I've missed the old Wonder Woman

[Dr. Hurt]

Because the Batman character is simple.

Wondy is complex.

Being the personification of Truth contradicts what WW was intended to be....

A liar?

Not that i like her being the personification of truth... Just saying.

[Legato]

A liar?

Not that i like her being the personification of truth... Just saying.

The one on the left is Pre-Relaunch Wonder Woman while the one on the right is Post-Relaunch Wonder Woman

[SteveGus]

No, its not quite like that. You'd see it differently if you just realize that nearly everything they did to Wonder Woman after Marston died just didn't stick with the essence/vibe of the character that Marston intended. Whereas the things done to Batman after Bob Kane were viable and still true to Batman, and significant of all, not CONTRADICTORY to the essence of Batman. Because the Batman character is simple.

Wondy is complex.

Being the personification of Truth contradicts what WW was intended to be....

I'm not sure that Batman lacks complexity or depth. There have been times -- the Schwartz/Infantino and Adam West TV years, in particular -- where I might say that the essence of the character was in danger of being lost, and the character was treated in a way wildly inconsistently with Bob Kane's concepts.

I am not a Batman fan, and in fact am something of a Batman resenter. The Schwartz and West Batman amuses me, largely because it seems so very different from, and pleasanter in mood than, the post-Frank Miller Batman. You might say that Miller's Batman is a similar opposite distortion. But there is an element of Schadenfreude in seeing Batman played as camp, especially from people like myself who tend not to be fond of serious Batman, and dislike his constant upstaging of heroes we like better than him.

Wonder Woman seldom gets to upstage anybody like Batman, but for some reason she too seems to have people who resent the character. Unfortunately, one of them is writing her.

[Dr. Hurt]

but for some reason she too seems to have people who resent the character. Unfortunately, one of them is writing her.

Oh you!

10char

[jancy]

A liar?

Not that i like her being the personification of truth... Just saying.

YES...she's a liar. She deceived mother just so she can enter the contest to take her boyfriend back to America.

[Maximum Impact]

This is Wonder Woman. This is exactly it...the feel that Azzarello is missing, the quintessence.



Janet Jackson in her prime, brimming with sexuality but nevertheless relentlessly sweet. No matter what she wears or doesn't wear, or what she says or doesn't say, or what she does or doesn't do...whether she's the innocent ingenue in "Let's Wait Awhile", or tough girl in "Nasty", or activist politician in "Rhythm Nation", or iconoclastic tour guide in "Runaway"...she's always SWEET...and her innate goodness permeates everything she does. This is Wonder Woman to me, and all these aspects are missing in Azzarello's version.

[carabas]

Janet Jackson in her prime, brimming with sexuality but nevertheless relentlessly sweet. No matter what she wears or doesn't wear, or what she says or doesn't say, or what she does or doesn't do...whether she's the innocent ingenue in "Let's Wait Awhile", or tough girl in "Nasty", or activist politician in "Rhythm Nation", or iconoclastic tour guide in "Runaway"...she's always SWEET...and her innate goodness permeates everything she does. This is Wonder Woman to me, and all these aspects are missing in Azzarello's version.

I'm not sure that's Wonder Woman that's ever appeared in comics. DC seems to really, really hate the idea of Wonder Woman being in any way at all sexual (other than for T&A covers).

[Dr. Hurt]

This is Wonder Woman. This is exactly it...the feel that Azzarello is missing, the quintessence.



Janet Jackson in her prime, brimming with sexuality but nevertheless relentlessly sweet. No matter what she wears or doesn't wear, or what she says or doesn't say, or what she does or doesn't do...whether she's the innocent ingenue in "Let's Wait Awhile", or tough girl in "Nasty", or activist politician in "Rhythm Nation", or iconoclastic tour guide in "Runaway"...she's always SWEET...and her innate goodness permeates everything she does. This is Wonder Woman to me, and all these aspects are missing in Azzarello's version.

The song is sweet, she acts sweet, but she looks.... i'm not even going to say it. And anyway why is Azzarello missing this sweetness? If anything his WW is down to earth, very friendly and has a sense of humor.

[Gaelforce]

Tho' there are things I don't like about the current run, I like Diana's portrayal. However, I do think the 'sweetness' factor is missing. Not the same as having a sense of humor or being friendly.

I'm really hoping that when this current arc is done Azzarello will focus more on Diana's personality rather than on world building. Many people, myself included, get an 'ensemble' feel from the book which is fine in the short term, but not something I want to see in the long term.

Maybe if Diana were more front and center with a supporting cast, we'll see more of that 'sweet factor.'

