'Rama Interview: Brian Azzarello on WW

[majormcmeat]

Right, because the previous depiction of the Amazons with their awesome perms and chrome-plated armour was so compelling. I guess that's why the title was such a top-seller. Those darned Greeks and their boring myths just pale in comparison, no doubt about it.

Keep in mind that sales are not always indicative of quality. Chew's goddamned amazing, but it'll never top the charts, for example.

But I totally agree that the previous depiction of the Amazons was no more interesting than what we've got now. They were changed to fit into the story being told, something that has happened before and will doubtlessly happen again.

[RandomFalls]

Murderers? They're warriors. And they do have a flawed utopia since they must be warriors to preserve their way of life. There's a difference between warrior tribes and barbarians.

No, they're murderers. Warrior would imply that they killed those men while at war, rather than seducing them and killing them while their pants were round their ankles. That's just straight up murder.

[Dr. Hurt]

For them to be "grey," there has to be some white. I don't see any white thus far. They exist to 'seduce' men and kill half the kids. Sex and violence. That's it.

Why did the exist before? I dont remember them doing anything important. Azzarello is just trying a more realistic approach and saying that if you seclude yourself on an island, you dont become perfect.

They can only be believable, relevant and cool if they kill some kids?

Yes because ancient backwater civilizations did exist. Ours will one day be one of them when humanity stops war, hunger, disease and crime and progresses further from what we are now.

But there's never been an island of preachy immortal amazons so far.

[americanwonder]

Well what would you have them do? How else are they supposed to continue as a people?

Do you really think this is the only way a fictional society can continue?

It just seems laughable to me that we should impose our morality on an ancient, supernatural, fictional society.

Because killing is all culturally relative?

I would think the "white" would be them raising Diana, the woman who has become Wonder Woman, one of the greatest heroes and defenders of truth and justice on the planet.

Can we really count that? For instance, let's say I was raised by an all-white, group of white supremacists. Years later I'm shocked to find that they mistreat (to say the least) people of other races. Would we really credit my upbringing to me not being a racist?

Right, because the previous depiction of the Amazons with their awesome perms and chrome-plated armour was so compelling. I guess that's why the title was such a top-seller. Those darned Greeks and their boring myths just pale in comparison, no doubt about it.

Because the only options are "chrome and perms" vs. "men are only good for sex and violence"? Also, am I reading WW or a thesis on Greek myth?

Majormcmeat is right that sales is an argument with some big holes.

[Dr. Hurt]

Many great people have had flaws. All of them, in fact. Yet, we still find them admirable. Even interesting. I think the Amazons can have flaws, and still be admirable, and even greater than any other known society. All without being the trite 'man-hating, baby killers.' A little imagination goes a long way on this. Or, like Javier said above, just don't write them and focus on Diana in our world.

How is that trite but "heroic immortal warrior society of women who you should aspire to" isnt?

Come on now, lets try to be a bit more objective here.

[fanboiii]

No, they're murderers. Warrior would imply that they killed those men while at war, rather than seducing them and killing them while their pants were round their ankles. That's just straight up murder.

Warriors don't go on raids or pillage? Hello Megan, war is murder. Are Vikings barbarians?

[RandomFalls]

Warriors don't go on raids or pillage? Hello Megan, war is murder. Are Vikings barbarians?

It's still murder whatever way you slice it. Yes those delightful vikings did murder when they went pillaging. They also raped and stole... since, y'know that's what pillaging was about. Thwy don't kill the peasants in battle, they murdered them as they fleed for their lives pr tried to protect their families, or whatever. It's murder. The Amazons are murderers. If a soldier comes home from war and then shoots some random dud ein the dtreet, that would be murder. The fact that he's (or she, lets be fair) a soldier (a warrior) doesn't make it not murder.

[Gaelforce]

Warriors don't go on raids or pillage? Hello Megan, war is murder. Are Vikings barbarians?

Umm...they're pretty much the definition of barbarians, yes.

