Wonder Woman

By the way, how many times has has each D Cn U Bat-villain escaped from Arkham?

You know, I've been thinking on how to portray Diana's (or other characters') wisdom, and I have a take I like: how about if they narrate the stories, in the first person? And as they go, analyze why what happens is good or not, and justify their actions/correct their mistakes?

The whole story wouldn't need to be 1stPerson POV, only the moments where the character would logically stop to think.

For example: Diana could be introduced, writing in her journal about her life in Paradise Island, and what she thinks about their situation and the rest of the world's. Then after she meets her first Man (Steve Trevor) we get to contrast that reaction with her earlier thoughts. Similarly: why did she choose to become the Amazon's champion (was it entirely selfless or did she want to see the outside world- and Steve?) Then her impressions of the modern world, positive and negative... especially on the other superheroes. And when (inevitably) a moral conundrum such as whether it is right to kill comes up, it should also be discussed from her POV.

The idea here is to show us how Diana thinks, so we can see her make wise choices (or learn from the unwise ones) rather than just be told she is the wisest of the Amazons. Of course this would require good writing to pull off, but then, so does comic book writing overall.

Btw, is it me or are Thought Balloons in general hardly used in comics these days? Why is that? Are they just trying to cover up the art as little as possible? I found those to be invaluable aids in getting to know a character.

edited 28th Nov '11 6:43:09 AM by Sijo

Problem there is, since she's supposed to be incredibly wise, the audience is essentially being told that whatever conclusions Wonder Woman reaches are the right ones. That creates a serious risk of coming off didactic.

A wise character only works if you have a wise creator, and unfortunately, comics are a medium in which creative teams get handed off quite often and sometimes by people who either just don't get the character or just doesn't care what slop they put out.

Again, "wise" doesn't equal "always right"- wise people can commit mistakes too, but they admit their errors and learn from them. The writer needs to make the public aware of this.

It is the Editor's job to make sure a character stays constant despite changing writers. Of course, that means the editor must understand what "wise" means too.

The combination of wisdom and Thou Shalt Not Kill (or the breaking of it) is a concept that goes at least as far back as The Aeneid.

• Wonder Woman killed Maxwell Lord, and just about everybody blew a gasket over it. Some would argue that her killing Lord was an act of wisdom, because he was simply Too Powerful to Live at that point. Others would argue that it wasn't, because she ruined her identity as an ambassador of peace in doing so.
• Huntress has not actually killed anybody...to my knowledge. However, numerous times she has demonstrated intent to murder people. However, she wants to kill them not because it's the wise thing to do, but because she's so angry and wants Revenge. Batman naturally has a problem with that, but instead of trying to form a bond with her, he insists on acting like an unreasonable Jerkass toward her. For a guy who seems so intelligent and...wise(?), he seems to forget that bees are more attracted to honey than to vinegar.
• Kate Spencer AKA Manhunter is a prosecutor who has killed Karma Houdini criminals. It's hard to say if she does that because she thinks it's the wise thing to do, or if she is simply so frustrated that criminals keep escaping Karma. Oddly, no one blows a gasket over her killing people, while other characters get the riot act over one killing. Is something wrong with this picture?
• Green Arrow killed Prometheus in his own home with an arrow to the head. Funny enough, Huntress would have done exactly the same thing had Batman not stopped her. Green Arrow's deed was supposed to be considered a terrible act of Revenge, but most people considered it justified and the wise thing to do, given that Prometheus had become Too Powerful to Live. If Batman had not stopped Huntress from killing Prometheus, how many lives (like Lian Harper) might have been saved?

The way I see it, DC seems to have strange ways of handling the conflict between wisdom and Thou Shalt Not Kill.

