Comics Books Reviews: Wonder Woman: What makes her tick?

Wonder Woman by Brian Bolland

About a month ago, I quoted Tom Spurgeon and agreed with him that a major problem with getting a Wonder Woman TV series or movie off the ground is the tendency of writers to over-think the character. There was some good discussion in the comments that followed that post. Not all of it on-point, of course, but that’s the cool thing about conversations. It’s okay if they lead you away from where you started.

I’m thinking specifically of some comments around the middle of the thread where folks started to do the very thing that – on the surface – I said writers shouldn’t do: fuss with the character. That’s fine though, because a certain amount of fussing is necessary. Spurgeon even implied it in his original quote and some of the comments he made later. “Stop fussing” implies that some fussing is already being done and Spurgeon doesn’t appear to judge that. Taken literally, he’s just saying that there’s a time to put that away and just write some damn adventure stories. When he says in the comments, “embrace what you like and streamline past what you don’t,” he assumes that some thinking has been given to what you like and don’t about the character.

It’s the same point I made when I wrote, “While it’s important to know the character you’re telling a story about, the story itself doesn’t have to be an overt demonstration of how you’ve figured that out.” Figuring out the character and writing fun stories about her are two different things and should be kept separate, but they’re both important to do. Since that last post focused on the need for writing fun stories, this one’s about offering a suggestion on figuring Wonder Woman out. Particularly, how it’s not as hard as it’s made out to be.

Lynda Carter

For a lot of people my age, our introduction to Wonder Woman was through the Lynda Carter TV show. As Peter David pointed out in the comments to that other post, “If that show hit the airwaves for the first time today, exactly as it was, fans would be decrying it for extreme campiness.” That’s probably true, but it’s not the bad German accents or Steve Trevor’s incompetence that make people remember it so fondly. It was how honest Lynda Carter’s portrayal of Wonder Woman was. She completely sold the character as a real person and she was every bit as heroic and strong (not just physically, but spiritually and emotionally) as Superman or Batman any other superhero. And I think the memory of that completely strong, comfortable, confident woman is what audiences are looking for in not only a Wonder Woman TV show or movie, but the comics as well.

Wonder Woman should be the Sean Connery of her gender: men should want to be with her and women should want to be her. When Connery played Bond, he walked around every setting he found himself in as if he owned the place. Didn’t matter if it was his office, a hotel, or the villain’s headquarters, he was completely comfortable with himself. That’s how Wonder Woman should be.

Not aggressively so. Not strident. Connery never had to convince anyone through aggression that he was competent. You knew it by just looking at him. Wonder Woman should be the same way. That’s what sets her apart from all the other female superheroes with great hair, big boobs, and long, long legs. When she’s written and drawn (especially drawn!) correctly, she’s able to walk around in a frickin’ bathing suit and be completely at ease. She’s like the Sub-Mariner that way, only not so much a jerk about it. Sub-Mariner is another character who oozes confidence and so gets away with swim gear as a costume. It’s not the skimpiness of the outfit that’s attractive; it’s the way they carry themselves in it.

Wonder Woman #613

Caleb Mozzocco made a similar point recently on his blog while discussing all the fussing – by creators and fans – over Wonder Woman’s costume.

By making Wonder Woman wear pants, are they (and, by “they” I mean Jim Lee, DC Comics, David E. Kelley, Warner Brothers and/or whoever is advocating she cover up those bare legs) failing the enlightened view of the female body litmus test that Wonder Woman’s costume functions as? Are they seeing the wrong things when they see Wonder Woman’s flesh, thinking her a brazen, exhibitionist hussy and condemning her for it, or worrying that she will incite lust in others?

Almost 70 years after that story in All-Star Comics #8, are we still not at the point where we’re okay with an Amazon princess strutting around with bare legs, shoulders and arms?

It was actually that post that inspired this one. I’m not a purist who thinks that Wonder Woman’s costume should remain skimpy just because it’s always been that way. Hell, I think she should have lots of different costumes. Vary her look from issue to issue or story to story, only keeping a few, iconic elements. That would be cool. But covering her skin in the name of modesty isn’t the way to go. Wonder Woman’s above all that.

