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

[SteveGus]

It's fair to say that "perfect person from a perfect society," as a characterization of Wonder Woman in previous runs, is hyperbole. And I can understand how it annoys some people.

I guess it might be more accurate to say that "Wonder Woman's and the Amazons imperfections generally did not create enough drama and storytelling potential for our taste because those imperfections were either not sufficiently serious, not widespread or visible enough, or not of the right kind for that purpose, in our opinion."

Assuming for the sake of argument that Azzarello's destruction of Paradise Island is just a plot point in the story he wanted to tell, and not intended to be a permanent feature of the nu52 universe, it still set the worst possible precedent. I'm still not sure how the sex pirate business fits into the story other than to set up a single scene where Diana fails when she tries to act like Wonder Woman. But at least for the time being, he's removed them as a source of a supporting cast or a way to introduce characters related to Wonder Woman in the nu52 universe.

It will be changed by the next writer somehow, that much is certain. Because, while since Perez and before, too many new writers have given Wonder Woman a new city and a new supporting cast, and used their original villains rather than developing villains from previous issues. The one constant was her relationship with Paradise Island, the Amazons, and the portion of the supporting cast that was headquartered there. Now everything's been put on the table for the next writer to sweep away. I do not see this as a positive development.

[Outside_85]

Good point--but maybe they think Strife is non-obvious because she seems like more of an antagonist than a sponsor? And the same could be said of Ares. Of course, you're right that they're likely suspects if we're expecting a little but of a curve ball.
Who would be truly unlikely, I wonder? Persephone? Hades? Hecate? Dionysus? Eros? Pan? Hermaphroditus?

I actually think it's Ares, it would explain why he was going to sit out on the chance of getting the throne. (Also, despite what Diana may think about him helping her, he will probably do so as long as he benefits from it in some way...like the resulting violence that he's the patron of.)

[hunter_peterson]

About Strife, i dont want her as a patron. Strife is... strife. She's a troll, she wouldnt help anyone for the greater good.

That said, i think she has a human side too. She looks like she needs a hug and that she was trying to be friends with Diana in her own way. I think it's an interesting dynamic and i hope she sticks around so she and Diana can be uneasy sisters.

Yes... except Strife hasn't lied ONCE in Azzarello's run. Her connection to Diana would actually make the most sense, because Diana is a vehicle of truth, which is often and has been shown in-story to cause STRIFE. Not to mention the way she's basically Rambo-ing through her new family tree just on the principle of the thing. And there's the Trojan War connection, where Eris/Strife deliberately sowed dissent among her female relatives, leading to later bloodshed. In this case, her agreeing to be Diana's sponsor (as in; in on the cover up), could be her saving this secret until it was ripe for revelation and could bring about the most entertaining (for her) fallout. Makes a lot of sense...

Of course, Zeus could be the fourth sponsor. It would make sense if he told Strife the truth about Diana before his disappearance, as part of his master plan, knowing that word would spread. So she needn't be personally involved prior to this.

[hunter_peterson]

Assuming for the sake of argument that Azzarello's destruction of Paradise Island is just a plot point in the story he wanted to tell, and not intended to be a permanent feature of the nu52 universe, it still set the worst possible precedent. I'm still not sure how the sex pirate business fits into the story other than to set up a single scene where Diana fails when she tries to act like Wonder Woman. But at least for the time being, he's removed them as a source of a supporting cast or a way to introduce characters related to Wonder Woman in the nu52 universe.

It will be changed by the next writer somehow, that much is certain. Because, while since Perez and before, too many new writers have given Wonder Woman a new city and a new supporting cast, and used their original villains rather than developing villains from previous issues. The one constant was her relationship with Paradise Island, the Amazons, and the portion of the supporting cast that was headquartered there. Now everything's been put on the table for the next writer to sweep away. I do not see this as a positive development.

He didn't destroy the island. He took the Amazons out of the immediate picture in a non-lethal way that is clearly reversible. This lets Diana learn about the world she comes from through an outsider's perspective, which she'd never had. Being VERY sheltered by the overprotective Hippolyta (for good reason, it turns out) only made her more blinkered to the darker side of the society she was raised in. That isn't an uncommon thing, really. Many people never face the darkest, dirtiest parts of their society, but Diana is doing that because she NEEDS TO KNOW, now that she knows she didn't have the full picture. Part of the quest she's on is the quest for answers, about her new and old family. Bringing them back is the plot that drives that.

And she by no means "fails at being Wonder Woman" in that scene. She actually epitomizes what Wonder Woman is about, but the situation was simply more complex than she'd first thought. The truth wasn't what she expected it to be, and was the more troubling for it. She's basically the idea of empowerment; even "loving submission" is still submission in her eyes. But she didn't know how to respond-- what's she going to do, take these men from their home and call them free? She is right to back down, and not weaker for it. That is actually direct evidence that the pirate-rape thing has positive outcomes as well as negative. Negative, the men used for breeding are killed. Positive, no child born of it goes without a home or ever wants for anything, even if they are segregated from one another. They both get peace, in a way.

