See now this is actually a change I can sink my teeth into and enjoy. It seems consistent with Amazonian myth and yet seems modern and innovative. As for Diana having siblings, well that revelation just adds richness to the narrative in my opinion. Uncaring, laconic, almost spartan in character for a taste that seems entirely warrior and communitarian in nature. I applaud these changes and look forward to how they bring about Diana's development throughout the course of the book.

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap: Diana has always been the liberal minded one compared to the remainder who have been conservative in approach to almost everything. There are other instances of Amazons acting very militaristic, like trying to educate Lyta away from her mother's path, even to an extreme degree. Anyway there is no indication that Hippolyta was involved with this as far as we know. And she would have known as their leader, but then it raises interesting questions about what her role as leader is.

What? Hippolyta is their queen! How does she think her people reproduce? Of course she knows. She probably organizes it.

And yes, she already was the most liberal minded but then, she came from a peaceful society way ahead of their time.

In the new version, they are all psychopaths, monsters invented 1000 BC to scare people, like the Nemean Lion and the Hydra. And we are supposed to believe that Wonder-Woman got 21th century values from these people? Nonsense!

This change actually makes me very interested in picking up the series, so I guess that's positive.

@RazzaTazz: Done

The first thing I have to say is that making a group of people who completely reject men is by it's very nature sexist. It's just that the roles are reversed. So don't use that argument

Next, I agree the fact that Wonder Woman doesn't realize this is part of her history is a very big plot hole, one that needs addressing.

Besides that, the story is good, and all this change implies is that what she was told of her history was a lie meant to protect her from hera, so you can still assume that the rest of her stories still went along in canon.

Also, remember that the amazons were a warrior society, so the fact they are brutal in their actions makes complete sense. And you can't blame Azzarello for making the series closer to greek mythology. William Marston name the characters amazons, basing them off of these legends. his fault for ignoring the fact that the women seduced and killed all men they met

I don't particularly like this rewrite...

These changes are obviously dividing the comic community a little (I guess change itself usually does).

I'm still enjoying the series and I like the changes, very entertaining. Wonder Woman is one of those titles that should be on eveyone's must-read list.

The first thing I have to say is that making a group of people who completely reject men is by it's very nature sexist. It's just that the roles are reversed. So don't use that argument

Next, I agree the fact that Wonder Woman doesn't realize this is part of her history is a very big plot hole, one that needs addressing.

Besides that, the story is good, and all this change implies is that what she was told of her history was a lie meant to protect her from hera, so you can still assume that the rest of her stories still went along in canon.

Also, remember that the Amazons were a warrior society, so the fact they are brutal in their actions makes complete sense. And you can't blame Azzarello for making the series closer to greek mythology. William Marston name the characters amazons, basing them off of these legends. his fault for ignoring the fact that the women seduced and killed all men they met

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap said:
This raises some interesting points though. Like maybe Hippolyta doesn't like this practice but she knew that if she stood against it that she would be deposed. This is the rule of the mob as we see everywhere in the world these days from invasive ultrasounds to shooting kids on the way home from the candy store, and the fact that such a thing is being treated in this comic series makes Wonder Woman a lot more relevant than she usually has been

I understand the political climate sucks in the US right now but I really do not think Azzarello had any of that in mind.

He just does not care about what came before him. If it means he has to destroy who Hippolyta had been in the comic books for the last 70 years, so be it. He does not give a damn, like always.

And as I said, it makes no sense because then who taught Diana her values?

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap said:
This raises some interesting points though. Like maybe Hippolyta doesn't like this practice but she knew that if she stood against it that she would be deposed. This is the rule of the mob as we see everywhere in the world these days from invasive ultrasounds to shooting kids on the way home from the candy store, and the fact that such a thing is being treated in this comic series makes Wonder Woman a lot more relevant than she usually has been

I understand the political climate sucks in the US right now but I really do not think Azzarello had any of that in mind.

He just does not care about what came before him. If it means he has to destroy who Hippolyta had been in the comic books for the last 70 years, so be it. He does not give a damn, like always.

And as I said, it makes no sense because then who taught Diana her values?

These changes are obviously dividing the comic community a little (I guess change itself usually does).

I'm still enjoying the series and I like the changes, very entertaining. Wonder Woman is one of those titles that should be on eveyone's must-read list.

@RazzaTazz said:

The matter of values is highly subjective I think. Although there are what is considered to be universal human rights, it doesn't mean that there actually are. Of course this is bad behaviour as well, but I think it falls much more into "do as I say not as I do" without actually telling her what they do.

How does this contradict my point? Of course values are subjective.

