A thought occurred to me when I saw the BBC headline this morning of the Queen and Prince William visiting the area of the Grenfell tower fire. A fire that has left 17 people confirmed dead with 76 missing.
Buckingham Palace: Receives £370m for refurbishment.
Grenfell Tower: Doesn’t receive £300,000 for a sprinkler system.
As pointed out by numerous voices, one example being Aamer Anwar, these people died because they were poor. They continually raised awareness that fire alarms didn’t work and lifts repeatedly stopped.
People who were on the lower floors hurled whatever they could at windows to try and wake people up. They are at outside the incident now wondering whether they should have bothered as they think it would have been better if their neighbours had died from smoke inhalation in their sleep rather than in a panic to escape.
Aamer Anwar, human rights lawyer and current rector of Glasgow University, has said that a government inquiry is not good enough as it allows the government to set the parameters. He pointed out examples like the Hillsborough disaster and Bloody Sunday and how the government continually white washes these to make no one, especially the government, look at fault.
He wants an independent inquiry and a criminal investigation. This happened as a result of Tory austerity and cuts to both social housing and to the emergency services. That blood is on their hands.
When Boris Johnson was mayor of London he oversaw the closures of dozens of fire stations. We had Labour leader to Tony Blair, John McTernan, saying that ‘Only 2% of a fireman’s time is spent fighting fires.’ You cannot afford to cut emergency services to save a quick buck. Austerity does not work.
According to Akala, rapper and poet, rich people living nearby complained that the tower block was an eyesore and urged a refurbishment. This refurbishment results in 'pretty panels’ being placed on the outside, according to Aamer Anwar these panels assisted the fire.
The biggest tragedy in Persona 5 is that Yusuke sees absolutely zero royalties from all the Phantom Thieves merch that was sold using his logo design when the poor kid can’t even afford to feed himself.
As per yesterday’s postings on strange fandom wishes for Sansa’s endgame, sometimes I equally don’t understand people wanting her to be this cold, aloof ice queen ruling alone. I think the show has probably contributed to that imagery, because it doesn’t really exist in the books . Again there’s that strong woman = emotionally severed from most other human beings BS that keeps popping up. There is an underlying good intention of wanting her safe that should be acknowledged, but sometimes it’s at the expense of ignoring her characterization.
If anything she was closer to being cold and aloof at the start of AGOT. Courtesy and politeness are not equal substitutes for warmth and kindness. Then by TWOW sample, we see she’s evolved to being self-assured and magnetic. She’s no longer constrained by strict adherence to class boundaries and proper behavior. She throws her arms around Lothor Brune in an impulsive hug for his support. Younger Sansa would never hug a servant like that. She runs like a free spirit with Myranda Royce not caring what anyone thinks. This is not a woman shrinking back from the world, but someone who has seen much and still finding reasons to embrace other people. Even difficult people. She’s exceedingly patient with SR, talks him through his fears, and gives him just enough firmness that he starts behaving better. She’s a natural nurturer and a good parent who has envisioned children in her future.
And she still wants someone to love her for herself. She’s only evolved to a point in the later books of being able to discern who wants her and who wants her claim. The only reason she is entertaining this idea of marrying Harry is because it’s the hand she’s been dealt and she must decide if she is willing to play that hand if she wants to go home. But there’s no rose colored glasses here. She’s looking at him with a very critical eye. There wouldn’t be a sense of settling here if she didn’t still hope that someone would like her as a person and equally important that she likes him too. Wanting real love is not stupid or naive, only the way she pursued it and thought about it was. Her standards have actually gotten much higher and tougher to pass muster.
