After Azzarello who should write WW?

[Auguste Dupin]

To those ants, I'm evil incarnate, the uncaring destroyer of everything they ever held dear; as we are the "ants" to Poseidon, damn straight I see his callous indifference as evil. As a matter of fact, callous indifference has caused more grief and destruction and loss than actual plotting ever has. Manslaughter is a crime, even if murder is regarded as worse.

But antslaughter isn't. So, unless you have ever been put on trial by ants, using human legal terms to qualify his actions doesn't make much sense. It's the whole "is Galactus evil" all over again. To me, there is a difference between someone like old days Ares who actively tried to spread war and start (when he decided for some reason it was a good idea) a nuclear war, and Poseidon, who just don't give a crap (and that, at the very least, is coherent with the old myths).
And, again, you said all gods are malevolent here. I pointed that, at the very least, nothing here indicates that Hermes is anything but benevolent and other gods are more ambiguous than "malevolent" like Eros or Hephaesteus.

[DC#1]

I remember before #600, both Supergirl and Batgirl were kicking Wonder Woman's ass in sales.

And now she has the top female-centric book for March. So the readers have spoken and they like what's going on.

[Sk8maven]

And now she has the top female-centric book for March. So the readers have spoken and they like what's going on.

Maybe. Or maybe they just like NEW and DIFFERENT. Let's see what happens when the books have all been around for a year or two and aren't so "new and different" any longer.

[DC#1]

Maybe. Or maybe they just like NEW and DIFFERENT. Let's see what happens when the books have all been around for a year or two and aren't so "new and different" any longer.

That's true, but you could say the same about most of the 52 books, can't you?

[chastmastr]

But antslaughter isn't. So, unless you have ever been put on trial by ants, using human legal terms to qualify his actions doesn't make much sense.

Legal terms may not, but moral terms definitely do. (And ants aren't sapient beings, either, unlike humans.) Unless one really believes that those DCU Greek gods really are above humankind in terms of the "chain of being" or the like, and are perfectly right to slaughter innocents as they wish because it is, after all, their right to, their proper place in the cosmos--perhaps even worthy of mortal reverence, worship and obedience--then they don't get a free pass for that. Nor should Galactus.

[Dr. Hurt]

Legal terms may not, but moral terms definitely do. (And ants aren't sapient beings, either, unlike humans.) Unless one really believes that those DCU Greek gods really are above humankind in terms of the "chain of being" or the like, and are perfectly right to slaughter innocents as they wish because it is, after all, their right to, their proper place in the cosmos--perhaps even worthy of mortal reverence, worship and obedience--then they don't get a free pass for that. Nor should Galactus.

So you want good gods up in the heavens and bad gods down in hell. A perfect distinction of black and white. Good guys help, bad guys are there for WW to fight. No ambiguity, no grey.

Back in antiquity, the Greek gods werent representatives of good and evil the way christianity has arranged its characters. The gods were just forces of nature. Hell, Hades was probably one of the best guys in the bunch and he was the ruler of the underworld. This narrow minded (no offense) view of deities is what led to Hades being portrayed as the evil guy in almost all of his appearences in Hollywood whereas Zeus is usually the christian god with lightning powers and Poseidon is somewhere in the middle of being a good and bad guy.

[Lorendiac]

I don think that Azzarello will have a very long run probably over a year long
so after that is done
who do you think should write WW?

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Like any fan with literary ambitions, there's only one honest answer I can give whenever the question arises about our preferences on any title featuring characters we care about: "Who should write this title next?"

That honest answer, of course, is: "Me, me, me!"

To pretend otherwise would be hypocritical on my part!

[WhitOro]

That honest answer, of course, is: "Me, me,, me!"

This is so true it hurts.

First thing first, a 4 issue arc entirely focused on Dr. Psycho
Then an adventure with Cheetah (3) and Giganta (2).
Then an arc where Diana finally comes out of the closet while battling Circe (6).
Then a massive Red Panzer War (6)

[chastmastr]

So you want good gods up in the heavens and bad gods down in hell. A perfect distinction of black and white. Good guys help, bad guys are there for WW to fight. No ambiguity, no grey.

Back in antiquity, the Greek gods werent representatives of good and evil the way christianity has arranged its characters. The gods were just forces of nature. Hell, Hades was probably one of the best guys in the bunch and he was the ruler of the underworld. This narrow minded (no offense) view of deities is what led to Hades being portrayed as the evil guy in almost all of his appearences in Hollywood whereas Zeus is usually the christian god with lightning powers and Poseidon is somewhere in the middle of being a good and bad guy.

Actually, you may note that what I said above is: "Unless one really believes that those DCU Greek gods really are above humankind in terms of the "chain of being" or the like . . . then they don't get a free pass for that. Nor should Galactus." If one does not believe that, then all of the comparisons involving ants are rather missing the point, and as sapient beings murdering other sapient beings, the DCU gods (and Galactus) should be held accountable for their actions. You'd the GL Corps would be on it: stopping cosmic, powerful beings running around treating mortals like ants is kind of right up their alley.

And, absolutely, Hades was one of the better ones. I seem to recall in the Perez era he wasn't too bad, just a tad somber.

