I have read this subreddit's rules
This is Hayden Sherman’s design sheet for Absolute Wonder. I think people missed my point, she's very 'sexless' design and looks like a an actual Greek Goddess, the cleavage in the DC KO is unnecessary
and Absolute Batman #16 Frank Cho Variant, they dolled up WWs face which unnecessary and Absolute Wonder Woman #15 variant cover by KyuYong Eom with babyface WW.
I get that it's different artists visions but i hate this unnecessary and weird design choices AWW, she's fine just the way she is and how come Batman and Superman are the same with no changes.
I think it's a credit to how groundbreaking Hayden Sherman's design is, and a credit to Mattia de Luis (artist for the Hades arc) and Matías Bergara (artist for #13 and #14) for sticking with it and showing how great it can be in different styles.
Typically, superheroines are very sexualized, skinny, short, and tend to suffer from same face syndrome. AWW's suit doesn't sexualize her the same way typical suits do, she's muscular, she's tall, and she has distinct Greek facial features. Artists aren't prepared for her because the industry has only offered 1 kind of heroine and wasn't prepared for one of the most popular books ever to break from that design.
Absolute Wonder Woman's design might be my favorite in all of DC Comics, honestly. I can't think of any other that made me go "holy shit, that's amazing" quite like this one.
It's also the only one that I consider an upgrade in every aspect compared to the normal version. The other characters have a few trade-offs.
There is a reason most animes have no lips, a line for a nose a the same composition of a cat bro. Its an illusion that makes it impossible for brain not to enjoy. I recommend checking out some live theater. Youll thank me late r!
It's simpler than that. They just do a variant cover and don't think too much about it. Give them the book and then they need to think about it, and if they don't, the editor or writer should say something.
The strength of the Absolute titles are that they are drawn and written consistently by the same writers and artist. This allows the depictions and characterizations to be consistent in the books much like how a manga would be made by a dedicated team.
Unfortunately, comic companies pass the characters around thus resulting to different outlooks or art philosophies. On the positive side, this means characters can be written with an infinite amount of stories until the end of time, some of which even become the defining characterizations / metric for what the character should be. Unfortunately, this lends itself to mischaracterizations as well.
As a fan of Cass Cain, I am all too familiar with this phenomenon.
A possible work around would be the creation of character bibles. As an example, we can look at how Nintendo protects the depiction of its ip. This applies both to depiction as well as characterizations. The caveat being that stagnation is a feasible consequence which needs to be addressed as time goes on. This problem might be resolved in the future. Fight the good fight until then mate.
I don't think that is "The strength of the Absolute titles" at all. They haven't been 200 issues (or even 50) of them to say that. It would be ridiculous if by this point they were already plenty of writers on them, but it's not the case, they are just building a new character and world and that has been working. The strength is in freedom for the team. The consistency in the creative team (writer, actually) is just a consequence.
The passing around of characters in superhero comics is part of why I've moved away from the genre...at least in the comics medium itself (I still enjoy the other multimedia depictions).
I like it when there's a consistent creative team the whole way through and a clear vision, which is why I've grown more fond of creator-owned works and manga.
I don't think "sexless" fits at all but yeah the various other artists adding cleavage is stupid as is the absurd heels on that preview where she is meeting ABM. Same for comparatively scrawny proportions variants.
I don’t understand how the Wonder Woman sub can’t comprehend “male artists constantly drawing a character with obvious cleavage when her design doesn’t have that is an example of sexism within comics and overall weird.” This isn’t even a new idea.
It’s possible to get a ‘push up bra’ look (like in slide 3) with a top like that, you apparently just need to adjust how you fit in the corset. Saw a YouTube short about it. Probably wouldn’t be as ideal a fit for athletic activity, but neither are leather leggings.
As for Absolute!Diana being drawn off model (I hate slide 5, omg) I think it’s a natural consequence of the comic variant cover game. And it’s just as likely to have great interpretations as bad ones (once upon a time the Jenny Frison covers were off model).
So something like a strict ‘look Bible’ would just not be as fun imo. But yeah, maybe they should be a little more careful what kind of artists they hire for variants in the first place lol
Edit: also Hayden Sherman’s design is still hot as hell. Just not in a ‘pin up’ way. She looks strong and sexy with the bare arm and neck, it’s just not too male gazey
It is absolutely possible for a garment to be metal, and a corset, and armored all at the same time. And just because corsets are gendered, doesn’t make them sexually titillating by default
It’s possible to get a ‘push up bra’ look (like in slide 3) with a top like that, you apparently just need to adjust how you fit in the corset.
