Woman writer for Wonder Woman as of March, 2007

[fulltimer56]

I saw this in the "USA Weekend" insert in the Sunday paper:

Q: Is best-selling novelist Jodi Picoult really writing a Wonder Woman story for DC Comics?

A: Yes. The first of her five parts comes out in March. Wonder Woman editor Matt Idelson says Picoult is good at "making characters real." And because "there's a strong female appeal to Jodi's books," she may bring in a new audience. Besides, having a woman write Wonder Woman makes sense.

What do ya'll think? Will this be a first or has there been other women writers for Wonder Woman before?

Linda

[oxbladder]

I know of at least one woman who wrote a few issues in the first series. Mindy Newell wrote issues 326-328.

To me it is no big deal if a man or a woman writes the book. I just hope Picoult (if she ever ends out writing the book or not since I had heard rumours she was not going to be doing the next arc) can not hold the book up the way Heinberg has. I do not appreciate how long it has taken Heinberg to get the first arc done (my understanding is that it is at least partly to do with Heinberg).

I certainly hope Picoult is able to do justice to the character and her history. It is very different writing books and comics. Once she is done with her arc I REALLY hope DC gets a proven talent on the book ... one that can write more than one five issue arc a year. DC has pissed a huge number of fans off and it will take many years to recover from this fiasco .... WW might even be in as bad a shape as when Byrne destroyed her readership.

[StlComics]

I actually enjoyed the Byrne run... :D It was mostly because it was so involved in the Donna Troy stuff though (I'm a big Teen Titans fan). I wasn't really a reader of the WW series before Byrne, and honestly I didn't really read much of it after him either. If you want to know who I'd really like to see on the book again, it's Perez. Sure his first take on the character might be somewhat dated now, but it was great then. I think he could do it again.

[SatansProdigy]

Is Wonder Woman...well...Wonder Woman again? Or is it still Donna Troy? I bought the first issue and stopped.

[oxbladder]

I actually enjoyed the Byrne run... :D

You are the first person I know to admit that.

The store I worked and shopped at had around 12-14 people on that book when Byrne took over. Within ONE year I was the only person left collecting it and NOT because I liked what Byrne was doing. In fact within a year I was the only person left on the title between the two stores that the owner had.

I have not and will not touch Byrne stuff again. I don't like his writing, his art is tired, and he has the next crappiest attitude in comics after McFarlane.

[SILLYSHIP--pirate eye--]

What do you mean by the "crappiest attitde" what's wrong with their attitude? I seem to remember that McFarlane was the first to kill a child molester. What is wrong with that?.......Yeah, I hate McFarlane too, but I also love him.

[dpxcomicsgirl]

You know, I've loved Wonder Woman since my Superfriends childhood days. I had a Wonder Woman costume when I was a kid. But it seems there aren't many Wonder Woman comics that are really worth reading.

I just hope that:

1) The comic comes out IN TIME and on a MONTHLY basis.

2) That it's good!

[StlComics]

So far, the new WW series really isn't doing much for me. I may buy one or two more issues as I'm trying to give it a chance, but if something doesn't change, I'll spend my $3 on something else.

[oxbladder]

1) The comic comes out IN TIME and on a MONTHLY basis.


I have heard nothing to tell me that WW will switch back to monthly. Hopefully whats-her-nose will get her writing done on time heinberg was absolutely terrible at getting his writing done .... well nothing different from Young Avengers really he was hopeless at getting that book out on time.

[oxbladder]

What do you mean by the "crappiest attitde" what's wrong with their attitude? I seem to remember that McFarlane was the first to kill a child molester. What is wrong with that?.......Yeah, I hate McFarlane too, but I also love him.

Clearly you have not read how these people have conducted themselves in interviews, articles and in public. Byrne has said racist and bigotted things and considers himself god. He cannot take criticism at all and will remove all criticism of him off his site.

McFarlane has said and done some nasty things. Go back and read his responses to letters in his Spider-man book. Blames everyone but himself for plot holes etc. He is down right rude.

If their art can get you past this behavior thats fine but I can't stand them.

