.jpg) |
| Images copyright DC COMICS |
WONDER WOMAN, the creation of WILLIAM MOULTON MARSTON (whose pen name was CHARLES MOULTON) debuted in ALL STAR COMICS #8 (dated December 1941), next appeared in SENSATION COMICS #1 (dated January 1942), and the first issue of her own comic came out six months later. Originally called SUPREMA, her name was changed before her first appearance to the one we all know and love today. (Interestingly, Marston also invented the Polygraph, so the Amazon Princess isn't his only claim to fame.)
In 1968, out went the old and in came the new, in the form of a powerless DIANA PRINCE, whose blind mentor, I-CHING, trained her in the martial arts in order to combat the foes she would encounter in her fight against crime. Written by DENNY O'NEIL and drawn (and soon written) by MIKE SEKOWSKY (with inks by DICK GIORDANO), Diana was transformed, essentially, into an American version of EMMA PEEL. This lasted until issue #204, when I-Ching was killed and Diana's powers and costume were returned to her, and she resumed her career as WW.
The character has since undergone several revisions, but this one was possibly the most radical (and interesting). Here are the first seven covers for you to paste your peepers on, you lucky Crivs! More to come when I remember to scan them.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
I wonder in the Polygraph inspired Charles Moulton to create Wonder Woman's lasso of truth or vice versa? I have only read about 3 WW books (and a few stories in compilation comics like DC Superheroes etc) but could never really get into the mythos of the character and found her a bit dry (although for some reason the 70s TV show I did like, I wonder why) but that period where she was plain Diana Prince always looked interesting and I always enjoyed Sekowskys art around this time - I wonder what the New 52 has done to the character of Wonder Woman ?
ReplyDeleteD'you know, McScotty, I've often wondered why WW is regarded as one of the big 3 DC mags, which has been in almost constant publication since it first came out. The stories always seemed pretty lame to me, what with an invisible 'plane (give me a break) and all that bondage stuff in the tales from the '40s. I think Marston was a psychologist, which means he probably had some weird stuff going on in his head. As for the New 52 WW - they've probably ruined it like they seem to have done with Superman.
ReplyDeleteThe amount of DC comics I've read can be counted on my fingers but I did read a couple of issues of Wonder Woman around 1982 and I quite enjoyed them I must admit - as for the New 52, from the pictures I've seen the art on WW is awful. Lynda Carter's version would have been a lot different if DC had stuck to the "new" WW - no spinning around or "fighting for her rights in her satin tights" (I think that's how it went).
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, Col, I think that was when Roy Thomas was the writer and Gene Colan the artist, so the comic would've been better than usual. I've just never been that impressed with the character (except when she was Lynda Carter).
ReplyDeletePossibly the best era for WW for me, this was. Absolutely glorious.
ReplyDeleteI think Marston's estate has it in legalese that WW must be kept published by DC in perpetuity for his children.
That's interesting, Karl. WW wasn't published for a few months some years back, but would DC be obliged to keep publishing the comic if it continually lost money? I'm not sure Marston's estate could legally impose that sort of condition.
ReplyDelete