Indeed, I would argue that the post-Crisis, pre-Flashpoint era was much better about having a more complex, nuanced approach to the Greek gods (Zeus does some good things but also some bad--and there's even a dash of the numinous in their world. The whole M.C. Escher-styled Olympus, suggesting something just a bit beyond human perception, etc.) than what we've gotten in this run.

I really think that someone like Neil Gaiman or Alan Moore or Grant Morrison had been called in to establish the new Wonder Woman (and DCU) metaphysical cosmology. If we're going to go deeper into showing the dark sides of the gods, something like Neil Gaiman's portrayal of, say, Ishtar in Sandman could be in the right ballpark.

[Lorendiac]

As far as those in charge are concerned, selling and working is the same thing. Whether its working or not from an entertainment point of view for the individual is obviously subjective, and not when I mean when I say its working.

I remember seeing an X-Men fan make that point once. He said something like this: "If you are a loyal veteran fan who hates the current storytelling on an X-Book, and you complain about it long and loud in online forums, but you keep buying the stories so as to maintain a 'complete set', then the bottom line is that Marvel receives the following message loud and clear: 'He is buying these stories! No need to change anything in our current approach if we don't want to!'"

[DC#1]

So you want good gods up in the heavens and bad gods down in hell. A perfect distinction of black and white. Good guys help, bad guys are there for WW to fight. No ambiguity, no grey.

Back in antiquity, the Greek gods werent representatives of good and evil the way christianity has arranged its characters. The gods were just forces of nature. Hell, Hades was probably one of the best guys in the bunch and he was the ruler of the underworld. This narrow minded (no offense) view of deities is what led to Hades being portrayed as the evil guy in almost all of his appearences in Hollywood whereas Zeus is usually the christian god with lightning powers and Poseidon is somewhere in the middle of being a good and bad guy.

A traditional good vs evil storyline would be boring, and is not what this book needs right now.

[Auguste Dupin]

Legal terms may not, but moral terms definitely do. (And ants aren't sapient beings, either, unlike humans.) Unless one really believes that those DCU Greek gods really are above humankind in terms of the "chain of being" or the like, and are perfectly right to slaughter innocents as they wish because it is, after all, their right to, their proper place in the cosmos--perhaps even worthy of mortal reverence, worship and obedience--then they don't get a free pass for that. Nor should Galactus.

Well, if you admit that gods do exist (wich I don't, being an atheist and all), you admit they are above humans. Because that's the point of gods. And by definition, a believer never questions gods' morality. Jews don't question God's morality when he killed all the first born in Egypt, or when he decieds to kill 99% of the living things in a flood. Greeks didn't question Zeus' morality when he turned himself into a bull and had sex with a woman.
As for the "ants aren't sapien" stuff, frankly, scientists thought monkeys weren't sentient either less than a century ago (and I say century because I want to make sure I don't make a mistake, to me it's more in the lines of 30 years). And since then, they discovered that they actually were. Besides, why killing non sentient thing sudenly makes it all right? To me, that just sounds like "it's okay if we kill other beings, but it's not when others do this to us". Understandable, but hypocritical.
As for Galactus, of course not. He kills planet because it is his only way of survival. Some versions of his struggle say that his death would result in the end of the universe. Killing something in order to survive is rarely considered "evil". Morally ambiguous, yes. Galactus' no hero, neither is Poseidon. But that doesn't make them villains.

[Lorendiac]

Well, if you admit that gods do exist (wich I don't, being an atheist and all), you admit they are above humans. Because that's the point of gods. And by definition, a believer never questions gods' morality. Jews don't question God's morality when he killed all the first born in Egypt, or when he decieds to kill 99% of the living things in a flood. Greeks didn't question Zeus' morality when he turned himself into a bull and had sex with a woman.

I don't believe I ever before saw anyone say "by definition, a believer never questions gods' morality" with reference to all legendary "gods" from any belief system in the world -- although I have seen similar statements made in regard to the Judeo-Christian God as a specific case.

I've read Edith Hamilton's book "Mythology," and other collections of myths about the old Greek gods, and I don't remember getting the feeling that the people telling those stories never disapproved of any of Zeus's escapades. If anything, I would think their attitude had been more along these lines: "Zeus and the other gods are so powerful that they can do anything they want, and we mere mortals don't usually have any way to stop them. We may heartily disapprove of some of what Zeus does -- but guess what? He's still going to do it! Best we can hope for is to make all the appropriate sacrifices to him and pray he picks on somebody else when he's in a bad mood!"

That is not the same thing as saying "we have no right to question the moral fiber of the god Zeus, and therefore we never shall."

(Watch -- now an expert on Classic Greek culture will speak up and tell me I've missed a crucial point about how those old Greeks looked upon their mythological gods -- according to the best modern analyses of what was happening a few thousand years ago, anyway . . .)

[estee]

Gail Simone and the Dodsons.

Yeah...;)

[chastmastr]

Well I'm just going to have to disagree with there sir.

Yes, I think "does not deserve to write anything" is a bit harsh. The rest of it, absolutely, but Azzarello is acclaimed for 100 Bullets and the like. If DC had just made this an ongoing Elseworlds/alt-universe series, rather than their official mainstream version of the character, that would have been fine.