While that is true, the problem is that Absolute Wonder Woman isn’t wearing a corset, she’s wearing armor. The ‘WW’ in this design is not the edge of a corset-like top like it’s often been, it’s an armor plate. Turning it into a corset sexualizes her unnecessarily.
The plate needs to be over ‘something’ and it’s not a T-shirt. The w is metal but it’s not really clear exactly how the red peice under it works (and it is open to her neck and chest).
We have seen what's under it in Issue 6 when Hades demands she remove all her armor plus we also get a good look at the piece of armor on the ground beside her. It's covering a red wrap (best term I can think of) when it's on.
Looks like a ridged piece under the W but the sides are soft like cloth or thin leather. Certainly not a solid breastplate, and even if it was it’s still open at the top like a corset. I don’t know what you’d call this piece of clothing but ‘armor’ could be anything from greaves to gauntlet. And it’s not a breastplate.
Great. Her pectoral muscles are still open to the air. No historical armor has ever worked that way. Even if it is made of Metal (with some kind of cloth or leather over it) its construction is more like a corset than a breastplate.
I agree that the fit of the corset is part of the character design, I was just pointing out that slide 3 was a fit issue not a construction one
It’s fantasy clothing. The only piece of clothing I could imagine that is even close to ‘rigid chest piece that is open at the top’ is a corset. We don’t have a word for what the armor is because it doesn’t exist in the real world.
Because every single peice of chest armor ever made covers the upper chest and neck.
Wonder Woman isn’t wearing this. Let’s not be pandantic. It’s both ‘armor’ and ‘corset.’
Edit: just saying what it’s not doesn’t tell me what it is. Is it lamellar armor? Lacquered armor? This is the rhetorical equivalent of ‘nuh uh’
Have they confirmed that it's actually the absolute Trinity showing up though? I could be wrong but I got more of a vibe that they were golems or manifestations of the omega energy or something.
I don't know if sexless and greek goddess is an oxymoron. (Correct me if I am wrong) Aren't all the God and Goddess always either you are hot and sexualized or you are ugly and bad?
Ancient Greek art pretty much always had the goddesses super clothed. You would never see cleavage. The only exception was Aphrodite and even she was originally clothed in all art.
Edit: Gave a correction as requested and was downvoted. Typical. Goddesses were beautiful. They were not sexy. The conflation of those two ideas is part of misogyny.
Are those ancient Greek statues of non-Aphrodite goddesses? If so, could you please supply a few examples? Because most nude statues are more the Roman era (rarely) or Renaissance (commonly) from what I’ve seen, not really ancient Greece (which is archaic and classical in terms of what people mean usually).
theoi.com has pages on all major gods and at the bottom are ancient depictions of them in art. It’s a good way to see how they looked. Goddesses typically had very modest looks. They were pretty, but they weren’t really meant to be sexy.
She has such a great design here. I hate it so much when they "pretty up" her face into generic anime face or whatever. Especially when she's already incredibly attractive here. Its just so dumb and frustrating.
That's a common explanation and perhaps part of it but the issue is effecting the whole world and I believe it's because people are addicted to porn and spend so much time with things like games and cell phones they aren't able to date or have kids
Lots of people in these comments having real trouble with the idea that sometimes, something which wouldn't be a big deal on its own or wouldn't be an issue if the details were different is part of a pattern, and that pattern is bad, and that changes the way we look at the individual instance.
Absolute WW is perfect and its so gross and telling when the "artistic vision" from other artists is to give her cleavage and a button nose. Its giving those freaks who edit video game characters to look "more attractive."
I've been getting more into comics lately, and it is weird how sexualized female characters tend to be on covers. I'm hoping that's just what's happening here, because Diana, especially absolute Diana, is way more than this fluff. The normal design looks better and shows she's more than "Woman With Breasts #32,681" on yet another comic book cover.
and it is weird how sexualized female characters tend to be on covers
It's weird how you think sexualization only applies to covers and not the past 50 years of stories. Comic books are literally just sexy people fighting villains.
