Grant Morrison Weighs In On "Batman v Superman's" Wonder Woman

[gwangung]

From earlier interviews , I get the sense that Morrison doesn't view the bondage and dominance aspect of WW as exactly the same thing as the aggressive violence of swords. There's a world of difference between what a sword can be primarily used for (cutting, killing) and what a lasso is primarily used for (binding, restraining). Yes, a sword can be used less agressively (flat of the sword as a blunt object) and a rope can be used more aggressively (a noose for lynching) but it does send a different message that the tool she more often has in her hand these days is the sword, not the lasso (i personally have no issue with her carrying a shield).

There was this whole long discussion he made a couple years back that the current versions of Wonder Woman are curiously blunted in their sexuality, with only the hetero-normative aspects being touched upon. And I think he's right; I wonder if a modern take on Wonder Woman could actually take on variant forms of sexuality and make them part and parcel of the stories. It's easy enough to see with the role playing and consent, but I wonder if you could go further with that....

[BertoFlyingFox]

That may have been the original creators intention, but the mythological society he picked are warriors...who go to war. Amazonomachy is a thing.

This Marston fella picked a myth out of a hat and apparently never researched them, or he intended for Diana to somehow be the only amazonian not steeped in war and questionable deeds.

[PretenderNX01]

That may have been the original creators intention, but the mythological society he picked are warriors...who go to war. Amazonomachy is a thing.

This Marston fella picked a myth out of a hat and apparently never researched them, or he intended for Diana to somehow be the only amazonian not steeped in war and questionable deeds.

Well, a lot of what we believe about Amazons are myths themselves. They didn't cut a boob off or anything like that and it's fine to make up a group for comics and name them after real peoples. This is at most "historical fiction" then and he can do as he pleased with it. No other group in comics is restricted to history. Thor rewrites Norse myth as they please.

I don't think he's calling out the movie so much as how the movie is using that side of the character that's become a part of her in promotional material (more so the poster than the trailer). It's not near as much as Azzarello did. We don't know the context of Wonder woman's bracelets causing a shockwave, I think it's possible to be a peacemaking character and still have defensive capabilities.

Yeah, I thought it was mostly male artists (and, OK, maybe Georgia O'Keefe) who felt compelled to put symbols of genitalia everywhere. Morrison seems to be assuming (or pretending, with tongue in cheek and in an affectionately bemused semi-parodic homage to Marston) that true "female-based design" would consist of replacing phallic symbols with clitoral and vaginal symbols.

I think his artist who is also male had done that. It's an interesting question, we live in a dick obsessed culture and people scrawl them all over and see them in the tracks of Curiosity on Mars, so I wonder if a ladies only culture would just naturally do as Georgia O'Keefe did. There is a woman in Japan making vaginal boats as so on.

As for Diana's aggression or not, the only female I know of who is close to an expert on her would be Lynda Carter and she's expressed an opinion that Diana should use her brains more as a woman rather than just fight like men.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pollo-...b_5115569.html

But she makes it clear she supports Gal
“I’ll have to wait and see. I hate to comment on something that I haven’t seen and I’m very supportive of Gal Gadot. I’m very supportive of them doing Wonder Woman, putting her in any capacity. I think she needs to be out there. … It’s high time somebody took a chance and did it and so I’m really happy about that.”
http://screenrant.com/gal-gadot-wond...-lynda-carter/

[BertoFlyingFox]

Well, a lot of what we believe about Amazons are myths themselves. They didn't cut a boob off or anything like that and it's fine to make up a group for comics and name them after real peoples. This is at most "historical fiction" then and he can do as he pleased with it. No other group in comics is restricted to history. Thor rewrites Norse myth as they please.

Of course anyone could do what they please with their own works. Just dont see the point in picking a society that's steeped in killing then changing up everything that made them what they were. I personally like what they did with Wonder Woman in recent years and have absolutely no interest in picking up an OGN where the first 48 pages are talking heads. Even Marston wouldnt have made 48 pages of just talking, there's constant imagery of her tying up villains, eating through chains, and breaking submission. But somehow in 2016 that has to be thrown out, replaced with 48 pages of blabbing, and a reluctance to put a battle scene in a comic book because "that's just boy's adventure fiction". Ridiculous.

