Dc hates Wonder Woman. What could Nubia’s name be turned into? I mean it is Egyptian name meaning gold most likely. Why not have Hippoltya before she prayed the gods to being them to life she already gave them their names?
Dc hates Wonder Woman. What could Nubia’s name be turned into? I mean it is Egyptian name meaning gold most likely. Why not have Hippoltya before she prayed the gods to being them to life she already gave them their names?
Last edited by AmiMizuno; 10-15-2017 at 05:19 PM.
Yeah, a "brother and sister" that just met, right? As such, they have no previous interactions of note. Any real "emotional resonance" for the story will come from their interaction going forward. Just as she could develop "emotional resonance" with someone totally unrelated or someone else molded from clay. The long, lost sibling trope is just lazy, faux drama (yes, that goes for Nubia as well).
As I said, I find Azzarello's statements rather telling, though, no, DC isn't going to tell us the whole truth. But, as I put it in another thread regarding Jason, their actions are telling:
DiDio has consistently pushed to undermine and distort the feminist aspects of the WW story in order to make it what he perceives as more male-market-friendly.
Last edited by Awonder; 10-15-2017 at 09:44 PM.
Giving Diana any father is "unnecessary." And, any such change - Zeus or Joe Normal - would require changes to make it happen.
So, why is a normal good guy more "lame" than Zeus?
Why is it "illogical" for Hippolyta to love a good normal guy, but not illogical for the woman leading women away from man's world because of the oppressive sexism and abuse of patriarchies to fall in love with the father of her rapist who is himself the patriarch of patriarchs and a well known abuser of women? Zeus is the epitome of all Hippolyta and the Amazons hate about man's world.
Why does Diana need a father at all? Why can't this one superhero story be maternal instead? Don't fathers already push mothers down to second rate treatment enough in the genre? Why should WW be part of the pattern of patriarchal dominance?
Last edited by Awonder; 10-15-2017 at 09:46 PM.
When you read the Perez-Potter WW #1, do you really think the focus is on Hermes?
Hermes isn't Diana's father.
The creation of the Amazons is not his idea.
The "birth" of Diana is not his idea.
He is only one of the gods involved with blessing her - the rest are all women.
In other words, the narrative is still very female-centric even with the addition of Hermes.
As the sticking point of your argument is that Perez origins were somehow a purely feminist venture, it doesn't matter if he is the focus or not, he is there and part of it.
Technically Hermes has been Diana's dad in the post crisis era as much as the 5 goddess' and Hippolyta are her mothers and all the Amazons are her aunties.
And we don't know the details about the Amazons creation as of yet, if we ever will.
The assumption here I guess is that Zeus knew exactly what would come of sleeping with Hippolyta?
Is a white sheet clean if there is a black spot on it?
Is it now? I kinda find that hard to see when there is actually no empathise being placed on what gender the deities have, it just happens that those were the ones who thought this was a good idea and pitched in.
Zeus is the ultimate rapist--both in the classical and the modern sense--given he's the ultimate authority in the ancient world of the Greeks. There is no male or female that has agency in this scenario--they are all controlled by Zeus and can't legitimately give consent. He's often creeping around, doing very predatory things, either deceiving or pressuring people into exploitive situatons. Even when it seems passive, there's something morally questionable in getting a woman pregnant, without her consent, by becoming a shower of gold.
Which is why, around the time of Plato, the Greeks were starting to treat these tales of the gods as simply fanciful stories, elaborate metaphors, and not actually reflective of the gods they worshipped. Because they didn't want to believe in gods that were so perverse.
In the Golden age, the island was simply uncharted. So maybe a man wash ashore. Why make Diana a rapist father and abuser of women? We have seen in Wonder Woman how Zeus can be a creepy man. Why not keep the clay
The first (according to the OEDs) example of the term being used to represent intercourse was in 1927 in the stage directions for the Mae West play "Sex." And then in 1934 George Orwell's novel Burmese Days uses it in a way that most people consider to reference the physical act of sex.
My point with this is not to split semantic hairs but, considering the various crypto-sexual themes in Marston's work, I wouldn't be surprised if he was playing with both uses of the term.
Some writers might've meant sex--maybe that was their way of getting it into their books--but I think the softer meaning was still prevalent in the 1940s when Donna Reed famously said to her mother that George was "making violent love to me" in IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE. Mary Hatch was trying to upset her mother, but not to that degree.
I always found it funny reading old novels that used the expression when they really didn't mean sex and just meant "pitching woo."
Well even if Marston did mean sex, Diana wasn’t made from that . She was made from clay and many of her childhood friends were