Azzarello and Chiang at Chicago Con-- Spoilers--?

[slvn]

This!

Garion, since you're agreeing with Javier Valasco's call for someone to post three positive things that Azzarello has said about Wonder Woman as a character, I wanted to point out that I have already done as he asked. I don't know whether he saw it either, so I'll repeat it here:

You ask for the three top statements by Azz about Wonder Woman herself. I don't know about "top," but here are three--or more than three, depending on how you count. Each includes different pieces of an interview,but they're not exactly in context, but you can see the links for full context.

1. "I liked the Marston stuff a lot. Yeah, I liked that stuff. I think that stuff's fun....Wonder Woman's a myth, just like the gods, and I put her in the same boat as Superman or Batman....I'm much more concerned with what goes on behind her eyes than what goes on, what goes on her thighs....There's conflict. She's not perfect, and she knows ....There are things about that character that make her unique from other characters that need to be pushed to the forefront. I think a lot of what makes her unique is like I said, it's behind her eyes. That's what she needs."

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?p...ticle&id=34485

2."Q: What have you learned about Wonder Woman that you maybe didn't know before that surprised you?

Azzarello: I didn't know she was capable of telling jokes. And she is. She has a good sense of humor. It's dry, very dry. It's good.

...
Q:Do you picture anyone in your mind when you're writing Wonder Woman?

Azzarello: My mom. My mom is my Wonder Woman."

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?p...ticle&id=35105

(People may laugh at this one, but I'm guessing that if he's willing to associate his mother with Wonder Woman, he sees some good in the character)

3.
"Q: You’ve written a lot of complex characters in 100 Bullets and Loveless. How do you think Diana compares to your previous female characters?

BA: Oh boy, man. She has a much more identifiable moral code, ’cause a lot of the women I’ve written have been—sure they’re strong, but they’ve also been morally compromised in some way. Ruth in Loveless, she was a murderer. Dizzy [in 100 Bullets] was tortured. Wonder Woman’s not tortured. I think Wonder Woman’s very strong and very confident in who she is, a sort of calmness and a sense of humor that I think has been lacking from that character for a while."

(Yes, I realize that people may differ about whether calmness and sense of humor has been lack "for awhile, but at least he's recognizing that those fine qualities were there in the first place, right?)

http://www.avclub.com/articles/brian-azzarello,64974/

Javier, you felt that those who have issues with the run would be more likely to cut Azz some slack if they saw some positive things he had said about the character. So, do you think any of those help?

[Javier Velasco]

cgh,

Again, you are doing exactly what is frowned upon on this board. Characterizing themotivations and validity of a fellow posters opinions. I have never said that I hate this run. What I have said is that I am not purchasing it and I have given the reasons why. There are many things that I don't buy because they don't interest me. That doesn't mean that I hate them, just that I don't like them enough to spend my money on them.

As far as my respecting reality. Again, please don't tell me what to do. If you notice my request of you was not to characterize my opinions. And in response, you have again characterized my opinions.

Feel free to disagree with my (or any other posters) conclusions on facts. Feel free to show examples and debate. But do so in a respectful manner to everyone on the board.

I understand that on many message boards, personal aspersions, negative asides, and characterizations are permitted. But they are frowned upon here. If you have any questions about this please read the reiterating forum behavior thread. And yes, telling someone to "respect reality" is a negative characterization.

If you feel that you are being unreasonably singled out, you may message me to continue the discussion.

As for the Golden Age's depiction of violence and mayhem. I would invite you to post a Golden Age Superman or Wonder Woman image that is as graphically violent as we we are currently seeing.

Javier

[Javier Velasco]

Javier - did you watch the X-Men: Evolution cartoon about ten years back? I ask because one of my favorite episodes was when they used their powers to save a resort town from an erupting volcano. I'm ok with superhero violence, but like you, I'd like to see more other stuff, too (eg, stop a damn from breaking).

I didn't see it it, but I would add to this that I do think that some of those animated series were doing a good job of balancing things out.