I feel sometimes as Sansa is a character that is screaming who she is and very few actually listen. She’s grown even more loving, passionate, and intimately connected to others. She’s become even more nurturing and maternal. She’s more authentic, engaging, and kind. She’s someone that draws strength from her connections to others. I don’t understand how it would somehow be better for her that she winds up alone, childless, and immersing herself in a purely political life. Just why? Why would that be a kindness to wish for her when she’s repeatedly wished for the opposite? It could not be more clear how important love and family is to her. Not just her siblings and parents, but a family of her own someday. Is love and family somehow incompatible with being a good leader? Is love and family not compatible with overcoming her past trauma? I absolutely despise all the implications of the lone ice queen and I see no evidence that this is what George intends. The Sansa we’re seeing is stronger than a lone ice queen. She’s seen how some of the most evil people in Westeros operate, experienced abuse and exploitation, and has every reason to never trust another soul again. She still doesn’t retreat from people or life, she runs toward them and is willing to put herself out there again to find what’s real and good. Her dreams are still mostly the same, just re-calibrated and balanced with experience. Alone and aloof would be a absolute tragedy for her character, worse than dying. It would really be the real death of her character.
As our party of 5 delved deeper into the cave our barbarian and wizard (me) got into a scuffle.
*Casts minor illusion* Wizard: I will give you 1000 gold if you take up a future job offer.
*Fails investigation* Barb: I will do anything for that amount of money.
*Paladin succeeds investigation*: You know hes lying to you, right? This must be punished in some way.
Wizard: Job offer just came up, apprehend the paladin and keep him quiet.
Barb: OH! Well in that case I want 1000 real gold or I will smash your face in.
The barbarian rolled a nat 20 on intimidation which sent the wizard fleeing down into the cave unaware of what was about to happen to him. The wizard ran into the tendrils of a roper, just waiting for his next victim. As the wizard goes through a surprise round of attacks you benign transpositions his way out deeper into the cave to escape. Initiative was rolled and the chaos began.
The barbarian ran in, was sweeped off his feet by the tendrils, and spent his action throwing a potion that we call “Cleanser” into the roper’s mouth. This is a home brew item that gives you 10 temporary hit points and +2 to con and dex. The only thing wrong with this potion is that you must endure 6 hours of constant shitting until the effects kick in. We usually do this in the morning before combat, but this roper just took a full dose.
DM: … So immediately after tossing in the cleanser, the roper unleashes brown fury below him. You and everyone who steps within range will face the wrath of the roper’s shit rain.
The rogue, the barbarian, and the paladin were below the roper at this time, with the paladin getting the most of it as he gets thrown around in the puddle by the tendrils.
After a couple of rounds of mud wrestling, the roper made another attack on the paladin, and scored a nat 1. In our game, if you score a nat 1 on your attack role you invoke the critical fail chart of 100 terrible occurrences. Once invoked you must roll a d100 to see which occurrence from 1 (Being absolutely nothing) to 100 (Absolute tragedy)…
It rolled a 100.
DM: The roper falls from the ceiling and is now prone. Then suddenly, crawling out of the intestines and bursting through the rectum of this roper, summons a black dragon.
The party screams in terror and laughter.
(We ended up killing the roper and fleeing away from the dragon. One could say it was a real “shit show.”)
“Brooklyn Nine-Nine” can do something that political discourse seems to find incredibly difficult. The series is confident and optimistic about the necessity of good policing, without ever being remotely defensive about the prospect that this essential job could and should be done better. Its characters are meant to be the best of the NYPD, and they still struggle with bureaucracy and their own impulses. The series doesn’t need them to be perfect — if they were, their excellence would be as deadly to the show’s comedy as incompetence.
That’s an essential perspective. Equally essential: the way Goor and his team have unlocked Andre Braugher’s comedic genius; the way the series managed to revitalize the sitcom holiday episode; the show’s love for and critique of decades of police pop culture; any series that gives us the sight of Samberg pretending he has the mumps. It would be sad to lose “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” if it were only the funniest or one of the most politically fascinating shows anywhere on television. Given that it’s both, seeing it go off the air would be an absolute tragedy.
make me choose; chancehouse asked: doctor who season 3, season 7 or season 9 When something goes missing, you can always recreate it by the hole it left. I know her name was Clara. I know we travelled together. I know that there was an Ice Warrior on a submarine and a mummy on the Orient Express. I know we sat together in the Cloisters and she told me something very important, but I have no idea what she said. Or what she looked like. Or how she talked. Or laughed. There’s nothing there. Just nothing. There’s one thing I know about her. Just one thing. If I met her again, I would absolutely know.
