Round Two

This post should finally get me caught up to where I'm supposed to be. I'll do my best not to rehash stuff I've said recently, but I'm running out of material to work with here.

I read Alan Moore's little essay about the creation of V for Vendetta after I finished the comic, and I found it pretty interesting. I think the chronicling of the long creative back-and-forth process between the two men serves as a great example of why comics are so unique. I think my favorite part was where he mentioned that the Muse very rarely delivers an entirely complete idea in pretty gift wrapping. That's especially applicable to a work of serialized fiction. I mean, they obviously had to have a general sense of where the story was going and what they wanted to accomplish by the end, but the story definitely got pieced together bit by bit over a long period of time. Given how long it took them to finish the series, it's rather amazing to me that it all hangs together so well and brings together so many different plot elements. Moore mentions some minor inconsistencies and oversights that were committed in the early chapters, but I didn't notice any jarring contradictions or stylistic changes.

We talked about ideologies present in V for Vendetta last time in class. For me, it's hard to separate the comic from the movie in this regard. The movie really exemplifies and emphasizes certain themes in the story. On the other hand, it changes the story in ways that Alan Moore didn't intend, so I think looking at the film is harmful in this case. One of the themes that is made much more explicit in the comic is that anarchy is not the same thing as chaos. I mean, it's still an incredibly radical political ideology, but to dismiss it as a total lack of order is misleading. V describes it as the difference between the Land-of-Do-As-You-Please and the Land-of-Take-What-You-Want. In the film, the ending seems much more reminiscent of the American Revolution: an overthrowing of a tyrannical system of government for a more democratic one. But V isn't advocating democracy. He's advocating anarchy, which is why he blows up Parliament. It's this sort of radical thinking that is supposed to make us question whether V really is any more than a terrorist. We tend to ignore or downplay his radicalism and assume he shares the same values that we do.

Playing Catch-up

Ok, this time I'm really going to do two posts. I promise. I hope.

It was hard going on the manifesto at first. I typed up two pages for the rough draft last week to bring to class for peer reading, but I ended up scrapping every last word that I had written and starting from scratch. I'm not sure if the six pages and some change that ensued were at all convincing or well argued, but I am sure that I wrote a manifesto and not a persuasive essay. It got easier as I went on and my rant seemed to gain momentum. I always worry about losing focus if I just start writing off the top of my head without taking the time to make sure I'm staying on task, but I guess that's OK to a certain extent here.

Another issue that came up is I realized that I'm not exactly an authority on webcomics. I mean, I follow two pretty regularly, but that hardly qualifies me as an expert on the subject. Furthermore, the webcomics that I follow are video game focused. I tried to write the paper and pick comics that don't require any knowledge of video games. A lot of the strips don't even talk about video games directly, anyway, and I think they're funny enough to stand on their own. Unfortunately, time was kind of a factor when I was trying to print it out in the morning, and I realized that trying to paste webcomic strips onto a Word document is a pain in the ass. I had to really shrink the strips, lowering their quality and distorting the proportions. Hopefully they're still readable. I had wanted to use my roommate's printer, but he was asleep at the time and his printer was low on ink, anyway. So I ended up having to pay over two bucks to print it out in the computer lab. Weak. Submitted below for you entertainment is one of the strips I discuss in my manifesto. It's a Penny Arcade strip ominously titled "I Hope You Like Text".

Bonus Post

So apparently there wasn't class on Wednesday, but there was supposed to be a blog post. In light of this fact, I present to you not one, but two separate posts on the same day. For the sake of simplicity, this post will be about the rest of V for Vendetta, and the next post will be about my manifesto.

