Outrage!!! Cho leaves Wonder Woman

[Darjis_]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

[Prince Namor]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

[SquareChaos]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

 

As I commented previously, DC knew who Cho was when they hired him. I don't really know that Wonder Woman was created for the purpose you mention either, but I think that may be beside the point, my first comment is more to the point considering our topic.

 

Last point... I don't think anyone here thinks the artist can draw anything he wants, I think you're putting up a straw man there, we all know there are limits, and honestly, objectively, he wasn't close to it on that third cover. We've all seen far, far more suggestive covers from the very same publisher.

 

[Darjis_]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

 

blah blah blah

 

according to Cho's account - it wasn't DC saying anything about his art and it certainly wasn't 1 single image that Rucka had a problem with. It was nit-picking from the get go and Cho had enough of it. It's not Rucka's property but DC's so if DC is fine with it - then Rucka should get over himself and stop trying to censor something absolutely ludicrous. Now had Cho drawn WW w a big in her mouth than fair enough but this is just needless PC garbage and censorship for no other reason than to glorify a writer's massive ego

 

 

Incidentally - I DO completely agree w you in that if you work for a 'corporation' you need to adhere to their rules. I'm right there with you and if this was the case here than I'd say "suck it up" but it's not. As Cho said, DC was great and tried to work with him as best they could but they were stuck between a rock and a hard place because Rucka was the problem and obviously they weren't going to let him go so Cho opted to walk then tolerate Rucka's constant tantrums.

[Prince Namor]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

 

blah blah blah

 

according to Cho's account - it wasn't DC saying anything about his art and it certainly wasn't 1 single image that Rucka had a problem with. It was nit-picking from the get go and Cho had enough of it. It's not Rucka's property but DC's so if DC is fine with it - then Rucka should get over himself and stop trying to censor something absolutely ludicrous. Now had Cho drawn WW w a big in her mouth than fair enough but this is just needless PC garbage and censorship for no other reason than to glorify a writer's massive ego

 

 

Incidentally - I DO completely agree w you in that if you work for a 'corporation' you need to adhere to their rules. I'm right there with you and if this was the case here than I'd say "suck it up" but it's not. As Cho said, DC was great and tried to work with him as best they could but they were stuck between a rock and a hard place because Rucka was the problem and obviously they weren't going to let him go so Cho opted to walk then tolerate Rucka's constant tantrums.

 

Actually, Cho is mistaken. If DC was great, they would've sided with him, as it is a character owned by the publisher. But apparently they decided, Rucka was important enough and in the right enough to take his side.

But they've obviously hired him for more than just to write the book, but rather to decide the direction and tone of it. So they took his side.

Just not the blame.

 

Cho is an artist for hire. A VARIANT artist for hire. And regardless of how good he is, he's going to have to take direction when working for someone. And Rucka, as a representative of DC/Warner, gave him direction he didn't like.

 

You may think a 'D' in the mouth of the character is where the line starts, but you don't own the character, you're not responsible for it, you don't over see its production on children's toys or even answer to parents in a comic shop who bring their kids in. We don't have to see it in Batman Comics, why is it necessary to sell Wonder Woman comics?

 

[Darjis_]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

 

blah blah blah

 

according to Cho's account - it wasn't DC saying anything about his art and it certainly wasn't 1 single image that Rucka had a problem with. It was nit-picking from the get go and Cho had enough of it. It's not Rucka's property but DC's so if DC is fine with it - then Rucka should get over himself and stop trying to censor something absolutely ludicrous. Now had Cho drawn WW w a big in her mouth than fair enough but this is just needless PC garbage and censorship for no other reason than to glorify a writer's massive ego

 

 

Incidentally - I DO completely agree w you in that if you work for a 'corporation' you need to adhere to their rules. I'm right there with you and if this was the case here than I'd say "suck it up" but it's not. As Cho said, DC was great and tried to work with him as best they could but they were stuck between a rock and a hard place because Rucka was the problem and obviously they weren't going to let him go so Cho opted to walk then tolerate Rucka's constant tantrums.

 

Actually, Cho is mistaken. If DC was great, they would've sided with him, as it is a character owned by the publisher. But apparently they decided, Rucka was important enough and in the right enough to take his side.

But they've obviously hired him for more than just to write the book, but rather to decide the direction and tone of it. So they took his side.

Just not the blame.

 

Cho is an artist for hire. A VARIANT artist for hire. And regardless of how good he is, he's going to have to take direction when working for someone. And Rucka, as a representative of DC/Warner, gave him direction he didn't like.

 

You may think a 'D' in the mouth of the character is where the line starts, but you don't own the character, you're not responsible for it, you don't over see its production on children's toys or even answer to parents in a comic shop who bring their kids in. We don't have to see it in Batman Comics, why is it necessary to sell Wonder Woman comics?

