Perez #1 Discussion

[brettc1]

This post spun off for me from another discussion on the thread about the Azzarello Amazons. There was of course the inevitable discussion comparing them to the Perez Amazons, and the battle between them and Heracles forces which resulted in the deaths of many of the Themyscirans and almost all of Heracles army.

One thing that always stuck in my mind [and maybe my craw], right from the first time I read this issue, was Hippolyta's words on these two pages.

Wonder Woman #1 - Page 16.jpg

On the other thread part of the discussion was whether the Amazons were foolish to let the Greeks into the city and, in fact, should be considered partly responsible for the ensuing tragedy. While I hold that the Greeks are solely responsible for their own heinous actions, Hippolyta's words penned by Perez here have long troubled me.

Basically the way she is written here - well, if her purpose was to avoid a confrontation then I think she makes some particularly poor choices of words. Calling somebody foolish, flatly stating to be somebody's superior, and inviting them to fall into line behind your lead is not the way to open a dialogue to establish peaceful relations with somebody you know has come with a hostile army at their backs. Telling them your troops are laughing at them is even worse.

In short, my feeling is Hippolyta's opening words to Heracles could hardly have set the stage for a violent confrontation more successfully if that had been her deliberate intent.

[Korath]

Well, this beginning is strange. First, we see Hercules speaking about his madness but also of his wrathful and callous behaviour when it comes to women, then we see a servant of Ares playing him and using him for the God of War's wishes, so it seems to imply that left to his own devices, Hercules may have had another behaviour when meeting the Amazons. Then, there is this scene where, for one as prideful as this Hercules, he is suffering great slights to his honour. But then he seems fine with it, until he behave himself like an assassin or someone bereft of honour by poisoning Hippolyta and possibly all the Amazons. But is he plainly conscious of his acts or does his madness play a part. I think that when he poison the Amazons, he is fully in control, because he has had time to cool off and think but that he was not of sane mind when encountering Hippolyta.

Overall, the Amazons can't really be blamed for the way they acted against Hercules' army. But the Goddesses plainly state that even before that, the Amazons had become an insular and isolationist society (for how long is not clear, and we don't know if it was self-imposed or the result of even the neighbouring Cities refusing to deal with them). So, there is ambiguous behaviour from them (which does not mean that they are to blame for Hercules' behaviour).

[Agent Z]

Somehow, I don't think what are essentially a few hurtful jabs are deserving of what was done to the Amazons. And considering Heracles invaded their home, he should have been grateful a few insults was the worst he got

[Awonder]

... In short, my feeling is Hippolyta's opening words to Heracles could hardly have set the stage for a violent confrontation more successfully if that had been her deliberate intent.

"My oracle says you come to war upon us. That would be foolish. Why not join us instead, in peace?."

Such fighting words. How could any adult man not respond to that by attacking her?

[Outside_85]

I maintain the Amazons have a partial responsibility for what happened to them in the sense that they blindly trusted their ways would see them through, even when the risk should have been obvious to them.

They are not like the infamous Dodo, because that bird and many other island dwelling species had no reason to consider humans as dangerous. The amazons are different because, a page or two before the 2 pages Brett posted, there is an Amazon mentioning how man had hounded them years before this day. And for some reason still, Hippolyta decided that this demigod and his army was not really a risk.

Fair enough if she thinks Heracles is sincere after she knocks him over and all that, but as for making peace... you could have settled with inviting a delegation inside for talks and have the others wait, not just leave the city gates wide open.

[brettc1]

"My oracle says you come to war upon us. That would be foolish. Why not join us instead, in peace?."

Such fighting words. How could any adult man not respond to that by attacking her?

Yes, I can see how if you take those three sentences as the only one you quote and ignore everything else then my argument quite evaporates.

But even in this somewhat cherry picked selection the word foolish is unfortunate. Hippolyta, supposedly being written as wise but not really showing it here, could have said. "But there is not need for us to fight."

[brettc1]

I maintain the Amazons have a partial responsibility for what happened to them in the sense that they blindly trusted their ways would see them through, even when the risk should have been obvious to them.

They are not like the infamous Dodo, because that bird and many other island dwelling species had no reason to consider humans as dangerous. The amazons are different because, a page or two before the 2 pages Brett posted, there is an Amazon mentioning how man had hounded them years before this day. And for some reason still, Hippolyta decided that this demigod and his army was not really a risk.

Fair enough if she thinks Heracles is sincere after she knocks him over and all that, but as for making peace... you could have settled with inviting a delegation inside for talks and have the others wait, not just leave the city gates wide open.

That... is actually not without merit.

I don't agree that the Amazons are responsible for the men being rapists, but in light of the comment above an argument could be made that Perez has the Amazons act recklessly.

[Outside_85]

That... is actually not without merit.

I don't agree that the Amazons are responsible for the men being rapists, but in light of the comment above an argument could be made that Perez has the Amazons act recklessly.

Bold: That part is something I fully agree is the men's fault, that's their thing to control.... and by contrast not something the Amazons are the masters of, even thought they know what men are capable of doing to women.
What the Amazons do control however are their gates and their own sense of self-preservation, which for one reason or another was put aside this time.

[brettc1]

Bold: That part is something I fully agree is the men's fault, that's their thing to control.... and by contrast not something the Amazons are the masters of, even thought they know what men are capable of doing to women.
What the Amazons do control however are their gates and their own sense of self-preservation, which for one reason or another was put aside this time.

