Wonder Woman Controversial Opinions Part 2

[Rightoya]

I would say that if you want a good example of Greek mythology being used well, its Brian Azzarello's run, which, I think we can all agree remains the best modern Wonder Woman story.

I don't think there are many Wonder Woman fans from before Flashpoint who would agree with that, if any.

[SiegePerilous02]

I feel like any conflicts between the Wonder fandom are matched or exceeded by pre Crisis vs post Crisis Superman, or the Spider-Man marriage

[Gaius]

I feel like any conflicts between the Wonder fandom are matched or exceeded by pre Crisis vs post Crisis Superman, or the Spider-Man marriage

Or just any regular ole' topic when it comes to X-Men.

[Stanlos]

I don't think there are many Wonder Woman fans from before Flashpoint who would agree with that, if any.

I think you are 100% correct.

[Stanlos]

I think that when people say that WW is challenging to write what they mean is that they don't want to deal with WW's fandom.

I disagree. I think those that have difficulty are those whose first, and often only, instinct is to reach for well worn tropes for how females "should" be written with the unstated qualifier "within patriarchal structure". These normally conform to performative notions around the construct of "Woman". A lot of lauded scribes, when tackling WW--or attempting to--get tripped up and end up stating something along the lines of she seems not like a real woman (itself silly to state--is the flying dude with lazer eyes "real"?) or that she is diffi ult to understand.

I call BS on that. It is just a combination of laziness, complacency, and the resentment that Gaines--Marston's publisher--called out some 80 or more years ago. Society's social constructs and notions regarding femininity and power are directly challenged by WW's design. It takes a bit more brain power, security of self as a male operating within those structures, and openess to really engage the design successfully. If you analyze the dynamics of the Azz run it becomes quite clear that it is more "Patriarchy friendly" (since so many like to pretend the M word doesn't exist or that its only form is cartoonishly dragging a woman around by the hair with club in hand). It and DiDio's Amazons Attack leverage these tropes and celebrates them which makes those who are more aligned with those constructs feel much more comfy.

But to the critical eye, they are basic af. There's almost a 1:1 between them and say Wizard Magazine's proposed ultimate version of WW.

[HotBoy]

I disagree. I think those that have difficulty are those whose first and often only instinct is reach for well worn tropes for how females should be written with the unstated qualifier "within patriarchal structure". These normally conform to performative notions around the construct of "Woman". A lot of lauded scribes, when tackling WW--or attempting to--get tripped up and end up stating something along the lines of she seems not like a real woman (itself silly to state--is the flying dude with lazer eyes "real"?) or that she is diffi ult to understand.

I call BS on that. It is just a combination of laziness, complacency, and the resentment that Gaines--Marston's publisher--called out some 80 or more years ago. Society's social constructs and notions regarding femininity and power are directly challenged by WW's design. It takes a bit more brain power, security of self as a male operating within those structures, and openess to really engage the design successfully. If you analyze the dynamics of the Azz run it becomes quite clear that it is more "Patriarchy friendly" (since so many like to pretend the M word doesn't exist or that its only form is cartoonishly dragging a woman around by the hair with club in hand). It and DiDio's Amazons Attack leverage these tropes and celebrates them and make those who are more aligned with those constructs feel much more comfy.

But to the critical eye, they are basic af. There's almost a 1:1 between them and say Wizard Magazine's proposed ultimate version of WW.

[Agent Z]

Azzarello's take on the myths is just a shallow regurgitation of popular tropes seen in Greek myth adaptations while trying to be Neil Gaiman's Sandman.

[wonder39]

Azzarello's take on the myths is just a shallow regurgitation of popular tropes seen in Greek myth adaptations while trying to be Neil Gaiman's Sandman.

On point. I remember people at the time saying how genius it was.... * Barf*

[WonderScott]

I'm going throw this out there...not controversial so much as a conspiratorial opinion...I think a lot of writers that have handled Wonder Woman (not all, but a lot) deliberately half-assed it.

I'm sure someone out there has a classic story in them about a mad scientist attacking a hero with poisonous gas that messes with their minds that's genuinely creepy and scary...but they'd rather make it a Scarecrow story and save it for when they get to write Batman instead of Dr. Poison and Wonder Woman.
Someone could make a grand epic about Queen Clea invading the surface world...but they'd rather save that for their Justice League run with Ocean Master as the villain instead.

