Is it Time Wonder Woman Got a New Editor?

[Outside_85]

Then at least Idelson could have found guest writers to fill in the void and not let Wonder Woman lapse into a quarterly book.

He could, but lets be honest, we don't know what kind of deal Heinberg had with Didio (or whoever it was that hired him for the job). BA/CC had their pitch for a story and the timeframe it would take them to tell it and got the green light to tell it, maybe Heinberg had similar arrangements.

[wagthedog]

He could, but lets be honest, we don't know what kind of deal Heinberg had with Didio (or whoever it was that hired him for the job). BA/CC had their pitch for a story and the timeframe it would take them to tell it and got the green light to tell it, maybe Heinberg had similar arrangements.

When an editor lets one of his titles, the pre-eminent superheroine, slip to a quartely title, you would think it is his job, regardless of a contract with Heinberg and whatever it entailed, to get the comic book out on a monthly basis. Otherwise what use is he? This is Wonder Woman we are talking about, not some Flaming Carrot title.

[numberthirty]

it's time for someone to sit down and say "this needs to be our vision for Wonder Woman going forward" and establish who her central supporting cast and rogues should be similar to how Lois, Jimmy, Perry, Cat, Luthor, Brainiac, Metallo, etc. are with Superman or Alfred, Commissioner Gordon, Damian(barf), Joker, Riddler, Ras, & Scarecrow are with Batman. Every title needs some variety from time to time but I'd like to be able to pick up a Wonder Woman book knowing that over a year's time, I'll see Steve, Etta, Donna, Artemis, Cheetah, Giganta, Circe, Ares, and Dr. Psycho featured or at least mentioned semi-often. I'd also like a clear tone and setting established for the book.

If they had done that post-"New-52" issue#35, it seems like it would have bugged a good portion of the fan base.

It also seems like setting the creative terms for writers is a pretty good way to get decent writers to steer way clear of writing Wonder Woman. Would Snyder have taken over one of the "Batman" family books if DC had said "No Court Of Owls. We want you to stick to this set of characters/characterizations."?

[Matt Krotzer]

Probably, but not for any of the complaints listed in the OP, which sound to me like "They're not doing it the way I'D do it," which is my least favorite complaint type. If we're seeing various takes on Wonder Woman, I don't see that as a problem. Especially when they've been hit-or-miss along the way. It looks to me like an editor passionate about the character, willing to take chances and try new things to find an audience that wants to read about Wonder Woman.

That said, sometimes a new viewpoint is what's really needed. If Idelson's not going to Burbank, we'll get one soon.

[Agent Z]

Probably, but not for any of the complaints listed in the OP, which sound to me like "They're not doing it the way I'D do it," which is my least favorite complaint type. If we're seeing various takes on Wonder Woman, I don't see that as a problem. Especially when they've been hit-or-miss along the way. It looks to me like an editor passionate about the character, willing to take chances and try new things to find an audience that wants to read about Wonder Woman.

That said, sometimes a new viewpoint is what's really needed. If Idelson's not going to Burbank, we'll get one soon.

Many would say a lot of these different takes have been more miss than hit. Even before the Finches took over, there were people saying they were ready to jump ship once Azzarello was done. Just because it's a different take doesn't always mean it's a good one.

[numberthirty]

Just because it's a different take doesn't always mean it's a good one.

That also goes for "Let's just stick to the same old take.", doesn't it?

[Vanguard-01]

I was under the impression that he left because he learned that Flashpoint would wipe out all of his work the moment he finished, so he just went off to write Superman: Earth One.

Was that it? I hadn't heard that before.

I guess that could make sense too. Keep in mind, JMS came to DC from Marvel after they destroyed his work on both Spider-Man and Thor in the name of their latest event. Stands to reason he'd have a pretty low tolerance for going through that yet again at DC.

[Agent Z]

That also goes for "Let's just stick to the same old take.", doesn't it?

Just pointing out there exist negatives to both approaches. I hear people using "it's new" as proof of why a story or concept is good.

[Matt Krotzer]

Just pointing out there exist negatives to both approaches. I hear people using "it's new" as proof of why a story or concept is good.

I figured the "numerous different approaches" was self-explanatory that their successes were slight, if not nonexistent. (If they were successful, it'd be silly to change course, after all.)

[Outside_85]

When an editor lets one of his titles, the pre-eminent superheroine, slip to a quartely title, you would think it is his job, regardless of a contract with Heinberg and whatever it entailed, to get the comic book out on a monthly basis. Otherwise what use is he? This is Wonder Woman we are talking about, not some Flaming Carrot title.

