Watching the Watchers of Watchmen
Mar. 9th, 2009 10:11 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakThings learned over the weekend:
1) FFN is bursting with Rorschach-Sues. As![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wee_warrior said, it's hard to decide who would be more horrified about this, the character or Alan Moore. So when do we get the Watchmen "they're all in high school" AU?
2) Judging by the sheer number of reviews who mention Dr. Manhattan's genitals, male frontal nudity is still far more shocking to Americans than anything else. See, that's what you get from being brainwashed by countless scenes in which characters who are naked in bed immediately wrap themselves in sheets when they get up, and visit the sauna covered in towels and/or bathing suits.
3) Laurie Juspeczyk (book)/Jupiter (film) has joined the ranks of characters who aren't my favourites in their respective fandoms but whom I nonetheless feel ridiculously protective about, not least due to them being everyone else's most hated character. I like Laurie. I like that she's basically Everywoman in a superhero suit in an environment where everyone else is larger (or rather, more distorted) than life, I like that her issues with her mother do influence but don't emotionally cripple her, I like that neither of her two romances is presented in an OTP fashion or as a grand passion. She and Dan as Laurie says early on "the two leftovers", comrades who rediscover superheroing after both having rejected it for different reasons, and find solace in each other, which strikes me as a refreshing change from most stories presenting their m/f relationships of the "OMG I can't live without you!" type. I could buy scenarios in which Laurie and Dan remain a couple, and I could buy scenarios where they don't, but in either case, I see them remaining friends. Which I find attractive in a relationship. As for Laurie and Jon, she fell in love with him when she was sixteen, and yes, it's presented as one of the few things which tie him to humanity, but when we meet them, Laurie is in her late 30s and the relationship is in the process of falling apart, and both book and film make a point of showing it's the second, not the first of his relationships, and following a pattern. The story doesn't blame either of them for this but makes it a part of their natures; his simultanous perception of time - the first time he kisses Laurie, he can already see when she'll leave him - and her growing discontent with herself as well as him. The reason why the scene on Mars works is because it happens after they've broken up, and isn't about her getting back to him; that at no point is an issue. But their years together mean they can talk to each other and listen, which to me is one of the better results of having loved someone I've seen in fiction.
No, Laurie isn't as "deep" as Rorschach or Dr. Manhattan, as psychopathic yet charismatic as the Comedian, as vibrant as her mother. Or as downright nice as Dan. But she grounds Watchmen in many ways. Remove Laurie as a character, and you have no female character who responds to Rorschach's relentless misogyny. (His defense of the Comedian "I'm not here to speculate on the moral lapses of men who died in their country's service" - and her furious "Moral lapses? Rape is a moral lapse? You know he broke her ribs? You know he almost choked her?" are really important to make it clear that Rorschach =/= Moral Voice Of The Story.) Remove Laurie, and you have no one who shows the reader the lighter side of superheroing, the one which isn't about dealing out violence. Not that she's not shown to do that well and enjoy it, too, but the entire sequence where Laurie discovers the Owlship and Dan lights up, showcasing his gadgets, the fact he can share the fun of flying that ship with her and that they rescue people and enjoy that is really as important as them beating up muggers in an alley. (In a recent interview, Dave Gibbons lamented that the countless Watchmen imitators focused on coming up with ever more dysfunctional characters to rival Rorschach and completely missed out including something like the joy in toys/movement/flight/saving as embodied by Laurie and Dan, which is as important to what makes the superhero genre. Incidentally, last year's Iron Man movie remembered this, and gave us the long sequence of Tony Stark building the suit in his garage and having fun trying it out.) Remove Laurie, and Jon's existential monologues and god-like status aren't punctured by things like "Jesus, Jon, you stupid bastard" (after he forgot that she needs to breathe on Mars) - and you don't buy the man really was human once upon a time. Remove Laurie, and we don't see that one night stand or not, Sally is still scarred by her earlier experience with the comedian ("Things like that don't ever get settled, not completly, and they're not going to happen to my daughter!") and the whole "woman who almost got raped later has sex with the same man" backstory becomes beyond squicky. Remove Laurie, and no one in this story ever gets over anything in an healthy way (as I wouldn't call Sally's one night stand with the Comedian healthy, but Laurie reconciling with her mother and reconciling with her parentage without suddenly going mushy on the Comedian is). Remove Laurie, and Watchmen would be the unrelenting nihilistic vision without humanity some people seem to think it is, and it would be the poorer for it.
