Looking Out For No. 1
If Rich Johnston's latest report about the future of Wonder Woman is accurate, it could be good for the character -- so why am I still worried?
[SPOILERS behind the link above and the one below.]
For those of you who didn't follow the link to CBR, Johnston reports that Wonder Woman will restart with Volume 3 #1, by the new creative team of Allan Heinberg and Terry Dodson. Heinberg's Young Avengers has been well-received, and hasn't been shy about tackling the same kinds of social issues that WW v.2 often explored. Personally, my only Heinberg exposure has been as the co-writer of recent JLA issues, but I've enjoyed those. Of course, Terry Dodson is a fine artist who also draws shapely women well, so he's more than adequate.
However, this smells like a fix for something I didn't think was broken. Even Diana's role in "Sacrifice" didn't seem out of character for her. During his tenure, Greg Rucka seemed to have pulled together all the political, mythological, and fantastic elements of Diana's post-Crisis setup into a unique narrative. If his run concludes with Diana losing any of the elements which make her more than just a superhero, it can only hurt her in the long run.
Of course, new #1s usually signal comprehensive reboots, including replacing the title character. Accordingly, another Internet rumor has Diana dying and/or being replaced by Donna Troy, either of which would be a colossal mistake. Just in the post-Crisis era, Diana has "died" twice (1991, 1997) and been replaced twice (1995, 1997). If Donna replaced her, it would make Wonder Woman's history exponentially more complicated, and it would practically defeat the purpose of bringing Donna back from the dead. (Why revive someone just to replace someone you're planning to kill?)
Still, even if that doesn't happen, there must still be some big shakeup in the works, and I can't help but think it will be related to the aftermath of "Sacrifice." If it were up to me, I'd have Diana become full-time ruler of Themyscira and let Donna take over as the island's ambassador. Fans may be expecting Donna to land in Teen Titans, Outsiders, or even JLA or JSA, but making her a major part of Wonder Woman v.3 would strengthen her mythological roots in a (relatively) new environment. Donna's relationship with Diana has always been discussed more than shown, so such a setup would help develop their unique bond. Besides, as the nicest woman in DC history, Donna may well be a natural diplomat.
Obviously, that won't happen either, because my predictions are never right. Wonder Woman v.3 may well begin with Diana on trial at The Hague and Donna married to a resurrected Trevor Barnes. A new #1, coupled with the post-Infinite Crisis "one year later..." gimmick, would be the perfect excuse for DC to tell new readers they don't have to approach each new issue as if it were an Olympian "West Wing." In other words, a new #1 signals to me that the book will be more user-friendly and less challenging.
However, the history of Wonder Woman v.2 has been filled with challenges to the longtime reader. George Perez did away with the invisible plane and secret identity, instead beefing up Diana's power of flight and making her an ambassador. Bill Messner-Loebs had Diana working behind the counter at a taco stand. Greg Rucka started his run by capitalizing on Diana's status as a public figure and subjecting her to the 24-hour news cycle. With "Sacrifice," Rucka has now made it very easy for DC to punish Diana by remaking Wonder Woman into a more straightforward superhero book.
That would be a mistake. Wonder Woman is, at the moment, the most complex of DC's "Big Three" characters, and the only one who seems to be keeping her head throughout all the pre-Infinite Crisis carnage. It's possible that Rucka is steering Diana off a cliff, but it's hard for me to believe that he would have invested so much in her and her book only to roll it all back to a more pedestrian status quo.
In any event, future WW writers shouldn't jettison Rucka's complicated themes, characters, and subplots. For the past couple of years, Wonder Woman has been a great synthesis of fantastic elements in a realistic setting, which seems to be the standard for any superhero comic. I am cautiously optimistic that a creative team on the order of Heinberg and Dodson would follow in this tradition of continuing to develop Diana's potential. If there is to be a Wonder Woman v.3, its creators owe the character the dedication to her evolution that has made the current volume both unconventional and successful.
[SPOILERS behind the link above and the one below.]
For those of you who didn't follow the link to CBR, Johnston reports that Wonder Woman will restart with Volume 3 #1, by the new creative team of Allan Heinberg and Terry Dodson. Heinberg's Young Avengers has been well-received, and hasn't been shy about tackling the same kinds of social issues that WW v.2 often explored. Personally, my only Heinberg exposure has been as the co-writer of recent JLA issues, but I've enjoyed those. Of course, Terry Dodson is a fine artist who also draws shapely women well, so he's more than adequate.
However, this smells like a fix for something I didn't think was broken. Even Diana's role in "Sacrifice" didn't seem out of character for her. During his tenure, Greg Rucka seemed to have pulled together all the political, mythological, and fantastic elements of Diana's post-Crisis setup into a unique narrative. If his run concludes with Diana losing any of the elements which make her more than just a superhero, it can only hurt her in the long run.
