away from Wonder Woman. He had his event where Diana should have been treated properly, and he spat on her.

[kingsyn]

Substantially lowered my opinion of Grant Morrison. Not because he doesn't like Diana; most creators don't, including most of DC's big guns (Morrison, Geoff Johns, etc.); but instead of just leaving her be he admits to writing a story that purposefully denigrates her because he doesn't like her (which is a theme in DC's events; Johns did the same thing; though maybe we should have seen this coming, since Morrison wrote that horribly insulting scene in 52 with her in Nanda Parbat). Hack.

Keep his grubby little unprofessional hands away from Wonder Woman. He had his event where Diana should have been treated properly, and he spat on her.

Which scene was that in 52? The one that was offensive.

[CaptainCanada]

Diana visits Rama Kushna and is told the solution to all her problems is to be more "human", which Greg Rucka (one of the few writers to care about the character and see her as an important figure in the DCU) correctly asserted was a grotesque take on the character, but Johns and Morrison didn't care. Diana's natural state to them is an ice queen bitch who needs to be taken down a peg, stop pretending she has anything to bring the world, act like a good American (wells, that would be Johns, anyway), and stop trying to do anything more than punch people. And she needs somebody else to hand her her Big Personal Revelation gift-wrapped, in basically her only scene of any significance in that whole series, while Superman and Batman get far more time devoted to them.

[John Lynch]

I believe Morrison was referring to the fact that she isn't one of DC's three most popular characters. Superman and Batman are most definitely DC's top-tier heroes because they're the most popular heroes DC has. As shown by the fact that they've been able to keep 2 books starring themselves profitable for decades. Wonder Woman on the other hand has only 1 book which has been relaunched plenty of times over the years in an effort to boost its sales, all of which have failed in the long run.

However despite these failings (whether its the character's fault or the writer's of the character isn't important), DC pushes her forward as if she is on the same level as Batman and Superman. The only reason DC does this is because she's female and they want to appear PC/appeal to women.

That is what I see as fake and artificial about the character. Whether or not Morrison agrees I don't know. But I think its what he meant.

As for Morrison's plans for Wonder Woman. Considering Batman RIP where we got yet another fake-death that we've seen a gazillion times and a villain whose identity is probably unknown even to its creator, I think its best if Morrison forgets Wonder Woman even exists.

[Quinnhop]

He means what he says. She seems artificial.

Fake.

Affected.

Forced.

He should write a Wonder Woman story that uses metatexuality to analyze her forced popularity (being one of the big three; lol) in terms of her character's canon origin as actually being an artificial construct (made of mud; lol).

It could end with her deciding to go back to being a part of "the Earth," using her artificiality to stabilize the Multiverse and prevent any future Crises from occurring. Her rigid, uninteresting structure, then, would serve some interesting use.

Plus, in becoming one with "the Earth," she'd literally become an important piece of the DC Universe, instead of just pretending to be.

[carabas]

Wonder Woman on the other hand has only 1 book which has been relaunched plenty of times over the years in an effort to boost its sales,Just twice, really. The first time after Crisis On Infinirte Earths, where the character got a cold reboot. And the second one after Infinite Crisis, and only because Alan Heinberg really really wanted his very own #1.

[Retro315]

I actually get what Grant's saying, and agree.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Wonder Woman, and pretty much have always liked her. She's a great character, has a great book right now, and has a unique and cool origin. Cool powers. Cool personality.

Not to mention the fact that she's a goddess, and when she's used as a role-model, there have been some real winning themes. She's something to aspire to be, definitely. The problem is ... a girl could aspire to be Wonder Woman, but no amount of hard work or aspiring can get you there. Because Wonder Woman isn't a real woman, she wasn't born, she was created ... by gods.

She's not technically a real human woman - she was made of clay, groomed on a paradise island, and has trouble fitting into the "real world".

That doesn't seem that far of a stretch from "she's made of plastic, lives in a dream mansion" ... she's a little bit of a Barbie-doll analogue.

I mean, yeah, Wonder Woman would slap Barbie for making girls look dumb, hop into your brother's room and smack his G.I. Joes around, and so forth ... but the whole "doll" or "fake" thing still kind of sticks.

I'm not saying to befit the name "Wonder WOMAN" a character needs to be a street-smart, tough-as-nails lesbian like Renee Montoya (although I am perfectly comfortable saying that Montoya is the strongest female character in the DCU, from a storytelling and coolness standpoint).

But it's not that easy to be the "pinnacle of WOMAN" if you were scratch-built by gods out of clay. See, Superman is "more than a man" (more than human, even). Batman ... now if there was ever a candidate for "wonder MAN". The guy is the pinnacle of what a human being can be.

I think the argument that DC doesn't really have a Big Trinity are interesting. I mean, popularity-wise, really, DC has a Big Two. But I'll disagree with the argument that Wonder Woman is tacked on just to be the PC "female voice" to counterpoint Superman and Batman.

There's always a female counterpoint, in real life. We have sisters, mothers, girlfriends, wives, cousins, friends, bosses, employees, whatever. There's more women than men on the Earth.

And plus ... it's impossible to deny that WW is as iconic as Superman and Batman, even if she is less popular. Icon status comes from the artists in the heydey, and the costume. And in that costume, how can she not be an icon?

Anyway, I've been loving what Gail Simone has been doing with Wonder Woman. There's a lot to be said for a book that actually entertains.

Anyway, strictly speaking right now aren't DC's big three Superman, Batman and Hal mother-effing Jordan?

[CaptainCanada]

Because Wonder Woman isn't a real woman, she wasn't born, she was created ... by gods.

She's not technically a real human woman - she was made of clay, groomed on a paradise island, and has trouble fitting into the "real world".

Being made of clay by the Gods makes her no different from any other human; that's how everybody was made in Greek myth (by Prometheus). I really, really wish they would have her point this out in-universe.

[Retro315]

Being made of clay by the Gods makes her no different from any other human; that's how everybody was made in Greek myth (by Prometheus). I really, really wish they would have her point this out in-universe.

I understand that. And I agree ... I'd like to see a nice Secret Origin or Year One for Wonder Woman that really set the bar for her, and made those connections for people, something that makes her feel less like a statue of a goddess come-to-life and more like a spirited little girl who grows up into freaking Wonder Woman.

If Gail could (and I believe she could) spell out how her being made of clay is 100% equivalent to messy, normal human birth, that'd be cool as hell.

[Xero]

At least Morrison remembered Nubia/Nu'Bia, whene was the last time anyone used that character? Has anyone seen Gail Simone post anything about wanting to use Nubia?

[Shellhead]

I actually get what Grant's saying, and agree.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Wonder Woman, and pretty much have always liked her. She's a great character, has a great book right now, and has a unique and cool origin. Cool powers. Cool personality.

Not to mention the fact that she's a goddess, and when she's used as a role-model, there have been some real winning themes. She's something to aspire to be, definitely. The problem is ... a girl could aspire to be Wonder Woman, but no amount of hard work or aspiring can get you there. Because Wonder Woman isn't a real woman, she wasn't born, she was created ... by gods.

She's not technically a real human woman - she was made of clay, groomed on a paradise island, and has trouble fitting into the "real world".

That doesn't seem that far of a stretch from "she's made of plastic, lives in a dream mansion" ... she's a little bit of a Barbie-doll analogue.

I mean, yeah, Wonder Woman would slap Barbie for making girls look dumb, hop into your brother's room and smack his G.I. Joes around, and so forth ... but the whole "doll" or "fake" thing still kind of sticks.

I'm not saying to befit the name "Wonder WOMAN" a character needs to be a street-smart, tough-as-nails lesbian like Renee Montoya (although I am perfectly comfortable saying that Montoya is the strongest female character in the DCU, from a storytelling and coolness standpoint).

But it's not that easy to be the "pinnacle of WOMAN" if you were scratch-built by gods out of clay. See, Superman is "more than a man" (more than human, even). Batman ... now if there was ever a candidate for "wonder MAN". The guy is the pinnacle of what a human being can be.

I think the argument that DC doesn't really have a Big Trinity are interesting. I mean, popularity-wise, really, DC has a Big Two. But I'll disagree with the argument that Wonder Woman is tacked on just to be the PC "female voice" to counterpoint Superman and Batman.

There's always a female counterpoint, in real life. We have sisters, mothers, girlfriends, wives, cousins, friends, bosses, employees, whatever. There's more women than men on the Earth.

And plus ... it's impossible to deny that WW is as iconic as Superman and Batman, even if she is less popular. Icon status comes from the artists in the heydey, and the costume. And in that costume, how can she not be an icon?

Anyway, I've been loving what Gail Simone has been doing with Wonder Woman. There's a lot to be said for a book that actually entertains.

Anyway, strictly speaking right now aren't DC's big three Superman, Batman and Hal mother-effing Jordan?

Outstanding post.

As a comic fan, I am probably part of the problem. I enjoyed the Perez artwork enough to give his Wonder Woman run a try, but gave up after about a dozen issues because I just wasn't enjoying it enough. Part of it is that even though I'm fine with buying comics as an adult, I don't bring them to work and I would find it embarrassing to be seen by anyone carrying a Wonder Woman comic. Or Ms. Marvel or She-Hulk. Somehow Promethea didn't bother me. Anyway, I suspect that I'm not alone in this, that a lot of male comic fans are disinterested in or uncomfortable with buying solo titles featuring female heroes.

And while Wonder Woman should theoretically be a perfectly viable character, her rogues gallery is pretty lacking. Many writers have trouble conveying her wisdom and empathy that balance out her warrior aspect. Male writers in general tend to be more comfortable writing male protagonists, and the comic industry has always skewed heavily towards male fans and male creators. And in a solo title, it's critical to develop a decent supporting cast, which Wonder Woman has often lacked. Etta Candy? No.

Even before I finished reading your last sentence, I already had the same thought... DC's real trinity today is Superman, Batman and Green Lantern. Wonder Woman is too problematic. I hope that they find better ways to use her in coming years, but after all these decades, I doubt that will happen.

[Pixie_Solanas]

I actually get what Grant's saying, and agree.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Wonder Woman, and pretty much have always liked her. She's a great character, has a great book right now, and has a unique and cool origin. Cool powers. Cool personality.

Not to mention the fact that she's a goddess, and when she's used as a role-model, there have been some real winning themes. She's something to aspire to be, definitely. The problem is ... a girl could aspire to be Wonder Woman, but no amount of hard work or aspiring can get you there. Because Wonder Woman isn't a real woman, she wasn't born, she was created ... by gods.

She's not technically a real human woman - she was made of clay, groomed on a paradise island, and has trouble fitting into the "real world".

That doesn't seem that far of a stretch from "she's made of plastic, lives in a dream mansion" ... she's a little bit of a Barbie-doll analogue.

I mean, yeah, Wonder Woman would slap Barbie for making girls look dumb, hop into your brother's room and smack his G.I. Joes around, and so forth ... but the whole "doll" or "fake" thing still kind of sticks.

I'm not saying to befit the name "Wonder WOMAN" a character needs to be a street-smart, tough-as-nails lesbian like Renee Montoya (although I am perfectly comfortable saying that Montoya is the strongest female character in the DCU, from a storytelling and coolness standpoint).

But it's not that easy to be the "pinnacle of WOMAN" if you were scratch-built by gods out of clay. See, Superman is "more than a man" (more than human, even). Batman ... now if there was ever a candidate for "wonder MAN". The guy is the pinnacle of what a human being can be.

I think the argument that DC doesn't really have a Big Trinity are interesting. I mean, popularity-wise, really, DC has a Big Two. But I'll disagree with the argument that Wonder Woman is tacked on just to be the PC "female voice" to counterpoint Superman and Batman.

There's always a female counterpoint, in real life. We have sisters, mothers, girlfriends, wives, cousins, friends, bosses, employees, whatever. There's more women than men on the Earth.

And plus ... it's impossible to deny that WW is as iconic as Superman and Batman, even if she is less popular. Icon status comes from the artists in the heydey, and the costume. And in that costume, how can she not be an icon?

Anyway, I've been loving what Gail Simone has been doing with Wonder Woman. There's a lot to be said for a book that actually entertains.

Anyway, strictly speaking right now aren't DC's big three Superman, Batman and Hal mother-effing Jordan?


Im with you on all points, well said.

However, I gotta say that Simone's WW bores me to tears.

[Stanlos]

He at least apologized to the legions of fans of hers and promised to do something in the future with her a bit more meaningful if given the chance.

I think it great that he apologized and that he has identified what has been obvious to me ever since he first began commenting on WW through JLA character profiles and Just Us Leaguers write-ups. Now that he has identified this, perhaps he can now begin working on just what it is about the character’s design that so troubles and unnerves him.

That will no doubt prove a transformative experience for him.

[WorstThingUS]

Being made of clay by the Gods makes her no different from any other human

It makes her plenty different and she's been returned to clay before because of it. Pinnochio becomes a real boy in the end, but that doesn't change that he was originally made from wood.

And what Morrison is speaking of even though he doesn't realize it is that Wonder Woman represents nothing the way Superman and Batman do. Superman is the bright and shining ideal, while Batman is vengeance and justice. Morrison's writings are usually based on these core concepts. What's WW's core concept? Peace? Feminism? What? That's what she's always lacked and why she's never really succeeded like Superman and Batman. It's easy to say it's just because she's a woman, but it's really that's all she is: a superpowered woman and not much else.

[Retro315]

It makes her plenty different and she's been returned to clay before because of it. Pinnochio becomes a real boy in the end, but that doesn't change that he was originally made from wood.

And what Morrison is speaking of even though he doesn't realize it is that Wonder Woman represents nothing the way Superman and Batman do. Superman is the bright and shining ideal, while Batman is vengeance and justice. Morrison's writings are usually based on these core concepts. What's WW's core concept? Peace? Feminism? What? That's what she's always lacked and why she's never really succeeded like Superman and Batman. It's easy to say it's just because she's a woman, but it's really that's all she is: a superpowered woman and not much else.

The answer to that dilemma is simple, just like how most DC superheroes origins are complex, years of analysis of these simple concepts.

She's pure as the winter snow, started out naive, etc ... etc ... etc ... and she's sort of stuck in the "not a real person, trying to fit into a world of real people".

In that regard, Wonder Woman could represent innocence the way that Superman represents hope and Batman represents justice.

That could be played a variety of ways. Internally, it's a fight to retain her innocence in a world where it's so easy to be corrupted. Externally, she's literally fighting to protect innocents and innocence all over the world.

That would also open the door for the juggling act it must be to try to keep your standards and virtues while getting your hands dirty protecting the standards and virtues of others.

Batman defends justice, but often has to come close to breaking his own rules to get the job done. It tests him. He endures.

Superman is hopeful, and every monster, evil aspect of humanity, and so forth, tests his resolve and his optimism is combated by seemingly overwhelming pessimism. He endures.

Wonder Woman is innocent, and there's a world full of people who want to take that away, and she sees disasters and crime and bad guys, and so it's a struggle to keep that sense of innocence. She'll endure.

Also, another thing that comes with innocence and her naievity - and this is really the main thing where Gail Simone can shine ... is that with that comes curiosity. Wonder Woman, as sheltered as she was, and as insightful as she is, must be one of the most curious people on the planet. She must ask a lot of "whys".

Like, somebody rapes a girl. Wonder Woman is like "why would somebody do something like that?" At this point in time, sure, she might have a pretty good idea. But when she first came on the scene it must've all been new to her. And I'm sure there's still plenty about the world that she's curious about and doesn't fully understand.

[ruppan]

I'm not even going to bother reading the interview. Morrison's treatment of WW in Final Crisis sums it up. He turned the only female character in comics with some mainstream recognition as a feminist icon into a carrier and spreader of disease. That's some powerfully messed up psychology at work there, and I'm not even a WW fan.

If Morrison has such problems with the character, he should either fix her or not use her. It's not like Morrison is especially beholden to any continuity he chooses not to acknowledge. If he thinks something is bad about WW, then change it. Put those high concepts to work. Denigrating her simply for pleasure is an insult to her fans and damages the intellectual property.