[SILLYSHIP--pirate eye--]

I don't have anything to do with "The Public" as related to comics. I am learning some history, but I did not know of the things you spoke of. I know that McFarlanes public record is made to look good by the ideas that he started a company to give artists the rights to their work and does quite a bit of charity work. I don't, admittedly know much about him though. His comics can be a little over the edge as far as how evil the characters are, they sometimes make me the slightest bit uncomfortable. And many times, after reading things in the comics and related to his toy company and the movie I have thought that he seemed very commercialistic and I don't think I'd like him. But, who knows.

Truthfully, I don't really like Byrne's art that much, it's too advertising commercial stylized. It reminds me of the super-friends.

I know very little about the people who create the comics. Being an artist myself and being surrounded by artists that I have to deal with, I find it useful not to relate the art to the artist. I think of the art as a child. You cannot blame the sins of the Father on the child. In the art world, quite often a piece is viewed as something utterly different from what it was meant to be by the artist. This goes to show that the artist is really never more than a vehicle for the creative force of the Universe and the art stands alone.

[SILLYSHIP--pirate eye--]

Ohw, by the way, I think it is really cool that a woman is writing WW, but I can't believe so few have in the past.

[oxbladder]

Ohw, by the way, I think it is really cool that a woman is writing WW, but I can't believe so few have in the past.

Probably has everything to do with that historically women have had very little interest in comics and how comics have been considered a lower art form. There could very well be prejudice down the line somewhere but more than likely it has more to do with my first point.

[oxbladder]

I don't have anything to do with "The Public" as related to comics. I am learning some history, but I did not know of the things you spoke of. I know that McFarlanes public record is made to look good by the ideas that he started a company to give artists the rights to their work and does quite a bit of charity work. I don't, admittedly know much about him though. His comics can be a little over the edge as far as how evil the characters are, they sometimes make me the slightest bit uncomfortable. And many times, after reading things in the comics and related to his toy company and the movie I have thought that he seemed very commercialistic and I don't think I'd like him. But, who knows.

Truthfully, I don't really like Byrne's art that much, it's too advertising commercial stylized. It reminds me of the super-friends.

I know very little about the people who create the comics. Being an artist myself and being surrounded by artists that I have to deal with, I find it useful not to relate the art to the artist. I think of the art as a child. You cannot blame the sins of the Father on the child. In the art world, quite often a piece is viewed as something utterly different from what it was meant to be by the artist. This goes to show that the artist is really never more than a vehicle for the creative force of the Universe and the art stands alone.

Nothing really to argue here as it is your unique perspective. I just wanted to comment on two points.

First on McFarlane's starting image. The principles of Image and other independents are just fine. However, how they (as in most of the Image folks) took jabs at Marvel and DC were a bit unfair. The first Image creators owe a lot to the likes of DC and Marvel. If not for them it could well be that the likes of McFarlane and Jim Lee would never have got to the positions they have now. They were talking like DC and Marvel were these big evil corporations that sucked artists dry which is not really true. Some folks can work in a more structured environment and don't really care about thing like rights or larger paychecks.

(Image also had terrible problems early and to some degree today getting their product out on time. This is something that has penetrated the big two now too and is something most of us get really annoyed about. Whether a book is independent or not it should ship on time barring unforseen problems like Jeff Smith or Jim Lee had (Wildstorm had some sever problems for almost a year because Jim had to take time off for personal problems (Death in the family I think) and Jeff Smith had to take some time off from creating Bone due to cancer.)))

As for Bryne's art ..... I would have to agree with you there. I like his early work but his style never really changed or refined. When he did WW it actually got horribly sparse with no background or what ever. Some of his work recently has been much better but I have to admit it really does nothing for me. His writing is usually pretty horrible now too. Oddly he just doesn't see it because he chooses to tune out his critics for the most part. The way he talks you would think he is still as good as he was on X-Men and FF.

For your other points.... I know someone that certainly could use a dose of your perspective as he has worked within the industry for awhile now and has a very tainted view now and he certainly could use something to renew his faith.