What I am saying is, why would the Amazons teach their children to be compassionate and to treat men as their equals for the first twenty years of their life, only to ask them ten years later to kill their mate and to abandon their male newborns to a life of slavery. Either they think men are lesser (and so much so that they do not deserve to live) or they do not. If they do, that is what they teach their children because that is the best moment to teach values.

That's f*cked up.

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

@RazzaTazz said:

The matter of values is highly subjective I think. Although there are what is considered to be universal human rights, it doesn't mean that there actually are. Of course this is bad behaviour as well, but I think it falls much more into "do as I say not as I do" without actually telling her what they do.

How does this contradict my point? Of course values are subjective.

What I am saying is, why would the Amazons teach their children to be compassionate and to treat men as their equals for the first twenty years of their life, only to ask them ten years later to kill their mate and to abandon their male newborns to a life of slavery. Either they think men are lesser (and so much so that they do not deserve to live) or they do not. If they do, that is what they teach their children because that is the best moment to teach values.

@RazzaTazz said:

I think in my opinion (and as someone that has read every single monthly issue every published with her name on it) that this is an excellent development for the character. In the past I have had a few issues with a lot of the portrayal of the Amazons. In a sense the Amazons for much of Diana's golden and silver age history played the role of the Batman related puns in the 1960s television show. If Diana ever needed something then she would just go to Paradise Island where one of the scientists was coincidentally working on that particular thing. With Perez the Amazons were updated somewhat, less of passive altruists and more as real people, but there was still a bit of a disconnect, from being a warrior race that promoted peace. Of course, there were divisions within the society over this role, but essentially the Amazons still remained quite mythical as opposed to real, and having this as a part of Wonder Woman also made her somewhat more artificial. I think this new development really answers is sort of like finding out peeling back the layers of the Amazons and finding real (and ruthless) people underneath. It would be kind of as if you just found out that your grandfather - who you love and who treats you as a favoured grandchild - served time in prison for murder or some such things. There are skeletons in the closet of every family, and while these are some pretty big skeletons, I still think it adds a depth to the character and her family that has never been seen before.

Interesting.

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

I am ambivalent. Over the last few years I have gone from being a hardcore; don't change the essence of WW- to a 'why not' as long as they write it brilliantly, ardent fan.

I love WW so much, I am willing to accept changes that will help grow an audience, who will hopefully embrace & respect WW (and read faithfully), as I do.

Though I am naturally resistant, I'll welcome changes... but hey DC - don't eff it up. ;D

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I have a bit of a theory regarding this latest development:

We all know that the Wildstorm Universe was integrated into the DCU when it became the DCnU, right?

So, in the old Wildstorm days, what were the equivalents to the Amazons? The Coda, Zealot’s (of Wild C.A.T.S.) warrior woman clan.

My theory: Azarello must be setting something up where it’s revealed that not ALL the Amazons are responsible for these actions–it’s the doing of a splinter sect called (drum roll please)….the Coda!

So people, don’t be surprised if somewhere later in the book, Diana learns of a splinter sect of the Amazons that were the real and only perpetrators of these actions. If they reintroduce Zealot this way, she’d probably be a Coda disgusted and disillusioned by the actions of her ‘sisters’. It would still tie in to the original depictions of the Amazons of ancient Greek myth, but would keep the blood off of Hippolyta's--and the rest of the DC Amazons'--fair hands.

What do you all think?

I am ambivalent. Over the last few years I have gone from being a hardcore; don't change the essence of WW- to a 'why not' as long as they write it brilliantly, ardent fan.

I love WW so much, I am willing to accept changes that will help grow an audience, who will hopefully embrace & respect WW (and read faithfully), as I do.

Though I am naturally resistant, I'll welcome changes... but hey DC - don't eff it up. ;D

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I am not really sure, it raises some interesting question though

@Primmaster64said:

@RazzaTazz:She did right?

SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content.

Oh boy

Also, complete rip-off from the great conclusion to the Superman TAS.

"I am many things Kal-El, but here, I am God."

Greatest DC scene outside of comics. No movie has ever come close.

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I am not really sure, it raises some interesting question though

Like?

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I am not really sure, it raises some interesting question though

Like?

I think to go into it too much would be a spoiler, but basically it is a human rights issue I guess dealing with slavery

@Babs

Why do you keep crediting the Pre-New 52 origins to Loebs? It was Greg Potter and George Perez that created that origin. Loebs just stumbled through a flashback issue like a drunkard in #72.