As I might have guessed from the disparities early in the story, the endings of the comic and the movie differ a good amount. I mean, the whole Viking funeral thing is still there, but the details surrounding it are entirely different. After finishing it, though, it's given me appreciation for how well the movie follows the excellent scene transitions in the comic. The domino thing was just fantastic, and the movie possibly did an even better job with that part. Also, I hate to say it, but I didn't really like V's death in the comic. Sure, having him die at the end lends a nice martyr aspect to the story, but I don't really see the practical reason for his death. I mean, Finch says himself that V was like greased lightning and the guy basically let him kill him. Even if the film's ending was pretty...well, movie-ish, it at least made more sense that it took a room full of guys with guns to take him down. Even if it did look like something out of The Matrix (c'mon, Wachowski brothers).

I did like the resolution provided for some of the other major characters, though. Evey's torture and training by V are much better explained by comic because we can see that V was training Evey to succeed him. The movie instead chooses to pursue a pseudo-love story, and that seems artificial and unrealistic. I can see why some of the key characters were changed, though. The Leader is radically different in the movie (they even rename him), and I can see why. Susan's obsession with Fate is not only creepy, but the idea of some super computer being used to control society definitely reeks of the 1980's. Ironically, though, in doing so they make the movie seem more like 1984 (the guy who plays High Chancellor Sutler was even in the movie adaptation of the book). Like Watchmen, V for Vendetta is the product of a different political era, and trying to modernize it in a film would make it difficult to stay true to the original story and still have American audiences relate to it. Oh well.

Manifestos Are Hard

In keeping with my tradition of complaining about all the work I have to do in this class, I thought I'd spend some time discussing the rough draft of my manifesto. I really didn't know where to start with this one. I've never written anything close to a manifesto, unless you count message board rants. It's just weird--all your academic life you're told that you have to write argumentative essays in a particular way. You have to have an introduction that introduces your claim in the form of an argumentative thesis, you then have to create a body of evidence for this claim, usually backed by textual evidence or outside sources. You know, that sort of thing. Here I'm just like, "Hey, this is what I think about some stuff you probably don't care about". I don't know, I just hope I didn't misinterpret the spirit of the manifesto.

The hardest part of this assignment for me was finding something that I care enough about to write a five page rant about it. I mean, I can rant with the best of them, but I need motivation and focus. I also wanted to stay away from the typical "Hey, comics are art, too!" line. In that sense, I've probably somewhat failed since much of what I've written thus far revolves around that very subject. Oh well, can't win them all, I suppose.

I've also started V for Vendetta. I watched the movie fairly recently and it's not terribly surprising to see a large number of differences between the film and the original comic. I thought the movie was pretty good, but so far I'd say that the comic trumps it. The movie particularly alters the role of Evey Hammond. Don't get me wrong--I love Natalie Portman and I think she did a great job in the movie. But she can't play a sixteen year old girl anymore and the movie had to be altered to reflect that. I'll have to reserve my judgment until after I finish the comic, though. I'm told that the ending differs significantly from the movie.

I Wonder if V for Vendetta is this Weird...

Okay, I was prepared for the ending of Watchmen to be weird. I was expecting plot twists and unforeseen outcomes. But I was not expecting teleporting, exploding, psychic, pseudo-alien clones.

The fact that Veidt was behind everything the whole time was not terribly surprising. I mean, if I was the world's smartest man, I'd probably be arrogant enough to assume that nobody would be able to stop my elaborate plan in time. And I guess he was right. It's kind of strange to think that in this story the "heroes" fail and the "bad guy" wins. Of course, I think the characters of Watchmen defy such simple labels. At the crux of the issue is that annoying ethical dilemma: how do you justify killing millions of people, even if it means potentially saving billions more? Who deserves to be able to make those kinds of calls? Can one human being ever justify passing judgment over another, let alone millions? Suffice to say, the end of the story got really philosophical.