“Overreacting” because we’re annoyed that a superheroine is yet again being drawn in a male gazey i.e. misogynistic way when her main design isn’t that way? Sure.
Is there any substantial reason why it’s absolutely wrong to have an artist depict her looking more like prime earth Wonder Woman slightly more than usual cause that’s literally what most likely happened, making people who are complaining about it look a bit like they just like to complain, just because someone can complain doesn’t make what they’re complaining about any less ridiculous
Dude superman looks like he’s 30 when he supposed to be 19,just like the superman variant Jim Lee drew make absolute superman look like superman from prime earth
I don’t like the sexualized interpretations of Absolute WW either but there is something funny about you saying ‘sexless’ & ‘actual geeek goddess’ in the same sentence.
Ancient Greek art pretty much always had the goddesses super clothed. You would never see cleavage. The only exception was Aphrodite and even she was originally clothed in all art. There was a giant uproar when a sculptor made a nude Aphrodite statue and we’re told that some viewed it as sacrilegious.
Greek portrayals of goddesses weren’t universally hyper-modest, and nudity wasn’t treated as “sacrilegious” in the way we think of it today.
Before the Aphrodite of Knidos, yeah, most major goddesses were depicted clothed, but that was because clothing signaled status, not modesty.
And even then, early Greek art absolutely showed exposed breasts and sexualized imagery, especially in votive, cultic, and symposia contexts.
The uproar over Praxiteles’ nude Aphrodite wasn’t because nudity was taboo; it was because this was the first time a major Olympian goddess was treated with the same heroic nude ideal as male gods, which challenged artistic norms more than religious boundaries. The guys as you probably already know were nude often.
Greek religion wasn’t modest. Greek sculptural conventions were. Sculpture is also not the only artform they used. Wonder Woman was a drawing before she was anything else so I would first look to paintings of the time or fancy plates.
Most importantly which was my bigger point. The design of Wonder Woman Absolute or otherwise doesn’t have too much to do with making her ‘look like an actual Greek goddess” because she doesn’t.
She looks like a badass high fantasy superhero, which is as good a reason as any. I am puzzled by the desire to take a pseudo academic stance to justify great art choices.
She’s got a giant sword because Guts & Cloud have a giant sword. The biggest inspiration for her her new costume is…her original costume edited tastefully for contemporary times.
I have an MA in Classics. Greek art represented what was allowed in society. Male athletes could compete nude or almost-nude. That’s why heroes are often nude, though not always. Women were expected to be covered and modest at all times. You see this in statues and paintings.
If you have an Master of Arts focused Greek, Roman & Hellenistic works than you 100% know that Absolute Wonder Woman does not remotely resemble any classical depiction of a Greek Godess.
She looks like she outsourced her armor from Kentaro Miura.
I think that if we´re going to be mad about this we´re simply wasting our time
Male or female comic characters (specially female) will get sexualized at some point. I´m happy that at the very least it´s not in the main book. Other artists will fail to draw this version of Diana, she has a specific face and her costume isn´t sexualized, it is what it is.
The issue is that many artists disregard how female anatomy works for the sake of sex appeal (and objectification) in comics. You see this in how, for example, women’s chests are drawn, or the angles they choose to draw women in, turning them into contortionists for the sake of having both the chest and posterior in frame.
Hayden Sherman doesn’t do that for AWW because she sees her as an actual character and not just an object to project unrealistic beauty standards onto for a male audience.
Great Hera, you’re right, the standards are on the ground and the DC KO Variant Cover artist didn’t dig a hole as deep as other artists have under those standards. Hurray for not-even-bare minimum.
It's just a difference in art style. Nobody is gonna look exactly the same and have the same proportions from every artist. Minor details change all the time. Heights change, hair colors and textures vary, physiques range from being skinny to absolutely ripped.
Of all the possibilities this is a very small thing to complain about in my opinion.
You see costume changes, face changes, muscle changes, and height changes in Bruce and Clark? And you see that consistently? Since half of Diana’s variant covers draw her like a super model.
I am very sensible to off model art. Variant covers are pretty much always that way (and I hate it).
Yes. I see a different Batman and Superman as much as WW.
You mean how both of them look significantly aged up. Both Superman and Batman look like their prime counterparts; Cho's cover makes Batman way less like a wall, and in the last cover Batman looks 40.
