![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccatoriaSoooo, the New York Post has an article with a spoiler about Wonder Woman #3, pertaining to her origins in the relaunch. Frankly my general response is that I want to wait and see how it plays out, but I do have a bunch of thoughts beyond that. So, under a cut they go:
So, recap, turns out that Diana, rather than being made out of clay and given life, a soul, and super cool powerz by a bunch of Greek Goddesses, is in fact, the daughter of Zeus.
Honestly, while it's not a plot twist I particularly like (though not one I hate either, as I'll explain), it is one I saw coming pretty much since the #3 solicit came out declaring that Diana would learn a secret her mother had kept from her all her life and that Hera would freak the fuck out about it, complete with a picture of a shattered clay statue of Diana. Plus another interview had an editor or...some other higher up talking about the series and saying that, to paraphrase, "without revealing too much, we'll be meeting Wonder Woman's family". Which, yeah, it was fairly telegraphed. So even though I didn't really think they would do that, I did have it in the back of my mind as a possibility so my reaction now is a bit more...measured?
Basically I get why people are freaking out about it a bit, because it's a bigger shift in her origins than "one set of greek gods" to "another greek god" because of the thematics behind it, but honestly I think it hurts Hippolyta's character more than Diana's. But I'll get to that.
Firstly there's the baseline gender issue. Wonder Woman now derives her powers from a man instead of a bunch of women. Wonder Woman's fabulously queer origin story is now very heteronormative.
I think these are actually two pretty separate issues, and it's the second one that bothers me more.
To the first one, I've written before about how Wonder Woman is amazing because she makes everyone uncomfortable. And part of that post is about how the Amazons and her origin are hugely problematic to keep OR to change. I got into it in more detail in that post, and I'm not trying to dis Diana's Amazonian heritage which is one of the bestest things about her, but ultimately, it's way too easy to see in Themyscira a two-dimensional stereotype of second wave feminism; a bunch of angry, militant isolationists. It's almost impossible to tell, at times, whether the Amazons represent a group that makes people uncomfortable because it's truth-telling feminism or because they're a throwback to bondage-inspired caricatures of "feminism" invented by men who didn't know what they were talking about. Probably because both are true.
So you have this militant exclusion of anything male that's way to easy to tip over into stereotype and fetishisation, but if you try to add anything male to it, it feels just as awkward because it's like a negation of the principle.
The bottom line being, if Wonder Woman is Zeus' daughter, on the gender issues, I can see why people would have problems with it. Personally if I wanted her to be the daughter of one of the gods I would have gone with Athena. Made her the sole god to grant life to the clay Diana. She's already Diana's primary patron. She jumped full-formed from the brow of Zeus so it's in keeping to have her create a daughter in the same way and you gain the simplicity of saying that Wonder Woman is a Greek demigoddess while also keeping her queer origin.
But, okay, if it's going to be Zeus, my issue is actually less with the gender issues alone because, as I said, I think that's an unwinnable clusterfuck already, and possibly the answer is just to accept that mess and embrace the weirdness. If Diana herself is still raised by a bunch of Amazon moms, then a consolation prize we may get will be the subversion of all those father-son legacy-refusal angst tropes that boys always get and girls never do. Is subverting the prodigal son idea enough to justify it? Who knows, and who knows if it'll happen, but it is something I think could be cool, even if not cool enough.
On the queer origin story stuff, yeah, as I said, that kind of sucks. Again, it could be mitigated by execution. I loved the way Simone presented her as the daughter of all the Amazons. The post I linked above also made note of a bunch of uncomfortable gender stuff in that story too, which is part of why I say that in some ways I think uncomfortable weird gender stuff is par for the course with Wonder Woman, for better or worse. It's kind of always been there and that's not always a bad thing. But...I will really be crossing my fingers that even if her literal creation ceases to be this queer, her upbringing and social origin, at least, will be. As I said, this is my primary concern from what introducing a father for her does in thematic terms.
In terms of the actual characters, I'm pretty much unworried insofar as Diana herself. She will be the same as ever, and there's the potential for some really interesting character moments when she finds out that, forgive me if you hate the development, I'm cautiously looking forward to.
The one thing I hope is made clear, though, is Diana's position relative to other demigods. Her creation from clay was fairly unique, so while "demigod" was a good descriptive term, it wasn't literally accurate and therefore not proscriptive in terms of other characters. She's supposed to be as powerful as Superman, one of the most powerful beings on Earth unless you start counting actual, well, gods or giant space aliens. Given Zola's situation, we know that Zeus is still up to his old tricks; is Diana now one of hundreds of bastard demigods running around? What makes her so special? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that Athena, Aphrodite, et al, are still her patrons. Speculatively, I think she was always told that she was formed from clay and given gifts by them, so it seems likely that she was given those gifts by them, which would account for her higher power levels. I guess...I don't want to be a supernerd about it, and ultimately I just want to be sure she's being written as the powerhouse she is, but it is something that the supernerd in me is...nerdy about.