@RazzaTazz said:

I am not saying that all amazon children would have gotten the same treatment, but just like little Kal-El escaping Krypton, maybe Diana's mother wanted something better for her

Except Jor-El and Lara were not king and queen of Krypton. Hippolyta is.

It would be like saying that Jefferson Davis "sure had to deal with a lot of racist people ".

If you are in this position of power, to the point you are not even President but Queen, changes are, you are not the exception to the rule.

@DarthShap: LOL Dind't see the relation before. That fight was awesome.
 
@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I am not really sure, it raises some interesting question though

Like?

I think to go into it too much would be a spoiler, but basically it is a human rights issue I guess dealing with slavery

I see....Something that will be address in the future...Since doesn't WW represent freedom?

@RazzaTazz said:

I am not saying that all amazon children would have gotten the same treatment, but just like little Kal-El escaping Krypton, maybe Diana's mother wanted something better for her

Except Jor-El and Lara were not king and queen of Krypton. Hippolyta is.

It would be like saying that Jefferson Davis "sure had to deal with a lot of racist people ".

If you are in this position of power, to the point you are not even President but Queen, changes are, you are not the exception to the rule.

I'm on the fence.

I'm a long time reader of WW. And I have to admit, sometimes her stories had been pretty lame. I liked the mythological aspect and the interactions with the characters of legends. I do like that the new team is shaking things up a bit - some of the stuff she got saddled with over the years was downright corny. I don't miss the lack of flight at all - with flight she seemed too much like Superman.

But I read Greek mythology years before I got enough allowance to afford a comic. The Wonder Woman writers usually did a decent job with the characterization of the characters of myth so that could believe that they would appear with WW. This version drastically changes the portrayal of characters who have lived in stories for literally thousands of years.

The book has me interested. I do want to know what happens next. But I really haven't decided whether I like it yet. It seems like the writer wants to rewrite Greek mythology and give us that story, and Diana just happens to be a plot device for that.

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@DarthShap: LOL Dind't see the relation before. That fight was awesome.

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@Primmaster64 said:

@RazzaTazz: Nice. In the long run, this will make absolutely good stories and Diana will probably try to convince her brothers about the open world out there.

I am not sure how concerned she will be, at least in the immediate future.

If she really is a super hero, the answer is obvious.. :)

I am not really sure, it raises some interesting question though

Like?

I think to go into it too much would be a spoiler, but basically it is a human rights issue I guess dealing with slavery

I see....Something that will be address in the future...Since doesn't WW represent freedom?

SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content.

Well the point which the comic makes is "are they really slaves if they want to be there and love their master for saving them"?

I really do not think that it was the point. Because you do no cease to be a slave just because your master treats you right, especially if you do not know any better.

The original point showed that Superman could not win because Apokolips had been completely corrupted by Darkseid, to the point where he was considered to be God by the people.

The point of the rip-off is that not everything is black or white and that there are some shades of grey. But I am not sure it works here because to say in 2012 that sometimes slavery is "grey" is just stupid.

@Darkmount1said:

I have a bit of a theory regarding this latest development:

We all know that the Wildstorm Universe was integrated into the DCU when it became the DCnU, right?

So, in the old Wildstorm days, what were the equivalents to the Amazons? The Coda, Zealot’s (of Wild C.A.T.S.) warrior woman clan.

My theory: Azarello must be setting something up where it’s revealed that not ALL the Amazons are responsible for these actions–it’s the doing of a splinter sect called (drum roll please)….the Coda!

So people, don’t be surprised if somewhere later in the book, Diana learns of a splinter sect of the Amazons that were the real and only perpetrators of these actions. If they reintroduce Zealot this way, she’d probably be a Coda disgusted and disillusioned by the actions of her ‘sisters’. It would still tie in to the original depictions of the Amazons of ancient Greek myth, but would keep the blood off of Hippolyta's--and the rest of the DC Amazons'--fair hands.

What do you all think?

From what I can tell, Azzarello has not read one Wonder Woman comic book and is just interested in telling a story on Greek Mythology that would sell, hence the need to include Wonder Woman in the picture because that is how you sell comic books for the US market.

Seeing how he has not tried to include one element from Wonder-Woman's past, except to mock it (the clay origin and the fact that they were all women because the gods said so), I really doubt that he would go through all these intricacies to include the Coda, especially considering that he never worked on them to my knowledge.

Never really knowing the full history of Wonder Woman before I always went by the greek stories and assumed the amazons were always a race of warriors especially considering its been portrayed that way for years in the Justice League cartoon, The Wonder Woman movie, etc. Also in books like Superman/Batman: Supergirl or Amazons attack. To me the amazons have always been warriors first and going by the original mythology I always figured the amazons killed men after using them to procreate because men were viewed as tools to them. I guess to me this doesn't really change much for me. I haven't read the issue yet but maybe I should comment again after I do.

