What is the deal with Wonder Woman? (And Supergirl, She-Hulk, PowerGirl et. al.)
Is she a powerful role model for girls?
Is she a pre-pinup for boys?
Is she aimed at adult men?
I am familiar with the Wonder Woman of my youth. She seemed remarkably un-liberated. I do not think she appealed to either boys or girls. Has that changed?
I think much of it boils down to who’s writing for her and what the storyline is. Much of the recent stuff (past few years) has had her as the ambassador of Themascyra (until the horrid ‘Amazons Attack’ storyline), and a very politically-aware, strong, leader-type. They also tend to push her empathy for situations and people (I recall some hero mentioning, more than once, something along the lines of, “You always felt that she understood and genuinely cared.”)
Of course, the fact that most female superheroes are of pin-up stature has been a tradition for a long time, long enough that it’s easier to list those who aren’t than those who are.
I’m sure people more versed with the history will be able to give you more specific details than I.
You mean, aside from the lesbian bondage subtext? (I know it can’r be subtext … subtext should be subtle.)
From what I’ve heard young girl comic and cartoon fans have always held WW in high esteem. She’s sort of like a female Superman, gifted with superhuman abilities but also with a kind and considerate nature, at least in the original incarnation.
I have definitely not kept up with this sort of thing, but I know the Marvel “universe” has gone through numerous changes–I think mainly in order to allow heroes to be killed off and then return in some form. Isn’t it true that in some of the later incarnations, WW has become someone darker in nature?
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
What is the deal with Wonder Woman? (And Supergirl, She-Hulk, PowerGirl et. al.)
Is she a powerful role model for girls?
Is she a pre-pinup for boys?
Is she aimed at adult men?
I am familiar with the Wonder Woman of my youth. She seemed remarkably un-liberated. I do not think she appealed to either boys or girls. Has that changed?
[/QUOTE]
All the questions really depend on the creative team that has the reins of Wonder Woman at a given moment. I’ll give you my opinions:
Role model for girls: she can be. Taking her entire history into account (including out-of-continuity comics), I’d have to fall on the side of “no,” since she’s often been written pretty poorly. Taking specific instances of Wonder Woman, she probably has been. Trina Robbins’ take on WW in the '80s was specifically aimed at being a role model for girls, and apparently Gloria Steinem felt the early-70’s Wonder Woman was a feminist role model, putting her on the cover of the first issue of Ms. Magazine. (Interestingly, DC had taken WW out of her bustier and put her in street clothes before this, downplaying the sex appeal, but Ms. Steinem appealed to DC to bring back the earlier WW.) The '70s live-action WW was apparently a role model for some, or so claims Lynda Carter in some of the behind-the-scenes interviews on the DVD sets.
Pre-pin-up for boys: yes, for many versions. Despite the stilted early artwork, WW was, as DrFidelius points out, created to explore bondage themes; the early issues featured lots of “headlight,” bondage, and “Good Girl Art” covers and interiors. Lynda Carter, dressed as Wonder Woman, was herself a popular poster-girl in the '70s. George Perez’s version in the ‘80s (while, IMO, being a good potential role model) also unabashedly exploited WW and her costume-- Perez was a noted fan of voluptuous women. Mike Deodato, who also had pencilling duties, also tended to do pin-up art in the series. DC has also used several noted “Good Girl Art” cover artists, like Adam Hughes, whose careers are built on doing sexy illustrations. On the other hand, there are other versions of WW-- like Trina Robbins’ Legend of Wonder Woman series, or the early-70s street clothes stories-- that aren’t pin-up material at all.
Aimed at adult men: usually, but not exclusively. She was created by a man to explore bondage themes, and mostly written by men over the years. I’d say the stories have been aimed at both sexes over the last few decades, though there have been lapses into male-fan-service. (The overuse of WW as a basic action hero, though, could turn off a lot of potential female readers.) The Robbins series was aimed at girls, however, and several writers have done creditably well at appealing to women as well as men; Perez wrote her as a strong, feminist woman, for instance. (I’ll plead ignorance of writers over the last few years…)
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi]
Is she a powerful role model for girls?
[/QUOTE]
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Wonder Woman is and has been so many things, that asking what her deal is really depends upon when and where you’re talking about.
As conceived, Wonder Woman was not only a liberating figure, but a subversive one, running around in next-to-nothing, more powerful than any man, and touting ideals of empowerment and self-improvement along with her creator’s bizarre views of the importance of living in “loving submission” to a benevolent master (or mistress; Marston thought that women would eventually rule the world).
She was specifically created as a counterpart of Superman for little girls (in fact, her original name was “Suprema,” and changed shortly before her first appearance).
Beginning in the late 40’s and continuing into the 50’s and early 60’s, Wonder Woman became less and less subversive. Following the death of her creator and the implimentation of the Comics Code, her stories became more tame, she was less of a feminist, she was discouraged from showcasing her powers (and, in fact, prohibited from engaging in physical combat with a man), and spent most of her time rejecting marriage proposals from Steve Trevor (since, as a woman, marrying Steve would have meant giving up her career).
