You know, on Wednesday, I really thought if there was any controversy over the current Wonder Woman comic by Greg Rucka, Liam Sharp and Nicola Scott, it would have been the suggestion of past girlfriends on Paradise Island – from people who hadn't read Wonder Woman before. And, gratifyingly, there was none.
Then yesterday, Bleeding Cool ran a statement by Frank Cho over his decision to leave the Wonder Woman variant cover gig only 25% in, over artistic differences with the book's writer Greg Rucka, and his influence over the creative process. The story was picked up by a number of sites including The Mary Sue, Comics Beat (though deleted, still available here), The Outhouse (twice) and a variety of activist Reddit boards. And was read by more people than any of those silly Marvel Previews leaks from a few days ago.
And it seems to have riven the internet apart, leading people to choose #TeamCho or #TeamRucka.
But what are the arguments? Here are a few prominent discussion points…
But on that point…
What could make this discussion worse?
Oh, there we are. But for some there was only one matter at hand…
Bleeding Cool, of course, remains neutral. Greg Rucka has chosen to keep his own counsel on this, saying only,
UPDATE: And Gail Simone posts on Facebook,
Watching a bunch of geniuses with zero experience working in comics and even less insider knowledge offer their astounding insights into what they are CERTAIN happened between a writer and and artist regarding a cover dispute.
Embarrassing. It'd take an hour to explain how that process goes and it wouldn't change their brilliant insights anyway. Watching them completely mangle even the scant facts presented so far is both funny and sad.
Here, let me help. I've written 400 comics for DC. I know most of the people involved, I have written for that character extensively, and I had many, many disagreements with the direction of covers over the years (very little of it with the artists, I was usually arguing FOR cover concepts editorial didn't like).
So, I actually DO know this process. And what do I know, what have I gleaned about this story, with that knowledge?
The story so far is one understandably upset artist who feels censored. While the writer is a good friend of mine, and I don't know the artist personally, this is an unfortunate situation. I'm a fan of this artist (I'm not using names because this is not a singular event). I don't like to see talented artists put in this position.
But beyond that, it all goes into a black well of details we don't know. What these self-appointed experts are unaware of is, this stuff happens ALL THE TIME. Covers go past a LOT of eyes before approval. A-list writers are ROUTINELY asked for input on the covers. And a misstep between how a book is meant to be portrayed and the artist's freedom is common. Beyond that, the writer has not spoken up, and DC WILL NOT speak up. They don't talk about behind the scenes stuff and that's good, in my opinion.
I get it, it's fun to be outraged, and it's fun to believe whatever narrative fits your belief system.
But if all you know is that one story, you don't know much of anything. Neither do I.
Let's all go ahead and make up weird theories, anyway, shall we?