@JonSmith said:

Hm... You make good points. I agree. While trying to change the Trinity is a fools errand (they've been around too long unchanging to ever be truly changed in the minds of the fans) Aquaman does admittedly fit the space better than Wonder Woman. Hell, you can go a step further and give them the Navy S.E.A.L.S motto: "By land (Batman), sea, (Aquaman), or air (Superman)." They even have the obvious similarity in that each of them has a name ending with 'man'.

Those are fine points indeed. Quite rational, to be sure.

Then again, if you take Wonder Woman out of the Trinity, even if you leave her as a Leaguer, she just doesn't have much GOING for her. Sure she's an awesome Amazon with a ton of history, but I feel if you took her away from the Trinity, away from being front and center alongside Bats and Clark, she'll just end up being relegated to the background as a B or even C-List hero, like Marvel's own Hercules (COME AT ME, @PowerHerc!)

And this bit of humor is nice, too. Lol.

The OP makes sense to me.

I could go for Supes/Bats/Aquaman as the Trinity.

Kinda superficial, don't you think? I mean on one hand, Wonder Woman actually does fit some of the criteria you laid out for Aquaman (Magic, traditional, greatness born, etc). On the other, those criteria are meaningless because none of them actually help Arthur find himself in a trinity between Batman and Superman any better than Diana did. Light, Darkness and... Sea, doesn't have any better ring to it. And there's really nothing about what colors they wear, where they grew up, what families they're from, how many sidekicks they had (as a note, Superman doesn't have any. He has people using his name, not working with him), or what race their archenemies they are that makes them any better foils for each other. They're just meaningless coincidences.

Not that Green Lantern, or Flash, or Cyborg or Martian Manhunter or anyone else would work better. If you feel that Wonder Woman is shoehorned in, that's only because there is one glaring problem with DC's Trinity: It doesn't exist. What exists is a dichotomy between Superman and Batman which doesn't really allow for a third point of view. No other character can stand opposite both of them for it to be an actual trinity, he can only stand in the middle, mediating between the two. That's why it seems like Wonder Woman doesn't her own iconic description or juxtaposition. The setup between her peers won't allow it. She's not supposed to be the third corner of DC's triangle, she's supposed to be the middle point between two extreme views, the Kirk to their Spock and McCoy, if you will. In this sense being the token chick actually works for her because gender is one dichotomy Batman and Superman cannot cover on their own and which allows her to stand against both of them, something no other member of the JLA can do. Put Aquaman or Green Lantern in there and they'd just try to butt heads with both of them, and naturally they'd loose and be pushed out.

@AtPhantom said:

Kinda superficial, don't you think? I mean on one hand, Wonder Woman actually does fit some of the criteria you laid out for Aquaman (Magic, traditional, greatness born, etc). On the other, those criteria are meaningless because none of them actually help Arthur find himself in a trinity between Batman and Superman any better than Diana did. Light, Darkness and... Sea, doesn't have any better ring to it. And there's really nothing about what colors they wear, where they grew up, what families they're from, how many sidekicks they had (as a note, Superman doesn't have any. He has people using his name, not working with him), or what race their archenemies they are that makes them any better foils for each other. They're just meaningless coincidences.

Not that Green Lantern, or Flash, or Cyborg or Martian Manhunter or anyone else would work better. If you feel that Wonder Woman is shoehorned in, that's only because there is one glaring problem with DC's Trinity: It doesn't exist. What exists is a dichotomy between Superman and Batman which doesn't really allow for a third point of view. No other character can stand opposite both of them for it to be an actual trinity, he can only stand in the middle, mediating between the two. That's why it seems like Wonder Woman doesn't her own iconic description or juxtaposition. The setup between her peers won't allow it. She's not supposed to be the third corner of DC's triangle, she's supposed to be the middle point between two extreme views, the Kirk to their Spock and McCoy, if you will. In this sense being the token chick actually works for her because gender is one dichotomy Batman and Superman cannot cover on their own and which allows her to stand against both of them, something no other member of the JLA can do. Put Aquaman or Green Lantern in there and they'd just try to butt heads with both of them, and naturally they'd loose and be pushed out.