The problem there is to assume the group-editor is the only authority that has influence on the book, when he/she is just the day-to-day manager someone else left in charge.
Whenever it's Wonder Woman or Captain Carrot is mostly irrelevant as long as (in this case) DC continues to uphold the agreement it made with the Marston-estate in ages past.

Was that it? I hadn't heard that before.

I guess that could make sense too. Keep in mind, JMS came to DC from Marvel after they destroyed his work on both Spider-Man and Thor in the name of their latest event. Stands to reason he'd have a pretty low tolerance for going through that yet again at DC.

It's what I've heard, but I've got no proof of it.

[Dr. Poison]

If they had done that post-"New-52" issue#35, it seems like it would have bugged a good portion of the fan base.

It also seems like setting the creative terms for writers is a pretty good way to get decent writers to steer way clear of writing Wonder Woman. Would Snyder have taken over one of the "Batman" family books if DC had said "No Court Of Owls. We want you to stick to this set of characters/characterizations."?

But Snyder didn't just do Court of Owls. He's used many(if not all) of the Batman supporting cast and rogues that I mentioned.

[Dr. Poison]

Probably, but not for any of the complaints listed in the OP, which sound to me like "They're not doing it the way I'D do it," which is my least favorite complaint type. If we're seeing various takes on Wonder Woman, I don't see that as a problem. Especially when they've been hit-or-miss along the way. It looks to me like an editor passionate about the character, willing to take chances and try new things to find an audience that wants to read about Wonder Woman.

That said, sometimes a new viewpoint is what's really needed. If Idelson's not going to Burbank, we'll get one soon.

Actually, I loved Heinberg's run, felt that Simone's run had some really good and really bad points, felt the JMS/Hester run was a borderline decent alternate reality story, and I like the Finchs' run so far. On the flip-side, I didn't care for Picoult or Azzarello's runs. I'd just like to see a little more consistency in the tone, setting, and cast rather than having the title swerve all over the road like a highly intoxicated driver.

[Darius]

Actually, I loved Heinberg's run, felt that Simone's run had some really good and really bad points, felt the JMS/Hester run was a borderline decent alternate reality story, and I like the Finchs' run so far. On the flipped, I didn't care for Picoult or Azzarello's runs. I'd just like to see a little more consistency in the tone, setting, and cast rather than having the title swerve all over the road like a highly intoxicated driver.

you aren't going to get more consistency than what we had with Azzarello. So you have to consider that part of these issues are also on the writers themselves. Every character goes through these issues at times, regardless of editorial involvement. I've heard complaints that writers and artists don't always have the same vision for the character and that can lead to wild swings in tone/consistency regardless of what editorial wants. With that said, I'd say overall DC Editorial has issues, not just Idelson. The entire DCU has had consistency and tone issues for 25 years so they keep hitting the "reset" button and try to start all over, only they don't really start all over just sort of eliminate the past and start making many of the same mistakes all over again. Personally I doubt we'd see a ton of difference with a new editor v. Idelson as I think an individual title's editor has far less power than you seem to think.

[Dr. Poison]

you aren't going to get more consistency than what we had with Azzarello. So you have to consider that part of these issues are also on the writers themselves. Every character goes through these issues at times, regardless of editorial involvement. I've heard complaints that writers and artists don't always have the same vision for the character and that can lead to wild swings in tone/consistency regardless of what editorial wants. With that said, I'd say overall DC Editorial has issues, not just Idelson. The entire DCU has had consistency and tone issues for 25 years so they keep hitting the "reset" button and try to start all over, only they don't really start all over just sort of eliminate the past and start making many of the same mistakes all over again. Personally I doubt we'd see a ton of difference with a new editor v. Idelson as I think an individual title's editor has far less power than you seem to think.

With some titles, what you say is true but with others it isn't. Look at both Green Lantern and Aquaman, when Geoff Johns left those titles, the tone, setting, and supporting cast/rogues kept a similar vibe as to when Geoff was writing them. With low selling titles, I can understand the need for a shake-up from time to time but Diana has been a mid-point seller for a very long time now. Heinberg's #1 sold around 125K and Azz's #1 sold around 78K with the Finchs' first issue selling around 50K. Granted those are first issues but the book has stayed selling over 25K for quite some time.

[numberthirty]

But Snyder didn't just do Court of Owls. He's used many(if not all) of the Batman supporting cast and rogues that I mentioned.

Sure. However, I don't think he was given a mandate as far as "Appropriate" characterization(He obviously "left turned" The Joker right off the bat) or given a list of an acceptable supporting cast.