I think you and I have a very different understanding of the word 'depth' if you seriously equate Winick's shallow handling of the character to the far more qualitative writing of Ed Brubaker. So I'll just leave it at that.
(1) Do not mistake Winick's own shallow understanding of the character and what she is about as the character having 'shallow traits,' and (2) you're now arguing in circles.
no subject
no subject
Shake?
no subject