scans_daily | What is DCnU's Wonder Girl's Relationship with Wonder Woman?

Entry tags:

What is DCnU's Wonder Girl's Relationship with Wonder Woman?

In Teen Titans #19 it suggested that Cassie is the daughter of Wonder Woman’s brother Lennox. That would make Wonder Woman her aunt and Zeus now her grandfather instead of father.

More information in the interview here,
http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/55507813446/azzarello-confirms-connection-between-wonder-girl-and

I also learnt elsewhere that apparently the thing from the end of the first DCnU storyarc, where Diana removes her bracelets and gets even more powerful, was actually something that had already been established...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only | Expand All

Diana is going Fist of the North Star-style on that centipede guy.

Lol, go Diana!

I was thinking that also.

Now I can't view that panel without hearing a high-pitched "AHTATATATATATATATATATATATATATA!" in my head.

Really? All I can hear is, "Gomu Gomo noooooo... JET GATLING!"

I remember seeing that was an old silver age thing--Azz just tweaked it a little to make it more in line with what he was doing with Diana's new bloodline. Plus you can't go wrong with more Kirby Krackle.

I'm glad Azz confirmed that connection--I wonder if that was something that Lobdell asked Azz to put in or if that was an editor's idea and said "Hope you're okay with that," but that is a cool connection.

I would definitely like to see Diana meet up with Cassie at some point. Maybe in Superman/Wonder Woman? It looks like that's the book where a lot of Wonder Woman's family will interact with the greater DCU.

Taking her bracelets off doesn't make her stronger per se, they just removed her self control and she goes into berseker mode.

The bracelets thing goes back to the Golden Age, and actually it was established that she gets stronger--but she also completely loses all of her composure and gives in to her anger. Sort of Hulks out.

So in order to be a wonder, you have to be a bast***? That's the message I'm getting from this.

...Leaving aside your repeatedly stated issues, which are pretty clear at this point, CASSANDRA SANDSMARK WAS ONE BEFORE!

WHEN HER DAD WAS ZEUS BEFORE THE REBOOT HE WASN'T MARRIED TO HER MUM THEN EITHER!

As was Wonder Woman. I mean, Hippolyta wasn't married when Diana was born (or, sculpted), was she?

I believe that the good Jeyl earlier stated that that didn't count as Diana wasn't technically born, just magically created by the gods, or something.

Technically speaking, jeyl never implied that the message wasn't there before either, although that's classic Absence of Evidence right there.

Furthermore, Let Riker join in the fun too! (see icon)

I think the point about Wonder Woman being given her sidekick's origins was one of my biggest gripes about this new take since day one. The fact that Wonder Girl is still going to be a bast*** child seems to play on the idea that you cannot be a cool character unless you are a, well you get the point. The Wonder Women of the DC universe deserve a lot better than this.

What's wrong with kids born out of wedlock?

Nothing. It's writers who think that taking iconic characters and turning them into bast***s is a way of improving the character.

I don't think that "heh, their parents aren't married, that'll be edgy and COOL" was the mental process behind Cassie's and NuDiana's backstories.

(no subject)

jeyl - 2013-07-16 03:46 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

silicondream - 2013-07-16 04:18 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

jeyl - 2013-07-16 04:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

md84 - 2013-07-16 09:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 11:05 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

md84 - 2013-07-16 12:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

theflames - 2013-07-16 11:42 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

md84 - 2013-07-16 12:34 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 15:03 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

theflames - 2013-07-16 16:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

silicondream - 2013-07-16 09:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

mrstatham - 2013-07-16 06:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 10:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 14:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 15:03 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 15:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 16:10 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 16:13 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 16:18 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 16:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 16:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 16:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

btravage - 2013-07-16 03:49 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

mrstatham - 2013-07-16 06:37 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

theflames - 2013-07-16 11:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

shadowpsykie - 2013-07-16 14:39 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

icon_uk - 2013-07-16 16:13 (UTC) - Expand

You say that as if it's something that makes the characters poorer for their association, thus implying something is *wrong* with people born out of wedlock.

So either something is wrong with them, or ?? I'm not sure why you insist on using 'bastard' in this context.

If nothing's wrong with being born out of wedlock, then what's wrong with having that happen to iconic characters?

Particularly Wonder-legacy characters and other Amazons, who for obvious reasons aren't usually affiliated with traditional nuclear families?

The way you are harping about characters being born out of wedlock by calling them "bastard" (and, nope, using cutesy * doesn't make it any better) as a way to criticise DC editorial decisions is frankly coming close to a group attack on S_D members who may not have been born from a married couple. Knock it off.

Re: Mod Note

jeyl - 2013-07-16 15:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Mod Note

salinea - 2013-07-16 15:46 (UTC) - Expand

A bastard weighs in

philippos42 - 2013-07-21 22:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: A bastard weighs in

jeyl - 2013-07-22 02:34 (UTC) - Expand

I think that's the single most bizarre train of thought I've read; Are you actually trying to imply that characters at DC are being forced into a 'bastard child' status, which hasn't *really* changed that much about who they are?

Also, as someone born to those kinds of circumstances, I'm really taking exception to your attitude here, because despite your *saying* there's nothing wrong with it, that's not what I'm getting from what you're putting across.

...Why would you even bring this up? I'm fairly certain that them having superpowers has less to do with them being born out of wedlock and more to do with their parents having divine heritage and various magical weapons.

That Silver age Wonder Woman strip makes me laugh so much for some reason. The way she just sways into a violent rage after letting out a hilarious 'AIIIIEEE!'

I dunno, I've been told that on a Monday morning I can be surprisingly close to that exact thing.

motto on that. i am NOT a morning person, least of all a monday morning person.... i'd just as soon release a blood curdling AIIIIEEEE occompanied by pumelling as say good morning.

The berserker rage on losing her bracelets is something I'm glad Pérez dropped, actually. I think it first came in when Marston and Peter were doing the book. For a series full of explicit messages about female self-empowerment, which also had weird quasi-metaphorical gods running around, it seems like a bad choice for a weakness. I don't know if it was meant as a metaphor for self-control, or just some cracky thing that Marston dreamt up and threw in; but it comes off too much like a metaphor for being bound in submission to another.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only | Expand All