InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Sleep"

bluefall (bluefall) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-03-28 23:07:00

Entry tags:

char: wonder woman/diana of themyscira, creator: doug mahnke, creator: joe kelly, group: justice league of america, series: when wondy was awesome, series: world of wondy

When Wondy was Awesome, part 14 (Golden Perfect)
Thus far, I've mostly been showing Diana at her best; her defining moments of triumph and growth and victory. Diana being who she is, that is most of the picture; heroes are heroes because they get it right, unlike the rest of us. But even Diana fucks up sometimes, and, like Clark or Hal or Babs or anyone with that kind of crazy power, her fuck-ups can be catastrophic.

But entertaining!

So, let us observe one of these fuck-ups, by moving into the year 2002 and the Kelly era of JLA vol 3. It seems to me that Joe Kelly is very fond of Diana; he writes her in the forefront of the team and generally pretty well, with the exception of the idiotic Bruce/Diana romance (which is not only inappropriate on its own terms, but often causes him to diminish her for the sake of Bruce's masculinity). That comes later in his run, though, and we're here to look at his fabulous first arc, "Golden Perfect."

The timing here is pretty much immediately after "Our Worlds at War," although Diana's not being drawn with the Cheetah scar over her eye, so we're presumably post-Circe's battle of the sexes. Our story begins in an Athenean Women's Shelter, or a Wonder Woman Foundation home, or a Mindy Mayer building or whatever the hell they're calling them at that particular moment. This one is being run by actual amazons, and a woman speaking an unidentifiable language has come with her son, seeking sanctuary.

She has been chased.

We then jump to California, where Diana is helping J'onn face some inner demons with the lasso.

J'onn and Diana: they have a bond, folks. Also, I talked about this in more depth in re: her herself in the League of One post and will get around to it in terms of other people more fully with the Max stuff, but notice here yet another example of Diana neither fearing nor judging the most ugly and frightening inner, secret impulses of those around her.

Look! Diana has a sense of humor! And also, has Polly on the brain. A fair number of them got cut for space, but for those with the trade who're playing along at home, take a shot every time Diana says "Mother" in this arc and you'll get pretty damn drunk.

Um, yes, Plas. The correct answer is yes. (Kelly is not, particularly, fair to Plas, I think, but we're not here for him.)

The message, of course, is about the fight at the shelter, and the woman who was being protected there. The amazons failed to keep the monster from taking her son, and the JLA is debating getting involved.

Note Diana used the lasso on Ailani and knows her story is accurate. It is absolutely beyond question that Ailani's life in Jarhanpur was hell, and her child is a prisoner. That will be important in a minute.

So off they all go to the magic city Jarhanpur, only to discover that it is, apparently, a paradise. The people are happy, the architecture is glorious, and there's nary a whiff of brimstone nor a weeping child in sight. Diana, knowing from the lasso that this can't be taken at face value, is skeptical. Agressively so.

Diana calls for an instantaneous mental conference. Once again, I love these scenes for what they say about our heroes' self-perception. Diana's is totally beautiful, but I'm also a particular fan of Clark's Farmboy-in-a-cape.

Even though virtually no time at all has passed in the real world, Rama Khan is aware of their conference and, in fury at their "conniving," has forcibly expelled the lot of them from Jarhanpur.

Naturally, this results in a big fight. Diana is dead set on not leaving without the child, even though Rama Khan calls on the very earth to kind of whomp the whole League, badly. So she falls back on her old standby of using the lasso to force a powerful opponent to see the truth.

Ailani is right. Rama Khan is right. Diana is paralyzed.

The lasso, the unbreakable magic lasso, dissolves to shreds in her hands.

Minor digression here. J'onn and Supes both suffer from power glut. I don't mean in the sense that they're too powerful; it's that they have too *many* powers. Supes especially has so many powers that his powers have powers, and many of them are random and not easily connected by his theme as a hero. And I'm not even talking pre-Crisis here. This is true to the point that many of those powers don't see use for an entire author's run because he simply forgets the heroes in question even have them.

Diana, though, has it even worse than either of them. Her communion with animals and her immunity to fire are kind of off-beat and frequently forgotten, her resistance to and ability to sense magic is almost always forgotten; but I'd say her absolute most confused and underutilized gift is her at-will plane shift, the ability to wander freely around other planes of existence. Along with visiting Olympus whenever she likes, she's poached in the fields of the sun for healing golden fleece to restore a man to health, communed with Pan to understand insanity and save herself from Joker venom, and hunted for her mother's spirit in the realm of myth and metaphor. You can see why this doesn't get much play; it's too powerful and too ill-defined (try keeping someone in prison who can shift sideways off to another dimension with a thought). But it's nevertheless an established ability, and I give Kelly great credit for using it here and using it well.

