A Real Deconstruction of Wonder Woman

[Agent Z]

Seven Deadly Sins is kind of limited. I would say that Diana's flaw is naivete. Especially around other women and not realizing that some women can be just as manipulative and hateful as men like Ares and Hercules.



To me Barbara is the one who underscores Diana's privilege the most. Both her pre and post crisis version. Barbara is human, disabled, overlooked by her parents and those in her field, she got her powers not as a gift but as an attempt to survive. Diana cant relate to any of these but there are many women who can relate to Barbara. Thus Barbara is more sympathetic than Wonder Woman. Where that sympathy stops is that Barbara ultimately wants whats best for herself while Diana wants every one to be at their best. Diana's attempts to reform Barbara leads to them hurting each other and others around them.


Also: re: Spirit of Truth

Oh boy, talk about a story that started off well and then veered off into 'Superman is the bestest hero and everyone should emulate him' territory. Never mind the sketchy politics of how it depicted the Middle East. I should put that story in the thread about fixing Diana's role in famous stories.

I think this might apply to the pre crisis version of Cheetah but not really the post crisis one. The latter version is nothing more than a greedy woman who seeks to add to her treasure collection and holds no respect for the cultures she exploits and steals from.

[John Venus]

I think this might apply to the pre crisis version of Cheetah but not really the post crisis one. The latter version is nothing more than a greedy woman who seeks to add to her treasure collection and holds no respect for the cultures she exploits and steals from.

I was thinking about the Rebirth Cheetah actually who is more than sympathetic than her Post Crisis counterpart.

[HotBoy]

It's easy to deconstruct Diana if you focus on the fact that she is the most privileged person in the world; born to royalty, gifted with powers from a young age and pampered since birth. Have you seen wealthy people pretending to relate to regular people or how tone deaf they can be to the struggles of ordinary people? Now apply that to Diana; how much of a role model can you be when you grow up so isolated from the world? Someone who hasn't grown up in Man's World would also have a harder time navigating it; they would lack the wisdom that comes from life experience and could end up as a danger to others than an asset.

Isn't this Veronica Cale's entire point? From Wonder Woman #202 (2004):

[Zahina]

Hm you two make some good points. Perhaps leaning into her privilege is the way to go. Maybe this would make things easier: what are Diana’s flaws? Batman obviously has the classic flaw of Pride, and that’s made him pretty easy to take apart. Superman I would argue has the classic flaw of Wrath. What is Diana’s? What is the chink in her armor, the blemish in her otherwise ideal image? Knowing that would make it easier to take her apart.

I know what *I* would make her big flaw but I’m curious to read others.

Does Diana lust for adventure and competition since she was isolated on the island and raised as a warrior?

[HotBoy]

Hm you two make some good points. Perhaps leaning into her privilege is the way to go.

From Wonder Woman #170 (2001).

wonder woman_170_13.jpg

[Guy_McNichts]

I think, when discussing flaws, there is a distinction to be made between long-term flaws and short-term ones.

Character flaws, ultimately, are about creating conflict in stories for them to deal with. Long-term flaws are the kind that hover over a character indefinitely and are constant sources of conflict. Short-term flaws are the kind that can crop up every so often and you can only get a handful of stories out of.

For instance, I can see Diana being naive and overly trusting when it comes to fellow women...but only when she's starting out. Since many of her rogues and enemies are women--Cheetah, Clea, Osira, Gundra, Giganta, Dr. Poison, Veronica Cale, etc.--I would think she'd get over that naivete fairly early in her career.

There are questions that can be addressed regarding Diana's lust for adventure and glory. But again, that strikes me as a short-term flaw that can only be an issue every once in a while because, however competitive and adventurous Diana is, we know at the end of the day, she does this because she genuinely wants to help people. There is a definitive answer.

Diana's privilege is a flaw worth exploring, and you can probably get a decent amount of mileage out of, but I don't know if it's the big long-term flaw that becomes a cornerstone of her character. Personally, I think her habit of spreading herself too thin and overworking herself has more meat to it.
It's been discussed in older threads, but I've said there was a decent idea in her Heroes in Crisis confessional that suggests she's so selfless she doesn't give herself time to deal with her own pain.

I think her great weakness or flaw or challenge...whatever you want to call it...is the possibility she might burn herself out. Either through overworking or disillusionment or just alienating herself because she tries too hard.

[Vordan]

Yeah her being naive works for Years 1-3, but by Year 5? Or Year 10? No that doesn’t make sense, at that point she would just come off as an idiot.

[HotBoy]

I think her great weakness or flaw or challenge...whatever you want to call it...is the possibility she might burn herself out. Either through overworking or disillusionment or just alienating herself because she tries too hard.

In real life, activists fighting for progressive change often get burned out. Or, after a time, decide if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

I don't think Diana would ever "join 'em," but I could definitely see her saying, "[bleep] this" and walking away from it.