Thor is still very much about war, I havent read anything about the original creators intention being to make a pacifist norse god with dildo planes flying this way and that.

[Silvanus]

I think his artist who is also male had done that.

Yes, Yannick supposedly is doing it, though we haven't seen it yet, and it may be more subtle than Morrison is making it sound. I just think Morrison's being humorously, and probably intentionally, glib by seeming to assume it's an obvious, incontrovertible fact that more vaginal and clitoral symbolism would equal "female-based design." It would be interesting (if there was any way to know) to see if Morrison's OGN gets a more gender-balanced audience than the monthly comics usually do; if so, then in effect it will be less like "All-Girl Adventures for Men."

As for Diana's aggression or not, the only female I know of who is close to an expert on her would be Lynda Carter and she's expressed an opinion that Diana should use her brains more as a woman rather than just fight like men.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pollo-...b_5115569.html

I think that it's not either/or; she can use her brains and also fight more. Some people seem to think that Azz's Wonder Woman in particularly aggressive, and there are a few scenes where her aggression is depicted a more graphically than we may be used to seeing (though Gail Simone, who I would add to you Lynda Carter on your list of female experts on WW, did have her cutting Ares' head off--or splitting it with an axe, or something like that) but it seems to me that Azz mostly had her handling situations peacefully--embracing Siracca, converting Hera, encouraging Milan, sparing the Minotaur, and so forth.

And I think there's room for multiple approaches. I'm happy that Morrison is going to out-Marston Marston and out-Azz Azz by doing a Wonder Woman without fights, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the Gadot version being more aggressive. Just like all women don't have to be one thing, WW doesn't have to be stuck with one approach.

[HellHere]

and have absolutely no interest in picking up an OGN where the first 48 pages are talking heads. Even Marston wouldnt have made 48 pages of just talking,

Just because there's no fighting, doesn't mean it's going to be 48 pages of people standing around. Morrison's better than that.

[Stone Cold]

Morrison doesn't think Wonder Woman is good enough to be action hero.

[Fuzzy Barbarian]

Yeah, I gotta agree with him. All the Wonder Woman stuff is her snarling with weapons at the ready, like trying to say, "forget the Linda Carter crap, THIS IS BADASS!!111!1!111" I feel that way about Aquaman as well. It feels like they're afraid to have anything that can even be remotely silly in their movies, so they're overcompensating by making everything generically 'badass'.

Also, spat water on my iPad at the vagina line. Read it over a few times to make sure I read it right

Morrison's pretty hit or miss with me, but I'd like to see what he brings to Wonder Woman. She's the only one of the trinity he hasn't written, and I loved most of his Batman run and some of my favourite Superman moments are from All-Star Superman. The Earth One line is pretty 'meh' to me (Batman was okay, but I don't think it's as good as the Johns fanboys say it is), and apparently Titans was average at best. Haven't touched Superman, but Supes fans I know are pretty mixed about it. Hopefully this coming wave of Earth One stuff is better.

[MarvelMaster616]

I love Grant Morrison's work on Superman. He's been one of DC's top writers for years. That said, I've noticed in recent times that he's become a bit more...eccentric. Whenever he gives an interview or talks about a certain character, he tends to get overly snooty or weird. He's not like Alan Moore just yet, but he doesn't strike me as a guy who's very down-to-Earth anymore. That leaves me somewhat concerned about what he's going to do with Wonder Woman: Earth One. He's not afraid to try crazy new ideas, but not all those ideas work out. And I'd rather rather one of those ideas not bring down this book. Earth One has been a top quality book since it started and I think adding Wonder Woman to the mix will help expand it. But with Morrison's style, I'm not entirely sure it'll work.

[SiegePerilous02]

That may have been the original creators intention, but the mythological society he picked are warriors...who go to war. Amazonomachy is a thing.