What about the Zeus/Hades/Poseidon trichotomy or the Sky/Land/Sea trichotomy?

The fact that the three would be a triangle without a central mediation point adds drama and conflict to their interactions, which makes it remarkable when they work together. It's like the entire Earth coming down on an enemy.

@Captain13: My point is that they can't be a triangle at all. Batman and Superman represent the two extremes of the Superhero world in every way. Aquaman can't make himself the third extreme, he can only locate himself somewhere along the Superman-Batman scale.

The land/sea/air division isn't interesting because it's meaningless. It would be great if they actually were Zeus, Hades and Poseidon, but they're not. They're not kings protecting their realms (Well, Aquaman is, but that's rather meaningless on its own), they're superheroes protecting the innocent. To divide them along those lines would add absolutely nothing to their characters and would just be shoehorning them into roles they aren't meant to play.

Moreover, there really is no land/air distinction between Batman and Superman. Just because Superman can fly and Batman's base is under ground doesn't make them kings of the elements.

@AtPhantom said:

@Captain13: My point is that they can't be a triangle at all. Batman and Superman represent the two extremes of the Superhero world in every way. Aquaman can't make himself the third extreme, he can only locate himself somewhere along the Superman-Batman scale.

The land/sea/air division isn't interesting because it's meaningless. It would be great if they actually were Zeus, Hades and Poseidon, but they're not. They're not kings protecting their realms (Well, Aquaman is, but that's rather meaningless on its own), they're superheroes protecting the innocent. To divide them along those lines would add absolutely nothing to their characters and would just be shoehorning them into roles they aren't meant to play.

Moreover, there really is no land/air distinction between Batman and Superman. Just because Superman can fly and Batman's base is under ground doesn't make them kings of the elements.

But Batman and Superman aren't at extremes. It's not like Batman kills. At the end of the day, they do the same thing. They are just comparative abstracts, so a triangle does work. And if they were written as a triangle, the three kings thing could be interesting. For example, if New Krypton were done today, Superman could take the side of New Krypton, Batman could take the side of Earth, and Aquaman could take the side of Atlantis. Or they could have leaderhsip disputes on the JLA that represent their realms. Superman can fly over borders, so he wants the JLA to be involved in the entire world. Batman is grounded. He prefers to work locally and in the shadows if given the option. Aquaman has his own borders, so he wants the JLA to help more with seas and coasts, but he doesn't go as far as Superman. There's a lot you can do with this--especially if you create paralells between the JLA and Greek mythology.

@Captain13 said:

But Batman and Superman aren't at extremes. It's not like Batman kills. At the end of the day, they do the same thing. They are just comparative abstracts, so a triangle does work.

That's because they're both idealistic extremes. Just like all the other DC heroes are.

Let's make a simple a thought exercise. Imagine a scenario where the trinity (Batman, Superman and whoever else) will disagree on principle, with each member having their own distinct opinion that isn't a middle ground between the other two. I guarantee it's harder than it sounds.

I'll respond to tomorrow, heading to bed now.

@AtPhantom said:

@Captain13 said:

But Batman and Superman aren't at extremes. It's not like Batman kills. At the end of the day, they do the same thing. They are just comparative abstracts, so a triangle does work.

That's because they're both idealistic extremes. Just like all the other DC heroes are.

Let's make a simple a thought exercise. Imagine a scenario where the trinity (Batman, Superman and whoever else) will disagree on principle, with each member having their own distinct opinion that isn't a middle ground between the other two. I guarantee it's harder than it sounds.

I'll respond to tomorrow, heading to bed now.