[Dr. Hurt]

Tho' there are things I don't like about the current run, I like Diana's portrayal. However, I do think the 'sweetness' factor is missing. Not the same as having a sense of humor or being friendly.

Technically no, but i found her pretty sweet in all her character moments with Zola. I dont know, the fact that she is so open and approachable despite being freaking WW makes her sweet to me.

And of course she was that pre-FP as well, but she was also a bit formal and ideal, which created a bit of a barrier.

[jancy]

Others have touched on this theme and it has since faded into history, but it is incorrect to say 'never' the personification of anything.
You may disagree with what the writers did, but that doesn't change that they did it.

Soooo instead of just telling me something to the effect of, "Hey, what do you mean she never personified truth? What about the Byrne era making her the Goddess of Truth?"....you decided to just go ahead and assume that its a matter of me simply DISAGREEING with the writers, rather than a matter of me basing my position on fact? Just so you can tell me that "You can keep saying this, but unfortunately that doesn't make it true". Hmmmmmm.

Anyway...

No, its incorrect to say that Wonder Woman was never PORTRAYED as personification of truth. But, its IS correct to say that the character herself was never made to be the personification of truth or anything else. If you read William Marston's original interviews, he himself says that Wonder Woman is actually a dramatized symbol of her sex, true to the universal characteristics of women everywhere. And her magic lasso is merely a symbol of feminine charm, attraction. She was never created to personify truth, nor was the lasso. (Ironic how the idea of TRUTH being the concept behind Wonder Woman & the lasso is really a big fat LIE.)

Byrne making Wonder Woman a goddess of truth, and any writer who made a big deal of this truth theme, is a result of them just not truly understanding the essence of Wonder Woman, and therefore assumed that truth must be her main theme (due to the lasso). And so they and most fans would fail to see that that's like making Batman into the embodiment of technology.

As we all know, Batman was created to be this dark avenger. That is the core concept of the character. And so any evolution or variation that stays true to the character would not veer from this core, right?
Well with Wonder Woman, making her the personification of truth or anything else DOES veer from the core. The problem is, people would not be able to determine if they're veering from her core or not because they still haven't conceived what her core IS! Early readers of the Golden Age have known. But Wonder Woman has gone thru many distorting changes that her core concepts have been blurred or faded out, leading to what we have now. And so that leaves many modern readers clueless about the original concept of Wonder Woman...that is, if they don't take a good look back at the Golden Age stories for what they really are, beyond just the bondage.

[carabas]

As we all know, Batman was created to be this dark avenger. That is the core concept of the character. And so any evolution or variation that stays true to the character would not veer from this core, right?
Well with Wonder Woman, making her the personification of truth or anything else DOES veer from the core. The problem is, people would not be able to determine if they're veering from her core or not because they still haven't conceived what her core IS! Early readers of the Golden Age have known. But Wonder Woman has gone thru many distorting changes that her core concepts have been blurred or faded out, leading to what we have now. And so that leaves many modern readers clueless about the original concept of Wonder Woman...that is, if they don't take a good look back at the Golden Age stories for what they really are, beyond just the bondage.

Well, considering that Wonder Woman's supposed core has not been seen for over 50 years, and probably won't be seen ever again until Grant Morrison's effort finally sees the light of day, how does it matter?

[jancy]

Well, considering that Wonder Woman's supposed core has not been seen for over 50 years, and probably won't be seen ever again until Grant Morrison's effort finally sees the light of day, how does it matter?

OOOOOH! You're thinking of the SEX, right? Not really what I was thinking as her core. But let's talk about the SEX anyway...

It matters to those fans that hold it dear to their hearts. Nostalgia, maybe? But for me, I hold onto the core (not the sex) because I see great potential from what Marston originally created, but havent seen it explore to its fullest yet.

For Batman, his potential is been explored many times over, because his core has been grasped and written into EVERY incarnation, even a bit in the campy Adam West version.

As to what her core is (in case anyone doesnt know), refer to the following (but not limited to) books or graphic novels:

JMS's "Odyssey"
"Wonder Woman" by Gloria Steinem
"Why 100,000,000 Americans Read Comics", of The American Scholar 1943, winter, page 35-44.
"Our Women Are Our Future", of Family Circle, 1942, August, by Olive Richard.

[carabas]

OOOOOH! You're thinking of the SEX, right?

Well, the guy posting the Janet Jackson clip was... But "the SEX" is very much part of her core, of course.

[Dr. Hurt]

As we all know, Batman was created to be this dark avenger. That is the core concept of the character. And so any evolution or variation that stays true to the character would not veer from this core, right?

Ahem





Harcore WW fans need to chillax.