Watchmen

SPOILER: I'll discuss the story's ending. I'll also compare Watchmen to other works, such as Kingdom Come.

I think Watchmen is basically a condemnation of ubermensch theory (Nietzsche's idea that "supermen" are entitled to violate society's moral laws, imposing their will on those "inferior" to themselves. Hitler infamously used the theory to justify Nazism. I concede I am no expert on Nietzsche.), and an accusation that superhero stories endorse this philosophy by lionizing vigilantes. Watchmen also attacks the genre's simplistic good vs. evil morality.

Only one character has "superpowers" to justify claims of superiority, yet Dr. Manhattan takes too little interest in human affairs to want to control others. On the contrary, he lets himself be used as a tool, hoping to retain his humanity by pleasing people. Yet he's now too detached to morally judge his orders, becoming a living military weapon. Apparently, desire for power over others is for mortals living among mortals--like Ozymandias, the archetypal Aryan "superman": a blonde, blue-eyed, physically perfect, supremely brilliant, self-made billionaire.

Achieving peace through slaughter, Ozymandias, like his hero Alexander, embodies Nietzsche's belief that ends justify means. If paradise is attainable through atrocities, as Nazi and Soviet propaganda claimed, is it worth it? And, once the eggs are broken, should one reap the benefits of the sin? (I ask this sitting comfortably in California, stolen first from Native Americans, then from Mexico.)

Rorschach--Watchmen's brutal, uncompromising conscience--says no, and his journal seems to give him the last word. Yet Rorschach tortures for information, sometimes needlessly. Besides, his winning may mean Armageddon.

In keeping with a thought experiment in Nietzsche's worldview, Watchmen's universe is an apparently godless one, as stated by several characters. Crime and Punishment's Raskolnikov justifies murder through Neitzschean arguments, but then feels remorse and, through this reluctant acceptance of higher morality, comes to believe in God. C.S. Lewis's arguments in favor of God's existence hinge on morality's independence of human preference. Watchmen's ending is too ambiguous for any divinely transcendent morality or providence to be clear to the characters or reader. As a Christian, I acknowledge the realism of this ambiguity, for even assuming that God exists and His will constitutes absolute morality, His moral intent is rarely as discernable in real life as in melodramas (the classic example of divine inscrutibility being Job's sufferings in the Bible). As Hollis Mason says in chapter 3, "Real life is messy, inconsistent, and it's seldom when anything really gets resolved."

I like Watchmen--but fear I now better understand why the genre degenerated following its publication. It's a damning attack on superheroes, yet publishers couldn't stop printing their bread and butter, so self-indictment pervaded superhero books of the following years as they struggled with Moore's accusations. Also, as Neil Gaiman observes in his introduction to Busiek's "Astro City: Confessions," the easiest "riff" of both Watchmen and Miller's "Dark Knight Returns" for hacks to steal was darkness, not depth.

There are other reasons for the so-called "Iron Age's" violent nihilism besides Watchmen and DKR's influence. Such trends were already growing in early 80's comics. DC had ravaged almost its entire stock of characters in 1985's "Crisis on Infinite Earths." There was also the need to satisfy reader bloodlust once the maligned Comics Code, for better or for worse, became a rubber stamp. Universally recognized characters synonymous with virtue in the public imagination became brutal, wrathful, petty--and if heroes became jerks, villains became the most lurid sadists imaginable. This culminated in the near-plotless splatterpunk and exploitative sadism of the early Image Comics. "Good vs. evil" became "merely evil vs. nauseatingly evil." Moore expressed dismay that things took the direction they did in those years.