Diana's being kind of childish here, but I can sympathize. The thing that is the very center of everything she is and has ever believed in has suddenly stopped making sense, and she's gone on an astral walkabout to find the Moirae and ask them what the hell is going on before she snaps completely. I would kind of want my friends to leave me to my self-hatred too.

Hmn. Here's your Runaways Skrull problem, right here. J'onn says he's asexual, and given that he's a shapeshifter, I'd like to believe him, but considering his behavior in everything else I've ever seen him in, he certainly seems to identify strongly as male, so... yeah, not so much.

That aside, the point of this is mostly that Diana needs a hug.

Meanwhile, in the non-astral planes where the rest of us have to live, weird shit is happening.

Funny, we are the center of the multiverse. I think the center of the universe would require time travel, though.

Incidentally, Rama Khan is still an asshole.

Note the general trend here - Earth as the center of the universe, women falling prey to a nusery rhyme. Truth has become subjective. Here, I'll let Atom explain it.

Gee, anyone have any ideas about whose fault this is?

Diana finally makes her way to the top of her astral mountain and finds the Fates waiting... covered in bugs and accusing her of rank arrogance.

Diana then disappears off the map completely; the League can't find her and J'onn can't touch her mind, and they're too busy for an exhaustive search because they're fighting the collective subjective consciousness of all humanity. The moon turns to cheese. The South really does start to rise again. Gods show up in ways that signal impending armageddon. And Batman fails to figure out the Riddler's riddles.

Batman does figure out what happened with Diana, sort of, and that she's gone to the obvious place.

J'onn makes a very good point here (also, I like how he says "we" even though this is all on Diana - it's a nice note of solidarity). The politics, particularly the race politics, of this arc are fairly troubling on some levels. But I give Kelly props for acknowledging that, and for the fact that the entire point of this story is that this decision isn't a binary right-or-wrong call. Still, this is a very dangerously white JLA to be telling this story with.

Oh, yeah, and as you might have figured, GL is Hal there because most of the world still thinks of Hal, not Kyle, as the League's "real" Green Lantern. I love this story. It hits like, two thirds of my literary kinks all at once.

Let's go back to Diana, shall we?

She's standing around in Jarhanpur, covered in the centipedes and other icky bugs that were crawling on the Moirae before, which are apparently lies given form. She's totally sanguine about this, which I have to say I admire. I would very much not be.

Rama Khan is still an asshole, by the way.

I like that Diana, of all of them, remains unaffected by outside perceptions. Yes, she's the epicenter and all, but I like to think it's really just a matter of Diana being Diana. Perhaps that's meta leaking in; I'm very comfortable with the idea that no matter how inaccurately some idiots may see her, not even ~~years of bad writing~~ reality breaking around her can change who Diana actually is - she's just too elementally Truthful for that.

Anyway, Diana's still not quite getting why the League has come and the fact that if it's her fight, it's everyone's fight. Because Diana has a really keen sense of responsibility, and would never assume anyone else should be responsible for cleaning up her mess. But she's happy they've come, or at least as much as she can be happy while she's going out of her mind with guilt and indecision.

Oh, Diana's face there gives me chills.

What is amazing about this scene? Diana surrenders her pride without surrendering her dignity. She gives a sincere, heartfelt apology, freely admits to her wrongdoing, and humbly seeks to make amends, and this in no way diminishes her. If anything, it makes her greater. That is a hell of a trick, particularly with a female character.

An even better trick: Diana figures it out. Notice Bruce and J'onn tell her what's going on and how to fix it... and they're completely wrong. That's incredibly important. Diana made this mess, singlehandedly; it's crucial that she be the one to clean it up, that she be the one who best understands how her weapon, her world, and her very calling actually operate. It's what makes her apology work, it's what makes this whole story work, that this is not Diana fucking up and the League bailing her out, but rather Diana fucking up and then making it right while the League supports her. Considering she isn't even always accorded that respect in her own title ::coughHeinbootcough::, to see it happen in JLA is astounding.

In other news, Rama Khan: still an asshole.

Diplomacy: Not always effective.

Jarhanpur: Not interested in being strongarmed.

Diana: Grateful for her friends.

I love how Diana has a sense of perspective about this. That sort of self-depreciating "I mangled reality because I want my mommy back" tells you just how aware she is of what a colossal fuck-up she was here. She's not a hypocrite and doesn't condemn Rama Khan for his blindness or pride. But neither does she absolve him of blame, and while she isn't happy about this disaster, she is satisfied that she, and the League, did the best they could in the end, and there is no place nor purpose here for guilt or recrimination.

Further key insight to her character can be seen in that, after almost destroying the universe because self-doubt in the avatar of Truth and highly magical nexus points don't mix:
- She calmly accepts that she screwed up and resolves to do better.
- She goes to work the next day.
- She finds her own answers.
- She re-asserts her beliefs and her value system.
- She remains confident in her decision once she's done what she feels to be the right thing.
- She accepts and appreciates the support of her friends.