That was an example, not necessarily the line....

 

So, you seriously - in all honestly - think that the Cho covers cross a line? How thick are your glasses?

[Prince Namor]

Please - the censorship that Ruka showed is horrid and more of that entitled SJW 'Offended by absolutely everything' nonsense. The covers that Cho drew were equal to the interior art in terms of "graphic", and seriously - 'panties'? wtf do you think she wears under that amazon warrior skirt thingy? Nothing? Heaven forbid he draw something with the correct pose / perspective in terms of how cloth moves and would lift - while still covering her up.

 

And those of you asking "who made the decision" - Cho says he walked after Ruka repeatedly complained his art was too sexual.

 

File this under : entitlement

 

Entitlement for whom?

Rucka

 

 

And I actually agree w what a few other's have posted in that it does seem like there was either a personality conflict or that Rucka had it in for Cho - I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of his "outrage" covers.

 

Clearly these covers are not sexual in nature - especially when you compare them to other stuff Cho has done

 

Rucka, as the writer of the book, a long time respected writer that DC is lucky to have, considering how many people have abandoned the Big 2 over the last year, SHOULD be entitled to have some direction and say in the presentation of the character.

Considering Wonder Woman was created as a personification of the empowerment of women, his questioning as to the need to show her 'panties' doesn't seem out of line at all. There are plenty of characters for Cho to draw that he can use that pose for, Rucka apparently didn't think it was appropriate for who HE wanted the character portrayed as the writer of the book.

You're right - this IS about entitlement. How the artist feels he should be able to draw whatever he wants, with no input or supervision. Which of course he CAN, when he's working for himself, as evidenced by his sketch covers.

People who think they can work for a corporation, like Warner/DC and not be instructed as to what is acceptable or not, are living in a delusional world.

 

blah blah blah

 

according to Cho's account - it wasn't DC saying anything about his art and it certainly wasn't 1 single image that Rucka had a problem with. It was nit-picking from the get go and Cho had enough of it. It's not Rucka's property but DC's so if DC is fine with it - then Rucka should get over himself and stop trying to censor something absolutely ludicrous. Now had Cho drawn WW w a big in her mouth than fair enough but this is just needless PC garbage and censorship for no other reason than to glorify a writer's massive ego

 

 

Incidentally - I DO completely agree w you in that if you work for a 'corporation' you need to adhere to their rules. I'm right there with you and if this was the case here than I'd say "suck it up" but it's not. As Cho said, DC was great and tried to work with him as best they could but they were stuck between a rock and a hard place because Rucka was the problem and obviously they weren't going to let him go so Cho opted to walk then tolerate Rucka's constant tantrums.

 

Actually, Cho is mistaken. If DC was great, they would've sided with him, as it is a character owned by the publisher. But apparently they decided, Rucka was important enough and in the right enough to take his side.

But they've obviously hired him for more than just to write the book, but rather to decide the direction and tone of it. So they took his side.

Just not the blame.

 

Cho is an artist for hire. A VARIANT artist for hire. And regardless of how good he is, he's going to have to take direction when working for someone. And Rucka, as a representative of DC/Warner, gave him direction he didn't like.

 

You may think a 'D' in the mouth of the character is where the line starts, but you don't own the character, you're not responsible for it, you don't over see its production on children's toys or even answer to parents in a comic shop who bring their kids in. We don't have to see it in Batman Comics, why is it necessary to sell Wonder Woman comics?

That was an example, not necessarily the line....

 

So, you seriously - in all honestly - think that the Cho covers cross a line? How thick are your glasses?

 

If I wrote Wonder Woman, and I wanted her taken seriously as a character, in the same way as Batman and Superman are, yes, it might be something I would consider as not wanting. It might not even be my OVERALL preference (and it's not, I have a strong appreciation for GGA Art, Bad Girl art and even adult art), but for THAT specific project, if I didn't want it that way, and it was MY project to decide, then by god it'd be done the way I want it.

I would appreciate what Frank Cho had to say, but ultimately if the success or failure of the project was on ME, then he's just going to have to live with the decision I make.

It would have nothing to do with 'PC' or whatever political nonsense people want to throw at it - I've worked in the adult entertainment industry for 20 years of my life - it'd have to do with the vision I personally have for THAT character at that time for THAT project.

And not unlike an NFL coach, I'm not going to change my game plan because some kicker wants to do things his way.

It's Rucka's project. Cho was a hired player. It's that simple.

 

[Darjis_]

i get your point but I just don't see the controversy on his covers. I thought they were mega tame to be honest. And actually pretty good representations of what WW would look like should she be real.

 

also, how would a variant cover effect the story or how it's perceived? In my experience - the variants have zero to do with the story. Look at the ASM variants. Rarely do they have anything to do with what's going on in the issue itself.

