Thursday, March 5. 2009The Watchmen: Novel or just Graphic?
[Author's note: This is a very long post (for me at least, but not necessarily Mr. Elbows). I have been working on this for the last six months, reworking things here and there. Frankly, a few points in this post are quite preachy. I don't know how else to say those things, but since the movie Watchmen is coming out tomorrow, I guess we are just going to have to live with it. Apologies to any I might offend. This is meant as my opinion and not an attack on something you love/admire. Writing this has been an arduous experience for me. While I know most who read this won't be judging my writing style, but the content and opinion I share, I still wanted this to come out as perfect as possible. I have not achieved that to my satisfaction. Please look beyond that in your judgment. Special thanks to my friend Melissa for editing assistance (on all but the last paragraph - if I did something wrong in that, it's my fault) and AoD for formatting assistance as well as for providing me a digital copy of the graphic novel to read.]
[Edit: There is a fantastic blog post here at blog.joeysmith.com that takes another point of view on this issue. I recommend it to everyone.] Graphic - depicted in a realistic or vivid manner
Novel - a fictitious prose narrative of considerable length and complexity Graphic Novel - a novel whose narrative is related through a combination of text and art A Beginning I was first introduced to graphic novels back when I was a preteen. My family was staying at my aunt's home. I was in my older cousin's room and was bored. So I began to go through his stuff. For a ten-year-old, I hit the jackpot. There, in the bottom drawer, was a collection of what I thought were Conan the Barbarian comics. I thumbed through them and noticed that they weren't quite like the Archie and GI Joe comics my parents let me get. The drawings were fantastic and so realistic. I could see the outline of boobs on the female characters. Boobs. Real Boobs! Not just indiscriminate lumps under a long sleeved shirt. A ten year olds heaven. And the dialogue was stuff I had never read before. I spent the next few hours going over each page, taking in every detail of the drawings. I skipped over most of the text as I found it boring or confusing. (I think I just didn't know the back story.) I just loved watching Conan attack countless evil things during his quest. It left an indelible mark on my memory; now, some 20 years later, I still remember lying on my cousin's water-bed that afternoon. An Introduction The first time I actually was told about graphic novels was about five years ago by AoD. He told me I should borrow his copy of Midnight Nation by J. Michael Straczinsky. I did so. At the time I found it mildly interesting. The art was good, but the story was somewhat lacking. It had nothing to drag me in other than the occasional scantily dressed woman. But the one thing I remember most was how dark it was. There was nothing uplifting about it. I don't honestly remember the point of the story. What I do remember is the darkness. Perhaps that is what the author intended. Perhaps not. To be fair, that wouldn't have been the first time I missed the point of story. But I learned nothing from it. A Re-Introduction And most recently my friend Jon Madsen and AoD encouraged me to read The Watchmen by Alan Moore. I knew going in to it that it was going to be very explicit. But after conversations with both friends I decided to "make the attempt" and judge for myself. If I were to critique the art work I would have to say that it was nothing special. It got the point across, yes, but I found it rather drab. The story was compelling at first. It was a mystery with "superheroes" as the main characters. I was growing more and more excited as it continued on. But then I slowly started to realize just how graphic this thing was. I won't take the time to detail any of the vivid things. Suffice it to say that I had to check and make sure all the blood I saw was actually only a part of the comic and that I had not dipped my laptop in to a vat of blood. Or accidentally browsed to a soft core "art" website. Probably what disturbed me the most was how the story ends. Perhaps I have grown accustomed to the happy ending, but it was just dismal. I could find no great point or meaning in the conclusion that was worth holding up for praise or adoration. If I had, I might not be writing this. It seemed to me to just be gruesomeness for its own sake. To be fair, there may be some point that I have missed. I suppose if I squint just right it can be taken as a tale of what happens when people choose to not stop injustices. Please enlighten me if I have missed the point. I am not sure it will change my mind, though. The Soapbox Now I am sure that there might be those who are reading this who will disagree with me. You might say that I missed the point entirely. You may very well be right. My powers of deduction and analysis are keen but by no means perfect. So let's work under the assumption that I am wrong and there is some greater meaning the author and illustrator were trying to impart. If there is some overarching point or purpose, then why choose to display or present it with vulgarity, nudity, and violence? Why would you glorify the ugly things of the world to make a point? You might now argue that the world we live in is not happy, kind, or safe. I agree. But ought we not want to lift ourselves above our more base characteristics? Darkness and unhappiness as a medium can be useful tools as long as there is a point. But to portray them in such a blatant and scintillating way smacks the face of the 13th Article of Faith. I offer three examples to add strength to my position. Example 1: College Soccer It did not serve to raise the