I read somewhere that Helena Wayne was considered to be in Batman Beyond as Huntress. What would you have to seen in her portrayal in the DCAU and her interactions with the entire cast?
Anonymous

I heard about that was well.

Within the context of the Batman Beyond universe, she probably would’ve been raised by her mother and only find out about her father later. Since I don’t like fridging, I personally would loved to have seen Helena decide to become the Huntress all on her own and without needing to kill her mum to get her into that role. 

I also think a DCAU Helena Wayne would’ve started fighting crime in Gotham both to get her father’s attention and to carry on her parents’ legacy. Since Timm et al really like these characters, I think she would’ve been characterised closer to her pre-Crisis incarnation. She would have her quirks and much of her mother’s attitude. I also could’ve easily seen her as a university student studying law.

How she would introduce herself to Bruce, I think she would surprise him the same way she always does in the comics: by demonstrating that she can easily outsmart his tough security and successfully break into his ‘fortress.’ I think both he and Terry would be very surprised that Bruce had a baby with Catwoman and didn’t know it.

How do you think Helena would react if she met Terry and Bruce in the Batman Beyond universe?
Anonymous

Huh. Good question. I’m not really sure in this case, especially since she’s from Earth-2, and Terry is implicitly an Earth-1 character.

I think this is more of a ‘how would Damian Wayne react to Bruce having another biological son who isn’t him succeeding his father as Batman?’ In which case I would say ‘he would probably try to kill Terry.’

With Helena Wayne, it’s tough to say. At best, if this was the pre-Crisis Helena Wayne (who was genuinely a nicer person), she would probably be very excited to meet Terry, but would be horrified to see the Earth-1 Bruce as a bitter old man who mostly ended up alone.

The New 52 Helena Wayne, however, would probably not give a shit. To start with, she doesn’t think of the Earth-1 Batman as her ‘father’ and doesn’t really like him that much. From her point of view, her father is the real Bruce Wayne/Batman. She thinks his Earth-1 counterpart isn’t half the man her father was, and doesn’t especially like the fact he has serious trust issues. She actually called him out on that in Batman/Superman #8. With that kind of impression, I don’t the future Earth-1 Bruce would surprise her at all.

With Terry, if her meeting Damian is anything to go on, she would probably consider him a ‘brother’ of sorts. Beyond that, I don’t think she would be interested in pursing anything further. 

If Helena met her paternal grandparents do you think they would get along?
Anonymous

Within the context of the New 52, I think Helena Wayne would be really upset to learn that her father never told her that her grandfather was still alive.

I also don’t think she would react well to learning that her grandfather worked for the mafia before Bruce was born, and that he met Martha through the Falcone crime family. 

On that note, I don’t think she would overlook the irony of her ‘pretending’ to be a mafia princess on Earth-1, only to find out she’s a legitimate one on Earth-2. 

Beyond that, I’m not sure how the Earth-2 writers are going to handle that. I personally don’t think it would end well.

32 or others might put it 5 years later :P
Anonymous

At 32, I’m pretty sure I would still be talking about how fabulous my career is. :)

Also celebrating the fact that I survived living on this planet for three decades. ;)

Cool :) I kinda like the show too. Also, aside from the harem plotline (whether or not you enjoyed it), it’s also a pretty feminist show (though not perfect); there were many female characters and most of them were in positions of power (hell, Washu was revealed to be a goddess. Among a group of goddesses!) :) (has nothing to do with the age meme, I'm sorry)

I’m not sure if I’d go as far as to say it was a feminist show since the women were often written in ways that reinforced negative stereotypes about women. They were also often presented in very objectifying and exploitive ways.

I do agree though that the women were the best thing about the show. They all had interesting back stories and Washu was—I would argue—the character that was best characterised.

highpriestessofjogan:

helenawaynehuntress:

highpriestessofjogan:

I prefer the Huntress who is Helena Bertinelli, last surviving member of a mob family who goes in and becomes queen of all the mob bosses in Gotham, much like Oren Ishii in the Kill Bill franchise.

I especially hated when they did the Birds of Prey TV series where they made Helena Batman’s daughter.  Okay, I understand now that Huntress started out as Batman’s daughter, but in the Birds of Prey comics she is not so if you’re going to do a TV series based off of a specific comic line, then I feel you need to go with the background for the characters from that comic.  It really pissed me off in addition to what they did to botch up Black Canary.  

I love the show, it’s awesome female empowerment stuff and you will feel like you can kick all kinds of ass when you watch it, but I just have to keep reminding myself when I watch it that it’s different storylines than the comic I had come to love.

Helena Bertinelli was not added to the Birds of Prey team until 2003. The Birds of Prey television show aired in 2002.