hi! reading your posts has made me really aware of how neglected my education in the classics has been. i thought probably it makes sense to start with the odyssey, but...(a) is there a translation that you think is particularly good? and (b) is there something else that would be a more interesting/useful/compelling place to start? (or, alternatively, what else do you think is fun to recommend!)
a reading list for classics babs by e.e. rose:
Epic is the central genre of ancient literature. Every other piece of classical lit is in dialogue with the epics somehow. Start with the Greeks and Homer’s Odyssey, which is about the hero Odysseus returning home from the Trojan War: the Penguin Classics translation by Rieu is very good. The Iliad (describing the doom of Achilles and the climactic days of the Trojan War itself) is imo better, but it’s sadder and grander and less immediately accessible. The great Roman epic is Virgil’s Aeneid, which is a national epic about the foundation of the Roman race- again, go for the Penguin Classics edition with David West’s translation. However bear in mind that reading the Aeneid is sort of like reading highly self-referential fanfiction in a fandom which has been going for centuries where the author assumes you already know all the tropes and are here for the good stuff. The particularly good stuff in the Aeneid is Books 2, 4 and 6, and I will fight anyone who says otherwise.
You might want to hit the Greek tragedies before you risk the Aeneid, since Virgil is absolutely bouncing off the tragic tropes of ruined cities and angry women. There are three tragedians: Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Aeschylus is the hardest to get to grips with, but the Agamemnon - telling the story of Agamemnon’s return from Troy and his murder at the hands of his wronged wife Clytemnestra - is another Central Text of Ancient Literature. Then you can do Sophocles, who is my favourite: I recommend Oedipus the King (in which Oedipus kills his father, marries his mother, regrets his choices, and accidentally gives birth to Freudian psychology) and its spiritual sequel Antigone, which tells the story of Oedipus’s cursed-because-incest sister/daughter. We have a lot more Euripides than the other two and some of them are kind of weird and noooot that great, but there are also some amazing ones - definitely read Medea and Bacchae and Trojan Women. Medea is my go-to ancient text for newbies: it’s a pretty quick and easy read and it’s incredible.
While I’m on Greek drama I should mention comedy: it’s waaay harder to read than tragedy because most of the jokes are topical satire and therefore no longer make sense, but the great exception is Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, where the only context you need is that there’s a war on and all the women are sick of it; from there it’s just dirty jokes all the way. If you’ve read Aeschylus and Euripides (& the Odyssey!) you could also go for the Frogs by the same author, which parodies all three.
We have plenty of surviving poetry that isn’t part of the epic tradition, and especially some really good love poems. Read what there is of Sappho - sadly we don’t have much! After that probably switch over to Romans because the Greeks get highly allusive and unfriendly to new readers pretty fast. (A lot of classical literature is actually like fandom imo - everyone knows the ‘canon’ of the epics, tragedies and didactic poems, and people are riffing on them all over the place and assume you know what they’re talking about.)
For Romans I like Horace Odes, Catullus’s collected poems, and especially Ovid Amores. Ovid is my favourite anyway - smart, funny, irreverent, rebellious - and it’s a big undertaking, but the real Ovid to read is his epic-with-a-twist, the Metamorphoses, in which he casually decides to write all of mythology in one fifteen-book poem. It rewards reading right through but you can get away with dipping into it - I like Books 9 and 10! There’s also his pick-up guide for ancient Romans, Ars Amatoria (’The Art of Love’) which is a delight and also full of great tips for finding love. For example, you can go to the Circus, where everyone is already in a good mood and feeling worked up, and sit down next to someone who is sexy, and take it from there!
NB do not actually follow Ovid’s romantic advice, all his actual relationships appear to have been gigantic disasters.
WHAT ABOUT PROSE THO
Okay so maybe you’ve had enough poems and you want stuff with a bit of weight to it. You can start with history - specifically, Herodotus Histories, in which Herodotus tries to explain the Greco-Persian wars with reference to everything he knows about everything he’s ever seen, heard, guessed, or just totally made up. The book is part history, part travel writing, part absolute nonsense (at one point Herodotus explains, in all seriousness, the complexities of gold-mining in India where they use giant ants to dig up the gold) and completely charming. But it’s long! It’s a long one.