[amazoniansrule]

Why is it that anything with Grant Morrison,the simplest answer is often the one that eludes him. Wonder Woman is a warrior amazon raised in Greek Culture. If you stick to her core concept based on the creator's point of view...then you are in for alot of issues. Just take her as she is,a warrior woman. I mean dammit,it's not that hard. xena warrior princess,helped people,was tough,fought hard.

Grant probably feels that she needs to be run through the 5th dimension of his libido in order to understand her. Or some other acid laced trip.

[WorstThingUS]

The answer to that dilemma is simple, just like how most DC superheroes origins are complex, years of analysis of these simple concepts.

She's pure as the winter snow, started out naive, etc ... etc ... etc ... and she's sort of stuck in the "not a real person, trying to fit into a world of real people".

In that regard, Wonder Woman could represent innocence the way that Superman represents hope and Batman represents justice.

That's hardly an interesting premise for a hero and that's the problem. Who the hell wants to be innocent?

Why is it that anything with Grant Morrison,the simplest answer is often the one that eludes him. Wonder Woman is a warrior amazon raised in Greek Culture. If you stick to her core concept based on the creator's point of view...then you are in for alot of issues. Just take her as she is,a warrior woman. I mean dammit,it's not that hard. xena warrior princess,helped people,was tough,fought hard.


Yeah, but that still doesn't make her representative of an idea the way Superman and Batman are. The problem is, she's kind of a mixture of both which makes her redundant if not for her gender. This is why Morrison has no clue what to do with her in Final Crisis. Superman already has the source of all hope role filled, and Batman's the warrior with the undefeatable will (say what you want about RIP, the way he was able to escape the trap was awesome). What was left for her to do?

...though, if Morrison weren't so clueless, she should have been the one to hold the resistance together until Batman and Superman returned because she bridges that gap, but he is, so she didn't.

[amazoniansrule]

The undefeatable will of a warrior can be said for hawkman. it's not a concept only for one person to hold. Batman for all his training,he was not born into the role. Wonder Woman was. She also is the hope and symbol of a mother figure protecting her children. If you want to use that concept.

[Shellhead]

Maybe we would have that Hollywood movie about Wonder Woman by now if the core concept was more compelling.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Why is it that anything with Grant Morrison,the simplest answer is often the one that eludes him. Wonder Woman is a warrior amazon raised in Greek Culture.

Yeah, amazonian greekstress. We know. It's not all that enthralling, frankly.

[GozertheGozarian]

Being made of clay by the Gods makes her no different from any other human; that's how everybody was made in Greek myth (by Prometheus). I really, really wish they would have her point this out in-universe.
Prometheus' race of humans was destroyed by flood. The current crop are the Pyrra/Deucalion variety.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Maybe we would have that Hollywood movie about Wonder Woman by now if the core concept was more compelling.

You've got to go high camp (i.e. Lynda Carter) or else she's just a gross representation of a stoic, largely asexual mother protector. And competely and totally teats-off boring.

[WorstThingUS]

The undefeatable will of a warrior can be said for hawkman. it's not a concept only for one person to hold. Batman for all his training,he was not born into the role. Wonder Woman was.

Hawkman isn't one of the big three icons and Batman also represents justice which Hawkman does not. And that's all Batman is. Warrior for justice, period. That's and attractive concept, whereas WW...

She also is the hope and symbol of a mother figure protecting her children. If you want to use that concept.

This is right up there with "innocence" as one of the least attractive ideas for a superhero ever.

"I fight for for the betterment of all mankind."
"I fight for justice"
"I fight for innocence and the children."

See the problem?

[BYC]

Will somebody please think of the children!!!

I like WW, but the problem has always been she has no direction. And after all these years, I don't think she'll have one now competiting against all these newer media formats. I think Morrison using WW as the carrier was showing how even though she's a symbol (in the DC comics universe, but not in real life), the god of evil utterly destroyed her and crushed that symbol. Unfortunately, it means that Superman and Batman's symbolism is more important and stronger than hers

I'm beginning to think nobody can make her truly work. WW can be written well or poorly, but never great enough to be equal to Superman and Batman.

[Redem]

As more of a joke than a statement I will say this

Kinky fetish aside if I recall correctly one the reason the creator of wonder woman decided to make her a woman because he believed that Male superheroes were not able to feel compassion the same way a female would do, but where is the compassion in a profession that require to routinely beat up people after being raise by amazon warrior who live isolate from the rest of the world :biggrin:

[kingsyn]

What did Grant mean by contradictions in WW?
Gail Simone says she likes the contradictions in WW, because thats what makes her a great character. :confused:
What contradictions are these exactly?

[the-wolf]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think more writers would be successful with her if they just pretended she was a man. Wrote her like a man. She has a great origin; if you think about it, far more interesting than the backstories of most characters. Now, she's also predominantly a warrior and most warriors (like it or not) are men. So, write her like that and then "add in" the feminine characteristics afterwards. Which most male writers suck writing about anyways. But at least she'd be half-cool.

I know this sounds weird, but here's an example: Ripley from Aliens. To me, they basically wrote her character exactly as though she were a man and not a woman trying to be as tough as a man. Then they sprinkled in some natural mothering and nurturing traits on her so that she wasn't butch. The end result was a woman who is the equal of any man rather than an "artifical/forced" stereotype. Except Diana has even more warrior in her. She's a female Russell Crowe in Gladiator.

Or maybe I've just been into the kool-aid too much. I don't know, I'd like to see Ron Marz write her. I loved the job he did on Arwyn in Crossgen's Sojourn.

[Shellhead]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think more writers would be successful with her if they just pretended she was a man. Wrote her like a man. She has a great origin; if you think about it, far more interesting than the backstories of most characters. Now, she's also predominantly a warrior and most warriors (like it or not) are men. So, write her like that and then "add in" the feminine characteristics afterwards. Which most male writers suck writing about anyways. But at least she'd be half-cool.

I know this sounds weird, but here's an example: Ripley from Aliens. To me, they basically wrote her character exactly as though she were a man and not a woman trying to be as tough as a man. Then they sprinkled in some natural mothering and nurturing traits on her so that she wasn't butch. The end result was a woman who is the equal of any man rather than an "artifical/forced" stereotype. Except Diana has even more warrior in her. She's a female Russell Crowe in Gladiator.

Or maybe I've just been into the kool-aid too much. I don't know, I'd like to see Ron Marz write her. I loved the job he did on Arwyn in Crossgen's Sojourn.

I think that you've got the right idea. My favorite portrayal of Wonder Woman was in Kingdom Come, where she was so tough that she made Superman look emo by comparison.

[carabas]

She also is the hope and symbol of a mother figure protecting her children. If you want to use that concept.What? No she isn't. No seriously, where did you get that idea? Virgins (DC has issues...) make very bad mother symbols (outside of some pretty weird Catholic dogma anyways).

It makes her plenty different and she's been returned to clay before because of it. Pinnochio becomes a real boy in the end, but that doesn't change that he was originally made from wood.Only when written by wrioters who don't understand the mythology or the character. Anything that turns Wonder Woman into clay should turn anybody into clay.

[WorstThingUS]

Only when written by wrioters who don't understand the mythology or the character. Anything that turns Wonder Woman into clay should turn anybody into clay.

"Anybody" wasn't originally formed from clay. If it's created my mystic means, it can be undone by mystic means.

[WorstThingUS]

What did Grant mean by contradictions in WW?
Gail Simone says she likes the contradictions in WW, because thats what makes her a great character. :confused:
What contradictions are these exactly?

Warrior and ambassador of peace.


I know this sounds weird, but here's an example: Ripley from Aliens. To me, they basically wrote her character exactly as though she were a man and not a woman trying to be as tough as a man.

Ripley was written as a man. It happens more than you think in films

I think that you've got the right idea. My favorite portrayal of Wonder Woman was in Kingdom Come, where she was so tough that she made Superman look emo by comparison.

Well, Superman's not supposed to be a tough guy so that's not saying much.

[carabas]

"Anybody" wasn't originally formed from clay. If it's created my mystic means, it can be undone by mystic means.That wholly depends on your religion. All of mankind was mystically created by the gods or god. Bibilically speaking, we were created from dirt; the Greeks don't know how have it good they have it.

[Stanlos]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think more writers would be successful with her if they just pretended she was a man. Wrote her like a man. She has a great origin; if you think about it, far more interesting than the backstories of most characters. Now, she's also predominantly a warrior and most warriors (like it or not) are men. So, write her like that and then "add in" the feminine characteristics afterwards. Which most male writers suck writing about anyways. But at least she'd be half-cool.

I know this sounds weird, but here's an example: Ripley from Aliens. To me, they basically wrote her character exactly as though she were a man and not a woman trying to be as tough as a man. Then they sprinkled in some natural mothering and nurturing traits on her so that she wasn't butch. The end result was a woman who is the equal of any man rather than an "artifical/forced" stereotype. Except Diana has even more warrior in her. She's a female Russell Crowe in Gladiator.

Or maybe I've just been into the kool-aid too much. I don't know, I'd like to see Ron Marz write her. I loved the job he did on Arwyn in Crossgen's Sojourn.

Interestingly enough, the character of Ripley was originally a male.

Ron Marz also wrote a Green Lantern story featuring Wonder Woman. Check out Green Lantern 73
http://images.comiccollectorlive.com/covers/961/9617fdc9-f6de-44ef-b422-da9339556451.jpg

[WorstThingUS]

That wholly depends on your religion. All of mankind was mystically created by the gods or god. Bibilically speaking, we were created from dirt; the Greeks don't know how have it good they have it.

This isn't a formal examination of religion, it's comic book where Wonder Woman has been returned to the mystic clay from whence she was formed before. Every character has had his or her origin undone---be it magic or science---for dramatic purposes in a story. She's no exception.

[B. Kuwanger]

I suspect that I'm not alone in this, that a lot of male comic fans are disinterested in or uncomfortable with buying solo titles featuring female heroes.

Oddly enough, for me, it's just Wonder Woman. I've brought She-Hulk and Ms. Marvel to work before, and the thing about that is that I didn't enjoy those comics. I like the character of Diana from what I've read in Perez and Joe Kelly books, but I'm weird about bringing WW comics into a non-comic atmosphere, like work or a friend's house. To be honest I was searching for WW back issues just yesterday and I didn't feel like asking for help from comic shop guys I've known for years.

[MrPalen]

"Anybody" wasn't originally formed from clay. If it's created my mystic means, it can be undone by mystic means.
That wholly depends on your religion. All of mankind was mystically created by the gods or god. Bibilically speaking, we were created from dirt; the Greeks don't know how have it good they have it.

No. People aren't made out of clay or dirt.

[MrPalen]

Oddly enough, for me, it's just Wonder Woman. I've brought She-Hulk and Ms. Marvel to work before, and the thing about that is that I didn't enjoy those comics. I like the character of Diana from what I've read in Perez and Joe Kelly books, but I'm weird about bringing WW comics into a non-comic atmosphere, like work or a friend's house. To be honest I was searching for WW back issues just yesterday and I didn't feel like asking for help from comic shop guys I've known for years.

I think it's because Wonder Woman is sort of a female icon. Seems to me it would be kinda like carrying around Barbie or She-Ra comics, people would think you're reading comics for girls. She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel.. they don't have that same connotation.

[NeoStar9X]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think more writers would be successful with her if they just pretended she was a man. Wrote her like a man. She has a great origin; if you think about it, far more interesting than the backstories of most characters. Now, she's also predominantly a warrior and most warriors (like it or not) are men. So, write her like that and then "add in" the feminine characteristics afterwards. Which most male writers suck writing about anyways. But at least she'd be half-cool.

I know this sounds weird, but here's an example: Ripley from Aliens. To me, they basically wrote her character exactly as though she were a man and not a woman trying to be as tough as a man. Then they sprinkled in some natural mothering and nurturing traits on her so that she wasn't butch. The end result was a woman who is the equal of any man rather than an "artifical/forced" stereotype. Except Diana has even more warrior in her. She's a female Russell Crowe in Gladiator.

Or maybe I've just been into the kool-aid too much. I don't know, I'd like to see Ron Marz write her. I loved the job he did on Arwyn in Crossgen's Sojourn.

I think this might be the best idea. It's actually one I've thought about for a while now as the way she should be approached. Like said though the character of Ripley was originally written as a male character. Still in WW's case they need to stop making it come off as a female Superman. We have that already in Supergirl and she's just fine. It could be that Wonder Woman unlike other heroes was created to try and prove a point that didn't really have to do with comics or superheroics. Not created as a hero a person (readers or the creator) could enjoy the way others were.

My issues with WW are unique to WW herself. I don't have any problem reading or watching female heroes. Honestly one of my favorite shows of the last several years has been Charmed (have to thank and blame my sister for that). When I was a kid one of my favorite shows was "Clarissa Explains it all" that stared a young Melissa Joan Hart. I tried to never miss an episode of Xena when that show was airing. So I don't think I have issues with shows or books with female characters or strong female characters. I'm sure that's the case for a lot of male readers that simply aren't feeling Wonder Woman. However the idea that the issue could be the actual character of Wonder Woman and not simply how she is written seems to be something some WW fans do not want to hear or even address. For them it has to be that you just aren't getting her or in some cases you don't like strong women, etc.

[the-wolf]

Interestingly enough, the character of Ripley was originally a male.

Ron Marz also wrote a Green Lantern story featuring Wonder Woman. Check out Green Lantern 73
http://images.comiccollectorlive.com/covers/961/9617fdc9-f6de-44ef-b422-da9339556451.jpg

I probably have that issue. I'll have to go back and re-read it. Thanks. And cool info about Ripley. To both posters who mentioned it. Feels good to be right :rolleyes: :wink: .

[the-wolf]

Warrior and ambassador of peace.







.

I have to disagree with you here quite strongly. How about a mild-mannered scientist who turns into a raging Hulk? In general, it's the contradictions in a character that make them interesting because it more closely resembles what real people are like. And most real people are full of contradictions. Wihtout them them, you get a one-dimensional, flat character devoid of substance.

Speaking of Hulk, it's not a bad template for WW to follow. You have the conspiracy stories and the searching for a cure stories, the fighting inner-demons stories and the Hulk Smash stories. I think WW could have a similar range. Trying to fit into a different world as an outsider (something she does share in common with Supes, but that isn't played up enough), Greek/Amazonian politics/intrigue and fighting gods and demons and seven-headed monsters. The framework is there to tell a range of stories from human interest to all-out "300"-style battles.

[bannermanonemillion]

I dig the contradictions myself. I like the idea that on the one hand Diana is this truly compassionate and gentle woman but on the battlefield, she turns into a female Leonidas. We saw this in a Superman comic where he and Diana are stuck in this dimension for like 1000 years fighting demons. The minute they get there, Diana sees a monster and just frakking leaps into fighting it. Superman lets off a little "Whoa."

We see the same thing with Starfire.

[Shellhead]

I have to disagree with you here quite strongly. How about a mild-mannered scientist who turns into a raging Hulk? In general, it's the contradictions in a character that make them interesting because it more closely resembles what real people are like. And most real people are full of contradictions. Wihtout them them, you get a one-dimensional, flat character devoid of substance.

Speaking of Hulk, it's not a bad template for WW to follow. You have the conspiracy stories and the searching for a cure stories, the fighting inner-demons stories and the Hulk Smash stories. I think WW could have a similar range. Trying to fit into a different world as an outsider (something she does share in common with Supes, but that isn't played up enough), Greek/Amazonian politics/intrigue and fighting gods and demons and seven-headed monsters. The framework is there to tell a range of stories from human interest to all-out "300"-style battles.

Hulk is a popular character because he appeals to a variety of readers. Body builders envy his muscles and his feats. Nerds who have been bullied relish the concept of a nerd who turns into an unstoppable force who punishes all those bullies. As a guy with an anger management problem, I can relate to the experience of a towering, destructive rage, even as I have worked to control that tendency in myself.

Wonder Woman is popular with who? Who out there can relate to being both an amazon and a diplomat? Maybe a few female jocks with decent social skills?

[WorstThingUS]

I have to disagree with you here quite strongly.