This is why I don’t care for George Perez’ run on the series. It gets praised a lot for its attention to Greek mythology and its strong characterization, but Perez’s Wonder Woman isn’t the strong, confident heroine that I want to read about. His Wonder Woman is a fish-out-of-water. She’s the new kid on the superhero block. She’s wide-eyed and innocent.

When Perez draws her flying she has an expression of joyous rapture. “Whee! I’m flying!”

Which I guess a lot of people liked, but seems really… I don’t know, girlish? I much prefer this image of her flying.

She’s still smiling and enjoying what’s going on, but she isn’t so “yipee!” about it. She’s more mature. Comfortable.

I even enjoy this downbeat depiction of her.

She’s being led away in handcuffs and she’s not happy about it, but she is calm and in control. There’s nothing happening to her that she isn’t letting happen and it gives you the feeling that indeed nothing could happen to her that she doesn’t let happen. That’s not true, of course. Stuff happens to Wonder Woman outside of her control all the time. It has to in order to keep things interesting. But she creates the illusion that she can handle anything. Just like Bond.

I’m not a woman and don’t claim to speak for women, but I know a lot of women and all of them who’ve been willing to talk to me about it tell me that self-image and confidence are huge issues for them. If Wonder Woman has a deeper meaning than just being a generic female superhero (and she should), it ought to be about inspiring women and young girls to have confidence in themselves. That’s an easy thing to grasp about the character that sets her apart from other superheroes and gives her a mission in this world. But because it’s so integrally connected to who she is as a character, it doesn’t require every story to be about feminine confidence. To Spurgeon’s original point, she can have an infinite variety of adventures with the invisible plane or golden lasso or kangaroos or whatever else you dig and as long as it doesn’t change who she is as a person, she’s still inspirational and on-message.

June 22, 2011 @ 12:00 PM by Michael MayTagged: DC, wonder woman

11 CommentsStuartJune 22, 2011 at 12:19 pm

Great article. Love the covers.

That Wonder Woman doesn’t yet have her own modern movie is a bit of a disgrace. I loved what Marvel did with She-Hulk, that was a very female friendly comic, positive and peppy, in the vein you might have been hoping for.

I think the other problem is casting. Who do you find to play an Amazonian goddess? I would have said Angelina Jolie until she stole another woman’s husband.

Other than that I was pretty underwhelmed by the canned TV show’s choice. The costume looked daft and awkward too.

coconutphoneJune 22, 2011 at 12:20 pm

I agree. It’s confidence that sets her apart from most other heroes. She’s usually not racked wth doubt or guilt or angst. I like her when she’s at ease with herself and confidant.

Wesley SmithJune 22, 2011 at 12:51 pm

As someone who’s old enough to remember picking up Perez’s first issue, I think the best incarnation of Wonder Woman since then was Greg Rucka’s Themyscrian embassy years. An super-hero is only as good as his or her villains and supporting cast, and Rucka’s was the best Wonder Woman’s had in the past 25 years.

I think the problem with Diana at this point is not whether or not she has any place in the modern age, but whether or not she’s been redefined to death. In the years since the original Crisis she’s had, what, 6-7 MAJOR redirections with all-new supporting casts? It’s kind of ironic, because in her own way she’s lost her identity just as much as Donna Troy has. The Powers That Be–either at DC or WB–need to pick one characterization and stick with it for more than a couple years before we can seriously discuss how she’s being perceived by everyone else.

Simon DelMonteJune 22, 2011 at 1:18 pm

I remember liking what I read of the Perez era. It was intelligent, well written and fun. But for the life of me, I can’t recall if it was Wonder Woman that I liked. Also, I didn’t stick around that long. As usually happens with Diana, she never quite grabs my attention.