[Sk8maven]

Javier Velasco,

Please do me a favour and respect reality. As such an advanced reader of Golden Age comics, surely you realise the early issues of Action Comics were incredibly violent and featured death and mayhem on a regular basis. Same with Batman. The Comics Code temporarily suppressed all of that, but once it was broken in the '90s, comics returned to their old ways once more with a vengeance. Graphic depictions of violence in comics have been normal for at least twenty years now, probably close to half of your comic book-reading life.

Please get real yourself. The Golden Age comics were violent in a cartoonish way - things get smashed, things blow up, bad guys take long falls into water or acid or whatever, but there are not any lingering close-ups of the ghastly consequences. It's Road Runner vs. Wile E. Coyote. Toon stuff. DC actually published an issue of All-Star (#38) in which they killed off all the men of the Justice Society and then brought them all back to life good as new. You don't get much more Toon than that.

What we get nowadays is not Toon stuff - it's Grand Guignol. And yes, it's been going on - and getting worse and worse and worse - for at least twenty years. And comics readership has been dropping for at least twenty years, too. Correlation? Causality? Pursuing a shrinking niche market into oblivion?

Somebody should have noticed by now that just adding more guts and gore isn't giving superhero comics the same level of readership they had when they were indulging in Toon violence. Not even within light-years of it. Maybe there's a reason for that.

[Javier Velasco]

Javier, you felt that those who have issues with the run would be more likely to cut Azz some slack if they saw some positive things he had said about the character. So, do you think any of those help?

I definitely think that the last comment is a good strong specific comment about the character and I commend him for it.

Unfortunately, the first comment isn't as much about Diana as I would like it to be. He commends Marston, but not the character under Marston. And then he isn't specific about what makes the character unique. Just that she has to be.

As far as the My Mom is Wonder Woman comment. I would need more info from Azzarello on the statement. Only because sometimes Azzarello's briefest comments are jokes. As in Steve Trevor is going to be in the book. If he had said "My mom is Wonder Woman because...," then I could have something to digest. We assume that it is a positive statement, but it could just as easily be a negative one. I don't think it is, but without explanation it doesn't totally work for me.

All that said, I am glad that there is the clear statement of positive character traits. Thank you
Javier

[slvn]

All that said, I am glad that there is the clear statement of positive character traits. Thank you
Javier

My pleasure, and I can understand the desire for more specifics about what the author likes about the character.

[americanwonder]

... Javier, you felt that those who have issues with the run would be more likely to cut Azz some slack if they saw some positive things he had said about the character. So, do you think any of those help?

I appreciate you taking the time to pull those together, Slvn. I had read them before, but it was nice to read them again.

I particularly liked his comment about Diana's calm confidence. Given all that's happened, Diana has a very strong core to keep soldiering on (bad plans and all ). It was also interesting when he talks about what's going on behind Diana's eyes - maybe you're on to something, and she has this all planned out. I'm sure there's more going on than meets the eye, I'm just not very patient in waiting to see more.

[americanwonder]

Dr. Hurt - Here's some more feedback (hopefully constructive):

This should have been a WW moment.

Like you, I LOVE that moment in All-Star Superman. It's great for Superman. Would have been even more wonderful for WW. In my mind, that one moment is the empowerment message of WW. Diana's interactions with Zola have been good, but just not as powerful.

... Diana just came here and she was WW from day 1. "Now let me tell you about feminism, or liberty, or democracy, blah, blah, blah".

That didn't happen. But, I find this statement very fitting in that it matches Azzarello calling them "perfect." Both are over-statements. And, with both you and Azzarello, I find your statements about what you like in the new WW more enjoyable to read than your distortions of what came before.

... In other words WW is less tied down, less stuck up, more friendly, more casual...