I don't see how since this is literally what she's been since the reboot. A trained warrior sent to patriarch's world as an ambassador. This isn't my opinion; this is the set-up of the series. On one hand she wants all humanity to embrace each other in peace, on the other hand she's got a giant axe for when that plan doesn't work. In fact, the reason Zeus is sending men into the world now in the current storyline is because she failed to bring order to it.

[CMBMOOL]

I think that you've got the right idea. My favorite portrayal of Wonder Woman was in Kingdom Come, where she was so tough that she made Superman look emo by comparison.
I have to admit I like the KC Wonder Woman than regular Wonder Woman. :frown:

Because despite her success I don't see anything interesting that Gail can show me. :frown:

[CMBMOOL]

It makes her plenty different and she's been returned to clay before because of it. Pinnochio becomes a real boy in the end, but that doesn't change that he was originally made from wood.

Now that what always turns me off about Wonder Woman, the fact that she was made of Play-doh type magic clay.


Burrr, kind of wonky if you think about it. :frown:

[the-wolf]

I don't see how since this is literally what she's been since the reboot. A trained warrior sent to patriarch's world as an ambassador. This isn't my opinion; this is the set-up of the series. On one hand she wants all humanity to embrace each other in peace, on the other hand she's got a giant axe for when that plan doesn't work. In fact, the reason Zeus is sending men into the world now in the current storyline is because she failed to bring order to it.

Sorry, let me re-word. I don't disagree with you about what the contradictions are, only that the contradictions aren't interesting.

[CaptainCanada]

I don't see how since this is literally what she's been since the reboot. A trained warrior sent to patriarch's world as an ambassador. This isn't my opinion; this is the set-up of the series. On one hand she wants all humanity to embrace each other in peace, on the other hand she's got a giant axe for when that plan doesn't work.
Very practical. I don't see an inherent contradiction; she understands that peacemaking isn't all sunshine and rainbows, and there will be those out to defeat her aims. No different than UN forces carrying weapons into Bosnia.

In fact, the reason Zeus is sending men into the world now in the current storyline is because she failed to bring order to it.
Her ultimate goal is never going to be achieved within mainstream continuity, anymore than Superman will ever win the battle for truth, justice, and the American way, or Batman will make Gotham into a crime-free zone. It's a motivation and a mission to facilitate stories; not that you can't show her achieving things, but never the end (except in Elseworlds).

[the-wolf]

Actually, let me apologize. After re-reading your post, you don't seem to have said that at all. I still like the contradictions though.

One thing you mention in an earlier post, however, is that WW doesn't represent an ideal. Who cares? Most comic book characters don't. Or if they do it's "justice" or "revenge." I agree with theXena example. Just tell good kick-@$$ stories from the viewpoint of a female warrior. Who's also trying to be a "hero" in a man's world.

[the-wolf]

Hulk is a popular character because he appeals to a variety of readers. Body builders envy his muscles and his feats. Nerds who have been bullied relish the concept of a nerd who turns into an unstoppable force who punishes all those bullies. As a guy with an anger management problem, I can relate to the experience of a towering, destructive rage, even as I have worked to control that tendency in myself.

Wonder Woman is popular with who? Who out there can relate to being both an amazon and a diplomat? Maybe a few female jocks with decent social skills?

How many Superman fans are immigrants? How many Batman fans have lost loved ones to crime? The point with them is that those are interesting concepts. You can relate to them without direct experience. I again go back to the Xena example. Just tell great stories about a woman warrior in a man's world. Most people can relate to being out of their element and/or being given an impossible task and having an overwhelming burden of responsibility placed on them, the same way that they can relate to "justice."

Explore Greek and Amazonian mythology and politics. How that myths and politics tie into other mythologies like Egyptian or Atlantean. Sprinkle liberally with giant, spectacular battles. The Hiketia, for example. I actually found this story a little slow and with a boring ending, but the concept had so much potential. Do more stories like that.

[WorstThingUS]

Actually, let me apologize. After re-reading your post, you don't seem to have said that at all. I still like the contradictions though.

One thing you mention in an earlier post, however, is that WW doesn't represent an ideal. Who cares? Most comic book characters don't. Or if they do it's "justice" or "revenge." I agree with theXena example. Just tell good kick-@$$ stories from the viewpoint of a female warrior. Who's also trying to be a "hero" in a man's world.

Yeah, but she's supposed to be one of the "big three" icons. The biggest heroes represent something. Spider-man is "everyman." The Hulk is the hidden rage in everyone waiting to break loose. This is part of why she's an icon in name only because she doesn't represent anything. And her identity as "superhero" has always been compromised by this whole "ambassador or peace" idea. I maintain, it's a lame idea for a superhero.

[Shellhead]

Regarding her clay origin... Morrison made an interesting offhand comment about clay in Seven Soldiers. I think it was in Manhatten Guardian #1. Something to the effect that clay was the missing link between animate and inanimate objects. I'm surprised that he did use that as an angle for some wonky idea involving Wonder Woman. Or maybe that was why she was the vector for that power-draining virus in Final Crisis, only that was never made explicitly clear.

[Adam C]

I'm not even going to bother reading the interview. Morrison's treatment of WW in Final Crisis sums it up.

[...]

If Morrison has such problems with the character, he should either fix her or not use her. It's not like Morrison is especially beholden to any continuity he chooses not to acknowledge. If he thinks something is bad about WW, then change it. Put those high concepts to work. Denigrating her simply for pleasure is an insult to her fans and damages the intellectual property.

This is the point where you would want to read those comments (seriously, why has there been a four page discussion over these comments, but no one has bothered posting them) then...

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/010928-Grant-Final-Crisis.html

NRAMA: Regarding the big legends of the DCU: Superman got his mini-event, Batman took on Darkseid, Flash tries to outrun death, Green Lantern overcomes granny . . . but Wonder Woman turns out to be Anti-Life Patient Zero and spends the bulk of the series as a disfigured thrall. Why does Wonder Woman not have a comparable moment in that context?

GM: I wondered about that myself. I love what Gail Simone (especially) and other writers have done to empower the Wonder Woman concept but I must admit I’ve always sensed something slightly bogus and troubling at its heart. When I dug into the roots of the character I found an uneasy melange of girl power, bondage and disturbed sexuality that has never been adequately dealt with or fully processed out to my mind. I’ve always felt there was something oddly artificial about Wonder Woman, something not like a woman at all.

Having said that, I became quite fascinated by these contradictions and problems and tried to resolve them for what turned into a different project entirely. Partly because I didn’t want to use any of that new material in Final Crisis, I relegated Wonder Woman to a role that best summed up my original negative feelings about the character. My apologies to her fans and I promise to be a little more constructive next time around.

He admits he didn't get the character, tried to do her justice but the solution ended up sprawling into something else, and then apologises to her fans for not being able to better while promising to try and be more constructive next time he uses the character. It's not "for pleasure". It's simply a creative block he had trouble working around. He even puts in his recommendation for the current WW writer that he feels is doing much better work with the character.

[Adam C]

I don't see how since this is literally what she's been since the reboot. A trained warrior sent to patriarch's world as an ambassador. This isn't my opinion; this is the set-up of the series. On one hand she wants all humanity to embrace each other in peace, on the other hand she's got a giant axe for when that plan doesn't work.

I concur with the Captain here. Having the means to fight aggression doesn't necessarily mean that she supports aggression. Martial arts classes stress avoiding conflict all the time, even as they teach means of engaging in physical combat for self-defence. I'm not familiar with the details of Wonder Woman's training but it's not a great leap to suggest she learned these sorts of lessons as a warrior. In any case she's not greatly different than Superman and Batman in wanting a peaceful world while being willing to use physical force against threats to it.

In fact, the reason Zeus is sending men into the world now in the current storyline is because she failed to bring order to it.

Yeah, but based on his dialogue in the current storyline Zeus seems to want his Olympians to bring peace by conquering the world. We all know how that's gonna work out.

[the-wolf]

Well, the reson she isn't quite like a real woman is because she isn't quite a real woman. I'd like to see what GM will do with her though. I almost think that the concepts of a character like WW are more up GM's alley than Batman, who's far more straightforward.

[CMBMOOL]

Well, the reson she isn't quite like a real woman is because she isn't quite a real woman. I'd like to see what GM will do with her though. I almost think that the concepts of a character like WW are more up GM's alley than Batman, who's far more straightforward.
Ha- ha- ha-oh you're serious about this ? :confused:

If not that would be a great tale of mess to read as they would be perfect together. :evilsmile:

[BYC]

I think the real problem is Morrison just doesn't revere Wonder Woman as opposed to Superman and Batman. This comes up over and over again, but Diana isn't on the same level as Clark and Bruce. We're told she is, but we don't really believe it. It's almost a white lie told to kids. "Oh yeah, Wonder Woman is female empowerment!" Ummm...yeah.... It really doesn't help that Moulton's reasons to create her are bizzare to say the least by today's standards.

[Bat-Reader]

Actually, globally DC has five icons or whatever you call it, recognizable characters. Superman, Batman, Catwoman, Flash, Joker. Unfortunately, no one knows Wonder Woman.

[CaptainCanada]

Wonder Woman is extremely recognizable; in that respect, she's a member of the Trinity. But the recognition is a mile wide and an inch deep, because she never gets any media of her own to acquaint people with any aspect of her mythos beyond her visual image.

Ask people who she is, they know. Ask beyond that (origin, supporting cast, villains, stories), and you'll get, at most, some jumbled recollections of the 70s TV show.

[DCKar2nist]

well... she is "quite artificial" she has very little depth IMO. On average I've hated just about everything about her since Perez left and before Simone took over, and I had no problem with the way she was relegated in FC.

That being said I like the current Gail Simone run.

[carabas]

This isn't a formal examination of religion, it's comic book where Wonder Woman has been returned to the mystic clay from whence she was formed before. Every character has had his or her origin undone---be it magic or science---for dramatic purposes in a story. She's no exception.Perez, Rucka and Simone are in the camp that Diana is as closely related to clay as the next person. At least one writer (Perez IIRC) has had Zeus say as much on panel.

It's the really bad Wonder Woman writers who don't get the character (Heinberg, Geoff Johns) who go on and on about her being some sort of golem.

[DCKar2nist]

Still, I don't mean to be a smart ass but if she was created from clay she is a golem.

[carabas]

Still, I don't mean to be a smart ass but if she was created from clay she is a golem.Greek mythology: all humans are created from clay.

[Shellhead]

Actually, Morrison had a very cool scene for Wonder Woman at the start of Final Crisis #7. Her dialogue was so elegant, it was almost like poetry. Of course, that was an alternate reality version of Wonder Woman, so I can understand how some people wouldn't count it.

[Flâneur]

Actually, globally DC has five icons or whatever you call it, recognizable characters. Superman, Batman, Catwoman, Flash, Joker. Unfortunately, no one knows Wonder Woman.
Flash? Lulz, no. Superman, Lois Lane, Batman, Catwoman, Joker, maybe Robin and Wonder Woman are the recognisable ones. If your mum can't tell you who these are when you're a kid then they're not icons and most parents wouldn't have the foggiest as to who the Flash is and there's no movies of him out there either. The others I've mentioned, you don't need to see their cartoons or books to know who they are because they're so embedded into our popular culture that everyone knows about them even if they'll never be a fan.
well... she is "quite artificial" she has very little depth IMO. On average I've hated just about everything about her since Perez left and before Simone took over, and I had no problem with the way she was relegated in FC.

That being said I like the current Gail Simone run.
What depth does she lack that Superman has?
Still, I don't mean to be a smart ass but if she was created from clay she is a golem.
Superman is really just a green man, he never grew up with the Kents or anything. Batman is really just a random rich guy who likes cosplay.

[WorstThingUS]

Greek mythology: all humans are created from clay.

Actually, it's Greek, Babylonian and Chinese as well, but in the current DCU only Wonder Woman was created from clay. And didn't Zeus wipe out those clay humans anyway?

I think the real problem is Morrison just doesn't revere Wonder Woman as opposed to Superman and Batman.

And the is she doesn't represent any sort of ideal or concept the way an icon should and that's what Morrison works from with Superman and Batman.

Actually, globally DC has five icons or whatever you call it, recognizable characters. Superman, Batman, Catwoman, Flash, Joker. Unfortunately, no one knows Wonder Woman.

The Flash? Catwoman? Before Robin The Boy Wonder? I think not. As the tail end of "Batman and..." he's before even Wonder Woman. And given their proximity to Superman, Lois and Luthor also come ahead of half your list.

[carabas]

Actually, it's Greek, Babylonian and Chinese as well, but in the current DCU only Wonder Woman was created from clay. And didn't Zeus wipe out those clay humans anyway?I have no idea. But the most revered modern Wonder Woman writers are those who dismiss the notion that ther still is anything remotely claylike about her, that she is anything less than a completely flesh and blood human, while those generally agreed upon not to get the character are those who choose to dwell on that aspect of her origin and interpretet it as her being some sort of golem construct rather than a real person.

[WorstThingUS]

I have no idea. But the most revered modern Wonder Woman writers are those who dismiss the notion that ther still is anything remotely claylike about her, that she is anything less than a completely flesh and blood human, while those generally agreed upon not to get the character are those who choose to dwell on that aspect of her origin and interpretet it as her being some sort of golem construct rather than a real person.

Well, it's a pretty big deal. It's why Spider-Woman's origin was changed from her being an spider evolved into a human to a human given powers because there would always be the opening for someone to turn her back into a spider. William Messner Loebs seemed about to "fix" Wonder Woman this way by actually making Hercules her father and the clay a lie from Hippolyta to deceive the Amazons for obvious reasons. I still say they should have gone with it.

[Indigo Al]

I really don't get why the clay thing is such a horrendous problem. (Greek epic heroes always have unusual birth stories). She wasn't a clay sculpture come to life suddenly as an adult woman -- she's been shown to have a "real" infancy and childhood.

Do people really only see her as a walking dreidel with a tiara and a lasso?

[carabas]

I really don't get why the clay thing is such a horrendous problem. (Greek epic heroes always have unusual birth stories). She wasn't a clay sculpture come to life suddenly as an adult woman -- she's been shown to have a "real" infancy and childhood.
The problem is that certain writers do claim that that is exactly what Diana is: inhuman animated mineral.

[Sizzle]

I think part of the problem is she is not recognizable outside of her picture. Ask a non comic person Superman or Batman's origin, alter ego, job, and some villians. They can probably do a decent job with that. I don't think the same can be said for Wonder Woman.

While many revere Perez run on the book after Crisis, it apparently has not defined the character to a generation like Year One or Man of Steel.

I wish I had the money to read Gail's run and see what she is doing. I loved her Birds of Prey and I'm loving Secret Six, I'm sure she's doing a great job.

[John Lynch]

Wonder Woman is a well known woman with big breasts from the tv show. Like Charlie's angels, she's well known as being from a T&A show, not as a character from a comic.

That's another reason its phoney for her to be considered part of the trinity.

[Constantine Drakon]

Wonder Woman was created back in 1941, by a guy with a lot of issues and weird and kinky fetishes. But you cannot deny that the man had imagination, and he created a lasting iconography. Bullets and bracers, a lasso that compels truth, these are things that were going to last. Still, the stories, while amusing in a "I can't believe they published that" way, were rarely very good. And Silver Age Wonder woman stories were utter trash, in my opinion. Some of the worst mainstream comics DC has ever published, in my opinion.

The Bronze Age rolled around, and Denny O'Neil looked back at the character's history and realized that while Wonder Woman had been around for decades, had become famous, a household name, had imagery that was readily recognizable... she was actually a pretty bad character in the comics. He tried to address that, but went too far, getting rid of almost all that was recognizable about the character. It was undone.

In 1987 we got Perez, who wrote the definitive modern take on the character. Working with Potter and later with Len Wein, he was in charge of the character until 1992. He gave the character a fresh start, wiping away the dross of pre-Crisis stories, exiling much of the character's disturbing and embarrassing past to the limbo of "non-canon". He retained many of the character's most recognizable elements, the things the public expected in a character named "Wonder Woman", but approached them in new ways. This was, for all intents and purposes, an entirely new character that borrowed a few things from the old Wonder Woman.