For some shorter historical writing, try Plutarch’s Parallel Lives, which are biographical sketches of famous Greeks and Romans. Pick whichever one looks interesting to you and go for it. Another biographer is the fabulously gossipy Suetonius and his biographies of the first Twelve Caesars, the original emperors of Rome. Good for dirty details!
Philosophy is kind of a big deal in ancient literature and it’s very much not my thing, but if you are going to read philosophy, it should be a Platonic dialogue (like a little play! but starring people Plato knows), and it should be the Symposium, or: Six Weird Friends Go To A Dinner Party And Talk About Love Until A Hot Twink Bursts In And Complains That Socrates Isn’t Into Him.
Something that is my thing is ancient oratory, but it needs a lot of context to make sense. You could read Robert Harris’s novels about Cicero (the first one is called Imperium) and then read Cicero’s First Catilinarian Oration. Cicero is my own true darling anyway: pick up Shackleton-Bailey’s translation of his Selected Letters for a real insight into an actual person’s life and relationships in ancient Rome.
I want to read a gay romance where there is no gay-related tragedy, no gay-related struggles, where no one dies and suffers for being gay, where they’re a main pairing not a “generously written” subplot, just two gay people comfortable with their sexuality, meeting and falling in love and having the regular usual struggles found in any Heterosexual Romance books it’s very simple why is it so fucking hard
When tragedies like this happen, the State relies on Compassionate Progressive™ sentiment to impulsively call for tighter, broader central regulation—generally for strict control over a specific facet of our lives [disaster relief, firearms, mass destruction, famine]). This impulse riles up a swath of citizens, and makes them susceptible to State expansion that they might otherwise oppose in moments of calm.
Of course, nothing can change too quickly, or you would upset the status quo, which can lead to unwanted revolution. The State doesn’t want to rock the boat, but it can incrementally shift the status quo over time. In order to sustain itself, it must continue to grow and to do that it needs financial and civil support.
Sure the State might not take away guns tomorrow, but it could very easily exploit this event to implement tighter control on our movement, and on our perceived rights. Just look at the TSA, which many Americans excuse as a ‘given’ inconvenience despite its gross corruption and institutional ineptitude.
What do I mean by ‘perceived rights’? I’m talking about rights inherent to our humanity, for which the legitimacy depends upon our perception. Those who support the right to bear arms do so because they perceive a necessity of personal ownership. Even some gun control advocates will pay it lip service.
Gun control does not (and will not) have to be about confiscating weapons, but rather about shifting our collective perception on what is and is not appropriate with respect to firearms. 2A hardliners may want to disagree with me here, but stick with me.
The debate around the right to bear arms and the role of the State in regulating that right will continue for the week as it always does, and as usual it will die down; the State is not going to outright goosestep down the streets and confiscate en masse. Instead, the media will gently shift the narrative to other, less invasive means to monitor and control people; theoretically band-aids to prevent seemingly unpredictable future tragedies.
After 9/11, Congress signed the USA PATRIOT Act; most members never read the bill. The State used this foot in the door to expand the NSA, FBI, CIA and create the TSA; it also created the Department of Homeland Security, under which it were consolidated the Real ID and Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations (that’s movement and trade in layman’s terms). The State absolutely will tuck this tragedy into its arsenal to influence and advocate for additional security measures. Look today at sporting events, major metro stations, concerts. Now it will be casino, hotels, festivals. The fourth estate will happily wag its tail in exchange for influence on Capitol Hill.
It’s not just plausible, it’s reality.
But you can’t sell something so mundane through the energy of raw compassion. In fact, for most who voice this sentiment such a move would not be enough. However, the State would not upset its balance and would not immediately threaten our inherent rights. Instead, the State generally relies on the fears of
Conservative Traditionalists™ to support the enforcement of this new,
but still familiar, status quo. In this way, the perception of the right’s integrity remains in tact while in practice, those rights are diminished.
A penchant for the status quo is a crucial element of conservative ideologies—conserve is in the name. (Note, I am not talking about a left-right dichotomy). Just as this American sentiment helps to legitimize the ever-growing police state in the above-referenced facets of our lives, it would uphold future expansion too. If you aren’t convinced, then ask yourselves the following question.