Hippolyta's character, on the other hand, I feel bad for. I think it undermines her a lot more than Diana. I've spoken about how I think adding a man into her origin or vehemently denying a man take part in her origin are both problematic depending on execution and perspective, but I think that this storyline runs the risk of painting Diana's mother as a hypocrite - as someone who founded a society of women, eschewed contact with men, slept with one, had a child, then covered it up. I sincerely hope there's a better reason than that. I also hope it's not one that involved rape. ESPECIALLY if Hercules is still in canon. Because honestly, that's super weird with the Zeus revelation already. o.O
So, there you have it.
I'm...surprisingly unpanicked by it. I'm not thrilled about it. I see problems. I think the biggest is the potential for it to trash Hippolyta's character and the near-certainty that Diana's origin will now be less massively gay.
Perhaps I'm the hypocrite, but I'm honestly willing to wait and see how the gender issues play out with regards to the comic itself and Diana's character.
The tragic fact is that this origin probably WILL seem more accessible to new readers or people who just didn't like the character before. I mean, that sucks, and doesn't mean that it's a better story, but "daughter of Zeus" is something very simple and very iconic that people can grab hold of and understand instantly and I think that's genuinely something that has been a struggle for Wonder Woman to achieve, despite being so visually iconic. And yes, gender issues are a large part of why she's never gotten enough attention for her existing origin to really become that iconic (lord knows "last survivor of a dying planet who got superpowers due to the sun" isn't inherently more complex than, "made of clay then given life by a pantheon of Greek goddesses"), and now we're back to the way that Wonder Woman exists in the centre of a clusterfuck of gender issues, and I honestly don't know at what point you cave and make changes to make her more accessible to an inherently sexist world, or at what point you accept that she will never BE as iconic as Superman and Batman. If this change manages to make her more accessible and popular and doesn't fundamentally change her character or her behaviour or her attitudes, is it worth it?
I don't have an answer, but I think it's a question worth asking.
I guess, ultimately, I'm going to wait and see. But I think it could be good. I think more so than many other changes, this massively, massively depends on execution. And the first issue was good. So...I'm going to wait and see.
So, recap, turns out that Diana, rather than being made out of clay and given life, a soul, and super cool powerz by a bunch of Greek Goddesses, is in fact, the daughter of Zeus.
Honestly, while it's not a plot twist I particularly like (though not one I hate either, as I'll explain), it is one I saw coming pretty much since the #3 solicit came out declaring that Diana would learn a secret her mother had kept from her all her life and that Hera would freak the fuck out about it, complete with a picture of a shattered clay statue of Diana. Plus another interview had an editor or...some other higher up talking about the series and saying that, to paraphrase, "without revealing too much, we'll be meeting Wonder Woman's family". Which, yeah, it was fairly telegraphed. So even though I didn't really think they would do that, I did have it in the back of my mind as a possibility so my reaction now is a bit more...measured?
Basically I get why people are freaking out about it a bit, because it's a bigger shift in her origins than "one set of greek gods" to "another greek god" because of the thematics behind it, but honestly I think it hurts Hippolyta's character more than Diana's. But I'll get to that.
Firstly there's the baseline gender issue. Wonder Woman now derives her powers from a man instead of a bunch of women. Wonder Woman's fabulously queer origin story is now very heteronormative.
I think these are actually two pretty separate issues, and it's the second one that bothers me more.
To the first one, I've written before about how Wonder Woman is amazing because she makes everyone uncomfortable. And part of that post is about how the Amazons and her origin are hugely problematic to keep OR to change. I got into it in more detail in that post, and I'm not trying to dis Diana's Amazonian heritage which is one of the bestest things about her, but ultimately, it's way too easy to see in Themyscira a two-dimensional stereotype of second wave feminism; a bunch of angry, militant isolationists. It's almost impossible to tell, at times, whether the Amazons represent a group that makes people uncomfortable because it's truth-telling feminism or because they're a throwback to bondage-inspired caricatures of "feminism" invented by men who didn't know what they were talking about. Probably because both are true.
So you have this militant exclusion of anything male that's way to easy to tip over into stereotype and fetishisation, but if you try to add anything male to it, it feels just as awkward because it's like a negation of the principle.
The bottom line being, if Wonder Woman is Zeus' daughter, on the gender issues, I can see why people would have problems with it. Personally if I wanted her to be the daughter of one of the gods I would have gone with Athena. Made her the sole god to grant life to the clay Diana. She's already Diana's primary patron. She jumped full-formed from the brow of Zeus so it's in keeping to have her create a daughter in the same way and you gain the simplicity of saying that Wonder Woman is a Greek demigoddess while also keeping her queer origin.
But, okay, if it's going to be Zeus, my issue is actually less with the gender issues alone because, as I said, I think that's an unwinnable clusterfuck already, and possibly the answer is just to accept that mess and embrace the weirdness. If Diana herself is still raised by a bunch of Amazon moms, then a consolation prize we may get will be the subversion of all those father-son legacy-refusal angst tropes that boys always get and girls never do. Is subverting the prodigal son idea enough to justify it? Who knows, and who knows if it'll happen, but it is something I think could be cool, even if not cool enough.