level of conversation. All it did was shock and offend. Nothing was gained. I have played soccer my entire life. I love it so much that I often watch the Spanish language television station just so I can see it played. Well, it turns out that I was pretty good in high school (big fish/small pond syndrome), so I decided to play college soccer. I joined the team and soon became a starter. I was well liked by all the guys. They knew my standards and what I believed. I thought that I could be a positive effect on them. I may have been. But they had the more powerful effect on me. At the time I lived at home with my parents. It was not until dinner one evening that I found out how strong their effect on me was. My parents and I were sitting conversing about something when I made what I considered a fairly tame and innocent comment. The table went silent. Both my mother and father stared back at me with open mouths. I stared back and quizzically asked "What?" My father responded with something I shall never forget: "Bud, do you know what you just said?" I didn't. It turns out that I had used a rather colorful, yet unnecessary, adjective to describe something. I had just sworn in front of my parents. Anyone who grows up on a farm is going to hear the odd curse word; sadly I had used a more "regular" one. Certainly not dinner-table-conversation vocabulary. It may have fit quite well on a soccer field but not in my parents' house. It did not serve to raise the level of conversation. All it did was shock and offend. Nothing was gained. Example 2: The Family Guy Doing something in the name of humor is no excuse for debasement, and some things should never become the subject of humor. I love humor. I see nothing wrong with making myself the butt of a joke to get someone to laugh. Laughing just often feels good. And it can certainly be a good workout, at least a good workout for most couch-potatoes. This naturally carries over in to television. I love to watch funny shows. I have a friend who used to watch a show called Family Guy (a highly ironic title to be sure, IMO). Knowing that my tastes coincide so closely with his, he told me I should watch it because it contained such good writing and because I would laugh my head off. So I did. The couple of episodes I saw were quite funny. I indeed laughed because of how good the writing was. But I had to stop. It was unbelievably crude. Nothing was safe or sacred. Doing something in the name of humor is no excuse for debasement, and some things should never become the subject of humor. Example 3: Hot Rod-ing with Jen ...the real problem was that when I realized it, I did nothing to change the situation. My sister Jen crashed with me a few months ago while waiting for her train home. I decided to show her one of the funniest films I have ever watched: Hot Rod. I greatly enjoyed the look of puzzlement and exasperation as she watched this completely farcical movie. Then the jokes began to turn progressively ruder. I had never noticed before how bad it actually was. I always knew it was colorful, but it didn't seem to be "that bad." It wasn't until I had to sit uncomfortably with my sister through several risque lines of dialogue that I realized how bad it was. She never said anything, but I know she was uncomfortable with them. But because I found it entertaining, I didn't think twice about it. While I should have chosen a better movie from the start, the real problem was that when I realized it, I did nothing to change the situation. A Conclusion While under many definitions, The Watchmen can be considered entertaining (a highly subjective word); I know that several of you who are reading this find it to be so. That doesn't necessarily make it worthwhile entertainment. I know that to some of you this may not adequately explain my position. I wish I had another 6 months to more eloquently portray it. I guess the point of all of this is just my way of encouraging you to reach for something cleaner; better; higher. Many of us have those dark areas in our lives that we just don't want to let go of yet. I understand that; for me it is Metallica. But just because you have shades of grey in your life, that does not mean that you should embrace the darkness. Strive for the uplifting. I do not believe that The Watchmen graphic novel rises to the level of worthwhile entertainment. But as with all things, judge for yourself. Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
So many things to say, such a little box. This may need to grow into an article of my own.
I just want to start the conversation by repeating what I've already said to you in IM. I had no idea you felt that way about Midnight Nation - in fact, it makes me sad to hear it, mostly because it's one of my favorite stories, combined with what is perhaps the best artwork of any graphic novel I've ever read. While Watchmen is something I read on an intellectual level and appreciate for its "social significance", Midnight Nation is one that speaks to me on a very deep, almost primal level about pain, sacrifice, and redemption. Comments (3)
You know the artwork of Midnight Nation may have actually been good. I don't really remember. As for the message behind the book, it was a very long time ago. My point is that some 5 years ago all I remember is that it was really dark. But I can appreciate the meaning it has for you. Thanks for enlightening me.
Comments (2)
I have an excellent comment which this box is too small to contain. To respect your fear of being pushed below the fold, I will respond on blog.joeysmith.com
Comments (3)
My response has now been published at http://blog.joeysmith.com/93.html
Comments (3)
I don't think this is the right forum for this discussion.
Comments (2)
While there may be other reasons, I believe that people read for 3 core reasons.