Given that timeframe, the Huntress wasn’t an official member of the team in the mainstream comics at the time of the show’s airing.

If the show had followed the comics, the team would’ve just comprised of Dinah and Barbara who were the original team members.

Very cool.  Thank you for giving me that tidbit of info.  I have some of the comics pre-Helena, but didn’t realize they were before the TV show.  

Yeah, the Huntress didn’t officially join the team until Gail Simone started her run in 2003. The only time the Huntress teamed-up with the Birds of Prey before that was in the 1996 miniseries Birds of Prey: Manhunt, which also had Catwoman team-up with them.

beachgnome:

helenawaynehuntress:

beachgnome:

ITS FINE TO ENJOY DINAH DRAKE AND HELENA WAYNE

IT IS, HOWEVER, NOT OKAY TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN JUST SWAP WOMEN AROUND LIKE THAT

Sure they would have been interesting as friends to Barbara but it is MORALLY WRONG for DC to have done what they did. That fact needs to be acknowledged.

I have to ask, did you similarly think it was ‘morally wrong’ for DC to:

  1. Erase Helena Wayne as the Huntress for two decades and REBOOT her as another woman—in this case, Helena Bertinelli—while Batman’s sons get the privilege of keeping their origins intact?

  2. To EXPROPRIATE Helena Wayne’s name, origin, physical appearance, modus operandi, and identity as a superhero and as a woman onto an essentially different woman without ever acknowledging Wayne as the original Huntress?

  3. To give Helena Bertinelli MEMBERSHIP into the Bat Family, a family that is more rightfully Wayne’s?

  4. To pair off Helena Bertinelli with Dick Grayson romantically, even though Dick Grayson was an important person in Helena Wayne’s life, was her family, and even teased as a potential love interest for her?

  5. To pair off Helena Bertinelli with Catman in a way that heavily alluded to Batman and Catwoman’s relationship, even though Batman and Catwoman are Helena Wayne’s parents, and would therefore be the more appropriate Huntress to explore this idea with?

  6. For Helena Bertinelli to be written as wanting Batman’s approval despite not really having any real reason for it beyond her former life as Helena Wayne?

  7. For Helena Bertinelli go be given membership into the Justice League and work with other superheroes Helena Wayne teamed up with regularly in the pre-Crisis days?

More importantly, did you support any or all of those ideas and developments with your money at any time within the last two decades? Because, if so, you immediately invalidate any point you are trying to make here.

No one here is denying that DC Comics has a serious problem with women. But if you are going to have a legitimate discussion about DC treating their women as interchangeable, you yourself need to acknowledge that the problem with the Huntress started with Helena Bertinelli post-Crisis, not with Helena Wayne in the New 52.

I’ve said it before, I will say it again: the idea that Helena Bertinelli existed as a rebooted Helena Wayne in the post-Crisis continuity is a well documented FACT that’s been acknowledged in two legitimate DC Comics sources: the introductions to Huntress: Year One and Huntress: Darknight Daughter trade paperbacks.

Given that reality, it was neither a coincidence nor an accident that the post-Crisis Helena Bertinelli was developed in ways that either alluded to or were more more appropriate for Helena Wayne. As such, the post-Crisis Helena Bertinelli embodied all of the problems you and many others are complaining about here.

The fact that she was created as an Italian-American woman who is Catholic, connected to the mafia, and often times depicted as an ultra-violent heroine who was deliberately made to look worse than other antiheroes does not change any of that. If you so much as rationalise how unique Helena Bertinelli was while looking the other way at all the different ways her development borrowed heavily from Helena Wayne’s Huntress, you compromise your position in this argument.

Helena Wayne is the original character who originated and defined the Huntress as we know her. Much of what we like about the Huntress did NOT originate with Helena Bertinelli in any way, including:

  1. The idea of the Huntress as a female Batman. More specifically, becoming the Huntress in response to losing family to criminals, especially one who functioned as a criminal. That was Helena Wayne’s origin.

  2. The idea of the Huntress not dealing with sexism or misogyny, and beating unconscious any criminal who insults her on the basis of her gender. Helena Wayne did that first.

  3. The idea of the Huntress as a woman with psychological issues that in part influence why she does what she does. Again Helena Wayne got there first. There was even a whole story arc devoted to that in Wonder Woman.

  4. The idea of the Huntress as an aggressive fighter and being willing to use excessive force as a way of getting criminals to talk. Again, Helena Wayne got there first, particularly in the mid-1980s.