We have different tastes. I like Diana with a formal side. She was raised a princess (think Duchess Kate Middleton); she's a dignified lady even when kicking you ###. I also like the embassy. It was unique and gave her purpose. Now, what does she do - wait in her appartment for damsels to show up? I know, I know, it's still early for nu-Diana. ;)

I liked your comparison to Birthrite and Bruce's early travels. Only, I don't quite get the same vibe here (moreso in JL). For starters, how many average humans has she talked to besides Zola? Lennox doesn't count (and not just because he has bad plans ), but he's apparently a demi-god and family. So, Diana isn't really out exploring the big world, she's trying to get away from a bad family reunion where everyone is the crazy, drunk uncle.

Still, I like Azzarello's Diana, for the most part. I mainly just don't like the use and depiction of the Amazons (male and female) so far.

[Dr. Hurt]

That didn't happen. But, I find this statement very fitting in that it matches Azzarello calling them "perfect." Both are over-statements. And, with both you and Azzarello, I find your statements about what you like in the new WW more enjoyable to read than your distortions of what came before.

Overstatement? Maybe. But she was pretty much Wonder Woman from the start. Every hero had to find the ropes at the start of his/her career, but WW was set to go. Of course there was development, but there's development even in Kingdom Come where the heroes are old veterans. The point is that WW never felt young and inexperienced and with much to learn. The WW you'd get now is the WW you'd get at the start of her career.

We have different tastes. I like Diana with a formal side. She was raised a princess (think Duchess Kate Middleton); she's a dignified lady even when kicking you ###.

Fair enough. I find Thor pretty regal, but he isnt stuck up, he doesnt speak like the Queen, etc. He's fun, he's a bro, he's spoilt, he's arrogant (in his origin in the movie at least). That's much different that Mr Teacher dressed in the american flag lecturing me about morality.

So being regal and royal doesnt mean you have to be stuck up and condescending.

I also like the embassy. It was unique and gave her purpose.

I find politics boring, especially in superhero comics. If i wanted politics i'd read a newspaper.

Now, what does she do - wait in her appartment for damsels to show up? I know, I know, it's still early for nu-Diana. ;)

I think she's more of an adventurer. Or maybe she has a life in London, i dont know.

I liked your comparison to Birthrite and Bruce's early travels. Only, I don't quite get the same vibe here (moreso in JL). For starters, how many average humans has she talked to besides Zola? Lennox doesn't count (and not just because he has bad plans ), but he's apparently a demi-god and family. So, Diana isn't really out exploring the big world, she's trying to get away from a bad family reunion where everyone is the crazy, drunk uncle.

That's because this isnt her origin story. Her origin story would take place 5 years ago and it would involve her Johns JL younger self. The way Johns handled her it looked like she was here to explore, travel the world and learn new things, perhaps even herself. Not to be an emissary, ambassador, etc. So to me, it looks like they could write an adventure out of it.

Still, I like Azzarello's Diana, for the most part. I mainly just don't like the use and depiction of the Amazons (male and female) so far.

[Auguste Dupin]

Dr. Hurt - Here's some more feedback (hopefully constructive):



This should have been a WW moment.

Like you, I LOVE that moment in All-Star Superman. It's great for Superman. Would have been even more wonderful for WW. In my mind, that one moment is the empowerment message of WW. Diana's interactions with Zola have been good, but just not as powerful.



That didn't happen. But, I find this statement very fitting in that it matches Azzarello calling them "perfect." Both are over-statements. And, with both you and Azzarello, I find your statements about what you like in the new WW more enjoyable to read than your distortions of what came before.



We have different tastes. I like Diana with a formal side. She was raised a princess (think Duchess Kate Middleton); she's a dignified lady even when kicking you ###. I also like the embassy. It was unique and gave her purpose. Now, what does she do - wait in her appartment for damsels to show up? I know, I know, it's still early for nu-Diana. ;)

I liked your comparison to Birthrite and Bruce's early travels. Only, I don't quite get the same vibe here (moreso in JL). For starters, how many average humans has she talked to besides Zola? Lennox doesn't count (and not just because he has bad plans ), but he's apparently a demi-god and family. So, Diana isn't really out exploring the big world, she's trying to get away from a bad family reunion where everyone is the crazy, drunk uncle.