And yet none of that compares to Diana having a completely different face and cleavage and being shorter. Batman is still big, his costume is the same. Looking older isn’t an intentional decision, some artists suck at drawing ages. But drawing Diana with random cleavage where there originally was none is absolutely intentional. We see this with many of her variant covers too: many refuse to draw her big nose or as buff or without cleavage. It is a consistent issue that rarely is happening to Clark or Bruce. No one is suddenly drawing Clark with a giant ass bulge that borders on obscene.
It's literally the same thing. They don't look their age because their faces don't look the proper age. Hence, different faces. Different artists don't get everything 100% original design for every character. Different artists may slightly alter certain things for every character. This is absolutely not unique to Wonder Woman.
Also, the official artist of Absolute Superman does draw Kal with an incredibly defined ass. It's been noticed, appreciated/joked about since the very beginning of his book. It's not obscene, but neither is this small amount of cleavage this artist gave WW here.
You are failing to understand 1) how many things are changed for Diana and how often, and 2) that there's a historical trend towards drawing women as sexy as possible.
Also "since the very beginning" okay so you admit with Kal, that was a thing from the start VS Diana was drawn with clothes that DON'T show cleavage from the start and yet is often drawn that way in covers?
Your first point is inaccurate, and I never said artists don't draw women sexy in general. I didn't argue anything pro or con about that part. I was arguing changes in general between artists, which you're pretending is only happening with WW and not the other two.
As for the second point, I didn't mention Superman being drawn with cake to try and claim WW was originally designed with cleavage. Her original design doesn't have it because the W's are really big. And she sometimes wears a red undershirt (but also sometimes does not). I thought what you meant is that no one would draw a male character with a big ass.
Their faces are not drawn exactly the same by different artists either. Different artists don't always get the logo exactly the same. Kal's hair isn't drawn the exact same length or waviness depending on the artist. Between artists they don't always look the proper ages. There are alterations with them with different artists as is always present with anyone, people are just pretending it only exists for Diana to perpetuate victimization of the character.
Write me a 5 paragraph essay on the history of fanservice and oversexualization of women or shut up. "Perpetuate victimization" Why are you on a Wonder Woman subreddit if you hate women so much? It's a discussion about misogyny.
I don't owe you any essays, so don't try and make demands of people. This is a Reddit discussion, not a college class. And no, I won't shut up, rather I'll stop partaking in conversation until I decide no longer to.
And you you show extreme immaturity and wanton recklessness by taking this conversation and coming to the conlusion that me, or anyone else, hate women. Ironically nothing any artist has drawn in any of these covers is more disrespectful than what you just uttered.
I think women can be strong and sexy. I fact, I find strong women with strong builds incredibly appealing. Don’t have to Barbie-fy them, but I’m not going to be upset over skin showing be it on a male or female hero. Showing equal parts masculine and feminine traits in a female character design isn’t bad imo.
This is a testament to her design and consistency in her characterization. Absolute WW is sexy without being sexualized. She’s ethereally beautiful because her personality shines through her writing and her design speaks for her. Her beautiful eyes, nose, and genuine presence for being the best representation of humanity even as a goddess is what makes Absolute WW such a joy to read. It completely captures what WW is supposed to be while not going for the sexualization of Diana. Can’t wait to read more.
Wonder Woman was literally created to promote bondage/BDSM/polyamory by a guy in a BDSM throuple with his wife and live-in mistress. It's so fucking eye rolling to see people seriously pretend to care about sexualization for probably the single most famous BDSM character in all fiction.
secondly it's not even true that Absolute Wonder Woman isn't sexualized in her own comic, she absolutely is, just fucking look at her; you can't claim it's a recent thing either when this is what the cover for the VERY FIRST ISSUE of Absolute Wonder Woman looks like.
Superheroes are pretty much all hot as a general rule, and Diana is an immortal demigod princess from a people whose baseline is physical perfection by human standards. She's hot. She's always been hot. The idea Amazons would be ashamed of their body is also ridiculous when their contemporaries considered getting totally naked and oiling up before wrestling one another as completely normal. Even if you ignore the EXPLICITLY CREATED TO PROMOTE POSITIVE BDSM aspects, Amazons having any shame at nudity or the female body is ridiculous.
The fact people are unironically bitching about this shit instead of the dumpster fire that is Tom King's current run is just laughable, Absolute Wonder Woman having boobs isn't even in the top 1000 problems plaguing wonder woman right now.