It's impressive enough already that she's so awesome on her good days; I find it beyond heroic that she can respond so maturely and with such grace and honesty and self-consistency on such a very, very, very bad day as well.

Scans from JLA v3, issues 62-64, also found in the conveniently-named JLA 10: Golden Perfect.

Next time: Nessie Kapatelis returns, like you've never seen her before! Cassie is cool, for possibly the second to last time, enjoy it while you can! Secret and Empress cameo! Kon bitches about being an armadillo! Not one panel of Trevor-Sue Barnes! And I try very hard to present a Jimenez arc and remain unbiased! Everything is better with exclamation points!

(Post a new comment)

magus_69
2009-03-28 11:55 pm UTC (link)

It is my belief that a person's behaviour at their lowest point is frequently more indicative of their true nature than their behaviour at their highest point. Diana showed her true nature here, and it is fucking impressive.

Also, because it must be said: good GODS this artwork is gorgeous. Diana's a little too skinny for me, and I prefer her with curly hair, but she actually looks Greek. That is far too rare an occurance for me to not remark on it.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-03-29 01:11 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, I like Mahnke's men more than his women, as a rule, which tend to be a little scrawny (particularly in the arms), even the heroes, and lack the variety in body type his men have. But his style has a very sharp, classical feel to it that's incredibly appropriate to Diana, straight hair or not, which I've always liked this run for. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	blake_reitz 2009-03-29 12:51 am UTC (link)
	When this arc came out, I was not quite mature enough a comic book reader to really get it. Which is a shame, because it is an amazing Wonder woman story. I second how great it is to see Clark's mental image of him as a farmboy with a cape, and Bruce actually turning into an urban legend is pretty nifty too. (Reply to this)

	surlytmpl 2009-03-29 01:49 am UTC (link)
	This was pretty cool, even considering the whole "let's sacrifice the needs of the one [culture] for the needs of the many" vibe. (Reply to this)

	interrobamf 2009-03-29 01:57 am UTC (link)
	Goddamnit, the uncertainty principle is not the observer effect. The principle has to do with the fact that there is no state of absolute precision in both position and momentum. It's a fundamental feature of the quantum universe and has nothing to do with observation. (Reply to this) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-03-29 01:17 pm UTC (link)

Psh. Next you'll be complaining that the middle of a floor is not a load-bearing object and houses should fall apart when heroes lift them, or that Diana's invulnerability doesn't make sense because there's no such thing as "piercing" and "bludgeoning" damage, just force distributed over an area, or that you can move willpower as fast as you like in any direction and it will never become love or hatred.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	interrobamf 2009-03-29 07:06 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, I realize that comic books are the last place where one finds accurate physics, but, goddamnit, if you're going to name-drop a specific concept of physics, get it right. (Reply to this) (Parent)

janegray
2009-03-29 06:31 am UTC (link)

The lasso can destroy the world? Suddenly Wondy going out of her mind when Genocide took it makes a lot more sense. I mean, yes, I know it was her god-given, soul-linked, most treasured possession and all; but she reacted as if it was a catastrophe that Genocide specifically got it, rather than just the "it's terrible that I lost something I cared for so much!" thing I expected.

which is not only inappropriate on its own terms

Out of curiosity, why?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	jupiterrhode 2009-03-29 03:42 pm UTC (link)
	It's my hope the Gail makes some reference to this story. So far it's been mostly that Diana is freaked out because of the way the lasso works on souls, rather than the objective truth. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-03-29 04:19 pm UTC (link)

Well, there's some reason to think this isn't really a duplicatible event. This story is all about avatars trying to reverse their relationships with their sources. Rama Khan is the servant and guardian of Jarhanpur, but tries to behave as its master and dictate it on his terms, and Jarhanpur revolts and falls down around him. Diana is the servant and guardian of the Truth, but tries to behave as its master and dictate it on her terms, and the Truth revolts and falls down around her. But this is not something that Diana is ordinarily capable of doing - she's not so perfect that she's never denied the whole truth before this, or hasn't since, and yet this is the only time reality has dissolved. Only in Jarhanpur, where the magic is strong and the walls of reality a little thinner, was she able to exert enough command over the Truth for the Truth to have to fight back. The lariat, powerful focus though it is, would need someone much more powerful than Diana to be able to do that kind of thing again all by itself, and Genny's command of despair/hatred/whatever doesn't seem to significantly outstrip Diana's of Truth in that sense.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	jlbarnett 2009-03-29 08:36 pm UTC (link)
	ah, now that makes it make more sense. Although couldn't it also be the case that it isn't fighting back, but the magic in Jarhanpur actually strangthed the link enough to actually break it. (Reply to this) (Parent)

bluefall
2009-03-29 04:39 pm UTC (link)

Out of curiosity, why?