Things got sort of better in the late 60’s and 70’s, and certainly the Lynda Carter TV show boosted the character’s visibility.
In comics, the character was rebooted from scratch in 1987. Many aspects of the character were changed, making her more of a goodwill ambassador than a progressive feminist, and making her more of a warrior figure than a straight-up superhero.
That’s more or less where we are now. The big difference between early Wonder Woman and what we have today is that comics aren’t read by or targeted toward little kids anymore, and especially not little girls.
As a result, Wonder Woman’s primary function is the Justice League’s pin-up girl, and her adventures are targeted toward men between the ages of 20 - 50. She’s more violent than she has ever been, and her message is neither as focused as it was in the 40’s or as lame as it was in the 50’s. She still fights for truth and peace, but now it might involve slicing someone’s head off. Depictions of her without her boobs and ass spilling out of her costume are rare.
The last thing on her I’ve read was Wonder Woman: Mission’s End, a compilation of the last issues of her comic book in 2006 before the events depicted in 52, which had Wonder Women leaving the scene for a year. Another reboot was obviously coming. They’ve since done so. I haven’t read it but the reviews on Amazon for Wonder Woman: Who is Wonder Woman? are not positive.
Rucka’s take on the character was explicitly feminist and explicitly lesbian. She is almost as powerful as Superman but with a feminine heritage that is unique among the DC superhero crowd. She’s obviously intended to be a positive role model for girls. She’s idealistic and pragmatic, sort of a cross between Batman and Superman in morality.
And the art is obviously intended to make her a pin up. She does spill out of her skimpy costume and she and the other Amazons are continually being drawn in the nude, barely covered by a towel or some similar device.
Can you succeed by having it both ways? I didn’t think so. I thought the art undermined any chance of having the text resonate, but I’m not the typical comics reader.
They want to do a Wonder Woman movie, so the next reincarnation will undoubtedly make her more human and play up her Diana Prince identity. No megamovie would touch an island of goddess-worshipping lesbians as its core.
Well, perhaps some sorts of movies.
[QUOTE=Student Driver]
(Interestingly, DC had taken WW out of her bustier and put her in street clothes before this, downplaying the sex appeal, but Ms. Steinem appealed to DC to bring back the earlier WW.)
[/QUOTE]
It wasn’t just that they took her out of the bustier and into Diana Rigg-style outfits, it was that they also de-powered her. The “I-Ching period,” as it’s sometimes called, had WW sacrifice her powers to remain on Earth.
My husband’s brother used to dress up and pretend he was Wonder Woman. Hey, she was cool! She was a super hero!
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
No megamovie would touch an island of goddess-worshipping lesbians as its core.
[/QUOTE]
Sounds like Xena (from what I have read), which was a decently mainstream show from what I understand.
[QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus]
I have definitely not kept up with this sort of thing, but I know the Marvel “universe” has gone through numerous changes–I think mainly in order to allow heroes to be killed off and then return in some form. Isn’t it true that in some of the later incarnations, WW has become someone darker in nature?
[/QUOTE]
Wonder Woman is from the DC Universe. (You haven’t kept up, have you?)
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
I haven’t read it but the reviews on Amazon for Wonder Woman: Who is Wonder Woman? are not positive.
[/QUOTE]
The first three arcs - written by Allan Heinberg, Will Pfeiffer, and Jodi Picoult, respectively - are pretty much universally reviled, but Gail Simone’s current run is generally considered on par with Rucka or Perez, from what I’ve seen - most of the complaints being things she’s kept from Heinberg or Picoult’s runs (the powerless secret identity, and a romance with Tom Tresser), though even those are generally agreed to be well-handled by Simone, even by people who object to them on principle. (The romance is part of an effort to rehabilitate Tom after the horrid portrayal of him in Heinberg, Pfeiffer, and Picoult’s runs, according to Gail.)
Paul, which incarnation of WW are you asking about?
The TV one was my own personal role model when I was six or seven or so. I used up one of Mom’s yellow highlighters turning a long piece of string into my own Golden Lasso, and ran around the backyard in my underwear rescuing people with it. When I see clips from the show now, I’m shocked at how lame she actually was. In my rosy memories she was more like Xena (who is STILL my role model, even if the last season suxx0rzd).
I never had any patience for the derivative superheroines like Supergirl.
ETA: At the same age, I hated Charlie’s Angels on account of their excessive hair-tossing and simpering, and refused to be any of them when playing with other little girls.
Yes, but the angles still chased down the bad guys and pulled guns on them.