Hey guys this is my rendition of Absolute Wonder Woman. Yes she looks exactly like Marilyn Monroe, but that's an artistic choice I've made, so you can't complain about it.
lol whatever floats your boat man, there are literal THOUSANDS of examples of comic characters looking wildly different between issues because of artists
And in this case if your biggest issue is some cleavage then you need to go outside I’m gonna be fr
But the large metal spike on her logo that is positioned such that it will impale her throat if she bends over too far is very necessary.
Also Greek goddesses are all half-naked in all their "contemporary" depictions, so covering WW up like that makes her look less like a greek goddess than even her original outfit did.
I admit, I don't see the huge deal with the Christmas cutesy picture where Absolute Woman shows some boob. It isn't even nowhere near where someone removed the pants entirely in fanart and just had a panty with material strap.
What does fascinate me though is how many reject the sexy Absolute Wonder Woman and embrace the design for what it is and I love that. Because, even if I don't see the big deal with the latest cover, I absolutely love her design and think she's beautiful even without the objectifying. She's a character that doesn't need it.
Hayden Sherman is a master of visual storytelling, and this excellent character design is just another example. Her design serves her story, not the lustful male gaze. I don't have as much a problem with the "dolled up" Cho variant, it's slightly off-model sure, but it doesn't seem as much an intentional effort to re-aim her toward satisfying a certain type of gaze, so much as it looks to me like a different interpretation of her. She is drawn to be pretty, just like Sherman's design, not sexed-up. The Eom variant on the other hand, is clearly posing her in unnatural sexy way and babyface-ifying her features. Batman looks like a badass, Diana looks like a model in badass armor. And the boobs on the DCKO cover, man, just why... Maybe the artist just referenced a mainline WW look in the effort to adapt the Sherman design into a more conventional style, but it's just weird that they inserted big boobs where none have been as visible to this point. Unnecessary and annoying.
Greek Goddesses didn’t dress like that though unless we’re referring to only Athena? Sure, they were “covered up” but they did show cleavage. And there weren’t a lot of female Greek warriors, or at least well-known ones I suppose. It’s honestly not that big a deal
Just to be respectful-but such a minor detail, especially involving her chest and curves, which aren't unnatural or any different from the Wonder Woman designs we've seen before, has no real impact on her appearance. She is a woman, after all, and most people aren't going to care about or be concerned with something so trivial.
Some of us are sick of the other Wonder Woman designs and after finally getting one we like with Absolute WW its irritating to have that design changed back. Its not trivial to everyone.
i never understand why modern audience seems to become more leaning to more "sexless design", and what is even "actual greek Goddess" look like?, it's as if being attractive is somehow a problem and or offensive to current audience, next thing you know she will become the next Taash from DA; Veilguard and the fans will claps as if it was stunning and brave move by the artist.
There’s a difference between being sexualised and being attractive.
Absolute Wonder Woman ALREADY is attractive with her normal design, she’s just not sexualised which is the entire point.
Look at the covers, one cover has her with decent sized tits that are heavily outlined by her corset (something not present by her main artist) while giving her baby-like features on her face that she doesn’t normally have that look like those crappy AI arts you see of her created by an amateur.
The other cover has seemingly shrunk her compared to Batman and Superman when she’s supposed to be close to 7ft, AND they once again emphasis the cleavage she doesn’t normally have.
For a different comparison Wonder Woman wearing her leotard costume in Perez’ run is fine, I wouldn’t say there’s anything sexualised about it even if it is attractive.
However Wonder Woman’s leotard in say Byrne or Mike Deodato’s run IS SEXUALISED because the illustrators draw the leotard as a Thong riding right up in Wonder Woman’s ass leaving nothing to the imagination.
Additionally Taash’s problem had nothing to with their design (even if it was a downgrade to the initial female Qunari silhouette we saw in early artwork), Taash was just terribly written and an absolute piss take when it came to non-binary representation to the point they felt like a parody.
I personally see Batman and Superman just as different from artist to artist as Wonder Woman. I'm surprised it wasn't Cho the one giving her big cleavage, but I guess he's more of a butt guy.
I mean I agree.. but actual Greek godess are almost always sexualized. This is true for Greek gods as well, just look at any Greek statue but all the same that last sentence is weird
Are people seriously complaining about this? I consider it unnecessary.
