Grant Morrison's Wonder Woman

[Drz]

Looking for a comic to return Wonder Woman to her bondage roots, and then redefine her feminist credentials? Final Crisis and Batman and Robin writer Grant Morrison claims to be working on that very book, just for you.

During his LA appearance with Clive Barker earlier this week, Morrison admitted that Wonder Woman had disappeared from Final Crisis midway through the series, although he had a good reason why:

[The ideas] went into a different project with Wonder Woman... The basics of Wonder Woman come from William Moulton Marston, a psychologist who created the lie detector, of all things. His idea was that a utopia would be achieved if men were placed in subjugation to women. So, Wonder Woman is a character where you imagine this very strange mélange of girl power, bondage, and a slightly disturbed sexuality. There is this bondage element; these extremely weird dark elements of Wonder Woman haven't been adequately dealt with. Wonder Woman remains a really bizarre, untouchable character. She should represent women in the same way Superman represents men.

The project - all detail of which, including release date, format, artist and (most importantly) whether or not DC have greenlit it - has a simple mission statement, according to the author:

To make it work, to give [Wonder Woman] a sexuality that isn't exploitive, because that's too easy; but also to give her a [narrative] power.

Well, it's definitely better than her calling men "sperm bank," I guess.

Whos' excited? I sure am after reading All-Star Superman and seeing his take on Batman.

 

[yenaled]

This doesn't even come close to annoucing he is doing a WW book

 

[Drz]

So now we should ignore what Grant Morrison says he is planning to work on?

 

[WompuM]

I mean, WB also said a Metal Men movie would happen. Just don't hold your breath.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I don't know, I guess it would be good because it would attract attention for the character. I would be open to it I suppose, if it happens.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

So now we should ignore what Grant Morrison says he is planning to work on?

More like we have no idea what format this is going to be in. Isn't his next project a series of one-shot multiverse stories(like Shazam and Charlton)? It could be one of those. Nothing says it'll be an All-star book. As a matter a fact, DC said once Hughes' ASWW comes they are shelving the line for a while. And Gail Simone isn't leaving WW anytime soon.

 

[yenaled]

So now we should ignore what Grant Morrison says he is planning to work on?

He also said for a number of years after Final Crisis the only thing he is working on with superheroes is Batman and he's going to spend his time doing a lot of creator owned stuff he has had floating around in his head for a long time.

 

[Motown Marvel]

im game for this. im sure if he wants to do it, DC will have no problem green lighting it.

 

[Sawyer]

The more DC books that actually sound interesting, the better. The past few DC solicitations (with a few exceptions) have been a ****ing BORE.

 

[Anubis]

First of all, i'm totally saving that Grant Morrison pic before the Mods come in and wipe it away.

Secondly, Yen's right, this is just some stuff he's talking about possibly doing. This isn't news, it's gossip. That said, I'd buy the s**t out of it if it came out. I'd walk into a comic shop, and be like, "GIVE ME THAT S**T!" And they'd be like, "Wow, he bought the s**t outta that book." True story.

 

[cerealkiller182]

I'd rather hear he's doing Aquaman. For some reason I though Morrison would be amazing writing pre-OYL waterbearer Aquaman version

 

[The Eagle Host]

He also said for a number of years after Final Crisis the only thing he is working on with superheroes is Batman and he's going to spend his time doing a lot of creator owned stuff he has had floating around in his head for a long time.

His Multiversity books seem "weird" enough that I would give them a pass as far as tradition super-heroics go.

 

[kytrigger]

First of all, i'm totally saving that Grant Morrison pic before the Mods come in and wipe it away.

Secondly, Yen's right, this is just some stuff he's talking about possibly doing. This isn't news, it's gossip. That said, I'd buy the s**t out of it if it came out. I'd walk into a comic shop, and be like, "GIVE ME THAT S**T!" And they'd be like, "Wow, he bought the s**t outta that book." True story.

Definately. At first glance I thought it was a tattoo-less Spider Jerusalem picture and thought "Grant Morrison is writing a new Trasnmetropolitan?" The craziness of it pretty much gave me a 4 hour seizure that I'm just now recovering from.

 

[Watson]

I'd read this. Simone is doing a fine job, but there hasn't been anything really exciting for WW to do in a long time. She's one of the few characters I think could use the full reboot treatment.