Here's your problem then. "Wonder Woman" has been around since 1941, has been in the Justice League and Justice Society, had her own TV show, is quite visible and famous... but the Wonder Woman in the actual stories right now has only been around since '87, and in the character's pre-Crisis stories there's more to work against the character than for her.

Furthermore, the two best runs on her book, Perez and Rucka's, were both followed by disastrous runs that tore down much of what came before. William Messner-Loebs got rid of Perez's supporting cast, retconned the past of Wonder Woman and the Amazons (thankfully it didn't stick), and even killed the Amazons, keeping them dead for three years before realizing his mistake and bringing them back. We had some mixed runs until Rucka really started building the character up again, only to have it all torn down by the colossal idiocy of someone that thought the character needed to be more like her pre-Crisis self. Johns and Morrison both pushed the idea that she needed to be called a failure in 52, wanting to take her down a peg, against Rucka's protests. She was shoehorned into an embarrassingly bad secret identity, in a case of misplaced nostalgia, and handed off to a man that wrote four issues of Wonder Woman in a whole year, giving us a story entitled "Who is Wonder Woman?" (a question he himself clearly didn't know the answer to). Then came Amazons Attack, which may very well be the worst Wonder Woman story ever written. It was certainly one of the most damaging.

So here's the crux of the matter. You've got a trend at DC at the moment to restore elements of the Silver Age books, which has had some good results on some books, but which can do Wonder Woman nothing but harm. You've got a character with decades of appearances, making her popular and recognizable, but the real work to build her into a credible character has started only recently, and has been sabotaged a few times with very bad writing (most recently due to that aforementioned misplaced nostalgia).

And you've got Grant Morrison, a man that firmly believes that pretty much every story ever written about a character should count and be considered "part" of the character's whole. But with Wonder Woman that's a terrible idea. It's no wonder he had trouble with the character if he's trying to reconcile what she is now with what she was pre-Crisis. She really should be allowed to bury her past and put it behind her. People need to stop basing their opinions of the character on what she was before Perez, it's the only hope she has of becoming a character that can live up to the expectations people have for such a well-known and visible character.

Still, I don't mean to be a smart ass but if she was created from clay she is a golem.

As are the Power Puff Girls, I'm sure.

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." - Genesis 2:7

Earth turned into flesh and blood is not at all an uncommon story. She's not a golem, she's a human, as much as any of those people from Greek myth, as much as Adam in the Bible.

[carabas]

Johns and Morrison both pushed the idea that she needed to be called a failure in 52, wanting to take her down a peg, against Rucka's protests.Can you substantiate that Morrison actually pushed for this, rather than that he just went with what was at the time her editorially handed down characterisation from Infiite Crisis in that one scene he wrote?

[Sizzle]

As are the Powerpuff Girls, I'm sure.


No, they are made of sugar, spice, and everything nice. As well as a dose of, Chemical X!

[CaptainCanada]

Can you substantiate that Morrison actually pushed for this, rather than that he just went with what was at the time her editorially handed down characterisation from Infiite Crisis in that one scene he wrote?
Rucka's said that when they were discussing writing Diana in 52, that he thought the stuff that eventually ended up on the page was trash, but Morrison and Johns outvoted him, and Morrison wrote it.
Still, I don't mean to be a smart ass but if she was created from clay she is a golem.
No, a golem is animate clay. Diana is clay made flesh. All humans were created that way in Greek myth, and the descendants of Deucalion still are of that descent; the rest are transfigured stone. Diana being transfigured clay makes her no different from the rest of gods-created humanity (now, the DCU is a cosmological muddle depending on the property, but in theory her gods created the rest of humanity too; you kind of just have to allow that to cooexist with rival mythologies).

And the is she doesn't represent any sort of ideal or concept the way an icon should and that's what Morrison works from with Superman and Batman.

Feminism, ultimate warrior, enlightenment, take your pick. Morrison writes the Flashes and Green Lanterns just fine in FC, and they aren't some transcendant forms.

[WorstThingUS]

Feminism, ultimate warrior, enlightenment, take your pick. Morrison writes the Flashes and Green Lanterns just fine in FC, and they aren't some transcendant forms.


They aren't part of the big three, "ultimate warrior" isn't an ideal and "feminism" and "enlightenment" are hardly superhero concepts. "Oooh, look at me! I fight for equal pay under the law!"

[Indigo Al]

And Silver Age Wonder woman stories were utter trash, in my opinion. Some of the worst mainstream comics DC has ever published, in my opinion.

but the Wonder Woman in the actual stories right now has only been around since '87, and in the character's pre-Crisis stories there's more to work against the character than for her.

So here's the crux of the matter. You've got a trend at DC at the moment to restore elements of the Silver Age books, which has had some good results on some books, but which can do Wonder Woman nothing but harm.

So what do you think it was about her pre-crisis past that is damaging to her?

[WorstThingUS]

I think part of the problem is she is not recognizable outside of her picture. Ask a non comic person Superman or Batman's origin, alter ego, job, and some villians. They can probably do a decent job with that. I don't think the same can be said for Wonder Woman.


Actually, they do in the sense that she comes from an island of Amazons, but not much beyond that.

[West Mantooth]

So here's the crux of the matter. You've got a trend at DC at the moment to restore elements of the Silver Age books, which has had some good results on some books, but which can do Wonder Woman nothing but harm. You've got a character with decades of appearances, making her popular and recognizable, but the real work to build her into a credible character has started only recently, and has been sabotaged a few times with very bad writing (most recently due to that aforementioned misplaced nostalgia).

And you've got Grant Morrison, a man that firmly believes that pretty much every story ever written about a character should count and be considered "part" of the character's whole. But with Wonder Woman that's a terrible idea. It's no wonder he had trouble with the character if he's trying to reconcile what she is now with what she was pre-Crisis. She really should be allowed to bury her past and put it behind her. People need to stop basing their opinions of the character on what she was before Perez, it's the only hope she has of becoming a character that can live up to the expectations people have for such a well-known and visible character.



Thank You so much!!! People act like Morrison is saying Wonder Woman sucks but he was addressing Marston's original Wonder Woman/Pre-Crisis.

Some WW fans are so blinded that they say Wonder Woman needs more exposure then in the same breathe berate any unworthy depiction as just let Gail write it. Crappy depictions are apart of every character as some points.

[CaptainCanada]

They aren't part of the big three,
And yet, they were still well-written and given cool moments; and Diana was not.

"ultimate warrior" isn't an ideal
It's a concept.
and "feminism" and "enlightenment" are hardly superhero concepts. "Oooh, look at me! I fight for equal pay under the law!"
What is or is not a superhero concept? Particularly given how much of this story was metatextual mumbo-jumbo; do something about women in comics, or about how Wonder Woman is out to lead humanity to a better society. Those have both been used for plenty of superhero stories with the character.
Thank You so much!!! People act like Morrison is saying Wonder Woman sucks but he was addressing Marston's original Wonder Woman/Pre-Crisis.
But he's not writing Marston's Wonder Woman. He's writing Perez's (albeit with some of the Silver Age crap bogging it down, but he actually thinks that's a good idea). Treat her like Perez's.

Some WW fans are so blinded that they say Wonder Woman needs more exposure then in the same breathe berate any unworthy depiction as just let Gail write it. Crappy depictions are apart of every character as some points.
But Wonder Woman gets nothing but bad depictions most of the time; she's never contributed anything impressive to any of DC's big events; not here, not in Infinite Crisis, not the original Crisis, not in any of the others.

The whole "trinity" concept is one part publication quirk, one part t-shirt sales, and two parts DC wanting to say they have a really major female character; I've always felt trying to judge her on the level of Superman and Batman doesn't help the character at all, because no one's on that level. Not her, not Flash, the Green Lantern, etc. But DC keeps insisting that she is, and that they all regard her as being their #3, and then they do absolutely nothing to show it; for a Wonder Woman fan, it's insulting. We can tell they don't mean what they say, but they keep saying it anyway.

[frostedone]

Diana visits Rama Kushna and is told the solution to all her problems is to be more "human", which Greg Rucka (one of the few writers to care about the character and see her as an important figure in the DCU) correctly asserted was a grotesque take on the character, but Johns and Morrison didn't care. Diana's natural state to them is an ice queen bitch who needs to be taken down a peg, stop pretending she has anything to bring the world, act like a good American (wells, that would be Johns, anyway), and stop trying to do anything more than punch people. And she needs somebody else to hand her her Big Personal Revelation gift-wrapped, in basically her only scene of any significance in that whole series, while Superman and Batman get far more time devoted to them.

I actually get what Grant's saying, and agree.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Wonder Woman, and pretty much have always liked her. She's a great character, has a great book right now, and has a unique and cool origin. Cool powers. Cool personality.

Not to mention the fact that she's a goddess, and when she's used as a role-model, there have been some real winning themes. She's something to aspire to be, definitely. The problem is ... a girl could aspire to be Wonder Woman, but no amount of hard work or aspiring can get you there. Because Wonder Woman isn't a real woman, she wasn't born, she was created ... by gods.

She's not technically a real human woman - she was made of clay, groomed on a paradise island, and has trouble fitting into the "real world".

That doesn't seem that far of a stretch from "she's made of plastic, lives in a dream mansion" ... she's a little bit of a Barbie-doll analogue.

I mean, yeah, Wonder Woman would slap Barbie for making girls look dumb, hop into your brother's room and smack his G.I. Joes around, and so forth ... but the whole "doll" or "fake" thing still kind of sticks.

I'm not saying to befit the name "Wonder WOMAN" a character needs to be a street-smart, tough-as-nails lesbian like Renee Montoya (although I am perfectly comfortable saying that Montoya is the strongest female character in the DCU, from a storytelling and coolness standpoint).

But it's not that easy to be the "pinnacle of WOMAN" if you were scratch-built by gods out of clay. See, Superman is "more than a man" (more than human, even). Batman ... now if there was ever a candidate for "wonder MAN". The guy is the pinnacle of what a human being can be.

I think the argument that DC doesn't really have a Big Trinity are interesting. I mean, popularity-wise, really, DC has a Big Two. But I'll disagree with the argument that Wonder Woman is tacked on just to be the PC "female voice" to counterpoint Superman and Batman.

There's always a female counterpoint, in real life. We have sisters, mothers, girlfriends, wives, cousins, friends, bosses, employees, whatever. There's more women than men on the Earth.

And plus ... it's impossible to deny that WW is as iconic as Superman and Batman, even if she is less popular. Icon status comes from the artists in the heydey, and the costume. And in that costume, how can she not be an icon?

Anyway, I've been loving what Gail Simone has been doing with Wonder Woman. There's a lot to be said for a book that actually entertains.

Anyway, strictly speaking right now aren't DC's big three Superman, Batman and Hal mother-effing Jordan?

It makes her plenty different and she's been returned to clay before because of it. Pinnochio becomes a real boy in the end, but that doesn't change that he was originally made from wood.

And what Morrison is speaking of even though he doesn't realize it is that Wonder Woman represents nothing the way Superman and Batman do. Superman is the bright and shining ideal, while Batman is vengeance and justice. Morrison's writings are usually based on these core concepts. What's WW's core concept? Peace? Feminism? What? That's what she's always lacked and why she's never really succeeded like Superman and Batman. It's easy to say it's just because she's a woman, but it's really that's all she is: a superpowered woman and not much else.

I'm not even going to bother reading the interview. Morrison's treatment of WW in Final Crisis sums it up. He turned the only female character in comics with some mainstream recognition as a feminist icon into a carrier and spreader of disease. That's some powerfully messed up psychology at work there, and I'm not even a WW fan.

If Morrison has such problems with the character, he should either fix her or not use her. It's not like Morrison is especially beholden to any continuity he chooses not to acknowledge. If he thinks something is bad about WW, then change it. Put those high concepts to work. Denigrating her simply for pleasure is an insult to her fans and damages the intellectual property.

I think the real problem is Morrison just doesn't revere Wonder Woman as opposed to Superman and Batman. This comes up over and over again, but Diana isn't on the same level as Clark and Bruce. We're told she is, but we don't really believe it. It's almost a white lie told to kids. "Oh yeah, Wonder Woman is female empowerment!" Ummm...yeah.... It really doesn't help that Moulton's reasons to create her are bizzare to say the least by today's standards.

This is why I like the DCAU version of her so much. She is written not only well, but she has character and personality too.

The Justice League/Unlimited episodes starring her (usually the Themscarya ones) were some of the series' best.

With Bruce Timm leading the new animated Wonder Woman movie, this might end up good, and give her a proper story.

[CaptainCanada]

DCAU Wonder Woman was godawful. If she's not graceful, not diplomatic, not intelligent, not on a mission from her people and gods, she's not Wonder Woman. Timm and co. mangled her and her mythos in every conceivable way; she was a shoot-from-the-hip thug, the Amazons were emotionless ciphers, and not at all wise or morally advanced, her villains were bland (Ares) or changed so much as to not even be her villains anymore (Cheetah, Circe), and you could clearly see how little interest the writers had in the character every time they did a focus episode (another fan phrased it as "the clouds would part and say 'we would rather be doing anything else right now'").

[Cardinal!]

Wonder Woman was created back in 1941, by a guy with a lot of issues and weird and kinky fetishes. But you cannot deny that the man had imagination, and he created a lasting iconography. Bullets and bracers, a lasso that compels truth, these are things that were going to last. Still, the stories, while amusing in a "I can't believe they published that" way, were rarely very good. And Silver Age Wonder woman stories were utter trash, in my opinion. Some of the worst mainstream comics DC has ever published, in my opinion.... She really should be allowed to bury her past and put it behind her. People need to stop basing their opinions of the character on what she was before Perez, it's the only hope she has of becoming a character that can live up to the expectations people have for such a well-known and visible character.


I'm inclined to agree. Wonder Woman is one of my favorite characters (if not THE favorite) and I love everything about her character, right down to those wacky "contradictions" that are apparently so incredulous that writers seem to view them as detriments to her premise, but I have to say, as a child of the '80s who didn't even start reading comics until 1997, I have the post-crisis interpretation of the character to thank for that, achingly inconsistent though it's been. I can appreciate the older stuff for what it was (but truthfully, hardly ANY Silver Age stuff from DC really does anything for me), but it was the labors of Perez and company that bore a Diana that got my attention, and that's the version of her that I try to sell people on when I have to explain why she's so great. With the reinstatement of the Diana Prince identity, the return of the "Wonder spin," the absence of her mission/ambassadorship, the lackluster love interest in Nemesis, the mess that's become of Hippolyta and the Amazons... it's not quite as easy as it used to be. I have watched exactly ONE episode of the tv show and probably will not watch it again.

While it was obvious Morrison has never really had a use for Wonder Woman, his reasons here are perplexing. Yeah, there WERE a lot of bizarre elements to those earlier stories, but as has been mentioned, most of that has been whitewashed out of canon over the last forty years or so anyway. Besides, it's not like Superman and Batman don't have their share of unfavorable elements in their formative years; killing criminals? The blatant sexism? Having a sidekick run around in green scaly underwear (which, by the way, IS still in canon)? Come on now. If anything, considering Morrison's penchant for all things weird and outside-the-box-to-the-point-of-pretentiousness, you would think he'd appreciate a character who, in her basic design was intended to be bold and controversial and rebel against social norms (and if there is one thing about Wonder Woman from her inception that SHOULD have remained constant, it was this).

To all of you haters, if you don't like the character, you don't like the character. Don't change your mind because I tell you to.:-) But these are a few reasons why I like her, what I think makes her special - things I think that if more writers "got," we would have a stronger Wonder Woman running around with less people effing her up time and time again.

1. Going back to the controversial angle - it might have started with solely being about feminism and fighting oppression of the sexes, but I like to think in the changing climate of the years, Diana of Themyscira has come to reflect a much broader social platform than merely being about "girl power." Throughout George Perez's run, we saw not only the familiar theme of gender equality, but we saw the book touch upon drug abuse, teen suicide, homosexuality, materialism, menopause, and probably some other "real life" issues of the modern world touched upon - and amazingly, it never felt "after school special"-y at all. Eric Luke tinkered with Diana helping resolve a dispute in the Middle East. Greg Rucka, in his first issue, had Diana stepping in to help the military apprehend a Middle Eastern dictator. IMO, those initial leanings towards pushing the envelope along with her role as an ambassador have given her a unique footing in the political/social arena that characters like Superman and Batman don't really have. THIS is something that's been totally lost since the relaunch, an element that I REALLY wish would be reinstated.