On a lighter note, do you remember the hilarious "I'm a Marvel, I'm a DC" vids starring Batman and Iron Man that were made last year? Now there's one featuring Rorschach and Wolverine:
1) FFN is bursting with Rorschach-Sues. As
wee_warrior said, it's hard to decide who would be more horrified about this, the character or Alan Moore. So when do we get the Watchmen "they're all in high school" AU? 2) Judging by the sheer number of reviews who mention Dr. Manhattan's genitals, male frontal nudity is still far more shocking to Americans than anything else. See, that's what you get from being brainwashed by countless scenes in which characters who are naked in bed immediately wrap themselves in sheets when they get up, and visit the sauna covered in towels and/or bathing suits.
3) Laurie Juspeczyk (book)/Jupiter (film) has joined the ranks of characters who aren't my favourites in their respective fandoms but whom I nonetheless feel ridiculously protective about, not least due to them being everyone else's most hated character. I like Laurie. I like that she's basically Everywoman in a superhero suit in an environment where everyone else is larger (or rather, more distorted) than life, I like that her issues with her mother do influence but don't emotionally cripple her, I like that neither of her two romances is presented in an OTP fashion or as a grand passion. She and Dan as Laurie says early on "the two leftovers", comrades who rediscover superheroing after both having rejected it for different reasons, and find solace in each other, which strikes me as a refreshing change from most stories presenting their m/f relationships of the "OMG I can't live without you!" type. I could buy scenarios in which Laurie and Dan remain a couple, and I could buy scenarios where they don't, but in either case, I see them remaining friends. Which I find attractive in a relationship. As for Laurie and Jon, she fell in love with him when she was sixteen, and yes, it's presented as one of the few things which tie him to humanity, but when we meet them, Laurie is in her late 30s and the relationship is in the process of falling apart, and both book and film make a point of showing it's the second, not the first of his relationships, and following a pattern. The story doesn't blame either of them for this but makes it a part of their natures; his simultanous perception of time - the first time he kisses Laurie, he can already see when she'll leave him - and her growing discontent with herself as well as him. The reason why the scene on Mars works is because it happens after they've broken up, and isn't about her getting back to him; that at no point is an issue. But their years together mean they can talk to each other and listen, which to me is one of the better results of having loved someone I've seen in fiction.
No, Laurie isn't as "deep" as Rorschach or Dr. Manhattan, as psychopathic yet charismatic as the Comedian, as vibrant as her mother. Or as downright nice as Dan. But she grounds Watchmen in many ways. Remove Laurie as a character, and you have no female character who responds to Rorschach's relentless misogyny. (His defense of the Comedian "I'm not here to speculate on the moral lapses of men who died in their country's service" - and her furious "Moral lapses? Rape is a moral lapse? You know he broke her ribs? You know he almost choked her?" are really important to make it clear that Rorschach =/= Moral Voice Of The Story.) Remove Laurie, and you have no one who shows the reader the lighter side of superheroing, the one which isn't about dealing out violence. Not that she's not shown to do that well and enjoy it, too, but the entire sequence where Laurie discovers the Owlship and Dan lights up, showcasing his gadgets, the fact he can share the fun of flying that ship with her and that they rescue people and enjoy that is really as important as them beating up muggers in an alley. (In a recent interview, Dave Gibbons lamented that the countless Watchmen imitators focused on coming up with ever more dysfunctional characters to rival Rorschach and completely missed out including something like the joy in toys/movement/flight/saving as embodied by Laurie and Dan, which is as important to what makes the superhero genre. Incidentally, last year's Iron Man movie remembered this, and gave us the long sequence of Tony Stark building the suit in his garage and having fun trying it out.) Remove Laurie, and Jon's existential monologues and god-like status aren't punctured by things like "Jesus, Jon, you stupid bastard" (after he forgot that she needs to breathe on Mars) - and you don't buy the man really was human once upon a time. Remove Laurie, and we don't see that one night stand or not, Sally is still scarred by her earlier experience with the comedian ("Things like that don't ever get settled, not completly, and they're not going to happen to my daughter!") and the whole "woman who almost got raped later has sex with the same man" backstory becomes beyond squicky. Remove Laurie, and no one in this story ever gets over anything in an healthy way (as I wouldn't call Sally's one night stand with the Comedian healthy, but Laurie reconciling with her mother and reconciling with her parentage without suddenly going mushy on the Comedian is). Remove Laurie, and Watchmen would be the unrelenting nihilistic vision without humanity some people seem to think it is, and it would be the poorer for it.
