DC has a serious problem when it comes to retconning Wonder Woman, particularly regarding her origin and the core elements of her lore. The practice has become so frequent that even some of her most devoted fans struggle to keep her canon straight. But the issue runs deeper than just canon confusion.

While no DC character has entirely escaped the effects of retconning, Wonder Woman often feels like one of its biggest victims. It is frequently difficult to determine which origin story is currently in play for her or which pieces of character-defining lore are considered canon in ongoing storylines.

Batman and Superman have undergone their share of retcons over the years, yet the core aspects of their stories, especially their origins, have remained largely consistent. The same cannot be said for Wonder Woman. And it is this lack of stable lore in Diana’s mythology that has led to an even greater issue in her narratives: inconsistent characterization.

Wonder Woman’s Inconsistent Origins Are the Root of Her Identity Crisis

Constant Lore Revisions Make It Impossible to Define Who Diana Truly Is

Before delving into the larger issue of Wonder Woman’s inconsistent characterization, it is essential first to examine what is widely suspected to be the root cause of the problem: her inconsistent origin stories and lore. While Batman and Superman have the privilege of relatively ironclad origin stories, Bruce Wayne’s beginning rooted in a Park Row alley after witnessing his parents’ murder by Joe Chill, and Clark Kent’s rooted in the destruction of Krypton and his upbringing in Kansas by the Kents, Wonder Woman has not been granted the same consistency.

Diana’s origin has changed numerous times over the years. Her original backstory centered on being sculpted from clay by Queen Hippolyta and brought to life by the Greek gods. This clay origin has evolved through various iterations, often featuring tweaks, altered details, or even outright contradictions. The most drastic shift occurred when she was retconned as the biological daughter of Zeus and Hippolyta, completely abandoning the clay narrative. These inconsistencies extend beyond her origin as well; core elements of her lore, such as the abilities and limitations of her Lasso of Truth, have also undergone fluctuations over time.

In addition to the shifting lore, Wonder Woman has undergone some of the most drastic role overhauls among DC’s core heroes. Some writers depict her primarily as a warrior bred for battle, while others emphasize her pacifism. Some portray her as a diplomatic ambassador, and others elevate her to a divine goddess. While it can be argued that Diana embodies all of these roles to some extent, the problem arises when writers give one role precedence over the others. This selective emphasis has led to what many fans perceive as Wonder Woman being written “out of character,” contributing to the broader issue of her inconsistent portrayal.

How DC’s Shifting Vision Has Left Writers Confused About Who Wonder Woman Is

Simone vs. King: A Case Study in Diana’s Contradictory Characterization

While Superman, Batman, and other DC characters aren’t exempt from being called out by fans for being written “out of character,” Wonder Woman remains one of the most frequent offenders in the DC Universe when it comes to this issue. A strong argument can be made that the root cause lies in how often DC has changed her origins, defining lore, and prominent narrative roles. These constant shifts have left writers with little sense of who Diana truly is, unsure of whether she’s a pacifist who only resorts to violence as a last option or a crack-skulls-and-ask-questions-later kind of hero.

Gail Simone and Tom King serve as a clear example of the disconnect and wildly differing portrayals of Wonder Woman across creative teams. Wonder Woman Vol. 3 #25 perfectly captures her interpretation of the Amazon Princess: “We have a saying, my people. Don’t kill if you can wound, don’t wound if you can subdue, don’t subdue if you can pacify, and don’t raise your hand at all until you’ve first extended it.” It’s evident that Simone approaches Diana first and foremost as an ambassador.

In contrast, Tom King’s ongoing Wonder Woman run highlights Diana’s no-nonsense warrior side. In issues #20 and #21, readers see her brutalizing the Gods of Olympus to achieve her goals, with a tone that emphasizes her more violent and unforgiving nature. Wonder Woman #19 even depicts her forcing her enemy, the Sovereign, to carve the word “liar” into his chest. The stark contrast between Simone and King’s interpretations illustrates the broader inconsistency across writers. This problem leaves fans feeling confused at best and disappointed at worst regarding Wonder Woman’s characterization.

The Real Fix for Wonder Woman Isn’t Reinvention, It’s Commitment

DC Needs to Establish and Uphold a Unified Core Identity for Diana

To be clear, these drastic differences in Wonder Woman’s characterization go far beyond just Simone and King’s portrayals of the Amazon. This is a widespread and ongoing issue throughout Diana’s narratives, one that only seems to worsen with each ing year as various takes on the character continue to disrupt the expectations fans have for her. Fortunately, there’s a relatively simple solution to this problem, and it doesn’t require wiping the slate clean and reinventing Diana from scratch. Instead, it calls for a clear declaration of commitment from DC.

DC’s editors and higher-ups need to come together to define a clear core identity for Wonder Woman, one that allows for nuance but stays rooted in a stable foundation. This means agreeing on a consistent origin for the Amazon and establishing a core moral com, worldview, and personality that future portrayals can reference. Once these elements are set, DC must commit to holding creative teams able and avoiding major deviations. This would give Diana the stable identity she deserves, allowing consistent characterization across different writers. Ultimately, the solution is not reinvention but recognition of who Wonder Woman is and a commitment to honoring that truth.