Here's one such scenario: a terrorist attacks a city. Superman wants to do his job in a way that will get people to trust him and to feel hope, so that they can find a remedy to social ills like terrorism. Batman wants to do his job in a way that will get terrorists to fear him, so that there will be a fear of doing terrorist attacks. Aquaman just wants to do his job. He isn't out to inspire people because he knows that dramatic examples only stir people for short periods. He doesn't use fear because he knows that it doesn't really deter crime since criminals don't expect to get caught. So he just does his job, and he tries to lead. Batman and Superman are about influencing hearts/minds. Aquaman is not. He's used to being in charge and taking action without thinking of ideology. He does. That's your three way divide.

Also, Superman forgives. Batman seeks legal justice. Aquaman can be angered into committing outright murder. Comic fans wonder why Batman and Superman don't just kill people like Joker and Lex. It's because the are idealistic to the extreme. Aquaman is not. He's willing to put an end to those who threaten life.

Good night.

P.S.

As for families:

Super Family

Bat Family

Aqua Family

These three are pretty expansive.

@SC: Good points.

Personally, I wouldn't want to replace Wonder Woman as a member of the so-called Trinity. Although her real-life popularity and role as the 'token female' are regrettable, her place in the Trinity just feels iconic. When you think of the Big Three, you view them as the leaders of the entire superhero community and I think Diana's a big part of that.

That being said, this blog post (and posts mentioned by others) make a surprisingly convincing argument for Aquaman. Much of it is largely symbolic (The Zeus-Hades-Poseidon comparison, the power origins bit, the land-sea-air thing) and arguably superficial, but there are some pretty rational opinions here too. @Captain13 makes a very interesting juxtaposition between the three characters' modus operandis and their personalities.

I don't really have anything else to add to the conversation, but I'd definitely like to see some rebuttals in Wonder Woman's favor. Just wanted to say this thread makes for some interesting food for thought. Looking forward to where this goes.

@Captain13 said:

For example, if New Krypton were done today, Superman could take the side of New Krypton, Batman could take the side of Earth, and Aquaman could take the side of Atlantis.

The problem with this, which ties into the "They're not kings" issue (besides the fact that Atlantis is on Earth thus pointlessly dividing when fighting other planets) is that unlike Aquaman, Superman and Batman don't speak for their "realms". Aquaman is the king of the seas and thus has a political obligation to it. Superman and Batman do not. he entire land/sea/air distinction is simply not a natural one for them. It's telling that the first idea that comes to your mind would have to introduce an entire new setting into the mix and radically, fundamentally alter Superman's story in order for the triangle to become viable. Even then, it's not perfect match because there would be no reason for Superman to choose New Krypton over Earth (And indeed, he spent much of the NK arc not siding, but trying to balance between the two world and his own natures. You'd have him tip the scales to one end which is great for trinity, but sucks for Superman).

and is an attempt to conform Superman and Batman to Aquaman's situation. Hence the problems with your further points:

Superman can fly over borders, so he wants the JLA to be involved in the entire world.

Except when he can't, because we've seen countries try to keep him. There was even the example (Stupid as it was) of him renouncing his citizenship because of all the political flak he's picked up doing so.

@Captain13 said:

Batman is grounded. He prefers to work locally and in the shadows if given the option.

Except he really isn't, he's shown time and time again he doesn't give a damn about borders in pursuit of his prey. Just recently we've had the Batman inc. storyline which had him set up Batmen all over the world.

Moreover, it would be a debate in which Batman and Aquaman don't have a leg to stand on because once again they're supposed to be world's greatest superheroes and to in any way limit themselves to a single region is to deny people the help anywhere in the world even when you have the ability to do so is something none of them would stand for. To divide them along those lines is not a character or philosophical distinction, it's a political one, and one that allows for very little useful drama before it turns completely stale.

@Captain13 said:

Here's one such scenario: a terrorist attacks a city. Superman wants to do his job in a way that will get people to trust him and to feel hope, so that they can find a remedy to social ills like terrorism. Batman wants to do his job in a way that will get terrorists to fear him, so that there will be a fear of doing terrorist attacks. Aquaman just wants to do his job. He isn't out to inspire people because he knows that dramatic examples only stir people for short periods. He doesn't use fear because he knows that it doesn't really deter crime since criminals don't expect to get caught. So he just does his job, and he tries to lead. Batman and Superman are about influencing hearts/minds. Aquaman is not. He's used to being in charge and taking action without thinking of ideology. He does. That's your three way divide.