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap: A slave lacks among other things freedom of choice. They had a choice here, and they made it

So what is the point? That you cannot free a slave? That is even worse! That was part of the South's argument during the American Civil War!

@Darkmount1 said:

I have a bit of a theory regarding this latest development:

We all know that the Wildstorm Universe was integrated into the DCU when it became the DCnU, right?

So, in the old Wildstorm days, what were the equivalents to the Amazons? The Coda, Zealot’s (of Wild C.A.T.S.) warrior woman clan.

My theory: Azarello must be setting something up where it’s revealed that not ALL the Amazons are responsible for these actions–it’s the doing of a splinter sect called (drum roll please)….the Coda!

So people, don’t be surprised if somewhere later in the book, Diana learns of a splinter sect of the Amazons that were the real and only perpetrators of these actions. If they reintroduce Zealot this way, she’d probably be a Coda disgusted and disillusioned by the actions of her ‘sisters’. It would still tie in to the original depictions of the Amazons of ancient Greek myth, but would keep the blood off of Hippolyta's--and the rest of the DC Amazons'--fair hands.

What do you all think?

EXTREME Cop out. It would completely undo the impact of having this twist in the first place. And Azzarello seems to be playing Wonder Woman as close to Greek Mythology as possible, I SERIOUSLY doubt he'd bring in Wildstorm stuff to her origin, it wouldn't mesh well with everything he's been doing thus far.

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap: A slave lacks among other things freedom of choice. They had a choice here, and they made it

So what is the point? That you cannot free a slave? That is even worse! That was part of the South's argument during the American Civil War!

I've never read a WW before new 52, so when I read this issue, I thought it has always been like that since I've came across several greek mythologies that is in line with this. I'm just surprised people are so affected by it, I thought it was great.

@DarthShap said:

@RazzaTazz said:

@DarthShap: A slave lacks among other things freedom of choice. They had a choice here, and they made it

So what is the point? That you cannot free a slave? That is even worse! That was part of the South's argument during the American Civil War!

We have no indication of whether or not they are completely enslaved. Perhaps they ARE allowed to choose to leave if they want, perhaps they ARE allowed to see the surface and experience it to make their decision.

But we don't know. And neither did Wonder Woman. But they respect Hephaestus, and he appears to respect them back.

@The Mighty Monarch: Look, I have that theory because I am absolutely sick and tired of seeing nothing but KILL! KILL! KILL! in modern comics. For once, why can't we have a comic where, say, someone throws ONE punch and it knocks the other person out cold?

I guess I'm down with this change, as long as Wonder Woman comes to see it for what it is. Downright psychopathic, this culture is extremely messed up, and how would we feel if these genders were reversed?

I'm making the call right now. Wonder Woman does this ritual. Sleeps with Steve Rogers, realizes she can't kill him, and gives birth to a boy. BOOM, there's your story.

@DarthShap said:

@noj said:

@DarthShap: Look man you gotta stop looking at the Amazons and judging them so harshly. Sure from our point of view it looks terribly evil and wrong but this is from a 21st century POV. The Amazons are still practicing traditions that were not uncommon in their time period. Their isolation from the outside world basically ensured that they didn't move beyond these practices and develop with the rest of the civilized world.You cant really call it evil without basically calling all the people and cultures throughout history that led a similar life inherently evil as well. Its just their way of life. They are a society stuck in the past.

Except they were described as monsters even then. THEY WERE THE VILLAINS OF THEIR STORIES!

I wasnt solely talking about the Amazons of myth, I was also talking about real world cultures and people who practiced similar traditions, like the Spartans. You cant REALLY call these people truly evil, it was just their way of life. It is how they were raised. You can look at the Amazons in a similar light.

@Darkmount1: And Batman never knocks people out with his fists?

I'm not saying we can't tone down the killing, I for one kind of don't really care, but I'm looking at it from a literary standpoint. It just doesn't have even a tangental connection to what Azzarello appears to be doing is how I see it. As I said, he's playing things VERY close to straight Greek Mythology, I think its clear he's trying to make this pretty self contained, and I'm actually LOVING that.

And, no offense, but it still just seems like a weak way to worm out of controversy. "What's that? People aren't happy you made the Amazons into killers? Well lets just say it wasn't REALLY them, but these OTHER Amazons we haven't talked about in this series ever before. Yeah, it was actually them." It just..... it feels like a transparent cop out.