2. Someone mentioned earlier that the "emissary of peace" thing is not interesting. Are you SERIOUS?!? I find that to be one of the coolest things ever! Amongst the gaggle of super-heroes who (if they even have day jobs) are scientists, engineers, billionaire playboys, or reporters, how does a super-hero ambassador who addresses the UN on a regular basis in her day-job NOT leap out at you? By the way, thanks Geoff Johns, thanks Allan Heinberg, thanks DC, for deciding Diana wasn't "human" before, throwing out one more thing that made her special so she could work for... the US Government. Yay.

3. The proactive versus the reactive. Yeah, saving people from robbers and rapists and murderers is cool, but why not have someone around to actually take a whack at helping to correct the wrongs of a society that breeds these vices? Although people scoff at the very utterance of "the mission to bring peace to Man's world," you have to at least admire someone who is out there trying to be the best she can be to inspire and teach rather than just playing super-cop and exercising damage control.

4. The line she walks between diplomat/nurturer and warrior. When she's actually handled correctly (which is rare), it's a very cool juxtaposition. Those who think that the only way to make Diana interesting is by putting an axe in her hand and having her cash in completely on becoming the militant warrior bee-yatch should probably lobby for a return of Hawkgirl's title or go stick to your Xena episodes, because that's a sinful misrepresentation of what the character's about (unfortunately, it's the only take on her that Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison know how to spin). Wonder Woman IS a ferocious combatant and an army of one, and that should never be taken away from her - but first and foremost, she's a tactician and a diplomat, a warm, compassionate spirit who has genuine faith in mankind and what it can accomplish and will do whatever she can to help it grow and prosper, as she learns and grows herself. It's those situations when diplomacy fails and others are endangered that the tank is unleashed. People will no doubt find that to be a boring trait in a character; but it is what it is, and it shouldn't change. I would rather see the character ousted from the overrated "Big 3" concept than have her character boiled down to ridiculously simplistic elements to appease the masses who are concerned with seeing lots of blood, destruction, and big 'splosions.

[West Mantooth]

But he's not writing Marston's Wonder Woman. He's writing Perez's (albeit with some of the Silver Age crap bogging it down, but he actually thinks that's a good idea). Treat her like Perez's.

But Wonder Woman gets nothing but bad depictions most of the time; she's never contributed anything impressive to any of DC's big events; not here, not in Infinite Crisis, not the original Crisis, not in any of the others.

The whole "trinity" concept is one part publication quirk, one part t-shirt sales, and two parts DC wanting to say they have a really major female character; I've always felt trying to judge her on the level of Superman and Batman doesn't help the character at all, because no one's on that level. Not her, not Flash, the Green Lantern, etc. But DC keeps insisting that she is, and that they all regard her as being their #3, and then they do absolutely nothing to show it; for a Wonder Woman fan, it's insulting. We can tell they don't mean what they say, but they keep saying it anyway.

He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman. The Superman in FC wasn't Byrne/Johns/Waid/Siegel-Shuster it was the ideal Superman. The man who simply wished for the best instead of punching it to death like he usually does. Batman wasnt a jerk but the man who in all his incarnations is the most psychologically dedicated man in costume.

By your own admission Marston and Perez's Wonder Woman have an uneasy similarity that destroys the other's perception. No one in modern comic audiences really wants to see the original Superman or gun wielding Batman on a regular basis. But Wonder Woman still seems trapped the Pre-Crisis version despite ignoring most of it.

You're right about the Trinity thing. It's ironic that the real reason she's number three is because of her longevity(nothing to crap on or sneeze at considering how many characters have come and gone since),but no one would say Zorro or the Phantom are in the same league as Supes/Bats for that reason. Wonder Woman doesn't have titles like "The Killing Joke" or "Superman for All Seasons" that boil the character down and are considered essentials.

Gail seems to be moving towards a Secret Origins for Wonder Woman but I fear it will only be about moving characters around and superficial changes to Perez' origin instead of reconciling the Pre-Crisis and Post. Not that it could be accomplished by just her but Wondy would also need a few good writers afterwards as well.

I bet. If Morrison does his Wondy story, it'll probably be considered one of the greats because he does come at it from a skeptical place. I seem to remember him talking in an interview about doing a RIP/All Star "final" story for her.

[WorstThingUS]

And yet, they were still well-written and given cool moments; and Diana was not.

I would submit that even they represent things like "indomidable will" and "speed and determination." What does Diana represent. And ulitmate warriors are a dime a dozen and in her case totally conflicts with the other major aspect of her character: peacemaker.


What is or is not a superhero concept? Particularly given how much of this story was metatextual mumbo-jumbo; do something about women in comics, or about how Wonder Woman is out to lead humanity to a better society. Those have both been used for plenty of superhero stories with the character.

These are adventures stories and "adventures of the ambassador" is practically and oxymoron. Not to mention, Superman has the job of insipring humanity. He makes her redundant in that area.


The whole "trinity" concept is one part publication quirk, one part t-shirt sales, and two parts DC wanting to say they have a really major female character; I've always felt trying to judge her on the level of Superman and Batman doesn't help the character at all, because no one's on that level. Not her, not Flash, the Green Lantern, etc. But DC keeps insisting that she is, and that they all regard her as being their #3, and then they do absolutely nothing to show it; for a Wonder Woman fan, it's insulting. We can tell they don't mean what they say, but they keep saying it anyway.

Someone made the point earlier that Diana is only part of the "big three" because DC says so, not because she's earned it. Wolverine can be said to be one of Marvel's A-list stars because he earned it period. Ironically, the key to fixing Diana may be to acknowledge she's not A-list. After all, you don't keep climbing if you think you're already at the top of the mountain.

[Spiffy]

Wonder Woman was created back in 1941, by a guy with a lot of issues and weird and kinky fetishes. But you cannot deny that the man had imagination, and he created a lasting iconography. Bullets and bracers, a lasso that compels truth, these are things that were going to last. Still, the stories, while amusing in a "I can't believe they published that" way, were rarely very good. And Silver Age Wonder woman stories were utter trash, in my opinion. Some of the worst mainstream comics DC has ever published, in my opinion.

The Bronze Age rolled around, and Denny O'Neil looked back at the character's history and realized that while Wonder Woman had been around for decades, had become famous, a household name, had imagery that was readily recognizable... she was actually a pretty bad character in the comics. He tried to address that, but went too far, getting rid of almost all that was recognizable about the character. It was undone.

In 1987 we got Perez, who wrote the definitive modern take on the character. Working with Potter and later with Len Wein, he was in charge of the character until 1992. He gave the character a fresh start, wiping away the dross of pre-Crisis stories, exiling much of the character's disturbing and embarrassing past to the limbo of "non-canon". He retained many of the character's most recognizable elements, the things the public expected in a character named "Wonder Woman", but approached them in new ways. This was, for all intents and purposes, an entirely new character that borrowed a few things from the old Wonder Woman.

Here's your problem then. "Wonder Woman" has been around since 1941, has been in the Justice League and Justice Society, had her own TV show, is quite visible and famous... but the Wonder Woman in the actual stories right now has only been around since '87, and in the character's pre-Crisis stories there's more to work against the character than for her.

Furthermore, the two best runs on her book, Perez and Rucka's, were both followed by disastrous runs that tore down much of what came before. William Messner-Loebs got rid of Perez's supporting cast, retconned the past of Wonder Woman and the Amazons (thankfully it didn't stick), and even killed the Amazons, keeping them dead for three years before realizing his mistake and bringing them back. We had some mixed runs until Rucka really started building the character up again, only to have it all torn down by the colossal idiocy of someone that thought the character needed to be more like her pre-Crisis self. Johns and Morrison both pushed the idea that she needed to be called a failure in 52, wanting to take her down a peg, against Rucka's protests. She was shoehorned into an embarrassingly bad secret identity, in a case of misplaced nostalgia, and handed off to a man that wrote four issues of Wonder Woman in a whole year, giving us a story entitled "Who is Wonder Woman?" (a question he himself clearly didn't know the answer to). Then came Amazons Attack, which may very well be the worst Wonder Woman story ever written. It was certainly one of the most damaging.

So here's the crux of the matter. You've got a trend at DC at the moment to restore elements of the Silver Age books, which has had some good results on some books, but which can do Wonder Woman nothing but harm. You've got a character with decades of appearances, making her popular and recognizable, but the real work to build her into a credible character has started only recently, and has been sabotaged a few times with very bad writing (most recently due to that aforementioned misplaced nostalgia).

And you've got Grant Morrison, a man that firmly believes that pretty much every story ever written about a character should count and be considered "part" of the character's whole. But with Wonder Woman that's a terrible idea. It's no wonder he had trouble with the character if he's trying to reconcile what she is now with what she was pre-Crisis. She really should be allowed to bury her past and put it behind her. People need to stop basing their opinions of the character on what she was before Perez, it's the only hope she has of becoming a character that can live up to the expectations people have for such a well-known and visible character.

Here here. This is one of the best posts on the subject I've seen, either here or in the comparable topic going on in the YABS forum. I don't agree with all of it, but its well reasoned and argued.

Morrison's insistence that it all has to be reconciled is a huge part of the problem. No Grant, it doesn't.

I would argue that there WERE a few interesting things from the 1960s and 70s about Wonder Woman. Even if the execution was often trashy, there were a few fun ideas. It didn't suffer from the extreme fetishism of the Golden Age version. But that's irrelevant. Even if you CAN pick out some interesting details (I personally loved the jumpsuit!) that doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. A lot of those ideas are artifacts of their time. And what's even worse is trying to mish mash it all together and "reconcile" it. It was a big weakness of RIP that it insisted on trying to do that for Batman, and well... its an even worse idea with Wonder Woman.

Part of the problem for a lot of folks seems to be reconciling the idea that she's a warrior and yet a symbol for peace. We've hashed this out in the YABS topic, but I STILL don't really get the objections. Or for that fact why it even WOULD have to be reconciled. There's a lot of intentional duality in the BEST characters, so why's it such a big deal with Wonder Woman?

[West Mantooth]

2. Someone mentioned earlier that the "emissary of peace" thing is not interesting. Are you SERIOUS?!? I find that to be one of the coolest things ever! Amongst the gaggle of super-heroes who (if they even have day jobs) are scientists, engineers, billionaire playboys, or reporters, how does a super-hero ambassador who addresses the UN on a regular basis in her day-job NOT leap out at you? By the way, thanks Geoff Johns, thanks Allan Heinberg, thanks DC, for deciding Diana wasn't "human" before, throwing out one more thing that made her special so she could work for... the US Government. Yay.

3. The proactive versus the reactive. Yeah, saving people from robbers and rapists and murderers is cool, but why not have someone around to actually take a whack at helping to correct the wrongs of a society that breeds these vices? Although people scoff at the very utterance of "the mission to bring peace to Man's world," you have to at least admire someone who is out there trying to be the best she can be to inspire and teach rather than just playing super-cop and exercising damage control.

4. The line she walks between diplomat/nurturer and warrior. When she's actually handled correctly (which is rare), it's a very cool juxtaposition. Those who think that the only way to make Diana interesting is by putting an axe in her hand and having her cash in completely on becoming the militant warrior bee-yatch should probably lobby for a return of Hawkgirl's title or go stick to your Xena episodes, because that's a sinful misrepresentation of what the character's about (unfortunately, it's the only take on her that Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison know how to spin). Wonder Woman IS a ferocious combatant and an army of one, and that should never be taken away from her - but first and foremost, she's a tactician and a diplomat, a warm, compassionate spirit who has genuine faith in mankind and what it can accomplish and will do whatever she can to help it grow and prosper, as she learns and grows herself. It's those situations when diplomacy fails and others are endangered that the tank is unleashed. People will no doubt find that to be a boring trait in a character; but it is what it is, and it shouldn't change. I would rather see the character ousted from the overrated "Big 3" concept than have her character boiled down to ridiculously simplistic elements to appease the masses who are concerned with seeing lots of blood, destruction, and big 'splosions.


Superman in Morrison's Allstar tried to cure cancer for children and stopped a girl from committing suicide. I remember a story about domestic abuse in the 90s. So they have social commentary as well.

Who exactly is Diana the emissary for? The Greek Gods who either don't interact in the world except for Ares trying to destroy it. The Amazons who talk about peace but seem more content to sit on the island and keep sending variations on Wondy?

The idea of the diplomat is actually pretty recent/temporary I thought.

[CaptainCanada]

He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman. The Superman in FC wasn't Byrne/Johns/Waid/Siegel-Shuster it was the ideal Superman. The man who simply wished for the best instead of punching it to death like he usually does. Batman wasnt a jerk but the man who in all his incarnations is the most psychologically dedicated man in costume.

By your own admission Marston and Perez's Wonder Woman have an uneasy similarity that destroys the other's perception. No one in modern comic audiences really wants to see the original Superman or gun wielding Batman on a regular basis.
He should concentrate on the best depictions of the character and show her at her best; that's what he did with everyone else (the Superman and Batman in FC are nothing like their debuts, so it's not like he was chained to Wonder Woman's).

Gail seems to be moving towards a Secret Origins for Wonder Woman but I fear it will only be about moving characters around and superficial changes to Perez' origin instead of reconciling the Pre-Crisis and Post.
Most of the changes that people notice in the transition from pre- to post-crisis were superficial; getting rid of stupid stuff like the jet. Perez made her a coherent and good character for the first time; there's no need to "reconcile" her with the pre-Crisis depictions, you just need to get it through creators' thick skulls that Diana has been made a better character now and so they shouldn't be writing her like it's 1975.
I would submit that even they represent things like "indomidable will" and "speed and determination."
So nobody else has indomitable will or speed and determination? These are concepts shared by many characters. If those count, Diana as the ultimate warrior does.
And ulitmate warriors are a dime a dozen and in her case totally conflicts with the other major aspect of her character: peacemaker.
Only if you're being stupid. She's a peacemaker, which involves not just education but dealing with people who threaten the peace. It's that simple.

These are adventures stories and "adventures of the ambassador" is practically and oxymoron. Not to mention, Superman has the job of insipring humanity. He makes her redundant in that area.
As I said, no more redundant than anyone else having willpower makes GL. And Diana makes inspiration her actual job, not just an incidental aspect of her fighting crime. And plenty of good stories have been done with her as emissary; you act like being an ambassador means showing her in a bunch of meetings and stuff, rather than how it's actually been depicted.

Who exactly is Diana the emissary for? The Greek Gods who either don't interact in the world except for Ares trying to destroy it. The Amazons who talk about peace but seem more content to sit on the island and keep sending variations on Wondy?
She's emissary for the Amazon way; and the best runs, like Perez, Jiminez, and Rucka, depicted the whole Amazon society interacting with the regular world (something which could and should have gone further then even they went); it's hacks like the recent Crisis-Crew who want Themyscira to go away and have her be a total loner.

She's also the champion of the gods (or some of them, anyway), which makes myth- and magic-threats within her portfolio. That's a broad, broad canvas, and with all these New Gods invading the world, you'd think a good writer would have had her front and centre in that capacity; but no, Grant was stuck puzzling over obsolete Marston stuff instead of paying attention to what she is now.

The idea of the diplomat is actually pretty recent/temporary I thought.
The idea of Diana as an emissary dates to her creation in 1941; the more formal diplomat role dates to 1987 (intermittently, since writes like Loebs and Johns keep sending the Amazons away).

[Constantine Drakon]

The Flash? Catwoman? Before Robin The Boy Wonder? I think not. As the tail end of "Batman and..." he's before even Wonder Woman. And given their proximity to Superman, Lois and Luthor also come ahead of half your list.

The Flash is not better known than Wonder Woman.

"Batman's girlfriend" and "Superman's girlfriend" might be, but not as superheroes.

Robin is viewed as something of a superhero, but more as a sidekick, not his own man. He's well known in the same way Batman's utility belt is well known.