Bruce's entire MO is about generating shame and terror. Diana fights fear and stands for hope and second chances. Bruce is incredibly sexist and Diana's the ultimate feminist. Bruce loathes magic, Diana is magic. Bruce has faith only in himself, Diana is a priestess. Bruce hates and distrusts gods, Diana's been a god and remains a demigod. Bruce needs control and distance and plausible deniability, Diana gives of herself wholly and is only nourished by same. Bruce distrusts change profoundly, Diana's entire purpose is to change everything. Bruce is built out of deception upon deception upon deception, Diana is the incarnate Truth. Bruce loves and must protect Gotham, Diana loves and must protect her people.

They have *one thing* in common: they both punch bad guys.

"Opposites attract" may be a fun, trite little cliche to throw around, but birds don't fall in love with fish, and if they should try to live together, one of them dies. Bruce and Diana are incompatible on every level, and it takes a pretty good author to even make me believe they're the devout kind of friends they're supposedly meant to be. Lovers, never.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

janegray
2009-03-29 05:03 pm UTC (link)

And yet, all I can think reading your list is "so they complement each other then!" XD

More seriously, Bruce desperately needs a shrink (or an army of them) more than anything else, and Diana is an excellent therapist (hey, it's canon that she can help achieve in a few hours what it usually takes a lifetime of therapy to achieve). I really think she could help him work some his issues out and make him into a much better person, one she could actually be in love with.

I mean, I know it's never going to happen, because for some weird reason dick!Batman sells like hotcakes (why? why?) and DC is never going to let him stay a decent person for long. But still, I think the potential is there.

Then again, I'm a shipper, and shippers don't really need a reason to like something besides "ooooohhhhh! sexy!", so you could say I'm in denial and just looking for excuses :P

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

kamino_neko
2009-03-29 06:49 pm UTC (link)

Diana is an excellent therapist (hey, it's canon that she can help achieve in a few hours what it usually takes a lifetime of therapy to achieve). I really think she could help him work some his issues out and make him into a much better person, one she could actually be in love with.

She's also not the kind of person to get involved with someone to 'fix them'.

He's also unlikely to accept her help, to that point - he's that broken.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

bluefall
2009-03-30 10:42 am UTC (link)

Yeah, I don't know, I don't find it particularly romantic to have a relationship where one person has to do the entire work of fixing the other before he can be of any use to her. A partner is supposed to be a source of support, reinforcement, and safety, not a demanding and strenuous project to further drain one's emotional resources who provides nothing and costs much.

That's, of course if Bats were even interested in change, or DC could permit it (as you say, he sells as he is, and a radical personality change would be rejected even if it weren't at the behest of a woman).

Bronze Age Bruce was a more reasonable match, though, so there's always that goofy-ass story where Babs and Diana fight for his love to distract Copperhead. ^_^

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

darkknightjrk
2009-03-31 01:21 am UTC (link)

To be fair, though, I've seen further in the Kelly run, where most of the Bats/Wondy story takes place, that Batman does make an effort to be more open to her.

Also, I really don't get your statement earlier that Batman is sexist--not even because he's my fave character, I just don't see it objectively. To the best of my knowledge, besides the odd example in the 40s which were...less sophisticated times, there hasn't been a story where Batman has dismissed someone because of their gender. If anything, he's pushed more girls away because of his massive emotional issues, not because of any latant sexism.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

jlbarnett
2009-03-29 08:59 pm UTC (link)

although Bruce's civilian ID is a bit faked I don't think he's so much about deception. In fact I think Batman kind of forces honesty from his opponents, because well if they aren't bad guys they have nothing to fear from Batman.

Bruce has faith in the entire Batclan, meanwhile the standards he holds his fellow heroes to are so ridiculously high he must have some degree of faith in them

And the sexism is only in bad writing. Take a look at how he treated Batgirl in that Bronze Age story posted yesterday. Sure it was ages ago, but really if stories where the major female characters in Batman comics were good writing they wouldn't be consistently retconned.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

aaron_bourque
2009-03-30 01:59 pm UTC (link)

You just had to distill all the bad writing that's accumulated around Batman for 23 years, didn't you? How would you feel if someone did the same thing for Diana or Barbara Gordon?

Bruce's entire MO is about generating shame and terror.

Shame shouldn't be on this list, and terror should be qualified by "in the guilty."

Diana fights fear and stands for hope and second chances.

Bruce should also be a symbol of hope and second chances. That someone is actually out there trying to keep Gotham from losing it's last vestiges of civility should be ultimately inspiring. And sure, Batman is harsh and brutal to bad guys, but he's also got the Bruce Wayne identity for charitable work and giving people the chance (and sometimes second chance) they need to help prop up the city.

