Sooo...Watchmen

[weewarrior]

I've finally started reading the graphic novel, because somebody (and another somebody) urged me to do so, and it's totally depressing, yet awesomely compelling, and I can't stop reading it and now there are only 4 issues left, and.... erm. Help?

Also, somewhat cryptically: the Lost producers have read this, too, right? Some elements seemed *really* familiar.

ETA: There are now spoilers in the comments.

Comments

Re: I, the first

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

Well, here is where I suspect you'd be angry with me because I confess I'm not at all sure whether I'd I'd react like Rorsarch or like Dan & Laurie. Fro a pragmatic pov, those poor people are dead. The counter pov yells out that they die based on a monstrous lie and that there should always be truth, that you can't build a just world on top of lies. I'm ashamed to say that given the whole lack of chance to stop it, I'd probably see how things panned out rather
than instantly denounce it.

Leaving the fact aside that those poor people were slaughtered because someone just decided this would be the best and most glorious way to solve the problem, akin to cutting the Gordian Knot (Adrian's parallel), the fact that Adrian uses this to press his personal mark even more on the world and get even more incredibly and marvellously rich while doing so doesn't piss you off the least? This isn't just a peaceful new world, it's one sponsored by Veidt.

As for whether such a world can be just, no, I don't think it can. It's a too perverted price to pay, and the result can only be rotten, even if it's pretty on the outside. If that puts me on Rorschach's side, so be it. Although seriously, I don't think it does, exactly, since I think what crushed him wasn't the casualties, it was the bad guy getting away with it - which in turn of course is a sign for there being no justice. Adrian should not benefit from the situation, but he does.

This is why I think the ending of Watchmen is more challenging than the similar plot in Heroes, by the way. Much easier to try and stop a future like in Five Years Gone which seems utterly awful rather than one which might seem rather positive but at a horrendous cost. Plus, the poor people are dead, so the choice is whether the end justifies the means, always fraught with danger.

I agree that Heroes made it rather simple, not least because they put the conflict with Sylar being in power, not with Nathan building up a suppressive state because of Roy Cohnish self-hatred, but I really don't see the ending of Watchmen as morally ambivalent, because I don't see the world it depicts as positive. A challenging ending it is, yes, but because it shows a world that is completely devoid of morality, at least in my view. (Obviously I don't mean morality in the "no icky sex, no swearing" sense) Which brings us to

On that, could you expand a little on the 'living in an Aryan theme park' view? I admit that surprised me because I sort of viewed their future, as I say, as having some positive elements. It had a US & USSR working on harmony, for instance much to the annoyance of the New Frontiersmen. The arms race was over. I'm now wondering whether I've overlooked something important which would be embarassing.

*g* I was referring glibly to the advertisement on page 31 panel 4 of the twelfth issue, which depicts a blonde, happy couple who look like they are copied from a Nazi propaganda poster for the thousand years empire (is that what it's called in English? I'm more familiar with the German term: Tausendjähriges Reich.). Incidentally it's an ad for a Veidt perfume (I presume), which is called "Millennium." Add to that Dan and Laurie's disguise and blonde, blue-eyed Robert Redford running for presidency, and it's all very ... creepy. Apart from that, though, I do think there are more than a few fascist flavours to Adrian's view of the world, the notion that it's fine to sacrifice how many people you chose for the good of [insert your group of choice here - the Nazis obviously had what they saw as the "Germanic Race," Adrian probably would chose Earth inhabitants] among them.

Like I said, for me what brought about this "new world" makes it impossible to view it as untainted, but even apart from that, I was wondering if the inability to voice criticism against the new allies only goes for the radical right, or if it is a general suppression of more diverse opinions, probably in the name of "keeping up the morale," which seems a step closer to something totalitarian than is truly comfortable.
And of course there is the fact that Veidt products are everywhere. Whether you're pro-capitalism or not, one producer basically controlling the market generally isn't regarded as a sign of freedom, is it?

Re: I, the first

[snopes-faith.livejournal.com]

Gosh, I can't believe how appalling my typing is! So sorry for skipping the proofreading in the last reply.

the fact that Adrian uses this to press his personal mark even more on the world and get even more incredibly and marvellously rich while doing so doesn't piss you off the least? This isn't just a peaceful new world, it's one sponsored by Veidt.

It pisses me off hugely, believe me! And yes, it's maddening that he seems to be profiting so successfully. (I take commfort that his sould gets eaten from the inside, Black Freighter style) But for me, the thing is that the crime is a fait accompli. So the choice isn't stopping it, it's whether the new world is, on balance worth a try given that 3 million people have just lost their lives. Beacuse no punishment could be bad enough for Vedit to balance those scales. Plus, I presume that uncovering the deception would be the last straw for the Russians. I had always believed that uncovering Veidt's plan would lead to nuclear destruction.

I had a look at the last few pages - you are spot on about the imagery of the 1000 year reich in the perfume poster. Hmmn. so now I have to choose between death and Nazis?? Tough call.

I was wondering if the inability to voice criticism against the new allies only goes for the radical right, or if it is a general suppression of more diverse opinions, probably in the name of "keeping up the morale," Do you know, I never though about that. I assumed it was akin to the banning of Hate Speech but it is a lot more ambiguous. I'm loving talking to you - so mnay things I never really thought about and now seem so obvious!