I think Watchmen really tries to make an an argument for a godless universe. At least, not the normal kind of gods that people might pray to in church. In this story, it is men who become gods--Ostermann because of a typical comic book superhero freak accident, and Veidt because he is the archetypal superman. Both men push mortal existence beyond its boundaries and are able to see the forces and machinations that slowly change humanity over the years. Both men are presented as having godlike physical and mental capabilities. However, an interesting dichotomy exists between them. Veidt is concerned with building a utopia, a heaven on Earth for the rest of humanity. His actions are ultimately guided by his ethical beliefs on what will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number. Dr. Manhattan, however, is isolated from the rest of humanity and does not share Veidt's interest in its future. He is the more god-like figure in that, to him, humans hold no more significance than the smallest ants or the rocks on Mars. Without any sentimental attachment to humanity, Dr. Manhattan is able to see the long term insignificance of Earth's fate and turns his attention to more interesting matters. If one views Dr. Manhattan as a deity figure in this story, then the narrative runs thus: Man creates God, who then in turn loses interest in Man and abandons him. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but the idea that the very gods we created have abandoned us seems central to Watchmen's story.

There is so much more to discuss about these later chapters, but it's already quite late and I'm sure we'll talk about more ideas in class. I've got to get more sleep.

Of Wikis and Watchmen

I haven't finished Watchmen yet, but I'm getting there. The story is definitely starting to pick up and get interesting, so I'm looking forward to the ending. I hadn't read any of Alan Moore's work before, but after taking this class, I can see why he's considered so influential. I've seen the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and V for Vendetta movies, and my roommate tells me that there's one coming out for Watchmen. The LXG movie was pretty bad, but V for Vendetta was pretty well received because it was directed by the Wachowski brothers. My roommate seems to think that they picked a bad director to handle the Watchmen movie. Oh well. I guess not every superhero movie can be Batman Begins.

Speaking of Batman, I think my group's Wiki on the Batman comic series is done. Wow, what a clever segue, huh? Anyway, doing this project taught me a few things about making a Wiki. First, the best source of information...is usually Wikipedia, ironically. It's kind of hard to go out looking for other credible sources on the internet when everything is already neatly collected in one place for you. Luckily, my roommate has several Batman comics that he let me borrow, so I had an ace up my sleeve. Nothing like primary sources, after all. It was kind of nice that everything for the project is done online, though. We still met as a group to set things up and plan what we wanted to do, but other than that we were basically able to work on our respective sections separately.

My section was the characters page. I guess you could say I'm pretty pleased with how it turned out. Most of the information wasn't too hard to fill out since I'm pretty familiar with the Batman universe. Or so I thought. Most of my knowledge comes from the movies and animated series. Turns out the comics are much different. And much weirder. They've got alternate universes, multiple origin stories for the same character, and all kinds of other crap. I basically did the best I could to focus on the canonically significant stuff. Even then, Batman has been around in comics from the '30s. The comics have racked up quite a cast of heroes and villains by now. There have also been many different writers and artists that have worked on Batman comics. It's interesting to see different creative minds re-imagine the Dark Knight. I think Batman also enjoys a better relationship between different mediums than do most comics. The Batman movies and T.V. shows have generally been pretty good, with the 1989 Tim Burton film and the recent Batman Begins helping to reignite public interest in the caped crusader.

I'll probably talk about the end of Watchmen in my next post, assuming it's not spoiled for me in class. Now that I've gotten my feet wet with Watchmen, I'm looking forward to V for Vendetta, especially since I've seen the movie. I'm anxious to see how the story and presentation differ between the comic and the film. Also, humor.

I'm going to start running out of worksafe stuff that is still funny to people who don't play way too many video games or read too many message boards, but I'll see what I can do.

So...goddamn...wet

I was walking back to my dorm from the undergrad library, with nothing but a leather jacket and an umbrella to protect me from the monsoon that just blew into town. I think I've had enough rain for the next few months now.

Chapter five makes a good point about the use of iconic facial expressions and whatnot in comics. When I first was exposed to Japanese comics and television shows, the characters used a bunch of expressions and animations that I hadn't seen before. Most of the stuff in this chapter was fairly obvious and covered information that even most casual readers of comics are probably already familiar with.