Bruce is incredibly sexist

GRAAAARG THIS SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED, WHOEVER DID THIS SHOULD BURN FOR ETERNITY.

Bruce loathes magic

Well, yeah. As should all rational people. But just because he loathes it doesn't mean he would deny it exists, or even never use it himself, in the right circumstances.

Bruce has faith only in himself

And, the qualifier should go, his most trusted allies. Basically, the way your point should be put if Batman hadn't been kneecapped characterization-wise for far too long, Batman believes in self-determinism, Diana believes in destiny and fate.

Bruce hates and distrusts gods

Hates should be too strong a word (and distrusts should be too weak a word).

Bruce needs control and distance and plausible deniability

This I'll grant you. That's what makes Batman Batman, and not Dick Grayson in a Batman suit.

Bruce distrusts change profoundly

But should embrace it when it's inevitable. He's a scientist, after all, and science marches on.

Bruce is built out of deception upon deception upon deception

Which should be used as his survival mechanism, but not as the side of the bed he wakes up on. After all, he's supposed to be the World's Greatest Detective, and Detectiving is supposed to be all about uncovering the Truth. Whether he uses the truth is a matter of his devotion to Justice.

Bruce loves and must protect Gotham

And this should read "Bruce loves and must protect Gotham first, and then others."

Man, I miss really well-written Bruce. And now he's "dead" and we have to wait even longer for it.

What we really need is for writers to realize that they DON'T have to put their mark on a character as soon as they're hired for a gig. There should be a character bible that they have to follow, similar to how TV shows do it. Yeah, that's the ticket . . .

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-03-30 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	You just had to distill all the bad writing that's accumulated around Batman for 23 years, didn't you? Well, yes, since that's his character now and that's the guy who Kelly was trying to hook up with Diana. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

arrlaari.livejournal.com
2009-03-30 06:03 pm UTC (link)

Was Bat-DickGod in effect at that point in history? I'm not familiar enough with continuity to be sure. In particular, was the Bat-DickGod evident in Kelly's JLA itself?

I'm somewhat disturbed by your willingness to write off good Bruce and admit that bad Bruce is "in character." You (quite correctly) aren't willing to make the same concession to Diana's equally long history of bullshit takes and I'm not aware of any other character whose decent core you're willing to abandon to the wolves in this manner.

Less seriously;

They have *one thing* in common: they both punch bad guys.

Not true! They have lots of things in common; a few examples:

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-03-30 06:34 pm UTC (link)

When something is a character's dominant portrayal for long enough, it ceases to be OOC. Diana doesn't really have that problem because, as extensive as her history of bullshit is, it's fairly inconsistent bullshit. No two writers get her wrong the same way, so no wrong take can take hold. Bruce's dickery is well-established and very consistent across multiple writers, titles and years of publication.

Beyond that... When Diana is written as a moron, it makes her book annoying to read and her character look stupid. When Dinah is written as an incompetent dupe of Ollie, it makes her book annoying to read and character look stupid. When Dick is written as a waffling jellyfish, it makes his book annoying to read and his character look stupid.

When Bruce is written as an emotionally stunted, controlling jackass, it hurts Babs and Dick and Tim and especially Cass, it fucks over the Justice League, it gets characters killed (Steph, Ted), and makes half the DCU look twisted and foolish or cheap or overtolerant or like an abused spouse who comes back for more. It's not quite as easy to overlook or move on from once a good writer hops on board, when it leaves other characters bleeding in its wake in their own stories (or cuts those stories short). Particularly since the good writers are generally the ones doing it, which gives their stories traction ("Who is Wonder Woman" is a shit story on its own merits even if Diana had been a completely OC; "Bruce Wayne: Murderer" was an interesting crossover that had a lot going for it and good reason to be called back to).

And actually, I did throw Cassie to the wolves somewhere along the course of Johns' TT run. I genuinely don't think of her as the same character, any more than I think of post-Crisis Bruce as the same character as Bronze Age Bruce or DCAU Bruce.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

aaron_bourque
2009-03-30 09:55 pm UTC (link)

When something is a character's dominant portrayal for long enough, it ceases to be OOC.

I cannot disagree strongly enough.

When Diana is written as a moron, it makes her book annoying to read and her character look stupid. . . . When Bruce is written as an emotionally stunted, controlling jackass, it hurts Babs and Dick and Tim and especially Cass, it fucks over the Justice League, it gets characters killed (Steph, Ted), and makes half the DCU look twisted and foolish or cheap or overtolerant or like an abused spouse who comes back for more.

In other words, bad Diana effects only Diana (and maybe her ever changing supporting cast), whereas bad Bruce effects everyone. And yet, and yet, they keep . . . doing . . . it.

Either they need to get rid of the DC Universe as they intend it and bring back "each book stands alone", or writers need to stop thinking they have to put their mark on a character, and actually follow along with who that character is. Like with a bible, or frickin' editorial vision or something.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-03-30 11:16 pm UTC (link)

I cannot disagree strongly enough.