[John Venus]

I have to echo some of the posters here, Diana being naive and privileged is one of those aspects that lesser writers (like Geoff Johns and Tom Taylor) can pick up and easily exaggerate. Diana should be someone aware of her short comings but still actively working to become a better version of herself as much as she wants others to be their best selves.

Isn't this Veronica Cale's entire point? From Wonder Woman #202 (2004):

Yes, but given that she is also a wealthy white woman, it's hard to see that as anything but jealousy on her part. Rebirth Barbara and even some Post Crisis Barbara inhabited those themes better, imo.

[Vordan]

Seems there’s no real consensus on what Diana’s flaws are or how to deconstruct her. I think that points to the problem with her conception: unlike Superman, where he really only got turned into being perfect morally after the Donner films, Wonder Woman was created to be a role model. She was Marston’s conception of the perfect woman, and meant to show girls that they could be more than timid housewives. In other words Diana was created from the start to be perfect, and I think the struggle has been how do you honor Marston’s intent while acknowledging that people want flawed heroes now? Hence the difficulty in trying to think of how to deconstruct Wonder Woman outside of just lazily making the Amazons evil and her into FemThor.

Hmm could Historia be considered a deconstruction? It has elements that would apply, for example instead of Themyscaria being a place the Amazons go willingly, it’s where they’re exiled. Some of the Amazons are psychos, and Hippolyta herself is a flawed protagonist.

[HotBoy]

Yes, but given that she is also a wealthy white woman, it's hard to see that as anything but jealousy on her part. Rebirth Barbara and even some Post Crisis Barbara inhabited those themes better, imo.

I think Cale's point was that perennial conservative talking point: "I pulled myself up by my bootstraps." Her emphasis was that she was a poor and abused child who scraped her way to the top by her sheer willpower and intelligence, whereas Diana had been pampered since birth and given abilities--including intelligence--by supernatural beings. "Jealousy" doesn't quite seem to capture the nuances of Cale's grievance.

[John Venus]

Seems there’s no real consensus on what Diana’s flaws are or how to deconstruct her. I think that points to the problem with her conception: unlike Superman, where he really only got turned into being perfect morally after the Donner films, Wonder Woman was created to be a role model. She was Marston’s conception of the perfect woman, and meant to show girls that they could be more than timid housewives. In other words Diana was created from the start to be perfect, and I think the struggle has been how do you honor Marston’s intent while acknowledging that people want flawed heroes now? Hence the difficulty in trying to think of how to deconstruct Wonder Woman outside of just lazily making the Amazons evil and her into FemThor.

Hmm could Historia be considered a deconstruction? It has elements that would apply, for example instead of Themyscaria being a place the Amazons go willingly, it’s where they’re exiled. Some of the Amazons are psychos, and Hippolyta herself is a flawed protagonist.

I don't think we are far away from a consensus. Most of us agree that her flaws are her naivete and her privilege. But it needs deft execution otherwise it could damage the character.

When you have a character as powerful as Diana, the challenges are going to be problems that she can't punch her away out of or as a diplomat, it's situations where there are no easy answers. Sure, Diana wants to save Cheetah for instance and redeem her but how would someone whose been a victim of Barbara, whose seen the latter eat their loved ones, feel about Diana being sympathetic to Cheetah?

If you want a thorough deconstruction you could take Marston's ideals at their face value and not saw off their edges. Have Diana proclaim that women are inherently superior than men because women are inherently more nurturing than men and that men are aggressive. Have her confront the fact that not everyone is comfortable with 'loving submission' (turns out bondage isn't the answer to world peace or gender equality) and that not ever man is inherently aggressive and not every woman is inherently nurturing or loving. Or that every one wants to worship the Greek Gods.

[bardkeep]

Seems there’s no real consensus on what Diana’s flaws are or how to deconstruct her. I think that points to the problem with her conception: unlike Superman, where he really only got turned into being perfect morally after the Donner films, Wonder Woman was created to be a role model. She was Marston’s conception of the perfect woman, and meant to show girls that they could be more than timid housewives. In other words Diana was created from the start to be perfect, and I think the struggle has been how do you honor Marston’s intent while acknowledging that people want flawed heroes now? Hence the difficulty in trying to think of how to deconstruct Wonder Woman outside of just lazily making the Amazons evil and her into FemThor.

That's true to an extent but I'd actually argue that modern Diana is actually much less beholden to Marston's depiction than Superman is to Donner's - GA, SA, Post-Crisis, and n52 WW are all radically different characters while Superman in the comics has been pretty consistent since the '70s. And I think everyone has agreed on a bunch of things, not to mention the more mundane flaws like her occasional propensity to lose her temper.