  5. The Huntress being willing to kill under extreme circumstances and not always feeling bad for any criminals who die during their encounters with her. Again Helena Wayne got there first, even during Paul Levitz’ original run of her. The main difference with this one here is that the Comics Code of Authority (which was still in place during Helena Wayne’s original publication) prevented writers from depicting heroes actively killing anyone, and writers often had to ‘find ways around that,’ which they did with Helena Wayne.

That being said, people are entitled to like what they like, yourself included. People are also allowed to like things that are problematic as long as they don’t ignore the problems. 

You are absolutely NO ONE to say to anyone how they should spend their own money or support the characters they want to support. Many of the problems that exist with DC Comics are beyond the reach of most fans and even creators alike.

Even if we don’t actively support the changes they are imposing, that doesn’t mean (let alone guarantee) that DC Comics will bend back on their decisions and actually give fans what they want. If that had always been the case, Helena Wayne fans would’ve gotten Helena Wayne back A LOT sooner than we actually did because Helena Bertinelli was not initially successful with fans earlier on in her publication.

All of the problems that exist with DC Comics is up to executives to fix. It is up to them to LISTEN to their customers and make appropriate changes that will improve the quality and reception of their product.  

As for fans, we will buy anything that features our favourite characters and creative teams. That is how we roll. We may not support every decision that gets made with our favourite characters by the publisher (I sure as hell don’t), but we will nonetheless buy anything that features those characters we like in hopes of getting more of those characters.

And you know what? We are entitled to do that.

You’re all throwing up valid points. Though I am going to say that Catman argument is a bit of a stretch. Also, at her best written, Helena B could give less than two shits about Batman’s approval. It’s one of her selling points.

My main points in regards to these characters is this:

  • I am so sick of everything revolving around Batman
  • We have Earth 2 again so why couldn’t we have BOTH of these ladies? Really DC? I would have loved that shit.

I would be PUMPED about Helena Wayne if she was running around doing Helena Wayne things on Earth 2 but she’s specifically doing Helena B. things on Earth 1 and it freaks me out.

Having been lied to about which Helena I was reading for her series really drove me past the rage point in regards to the Huntress title. Heck, I used to think Helena Wayne was neat, some of the first comics I ever bought had stories of hers at the back. 

I just want her far away from the Birds of Prey because that belongs to everyone’s favourite Mafia bashing catholic vigilante schoolteacher.

Though I am going to say that Catman argument is a bit of a stretch.

It isn’t a ‘bit of a stretch’ when the character in question was created as a male version of Catwoman in the 1960s, and whose modus operandi for most of his publication history was—excuse the pun—a direct copy cat of Catwoman’s. Prior to Gail Simone’s reinterpretation of his character, he literally didn’t have much going for him in terms of originality.

Additionally, Huntress and Catman explored many of the same tropes that you often see with Batman and Catwoman, including:

  1. The iconic dancing while flirting scene.
  2. Flirting while fighting.
  3. Huntress feeling conflicted about pursuing a relationship with a criminal despite being very attracted to him.
  4. Catman wanting something more with the Huntress but knowing it’ll never happen.

For a bonus, even Deadshot was often written pointing out the obvious attraction between the two, even commented to Catman in Secret Six #1 that the Huntress was ‘the closest thing [he had] to doing with it with Batman.’

So no. It’s not ‘a bit of a stretch’ at all. It very much does play into the idea of a reverse-gendered Batman and Catwoman relationship. That is still Helena Wayne’s territory. 

Also, at her best written, Helena B could give less than two shits about Batman’s approval. It’s one of her selling points.

This completely misses the point of the issue I was addressing. She still appeared in Batman narratives for most of her publication history. She was still more closely associated with the Bat family than any other superhero family in the DC Universe. Most of her friends and relationships she acquired (or even wanted to acquire) from this family were Helena Wayne’s.

Even with the times that she was written as ‘not giving two shits about Batman’s approval,’ that doesn’t erase the fact that it still happened in other narratives. It also still doesn’t erase any of the other problems that came with her character that very much called for the systematic erasure of one woman while simultaneously using those same developments to service another.

I would be PUMPED about Helena Wayne if she was running around doing Helena Wayne things on Earth 2 

Now you’re backpedalling because this wasn’t in your original discussion at all. 

but she’s specifically doing Helena B. things on Earth 1 and it freaks me out.

You do realise you are talking about a character who post-Crisis was created as a rebooted version of Helena Wayne, right? You also realise that Helena Bertinelli’s modus operandi post-Crisis WAS Helena Wayne’s pre-Crisis, yes?