Was it George Perez or Phil Jimenez who actually said no one volunteers to write Wonder Woman?
That's why there are so few classic stories and so little effort put into her rogues. They'd rather phone it in with generic mythology stuff and save their A-material for the characters and books they do want.

I always laugh at that because Wonder Woman would be the first character I’d want to write!

I think most creators just don’t see her as interesting on the surface and first pass, but then you find creators like Rucka who fall in love with her after they spend time thinking about her creatively and critically.

[WonderScott]

Her fandom definitely isn't any worse than the Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men, or Superman fandoms (other than the number of dudes who apparently send in letters requesting specific fetish fuel...).

She's objectively a lot more difficult to write than most characters. And the challenges aren't faults, they're the things that make her interesting and unique - her best books really don't feel like any other cape fare. I think it's a few big "issues" with the same root:

(1) Her central grounding forces are her left politics and feminism. It's not a coincidence that her best-regarded stories are the ones that have put her subversive politics at the forefront, whether overtly or through allegory (Marston, Perez, Rucka in his Post-Crisis run, DeConnick in Historia). Most writers aren't trying to get into that, so they don't use any of her substance.

And it's not just me saying this. Mark Waid, probably the big-name writer who's most famous for openly not getting WW, has spoken at length about how he can't write her because he doesn't feel equipped to deal with her politics.

(2) There have been countless different, often contradictory takes on her, so there's no "definitive" portrayal like there is for Superman or Batman. If you scoop out her core themes, you wind up with a hollow shell of a character that writers have tried and failed to fill a whole bunch of different ways (changing her lore, switching up her supporting cast, giving her a sword...). It goes all the way back to Kanigher - he was scared of Marston's feminism so he warped the character to fit the conventions of his time and it all but killed her until Perez's reboot.

(3) People interpret "she's a feminist icon" as "she can't do anything wrong or have any faults" so they're either scared to give her flaws or they take the "flaws" waaaay too far (see: killer rapist Amazons, the sword-happy uber-violent Diana from the n52 days). Really what it means is that feminist themes like women's solidarity and self-actualization should be central in her stories and lore...which goes back to issue #1.

(4) Because so many great writers have totally shat the bed on her ongoing, her reputation for being hard to write precedes her, which makes her VERY intimidating.

Definitely all of this plays a part.

[WonderScott]

I disagree. I think those that have difficulty are those whose first, and often only, instinct is to reach for well worn tropes for how females "should" be written with the unstated qualifier "within patriarchal structure". These normally conform to performative notions around the construct of "Woman". A lot of lauded scribes, when tackling WW--or attempting to--get tripped up and end up stating something along the lines of she seems not like a real woman (itself silly to state--is the flying dude with lazer eyes "real"?) or that she is diffi ult to understand.

I call BS on that. It is just a combination of laziness, complacency, and the resentment that Gaines--Marston's publisher--called out some 80 or more years ago. Society's social constructs and notions regarding femininity and power are directly challenged by WW's design. It takes a bit more brain power, security of self as a male operating within those structures, and openess to really engage the design successfully. If you analyze the dynamics of the Azz run it becomes quite clear that it is more "Patriarchy friendly" (since so many like to pretend the M word doesn't exist or that its only form is cartoonishly dragging a woman around by the hair with club in hand). It and DiDio's Amazons Attack leverage these tropes and celebrates them which makes those who are more aligned with those constructs feel much more comfy.

But to the critical eye, they are basic af. There's almost a 1:1 between them and say Wizard Magazine's proposed ultimate version of WW.

The attempts at marketing/recreating Wonder Woman into something she’s not are repeatedly going to fail or feel not “right.”

She’s gotta be who she’s gotta be and that’s inherently political from her very conception. Find the writers that can handle that and she’ll find the audience she’s supposed to… and it’ll likely grow over time given the changes in attitudes and culture going on (at the very least in the U.S.) If you try to write her and her world to appease people who aren’t down with her vibes and messages, it’s just not going to work.

People are so divided now, just let her be “controversial” to those who seek to have her conform.

Great thoughts Stanlos - thank you for sharing them!

[Sebastianne]

I don't know if this will be a controversial opinion on Gail's part, LOL

[king81992]

I don't know if this will be a controversial opinion on Gail's part, LOL

I wouldn't call him a great character but he had/has potential.

[Gaius]

I don't know if this will be a controversial opinion on Gail's part, LOL

I like how this can be read as an answer for either/both questions.

[Stanlos]

Succinct.

And 100% correct.