DC seems to have no broad vision about their universe in general (as opposed to individual titles) except when it comes to their "Big Events"- and even those are more to please the big-name writers like Johns or Morrison, and everybody else just has to fit in however they can. And DC most *definitely* doesn't care about the morality of killing, except where it involves characters like Diana, and even then, it's more for the controversy than true concern.

edited 29th Nov '11 8:14:19 AM by Sijo

Speaking of Thou Shall not kill, I heard that what some people prefer about the cartoon Joker over the comics one is that its more acceptable that batman hasn't been driven over the edge into killing the joker because the comic version has caused a lot of pain to him and his loved ones.

At least, in the series,(not counting the movies, including return of the joker), he isn't allowed to be that dark.

Although, it's an exception that proves the rule, because the Joker dies.

edited 29th Nov '11 11:16:51 AM by KingZeal

People keep complaining that WW hasn't displayed wisdom, but has she been in a situation where wisdom would be readily apparent so far?

And about her being violent, well, when undead centaurs with maces for hands start rushing me I sure ain't gonna try to hug them, and the next act of "violence" would be throwing a tantrum and leaving Thamscyra... after finding out everyone she knows has been deceiving her her entire life.

And as much as I hate the appeal to number, WW is in the top twenty list now. When's the last time that happened?

I'm talking about Wonder Woman *in general* over the years and not just the reboot version. Linkara is the one who quit reading the new version after three issues. But then, with the decompression comics use these days, has even *one* full story about her been told in the New 52 verse yet?

edited 30th Nov '11 6:50:00 AM by Sijo

Nope. Not at all. Linkara really jumped the gun there. I was turned off by a lot of the New 52 but I reserve judgement on most of them until issue six comes out for each series.

edited 30th Nov '11 6:44:48 PM by Canondorf

A feminist icon, with an interesting back story, in a somewhat rare setup. Yet these things never seem to be done to their fullest. The boyfriend? Wait, Mary Parker, that doesn't surprise me anymore. Comic book writers hate relationships I've learned but earlier it did not seem like something so difficult to write. Spock's mom and dad, that's how you do fantastic ambassador romance...or really, any fish out of water case where the protagonist tries to learn more about the new world through their new roommates or whoever.

Sure, a wise person would realize that they can't learn everything from one guy but hey, chance for character development right there and they still get perplexed over their companion's strange customs. Would a clay statue brought to life by lesbians even come on to men, or anything else, as it shouldn't even have DNA? Instead DC takes something unique about the character and gives us yet another bastard god offspring. The clay doll has a lot of potential that isn't commonly touched on by fiction. Will she fall in love regardless? Do they adopt?

Make the Bastard Bastard a rogue. They did that in the silver age, and it worked until she was Good All Along. That could have worked if they weren't so stuck on Robin like sidekicks. Then a reboot made the demigod a cyborg...because that makes sense for a Greek statue's rogue. Naturally that one didn't even catch on after three retools. Maybe ''this' reboot will keep it an evil demigod. Why did Wonder Woman have an Angel and a Space Pirate in her Rogues Gallery? Maybe if the pirate was raiding her island it would makes sense but it came off as "evil and female, that will do".

Why were two of her highest profile rogues based around gimmicks that couldn't hurt her? Sure, there is tension besides "Will Doctor Psycho/Poison" mind control or poison her(she's immune to both) but Psycho would be better off with the Martian and Poison with Batman. Cheetah would get more mileage in Spider-man(Flash?). Once our "wise warrior" who isn't afraid to kill decides to kill them how are they going to stop her?

Greek Mythology is malleable, Wonder Woman's creation proved that. The Duke of Deception, a god of Deception, made for the story, was a much better villain for her, why not make more like him? Xena had plenty of original rogues that made sense with her setup. There were problems with using Clea when Atlantis's is already an ally but it was a start at using the mythology. But then Clea could have caught on as both their rogues if she wasn't a generic fish person with a trident.