And I do imagine that the Amazons are going to learn to change when they get back. I mean, NO WAY Diana doesn't tell her mother that they can stop killing sailors for sperm because you can just buy it from a sperm bank. (Which I imagine the Amazons would find a bizarre concept... why would they keep so much sperm in one place if they could just go out and get it for free?) They obviously have more to their culture than that, and the positives have to be real, because Diana is evidence of that. Hell, we haven't even seen that they're technologically inadvanced. Hephaestus had ray guns! They've probably got ray guns too.

As for the next writer just making everything up again... I doubt that. The book has never sold this well. Editorial will want it to stay that way, so there's going to have to be carry-over. Before, it was a string of under-performances, so they let people throw whatever they wanted at the wall in the hopes it would stick. Not happening this time.

[Seant]

I
Back on the fourth sponsor: If it is Strife, maybe she was using the Wonder Woman role (and escortign Steve Trevor off the island) as a kind of "golden apple" to create discord among the Amazons; she might have influenced them all to want to be Wonder Woman, thus instigating the tournament. The myths (Hesiod?) did say that Eris or strife could play a positive role by stoking peoples' ambitions to outdo each other, thus leading to greater achievements.

That's a good theory. Or, it's possible that Diana leaving the island itself caused strife, since we're not even sure there was a tournament. Paradise Island was still a pretty placid place, whether the Amazons were perfect or not-- not the sort of place where an ambitious young girl can find purpose. You need strife to drive you.

[MuhollandDriver]

The link to the video does not work on my computer. Could someone please elaborate on these "sponsors"? What are they for exactly? Aphrodite, Artemis and Athena were mentioned as the goddesses who might appear soon, correct?

[dshipp17]

So let's get back to Wonder Woman. Ignore the stories in JL and the WW book. Lets just look at her character.

In Justice League we saw her as a happy go lucky swashbuckler who wants to have adventure. I loved that. She was young and she felt young. She didnt mope (Odyssey), and she didnt come to preach, to become an ambassador, or a symbol. She's just a young girl. She's excited about life, about travels, about ice cream, about action. Even the goddamn batman got a globe trotting adventure before he became batman. For me the best part of Batman Begins was his mystical journey, not beating up Scarecrow. And that time of his life is so open to adding adventures. They've had him get training by Zatarra (BTAS episode "Zatanna"), have a rivalry with Ducard's son (B&R - didnt like that), meet a traveling Clark Kent in Nanda Parbat (S/B story that is not canon i think), etc. It's so mystical, interesting, adventurous! We now learn that Aquaman had a similar adventure with the Others. Even Superman had that as a young journalist in Africa (Birthright).

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". She was never really a fun young woman. But fans being hateful of change called her Xena, barbaric, bloodthirsty and other such nonsense. I dont know much about Thor but i watched the movie and i see Diana just like him. Eager for a fight, brash, perhaps a bit immature, and with a lot to learn. That's character growth. Aquaman was a douche 5 years ago, but he is a stoic hero now. What changed? I literally cant wait for Johns to tell me.


And what about Azz's WW. Well she's not as fun but then again she's older and she's being hit with shocking revelations about her and her nation. But she's friendly, she's compassionate, she's casual, she's heroic and brave. She's also brash, perhaps a bit too trusting in other people's good nature, and she has a temper when you push her too hard (as Aleka and Strife found out). She also doesnt mope, neither on a rooftop, nor in front of a TV while eating ice cream (god damn it Kelly). She's the outgoing type. She'll go to a club and listen to her favourite rock band and share her feelings. Perhaps she'll have a walk with Zola. And even to that little pathetic redneck girl, she's a sister, not a mother or a hero on a pondium that Zola must reach. WW accepts her for who she is.





In other words WW is less tied down, less stuck up, more friendly, more casual. More of a cool sister to other people and to the reader, than a mother figure who'll scold you because you dont uphold her ideals. Hell she was the ideals.

Going by your earlier Superman example, if you're implying that a huge part of Wonder Woman's (and Superman's) problems with appeal was not being considered cool, I'll have to disagree with you; the X-men are very popular because they are a group outcasts; yes, this may be an important element for you, but it wasn't necessarily a problem with the comic book audience; I think there were several issues, depending on the reader, but I think the huge part of her problems was a perception from the male audience, a huge part of the comic book fan base, was a perception that Wonder Woman promoted divisive ideas in relation to men and women coexisting together (and a subcategory for me, that I would address was the perception that Wonder Woman represented the idea that somehow living separated for years from the usual environment of the genders living with one another somehow entitled her the privileged of emerging from that environment, where the women constantly preach mistrust of men, to tell the outside world that they could teach the genders how to live together perfectly harmoniously; or that such represented a utopia entitling her to noble status on par with Jesus); sure, people here time and again say that DC portrayed the Amazons in such a way, but the general comic book audience is more sophisticated than that and they realize, as I do, that the Amazons need to jive with the real life Amazons, or, at least logic, and show the Amazons as having a major flow of being unable to relate to or get along with men, which, in tern, means that the Amazons have relatability issues which removes them from noble status; additionally, the transition period of Wonder Woman being purge of those ideas in order to properly integrate into society needs to be addressed; portraying Wonder Woman as possessing an er of perfection just continually hurt her character the longer that this lack of development of the character was allowed to persist; while the current efforts to humanize the character are good, humanizing the character in terms of transitioning into someone who can relate well with men remains unresolved; while it may not be important to you and a lot of posters at this forum, it's important to me and a large percentage of the comic book audience who were willing to give the character a try starting at the issue # 1 relaunch, the #600 relaunch, and etc.; so, please address the transition very soon and with more than a single issue; at least a story arc or two; this process will require Wonder Woman to appear to be taking men as her mentors, despite the possible dismay of some fans; from there, than we can understand how Wonder Woman can so gracefully get along with men in both a social and personal setting.