Yeah, I am seeing your point. If this were say, Star Trek, and the Federation were making first contact overtures with a race known as being previously hostile, people would go bannanas if that race was invited to send a heavily armed fleet straight to Earth.

In other words, combining this with her diplomatic faux pas with Heraclies, Hippolyta is penned here as saying she is wise but doesn't really show it.

[Agent Z]

Well, this beginning is strange. First, we see Hercules speaking about his madness but also of his wrathful and callous behaviour when it comes to women, then we see a servant of Ares playing him and using him for the God of War's wishes, so it seems to imply that left to his own devices, Hercules may have had another behaviour when meeting the Amazons. Then, there is this scene where, for one as prideful as this Hercules, he is suffering great slights to his honour. But then he seems fine with it, until he behave himself like an assassin or someone bereft of honour by poisoning Hippolyta and possibly all the Amazons. But is he plainly conscious of his acts or does his madness play a part. I think that when he poison the Amazons, he is fully in control, because he has had time to cool off and think but that he was not of sane mind when encountering Hippolyta.

Overall, the Amazons can't really be blamed for the way they acted against Hercules' army. But the Goddesses plainly state that even before that, the Amazons had become an insular and isolationist society (for how long is not clear, and we don't know if it was self-imposed or the result of even the neighbouring Cities refusing to deal with them). So, there is ambiguous behaviour from them (which does not mean that they are to blame for Hercules' behaviour).

I can't see the Amazons' isolation as anything but the fault of the men who treated them with misogyny and xenophobia.

[brettc1]

I can't see the Amazons' isolation as anything but the fault of the men who treated them with misogyny and xenophobia.

Actually the goddesses disagreed - basically they told the Amazons that they retreated into isolation because things got too tough. As a result they gave themselves no voice in the wider world and allowed the propaganda machines of their enemies to go unanswered.

[Agent Z]

Actually the goddesses disagreed - basically they told the Amazons that they retreated into isolation because things got too tough. As a result they gave themselves no voice in the wider world and allowed the propaganda machines of their enemies to go unanswered.

It isn't like they didn't try to counter them. And as we saw with Heracles, they were still willing to at least try to be open with outsiders. But there is only so much people can take and the onus shouldn't be the victims of oppression

[Soubhagya]

Why Perez wrote wrote like this? To forward the plot. In a few words Perez showed Hippolyta trying to establish peace while the story went ahead to a Hippolyta and Heracles fight within a few panels. It is very compact and effective storytelling. It is not obvious that Hippolyta was not an effective diplomat. One may not catch that in one reading.

Okay Hippolyta is not so good in diplomacy. But she wanted to avoid war by all means.

If there is an excuse for her less than stellar diplomatic skills let me point out that she was born as a young woman. I don't think she has received any training. She was Amazon queen on the order of the Gods. She was an excellent fighter and leader but diplomacy was not as excellent as other skills of hers. Or maybe those skills were rusty. We have no knowledge when they faced a danger like this before this.

It is possible that she got one chance to speak of her mission after a long time. Perhaps she had regrets that Amazons were not doing the duty they were supposed to do. Instead of leading humanity they had become bitter and withdrawn due to actions of the evil kings.

What if it was one error? Even the very best can make errors. To err is human.

[brettc1]

Why Perez wrote wrote like this? To forward the plot. In a few words Perez showed Hippolyta trying to establish peace while the story went ahead to a Hippolyta and Heracles fight within a few panels. It is very compact and effective storytelling. It is not obvious that Hippolyta was not an effective diplomat. One may not catch that in one reading.

Actually I have read it quite a few times in the last 30 years and it always strikes the same discordant note with me. You don't convince somebody who hates and fears you to be friends by arguing that you are awesome and they are lame.

Okay Hippolyta is not so good in diplomacy. But she wanted to avoid war by all means.

If there is an excuse for her less than stellar diplomatic skills let me point out that she was born as a young woman. I don't think she has received any training. She was Amazon queen on the order of the Gods. She was an excellent fighter and leader but diplomacy was not as excellent as other skills of hers. Or maybe those skills were rusty. We have no knowledge when they faced a danger like this before this.

Not really the issue, though clearly from her words about how wise she is Hippolyta is of the opinion she is pretty good at this. Hubris, perhaps?

It is possible that she got one chance to speak of her mission after a long time. Perhaps she had regrets that Amazons were not doing the duty they were supposed to do. Instead of leading humanity they had become bitter and withdrawn due to actions of the evil kings.

What if it was one error? Even the very best can make errors. To err is human.

I agree it was an error. The point of the discussion is that there is a tendency to look back at the Perez Amazons with nostalgia goggle on. Understandable, considering how many feel that later interpretations compare rather poorly. But in that particular scene I have always felt that the Amazons handled that first contact just really, really badly.

[Vanguard-01]

An arrogant man swagger into their territory, crowing about how he's going to conquer them all.....and Hippolyta deserves criticism for throwing back a couple retorts?

So Hippolyta should only approach violent people with a beatific smile and an offer of a hug now? Interesting viewpoint.

Heracles was going to attack the Amazons regardless of what Hippolyta said or didn't say. She could've approached him wearing a Heracles-themed cheerleader outfit and chanting his name and nothing would've changed. There is nothing wrong with a leader approaching a violent aggressor from a position of strength.