Will Pfeiffer screws up
SPURGEON: Now that you have a little bit of space between you and the series, what do you think the basis was for so many people to have a negative reaction to Amazons Attack!?They didn't like that the Amazons were depicted out-of-character, that's what! Or that the story itself was like an absurdist attack on the Dubya administration, only this time the reasons were far more meaningless. Nor did they like the fact that this only added to the accusations made in the past few years that comics have gone on a sexist spree.
PFEIFER: Was there a negative reaction? [laughter]
I think at its most basic, people have an idea about whatever superhero or character they love and have their ideal version of that character somewhere in their head. When you go against that version, some people are going to react very strongly. Amazons Attack! is right there in the title. They kill that guy and his kid on the very first page. People were really upset about that. But it was supposed to be shocking. It was supposed to be upsetting. It wasn't supposed to be a triumphant moment for the Amazons. People who have been reading Wonder Woman for however long they've been reading Wonder Woman -- and some of them have been reading for a long time -- they didn't like the fact that the Amazons were attacking and were evil. They also didn't like the fact that in Amazons Attack! that there wasn't enough Wonder Woman, and that Wonder Woman wasn't driving the plot along. The reason for that is that there's another book called Wonder Woman [Spurgeon laughs] where all that was happening.
Unfortunately, Pfeiffer, who seems to be interested in little more than the money that'll flow into his cash box for writing that mess, is not willing to stress those facts.
And I guess Spurgeon can also earn a few demerits for chuckling over something that's really no laughing matter.