If anyone wants to see how very cracked out Marston era WW was, check out the Wonder Woman: Bound to Blog series. The author is going through all of the first issues of WW and analyzing them. I really hope Morrison doesn't recreate the issue where all the Amazonians dress up as deer and WW catches them and fake eats them for dinner

 

[Anubis]

That sounds............hot.........and I don't know why......

 

[Watson]

^You must be Morrison's/Maston's target market

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I'd pass on this. Wonder Woman's bondagy roots were always kind of stupid to me. She's the one character who has, without question, done nothing but benefitted from her post-Crisis reinterpretations, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Yeah, I can agree with that. I think most people misinterpret those roots anyway, so it might be best to leave that aspect alone

 

[Drz]

Yeah, I can agree with that. I think most people misinterpret those roots anyway, so it might be best to leave that aspect alone

I believe in Grant Morrison.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm sure it wouldn't be as bad as it sounds, but the last time Morrison went all trippy and wanted to focus on sex, we got his one issue of Wildcats with Jim Lee, which wasn't even that great.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Yeah, I can agree with that. I think most people misinterpret those roots anyway, so it might be best to leave that aspect alone

I don't think people misinterpret it. It's just that Marston was writing a very specific idea using a very specific kink to express it. Asking 70 years worth of writers to follow it would be like asking a non-racist person to write the KKK's informational pamphlet. Even if you could fake it, there's no real heart in it because you don't believe it. Despite Superman change in tactics from his inception, the idea of wishfulfilment using strength is still central to the stories throughout.

So even Morrison is altering the Marston version, I think, to reflect something else. But I think he's planning on using the verbage of Marston though.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I don't think people misinterpret it. It's just that Marston was writing a very specific idea using a very specific kink to express it. Asking 70 years worth of writers to follow it would be like asking a non-racist person to write the KKK's informational pamphlet. Even if you could fake it, there's no real heart in it because you don't believe it.

So even Morrison is altering the Marston version, I think, to reflect something else. But I think he's planning on using the verbage of Marston though.

Actually I believe they do. Most times I tend to read about it people think it's all about bondage, but Marston wasn't just writing just because he thought bondage was cool and enjoyed it. That may be true, but the main driving force behind it was that Marston basically thought that men were too destructive and their role in this world should be total submission to the female side of the race.

People think that he's referencing submission towards women because Diana was often in that position, but he was really saying that he felt the destructive side of men were submitting women and they should break out and take their place as the superior sex of the human race

 

[TheCorpulent1]

It's extraordinarily easy to misinterpret, given that he had Wonder Woman lose all her power when she's bound.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Yeah, that part is pretty easy to misunderstand. I use to think around those those lines myself until I started reading up on the subject, Marston's own writings, and his personal life.

I guess he had to be zetta subtle about it, otherwise he probably would have been hanged or something

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Actually I believe they do. Most times I tend to read about it people think it's all about bondage, but Marston wasn't just writing just because he thought bondage was cool and enjoyed it. That may be true, but the main driving force behind it was that Marston basically thought that men were too destructive and their role in this world should be total submission to the female side of the race.

People think that he's referencing submission towards women because Diana was often in that position, but he was really saying that he felt the destructive side of men were submitting women and they should break out and take their place as the superior sex of the human race

Yeah, there was an interesting mutli-faceted approach he was spouting. Because women were supposed to submit to women only as long as it was a loving-authority.

The problem I see when people talk about Modern Wondy and Marston Wondy is that several of Marston's idea keep resurfacing throughout the decades, meaning they do understand the pieces, but don't like the image the puzzle creates when put together. I.e Men are destructive, let's put women in charge. Especially in a world dominated by fans of Superman and his "punch it still it stops" philosophy . The handful of Marston Wonder Woman I read, the idea that the Amazons hate men isn't really there. Men certainly are caricatured and Steve's a doofus but the idea of hating men is something more post-Marston. If you don't believe in loving-submission, the Wonder Woman tied up scene plays as either stupid bondage or run-of-the mill cat and mouse.

That's just my belief. People saw and understood what was there and dismissed it as the something to justify Marston's kinks(Which is how many ideas are forgotten, ridicule it until no one takes it serious). While possibly, partly true, doesn't mean he didn't believe it. So the bondage angle became such a joke and no one believes in the reason it was there in the first place(your illuminating post). Without it, she might as well be tied on a train track by a guy in a top hat and moustache, which is how a lot of those post Marston scenes looked.