But it *has* to be. If I'm going to say that the platonic Batman is the real Batman, that no matter how shitty the Miller/Moore heir post-Crisis Bruce gets, it's always OOC and always wrong and the real guy is the Bronze Age/DCAU one...

... then I also have to say that the real Wonder Woman is the pre-Crisis boy-chasing weirdly sexist clusterfuck whose powers don't work when a man binds her wrists. I have to say the real Supergirl is the abhorrent thing Loeb dropped in our lap when she was introduced, no matter how much work they put into fixing her and no matter how golden she may one day become. I have to say the real Black Canary is the useless captivity-prone limp fish she was before Birds.

If I permit enough persistent and consistent writing and characterization to change my perception of a character for the better, I cannot forbid enough persistent and consistent writing and characterization from changing my perception of a character for the worse. Either how a character is presented matters, or it doesn't.

Like with a bible, or frickin' editorial vision or something.

I dunno, isn't current editorial vision kind of the *opposite* of "who that character is," at both companies? "Who that character was when I bought comics" or "what event can we jam this big name into" are the best you're going to get from the ~~IIC~~ EIC types these days.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

aaron_bourque
2009-03-30 11:44 pm UTC (link)

platonic Batman is the real Batman . . . the real Wonder Woman is the pre-Crisis boy-chasing weirdly sexist clusterfuck whose powers don't work when a man binds her wrists

But she's not the platonic WW, you've shown us the platonic WW.

Either how a character is presented matters, or it doesn't.

It does indeed matter. Unfortunately, nobody's listening.

isn't current editorial vision kind of the *opposite* of "who that character is," at both companies?

I don't know, anymore. When 52 was coming out, of the the interviews with whoever was giving interviews that week said that the writers and artists and editors were supposed to be caretakers of the characters reputation. That's the sort of editorial vision I was talking about, but you're right. Their caretaking has been more like neglect, strapping them into wheelchairs, rolling them to the window, leaving the blinds drawn, and sticking a tube of applesauce-like substance down their throat until they choke to death or the substance comes back up, leaving aside the whole "Yeah, I'm not gonna clean that up" approach when they soil themselves, and failing to take action when their body is covered in bedsores, but it's okay, as long as you always take your medication each day, and come and join in on the arts and crafts fun, see how much fun we're having during carefully regimented blocks of fun, why aren't you participating, do you want to be taken back to your room, now, do you want to lose your television privileges, and we were thinking of sprinkling some cinnamon in your [open verbal-fingerquotes]lunch[close verbal-fingerquotes] but if you don't join in the spirit of things, we may have to rethink that!

. . .

Sorry, my mom used to work in a nursing home. It was always a joy when she had a story about her day. And by joy I mean torture. And by story I mean torture. And by day I mean torture.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; and by torture, I mean torture.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-03-31 08:44 pm UTC (link)

But she's not the platonic WW, you've shown us the platonic WW.

But she only exists because somebody looked at pre-Crisis Wonder Woman and said "well, this is junk, let's change it, a different take would make her more interesting/compelling/a better sale." Which is exactly what happened with Bruce - DKR was a different take, somebody thought it was a more interesting one that would sell better, and they changed it. That thinking saved Diana. That thinking made Batman a monstrosity. That thinking made Tony Stark a supervillain, and it made Shulkie quite possibly the only female spin-off character ever to be massively interesting, important and successful completely unconnected to her distaff counterpart (Babs doesn't count, as Oracle is not a distaff Batman). Lo, the muses they giveth, and the muses they taketh away.

and by torture, I mean torture.

But what do you mean by "always"?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

aaron_bourque
2009-04-01 12:34 pm UTC (link)

but she only exists because

Tut tut tut. The point is she exists. One day, the same will hold true for Batman, I have to have faith that it will. And every other character out there. Because there is no such thing as finite awesome, or finite love, and someday, they will get their due.

I may even live long enough to see it! You never know! Human life expectancy is only in the 70s-80s now, but by the time we're in our 70-80s, it could be longer!

But what do you mean by "always"?

Enh, whenever.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

arrlaari.livejournal.com
2009-03-31 12:12 am UTC (link)

then I also have to say that the real Wonder Woman is the pre-Crisis boy-chasing weirdly sexist clusterfuck whose powers don't work when a man binds her wrists. I have to say the real Supergirl is the abhorrent thing Loeb dropped in our lap when she was introduced, no matter how much work they put into fixing her and no matter how golden she may one day become. I have to say the real Black Canary is the useless captivity-prone limp fish she was before Birds.

By this system, you'd have to say that the real Batman was the golden age guy who didn't blink when the bad guys died, (and I honestly don't know anything about him other than that he was so boring), not the totally awesome dude with issues (serious. issues.) in DCU/Bronze Age.