Of course, new #1s usually signal comprehensive reboots, including replacing the title character. Accordingly, another Internet rumor has Diana dying and/or being replaced by Donna Troy, either of which would be a colossal mistake. Just in the post-Crisis era, Diana has "died" twice (1991, 1997) and been replaced twice (1995, 1997). If Donna replaced her, it would make Wonder Woman's history exponentially more complicated, and it would practically defeat the purpose of bringing Donna back from the dead. (Why revive someone just to replace someone you're planning to kill?)
Still, even if that doesn't happen, there must still be some big shakeup in the works, and I can't help but think it will be related to the aftermath of "Sacrifice." If it were up to me, I'd have Diana become full-time ruler of Themyscira and let Donna take over as the island's ambassador. Fans may be expecting Donna to land in Teen Titans, Outsiders, or even JLA or JSA, but making her a major part of Wonder Woman v.3 would strengthen her mythological roots in a (relatively) new environment. Donna's relationship with Diana has always been discussed more than shown, so such a setup would help develop their unique bond. Besides, as the nicest woman in DC history, Donna may well be a natural diplomat.
Obviously, that won't happen either, because my predictions are never right. Wonder Woman v.3 may well begin with Diana on trial at The Hague and Donna married to a resurrected Trevor Barnes. A new #1, coupled with the post-Infinite Crisis "one year later..." gimmick, would be the perfect excuse for DC to tell new readers they don't have to approach each new issue as if it were an Olympian "West Wing." In other words, a new #1 signals to me that the book will be more user-friendly and less challenging.
However, the history of Wonder Woman v.2 has been filled with challenges to the longtime reader. George Perez did away with the invisible plane and secret identity, instead beefing up Diana's power of flight and making her an ambassador. Bill Messner-Loebs had Diana working behind the counter at a taco stand. Greg Rucka started his run by capitalizing on Diana's status as a public figure and subjecting her to the 24-hour news cycle. With "Sacrifice," Rucka has now made it very easy for DC to punish Diana by remaking Wonder Woman into a more straightforward superhero book.
That would be a mistake. Wonder Woman is, at the moment, the most complex of DC's "Big Three" characters, and the only one who seems to be keeping her head throughout all the pre-Infinite Crisis carnage. It's possible that Rucka is steering Diana off a cliff, but it's hard for me to believe that he would have invested so much in her and her book only to roll it all back to a more pedestrian status quo.
In any event, future WW writers shouldn't jettison Rucka's complicated themes, characters, and subplots. For the past couple of years, Wonder Woman has been a great synthesis of fantastic elements in a realistic setting, which seems to be the standard for any superhero comic. I am cautiously optimistic that a creative team on the order of Heinberg and Dodson would follow in this tradition of continuing to develop Diana's potential. If there is to be a Wonder Woman v.3, its creators owe the character the dedication to her evolution that has made the current volume both unconventional and successful.
posted by Tom Bondurant @ 3:30 PM
3 Comments:
I dunno, Rucka and Rags have bored the shit out of me. At least Heinberg's YA and JLA have been exciting, and Dodson's way more dynamic than Rags.
Rucka's original artist was Drew Johnson, who I would describe (crudely) as a "softer" version of the Dodson/Adam Hughes curveaceous style. His stuff suited Rucka a little better than Rags does, although I have nothing against Rags.
Like I said, cautiously optimistic about Heinberg/Dodson if that turns out to be the case.
I feel your fears about this... it seems to me, as the creators shape the flow of the stories that they have all agreed to highlight the negative repercussions of what Diana has done in Sacrifice. I mean, it's not like a ton of characters haven't been forced to kill in action, and truthfully Diana's actions were a brilliant show of her character. Right from Diana loosing her cool over the revelations of Dr. Light in Adventures of Superman, and the panels in which she kills Max, we see a fully realized woman who personifies speaking and acting in a coherent manner. I'm more than a little annoyed that DC's creators are setting her up for a major fall, a type of greek hubris to the max. I remember the Flash commenting on how he didn't think of Diana as human, but the strength of her character has never seemed MORE human than how she is now. It's annoying that Batman has gotten off pretty light for all of his involvement with Brother Eye and the impending OMAC crisis, but WW's role in it seems to be leaving a large blot on her legacy. Also, it's not hard to see that they are cleaning the way for Donna Troy to take the ropes... you'll notice that Wonder Woman's presence in the DCU is growing smaller, if you notice the preview cover images for the December solicitations WW is only on two covers that month - one has her struggling against OMACs the other has her almost hiding behind a flank of Amazons. Meanwhile from September on, Donna Troy is getting one amazing "look at how tough and cool I am" cover after another. I think it's a bad move, only in that seems to be a real knock on Diana, a character that has spent so long struggling to achieve the tone she has today. I figure it's also a marketing move, as you can't really have Batman without Bruce Wayne and the tragedy that forms his life. You can't have Superman without an orphaned baby from space raised in Kanasas. But you can have anyone be a Wonder Woman, as long as they carry the tiara, the braclets, and the lasso, is tall and tough, with dark hair... I don't think "DIANA" or Diana Prince was ever essential to Wonder Woman... so I don't think in DC/Warner's eyes, Donna Troy as Wonder Woman will be that big a shift for the icon in general.
Post a Comment
<< Home