A Problem I Had With The Banas in Secret Six....

[Free-Man]

...I kind of felt that Gail made THEM into the victims. I mean, they were a bunch of murderers (and attempted murderers of course.)

So yes, what Smythe was doing was totally cruel and out of line, I don't think it was right to portray them as the victims, or have Diana rescue them. Not after what they did.

[bulldog_milt]

...I kind of felt that Gail made THEM into the victims. I mean, they were a bunch of murderers (and attempted murderers of course.)

So yes, what Smythe was doing was totally cruel and out of line, I don't think it was right to portray them as the victims, or have Diana rescue them. Not after what they did.

I don't think they were made to be strictly victims. She mentioned several times that they commited war crimes, but I think it is more a mirror of Guetmo. Even though there are terrorists in prison, some are not guilty of the crimes we're holding them for... and even if they are terrorists does that give us the right to treat them as if they aren't human beings.

[Free-Man]

I don't think they were made to be strictly victims. She mentioned several times that they commited war crimes, but I think it is more a mirror of Guetmo. Even though there are terrorists in prison, some are not guilty of the crimes we're holding them for... and even if they are terrorists does that give us the right to treat them as if they aren't human beings.

It's certainly an interesting parralel to Gitmo, but the Banas are different. The Banas who were taken into custody were without a doubt war criminals. They were guilty of a bunch of crimes (kidnapping, murder, destruction of property, attempted genocide) and at the very least hate crimes. Di should've quickly driven the boat to the nearest metahuman prison and dumped the smelly Banas there.

[Ceridwen]

It's certainly an interesting parralel to Gitmo, but the Banas are different. The Banas who were taken into custody were without a doubt war criminals. They were guilty of a bunch of crimes (kidnapping, murder, destruction of property, attempted genocide) and at the very least hate crimes. Di should've quickly driven the boat to the nearest metahuman prison and dumped the smelly Banas there.
Artemis wasn't. She spent the whole war forgetting that she was the democratically elected ruler of her people, forgetting she was an Amazon warrior once upon a time, forgetting basic decision-making skills, forgetting how to tie her damn shoes practically.

Which is probably how they captured her, but doesn't make her a war criminal.

[Free-Man]

Artemis wasn't. She spent the whole war forgetting that she was the democratically elected ruler of her people, forgetting she was an Amazon warrior once upon a time, forgetting basic decision-making skills, forgetting how to tie her damn shoes practically.

Which is probably how they captured her, but doesn't make her a war criminal.

My bad. Atie was a pretty big exception.

[gargoylekitty]

but I think it is more a mirror of Gitmo.

OTish-I wasn't sure if it was my having lived there that was making me think so much of Gitmo while reading it or if it was just such an obvious parallel. I'm not sure if 'good' would be the best way to describe it but I am pleased somehow to see it wasn't just me thinking that.

[Spiffy]

There were Bananas in Secret Six?

Where? http://www.msnheaven.com/content/emoticons/54/banana002.gif

[trypr]

There were Bananas in Secret Six?

Where?

Ragdoll always keeps one on his person. Y'know, in case.

;)

[Gail Simone]

If you were Ragdoll, YOU WOULD, TOO!

The story asks two questions. One, once you have put someone in prison, what is the line you draw on how you treat those people. And two, does proximity to a place where torture is allowed, or even sanctioned officially, what does it do to the people handling those prisoners.

A lot of people think this is purely about Gitmo but in fact, these are questions that have been raised for centuries, which is why other famous prisons were mentioned.

[Gail Simone]

...I kind of felt that Gail made THEM into the victims. I mean, they were a bunch of murderers (and attempted murderers of course.)

So yes, what Smythe was doing was totally cruel and out of line, I don't think it was right to portray them as the victims, or have Diana rescue them. Not after what they did.

Interesting.

[gargoylekitty]

The story asks two questions. One, once you have put someone in prison, what is the line you draw on how you treat those people. And two, does proximity to a place where torture is allowed, or even sanctioned officially, what does it do to the people handling those prisoners.

A lot of people think this is purely about Gitmo but in fact, these are questions that have been raised for centuries, which is why other famous prisons were mentioned.

True. I wasn't seeing it as being solely about Gitmo but when Smyth started talking about how well the families of the guards would be/where treated I couldn't help relating it to there.

And yeah. You give some people enough space from the eye of judgement and rulings of against the use of torture and they will act differently, not just in the handling of prisioners but of anyone under their watch.