Watchmen's theme is: if Nietzsche were right, as superhero comics claim, that would be terrible. It took a decade for superhero writers to rebut this accusation. Their answer came in Waid and Ross's "Kingdom Come" and was: We never claimed Nietzsche was right--the essence of superheroes is that the stronger someone is, the LESS excuse he has to abuse the weak, and the greater his obligation to them. (As Stan Lee wrote years earlier: "With great power there must also come--great responsibility!" Or, as Moore himself has Superman say in Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, "Nobody has the right to kill... not [even] Superman. Especially not Superman!") KC portrays a higher morality--indeed, a God-given one, delivered through the mortal Norman McCay. Perhaps it requires divine perspective to see that an ant who can shatter mountains is no better or worse than his fellow ants. Unlike Watchmen, but like most superhero comics, most of KC's characters have "powers"--flight, invulnerability, etc.--differentiating them from general humanity in a way that even bullet-catching Ozymandias is not. Yet they're not blessed/burdened with near godhood like Dr. Manhattan (staggeringly powerful even by superhero standards, Manhattan perceives all moments simultaneously, and creates and destroys life at will. He has no common reference with humans.). Powerful, yet mortal, they have no more free license to sin than anyone. Probably less. KC portrays a world which needs to relearn this, just as the comics industry needed to relearn it. (One shortcoming: unlike Watchmen, KC isn't self-contained. It assumes reader familiarity with Superman, Batman, etc. and with ultraviolent comics. )

KC and Watchmen bookend the Iron Age. Watchmen unintentionally (I say unintentionally because Moore apparently laments the fact) helped begin it, and KC helped end it.

Yet despite spawning these trends, Watchmen itself is breathtaking, complex literature which takes masterful advantage of comics' visual medium.

Warning: This is not an acceptable comic for children. An R-rated story with lots of sex and violence, Watchmen is a story for grown-ups.


"...a multilayered epic sporting a fantastic script..."   July 12, 2002
 23 out of 25 found this review helpful

I just recently got into graphic novels, but so far have read books from the SANDMAN series, The MAUS books, and of course, THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS. Needless to say, I've been sucked into the genre by these amazing stories, and I'm simply going down the list of highly acclaimed cult classics. Of course, when I got to WATCHMEN, I was skeptical. I'd heard of Batman and Sandman, but who the Watchmen? Sounded kind of obscure, and fraknly, a bit phony. Of course, after reading countless positive reviews claiming this book to be one of the absolute best in the history of comic literature, I had to pick it up. Right off the bat, I could tell there was something special about this one, which maybe wasn't so noticeable in the others I'd read.

The story starts out simple enough, with the murder of a "superhero," called The Comedian. He was evidently a member of a team, but only one of his former comrades, Rorschach seems to care about his death in the slightest. The others all remember him as a bad, immoral man, and therefore, a terrible hero. At first, you'll be wondering why the others don't grieve for him as Rorschach does, but as you see what foul deeds he committed, you'll start arguing the other way. Why is it that Rorschach is scouring the streets, searching for clues as to who may have killed The Comedian? Why is Rorschach the only one who cares about the ex-superhero's falling?

In this book, much like in THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, superheroes are not seen simply as idols and virtual gods through the eyes of the public. They're seen as a rebellious vigilante who disregard the police and take matters into their own hands. This is the story of an alternate 1985 where the world is rapidly turning into a hell which humans are creating for themselves, where superheroes struggling for internal-order are hated and ridiculed for their valiant actions. The superheroes themselves aren't all that important here--they simply represent the steriotypical masked figures in tights; a group of "normal" citizens fighting to change matters which may very well be out of their control. Alan Moore masterfully creates a multilayered epic sporting a fantastic script, filled with controversial dialogue and an interesting plot which changes the way people think about superheroes and comic books in general.

Rorschach's search for truth, along with the reader's search for explanation is explored through a series of flashbacks, side-stories and subplots. The 417 page graphic novel is split into 12 chapters, each with little tidbits in-between, providing some interesting background information on the characters. WATCHMEN is kind of a mini-series of comic-books, and was entirely original. The characters had never appeared in any other comic before, and never appeared in another again. When compared to THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, I say that WATCHMEN is slightly superior. While THE DARK KNIGHT was an exciting and moving tale of Batman's aging and eventual returning to the superhero life, where he was needed most, it was very short (about half the length of WATCHMEN) and left open ends, which were covered in some not-as-good sequels. WATCHMEN is simply a great solo-story which requires no background information or further reading, and boasts a strong, recurring theme: "Who watches the watchmen?" Compared to other graphic novels, ranging mainly from 100-200 pages, WATCHMEN is significantly longer, not only giving you more of a bang for your buck, but increasing the amount of pleasure you'll experience from reading this book.