Still, I like Azzarello's Diana, for the most part. I mainly just don't like the use and depiction of the Amazons (male and female) so far.

- Interinstingly enough, I never considered this moment as a "Wonder Woman" moment. I mean yes, it would have worked for Wonder Woman as well, but to me this just screams "Superman in a nutshell". Because I always interpreted this scene more as being about "hope" than "empowerement". "It's never as bad as it seems": things are going to get better.
Sure, you also have "You're stronger than you think you are", but it's more about inner strengh (the strengh to live happily) than empowerement, at least to me.
As for a "perfect Wonder Woman scene", well, I don't have any in mind (but I didn't read all the books), but it could be interesting to confront Diana with a woman beaten by her husband. You could have all her thematics in that scene: empowerement ("don't let him be in charge of your life, sister"), love (is she in love with that man?), peace against violence....that kind of stuff.

-Well, I don't think his perception is that distortionned, or at least, I see where he is coming from. I was reading the Batman/WW team up by Jimenez (the one where gods posess Batman villains) yesterday and, well, Wonder Woman was acting exactly as he said. I dunno, things happened in that story , but all I can remember is her preaching people: she was preaching the 3 gods, she was preaching Ares, she was preaching Batman...Sure, a big part was probably Jimenez' fault (because, let's be honest, she wasn't the only one preaching people in that story), but it's that kind of story that gives the impression that Wonder Woman is kind of obnoxious. I prefered her when written by Simone in the Circle, when she had gorilla pals (which, by the way, was a good way to showwase her compassion without being preachy) and was was making jokes at Nemesis.

-I think I prefer thinking of her as someone who can speak like a princess than as someone who does. I mean, for what I understand of it, the point of the Amazons are that, although they are a monarchy, they are sort of equal. Diana was considered as every one's daughter, not every one's future leader. So, to me, it would be more logical to have her as a very casual type of person, someone almost overly familiar with people she never met before, than having "Princess Thor".

[slvn]

Dr. Hurt - Here's some more feedback (hopefully constructive):
Like you, I LOVE that moment in All-Star Superman. It's great for Superman. Would have been even more wonderful for WW. In my mind, that one moment is the empowerment message of WW. Diana's interactions with Zola have been good, but just not as powerful.

It is a nice moment. I have to say, though, that I like that Wonder Woman doesn't tell Zola "it's never as bad as it seems." I'm an optimist, but I think that, in reality, occasionally it's worse than it seems. Wonder Woman is honest with Zola about that; in #1, when Zola says "I'm scared," Wonder Woman says "you probably should be." But she also promises protection. And she also respects Zola as an adult who can be held responsible and even teased a little. That kind of respect can be empowering. I think it's feminist to have Wonder Woman be not only a nurturing mother-figure but also a little bit of a drill sergeant, able to provide tough love (like lassoing Zola and dumping her on her butt, and reminding her to stick close, in #1) as needed.

What I think is probably most empowering of all, though, is that Wonder Woman is willing and able to listen to Zola. Just think how empowering it would be, if you were being protected by a world-famous hero, to have her take your advice on family matters. Near the end of the #4, when Wonder Woman is about to go back to Paradise Island, I think Zola is smiling not just with happiness for Diana, but with pride. I'm not saying that Wonder Woman has empowering Zola on her agenda at that moment, but she did it anyway by having the wisdom and humility to learn form her junior.

[Outside_85]

See, Cap's side doesn't hold much water with me (and not just 'cause I like Scott and the X-Men more). a) Cap showed up to talk, bringing along a flying aircraft carrier and an army. Tha's not really a talk. b) No one gets to decide where the Phoenix Force goes. Scott can't make it go to Hope. Hope can't tell it to go away. And I'm not a fan of "custody" based on the idea that the Phoenix Faorce may come to her and that may lead to harm.