[FemGeek]

It's certainly an interesting parralel to Gitmo, but the Banas are different. The Banas who were taken into custody were without a doubt war criminals. They were guilty of a bunch of crimes (kidnapping, murder, destruction of property, attempted genocide) and at the very least hate crimes. Di should've quickly driven the boat to the nearest metahuman prison and dumped the smelly Banas there.

I'm gonna disagree with you on this point, James. I dont think the Bana should have been locked up, seeing as instigating a war isnt a war crime. At no point in AA did I see a single war crime commited (though Wonder Girl did involve herself in an act of high treason). Wondy was right to try and free them, they were victimised, and sent to a slave camp. Furthermore, the Bana were given no rights under the Geneva convention as POWs (which they really weren't since the war was well over)

[Free-Man]

I'm gonna disagree with you on this point, James. I dont think the Bana should have been locked up, seeing as instigating a war isnt a war crime. At no point in AA did I see a single war crime commited (though Wonder Girl did involve herself in an act of high treason). Wondy was right to try and free them, they were victimised, and sent to a slave camp. Furthermore, the Bana were given no rights under the Geneva convention as POWs (which they really weren't since the war was well over)

Isn't purposely killing civillians a war crime? I don't remember the Banas doing that, but the Themmies mowed down a little boy who was on his knees BEGGING for his life for no other reason than being a male. I'm pretty sure that goes against the Geneva convention.

And the Banas tried to blow up Gotham at one point, again, a civillian location.

[FemGeek]

Isn't purposely killing civillians a war crime? I don't remember the Banas doing that, but the Themmies mowed down a little boy who was on his knees BEGGING for his life for no other reason than being a male. I'm pretty sure that goes against the Geneva convention.

And the Banas tried to blow up Gotham at one point, again, a civillian location.

Unfortunatley, killing civilians is done ALL the time and is overlooked as a war crime (see Dresden fire-bombing). Blowing up Gotham or anywhere else is fair game in a war.
However, there is the question of the deadly, deadly bees. Do they count as a chemical weapon?? That would be a war crime.

[Xeres]

Just because it's been overlooked doesn't make it any less wrong.

[Free-Man]

Unfortunatley, killing civilians is done ALL the time and is overlooked as a war crime (see Dresden fire-bombing). Blowing up Gotham or anywhere else is fair game in a war.
However, there is the question of the deadly, deadly bees. Do they count as a chemical weapon?? That would be a war crime.

Who knows? But at the end, I felt that as a whole, the Amazons f'ed up. Even if it was fair game, the Banas got caught, and who else knows what they did to innocents off panel? I keep hearing that the Banas are proponents of using males as breeding stock and then killing them....

Either way, I sincerely hope Gail plans on dealing with all of this at some point.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I felt that as a whole, the Amazons f'ed up. .

Me, I think the amazons were the ones who got f**d up.

[Xeres]

Me, I think the amazons were the ones who got f**d up.

Yeah. It's both. In book they messed up but were messed up by DC. It's too bad really.

[FemGeek]

I'd just like to know how the Bana got caught and the Classical Amazons didnt. And why the Bana seem to be taking sole responsibility for the war. And did they get trials, as is their right?? I wonder would there be fallout from this, will wonder woman make issue of it with the American government; they arent war criminals if they werent given trials, they aren't POWs since they havent been given POW rights, they arent terrorists since all acts were acts of war. Also all that slavery that was going on.

[Xeres]

I'm steering clear of this subject this time! *holds breath*

[Free-Man]

I'd just like to know how the Bana got caught and the Classical Amazons didnt. And why the Bana seem to be taking sole responsibility for the war. And did they get trials, as is their right?? I wonder would there be fallout from this, will wonder woman make issue of it with the American government; they arent war criminals if they werent given trials, they aren't POWs since they havent been given POW rights, they arent terrorists since all acts were acts of war. Also all that slavery that was going on.

She has no right to take a stance against the US. The Amazons attacked America and slaughtered a bunch of innocent people.

[FemGeek]

She has no right to take a stance against the US. The Amazons attacked America and slaughtered a bunch of innocent people.

True, but it's just that you simply can't imprision soldiers in the manner that was done to the Bana. The death of any civilians in a war is treated in much the same manner as death by misadventure. It's terrible and it shouldn't happen, but it isn't usually seen as a punishable offence, unfortunatley. The imprisionment of the Bana can be seen as 'victors justice'.