As has been noted, WW was supposed to be a role model for girls. Heck, I used to read her Silver Age stuff, but found it frequently pretty dumb. What did I know (What, for that matter DO I now know) about the female mind? Did they like that (A quick check with Pepper Mill shows that she did like it, even if it was sometimes stupid. We both put this down to the stories being written by Men.) She wasn’t a pre-pinup for me, and I didn’t get polymorphously perverse about any of her abilities or attributes.
Despite the intent, I never really got the feeling that she was really remotely as powerful as the guy superheroes. They gave her STUPID powers, as I’ve said before on this Board – one story from 1957 lists among her abilities “threading a needle underwater” and “running up a sheet of glass”. Nobody ever asks Superman or Captain Marvel to do THAT! And her stupid Invisible Plane that’s really Visible makes no sense. And wouldn’t even if it really WAS invisible!
But here’s the thing that gets me – I was at a Warner Brothers store today. They have T-shirts for Superman and Batman and Green Lantern and The Flash, and they look Tough and Cool.
They have T-shirts for Womder Woman and Supergirl, too (but no other female characters, I note), but they’re not cool. They’re all PINK. And they’re festooned with flowers and cutesy stuff. THIS is a powerful role model?
[QUOTE=Sage Rat]
Sounds like Xena (from what I have read), which was a decently mainstream show from what I understand.
[/QUOTE]
On one hand, a $150 million studio movie aimed at all audiences and opening on 4000 screens. On the other, a syndicated cult series seen on cable television.
[Chandler]How *could * they be more similar.[/Chandler]
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
On one hand, a $150 million studio movie aimed at all audiences and opening on 4000 screens. On the other, a syndicated cult series seen on cable television.
[Chandler]How *could * they be more similar.[/Chandler]
[/QUOTE]
Here’s a top 20 rating list I was able to find from 1997:
1 Wheel of Fortune 230/99 12.7 –
2 Home Improvement 232/98 10.5 12.5
2 Jeopardy! 225/99 10.5 –
4 Oprah Winfrey Show 235/99 9.2 9.3
5 Seinfeld 227/98 8.3 –
6 Portfolio XV 194/96 7.9 8.2
7 Xena 224/97 7.8 8.6
8 Simpsons 206/96 7.1 8.5
9 Journeys of Hercules 234/98 7.0 7.8
10 Wheel of Fortune-Wknd. 182/84 6.9 –
11 Entertainment Tonight 190/96 6.8 6.9
12 Star Trek: Deep Space Nine 238/98 6.7 7.3
13 WCW Wrestling 173/92 6.5 10.3
14 Inside Edition 155/91 5.5 5.6
15 Rosie O’Donnell Show 223/99 5.4 5.4
16 Jenny Jones 186/94 4.8 5.1
17 Mad About You 215/96 4.7 4.9
17 Montel Williams 194/96 4.7 4.7
17 Sally Jessy Raphael 173/94 4.7 4.8
20 Home Improvement-Wknd. 216/93 4.6 –
I think you’re going to have a hard time convincing anyone that a show which had more viewers than The Simpsons has no possibility of finding a large audience. The geek/comic book “cult” may be a subsection of US society, but they’re also one of the greatest sets of movie goers and have successfully made the LOTR, Spiderman, and what-have-you into some of the biggest grossers there are, and here Xena is ranked the highest of all three of this cult’s listed shows including The Simpsons and Star Trek: DS9.
I don’t see any particular reason to think that if a possibly lesbian Amazon Goddess couldn’t do perfectly impressive on the big screen, given the success of Xena with this group and their power in summer movie fortune-making.
[QUOTE=Sage Rat]
I don’t see any particular reason to think that if a possibly lesbian Amazon Goddess couldn’t do perfectly impressive on the big screen, given the success of Xena with this group and their power in summer movie fortune-making.
[/QUOTE]
It might work, I suppose. But we’ll never find out. You know why?
Because they’ll never make the movie.
And I know that the latest buzz has the script portraying “a new story involving Paradise Island and her background.”
And they’ll still never make that movie.
It doesn’t matter what you or I think or want, or what other shows have attempted. It’s about major movie studios and major blockbuster films.
They won’t make that movie. They won’t sink $150 million into it. They won’t pitch it as the equal to Superman and Batman. Not gonna happen.
Wonder Woman will come from a race of beautiful women in cut-off chitons, true. But she’ll spend the rest of the time as Diana Prince battling evil in the patriarchal world. If the movie ever gets made. And she’ll have a love interest. Male.
In what world do you live in that this won’t come to pass? Obama ain’t going to change things that much!
The problem appears to be with Joel Silver, principally. Another producer, who had more in his resume in the last two decades to brag about than The Matrix, could just as easily be sold on the reality of what sells. I don’t think you can spend sixteen years after Lethal Weapon 3 with only one major blockbuster in your name if you really still understand who you’re selling to.
Though really, DC would probably be wise to take a look at what Marvel is doing and go the path themselves instead of selling off the rights to Hollywood and hoping for the best.