The issue is that I think "don't tell stories that actively disempower women / lapse into misogynistic tropes" translates in a lot of people's minds to "she has to be perfect," so people are either afraid to give her flaws or overcorrect for the tepidness about her flaws and make her and/or the Amazons borderline psychotic. In reality the movies are a perfect example of "do this, not that." The first movie does a great job making Diana heroic but flawed - she's naïve, she's so focused on getting to Ares that she refuses to listen to anyone and lets Veld get gassed, she repeatedly loses faith and feels tempted to give up even though she comes around in the end. WW84 just falls into misogyny - she violates a strange man's body and nearly lets the world collapse because she's spent nearly a century hung up a guy she dated for, like, a month. Having her make irresponsible choices out of loneliness would've been a perfectly fine thing to do, it just really shouldn't have been about Steve and the body swap stuff was beyond unnecessary.

Going back to the original point, I agree with your observation where she struggles to figure out where to focus, though I think often losing sight of her mission is just one part of it. She wants to do so many different things but she gets hyperfocused and a lot falls to the wayside. Just look at Vanessa feeling abandoned in Phil Jimenez's run, or Gail Simone's run where she gets so fixated on repopulating the Amazons that she strings Tom along and plans their relationship without thinking about what he wants, or Hiketeia where she gets so caught up in teaching Batman a lesson that she loses track of Danny and can't save her from dying by suicide. It also leads to her occasionally being REALLY stubborn, like Witching Hour where she nearly destroys the world because she's so dead-set on fixing everything that she charges in without getting a handle on the Witchmark first or Golden Perfect where she's so set in her ways that the entire concept of objective truth falls apart. I'd also argue that killing Max Lord fits here.

And that's all far from a comprehensive look. People who say "she's never failed/hit her low point" clearly haven't read much of her stuff because she's failed so many goddamn times.

If we're deconstructing her personal flaws rather than her core character concepts and thematic foundations, I suppose the question would be "what happens when she tries to be everything at once and fails?" It's distinct from something like Superman wanting to be everywhere at once and save everyone, and it's a very real struggle that a lot of women go through. There's also a lot of mileage you can get out of the fact that she has no choice but to confront her flaws because of the lasso.

Hmm could Historia be considered a deconstruction? It has elements that would apply, for example instead of Themyscaria being a place the Amazons go willingly, it’s where they’re exiled. Some of the Amazons are psychos, and Hippolyta herself is a flawed protagonist.

I had this thought as well, and I think it's also a conceptual deconstruction. For example, it offers a response to the question of why the Amazons would sequester themselves on an island when it's actively against their mission and why they're warriors with seemingly no war to fight. It also digs into their roots as champions of oppressed women and explores the theme of trauma that also got a lot of airtime in Perez's run. You also have The Circle, another really successful deconstruction of the Amazons that tackles the implications of a barren society unfairly blessing one person with a child.

Interestingly both of these deconstructions were done by women, and I don't think either of them could have been executed successfully by non-women.

The Amazons being flawed is nothing new, though. The more generous, heroic portrayals of Hippolyta (Perez's run, Historia) still made her VERY flawed and kind of an emotional mess. Even Marston made one of her central traits her overprotectiveness. And infighting with the Amazons has been a pretty consistent theme in her comics as far back as WML's run - the first robust take on the Amazons for a mass audience (Paradise Lost) is even shaping up to focus centrally on their political and personal conflicts.

[Gaius]

I have to echo some of the posters here, Diana being naive and privileged is one of those aspects that lesser writers (like Geoff Johns and Tom Taylor) can pick up and easily exaggerate. Diana should be someone aware of her short comings but still actively working to become a better version of herself as much as she wants others to be their best selves.

Yes, but given that she is also a wealthy white woman, it's hard to see that as anything but jealousy on her part. Rebirth Barbara and even some Post Crisis Barbara inhabited those themes better, imo.

So was Barbara? Hell, Barbara was even further that she's the daughter of British aristocracy, Cale's mother was a working-class stripper.

Seems there’s no real consensus on what Diana’s flaws are or how to deconstruct her. I think that points to the problem with her conception: unlike Superman, where he really only got turned into being perfect morally after the Donner films, Wonder Woman was created to be a role model. She was Marston’s conception of the perfect woman, and meant to show girls that they could be more than timid housewives. In other words Diana was created from the start to be perfect, and I think the struggle has been how do you honor Marston’s intent while acknowledging that people want flawed heroes now? Hence the difficulty in trying to think of how to deconstruct Wonder Woman outside of just lazily making the Amazons evil and her into FemThor.

Hmm could Historia be considered a deconstruction? It has elements that would apply, for example instead of Themyscaria being a place the Amazons go willingly, it’s where they’re exiled. Some of the Amazons are psychos, and Hippolyta herself is a flawed protagonist.

It has elements like you say but I think an asterisk on it at the moment is we probably need to see DeConnick's whole story before making a judgement. There's a difference, imo, between adding some layers and "darkening" up a previous story and full on deconstruction.

[John Venus]

So was Barbara? Hell, Barbara was even further that she's the daughter of British aristocracy, Cale's mother was a working-class stripper.

I just like Barbara more than Cale okay? :P