How many more incidents of cops shooting peaceful—but armed—citizens would it take to convince you that people will absolutely defend this incremental growth in security (as they always have)? Police are already trigger-happy, and often presume whatever you’re holding is a threat. People defend it. They support it, and advocate it. Through this sentiment, the State will have its foundation to push the status quo just a little bit closer toward totalitarianism.
The second amendment is meant to guarantee our uninhibited right to bear arms, and yet we find ourselves living in a country where you are more and more likely to die for exercising that right (or for being perceived as exercising that right). Too often, those defending the former contrarily support the latter as well. In this way, the right to bear arms is perceived by the public at large as illegitimate if that right purportedly threatens a law enforcement official.
This will invariably happen when some poor American walks into a hotel a
security checkpoint with a gun, a knife, an oddly-shaped cell phone, an
obscured wallet and the police claim they ‘feared for their life’ and
The State doesn’t have to take your guns away. It just has to convince you that there’s no problem when an agent of the State imperils that inalienable right by aggressing you. By influencing our collective perception on what is and is not
acceptable (regarding the exercise of our rights), the State can shift the status quo to sustain its perpetual growth.
What do you think might happen to Seidou in the future?
Hi LS! I think Seidou’s arc hereon out will revolve around the symbol of Amon’s cross. To put my prediction into context, I’ll also be analysing his development throughout the series.
When we first meet Takizawa, he is introduced in contrast, as the kind of comedic follow-up, to the impressive entries of the big names of Shinohara and Houji into the story.
This is a perfect example of structure reflecting character. The very way we are introduced to Takizawa is exactly how he views himself - the underwhelming and pitiable novice following at the heels of his betters.
Right off the bat we are introduced to the two major character features that will guide the course of Seidou’s development henceforth: his earnest admiration (and desire to emulate) great investigators like Amon, and his lack of confidence in himself. These features are expanded further with Suzuya and Akira’s introductions, who further intensify Seidou’s inferiority complex with their immense skills and frustrate his admiration of the Investigator image with their unorthodox approaches: Suzuya’s complete disregard for the conventional and Akira’s disdain for how Takizawa longs for promotion.
Takizawa desperately wants to overcome his own weakness and become the Investigator he admires, especially with these constant aggravations to both his confidence and his ideals around. Thus his eagerness to get out into the field.
But when the call to arms finally comes, we see his ideals conflict with his confidence as he weeps over his testament. But in the end, Takizawa is able to conquer that weaker side of himself and strive forward to the ideal - even running to the rescue of his old hero Amon. And how is he rewarded for his bravery? For being the “ideal Investigator”?
He is turned into a Ghoul.
After a turn of events so twistedly and tragically ironic, it’s no wonder Takizawa lets go of his aspirations to be a praiseworthy hero and rejects Amon’s determination, especially after devouring his own parents. The human image is turned to meat in the next, and thus does Takizawa’s psychology change. “Give up what?!” indeed - the Hero is dead. So instead, he falls hopelessly into the pit of his other major character trait, his low self-esteem and self-hatred. He embraces the weakness he detests.
And he manifests that weakness in the form of extraordinary violence against the people deemed by himself and by others as his “betters”.
It is Kaneki who experiences this first, the man whose precedent Kanou tortured Takizawa to live up to, mirroring the pressure Seidou put on himself to live up to others in now graphic and hyperbolic format.
But, suppress it as he might, Takizawa’s Investigator complex, an intrinsic part of his character, can’t help but rear its head again when his other hero, Houji, comes knocking. His fantasy from his suppressed desire for heroism can finally become real. Depressive nihilism is not a sustainable ideology and if the light of hope appears, even if its been false in the past, you will still hopelessly run to it.