Again, Helena Wayne is doing what she’s always been doing since her very inception. I admit that the story in the Huntress miniseries was a more appropriate narrative for Helena Bertinelli given her Italian and mafia roots, and it is, in fact, very problematic how Helena Wayne was reintroduced in the New 52. I’m not going to argue against that. But beyond that? Helena Wayne isn’t ripping off of Helena Bertinelli at all. Helena Wayne is doing in the New 52 what she has always done as the Huntress pre-Crisis. The Huntress identity and subsequent mode of operation has always belonged to her.

I just want her far away from the Birds of Prey because that belongs to everyone’s favourite Mafia bashing catholic vigilante schoolteacher.

While I am not going to argue against your feelings on this matter (which are legitimate), it is worth nothing that if you are seriously going to argue that Helena Wayne should stay away from everything you identify with Helena Bertinelli, then you just placed yourself in another sticky spot in this discussion. Because by that same logic, you shouldn’t even be fan of the post-Crisis Helena Bertinelli either given how much of her own development heavily hinged on the pre-Crisis Helena Wayne’s. Outside of the few things that were truly unique to her character, she very much had Helena Wayne’s life and place in the post-Crisis DC Universe. 

This actually brings me back to my original point: your position in this discussion is not as sincere as you’re trying to make it look. If you want to have a legitimate discussion about DC Comics’ problem with women, you literally cannot look the other way at a problem that very much applies to the character you like. Once you do that, you immediately invalidate any point you are trying to make. On that same note, you also don’t get to tell other people how they should support their favourite characters, and even less so if you yourself supported characters you liked, problematic developments and all. 

As I said in my original response to this post, you are entitled to like the things that you like, even if they are problematic. What is NOT okay is for you to ignore the problems that do exist with the things that you like because you happen to like them. Even less so if you are attempting to address a very legitimate problem with the way DC Comics treats and repurposes their women, and more specifically, how they tend to throw out certain women like yesterday’s trash sometimes in favour of other women. This isn’t a problem that started with the New 52. It’s been a problem throughout DC’s publishing history that intensified especially after the Crisis reboot.

highpriestessofjogan:

I prefer the Huntress who is Helena Bertinelli, last surviving member of a mob family who goes in and becomes queen of all the mob bosses in Gotham, much like Oren Ishii in the Kill Bill franchise.

I especially hated when they did the Birds of Prey TV series where they made Helena Batman’s daughter.  Okay, I understand now that Huntress started out as Batman’s daughter, but in the Birds of Prey comics she is not so if you’re going to do a TV series based off of a specific comic line, then I feel you need to go with the background for the characters from that comic.  It really pissed me off in addition to what they did to botch up Black Canary.  

I love the show, it’s awesome female empowerment stuff and you will feel like you can kick all kinds of ass when you watch it, but I just have to keep reminding myself when I watch it that it’s different storylines than the comic I had come to love.

Helena Bertinelli was not added to the Birds of Prey team until 2003. The Birds of Prey television show aired in 2002.

Given that timeframe, the Huntress wasn’t an official member of the team in the mainstream comics at the time of the show’s airing.

If the show had followed the comics, the team would’ve just comprised of Dinah and Barbara who were the original team members.

Hi, I have a question about huntress. I've only ever read Bertinelli as Huntress, but since I started reading your posts, I've gained an interest in Helena Wayne. I know Bertinelli was super Catholic and everything, and that was the reason for the cross on her costume, but what was Helena Wayne's reason?

Hi! Thank you for your question.

In Worlds’ Finest #9 it was established that the cross came with the costume Helena Wayne bought from an ‘off-the-market’ supplier, and Wayne provided exact instructions for how she wanted her costume designed.

Additionally, it was further established that her Huntress costume is directly modelled after her mother’s Catwoman costume, which also had incorporated a cross-looking shape on her torso, and the Catwoman mask looks exactly like the Huntress mask.

Whether or not the Earth-2 Selina identified as Catholic like the post-Crisis counterpart is not currently known, but it is known that Helena Wayne designed her Huntress costume with her mother in mind. Even the purple on her costume goes back to the pre-Crisis version of her mother whose costume was purple.

beachgnome:

ITS FINE TO ENJOY DINAH DRAKE AND HELENA WAYNE

IT IS, HOWEVER, NOT OKAY TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN JUST SWAP WOMEN AROUND LIKE THAT

Sure they would have been interesting as friends to Barbara but it is MORALLY WRONG for DC to have done what they did. That fact needs to be acknowledged.

I have to ask, did you similarly think it was ‘morally wrong’ for DC to:

  1. Erase Helena Wayne as the Huntress for two decades and REBOOT her as another woman—in this case, Helena Bertinelli—while Batman’s sons get the privilege of keeping their origins intact?