And the is she doesn't represent any sort of ideal or concept the way an icon should and that's what Morrison works from with Superman and Batman.


Truth? What's wrong with Truth? Are you anti-Truthiness? She's been the goddess of Truth, her lasso has often been depicted as being Truth made solid, when she had trouble facing the Truth after her mother died it made reality start breaking down as the truth became malleable (the Earth became flat, etc), Simone's currently working on a storyline exploring how the lasso allows you to see someone's truest self, their "soul", and so on. It's been the largest recurring symbol in her post-Crisis history.

So what do you think it was about her pre-crisis past that is damaging to her?

In the Golden and Silver Ages, Wonder Woman lost her powers if she was bound/tied up. Her creator had a point to make, you see, that women in American society must free themselves from male domination, cast off their shackles, if they’re ever to be truly strong and independent.

Also? He was into bondage.

It became a convenient excuse for writers and artists to have Wonder Woman end up tied up, shackled, chained, gagged and otherwise restrained hundreds of times during the Golden and (to a lesser extent but still visible) Silver Ages. And her creator also put in a lot of spanking in those Golden Age stories, and women dressed as/passing themselves off as men, and some things that are just plain WEIRD (http://community.livejournal.com/scans_daily/3281274.html).

Silver Age Wonder Woman was under the watch of Robert Kanigher, who also worked on DC's war-themed comics, and during the Silver Age Wonder Woman's stories were heavily dominated by stories where she was an object of desire to anything with a Y chromosome... Steve Trevor, Mer-Man, Bird-Boy, even Amoeba-Man for pity's sake... Although I think I'd rather read another story about them than another flashback story to when Diana was a young "Wonder Tot" (something that showed up far too much in the Silver Age).

The main problem with the Silver Age stories is that they just weren't very good, and, didn't add anything lasting to the mythos, with the possible exception of Egg Fu (and is that anything to be proud of? A giant racist caricature egg?) and Donna Troy. And Donna was created by accident when the creative personnel at DC, clearly not Wonder Woman readers themselves (and who can blame them?) were putting together the Teen Titans book, saw that there was a "Wonder Girl" and decided to add her to the team without realizing she was just a younger version of Wonder Woman with a bad habit of time traveling to the present. "Donna Troy" was quickly dreamed up to fix the mistake.

So you've got this cringeworthy/hilarious fetish stuff in the Golden Age, some (IMHO) terrible stories in the Silver Age that still kept putting in some bondage themes every once in a while, and heavily focused on the main character as an object of desire, and one of her most famous supporting characters exists purely because other DC writers weren't bothering to read her book.

The Modern Wonder Woman made a break from all that, and does not lose her powers when tied up. But it's hard to put that stuff behind us, and a large number of people are still viewing the current Wonder Woman through the lens of what came before. Which is damn unfortunate, because, like I said, the current Wonder Woman is almost a completely different character.

[CaptainCanada]

Truth? What's wrong with Truth?
Ah, I knew I was forgetting something! That's the big one, built into her signature weapon, even.

Of course, she's currently lying constantly and pretending to be a government agent.:rolleyes:

[Constantine Drakon]

Ah, I knew I was forgetting something! That's the big one, built into her signature weapon, even.

Of course, she's currently lying constantly and pretending to be a government agent.:rolleyes:

Misplaced nostalgia irreconcilable with her dominant post-Crisis theme.

What you get when you attempt to make Wonder Woman more like her "pre-Crisis" self, despite it making no sense given how she's been written these last few decades.

[West Mantooth]

Maybe it's jus but I see a strange cohesion at the heart of Pre-Crisis Wonder Woman,dare I say better than most of the Post-Crisis. If I ever get into the industry, just wait for my sign!!!

[Constantine Drakon]

Thank You so much!!! People act like Morrison is saying Wonder Woman sucks but he was addressing Marston's original Wonder Woman/Pre-Crisis.


And he did a very bad job with it. I don't think he should have been doing in the first place, but if he was going to use DC's biggest event in years to do something about Wonder Woman's past as a fetish object, then he really needed to do a better job of it. As it stands, he had her defeated in battle, then she spent several issues as Darkseid's slave, spreading disease, showing off a whip-scarred back, and dressed in bondage/fetish gear. This all builds up to her being cured in a very poorly explained way, apparently by one of Grant's pet characters, after which she assists the heroes in a poorly explained way. Whatever the symbolism he intended, he ensured that her biggest audience in years saw her as weak, dominated, poorly explained, and creepy. That's his idea of summing up her character overall (as he tried to sum up Batman and Superman in this megastoryline)? That's putting so much emphasis on the negative aspects of the character's past it's downright shocking. Marston died in 1947. Let it go.

I don't think that the largest DC event in years was an appropriate place for Grant to wrestle with his difficulties over the character's origins, which, as I said, I think really need to stop influencing current stories and remain embarrassing trivia.

And, on a personal note, I don't think his explanation of how he treated her was very fair to Gail Simone. She's having a hard enough time with the character without one of comics' biggest names, a supposed friend, going on at length about how he's troubled by the character and finds her "bogus". Freedom of speech and all, he should be allowed voice his opinions and explain himself, yadda yadda yadda, but come on, that wasn't a very nice way of talking about the main character someone else is trying to sell a book about. Final Crisis has not been his finest moment.

DCAU Wonder Woman was godawful. If she's not graceful, not diplomatic, not intelligent, not on a mission from her people and gods, she's not Wonder Woman. Timm and co. mangled her and her mythos in every conceivable way; she was a shoot-from-the-hip thug, the Amazons were emotionless ciphers, and not at all wise or morally advanced, her villains were bland (Ares) or changed so much as to not even be her villains anymore (Cheetah, Circe), and you could clearly see how little interest the writers had in the character every time they did a focus episode (another fan phrased it as "the clouds would part and say 'we would rather be doing anything else right now'").


Well said. I understand that some people like her personality in JLU. Fair enough. But that show did a major disservice to the Wonder Woman mythos. Hell, it's bad enough how badly they mangled the villains she has in the books, they came up with a new one that was an embarrassing man-hating Feminazi stereotype.

[carabas]

Rucka's said that when they were discussing writing Diana in 52, that he thought the stuff that eventually ended up on the page was trash, but Morrison and Johns outvoted him, and Morrison wrote it.Fair enough.

I don't think he shouldn't have been doing in the first place, but if he was going to use DC's biggest event in years to do something about Wonder Woman's past as a fetish object, then he really needed to do a better job of it.IIRC he said he was putting his original, negative feelings towards her to rest in Infinite Crisis. What I get from the interview is that everything else, including her past, is something that didn't fit into FC and will be dealt with in a different project.

As it stands, he had her defeated in battle,Not really. She won her fight against Desaad/Mary. It's just that after the fight was done, s/he pulled out a virus.

and dressed in bondage/fetish gear.I suppose, like most superhero costumes, it is sort of fetish gear. But it was still the same costume she always wears.

That's his idea of summing up her character overall (as he tried to sum up Batman and Superman in this megastoryline)?It is not his idea of summing up her character. I don't know where you got that.

[CaptainCanada]

Not really. She won her fight against Desaad/Mary. It's just that after the fight was done, s/he pulled out a virus.

Which results in the same thing.

I don't mind that she lost; in the leadup, pretty much everyone is losing. It's the descent into darkness (Batman doesn't do any better). It's her utter failure to triumph at the end, like all the other important characters do.

[Constantine Drakon]

IIRC he said he was putting his original, negative feelings towards her to rest in Infinite Crisis. What I get from the interview is that everything else, including her past, is something that didn't fit into FC and will be dealt with in a different project.


Given how badly he's handled her in this and 52, I hope and pray that project never happens.



Not really. She won her fight against Desaad/Mary. It's just that after the fight was done, s/he pulled out a virus.

Which means she lost. Because the villain cheated, but hell, that's what villains do.



I suppose, like most superhero costumes, it is sort of fetish gear. But it was still the same costume she always wears.

Uh, no. Aside from the mask, after being "infected" she ended up with a collar around her neck, in the company of a girl with a ballgag (it came and went, but Mad Harriet/Batwoman had in her mouth at least half the time), and a dominatrix.


It is not his idea of summing up her character. I don't know where you got that.[/QUOTE]

It was mostly directed at West Mantooth's "He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman".

But while this may not have been him summing up the character, it was Wonder Woman, very prominently placed (on a few covers) in a story where Batman and Superman are being "summed up". If he was going to do an overall picture of the other big heroes, then this was not the appropriate place for him to examine one particular and disturbing part of Wonder Woman's past.

He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman. The Superman in FC wasn't Byrne/Johns/Waid/Siegel-Shuster it was the ideal Superman. The man who simply wished for the best instead of punching it to death like he usually does. Batman wasnt a jerk but the man who in all his incarnations is the most psychologically dedicated man in costume.

By your own admission Marston and Perez's Wonder Woman have an uneasy similarity that destroys the other's perception. No one in modern comic audiences really wants to see the original Superman or gun wielding Batman on a regular basis. But Wonder Woman still seems trapped the Pre-Crisis version despite ignoring most of it.

How so? There are a few iconic images that have solidified in the public consciousness. The costume, her blocking the bullets, "the spin", possibly the invisible plane... that's about as much as people expect, on average. You put those in, people will accept that it's Wonder Woman.

[carabas]

Which means she lost. Because the villain cheated, but hell, that's what villains do.Well, she did better against Mary Marvel than Marvel, Supergirl, and Black Adam put together.And in the end, Marvel brought her down by cheating.

Uh, no. Aside from the mask, after being "infected" she ended up with a collar around her neck, in the company of a girl with a ballgag (it came and went, but Mad Harriet/Batwoman had in her mouth at least half the time), and a dominatrix. Okay. But what you said was that Diana was dressed in fetish/bondage gear.

It was mostly directed at West Mantooth's "He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman".Ah, right. Sorry, my bad.

[Constantine Drakon]

And in the end, Marvel brought her down by cheating.

And? Supervillains cheat. It's what they do. Losing to them when they cheat isn't particularly bad, unless you have no real chance to save or avenge yourself. Then it just looks bad.

Okay. But what you said was that Diana was dressed in fetish/bondage gear.

Collar, animal mask, whipped back, and goes around spreading disease with a dominatrix and a girl dressed in a leather bustier and a ballgag.

Your call, but especially with the interview, I think this was Morrison making a nod to her sometimes disturbing kinky roots.

[West Mantooth]

It was mostly directed at West Mantooth's "He was writing an all-over look at Wonder Woman".

But while this may not have been him summing up the character, it was Wonder Woman, very prominently placed (on a few covers) in a story where Batman and Superman are being "summed up". If he was going to do an overall picture of the other big heroes, then this was not the appropriate place for him to examine one particular and disturbing part of Wonder Woman's past.


I'm sorry. I meant he wants to write the summed up version of Wonder Woman. That's what he did with Superman and Bats, but when he looked into the Pre-Crisis/Marston he could reconcile that with the Post Crisis.

The guy wrote Wonder Woman in the JL series. If he just wanted to show her doing stuff, he could have. He wanted show her as the iconic hero.

[CaptainCanada]

But that's not a summed up version of Wonder Woman. It's a grotesque take on 1941-1947; it's got nothing to do with the post-Crisis character at all, who is the best version, and the one he's dealing with.

[Retro315]

Truth? What's wrong with Truth? Are you anti-Truthiness? She's been the goddess of Truth, her lasso has often been depicted as being Truth made solid, when she had trouble facing the Truth after her mother died it made reality start breaking down as the truth became malleable (the Earth became flat, etc), Simone's currently working on a storyline exploring how the lasso allows you to see someone's truest self, their "soul", and so on. It's been the largest recurring symbol in her post-Crisis history.


First off how well known she is compared to other characters is really the last thing anybody should care about. Good stories and good ideas come first. Always. Look at The Question, the Secret Six ... countless other characters that aren't well known that have the best comics out there. Enough popularity contests.

I've been thinking about the "Truth" aspect recently.

And really, what occurred to me is that with an MO for something like "truth", how cool would it be if Wonder Woman's secret identity was Diana Prince, Attorney at Law.

How cool would it be seeing her ethical dilemmas as she used her lasso of truth to catch a criminal, but it doesn't hold up as evidence in a court of law? Or how furious she wants to be as a warrior who can't smack these crooks when they lie in court? Or even some goodness as she calls for a break in the courtroom because there's an invasion of griffins attacking the city, ducks into the bathroom, and sneaks off to battle them.

Or arguing the fine lines between "truth" and "facts".

[Apathetic-piggy]

So... a more truthful She-Hulk without the libido?

[WorstThingUS]

So nobody else has indomitable will or speed and determination? These are concepts shared by many characters. If those count, Diana as the ultimate warrior does.

Yes, but the focal point of GL is will. The focal point of The Flash is speed. They are meant to be the pinnacle of that. What's Diana's focal point? What's she the pinnacle of, heroically speaking?

Only if you're being stupid. She's a peacemaker, which involves not just education but dealing with people who threaten the peace. It's that simple.

Her goal is peace through communication, not violence. I'm not using "peacemaker" in the Colt .45 sense of the word. I mean, unless you're being stupid.

As I said, no more redundant than anyone else having willpower makes GL. And Diana makes inspiration her actual job, not just an incidental aspect of her fighting crime. And plenty of good stories have been done with her as emissary; you act like being an ambassador means showing her in a bunch of meetings and stuff, rather than how it's actually been depicted.

Name one. I repeat: no one reads adventure stories to see someone encouraging peace.

She's emissary for the Amazon way

Again, not a sizzling premise for a superhero comic.

She's also the champion of the gods (or some of them, anyway), which makes myth- and magic-threats within her portfolio. That's a broad, broad canvas, and with all these New Gods invading the world, you'd think a good writer would have had her front and centre in that capacity; but no, Grant was stuck puzzling over obsolete Marston stuff instead of paying attention to what she is now.

That's more interesting. As a creation of mysticism, magic should probably be more her superhero purview...but those characters aren't A-list either.

The Flash is not better known than Wonder Woman.

You misread. Robin is more famous than The Flash, Green Lantern and Wonder Woman.

"Batman's girlfriend" and "Superman's girlfriend" might be, but not as superheroes.

You didn't qualify before.

Robin is viewed as something of a superhero, but more as a sidekick, not his own man. He's well known in the same way Batman's utility belt is well known.

People know Robin by his secret identity. That's as famous as it gets for a comic book character. And he's the superhero sidekick. Not to mention an iconic one alongside Dr. Watson and Tonto. Saying he's like Batman's utility belt is like saying they're known the way Holmes' pipe is or The Lone Ranger's bullets are, which is to say utterly wrong.


Truth? What's wrong with Truth? Are you anti-Truthiness?

No, but it's not exactly an exciting conceit for a superhero and it's already the first thing on Superman's list of things to do, so once again she's made redundant if this is going to be her raison d'etre.

[Retro315]

So... a more truthful She-Hulk without the libido?

Yeah!

Although I can't imagine Wonder Woman as wanting to profit from justice ... she'd be a public defender or even a pro bono lawyer. After all ... like she needs the job to pay for her apartment or whatever ... as an Amazon princess of Themiscyra ... she could probably pay her rent and utilities in gold!

[Apathetic-piggy]

Yeah!

Although I can't imagine Wonder Woman as wanting to profit from justice ... she'd be a public defender or even a pro bono lawyer. After all ... like she needs the job to pay for her apartment or whatever ... as an Amazon princess of Themiscyra ... she could probably pay her rent and utilities in gold!

She already is a public defender. She defends those who can't defend themselves. I'd rather they don't try to make her into She-Hulk because, well, there's already an established character. Wonder Woman can work on her own but she needs to have some sort of place in the DCU. That isn't to say she doesn't have one, but it can be a lot better.

Because her villains are not the greatest threat to her nor push her to her limits such as some others, she sometimes feels a bit boring. If she's got abilities on par with some of Superman's combined with the training of an extremely capable warrior, well, it can be tough for a writer to make some of her rogues a threat. Gail's building up her rogues so we'll see what can be done. It would be fun to see Cheetah elevated to a point where we know she's a threat and don't have to be told by a writer or editor. She's not pathetic, but I feel she's got more room to grow. Geoff Johns has done that with Sinestro (he always had potential and he's finally being used to its fullest), so it's not impossible.