If I permit enough persistent and consistent writing and characterization to change my perception of a character for the better, I cannot forbid enough persistent and consistent writing and characterization from changing my perception of a character for the worse. Either how a character is presented matters, or it doesn't.

False binary. My policy is that my perception of how a character should be works like judicial review: There's stare decisis, but that doesn't hold against a good argument, e.g. "these qualities cause the character to suck, therefore the character ought not have such qualities." Excellence is the highest standard - the true Wonder Woman is the best Wonder Woman, regardless of what may have come before or after that Wondy, and likewise for Batman, Cassie, Joker, etc.

There's a presumption against a truly novel characterization, but that's reasonable. Such are, by this system, claiming to be the very best take on the character ever, and after the length of time and number of takes that have accumulated, that's a pretty tall claim.

As much as people mock Johns for retconning Hal Jordan's heel turn into "a yellow fear bug possessed him!" I feel a consensus that Evil!Hal was terrible and ham-handed, whereas redeemed Hal, under Geoff's pen, is as good and interesting as Hal has ever been.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	darkknightjrk 2009-03-31 01:34 am UTC (link)
	There's also the phoenomon known as "fanon." Basically--your interpetation is as valid as the next guy. Want your modern Wondy next to a saner Batman? Why not? (Reply to this) (Parent)

bluefall
2009-03-31 08:36 pm UTC (link)

Excellence is the highest standard - the true Wonder Woman is the best Wonder Woman

Fair enough, when trying to decide "what the real" version of a character is. If somebody asks me to write "a Batman story," totally divorced from all other considerations, I am naturally going to use the Batman who is closest to the platonic ideal, something that resembles DCAU or Bronze Age Bruce, something like a genuine hero.

That doesn't solve the problem of "what version exists now," however. Paranoid, insane, emotionally stunted, hostile asshole may be OOC for the ideal, "real" Batman, but given the (essentially) coherent DCU, it is not out of character; it can't be. Ted Kord is still dead. War Games still happened. Sasha Bordeaux is still half OMAC. Cass is still... well, okay, Cass is a whole other issue, but you know what I mean. As long as these things are still true, Bruce still did those things, which means a consistent and repeated pattern of behavior exists, which means that that character is still that character.

Maybe the "real" Batman isn't like that. But DCU Batman is.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	nevermore999 2009-03-29 01:24 pm UTC (link)
	You know, I love stories about the nature of myth and truth and duties and reality, especially about the idea of how humans perceive and view things and make up stories. So I think a big part of why I love Diana is her character is so beautifully perfect for stuff like that. In conclusion, this story is ace! (Reply to this)

	cmdr_zoom 2009-03-29 03:38 pm UTC (link)
	This is a great story, in every way, and I thank you and scans_daily for bringing it to me - before, and again. Also, that panel where Rama realizes he no longer speaks for Jarhanpur will always remind me of the one Swamp Thing issue (also featuring the JLA) where Woodrue takes and then loses control of the Green. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-03-29 04:40 pm UTC (link)
	Also, that panel where Rama realizes he no longer speaks for Jarhanpur will always remind me of the one Swamp Thing issue (also featuring the JLA) where Woodrue takes and then loses control of the Green. Yupyup. Never a good idea when you're the servant of a higher mystical power to forget that and try to set yourself up as its master. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	darkknightjrk 2009-03-31 01:36 am UTC (link)
	Another way of putting it: Don't fuck with Nature--otherwise she'll find a way to fucker faster and harder when you least expect it and most deserve it. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2009-03-29 05:31 pm UTC (link)
	Wow, thank you for this wonderful analysis! I liked "Golden Perfect" but I don't think I really understood it, certainly not to this depth. Your comments make the first time I feel like I really understand Wonder Woman--wish it had carried over into the DCAU. -vignettelante (Reply to this) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-03-30 10:43 am UTC (link)
	wish it had carried over into the DCAU. You are so very not alone in that. Glad you enjoyed it. ^.^ (Reply to this) (Parent)

	meatwhichdreams 2009-03-29 07:58 pm UTC (link)
	This is a rather impressively put together story that obviously respects Wonder Woman as a character from the get-go and tries to explore her weaknesses on an epic scale without making her weak. AND THAT ART! True, Diana is a bit skinny and straight-haired but damn if she doesn't look powerful AND GREEK, and damn if everything doesn't look so AWESOMELY EPIC. (Reply to this)

freeman333
2009-03-30 12:19 am UTC (link)

I've always loved this arc--part of one of the best periods for the JLA ever, in my opinion--even though, as a Radical Subjectivist, I'm a little pissed off by the whole "Oh noes, suddenly reality is determined by the beliefs of the individual!", since that's how I believe reality was already working all the time, magic lasso or no. I agree that Mahnke's art is fantastic, and as someone has pointed out, it's great that Diana actually looks Greek for once.