On the queer origin story stuff, yeah, as I said, that kind of sucks. Again, it could be mitigated by execution. I loved the way Simone presented her as the daughter of all the Amazons. The post I linked above also made note of a bunch of uncomfortable gender stuff in that story too, which is part of why I say that in some ways I think uncomfortable weird gender stuff is par for the course with Wonder Woman, for better or worse. It's kind of always been there and that's not always a bad thing. But...I will really be crossing my fingers that even if her literal creation ceases to be this queer, her upbringing and social origin, at least, will be. As I said, this is my primary concern from what introducing a father for her does in thematic terms.
In terms of the actual characters, I'm pretty much unworried insofar as Diana herself. She will be the same as ever, and there's the potential for some really interesting character moments when she finds out that, forgive me if you hate the development, I'm cautiously looking forward to.
The one thing I hope is made clear, though, is Diana's position relative to other demigods. Her creation from clay was fairly unique, so while "demigod" was a good descriptive term, it wasn't literally accurate and therefore not proscriptive in terms of other characters. She's supposed to be as powerful as Superman, one of the most powerful beings on Earth unless you start counting actual, well, gods or giant space aliens. Given Zola's situation, we know that Zeus is still up to his old tricks; is Diana now one of hundreds of bastard demigods running around? What makes her so special? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that Athena, Aphrodite, et al, are still her patrons. Speculatively, I think she was always told that she was formed from clay and given gifts by them, so it seems likely that she was given those gifts by them, which would account for her higher power levels. I guess...I don't want to be a supernerd about it, and ultimately I just want to be sure she's being written as the powerhouse she is, but it is something that the supernerd in me is...nerdy about.
Hippolyta's character, on the other hand, I feel bad for. I think it undermines her a lot more than Diana. I've spoken about how I think adding a man into her origin or vehemently denying a man take part in her origin are both problematic depending on execution and perspective, but I think that this storyline runs the risk of painting Diana's mother as a hypocrite - as someone who founded a society of women, eschewed contact with men, slept with one, had a child, then covered it up. I sincerely hope there's a better reason than that. I also hope it's not one that involved rape. ESPECIALLY if Hercules is still in canon. Because honestly, that's super weird with the Zeus revelation already. o.O
So, there you have it.
I'm...surprisingly unpanicked by it. I'm not thrilled about it. I see problems. I think the biggest is the potential for it to trash Hippolyta's character and the near-certainty that Diana's origin will now be less massively gay.
Perhaps I'm the hypocrite, but I'm honestly willing to wait and see how the gender issues play out with regards to the comic itself and Diana's character.
The tragic fact is that this origin probably WILL seem more accessible to new readers or people who just didn't like the character before. I mean, that sucks, and doesn't mean that it's a better story, but "daughter of Zeus" is something very simple and very iconic that people can grab hold of and understand instantly and I think that's genuinely something that has been a struggle for Wonder Woman to achieve, despite being so visually iconic. And yes, gender issues are a large part of why she's never gotten enough attention for her existing origin to really become that iconic (lord knows "last survivor of a dying planet who got superpowers due to the sun" isn't inherently more complex than, "made of clay then given life by a pantheon of Greek goddesses"), and now we're back to the way that Wonder Woman exists in the centre of a clusterfuck of gender issues, and I honestly don't know at what point you cave and make changes to make her more accessible to an inherently sexist world, or at what point you accept that she will never BE as iconic as Superman and Batman. If this change manages to make her more accessible and popular and doesn't fundamentally change her character or her behaviour or her attitudes, is it worth it?
I don't have an answer, but I think it's a question worth asking.
I guess, ultimately, I'm going to wait and see. But I think it could be good. I think more so than many other changes, this massively, massively depends on execution. And the first issue was good. So...I'm going to wait and see.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-10-15 02:48 pm (UTC)I have issue with simplifying her origin this way if the goal is to make her more accessible. Why couldn't people understand her original origin? why does it need to be dumbed down?
I agree with all your points and really, in light of everything else that's happened to women in DC in the past and with this reboot, it's another strike against.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-15 07:35 pm (UTC)But, um, they do, so they can't be ignored. So it gets messy and...blah.
The accessibility is a good point. Like I said her origin really isn't that complicated - it just lacks exposure. But I do think that it makes people sub/consciously uncomfortable. Which is a shitty reason to change stuff because, well, duh, but I don't know. I think it's just safer to make her Zeus' daughter while still seeming like it might be enough of a promotion to the top of the mythology foodchain that people won't flip their shit about it. And that's where you get that line I don't like to consider about how far you compromise to get exposure. And stuff.
Baaaah, I dunno. I'm not seeing red like I did with Starfire and I'm not moved to defend it like I was about Catwoman. I think I'm very much wait-and-see.
I will say that I loved the first issue, so I think that it'll be a good story. It just remains to be seen if it's a good thing to do with the character.
...waffly reply is waffly. :/