This Marston fella picked a myth out of a hat and apparently never researched them, or he intended for Diana to somehow be the only amazonian not steeped in war and questionable deeds.

Marston's Amazons were still warriors. They fought against armies who tried to conquer Amazonia, and battled their way to freedom after Hercules enslaved them. It just wasn't their only defining characteristic, and they didn't have anyone to fight while on their island anyway. The whole point of Marston choosing the Amazons was to deconstruct the misogynistic myth that created them. Women with power = obviously a bunch of violent creatures who would castrate a man on sight. That's the thinking that went into a lot of the original Amazon myths.

He went too far in the opposite direction in his thinking, that men are inherently violent and need the peace loving women to teach them a better way, etc. But there are ways to preserve his original intentions while also having more progressive thinking about both sexes.

[Justice]

I absolutely loathed Final Crisis, but have enjoyed his work on Superman and Batman. Warrior Wonder Woman interests a bit more. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see this interpretation as Wonder Woman was always meant to save the world through non-violent means. He's certainty gained my respect for having the courage to stick to an all non-violence book.

Also, this doesn't hurt:

Invisible_Vagina_Plane.jpg

[Outside_85]

Marston's Amazons were still warriors. They fought against armies who tried to conquer Amazonia, and battled their way to freedom after Hercules enslaved them. It just wasn't their only defining characteristic, and they didn't have anyone to fight while on their island anyway. The whole point of Marston choosing the Amazons was to deconstruct the misogynistic myth that created them. Women with power = obviously a bunch of violent creatures who would castrate a man on sight. That's the thinking that went into a lot of the original Amazon myths.

He went too far in the opposite direction in his thinking, that men are inherently violent and need the peace loving women to teach them a better way, etc. But there are ways to preserve his original intentions while also having more progressive thinking about both sexes.

I wouldn't say Marston was terribly adept at writing the Amazons as warriors, you are ofc correct they fought to free themselves and all that under his pen, but the heart of the matter is that Marston got just about all of his inspiration for their behavior from observing sorority communities. Which goes some distance to explain all the weird games the Amazons conducted.

I dont know if this is the place to suggest this, but in the event of the Amazons needing a revision from the bottom up; perhaps instead of studying school girls for your race of ancient immortals, perhaps one should study Tolkien's elves instead to instill them with a sort of ethereal quality they might uptain by having lived as long as they have.

[jimishim12]

Am I the only one who thinks having Wonder Woman a feminist peace bringing mediator of so much divine beauty, grace and perfection more sexist and offensive than a war seasoned, unfettered, somewhat questionable yet reasonable super woman of customs of ideals, honor and kickassery? Action Heroines get labeled as the softies in fiction enough as is. And while some may vary, I believe the role of action girls is always to project a woman's value as a fighter and a emotional stand in for real life women through acts of courage, determination, and sheer intimidation.

Diana in my eyes is Superman and Batman grown up to take on situations/principles they are too scared and uncertain to handle, like killing for the greater good and having clarity to know the situation decisively. Wondy's a more ruthless badass than Batman, and a more shining example of pure heartedness than superman, she is the ideal of truth itself. There is no middle ground for her.

[Agent Z]

Am I the only one who thinks having Wonder Woman a feminist peace bringing mediator of so much divine beauty, grace and perfection more sexist and offensive than a war seasoned, unfettered, somewhat questionable yet reasonable super woman of customs of ideals, honor and kickassery? Action Heroines get labeled as the softies in fiction enough as is. And while some may vary, I believe the role of action girls is always to project a woman's value as a fighter and a emotional stand in for real life women through acts of courage, determination, and sheer intimidation.

People want variety in female characters. It doesn't have to be limited to "generic action girl" or "damsel in distress".

Besides, most of the time when D.C hype Diana up as the most dangerous woman alive, they still have her play second fiddle to Batman and Superman. Might as well focus on other traits that have nothing to do with fighting if she's going to be so inept at it.

Action heroines get criticized for a variety of factors besides being "soft" (whatever the hell that means).

[Aioros22]

I just don`t find natural how suddently with Morrison is all about "how Marston wanted".