Sure, I cannot speak for even 93% of those who left, but I'd wager that addressing the above issues would recoup and retain most of those who left.

[Rob_Olivera]

The link to the video does not work on my computer. Could someone please elaborate on these "sponsors"? What are they for exactly? Aphrodite, Artemis and Athena were mentioned as the goddesses who might appear soon, correct?

Yes, they were mentioned. It's the "4th Sponsor" that he says will be totally unexpected by everyone. This leads me to think that it's not going to be anyone who has appeared in his run yet (and possibly prior to the nu52 for some time). I'm not buying any stock in anyone that says "Strife", etc.... if he says it's unexpected, it will be radically unexpected, as everything else he does.

[MuhollandDriver]

Yes, they were mentioned. It's the "4th Sponsor" that he says will be totally unexpected by everyone. This leads me to think that it's not going to be anyone who has appeared in his run yet (and possibly prior to the nu52 for some time). I'm not buying any stock in anyone that says "Strife", etc.... if he says it's unexpected, it will be radically unexpected, as everything else he does.

Thanks! So, what are these sponsors for? Was that mentioned?

[americanwonder]

So, what are these sponsors for?

The Diana and Zola NASCAR Racing Team!

video isn't working for me either.

[americanwonder]

But that's just not how Azz's interview style, you know?

Lies are an interview style now? I don't think it's too much to ask for him to talk about his WW without misrepresenting what others have done. To me, it's less about respect for the character and more about respect for fellow creators.

Back on the fourth sponsor: If it is Strife, maybe she was using the Wonder Woman role (and escortign Steve Trevor off the island) as a kind of "golden apple" to create discord among the Amazons; she might have influenced them all to want to be Wonder Woman, thus instigating the tournament. The myths (Hesiod?) did say that Eris or strife could play a positive role by stoking peoples' ambitions to outdo each other, thus leading to greater achievements.

I do like this bit of speculation and insight, Slvn. Well played. I doubt that was the plan, as they seem kind of surprised by Strife themselves. Maybe they can retcon their retcon and fit her in?

[Zagreus]

I think I'm just tired of hearing 'she was this perfect person from a perfect society' line. She wasn't perfect (as has been pointed out over and over and over again over the past decade worth of comics) and Themyscira wasn't perfect (it was a gate to Tartarus, there was the Circle, they were a bit on the xenophobic side ;) )

And the 'perfect people can't be heroes - they're just being themselves' line just rubbed me the wrong way. Nice to know Superman isn't a hero <grin>

Oh, I think Azz is absolutely right, there's no character drama with a perfect person, it's all superficial. If Superman is written as a perfect person (and I'd argue that he doesn't have to be written that way, he can have character flaws as well, probably relatively minor ones, but still) there is nothing to over come, no internal struggle. True heroism is overcoming oneself, the internal struggle rather than the external. Thats what gives a story depth and makes a story come to life. If you start with a character who is perfect, where is the journey, the heroic struggle. Sure bad guys can be fought, but the story is, by neccesity, shallow and not worth reading.

[americanwonder]

Oh, I think Azz is absolutely right, there's no character drama with a perfect person, it's all superficial...

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that "there's no character drama with a perfect person." The problem is that neither Diana nor the Amazons were "perfect." And that isn't a recent development. On that, Azzarello is simply wrong.

[cgh]

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that "there's no character drama with a perfect person." The problem is that neither Diana nor the Amazons were "perfect." And that isn't a recent development. On that, Azzarello is simply wrong.

The spirit of Azz's comment was that the imperfections, such as they were, weren't significant enough for the purposes of creating compelling dramatic fiction. The sales figures back that up - the book was boring and predictable for most potential readers (not to you, so don't take that personally, obviously you were a fan of the status quo and that is fine).

Now we have a fresh new WW universe to explore. It's not the same as before of course - think of it as a new flavour. Taste that yummy WW goodness!

[DarkKnghtJared]

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that "there's no character drama with a perfect person." The problem is that neither Diana nor the Amazons were "perfect." And that isn't a recent development. On that, Azzarello is simply wrong.

In that sense, what would you say was Diana and the Amazon's internal struggle before Azzarello?