Cap actually brought the Helicarrier and the Avengers along with him because they all knew that Scott handing Hope over quietly was like winning the lottery, added Wolverine did stress just how important Hope is to the Utopian mutants. The reason for Hope being the chosen on is based on how its been building up to it that she will be the host since Second Coming, sporadically manifesting it a few times, her given power level...and that she's a red-head like Jean (the Phoenix seems to prefer them).
Also, but it's one heck of a gamble Scott is running with this:
"Maybe it will trigger a Second Genesis and the Mutants will be saved? YAY!"
"Or maybe it will blow up the planet and kill every human and mutant on it? Oh crud..."

But yeah, Scott really should know better by now...but then again you can pretty much unbalance him by muttering a single name.
If AvX leads to anything good, it will be Scott either returning to non-duchebag form or simply vanishes for some time after it (dead, imprisoned, nuts or Magneto II).

Apologies to the mods for the detour. :D

[Gaelforce]

Overstatement? Maybe. But she was pretty much Wonder Woman from the start. Every hero had to find the ropes at the start of his/her career, but WW was set to go. Of course there was development, but there's development even in Kingdom Come where the heroes are old veterans. The point is that WW never felt young and inexperienced and with much to learn. The WW you'd get now is the WW you'd get at the start of her career.

This is what gives the impression that you haven't been reading Wonder Woman very long.

Like Superman, she had powers since she was an infant. Many other heroes were literally born with their powers, so in this she is not unique.

Perez's run and Piccoult's reboot were all about how she had so much to learn. In the beginning she was naive and ignorant of the way the world works and had to learn not only how to function in modern society but also as a superhero. Yes, she had powers from the start, but she was as much Wonder Woman from the start as Clark was Superman and Bruce was Batman from the moment they put their costumes on. Vol 2 and Vol 3 were all about how she came into man's world as a young, inexperienced hero. With Volume 3 and Piccoult it was so overdone that it had longterm fans gnashing their teeth at how she couldn't pump gas or manage a turnstile despite having been around for years.

For folks who have been reading the book for awhile, we're sick to death of the 'Diana is young, inexperienced and naive' or the 'Diana doesn't know what it's like to be human' stories. They've been done to death, so I really don't see how anyone who has been reading the book for any length of time can say the opposite.

[Dr. Hurt]

I've said in the past that i've read Simone's, Rucka's, and JMS' runs, as well as various single issues here and there. I've also watched the animated movie.

So yeah, i wouldnt say i've read all her history. While that might have been the focus of many stories, from what i've seen, they always focused on her adapting to our world, and learning how things work. Some gender stuff and politics too. But as a person, not as knowledge, as a person, she wasnt that different from the veteran WW. I've personally never seen a young WW that would qualify as inexperienced, noobish, etc. She was always the hero WW on her pondium, she just had to figure out how cars work or how to behave in man's world in general.

It's not about fighting skills, or knowing how a different country works, its about you as a person. I could go to Japan and not know a thing about how to behave, to take out my shoes when i enter their homes, how to hold the chopsticks, etc. But there's going to be a difference between me going to to Japan when i'm 19 and going when i'm 40. To me WW always looked like the 40 year old version, the final character that just needed to learn to take her shoes off. At least in my experience. I could be wrong.

Where i think i am not wrong is the part where Johns' WW doesnt seem to care about being a role model and stand on a pondium for women, or men, or being an ambassador, etc. She just wants to explore our world and learn new things. While fighting i guess. That's quite refreshing for a character that always had a massive stick up her ass and that's why i'm interesting to read about it.

[Outside_85]

This is what gives the impression that you haven't been reading Wonder Woman very long.

Like Superman, she had powers since she was an infant. Many other heroes were literally born with their powers, so in this she is not unique.

And this is where I come in and mention that WML wrote into the mythos that Diana grew up functionally powerless in comparison to her sisters because Hippolyta didn't want her growing up feeling above and beyond her sisters. So whenever her feet touched Paradise sand or soil she was back to being an exceptional Amazon and not a planet mover.