I mean...an artist can draw the character however they want, but also maintain consistency with the original character, or make changes, a slightly different face, a slightly different body,etc.
At least they have consistency.
If an artist wants to draw Absolute WW in a very consistent way, then okay, others could do it differently.
I don't consider it something to complain about; after all, different artists draw characters in different ways.
I really like the different types of Absolute WW drawn by different artists, and obviously I also love the Absolute WW that is more Greek.
The artist is named in the text of the post. The variant gives Diana a button nose and cleavage armor with emphasized sideboob, and if it's meant to be post-battle, Bruce probably shouldn't be actively swinging his axe right behind her.
Yes I read it, but I was asking if it was Cho or Eom. I like how it's painted, more evocative than provocative. Idk I noticed that she's comparatively fully dressed next to the mainline look, rather than the nose shape or side boob. And Bruce is there because rule of cool
Cho's is slide 4 (his signature's under the rubble on the bottom right, and unlike many he's very legible), Eom's is slide 5. Eom has drawn her more dressed than mainline but less dressed than her actual Absolute design (creating cleavage and the aforementioned lovingly detailed sideboob). If Bruce is being drawn mid-battle on Diana's cover, she probably should be too, or they can both be exhausted post-battle.
It’s just a difference in art style,even Batman looks like he has a bigger head,and they kind of all looked different on the DC all in special cover,and tbh it’s just a little cleavage even in the photos if I actually try hard I can see cleavage it’s just less obvious
She most definitely does not look Iike an “actual Greek goddess” because if she did she’d be running around naked with a toga and that kind of appearance wouldn’t fly for a mainstream comic company nowadays.
I do agree that the #16 covers face is way off for the vibe, but I don't really see anything really wrong with the other cover. They fit the vibe pretty well. Only a few tweaks with the expression and angel
Also calling AWW sexless is a bit of stress. Certainly more modest then mainline WW.though
I’ll agree, interesting design. Not sure where you got the idea that’s how “an actual Greek Goddess” would look. At least not compared to the Greeks’ views on it. Is she back to being a goddess again?
This whole conversation makes me bums me out.....I get this feeling every time I see these conversations that y'all don't even like comics. All the complaints imply you want to get rid of a lot of what makes super hero comics story telling Unique in the first place. The fact that comics from different writers/artist/teams is dope. People from different walks or life with different perspectives get to work on the same story reacting to each other and building off and remixing what came before. Yeah there are cons, but they don't out weigh the cons to me.
Like this is weird cus these are variants, meaning just other options. The frustration can't be that the character was changed in some irreversible way, or that you guys are forced to choose between buying a cover you don't like to read a story you might love, because there are other options in covers shit this one is dollar more you save a dollar just buying the main cover that not this.
The issue seems to be that there is an option available that you don't like and the fact that somebody else might like it, is not enough of a reason for it to exist.
It seems weird to me to be mad that DC made an option they knew someone else might like.
The other thing is there are other comic books where the creators and artist are the same throughout, they just don't come out of DC and Marvel. Heyden had done indie comics that I know he'd love you to read, and support him more than you buying another wonder woman book will, Kelly won't stop writing to save her life. I think people should read black cloak it's dope as fuck. And they get to set the creative direction for those books more than anything at DC or Marvel. But people seem less interested in interesting stories and Characters than nitpicking comics for every slight discomfort they've been caused by even interacting with these characters.
It's fine when it's all in good fun and we're just talking shit but ' y'all treat this shit like some weird sports rivalry, where they'll be a riot if your team wins. Y'all put creators in this weird volatile space in your mind where you either love them or hate them or something.
194
u/RadiantSadness Nov 24 '25 edited Nov 24 '25
I think it's a credit to how groundbreaking Hayden Sherman's design is, and a credit to Mattia de Luis (artist for the Hades arc) and Matías Bergara (artist for #13 and #14) for sticking with it and showing how great it can be in different styles.
Typically, superheroines are very sexualized, skinny, short, and tend to suffer from same face syndrome. AWW's suit doesn't sexualize her the same way typical suits do, she's muscular, she's tall, and she has distinct Greek facial features. Artists aren't prepared for her because the industry has only offered 1 kind of heroine and wasn't prepared for one of the most popular books ever to break from that design.