And Takizawa is disappointed yet again. His earlier rejection of the Investigator image returns tenfold in his fury, symbolically killing the model of it he looked up to. In an ironic reversal of his introduction, Takizawa is the only one of the three investigators introduced in that scene to still be active, and is easily the most powerful, to the extent that one of those ‘betters’ has now been killed by his own hand. Having returned to his crusade of envy, he launches his attack on Akira only to be prevented by Amon, who he similarly turns against. Takizawa is now driven by nothing more than that second part of himself in its most grotesque form - to prove himself better than them, no matter what the cost. But he finds himself backed into a corner by Mutsuki - Kaneki’s parallel, the symbol of the Half-Ghoul - and thus of his own slide into absolute Ghouldom. But on the brink of tragedy, true hope appears, as it does for our main character in this same arc. Seidou is protected from the symbol of his Ghouldom by the symbol of his humanity, and the reconnection to his better, heroic nature begins.
But to put back on the cape completely, Takizawa needs recognition by the vivid symbol of his better nature that still survives - the man he was introduced looking up to.
The cross is one of the most basic and famous archetypes for morality as well as being synecdoche for Amon’s character. In this way, Takizawa is holding his ideal in his hand - it is, quite literally, within his reach, whether he thinks he can handle it anymore or not. It is enough to inspire him to do his first purely good deed in years - saving Akira - and he spends the following arc following the path of self-sacrifice to ensure both her and Amon’s full recovery. Takizawa even states in his internal monologue later on that Amon inspires this change in him.
But of course, when he next meets Amon, the shoe is on the other foot. Despite what his own insecurity told him, Takizawa was a fine Investigator before his transformation - second in the class is nothing to scoff at, and his attempt to save Amon was truly heroic. Now Takizawa finds himself face to face with another fine Investigator transformed into a monster, and swears to make him a person again. He is being confronted with a doppelganger of his worse side and symbolically overcomes it. Kurona realises what he has become even if he himself has not.
However, despite that, and fittingly in the Moon Arc, Takizawa is still unable to embrace his Heroic side. Once again he is undermined by that tenacious lack of self-confidence. He decides that he can never live up to Amon or Kaneki after all he has done, and to simply do this one good deed for the people he cares about and then fall off the radar. Potentially, as Kaneki predicts, falling off this world.
So he tries to return the cross, that symbol of Heroism that reminds him of his inability to reconcile that desire with his own weakness - the “heavy chain”. But Kaneki doesn’t let him.
Kaneki won’t let him give up on that heroic side of his, because he remembers where he himself was headed when he did the same. Because Seidou’s conflict - between heroism and weakness - is, like so many other tragic characters, simply a battle between his duty and his feelings, his Giri and his Ninjo. Kaneki is only here today because he ultimately chose his Giri (without entirely neglecting his Ninjo), and he hopes Takizawa will do the same.
Indeed, Seidou is far more like his idols than he thinks. He might think himself irredeemable, but both Kaneki and Amon have a wide range of sins under their belts while still being heroes today. And what that cross really represents is far more than just moral excellence, as Takizawa probably assumes judging by his resignation to damnation.
It is a symbol specifically for repentance. The fact that Takizawa has been handed this cross once more symbolises, both to him on a personal scale and to us on a narrative scale, that he must one day fully make his repentance, banish his cowardice and become the hero that he always wanted to be. That, I believe, will be Seidou Takizawa’s final triumph over tragedy. His Ninjo ought to focus on the friendships he’s fostered rather than fixating on his own deficiencies. As the Christian imagery indicates, salvation exists for all repentant sinners.
He’s trying to live normally now, but to paraphrase the man himself, with the Oggai around living normally is no easy feat. To even accomplish the meagre goal he’s set himself, he has to be a hero, or a normal life won’t even exist anymore. He’s already been driven to help out Hakatori, someone he came to blows with back on Rushima. His better nature is leaking out, ready to gush like a flood. All it takes is this Judgement phase for it to break through.
I doubt he’ll join the CCG rebels after what happened last time, and just as well - if Marude blamed Urie for failing to save Iwao, he’s certainly not going to forgive Takizawa for outright killing Houji. I suspect he’ll eventually be reunited with them, but right now I see two options, represented by his two most prominent parallels. Either he’ll rejoin Kaneki and help him rebuild his movement, or he’ll seek out Amon and Akira and join them in whatever endeavour they’re engaging in.
He’s been set up to be a force against the Oggai - and this, surely, will bring him closer into contact with the true author of his tragedy, far more than Tatara ever was. A final reckoning with Kanou, I think, lies in Seidou’s future.