However, one of my favorite moments in this story is also one of the smallest: Di's reaction to Plastic Man peeping. It's entirely too common in comic books to have some man get caught peeping, either intentionally or accidentally (more of the latter in manga, but still) and have a woman totally freak out on him, calling him a pervert and so on. Now, it's entirely inappropriate and unacceptable for a man (or anyone else, for that matter) to violate a woman's privacy and safety by observing her body when she's unawares; in point of fact, it's a form of abuse. But all too often, the reaction (as exemplified frequently in comics by characters like Huntress or Power Girl) is that it's not the behavior that's wrong, it's the very fact that the peeper is sexually interested in women that's wrong. This strikes me as a problematic view, because it shames the perpetrator for their own sexuality rather than for inappropriate behavior, which contributes to a culture of sexual taboo and distaste for our own physical desires which actually makes sexual violence more common, because there aren't as many safe, consensual ways to discharge those desires without being shamed for them.

Diana doesn't go that route, though. She makes it very clear that the behavior won't be tolerated--and when the fucking Goddess of Truth tells you she'll kill your peeping ass, you know she's not just funnin' you--but she also acknowledges that the act of peeping has a certain value for Plastic Man that is not, in itself, necessarily wrong. "If my body were the last thing you ever saw, would it be worth it?" She knows her body has the ability to bring pleasure to others--c'mon, modest as she is, she's got to at least know it--and while she won't tolerate anyone using her for their own pleasure against her will, she also acknowledges that someone is naturally motivated to do something pleasurable. I personally feel that her offer there is genuine: "If this gets you off, great, that's your business, and as long as you're cool with me throwing you into the sun, I'm cool with you having your few moments of fun." There's a certain openness to Plas's sexuality, even as she sets a firm and appropriate boundary against it, which strikes me as both incredibly mature and extremely Diana.

Props to the author. That would have been an easy scene to write some other way, but I think writing it in the way it was written not only gives the readers an example of a woman who is much more mature and confident in herself, even as she makes it clear that she won't tolerate abuse, than the typical poorly-written shrill accuser, but also sets Diana apart from other comic book heroines in her poise, mastery of herself and her surroundings, and her general awesomeness.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

mari_redstar
2009-03-30 02:49 pm UTC (link)

That's a fairly good point. Me, I'd prefer something along the lines of "If your voyeuristic thrill is more important to you than any of the women on this team ever being able to feel secure in their privacy, this is not the team for you. Teleporter's that way, we'll send you your stuff," but it's true that it could be worse.

(I only ever seem to run across Plastic Man scans when he's being all "Constant intolerable sexual harrassment totally counts as wacky hijinx, right?" Possibly he has redeeming features somewhere else.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

freeman333
2009-03-30 05:57 pm UTC (link)

Fair enough. In "real-life" terms, being unable to keep it in your pants should be sufficient to keep you off of the earth's greatest superhero team, but as plenty of characters from Guy Gardner to Major Disaster have shown, harassment apparently just doesn't count when the woman in question can lift a Sherman tank. Which you think would actually be more of a deterrent to that kind of thing by itself, but it just goes to show you how the low the standards for respectfulness towards women really are in this setting.

As for Plas, I actually like him as a character, and I figure half the time he's being written as the "harassment = hijinx" douchebag you describe, and the other half he's being shown as a witty trickster who has some serious impulse control issues but who really loves being a hero and makes jokes to hide how scared he is that he doesn't really belong there. I find that second portrayal both more honest and more interesting, but it doesn't hide the fact that many writers consider being sexually inappropriate towards women to be nothing more than slightly humorous, and never acknowledge all the extremely unpleasant assumptions going into that stance. Part of what I like so much about Diana's position here is that she's confident enough to acknowledge that yeah, maybe there is something mildly amusing about it from a certain point of view, but damned if she's going to put up with it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	darkknightjrk 2009-03-31 01:40 am UTC (link)
	"(I only ever seem to run across Plastic Man scans when he's being all "Constant intolerable sexual harrassment totally counts as wacky hijinx, right?" Possibly he has redeeming features somewhere else.)" Read more of the Kelly run--he adds a lot of depth to the character. In fact, it starts in the same TPB that Golden Perfect is in. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	darkknightjrk 2009-03-31 01:42 am UTC (link)
	Great piece on this--love the arc and own it--one thing I did notice: "(Kelly is not, particularly, fair to Plas, I think, but we're not here for him.)" It's odd, because, as I mention up a bit, I think Kelly is the last guy that gives Plas any real emotional depth to him, later on in his run. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-03-31 08:52 pm UTC (link)
	You mean the thing with his kid? I'm pretty much with Kyle Baker on that one. Huh. I should post that. (Reply to this) (Parent)