[Prince Namor]

i get your point but I just don't see the controversy on his covers. I thought they were mega tame to be honest. And actually pretty good representations of what WW would look like should she be real.

 

also, how would a variant cover effect the story or how it's perceived? In my experience - the variants have zero to do with the story. Look at the ASM variants. Rarely do they have anything to do with what's going on in the issue itself.

 

Really there's not much of a controversy to it, other than Cho being butthurt for not getting to do it as he wanted. He's free to draw whatever he wants to anyone who'll pay him and DC is free to publish their character as they choose.

Cho can even make a request to DC to publish that piece as a print to sell - we'll see how 'great' they really are...

 

As far as variants depicting what's inside the book, I think this is more about asthetics than story content. It's an overall image they DON'T want to project.

 

 

[Prince Namor]

And I agree with the first two covers... They look pretty tame. Of course we've seen the finished product and don't know what Cho may have originally submitted...

[mister_not_so_nice]

that they get Milo Manara to replace him

[Ryan.]

William Moulton Marston (born in the same town as me ) certainly did not create Wonder Woman with the intent of having her be a representation of female empowerment. If anything, she was an outlet for his bondage fetish.

 

However, the character has definitely (and thankfully) evolved into a symbol of female strength. I hadn't given much thought to the eroticism that Cho infused into his WW covers. One could argue that, were WW real, she would have no problem being seen as something of a sex symbol, as sex does not automatically equate to exploitation. With that said, I like Cho's beefier version of WW. Wonder Woman should look like she can crush skulls.

 

And with THAT said, Nicola Scott, the actual artist of this book, draws a pretty great version of Wonder Woman as well.

[Doc McCoy]

that they get Milo Manara to replace him

 

[drotto]

that they get Milo Manara to replace him

 

 

Or if they really want Cho to look tame they can go get Guillem March.

[Darjis_]

Really there's not much of a controversy to it, other than Cho being butthurt for not getting to do it as he wanted. He's free to draw whatever he wants to anyone who'll pay him and DC is free to publish their character as they choose.

Cho can even make a request to DC to publish that piece as a print to sell - we'll see how 'great' they really are...

 

As far as variants depicting what's inside the book, I think this is more about asthetics than story content. It's an overall image they DON'T want to project.

 

Again, there is no 'they' - it was Rucka - ALSO A HIRED GOON for a book that is NOT his property. This is why I'm on the dislike for him and not necessarily for Cho. Variants are supposed to be a 'different interpretation' of said character, so to nit-pick all the way down the line because it doesn't fit some small version you have in your head of a story you are writing is petty and small.

[Artboy99]

I quite like the way Cho draws Wonder Woman: she isn't lean and skinny, she has some muscularity to her that I feel is warranted in an amazonian culture.

 

 

 

 

[Darjis_]

So this is the Rucka approved art? Really? But Cho's 'doesn't fit'. Why? Because it's more realistic?

 

Rucka is an absolute hypocrite.

 

[SquareChaos]

So this is the Rucka approved art? Really? But Cho's 'doesn't fit'. Why? Because it's more realistic?

 

Rucka is an absolute hypocrite.

 

 

 

When was that run? Early 2000s? Not in an attempt to give a free pass, but in an attempt to perhaps add a little context... a lot has changed over the last decade concerning the topic of sex and gender in comics. And who knows, maybe he didn't like it then, but had no power to change it.

 

I think you're throwing around 'hypocrite' pretty lightly. We'll never know the real story I imagine, not unless Rucka writes a tell-all about it, and I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

[drotto]

So this is the Rucka approved art? Really? But Cho's 'doesn't fit'. Why? Because it's more realistic?

 

Rucka is an absolute hypocrite.

 

 

I can see her panties in many shots!!

 

Maybe we just do not have the whole story yet. We has seen 3 or the 6 covers that have been completed. Maybe the last three are over the top? With the amount of cheesecake, and sexualized covers out there (even from Cho), these seem tame to me. Like others have said, WW current costume would require some kind of undergarment, that would be easily seen as she moved.

[Darjis_]

So this is the Rucka approved art? Really? But Cho's 'doesn't fit'. Why? Because it's more realistic?

 

Rucka is an absolute hypocrite.

 

 

 

When was that run? Early 2000s? Not in an attempt to give a free pass, but in an attempt to perhaps add a little context... a lot has changed over the last decade concerning the topic of sex and gender in comics. And who knows, maybe he didn't like it then, but had no power to change it.

 

I think you're throwing around 'hypocrite' pretty lightly. We'll never know the real story I imagine, not unless Rucka writes a tell-all about it, and I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

Yeah I suppose that's a good point. Regardless, censorship gets my blood boiling.