I'm not against Wonder Woman having a secret identity, but I think the only reason she'd have one is so she can have a coffee without anyone going ballistic. Not to be in a government organization or in the judicial system, just a little peace of mind without having to fly to some secluded area. Socialize with someone who can't juggle or buy a mountain should she want to.

But she needs to keep the gorillas. I love them.

[carabas]

And? Supervillains cheat. It's what they do. Losing to them when they cheat isn't particularly bad, unless you have no real chance to save or avenge yourself. Then it just looks bad.I meant Marvel, the guy in the red and golden tights, only brought Mary down by cheating.

And a huge iron collar and an orc mask are not fetish gear. Having a woman in fetish gear following you around isn't fetish gear either.

[Cardinal!]

.................................

[Cardinal!]

................................................

[Cardinal!]

Yes, but the focal point of GL is will. The focal point of The Flash is speed. They are meant to be the pinnacle of that. What's Diana's focal point? What's she the pinnacle of, heroically speaking?
....
No, but it's not exactly an exciting conceit for a superhero and it's already the first thing on Superman's list of things to do, so once again she's made redundant if this is going to be her raison d'etre.



Since you've discarded things like truth, peace/love/understanding, freedom, challenge, innocence (which I think is more Captain Marvel's thing than it is Wonder Woman's, honestly) and change as redundant and invalid for Wonder Woman, I don't really see the logic that validates "willpower" as Green Lantern's thing, as that's been well implied within Batman and Superman's respective profiles, as well. I mean, if standing for truth makes her redundant because it infringes on Superman's territory, in spite of the fact that it's been emphasized in her mythology about as much as willpower has been emphasized in Green Lantern's, how do you figure that one is redundant while the other isn't? Superman's been about willpower and overcoming the odds since day one. Why is Green Lantern not considered "redundant?" This IS all under the pretense that I agree with you that in order to have an iconic status, a character has to have an idea backing them that's solely theirs and no one else's, which I really am skeptical of. All super-heroes were in some shape or form derived from Superman and they all pretty much stand for the same ideals and exercise similar principles. They might vary in what principles and traits are reinforced, but at the end of the day, it can all be attributed back to the man with the spitcurl. I don't really think it necessarily subtracts from those characters' relevance to the extent that you're taking it in Wonder Woman's case.

Her goal is peace through communication, not violence. I'm not using "peacemaker" in the Colt .45 sense of the word. I mean, unless you're being stupid.

So that's why communication and diplomacy always come first. But do aspirations for peace necessitate total pacifism and passivity when yourself and others are being threatened???

Name one. I repeat: no one reads adventure stories to see someone encouraging peace.

Actually, I can name several. George Perez's first fifty issues reflected on Diana's ambassadorship and mission and bridging the cultural gap between Themyscira and the rest of the world, including one story that had a dozen or so delegates from all walks of life (including Lois Lane) visit Themyscira for a cultural exchange, which actually was one of the best storylines of the entire run, IMO. It all culminated in the Amazons ending their separation from Man's world in #50, finally leaving the island to reconnect with the rest of humanity. In Eric Luke's run, she intervened in a Middle Eastern dispute, locking two feuding leaders alone in a room so they could beat the crap out of each other until they finally resorted to discourse and understanding to resolve their differences. Greg Rucka's first storyline dealt with the controversy created by her releasing a book. Obviously these stories had more to their respective plots to sate the needs for action/drama that a super-hero book requires (i.e., evil gods sabotaging peace ceremonies, Veronica Cale using her book to spin some bad PR her way, etc.) than what was described, but these ARE examples of how skillful writing can handle her MO without it being totally lame. I don't read comics JUST for action and adventure; I like my plots to have meat to them, and there are way more story elements out there that can stimulate a plot and make for a stirring conflict than hitting things and making things go boom. :-)

[CaptainCanada]

I repeat: no one reads adventure stories to see someone encouraging peace.

You don't see a wealth of stories in wanting to end war?

[Flâneur]

People know Robin by his secret identity..
No, they don't. Heck, I can barely remember his name half the time, just because I'm a Marvel/Indie fan, Wonder Woman being the only big exception. Unless you read Batman, you're not going to know Robin's identity. People know Bruce Wayne. They know Clark Kent. The best you get is that people remember 'Dick' because of all the camp Batman jokes to go with it and even then that's for a generation more versed in comics. Even Batgirl has a more well known secret identity than whichever Robin of the week you want to look at.

[WorstThingUS]

Since you've discarded things like truth, peace/love/understanding, freedom, challenge, innocence (which I think is more Captain Marvel's thing than it is Wonder Woman's, honestly) and change as redundant and invalid for Wonder Woman, I don't really see the logic that validates "willpower" as Green Lantern's thing, as that's been well implied within Batman and Superman's respective profiles, as well. I mean, if standing for truth makes her redundant because it infringes on Superman's territory, in spite of the fact that it's been emphasized in her mythology about as much as willpower has been emphasized in Green Lantern's, how do you figure that one is redundant while the other isn't? Superman's been about willpower and overcoming the odds since day one. Why is Green Lantern not considered "redundant?" This IS all under the pretense that I agree with you that in order to have an iconic status, a character has to have an idea backing them that's solely theirs and no one else's, which I really am skeptical of. All super-heroes were in some shape or form derived from Superman and they all pretty much stand for the same ideals and exercise similar principles. They might vary in what principles and traits are reinforced, but at the end of the day, it can all be attributed back to the man with the spitcurl. I don't really think it necessarily subtracts from those characters' relevance to the extent that you're taking it in Wonder Woman's case.

Basically, Wonder Woman doesn't have "a thing" that's all hers that no one does better. Yes, other characters duplicate Superman's powers, but they take a single aspect and do it better. Stronger will, faster speed, etc. How is a better sense of the truth exciting? Again, this is adventure. Hell, let's not sugar coat it: violence. Your power has to enable you to kick ass. How are truth, love etc going to do that?


Actually, I can name several. George Perez's first fifty issues reflected on Diana's ambassadorship and mission and bridging the cultural gap between Themyscira and the rest of the world, including one story that had a dozen or so delegates from all walks of life (including Lois Lane) visit Themyscira for a cultural exchange, which actually was one of the best storylines of the entire run, IMO. It all culminated in the Amazons ending their separation from Man's world in #50, finally leaving the island to reconnect with the rest of humanity.

Yeah, and when I re-read that run recently (say it three times fast) I was bored senseless and sold off the entire collection on eBay.

You don't see a wealth of stories in wanting to end war?

I don't see an ionic characterization in them, no. Much less a successful adventure comic. Again, no one wants to read about someone's adventures in bringing peace to all mankind. It's a dull idea, not to mention dependent of acknowledging the real world in a way comics cannot. Tom Mankiewicz is acknowledged as the real screenwriter of Superman The Movie by the director, Richard Donner and appears with him on the commentary. There he mentions advising Christopher Reeve not to have Superman address world peace in Superman IV because Superman actually could bring peace to the world if he wanted. This is why he "respects" sovereignty in the comics, because it's the only way you can explain why he doesn't do it. Wonder Woman however, has made it her business to interfere in war and when words fail, she steps in with a giant axe. So why is there mass rape in Africa still? You can't have WW fighting real problems because there's no way she wouldn't succeed. A man with no powers can't stop all crime, so Batman will always have a job. Someone with godlike powers however on a mission of peace on the other hand...

No, they don't. Heck, I can barely remember his name half the time, just because I'm a Marvel/Indie fan, Wonder Woman being the only big exception. Unless you read Batman, you're not going to know Robin's identity. People know Bruce Wayne. They know Clark Kent. The best you get is that people remember 'Dick' because of all the camp Batman jokes to go with it and even then that's for a generation more versed in comics. Even Batgirl has a more well known secret identity than whichever Robin of the week you want to look at.

Then that's you. You can stop the average person in the street and ask them "Who's Dick Grayson" and they will know it's Robin. When Chris O'Donnell recently appeared on Grey's Anatomy, every article about him mentioned his turn at Robin. That's as mainstream and as popular as it gets. Remember: the last person to make that joke about his name being "Dick" was an actor by the name of GEORGE CLOONEY.

[Flâneur]

Then that's you. You can stop the average person in the street and ask them "Who's Dick Grayson" and they will know it's Robin. When Chris O'Donnell recently appeared on Grey's Anatomy, every article about him mentioned his turn at Robin. That's as mainstream and as popular as it gets. Remember: the last person to make that joke about his name being "Dick" was an actor by the name of GEORGE CLOONEY.

They talk about him as Robin. If you ask people randomly on the street who Dick Grayson is then you won't get very far. Ask them who Bruce Wayne, Peter Parker and Clark Kent are and you will.

I actually encourage you to go and do it. Set up an actual poll and go with a friend and get some people on the street to sign off on recognisable names. Go do it. I'm completely serious. You'll find that most won't know who Nightwing is if they don't read comics. Even less will be able tell you who the current Robin is and if you say the name Dick Grayson without leading them, most won't have recognition of anything.

And it being 'just me' isn't really the point. If I have to check wikipedia to be certain about Robin's identity when I'm a comic book reader who posts on a comic book forum and grew up with those Batman movies in the 90s without any memory impairment then obviously it isn't some instant home hold name. The sole difference here is that I'm not much of a DC fan but still, being exposed to this scene, so to speak, if I can't pick out who all the Robins were then obviously Robin's secret identity isn't a house hold name. It's just not in the public awareness.

[WorstThingUS]

They talk about him as Robin. If you ask people randomly on the street who Dick Grayson is then you won't get very far. Ask them who Bruce Wayne, Peter Parker and Clark Kent are and you will.

I actually encourage you to go and do it. Set up an actual poll and go with a friend and get some people on the street to sign off on recognisable names. Go do it. I'm completely serious. You'll find that most won't know who Nightwing is if they don't read comics. Even less will be able tell you who the current Robin is and if you say the name Dick Grayson without leading them, most won't have recognition of anything.

And it being 'just me' isn't really the point. If I have to check wikipedia to be certain about Robin's identity when I'm a comic book reader who posts on a comic book forum and grew up with those Batman movies in the 90s without any memory impairment then obviously it isn't some instant home hold name. The sole difference here is that I'm not much of a DC fan but still, being exposed to this scene, so to speak, if I can't pick out who all the Robins were then obviously Robin's secret identity isn't a house hold name. It's just not in the public awareness.

No, it's just you. And if you have to look it up, then I'm afraid you're obviously not much of a comics fan so I'm doubt your opinons on something like public awareness. You obviously don't have your finger on the pulse of much to have to look up Dick Grayson. I mean you're the guy who thinks Robin ranks alongside utility belt, which my Chris O'Donnell reference proved utterly wrong.

[vitruvian]

This isn't a formal examination of religion, it's comic book where Wonder Woman has been returned to the mystic clay from whence she was formed before. Every character has had his or her origin undone---be it magic or science---for dramatic purposes in a story. She's no exception.

Right - and in Greek mythology, everybody was formed from clay by Prometheus. That's the point you're ignoring.

Or created from stones (the 'bones of Mother Earth') by Deucalion and his wife.

Or created as remorseless warriors from ants (the Myrmidons - would actually make a good villain encounter).

Or sprouted from sown dragon's teeth.

Or... actually, this only applies to the first generation of any of these 'races' of men, since further generations would be born the regular way. Okay, so if we take this literally (as opposed to metaphorically, as in the 'ashes to ashes, dust to dust' of the stereotypical funeral), maybe it would only work on Wonder Woman and those in a similar boat, origin-wise.

Would you grant that if the Biblical Adam were a DCU character, the same sort of process should be able to turn him back into dust?

[WorstThingUS]

Right - and in Greek mythology, everybody was formed from clay by Prometheus. That's the point you're ignoring.

Or created from stones (the 'bones of Mother Earth') by Deucalion and his wife.

Or created as remorseless warriors from ants (the Myrmidons - would actually make a good villain encounter).

Or sprouted from sown dragon's teeth.

Or... actually, this only applies to the first generation of any of these 'races' of men, since further generations would be born the regular way. Okay, so if we take this literally (as opposed to metaphorically, as in the 'ashes to ashes, dust to dust' of the stereotypical funeral), maybe it would only work on Wonder Woman and those in a similar boat, origin-wise.

Would you grant that if the Biblical Adam were a DCU character, the same sort of process should be able to turn him back into dust?

I'm pretty sure I answered that question when I stated, "Every character has had his or her origin undone---be it magic or science---for dramatic purposes in a story." She'd be turned to clay, others back into normal humans and in some cases de-evolved into some sort of primate. Know why? Because in the DCU, other than Wonder Woman people don't come from dust, rocks or clay.

[vitruvian]

I concur with the Captain here. Having the means to fight aggression doesn't necessarily mean that she supports aggression. Martial arts classes stress avoiding conflict all the time, even as they teach means of engaging in physical combat for self-defence. I'm not familiar with the details of Wonder Woman's training but it's not a great leap to suggest she learned these sorts of lessons as a warrior. In any case she's not greatly different than Superman and Batman in wanting a peaceful world while being willing to use physical force against threats to it.



Yeah, but based on his dialogue in the current storyline Zeus seems to want his Olympians to bring peace by conquering the world. We all know how that's gonna work out.

In line with this, it wouldn't be out of order to go back to the original Marston conception, and make her single most important defining feature, 'compassion'. That's both a traditionally feminine trait, and one which can motivate both efforts at peaceful resolution of conflicts, and the fiercest possible defense of those in need.

[Flâneur]

No, it's just you. And if you have to look it up, then I'm afraid you're obviously not much of a comics fan so I'm doubt your opinons on something like public awareness. You obviously don't have your finger on the pulse of much to have to look up Dick Grayson. I mean you're the guy who thinks Robin ranks alongside utility belt, which my Chris O'Donnell reference proved utterly wrong.

LOL

I disagree so obviously I'm not qualified enough to have an opinion about whether most people recognise the name 'Dick Grayson'. I am in fact so unqualified that I'm uniquely disabled.

I love it.

I'm enough of a comic fan that I can recite every currently powered mutant off of the top of my head. I just put no effort into DC unless it's Wonder Woman. The public won't even have that much since a random person in the street definitely isn't 'much of a comics fan'. I also i) never mentioned the utility belt thing and ii) pointed out that talking about the Robin identity is not the same as everyone knowing who Dick Grayson is so pointing to a Chris O'Donnel interview means nothing. Everyone knows about Robin, Batman's sidekick, but, unless they are a Batman reader then they are less likely to put much stock in the name Dick Grayson.

[WorstThingUS]

LOL

I disagree so obviously I'm not qualified enough to have an opinion about whether most people recognise the name 'Dick Grayson'. I am in fact so unqualified that I'm uniquely disabled.

Pretty much. It's like telling me you know about music but don't know people in the top ten because "you're not into that mainstream stuff." If you know music you have an awareness of things do you don't necessarily care about. I don't read any X-comics, period, but I know of Dakon, the Old Man Wolverine storyline, the Manifest Destiny storyline, the War of Kings, etc. I don't read any Avengers, but I know Hank Pym is now the Wasp, the Scarlet Witch is back and they're forming another Avengers. I know these things because I am aware.


I'm enough of a comic fan that I can recite every currently powered mutant off of the top of my head. I just put no effort into DC unless it's Wonder Woman. The public won't even have that much since a random person in the street definitely isn't 'much of a comics fan'. I also i) never mentioned the utility belt thing and ii) pointed out that talking about the Robin identity is not the same as everyone knowing who Dick Grayson is so pointing to a Chris O'Donnel interview means nothing. Everyone knows about Robin, Batman's sidekick, but, unless they are a Batman reader then they are less likely to put much stock in the name Dick Grayson.

In American culture there is not, even today with The Dark Knight, a more famous or better known depiction of Batman than the 60's TV series where each and every week the phrase "millionaire Bruce Wayne and his youthful ward, Dick Grayson" was used. And it was used by George Clooney in one of the five biggest movies of his career (the three Ocean's films and A Perfect Storm). So I'm going to stick with it just. being. you.

