CSBG Archive
John Seavey’s Storytelling Engines: Wonder Woman
Here’s the latest Storytelling Engine from John Seavey. Click here to read John’s description of what a Storytelling Engine IS, anyways. Check out more of them at his blog, Fraggmented.
Storytelling Engines: Wonder Woman
(or “Why? Because Bob Kanigher, That’s Why!”)
And a tip of the hat to Chris Sims for the subtitle…
Reading Silver Age Wonder Woman stories is, at times, like reading someone’s dream diary. Flying saucer men animate parade balloons and send them on a rampage to conquer Earth, outer-space dinosaurs ride cosmic jet-streams from their home on Titan, an Amazonian “absolute zero” chamber freezes metal insects from space until they shrink down to nothing…every story seems to follow a surreal logic all its own. It’s a completely different type of storytelling than we see in modern comics (for the most part.) And yet, this was common practice during the Silver Age. What changed?
A lot of things, obviously. The target audience got older, the writers became more invested emotionally in their stories, the editors became more interested in universe-building, and a dozen other reasons, but one reason that jumps to the top of the list is simply this: Silver Age writers had to write their entire story in one issue. These “one-and-done” stories didn’t have a whole lot of exposition because the plot didn’t leave room for them. In a modern comic, “flying saucer aliens” would be given six to ten issues of backstory, motivation, and initial appearances to lead into their attempt to conquer the Earth–back then, the writer just put in a little caption box mentioning that they were evil aliens, and the reader went with it.
Obviously, this means that the whole question of “decompressed” vs. “compressed” storytelling isn’t easy to answer; on the one hand, much of the “decompression” of modern comics tends to be about extending sequences in order to heighten tension, instead of actually telling more complex stories (the death of Superman, for example, featured a whole issue of splash pages of Superman and Doomsday hitting each other. It heightened the intensity of the scene, but the whole fight could have been told in six pages.) On the other hand, compressed storylines frequently work better when dealing with children’s fiction, because children are more used to the idea of a story having rules that don’t necessarily make sense, but that are given to them by the storyteller and they just accept it. Pacing vs. padding, excitement vs. epic, it’s really a debate with no end. (Save, of course, that a bad writer can do neither, while a good writer can do both.)
But we are, lest anyone forget, looking at “compression” vs. “decompression” through the lens of the storytelling engine, and the key question is always, “Does it help the writer come up with stories, or does it hurt them?” And from that point of view, compressed stories are a hindrance to a writer, not a help, simply because when you write a complete compressed story every month, you have to come up with six times as many stories as someone writing a six-issue arc “for the trade.” As a result, Silver Age writers recycled stories a lot more than they could possibly do now, both by reusing story ideas (Superman was notorious for reusing certain stories every two years, in the firm belief that nobody who’d read it the last time was still reading comics), an by outright reprinting old stories. (Flip through the table of contents in an ‘Essentials’ and you’ll see “Issue #XX reprints issue #YY” quite a bit. The phenomenon even had a name, “The Dreaded Deadline Doom.” Seeing that when you opened a comic back then was like seeing “The Blue Screen of Death” for a computer user.)
Which isn’t to say that modern writers don’t reuse ideas (Brad Meltzer, I’m looking at you…) But they generally do so for different reasons. The climate of comics has changed, so that between decompression, willingness to sacrifice deadlines, and advance planning, nobody needs to whip up emergency stories. Compression forced Bob Kanigher to write quickly on ‘Wonder Woman’, and while that resulted in some of the most creative stories in comics, it also resulted in comics that made very little sense. Nowadays, writers don’t have that excuse.






6 Comments
johnny boy
December 5, 2007 at 11:15 am
This seems to have very little to do with Wonder Woman.
Graeme Burk
December 5, 2007 at 2:11 pm
I agree, but I think that’s John’s point. Silver Age Wonder Woman in particular doesn’t have a storytelling engine in the way that other characters or concepts do except the supercompressed high-wire act that was Bob Kanigher’s writing. There certainly was very little in the Wonder Woman concept by that time.
The truth is I wonder if Wonder Woman has much of a storytelling engine in any era. One of the writers who did it the most satisfying, George Perez, pretty much borrowed it from Walt Simonson’s Thor by doing it about a character connected to myth (this time Greek Myth) on earth. The other, Mike Sekowsky, eschewed everything. The rest of the time, it’s more or less the same: Amazon, secret identity, dull boyfriend, rinse, repeat. About the only period of the character that made those elements work was Dan Mishkin and Don Heck’s superlative (and tragically ignored) run on the character just before Crisis
Luis Dantas
December 5, 2007 at 9:14 pm
Wonder Woman is indeed a particularly difficult character to write. The character concept is both weak and self-contradictory. I truly doubt it would have survived past 1950 were it not for its privilege of being the most well-known female superhero.
EvilDeathBee
December 5, 2007 at 10:36 pm
“This seems to have very little to do with Wonder Woman.”
I think the point is that all of the weaknesses of the Wonder Woman backstory become strengths if you throw sense to the wind and go nuts.
Wonder Woman is a mish-mash of Greek mythology, magic, funny science, war, feminism, teenage romance, and a dash of everything else thrown in.
And gorillas.
Ordinarily this would be a weakness in the story engine (see “Claremont, Chris”), but it succeeds because of the demand for new stories that were placed on the writer at the time. The more elements that the creators crammed into the character’s backstory, the easier it was to think of something different from what they did the previous month.
Luke
December 6, 2007 at 6:12 am
Flip through the table of contents in an ‘Essentials’ and you’ll see “Issue #XX reprints issue #YY†quite a bit.
I guess I am reading the “wrong” Essentials, so to speak. In the 10 Essentials I own, I have seen this exactly once. I get the point, though.
Poor Wonder Woman never had much of a story engine to call her own, at least not that I have seen. Admittedly I never read that much of her comic, but after flipping through the Showcase volume, I had to put it back — I can get the same basic (though fun!) inanity from any number of Silver Age DC titles.
Dean
December 8, 2007 at 10:14 pm
If WW doesn’t have a unique story-telling engine, then why do one of these pieces on her?
BTW – I disagree. I think WW has stories that spin mostly out of the Paradise Island setting.