Wonder Woman has deflecting bracelets that can form a shield, a boomerang tiara, an unbreakable rope and an invisible plane. Weird but not generic. Maybe that's why her rogues are all over the place because more writers are trying to make someone equally as quirky without thinking about things like "does this enemy fit the theme", "is this enemy a threat to Wonder Woman" and "do they have reason for a prolonged grudge"? So my solution for better rogues would be "More mythology inserts", "More Power sets that compliment hers" and "more people out to ruin her island and or make her job hell."

Wonder Woman didn't need her own "Lex Luther". A muggle enemy needed to be focused around her ambassador job, her homeland directly or out to get her muggle friends. If she needed a jealous enemy she already had Circe. Not to mention Lex Luther already is the success who feels threatened by a Superpowered upstart. They could have gone with envy, someone out to take her place. Another amazon? As long as it's a rogue she could call her own, not her Lex.

Actually I was complaining how these days you (often) have to wait up to six months to see a story resolve itself. Yes, we should wait until Diana's new origin plays out before we judge her series; But on the other hand, having to wait half a year for that is ridiculous. What happened to comics that had full stories -with beginning, middle and ending- in one issue? You CAN make those and still have running plotlines, though- Spider-Man was like that for decades.

I don't like the "clay statue" origin. While I was OK with it originally -it does fit in with Greek myth- too many people keep thinking that Diana is only human because of a spell that can be canceled (turning her back to clay.) That's not how it's supposed to work; she should be *fully human* not some kind of golem.

Besides, why cannot she have a father? It so happens that Hyppolita had *actual children* in the original legends (including the not-to-inventively named Hyppolytus) so why couldn't she have been pregnant before she came to the island? It's using Zeus for that when there are so many other interesting possibilities that I find boring.

edited 1st Dec '11 6:09:14 PM by Sijo

I actually really like the clay origin. I just find it interesting, though I do agree that she has to be treated human. I also agree that it would be more than acceptable for her to have a father that isn't Zeus. I mean, Hercules was even mentioned in her original story, why can't he be Diana's father? Or maybe Odysseus? Or Perseus?

Odysseus would be a strange fit; I don't think you could make that work timeline-wise with both DC and Homer.

10 years at sea, your bound to come across an island full of hot women and being married and all wouldn't brag about it. Though that being said, Jason would be a good fit. If I remember correctly, the argonauts did come cross such an island.

Yes, she's better off without a father. She's from an island of man hating lesbians, being born without a man's sperm would make it that much harder for her to relate to them. Now Hyppolita having actual children, that's fine, that would help with why she decides to send an emissary to man's world, she knows better, even if she hate's to admit it but that child shouldn't be Wonder Woman.

If she needs a man in her life it should be her boyfriend, for the tried and true bonding with strangers in strange lands/when in Rome experience. Turn her back into clay with a spell? Doesn't she have high magic resistance? The Spectre could just make a steaming pile of manure regardless of her origins, if Circe hadn't managed to do it though why worry? I'd rather not treat her as fully woman physically(she was created, not born) but still fully characterize her as a woman(since she was made by them, for them). Supernerd isn't fully human either but still acts like it.

Genocide was one of the few original villains they made that I liked but the origin still gave me a headache. It would have been better if they just said "heinous magic ritual" and stopped there. The pseudo DNA science was bad enough without the fact no egg and sperm provided any to begin with. That's what made the original Silver Swan's origin good for an antagonistic. They were similar but on many levels fundamentally different.

You know, the thing that I find funny is how Wonder Woman is supposedly considered part of the Trinity alongside Batman and Superman, but she seems to get the short end of the stick on several counts.

For starters, she is supposed to be a warrior and a user of magic. Superman has no immunity to magic, and Superman and Batman are not quite on the level of warriors. So, technically, WW should at least be on equal footing with them.