[Flâneur]

Pretty much. It's like telling me you know about music but don't know people in the top ten because "you're not into that mainstream stuff." If you know music you have an awareness of things do you don't necessarily care about.
I do know music. I also don't know what or who is currently in the top ten since I genuinely am not "into that mainstream stuff". It would be ridiculous for you to assert however that this means I don't know music.

I don't read any X-comics, period, but I know of Dakon, the Old Man Wolverine storyline, the Manifest Destiny storyline, the War of Kings, etc. I don't read any Avengers, but I know Hank Pym is now the Wasp, the Scarlet Witch is back and they're forming another Avengers. I know these things because I am aware.
You collect trivia which means nothing to you, that you have no interest in and don't want to know about. Good for you?

In American culture there is not, even today with The Dark Knight, a more famous or better known depiction of Batman than the 60's TV series where each and every week the phrase "millionaire Bruce Wayne and his youthful ward, Dick Grayson" was used. And it was used by George Clooney in one of the five biggest movies of his career (the three Ocean's films and A Perfect Storm). So I'm going to stick with it just. being. you.
I'm not much older than 20 and I couldn't tell you a thing about the Batman show from the 60s except that he looked really camp and ridiculous. His costume was gray and black and his cape dragged on the ground. That's pretty much it. And if I try really hard, I can remember a little bit of the old theme song.

Most people in my generation aren't going to connect with the phrase "millionaire Bruce Wayne and his youthful ward, Dick Grayson" and for the generic person who doesn't care about Batman, they're not going to remember a weekly catch phrase from a childhood show they don't care about. You can recall that phrase being used. It has meaning for you. That isn't global and to be honest, if I don't meet the prerequisites for being in this 'aware' fan club then I don't see how every single man, woman and child is supposed to.

And here's another just me!

I had to google Dick Grayson. I still don't get it. Is Nightwing and Robin the same person?

[PastePotPete]

I'd like to see someone take all of the perverse weirdness of the Marsten stuff and make it work somehow.

Like it or not, that stuff is embedded deeply in the character, which is maybe why Wonder Woman has come off as a little fake in her subsequent incarnations.

Now, don't get me wrong. I don't want a book that plays up the perversion angle. I don't want a Wonder Woman book about bondage and lesbianism. But if Morrison can take all of the WTF weirdness of the silver age Superman and make it into something beautiful in All-Star Superman, and if he could re-integrate all of Batman's 1950's strangeness into that character (I liked RIP), then I think he could translate the bizarre Marsten material into something meaningful and palatable that honors the character without disavowing where she comes from.

[celticguy]

I do




I'm not much older than 20 and I couldn't tell you a thing about the Batman show from the 60s except that he looked really camp and ridiculous. His costume was gray and black and his cape dragged on the ground. That's pretty much it. And if I try really hard, I can remember a little bit of the old theme song.




wait hold the phone stop there are words becasue if their are you just made my day.

[carabas]

Is "Nanananananananana" a word?

[WorstThingUS]

I do know music. I also don't know what or who is currently in the top ten since I genuinely am not "into that mainstream stuff". It would be ridiculous for you to assert however that this means I don't know music.[/yeah]

No, you don't if you're not at least aware of other things.

[QUOTE=Flâneur;8349283]
You collect trivia which means nothing to you, that you have no interest in and don't want to know about. Good for you?

I don't care about the bus coming down the street, but I'm aware of it.


I'm not much older than 20

...so you don't know anything about anything at all. Sorry, kid. I thought I was talking to an adult. We're all done here.

[Alex Smith]

...so you don't know anything about anything at all. Sorry, kid. I thought I was talking to an adult. We're all done here.

The real question posed by this thread: Is it possible for anyone in the world to be more condescending than you? I think not.

Any real, "adult," would have the good sense not to speak down to someone simply because of their age. I'm sure in the numerous years you've been on this planet you've gained near infinite wisdom, but with comments like that it's you who acts like they know everything; not the younger person.

For the record, I'd disagree with you completely about the 60s T.V. series being more famous than The Dark Knight. It's the second highest grossing film of all time (In the United States, at least. Around 4th World Wide, I believe), and that is a series quickly fading from the memory of even those alive and old enough to recall watching the show.

[WorstThingUS]

The real question posed by this thread: Is it possible for anyone in the world to be more condescending than you? I think not.

Thanks. I gave it my best shot.


For the record, I'd disagree with you completely about the 60s T.V. series being more famous than The Dark Knight. It's the second highest grossing film of all time (In the United States, at least. Around 4th World Wide, I believe), and that is a series quickly fading from the memory of even those alive and old enough to recall watching the show.

The show was referenced in Batman Forever in 1995 and a TV movie about the show was made as recently as 2003. That's almost 40 years of influence vs. A movie that came out less than a year ago. Keep trying, kids.

[Spiffy]

Basically, Wonder Woman doesn't have "a thing" that's all hers that no one does better. Yes, other characters duplicate Superman's powers, but they take a single aspect and do it better. Stronger will, faster speed, etc. How is a better sense of the truth exciting? Again, this is adventure. Hell, let's not sugar coat it: violence. Your power has to enable you to kick ass. How are truth, love etc going to do that?
I think you may be suffering from a small failure of imagination if you can't see any way this is possible. Sometimes its as simple as her inspiring other people to resist a common enemy, or immoral or evil behavior they might otherwise have turned their back on. Sometimes its a more direct action from her personally, using her lasso. Its not just about tying people up, it also has the power to force the truth out of them. Sometimes even truths they are hiding from themselves. So Wonder Woman has used it any number of times to not only get information, but also to make an enemy confront some truth about themselves. She's used it to remove brainwashing from people (its no coincidence that Dr. Psycho is one of her ongoing enemies), to clear hostility from them which is causing their villainous behavior, etc.

Besides, part of the point of her is that violence is only an aspect of her--a tool to achieve a goal that's diametrically opposite from it.

[WorstThingUS]

I think you may be suffering from a small failure of imagination if you can't see any way this is possible.

Glad to be back on topic...

No, I'm just being realistic about superhero comics. They are about action. I'm not saying the character is bad per se, just not fitting for a superhero comic. How is anything about you say interesting to see? No one does a two-page spread of peace, truth and love.

[Alex Smith]

Glad to be back on topic...

No, I'm just being realistic about superhero comics. They are about action. I'm not saying the character is bad per se, just not fitting for a superhero comic. How is anything about you say interesting to see? No one does a two-page spread of peace, truth and love.

Isn't interesting really a matter of opinion? A superhero comic doesn't necessarily have to center entirely around action. Do most? Sure, but it's by no means a requirement.

[Mat001]

The show was referenced in Batman Forever in 1995 and a TV movie about the show was made as recently as 2003. That's almost 40 years of influence vs. A movie that came out less than a year ago. Keep trying, kids.

Not to mention it's used in "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy", as well as appearing in trivia games shows like "Jepoardy" and "Who Wants To Be A Millionare". And if the series is ever given a DVD release, people will know it.

[West Mantooth]

Isn't interesting really a matter of opinion? A superhero comic doesn't necessarily have to center entirely around action. Do most? Sure, but it's by no means a requirement.


I think he means superheroes as a genre. Like a chick-flick isn't going to have a jerk guy getting the girl like in real life.

[Jolly Mon]

No one does a two-page spread of peace, truth and love.

How about peace, truth, and love, in a bustier and thong? And if that doesn't work, she'll snap your neck like a rotten twig. :eek:

[WorstThingUS]

Isn't interesting really a matter of opinion? A superhero comic doesn't necessarily have to center entirely around action. Do most? Sure, but it's by no means a requirement.

In a perfect world Wonder Woman could fulfill the original intent and be a character who could "stop a war with/make a hawk a dove/make a liar tell the truth" and have a successful superhero comic, but in this one you have to punch a lot of people (not to mention, if she always has to punch people, isn't she failing as a diplomat?). Is there a successful superhero comic without punching?

Not to mention it's used in "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy", as well as appearing in trivia games shows like "Jepoardy" and "Who Wants To Be A Millionare". And if the series is ever given a DVD release, people will know it.

I worked home video for over a decade. The rights are a source of conflict between Fox which produced the show and Warner Brothers which owns the characters. In fact, a friend of mine still in the business insisted that The Watchmen lawsuit was partially brought on for Fox to finally get the rights from Warners.

[Spiffy]

Glad to be back on topic...

No, I'm just being realistic about superhero comics. They are about action. I'm not saying the character is bad per se, just not fitting for a superhero comic.
Then it sounds like this is just a matter of semantics for you. If it makes you more comfortable then pick a different title for her than Superhero.

How is anything about you say interesting to see?
Because (and lets be dead honest about this), the moment where she defeats the enemy with her lasso follows several pages of an intense fist fight, sword fight, monster fight, etc. It's the formula. Violence to subdue temporarily, but then truth for the ultimate defeat.
No one does a two-page spread of peace, truth and love.
Nor would anyone want to see that. That said, decent comics these days have complex characters with complex motivations, subplots which set up the eventual battles, philosophical or intellectual layers which add to the story, etc. "Peace, love and truth" doesn't have to be the actual weapon being used all of the time, but its pretty good as a motivation, a goal for people in the story, an influence on their actions, etc. What makes Wonder Woman stand out from other heroes is that she's a declared, direct symbol for those things. She often entreats an enemy to lay down arms and talk about a situation, even if that's typically ignored. Her subplots (and even you have to admit that comics need those to SOME extent) often center around peacemaking efforts. The whole idea is to set up a contrast between her peacemaking activities and her ability to be an instrument of violence. Its her duality, the way that being an all too human seeming nebbish and yet also the alien and yet oddly cool Superman belongs to Kal-El, or how the ultra driven and intense Batman is paired with the happy feckless fool that's Bruce Wayne.

[MrPalen]

No, it's just you. And if you have to look it up, then I'm afraid you're obviously not much of a comics fan so I'm doubt your opinons on something like public awareness. You obviously don't have your finger on the pulse of much to have to look up Dick Grayson. I mean you're the guy who thinks Robin ranks alongside utility belt, which my Chris O'Donnell reference proved utterly wrong.

Wait, so you're arguing that any random person will know who Dick Grayson is. But, at the same time you're saying that if someone doesn't know who he is then they musn't be much of a comics fan. Also, you imply that only a true comics fan would have knowledge of what the public is aware of? You are a bastion of logical perfection.

Oh and I just asked my housemate, and three people who were online on my MSN, "Who is Dick Grayson?". The answers:

"Don't know."
"No idea."
"Don't know."
"A comedian?"

[WorstThingUS]

Then it sounds like this is just a matter of semantics for you. If it makes you more comfortable then pick a different title for her than Superhero.

But that's what she is. A superhero. It's the genre in which she resides. If you want to explore the concept without those limitations you'd have go outside and do something in the Vertigo arena. It's like someone said earlier. Think of it as a film genre. You can't make an action movie about someone successfully stopping the bad guy through truth and love and communication. That's a drama. In a action film, that has to fail so heads can be busted. You can throw lip service to the treaty being signed at the UN, but if those commandos didn't go in and kill people first, it wouldn't have happened.


Because (and lets be dead honest about this), the moment where she defeats the enemy with her lasso follows several pages of an intense fist fight, sword fight, monster fight, etc. It's the formula. Violence to subdue temporarily, but then truth for the ultimate defeat.

...but you clearly already understand that. But this goes back pages to the conflict of Wonder Woman as warrior/diplomat. It's a conflict because no one is ever both.

What makes Wonder Woman stand out from other heroes is that she's a declared, direct symbol for those things. She often entreats an enemy to lay down arms and talk about a situation, even if that's typically ignored. Her subplots (and even you have to admit that comics need those to SOME extent) often center around peacemaking efforts. The whole idea is to set up a contrast between her peacemaking activities and her ability to be an instrument of violence.

Again, the conflict that no one can really make work, because honestly it's a false conceit on behalf of the audience. She has to fail as a diplomat so we can watch her kick ass. It's why we bought the book.

Its her duality, the way that being an all too human seeming nebbish and yet also the alien and yet oddly cool Superman belongs to Kal-El, or how the ultra driven and intense Batman is paired with the happy feckless fool that's Bruce Wayne.

I don't think that works, because for those men, their other personas either feed into their heoric identity (Clark Kent is the "soul" of Superman) or hide it (Bruce Wayne's dilettante to mask the focused Batman). You can't have her an ambassador just waiting to be a warrior and if she's longing for peace, her ass-kicking would be drenched in guilt rather than the glory of a warrior and that's no fun (even though Daredevil is a successfully miserable warrior).

[Retro315]

She already is a public defender. She defends those who can't defend themselves. I'd rather they don't try to make her into She-Hulk because, well, there's already an established character. Wonder Woman can work on her own but she needs to have some sort of place in the DCU. That isn't to say she doesn't have one, but it can be a lot better.

Because her villains are not the greatest threat to her nor push her to her limits such as some others, she sometimes feels a bit boring. If she's got abilities on par with some of Superman's combined with the training of an extremely capable warrior, well, it can be tough for a writer to make some of her rogues a threat. Gail's building up her rogues so we'll see what can be done. It would be fun to see Cheetah elevated to a point where we know she's a threat and don't have to be told by a writer or editor. She's not pathetic, but I feel she's got more room to grow. Geoff Johns has done that with Sinestro (he always had potential and he's finally being used to its fullest), so it's not impossible.

I'm not against Wonder Woman having a secret identity, but I think the only reason she'd have one is so she can have a coffee without anyone going ballistic. Not to be in a government organization or in the judicial system, just a little peace of mind without having to fly to some secluded area. Socialize with someone who can't juggle or buy a mountain should she want to.

But she needs to keep the gorillas. I love them.

DC already has Manhunter Kate Spencer as well ... a strong woman who's a lawyer is one of the classic comic cliches.

But there's got to be a more interesting way to balance the "woman warrior" part of Wonder Woman's personality to her regular life than "Department of Meta-Human Affairs". Seriously ...

I suppose she could be like Judge Judy and have her own TV court show.

"All rise for the honorable Judge Diana Prince ... and welcome to the People's Court!"

[Apathetic-piggy]

DC already has Manhunter Kate Spencer as well ... a strong woman who's a lawyer is one of the classic comic cliches.

But there's got to be a more interesting way to balance the "woman warrior" part of Wonder Woman's personality to her regular life than "Department of Meta-Human Affairs". Seriously ...

I suppose she could be like Judge Judy and have her own TV court show.

"All rise for the honorable Judge Diana Prince ... and welcome to the People's Court!"

You're completely right, I forgot Kate. I was hung up on a lawyer with powers rivaling She-Hulk. A touch more similar.

As for a TV Judge? Well, it'd certainly be a good outlet for any pent-up anger...


I really can't imagine she'd want a job, though. She strikes me as someone who would take up an art or enter society instead of entering the work force. I think she'd use a secret identity differently than most other characters.

She also strikes me as someone who would probably like to work with young children. People she can teach and protect who are not corrupt, jaded, or obsessed with politics. That does give a sort of image that may not look too good, though (shoe-horning a female character into the role of a teacher)...

Or we could just paint her green and have her rampage across New York screaming "Diana SMASH!" She's got potential to be used any number of ways (both well and badly).

[Flâneur]

...so you don't know anything about anything at all. Sorry, kid. I thought I was talking to an adult. We're all done here.
HAH

Honestly, if you're going to impose your juvenile (and isn't it worse that you're the one playing the child here?) standards, we're all more into Wonder Woman than you and your opinion does not matter. Heck, I'm probably more academically qualified than you to discuss her. Maybe I should tell you to go away because you lack the credentials?

Wonder Woman has strong iconography, she has a defining theme, strong stories and an accessible origin. It works very well in the superhero genre. If the X-men can be about racism and equality then peace, truth and the utopic vision work fine for Wonder Woman. Wonder Woman's main pitfall in the comic medium is that her writers are far from consistent which is what creates the conflict which people shift on to Diana. That is Wonder Woman's problem, not that she has all these character flaws and inconsistencies that supposedly make her an unworkable character in the genre.