  2. To EXPROPRIATE Helena Wayne’s name, origin, physical appearance, modus operandi, and identity as a superhero and as a woman onto an essentially different woman without ever acknowledging Wayne as the original Huntress?

  3. To give Helena Bertinelli MEMBERSHIP into the Bat Family, a family that is more rightfully Wayne’s?

  4. To pair off Helena Bertinelli with Dick Grayson romantically, even though Dick Grayson was an important person in Helena Wayne’s life, was her family, and even teased as a potential love interest for her?

  5. To pair off Helena Bertinelli with Catman in a way that heavily alluded to Batman and Catwoman’s relationship, even though Batman and Catwoman are Helena Wayne’s parents, and would therefore be the more appropriate Huntress to explore this idea with?

  6. For Helena Bertinelli to be written as wanting Batman’s approval despite not really having any real reason for it beyond her former life as Helena Wayne?

  7. For Helena Bertinelli go be given membership into the Justice League and work with other superheroes Helena Wayne teamed up with regularly in the pre-Crisis days?

More importantly, did you support any or all of those ideas and developments with your money at any time within the last two decades? Because, if so, you immediately invalidate any point you are trying to make here.

No one here is denying that DC Comics has a serious problem with women. But if you are going to have a legitimate discussion about DC treating their women as interchangeable, you yourself need to acknowledge that the problem with the Huntress started with Helena Bertinelli post-Crisis, not with Helena Wayne in the New 52.

I’ve said it before, I will say it again: the idea that Helena Bertinelli existed as a rebooted Helena Wayne in the post-Crisis continuity is a well documented FACT that’s been acknowledged in two legitimate DC Comics sources: the introductions to Huntress: Year One and Huntress: Darknight Daughter trade paperbacks.

Given that reality, it was neither a coincidence nor an accident that the post-Crisis Helena Bertinelli was developed in ways that either alluded to or were more more appropriate for Helena Wayne. As such, the post-Crisis Helena Bertinelli embodied all of the problems you and many others are complaining about here.

The fact that she was created as an Italian-American woman who is Catholic, connected to the mafia, and often times depicted as an ultra-violent heroine who was deliberately made to look worse than other antiheroes does not change any of that. If you so much as rationalise how unique Helena Bertinelli was while looking the other way at all the different ways her development borrowed heavily from Helena Wayne’s Huntress, you compromise your position in this argument.

Helena Wayne is the original character who originated and defined the Huntress as we know her. Much of what we like about the Huntress did NOT originate with Helena Bertinelli in any way, including:

  1. The idea of the Huntress as a female Batman. More specifically, becoming the Huntress in response to losing family to criminals, especially one who functioned as a criminal. That was Helena Wayne’s origin.

  2. The idea of the Huntress not dealing with sexism or misogyny, and beating unconscious any criminal who insults her on the basis of her gender. Helena Wayne did that first.

  3. The idea of the Huntress as a woman with psychological issues that in part influence why she does what she does. Again Helena Wayne got there first. There was even a whole story arc devoted to that in Wonder Woman.

  4. The idea of the Huntress as an aggressive fighter and being willing to use excessive force as a way of getting criminals to talk. Again, Helena Wayne got there first, particularly in the mid-1980s.

  5. The Huntress being willing to kill under extreme circumstances and not always feeling bad for any criminals who die during their encounters with her. Again Helena Wayne got there first, even during Paul Levitz’ original run of her. The main difference with this one here is that the Comics Code of Authority (which was still in place during Helena Wayne’s original publication) prevented writers from depicting heroes actively killing anyone, and writers often had to ‘find ways around that,’ which they did with Helena Wayne.

That being said, people are entitled to like what they like, yourself included. People are also allowed to like things that are problematic as long as they don’t ignore the problems. 

You are absolutely NO ONE to say to anyone how they should spend their own money or support the characters they want to support. Many of the problems that exist with DC Comics are beyond the reach of most fans and even creators alike.

Even if we don’t actively support the changes they are imposing, that doesn’t mean (let alone guarantee) that DC Comics will bend back on their decisions and actually give fans what they want. If that had always been the case, Helena Wayne fans would’ve gotten Helena Wayne back A LOT sooner than we actually did because Helena Bertinelli was not initially successful with fans earlier on in her publication.

All of the problems that exist with DC Comics is up to executives to fix. It is up to them to LISTEN to their customers and make appropriate changes that will improve the quality and reception of their product.  

As for fans, we will buy anything that features our favourite characters and creative teams. That is how we roll. We may not support every decision that gets made with our favourite characters by the publisher (I sure as hell don’t), but we will nonetheless buy anything that features those characters we like in hopes of getting more of those characters.

And you know what? We are entitled to do that.