[Free-Man]

True, but it's just that you simply can't imprision soldiers in the manner that was done to the Bana. The death of any civilians in a war is treated in much the same manner as death by misadventure. It's terrible and it shouldn't happen, but it isn't usually seen as a punishable offence, unfortunatley. The imprisionment of the Bana can be seen as 'victors justice'.

I meant more from a moral standpoint. I don't see her saying "You meanies!! You locked up my people for attacking you!" after they went and killed a bunch of Americans.

[FemGeek]

I meant more from a moral standpoint. I don't see her saying "You meanies!! You locked up my people for attacking you!" after they went and killed a bunch of Americans.

Morals tend to make everything more complicated, but being Wonder Woman I'd assume she'd rather come to some sort of agreement than drag everything out, particularly the civilian killing (though I didnt see the Bana do any of that, and Hippolyta is the one who should be facing charges if any are to be brought). I'm sure Wondy would agree to a punishment for the actual child civillian murderers, if they could be identified, but imprisionment of an entire people based on the actions of a few isn't something that should be allowed.

[Gail Simone]

I'm steering clear of this subject this time! *holds breath*

Trouble-man, you are always welcome to post whatever you like. Just because some people may not agree doesn't make your opinion invalid or unimportant. That is REALLY not what I'm trying to do.

[Gail Simone]

True, but it's just that you simply can't imprision soldiers in the manner that was done to the Bana. The death of any civilians in a war is treated in much the same manner as death by misadventure. It's terrible and it shouldn't happen, but it isn't usually seen as a punishable offence, unfortunatley. The imprisionment of the Bana can be seen as 'victors justice'.

You SHOULDN'T but we most certainly do.

[Xeres]

Actually I said what I needed to in the other thread. I didn't feel the need to re-type all that. :D

[gargoylekitty]

She has no right to take a stance against the US. The Amazons attacked America and slaughtered a bunch of innocent people.
But... she does. The US can't just sell POWs into slavery/detention/whatever they thought it was regardless of what they've done. Though, while on this 'they killed innocent people' tangent, please consider that the actual US has killed thousands of innocents since 2001 in the 'war on terrorism'. War is gritty. There are always civilian casualties. There are also proper ways for dealing with a captured enemy.

So, since you brought up the Geneva Conventions, let's take a look at what it says about these people (http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6fef854a3517b75ac125641e004a9e68). For example...

Art 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following
provisions:
(1)Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
Note the lack of 'if you violate this you loose those rights', things aren't meant to work that way. And...


Art 13. Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.

Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.

Art 14. Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons and their honour.

Women shall be treated with all the regard due to their sex and shall in all cases benefit by treatment as favourable as that granted to men.
Also...

Art 97. Prisoners of war shall not in any case be transferred to penitentiary establishments (prisons, penitentiaries, convict prisons, etc.) to undergo disciplinary punishment therein.

Assuming the US of the DCU is similar in this degree to our own, they are ultimately in the wrong. There's something to be said about following procedure and fair trial.
Speaking of which...

Art 99. No prisoner of war may be convicted without having had an opportunity to present his defence and the assistance of a qualified advocate or counsel.

But, of course, why would anyone want to follow a silly little thing like that which actually requires you to treat your enemy as though they were a human being. :\

[knowwonder]

BRAVO, Gargolyekitty! GREAT info. Now, can anyone identify which articles have most recently been violated by the U.S.? No, not in regard to fictional characters.......

I am in the camp that feel its the Amazons who have been f****d over by this whole affair. If in the end this story still stands and we continue to honor this STEAMING CRAP with the Amazons acting on their own accord, DC should just return Wonder Woman to the Marston Estate.

This is right up there with Wonder Woman's painted ass on Playboy--utter B.S.

[Free-Man]

BRAVO, Gargolyekitty! GREAT info. Now, can anyone identify which articles have most recently been violated by the U.S.? No, not in regard to fictional characters.......

I am in the camp that feel its the Amazons who have been f****d over by this whole affair. If in the end this story still stands and we continue to honor this STEAMING CRAP with the Amazons acting on their own accord, DC should just return Wonder Woman to the Marston Estate.

This is right up there with Wonder Woman's painted ass on Playboy--utter B.S.

That's just a dream. DC isn't going to just retcon something this big. OTHER books are still making reference to it to this very day.

[Xeres]

Ok, ok I'll add one more thing.

See I'm really of two minds about this. In book, or within the contextof the DCU, all the Amazons are equally accountable and should be punished. I've actually softened my stance on this issue. This is the stance I've been taking recently.