Which is why my admiration for the Rucka era on WW stands out, though after the fact. Rucka got Diana. No surprise given that his writes strong (but human) women on a regular basis and in many genres. He also had an idea of what to do to keep her busy..

Elayne RiggsJune 22, 2011 at 1:22 pm

This might be subtitled “What Does (Wonder) Woman Want?” Interestingly, I never see female readers asking this question, only male ones.

ShellyJune 22, 2011 at 1:56 pm

Well, I’m a woman, in my (cough cough) 50s, and I don’t claim to speak for all women, because (surprise surprise) we’re not all the same. We do not all think the same. We do not all feel the same way.

You made some excellent points. And I agree with most of them.

I started reading Wonder Woman in the ’60s. I am one of the people who actually enjoyed her powerless days with I Ching because it was very Diana Rigg/Avengers-ish. Around that time, I discovered Modesty Blaise, and I think that the powerless Diana was rather close in form to Modesty if not tone. I’m a big Supergirl fan and I adore Oracle and Black Canary, but I have to say my favorite female comics character is Modesty. And Modesty would strip at a moment’s notice if it would help her accomplish her goal, even to get some thug to gape at her while she’s kicking him in the nuts. Now that’s confidence!

I agree about Lynda Carter. She was everything Diana and Wonder Woman should be on screen. I did not like what little I read of the Perez’ run on the title and I thought Rucka’s version was too talky/boring. Gail Simone was doing a good job, but not as good as she does with quirkier or darker characters (Secret Six, Birds of Prey). I don’t know why so many writers have trouble writing her. And I don’t know why every writer I can remember who had a regular run on WW felt the need to reinvent her. Even when writers do that with Batman or Superman, it usually hasn’t felt as jarring as with WW. I think that lack of consistency, of writing the essence of WW, has hurt her in that so many people feel the need to figure her out.

Mythology will always be a part of Diana’s life/WW’s origin, but why can’t she just have adventures like the other characters headlining books.

Not that it matters anymore in the comics. I’ll be dropping most of DC’s titles come Sept. But I still would love to see WW back on TV or on the big screen. She’s earned it. And she deserves it.

Michael MayJune 22, 2011 at 2:09 pm

Elayne, why do you think that is?

JamieJune 22, 2011 at 2:35 pm

Honestly, I’ve never understood the appeal of Lynda Carter or the Wonder Woman series. I like the Wonder Woman character on the page, but the series and the actor never captured my interest whatsoever.

Apollokid9000June 22, 2011 at 3:56 pm

Of DC’s Big 3, Wonder Woman is currently the most interesting. Why it doesn’t seem like that’s the majorities’ viewpoint is due to the lack of confidence amongst the hire-ups who have to “protect” WW.
I would love to see a take on WW similar to Grant Morrison Batman run in that “everything counts”.
The original Martson stories, the I Ching years, the Lynda Carter show, the Perez run, etc.

Stop running away from the characters histories, especially if you’re only rushing to rewrite every few years.
Wonder Womans’ early stories had bondage in them. Deal with it.
Aquaman has the lame power to talk to sea life. Deal with it.
Comic characters have some interesting histories.
Some say complex. Others say complicated.
Embrace it, deal with it. Use the past as fuel for the next, interesting stories.

Alas, showing how interesting the character is is viewed as “too costly”.

AcerJune 22, 2011 at 4:35 pm

Argh, again somebody brings up the stereotype of Aquaman just being the guy who talks to fish. Sheesh! If Super Friends had depicted him using his other powers, then we wouldn’t have that lame joke recurring. Please, I beg you, all of you, convince people that Aquaman isn’t boring!

Son of BaldwinJune 22, 2011 at 4:53 pm

“I’m not a woman and don’t claim to speak for women, but I know a lot of women and all of them who’ve been willing to talk to me about it tell me that self-image and confidence are huge issues for them. If Wonder Woman has a deeper meaning than just being a generic female superhero (and she should), it ought to be about inspiring women and young girls to have confidence in themselves.”

Don’t limit her influence. She should serve this same function men and boys as well.