Warrior - someone who fights in a war against other warriors
Murderer - someone who kills helpless civilians after taking their sperm

[Dr. Hurt]

It's still murder whatever way you slice it. Yes those delightful vikings did murder when they went pillaging. They also raped and stole... since, y'know that's what pillaging was about. Thwy don't kill the peasants in battle, they murdered them as they fleed for their lives pr tried to protect their families, or whatever. It's murder. The Amazons are murderers. If a soldier comes home from war and then shoots some random dud ein the dtreet, that would be murder. The fact that he's (or she, lets be fair) a soldier (a warrior) doesn't make it not murder.

It wasnt just the Vikings. Practically every army in human history has commited atrocities.

Ooh... except DC's Amazons of course. No, they are warriors who train all day how to fight so that they can spread peace.


What... am i the only one who sees the logical inconsistency here?

[majormcmeat]

Do you really think this is the only way a fictional society can continue?

This particular one? Kinda. Sure they could pick female-only babies out of trees because it's fiction, but it wouldn't fit the story, setting, or tone.

Because killing is all culturally relative?

Yes

[americanwonder]

... I dont remember them doing anything important...

If doing something important is what's important, then give them something important to do. Azzarello's Amazons aren't doing anything important. They exist solely for the shocking cliche: "Your mama had sex, and your sister tossed her baby away." Hyper-simplistic shock solely for the shock. There's no depth there. And nothing important for them to do.

... Azzarello is just trying a more realistic approach and saying that if you seclude yourself on an island, you dont become perfect. Yes because ancient backwater civilizations did exist. Ours will one day be one of them when humanity stops war, hunger, disease and crime and progresses further from what we are now.

So you do believe that humanity can advance further than we are now? Why can't the Amazons be more like that society instead of "ancient backwater"? Because they are all women? Tell me, how many "ancient backwater civilizations" of all women have there been? In other words, how "realistic" is this really?

But there's never been an island of preachy immortal amazons so far.

And there's never been a "Superman" either, so? It's fiction. Comic book fiction.

Come on now, lets try to be a bit more objective here.

Wait, are you really trying to claim to be objective here?

[majormcmeat]

Because they are all women?

Because theirs is a small society based on an ancient culture on a limited landmass with limited resources that is cut off from the rest of the world, or more importantly, the billions of people collectively progressing said world.

[Dr. Hurt]

If doing something important is what's important, then give them something important to do.

I cant argue with that.

So you do believe that humanity can advance further than we are now? Why can't the Amazons be more like that society instead of "ancient backwater"?

Because they've done that for decades so they want to try something new.

Because they are all women?

Gender doesnt factor into this.

Tell me, how many "ancient backwater civilizations" of all women have there been? In other words, how "realistic" is this really?

Again, what's this gender thing? There have been backwater civilizations, so Azz is turning them into female Spartans who secluded themselves on an island, so they didnt get to advance with the rest of the world.

Wait, are you really trying to claim to be objective here?

That post of yours definitely was. Most of the ideas and concepts discussed here have been done a thousand times. There's no point in calling the opposition's ideas trite when the ones you support are trite too.

[Dr. Hurt]

Because theirs is a small society based on an ancient culture on a limited landmass with limited resources that is cut off from the rest of the world, or more importantly, the billions of people collectively progressing said world.

Well put. Who would expect anyone in their position to advance to Star Trek tech?


spoilers:

Feminists.

end of spoilers

[americanwonder]

What... am i the only one who sees the logical inconsistency here?

You may not be alone, but your logical inconsistency is a false illusion that doesn't have to exist. A little know director by the name George Lucas managed to sell a few movie tickets based around warriors (imperfect, too) that fight for peace. It's a big theme in many kung-fu movies, too. In fact, in our imperfect world, the UN sends peace keepers, soldiers with guns, to areas to try and promote peace (although, they aren't the most effective). It really isn't such a foreign concept.

This particular one? Kinda. Sure they could pick female-only babies out of trees because it's fiction, but it wouldn't fit the story, setting, or tone.

So, basically it has to be this way because the author created a world where it has to be this way? So that's the only way? Because the author couldn't have come up with a world where it didn't have to be this way?

Yes

So, you'd never judge me killing someone as long as I thought it sounded like a good idea at the time? It's all a-ok to you?