--They want to learn. --They want to be entertained (or uplifted). --They want to feel like someone understands them. I believe that writers write for similar reasons. I think that they write because --They want to teach. --They want to entertain (or uplift). --They want to show that they can empathize (or sympathize) with some marginalized point-of-view. I think that as long as there are humans who have violent, crude, or socially unacceptable desires and tendencies, there will also be books that portray characters with those traits. I have found, however, that even among the books that focus almost entirely on those traits, the characters with those traits usually end up either seeking for, and gaining redemption, or the story ends in a "dismal" way. I will confess that, when I am at low points in my life, I often choose to seek out violent and/or dark forms of entertainment. I find that these forms of entertainment remind me that, even in fiction, the violence does not solve problems, and that adding darkness to darkness does not create light. I find that these reminders often help me want to reach for light, and reduce the amount of time that I want to spend in the dark. With that being said, though, I do not think that my habit is the best use of my time. It would be better if I didn't want to spend time in the dark. I worry that if I spend too much time in the dark, I will come to choose the dark, rather than using the dark as a reminder of how much I love the light. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I view dark/violent entertainment as therapy, and I appreciate it when I need it, but would prefer not to need it. Comment (1)
I don't even know where to begin. And I'm torn. But I am glad to see a divergent opinion on it. So far there have been 2 camps for the Watchmen: it's awesome! or it sucks! Your opinion appears to be a third - although I'm not sure what it is.
Actually ignore this comment. I'm going to think through this some more. Comment (1)
I'm going to start by saying I really enjoyed Watchmen, and for me it was about the ending. Specifically in regards to Rorschach's journal. In fact to be quite honest, Rorschach was the best part of watchmen to me.
However reading it I remember thinking many of the same thoughts that you expressed. There were many scenes in the book that were meant mainly for shock and awe that could have been done another way. I've found that I've started noticing this a lot more. Prior to returning to the Church, it didn't bother me to go see an R Rated movie. Don't get me wrong I still will go see one, however I've lessened my viewing of R rated movies, because I've discovered that a lot of the story telling techniques, that generally ear a movie an R rating were unnecessary and the story still could have been told, and even told better, without resorting to such low standards. I feel the same way about Watchmen. There was a lot in the graphic novel that I felt didn't have to be there, and was mainly there for shock value. However I will say that I enjoyed the story enough, that those scenes didn't ruin the experience for me. Comment (1)
Your comment about liking the ending makes complete sense to me Sideshow, knowing you the way I do. You have always enjoyed an "unhappy" ending. Thanks for you comments. That was exactly what I was looking for.
Comments (2)
I disagree that parts of Watchmen were only there for shock value. That implies that the entire purpose of those scenes was gratuitous gore/violence/bloodshed/etc, the key word there being gratuitous. While they may be shocking, I think the scenes served a purpose within the storyline, and especially within the questions that the author was exploring, as detailed (very well, by the way) by AoD. The book is put together with an artistic and intellectual purpose. It's a work of art which is supposed to entice its readers to face some pretty dark questions - and answers.
Comment (1)
I think AoD and Sideshow covered most of what I would have said, so I guess a blog WAS the correct forum for this discussion. The rest of what I would say I covered in private IMs with Radar.
Comments (2)
my big complaint? it's watchmen, not the watchmen. the title simply doesn't have the formality that comes with a 'the.' i'm pretty sure that's deliberate.
otherwise. well said. i'm not going to make an excuse for the need for explicit content. for me it's always been something to wade through to what i consider a really awesome story is behind it. that doesn't give it any excuses though. graphic is graphic no matter the context or dressing. works with graphic material in them can and probably should be thrown out of sight. okay, i've made myself sound like a rotten person enough. and like i've said, point taken. in my life i wish i had more people around who are as 'judgmental' as you. i appreciate the positive encouragement. BUT... that's not what i was hoping for in your rebuke of watchmen. months ago i wasn't satisfied in what you said -- which as i recall was something like "the stuff in there has been done before and better." since there are only so many different stories that have ever been told on this earth, i found myself craving a response that better rebuked the story, the storytelling devices, the characterization, the conflicts, the duality, the symbolism and everything else that makes a good story. the point is -- everything unique about watchmen was thrown out (and like i said, perhaps deservedly so with the trump card of graphicicity (word?)). but i'll take it a step further. what if watchmen was simply a tragic tale? would you still feel the same for any 'negative' story. is there room in this world and are there lessons to be learned from tragedies? cyrano de bergerac, macbeth, sampson, king david, the freaky war at the end of the book of mormon -- do we appreciate these stories because we're sadistic or do we appreciate these works because they teach us what to improve in ourselves? ever hear of a movie called crimes and misdemeanors? it's a woody allen movie. i'm the only big woody allen fan i know, so i can only assume that everyone reading this hasn't actually seen it. it's very mild on the content it shows, but it is considered 'dark.' one of the stories involves a good guy who falters. his storyline concludes in what i consider to be an unusual way. i'm curious if you find anything redeeming about it. i certainly do, but that's only in how i interpret the message. watchmen has extreme graphic content and that will forever put a stain on it. i'm also really sorry i encouraged the reading of it with such exuberance. perhaps it's unfair to re-write the rules, but i'm still desperately curious to hear a criticism of everything ELSE about it. Comment (1)
|
Handy LinksQuicksearchCategoriesBlog AdministrationPowered byTheme dropdown |