My only real gripe about this book is to do with the art. Don't get me wrong--It's amazing stuff, filled with vivid colors that you wouldn't expect to see in such a dark story--but the action sequences leave something to be desired. Compared to THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, filled with tons of cool blurs, lines and other cinematic goodies you'd expect to make a comic book feel more animated, WATCHMEN is severely lacking in that department. If you try to see the book as a cartoon, like many of us do, it will look like a poorly animated one. Or, simply a series of stills, which is what a comic book is, but almost all comics successfully create the illusion of animation and movement within their pages. Nevertheless, the art is still amazing to look at, it will just require more imagination to see the characters moving.

If I were you, I wouldn't read any other reviews or check any futher into this great graphic novel. If you do, you might back out, thinking that it sounds too corny or not your type of book. Some people are turned off by the whole superhero idea, but Watchmen basically handles it in the most intimate and unconventional manner, bringing a whole new light to those imaginary masked-defenders of the Earth. If you enjoyed THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, this should be right up your alley, delivering more of what the former excelled in. If you aren't into comic books, then you should probably just head over to your nearest book store and read the first 10 pages or whatever. Chances are, you'll find that you love this and then you can buy it on the spot.


The Comedian is Dead, but not Forgotten   May 6, 2002
 20 out of 22 found this review helpful

Long before "Kingdom Come" meditated on a world without heroes, around the same time as Frank Miller's "Dark Knight" returned, and executed more forcefully than the "X-Men"'s story of Sentinels and Mutant Registration Acts, Alan Moore & company asked "Who watches the Watchmen?"

Set in a world where heroes and vigilante justice have run their course, and the last era of superheroes are living out their days quietly with their own ghosts, "Watchmen" is an amazing piece of literature and comic book artistry. The series itself, twelve issues now commonly packaged in one booklet, is sprung from the golden age of graphic novels - the 1980's, where graphic novels told stories and presented images where normal comics, movies, and televison shows feared to tread. Perhaps most importantly, the themes of the story ring as true today as they did then, and the emotionally-invested reader will perhaps see themselves in the everyday characters talking sports and entertainment as the newspaper headlines blare klaxons of war and pending doom. Society entrusts its safety to a greater body politic, but who watches the watchmen and what is the price paid for handing over the responsibilities of self-defense and indulging in a comfortable apathy?

These are the driving themes behind "Watchmen", a graphic novel so stunningly well-written and well-drawn that I do not hesitate to recommend it to even the most ardant skeptics who look upon comics with disdain, never thinking to read anything remotely associated with them. "Watchmen" represents the perfect synergy between the use of pictures, the potency of the written word, and the sublime power of symolism that drives artists wielding either brush or pen to record their art permanently on canvas or paper. A worthy investment that stands tall amongst the great literary works of the latter part of the 20th century.


Graphic literature at its best   September 20, 2001
 27 out of 31 found this review helpful

I'd written in my review of Marvels that it was my favorite graphic novel of all time...I guess I hadn't read enough graphic novels. The Watchmen is easily as good as Marvels, The Dark Knight Returns, or what have you. This is a super-hero epic designed for adults who have a serious interest as comic books as an art form. The term "graphic novel" is sometimes misapplied to over-blown comic books...that is not the case here. Alan Moore is a great writer (arguably the best in the field) and, in The Watchmen, he has created a story of great depth, scope, and meaning. I have discovered internet sites dedicated to pointing out the hidden subtexts and motifs of this book...they are not reading too much into it. The task Moore sets for himself (as he often does) is to ask the question, "What would the world be like if super-heroes really existed?" That question is more far-reaching than the average comic book implies. The plot unfolds, not in a comic book way, but the way it might really happen. The ending is completely original and totally unexpected.

On a personal note, this book will forever be entwined in my mind with the events of September 11, 2001. Some of the issues in the book cut a little too close to home. But for me specifically, I'll remember staying up late the night before reading this book, and then being awakened by my roommates early the next morning to the scene of the World Trade Center in flames...and thinking that I'd read the comic for too long. Things this terrible don't happen in the real world, only in comic books...right?