First of all, I don't think that's a good scenario. Such philosophy comes into play when people's lives aren't at risk. In this instance, all three of them would agree that the first task is to stop the terrorists with a moments notice. Taking action is something all three would do without much thought for how it should play out until it's done.

Second, taking action without thinking of ideology is the middle ground. To be a triangle would require him to have his own ideology and be able to get into a shouting match with the other two. By refusing ideology you're selecting a neutral ground between two polarized opinions. Essentially you're just refusing and backing down before the other two.

Third, Aquaman is a king. If being a king doesn't require you to inspire hope in your people, inspire fear in the criminals and play with politics and ideologies I don't know what does. :P

@Captain13 said:

Also, Superman forgives. Batman seeks legal justice. Aquaman can be angered into committing outright murder. Comic fans wonder why Batman and Superman don't just kill people like Joker and Lex. It's because the are idealistic to the extreme. Aquaman is not. He's willing to put an end to those who threaten life.

Well, first of all Wonder Woman too, as of late fulfills that niche (I don't agree with it but there it is) so Aquaman isn't any better off in that regard.

Second, that's a pretty terrible distinction. Seriously, if your only claim to fame is that you kill people, why are you in the group that the entire superhero community looks up to? You can't claim part of what is perhaps the most influential and inspirational gathering in DC and simultaneously commit acts that would make literally every single mainstream DC hero go "What the hell, man?" Do you think Superman and Batman would let him do that to someone in their presence? They would kick his ass up and down the Pacific for it. Killing does not make you Trinity material.

@entropy_aegis said:

Geoff Johns hates you.

Well I kinda hate him too these days so it evens out. :)

@drgnx: The topic fits in this forum since it discusses 4 Justice League members: Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Batman, and Superman. It also belongs in this forum because in the Aquaman forum, the responses would be more biased toward Aquaman.

@drgnx: That's kind of silly since the Trinity is often considered the leadership head of the Justice League, and the Justice League's nickname is "Trinity and Friends." For further evidence I point to the Justice League Unlimited opening that ended my centering on the Trinity and numerous Justice League runs. Also, Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben are not always in the fantastic four, but they are so tied to the team that you could have a thread titled "Why Black Panther is a better fit in FF than Reed" that centers on the five Marvek heroes I just mentioned and have it pertain to the FF or Fantastic Four thread. Your logic doesn't make sense.

@Dark_Guyver said:

I could go for Supes/Bats/Aquaman as the Trinity.

@drgnx said:

With the reasoning I've seen you use, I'm not surprised.

“Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength.”

― Eric Hoffer

@drgnx: I don't get how I was rude. I didn't understand your logic. Period. You insulted my intelligence. There is a difference.

@JonSmith said:

Hm... You make good points. I agree. While trying to change the Trinity is a fools errand (they've been around too long unchanging to ever be truly changed in the minds of the fans) Aquaman does admittedly fit the space better than Wonder Woman. Hell, you can go a step further and give them the Navy S.E.A.L.S motto: "By land (Batman), sea, (Aquaman), or air (Superman)." They even have the obvious similarity in that each of them has a name ending with 'man'.

Then again, if you take Wonder Woman out of the Trinity, even if you leave her as a Leaguer, she just doesn't have much GOING for her. Sure she's an awesome Amazon with a ton of history, but I feel if you took her away from the Trinity, away from being front and center alongside Bats and Clark, she'll just end up being relegated to the background as a B or even C-List hero, like Marvel's own Hercules (COME AT ME, @PowerHerc!)

I'm pretty sure that's the marines motto, but still good point.

@JonSmith: Actually technically you're right, but in the marines song/motto I think it says land, air, and sea. Also the marines have plane/Helicopters (air), Infantry/Tanks (land), and they work with the Navy and do amphibious operations (sea).

I'll stick with Wonder Woman even though I like big A.