There's the other side, of course, which is outside that realm. The fact that this arc was such a steaming pile of dung and so completely redciulous given the history of these Amazons before this arc that maybe the appropriate respone is a rediculous one. Not a retcon per se but rather a mere dismissal of those events. It's not my preferred choice but the authors of AA deserve their work to be treated in such a manner.

[Free-Man]

Ok, ok I'll add one more thing.

See I'm really of two minds about this. In book, or within the contextof the DCU, all the Amazons are equally accountable and should be punished. I've actually softened my stance on this issue. This is the stance I've been taking recently.

There's the other side, of course, which is outside that realm. The fact that this arc was such a steaming pile of dung and so completely redciulous given the history of these Amazons before this arc that maybe the appropriate respone is a rediculous one. Not a retcon per se but rather a mere dismissal of those events. It's not my preferred choice but the authors of AA deserve their work to be treated in such a manner.

It could've all been cleared up had they said something like "ALL the Amazons were infected with the Anti-Life Equation or under Granny Goodness' control".

[Xeres]

Yeah I think Gail said that the higher-ups canned the mind control thing.

Maybe Hippolyta should just wake up and tell Wildcat, "yano I had the weirdest dream that the Amazons invaded America. How dumb is that?"

[Free-Man]

Yeah I think Gail said that the higher-ups canned the mind control thing.

Maybe Hippolyta should just wake up and tell Catman "yano I had the weirdest dream that the Amazons invaded America. How dumb is that?"

If only, if only. :wink:

[jrp001]

Yeah I think Gail said that the higher-ups canned the mind control thing.

Maybe Hippolyta should just wake up and tell Wildcat, "yano I had the weirdest dream that the Amazons invaded America. How dumb is that?"

don't you mean, "wake up one morning, rollover, nudge Wildcat and say..."

[Xeres]

Hehe yep that's what I mean.

[americanwonder]

That's just a dream. DC isn't going to just retcon something this big. OTHER books are still making reference to it to this very day.

I don't see why they couldn't. Mass-murdering Hal was basically retcon aquitted with a yellow space flu. Johns even stated in his proposal (as seen in the Rebirth tpb) that it had to be explained away because otherwise too many people would always view him as a stained/ruined character. I don't see any reason the same couldn't/shouldn't be applied to the Amazons, a very fundamental aspect of WW.

Besides, AA didn't even sell that well, it isn't highly regarded and it served very little purposed. Even the story elements that remain don't help the WW mythos. It makes no sense to me why it's treated as some holy scripture that can't be thrown out like the trash it is.

I blame the whole thing on the shody reporting of the US media. Lois should break the real story and clear our gals.

[Phil Jimenez]

I don't see why they couldn't. Mass-murdering Hal was basically retcon aquitted with a yellow space flu. Johns even stated in his proposal (as seen in the Rebirth tpb) that it had to be explained away because otherwise too many people would always view him as a stained/ruined character. I don't see any reason the same couldn't/shouldn't be applied to the Amazons, a very fundamental aspect of WW.
.

Don't underestimate the general distaste, if not disdain, for many folks behind the scenes in regards to WW's whole mythos, which they see as creatively frustrating and commercially unsound (I've had numerous arguments over the years about how Wonder Woman's world, including the Amazons, get in the way of the character; they are not what makes the character special or unique; they're a crutch; they're too many of them (supporting characters/players); they are too alien and distancing for casual readers; they're stupid (yes, I've heard that rationale, too).

I always end up in a very defensive position when trying to explain to certain folks at DC why the DCU Amazons (and much of Wonder Woman's world) are more than chicks with togas. Even to the most receptive ones, the ideas seem conceptually difficult and emotionally uninvolving (this, of course, could be simply because I'm pitching it all wrong), but this has been my experience over the years.

That said, aside from folks like Gail, Greg, and George, I've encountered a few "non-WW" creators who really, really do care about the character and her world -- and give great thought to the mythos and how to make it better and stronger (at least commercially). Historically, without a strong editor to support the vision across the line, a lot of that care and creativity gets lost to larger corporate concerns and decisions, and you get stuff like Amazons Attack.

[bulldog_milt]

Interesting.


Sorry I should have worded my original message better.
I believe that there are certain parallels to gitmo and to other prisons throughout the world. The overall question is where the lines are and who controls those lines? Is it right to commit, what would be considered a crime (slavery) because of what a particular person did? When do you as a person lose your own humanity when punishing another person?