And in the interest of parallels, let’s not forget this conversation with Kaneki.
Takizawa very accurately pins down Kaneki’s development as being in the same place as his own - to live for someone else. Helping your friends is just one step down the hero’s path. If Takizawa’s destiny is to become a hero for the world, then it’s Kaneki’s too. He’s already gotten closer to that destination after Touka inspired him to care more for the plight of the Ghouls, just as Seidou has moved closer with his concern over the Oggai - but the rest of their development in this direction lies in the Judgement to come.
Whatever Seidou does henceforth, I’m sure it will be the right thing.
Hello friends! Are you all jazzed-up on Wonder Woman now that the DCU finally has a good movie? That’s great! Me too! But it doesn’t have to end there! Wonder Woman has a long history of great comic books that have long been overlooked my mainstream nerd culture!
While plenty of us have read foundational DC books like Batman: Year One, All-Star Superman, or Watchmen, Wondie has plenty of books that are just as central to her character as well! The above image is a general recommended reading list, and I certainly haven’t read all of them, but I can give a few recommendations on the ones I have!
Wonder Woman, by George Perez
This is pretty much your foundational modern Wonder Woman. Nearly everything about the character as she is today draws from this sensational run. It’s widely regarded among Wondie fans as one of the most quintessential runs in the character’s history. If you want to wholly *GET* Wonder Woman, this is a fantastic place to start.
Wonder Woman by Gail Simone
What can I say about Gail Simone that hasn’t already been said? Deadpool, Batgirl, Secret Six, Birds of Prey, the woman just has so many legendary comic book runs. And her run on Wonder Woman is no different. She wasn’t on the book for a super long time, but her run is one of the best!
Wonder Woman by Brian Azzarello
This one I understand is a bit polarizing among some on Tumblr. I get that there’s a number of people who don’t like the changes Azzarello made to the amazonian culture, specifically how they deal with male outsiders and male children. However, consider that characters are not interesting without flaws, and seeing for once a definite black spot on the seemingly-perfect Amazons was pretty interesting!
In addition, the book has fantastic art style, and does a lot to re-imagine the greek gods in a modern, almost horror-esque way. This run’s take on Wondie is that of a warrior goddess, so if you want a Diana that’s ready to throw down, this is the book for you!
Wonder Woman: Hiketeia by Greg Rucka
Wonder Woman has taken a sworn oath to protect a young girl! But when she finds out that this girl has murdered her sister’s killer, this puts her at odds with Batman, who is determined that the girl face trial! A modern greek tragedy penned by the masterful Greg Rucka, and an absolutely fantastic one-shot graphic novel!
JLA: A League of One by Christopher Moeller
An unstoppable dragon has awoken from its slumber! An amazonian seer has predicted that it will DESTROY the Justice League! To prevent her friends from dying, Wonder Woman must face the dragon ALONE! Even if it means fighting her friends to stop them from helping her!
Wonder Woman: Odyssey by J. Michael Straczynski
A pseudo-elseworlds story about an amnesiac Wonder Woman rediscovering her place in the world and her destiny. Featuring all-star talent, a gripping suspense story, and my personal favorite Wonder Woman costume ever.
Wonder Woman by Bill Messner-Loebs
Hey, did you know that for a while Wonder Woman was a space pirate? This run is fucking nuts and I love every page of it. If you want a run where some guys are just trying to tell compelling and INCREDIBLY varied Wonder Woman adventures, give this one a shot!
Wonder Woman: by Greg Rucka
There is a current Wonder Woman ongoing! It’s by Greg Rucka, who has previously done great work with the character. It’s called Wonder Woman: The Lies. Full disclosure, I haven’t read any of this. But if you want a Wonder Woman comic that’s currently ongoing, just pick up Volume 1 and start from there. There’s currently three books out, so there’s plenty of reading material.
Really, anything in the guide I posted first is a good read. Comics are an incredibly small medium, and need all the sales they can get. If you’ve seen the movie and you’re hungry for more, there’s a LOT of material. The character’s been around for over 70 years at this point. So please, head down to your local comic shop and pick up some Wonder Woman! Diana believes in you, and I do too!