Chapter six presents the war between words and pictures in the history of western culture. McCloud once again brings back the infamous pyramid of which he is so fond in order to demonstrate how over the years, words and pictures have gradually drifted away from each other in their representation of art. However, McCloud argues that during the nineteenth century, new forms of art brought words and pictures closer to their original relationship before ultimately colliding in the form of comics. He makes a good point that there is a general disinterest in the public for "modern art", but I have to ask: Hasn't this always been the case? As much as the art snobs might deny it, a fundamental aspect to high art is its relative inaccessibility to the average Joe. The claim that our definition of great art hasn't changed much in the last 150 years also seems like an over-generalization. Of course, as an English major, I have to defend 20th century works like The Great Gatsby and "The Waste Land" as iconic representations of a distinct "modern" period of art. Anyway, aside from his understandably defensive attitude towards the legitimacy of comics as a form of art, McCloud is right about the fact that the medium of comics is ideal for storytelling due to its ability to narrate through both words and pictures.

I have to confess that I feel a bit overwhelmed by the comic book wiki project. It's due on Monday and I haven't even started on it. I have a bunch of papers and projects going on this week and next week for other classes and trying to juggle that with the everyday readings and assignments for all of them is keeping me occupied, to say the least. Reading Watchmen has been the closest thing that I've had to a break this week, so I was disappointed to find that we were reading McCloud for today instead. Oh well. In dark times like these, I can always turn to my humor folder to help preserve my sanity.

Watchmen

In one sense, Watchmen falls much more in line with what I'd have expected from a comic book than does Blankets. Costumed crime-fighters and animated violence are slightly more familiar territory for the medium than semi-autobiographical accounts of growing up in the Midwest. Nonetheless, Watchmen certainly does have unique elements to its story.

It took me a while to get a grasp on the world presented in the story. It's set in America in 1985 (with lots of flashbacks, of course), but it's not exactly the America that actually existed in 1985. Instead, it's a sort of alternate timeline with many similarities to, but also several key differences from, twentieth century events. The most immediately noticeable disparity exists in the form of the arrival of comic book-like heroes. They wear costumes and fight crime--pretty much the kind of stuff that you'd expect to see in a comic book. The main plot of Watchmen consists of the plight of various super heroes from the '30s to the '80s. The point of view often shifts from one character to another, but the common theme is that most of the characters are now retired crime-fighters.

However, there are other disparities between Watchmen's world and actual twentieth century events. World War II is still fought and won by the Allies, ultimately ending with dropping the atomic bomb on Japan. But years later in Vietnam, U.S. troops fight alongside super heroes like the Comedian and Dr. Manhattan and eventually claim victory over the Viet Cong. Dr. Manhattan's arrival also precipitates a number of incredible scientific breakthroughs, resulting in modes of transportation like the electric car and airship becoming commonplace. However, despite the altered outcome of the Vietnam war, President Kennedy is still assassinated and the Cold War is still very much a reality.

Considering that Watchmen was written in the eighties, I have to wonder what political relevance the story has some twenty years later. On one hand, many of the themes presented in the story--the Cold War and the Red Scare, the military industrial complex, and the United States' position as a world power--these ideas still have a powerful impact on contemporary politics and ideology. However, the world has changed a great deal since 1985, most notably with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It is with the privilege and comfort of hindsight that we now can look back on events such as the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and see them as the last desperate acts of a dying super power. Ultimately, I think the effectiveness of Watchmen's narrative depends a great deal upon the reader's ability to comprehend the political tensions and uncertainty that dominated the Western world in the 1980s.

In other news, it looks like I'll be working on a Batman wiki for my first group project in English 300. I regret missing class that day and not being able to pick my own group, but at least the topic should be pretty interesting. I never really read the Batman comics, but I watched the movies and the shows, so it should be interesting to see the material on which they were based. I'll probably mention more about the project once I find out more information. In the meantime, here is another image that has been culled from my collection.