Those themes exist throughout time, and aren't specific to the US and recent events. It was just the most current version I could recall that seemed to relate.

Any good writer takes current issues and reflects on them through a more universal 'viewing glass'. This is something I've always found great about you as a writer. Your stories are topical without being too topical...

:biggrin:

[Free-Man]

Don't underestimate the general distaste, if not disdain, for many folks behind the scenes in regards to WW's whole mythos, which they see as creatively frustrating and commercially unsound (I've had numerous arguments over the years about how Wonder Woman's world, including the Amazons, get in the way of the character; they are not what makes the character special or unique; they're a crutch; they're too many of them (supporting characters/players); they are too alien and distancing for casual readers; they're stupid (yes, I've heard that rationale, too).

I always end up in a very defensive position when trying to explain to certain folks at DC why the DCU Amazons (and much of Wonder Woman's world) are more than chicks with togas. Even to the most receptive ones, the ideas seem conceptually difficult and emotionally uninvolving (this, of course, could be simply because I'm pitching it all wrong), but this has been my experience over the years.

That said, aside from folks like Gail, Greg, and George, I've encountered a few "non-WW" creators who really, really do care about the character and her world -- and give great thought to the mythos and how to make it better and stronger (at least commercially). Historically, without a strong editor to support the vision across the line, a lot of that care and creativity gets lost to larger corporate concerns and decisions, and you get stuff like Amazons Attack.

Is it that bad Phil? Where these other writers who made the remarks about the Amazons?

But I can see what they mean about the other Amazons potentially making the character less unique or acting as fetters.

[Gail Simone]

Don't underestimate the general distaste, if not disdain, for many folks behind the scenes in regards to WW's whole mythos, which they see as creatively frustrating and commercially unsound (I've had numerous arguments over the years about how Wonder Woman's world, including the Amazons, get in the way of the character; they are not what makes the character special or unique; they're a crutch; they're too many of them (supporting characters/players); they are too alien and distancing for casual readers; they're stupid (yes, I've heard that rationale, too).

I always end up in a very defensive position when trying to explain to certain folks at DC why the DCU Amazons (and much of Wonder Woman's world) are more than chicks with togas. Even to the most receptive ones, the ideas seem conceptually difficult and emotionally uninvolving (this, of course, could be simply because I'm pitching it all wrong), but this has been my experience over the years.

That said, aside from folks like Gail, Greg, and George, I've encountered a few "non-WW" creators who really, really do care about the character and her world -- and give great thought to the mythos and how to make it better and stronger (at least commercially). Historically, without a strong editor to support the vision across the line, a lot of that care and creativity gets lost to larger corporate concerns and decisions, and you get stuff like Amazons Attack.



It's true...a lot of people in the industry don't get WW and that's what makes Amazons Attack, not a lack of talent on behalf of the creative team.

[americanwonder]

Don't underestimate the general distaste, if not disdain, for many folks behind the scenes in regards to WW's whole mythos, which they see as creatively frustrating and commercially unsound (I've had numerous arguments over the years about how Wonder Woman's world, including the Amazons, get in the way of the character; they are not what makes the character special or unique; they're a crutch; they're too many of them (supporting characters/players); they are too alien and distancing for casual readers; they're stupid (yes, I've heard that rationale, too).

I always end up in a very defensive position when trying to explain to certain folks at DC why the DCU Amazons (and much of Wonder Woman's world) are more than chicks with togas. Even to the most receptive ones, the ideas seem conceptually difficult and emotionally uninvolving (this, of course, could be simply because I'm pitching it all wrong), but this has been my experience over the years.

That said, aside from folks like Gail, Greg, and George, I've encountered a few "non-WW" creators who really, really do care about the character and her world -- and give great thought to the mythos and how to make it better and stronger (at least commercially). Historically, without a strong editor to support the vision across the line, a lot of that care and creativity gets lost to larger corporate concerns and decisions, and you get stuff like Amazons Attack.

I've had my suspicions for some time, but to hear you say it, well, it saddens me deeply. :frown:

I don't really get it either - WW and the Amazons aren't that hard to understand. They're very similar to the Shaolin monks, the Jedi of the DCU, if you will - a spiritually minded people seeking to better themselves and the world around them. Why is that so difficult?

*sigh* Sometimes it amazes me she's lasted as long as she has when that's what she gets for support. :frown:

[Phil Jimenez]

I don't really get it either - WW and the Amazons aren't that hard to understand. They're very similar to the Shaolin monks, the Jedi of the DCU, if you will - a spiritually minded people seeking to better themselves and the world around them. Why is that so difficult:

My general feeling? Because they're women.