There's also the fact that Batman and Superman have both gotten more live-action films than you could shake a stick at. How many such films has WW gotten? None, zip, zero, zilch, nada. It's not for a lack of trying, oh no, no, no! In fact, there have been attempts to make a Wonder Woman film for the past few decades. One of the guys attempting to make the film said that unlike Batman and Superman, Wonder Woman doesn't have a particularly memorable storyline to make a movie out of. I'm afraid the man has a point there. In fact, one set of WW comics actually went out and mocked the idea of making a movie about WW, and it featured The Queen Of Fables. By the way, this Queen has, to my knowledge, appeared exactly twice, and she is a rather terrifying and powerful adversary for WW. It seems almost criminal that such a villainess doesn't get used more often!

Speaking of adversaries, a number of the villains WW faces just seem to be less than memorable, especially compared to the villains Batman and Superman face. The Queen of Fables proved to be tough for the entire Justice League, and in her first appearance, no less! Veronica Cale was supposed to be like Lex Luthor for WW, and the last that was seen of her, she was apparently committing petty crimes in a fictional part of China. Circe has proven to be a tough foe for WW, but she seems to have gone the way of Brother Chuck. Genocide certainly proved to be a memorable foe for WW, but she seems to have pulled a Brother Chuck, too. Boy, a number of villains for WW certainly seem to get a lot of respect!

Oh, yeah, and to my knowledge, Wonder Woman has died twice! The first time was by Circe, and the second time was by Neron. I bet a lot of you here don't even know that! Superman died at Doomsday's hands, and it was a big deal! Batman came pretty close to dying at Darkseid and those with an interest in Comic Books should definitely know all about it! The fact that WW died twice and it didn't seem to blip on anyone's radar is just sad!

Like I said, these facts alone just make me look and wonder (ha, ha!) why WW is not getting a lot of respect here?

edited 2nd Dec '11 7:48:56 AM by TiggersAreGreat

Because she's so rarely allowed near actual good writing.

Regarding the Amazons: they are not man-hating lesbians. Some are lesbians, sure, but not all of them (this was an early point in the Perez run.) And they didn't hate men, except maybe the ones who enslaved them. Remember, the Goddess of Love is one of their patrons. Diana wouldn't have been very wise if she'd been raised in a society of misandrists. In fact, the lost tribe was invented to show what would have happened had the amazons been consumed by hatred of men. (Unfortunately, someone didn't get the point and they let them rejoin the main group.)

WW has had some pretty good stories- in fact the Perez origin would make a great movie if you ask me- it's just that DC never gave them the same press they do to Batman or Superman's. They did try with Amazons Attack, but... well, THAT one sucked.

Admittedly, her villains aren't as memorable as Supes or Bat's. But that's nothing good writing cannot take care of. (And Circe is way, WAY overused.)

edited 3rd Dec '11 5:41:41 PM by Sijo

Except amazons are supposed to be lesbians who don't like men. True, they're also supposed to cut off one boob so they could use bows but that part can be ignored.(because seriously) The point of stories where the hero married the amazon were to be awe inspiring(ex:they were moved by Heracles's plight, he was forced to kill his family and then punished for it). Their typical modus operandi was take men as sex slaves then kill the boy babies, unless you were from a designated tribe, then they might let you stay home and maybe send you any sons they bare.

One of them considering that maybe this wasn't a good way to live and sending out an ambassador makes sense. Even if they have to build one because no one can stomach a trip to man's world.

I don't really remember any suggestion that the mythological Amazons were lesbians (although I can see them practicing a gender-flipped version of Ancient Greek pederasty). They did hate men, but that's not the same thing.

Artemis, on the other hand, really does come across as a lesbian in some stories.

Actually, the Amazons of myth weren't lesbians. They actually had a male half of their civilization; it's just that all the men were kept cloistered away (possibly on a different island, I'm not sure) and were really only used for breeding.

I thought the legend said they just picked up random men, said "You. Me. Breeding. Now.", hooked up for a night, and then disappeared in the morning.

...And later abandoned all the male babies on a hillside, cause child abandonment was okay back then.