I think if the Amazons were men, or a mixed tribe of men and women (ala the Jedi), you'd definitely have a much greater creative/emotional investment in those characters (keeping in mind, that most creators and super-hero consumer are male, and I've long believed that their fantasy needs remain paramount in the business, commercially).

[Phil Jimenez]

But I can see what they mean about the other Amazons potentially making the character less unique or acting as fetters.

Unlike, say, the Green Lantern Corps. :)

[FeminineMystique]

don't you mean, "wake up one morning, rollover, nudge Phillipus and say..."

There was a serious spelling error in your post darling. Not to worry, I corrected it for you!:biggrin:

[Xeres]

Maybe she nudges them both!

[raporfest]

I've had my suspicions for some time, but to hear you say it, well, it saddens me deeply. :frown:

I don't really get it either - WW and the Amazons aren't that hard to understand. They're very similar to the Shaolin monks, the Jedi of the DCU, if you will - a spiritually minded people seeking to better themselves and the world around them. Why is that so difficult?

*sigh* Sometimes it amazes me she's lasted as long as she has when that's what she gets for support. :frown:

The problem is when people think of a comic with amazons, Greek Mythology, and mythological mosnters they instantly think sword slashing, head chopping, and "THIS IS THEMYSCRICA!" kind of stuff due to it being portrayed like that in other media and being extremly popular like 300 and God of War.

Also when a person who isn't into Wonder Woman, hears the word "Amazon", they instantly think "badass warrior" which she is not or not entirly.

[loneangel74]

I've had my suspicions for some time, but to hear you say it, well, it saddens me deeply. :frown:

I don't really get it either - WW and the Amazons aren't that hard to understand. They're very similar to the Shaolin monks, the Jedi of the DCU, if you will - a spiritually minded people seeking to better themselves and the world around them. Why is that so difficult?

*sigh* Sometimes it amazes me she's lasted as long as she has when that's what she gets for support. :frown:

You know what gets me about the topic of WW and her mythos is that Perez had re-imagined a society of immortals who although they lived long lives without aging with time still managed to change and structured a new society for themselves. It was more a return to the ideals created by Marston back in the 40s. Surely we did not get the technical marvels of the original Amazons, but we did get the highly evolved skills of expert craftswomen whether their expertise were focused on the arts, medicine, or government. In 3,000 years they became far more than what how they began and we could see the change in attitudes toward the outside world through their being open-minded to Diana’s adventures and the information she brought back from Patriarch’s World. The nobility of the Amazon nation literally leapt off each page. The discord they had among themselves was resolved through open discussion and democratic processes. They were not warmongering diehards, although they were still the most capable warriors on the planet. The funny part of the Perez run was that after all they had been through and working to change themselves while they served their penance on Paradise Island, the Amazons end up discovering that Patriarch’s world had not changed that much. There was still a great deal of cynicism, mistrust, and violence that permeated the world beyond their shores and Messener-Loebs saw that aspect of the outside world was brought home to Paradise when he threw the island into an alternate dimension and incorporated the Banas. Thankfully, Jimenez’ run brought a subtle return to the ideals of Paradise at the end, and that was some darn good storytelling!!

Now, unfortunately, the message of who the Amazons are seems to have gotten lost in the DCU. Instead we get hardcore warriors without any real remorse or true explanation for their extreme actions. I think most people just can’t wrap their heads around the fact that WW and the Amazons have evolved from ancient Grecian incarnations. Failing to realize this is nothing more than creative laziness. It is like a genius storyteller saying something like he doesn’t truly get a character so he decided to place a boar’s head mask on her face and relegate her to the status of slave dog for a hell-bent, dark god. Here’s a tip… if you do not know how to write a character… leave him/her out of your freaking story!! There I said it… something totally out of character for me!

WW is her mythos! Without it, then she is truly nothing more than a female Superman. She is far more than that and arguably the most original character out there! They should start treating her like it! Embrace all that she is and then stand by what has come before! Then we will have a consistent character and then maybe people can start getting on the same page about who WW is and what she’s about!

Okay… I had better get back to work!! :biggrin:

Regards,

[jrp001]

There was a serious spelling error in your post darling. Not to worry, I corrected it for you!:biggrin:


I am not sure the Poly and Ted would be into the three-way... :eek:

the extra person might just get hurt by "teh passion"