On a lighter note, do you remember the hilarious "I'm a Marvel, I'm a DC" vids starring Batman and Iron Man that were made last year? Now there's one featuring Rorschach and Wolverine:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 09:21 am (UTC)Sigh, Laurie. Why So Misogynistic, Fandom? (Why am I surprised?)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 09:32 am (UTC)ETA: this is a good defense of the character, though, and yes, I do realize you're not directly talking to me. Heh. (I mean, I hope!)
I'll try and link to this next time it comes up because I've found myself in the uncomfortable position of defending the Watchmen on grounds of feminism from people who have only ever seen the film. The most important bit Laurie as 'function' is the discussion of feminism and comic book heroines.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:16 am (UTC)(3) I saw someone complaining that the "lapse" exchange was notincluded in the film.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:24 am (UTC)It's not that I don't get character dislike, what with my recent Bill Adama rants. But I was still surprised at the intenseness - I mean, I've seen people wishing Laurie (and Dan) would die in a fire, which did shock me.
...I suspect that aside from being female, Laurie also commits the crime of disliking both the Comedian and Rorschach and being perceived as coming between Rorschach and Dan?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:28 am (UTC)(The way both Laurie and her mother reflect different stages of comics and their way to present female characters is another subject worth exploring. Also a reason why you couldn't update Watchmen to the present.)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:32 am (UTC)(3) It wasn't (though some other hostile exchanges between Rorschach and Laurie were), but my Laurie defense was meant for both the book and film incarnation, as I've seen the hostility towards her as a "useless leech" coming based solely on the book incarnation, too.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:33 am (UTC)Rorshach is a fascinating character, but I root for Laurie and Dan.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 11:14 am (UTC)It's definitely the hatred that gets me. When I got to the ending of the novel, I was disappointed in Dan and Laurie, because they went along with something I found morally reprehensible, but at the same time I understood why they did it. They are the closest to "normal" characters the novel has, so as a reader, I identified a bit more with their POV than Rorschach's or Dr. Manhattan's, much as these two may be fascinating characters. This identification is responsible for my later disappointment, but that's one of the things that made the novel so interesting to me - it is not comfortable. You don't get to hide behind safe characters who make the morally "right" decision.
I also understand criticism like skywaterblue voices below about Laurie being underwritten, it's just when I hear or see something like "Laurie should DIAF" I am tempted to think this is more about her being one of the few relevant female characters in the story who just distracts from all the great men. (And, if your suspicion is right, comes between them and destroys their true love/manly friendship - seriously, do people really not see how sexist that is?)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 11:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 11:57 am (UTC)Silk Spectre I's rape issues seem a whole lot weirder and less excused by context without the constant ads for Nostalgia...
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 12:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:25 pm (UTC)My issue with the movie version is that the actress is FAR too young. Laurie is 35 and had been with Jon for almost 20 years. Akerman looks like she's MAYBE 25. I had that problem with pretty much everyone cast, but given that this is a hollywood movie, it wasn't in the least bit surprising.
But honestly. I have to believe that the people saying this shit and writing fluffy Rorschach/NiteOwl fic are painfully young. It's the only way I can get through the day.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:31 pm (UTC)Oh, I've long since decided this isn't true. Maybe it was decades ago, but today, while some shows still have a way to go issue with female characters, other shows - and movies, and books - offer them in layered, rich variety. Moreover: it's not like people aren't ready to fangirl and -boy male characters who are written as thin as paper. I mean, I'll never get the Boba Fett cult that developed after the original Star Wars trilogy. He has about two lines and doesn't do much but stand around in an armor. And yet he became one of the most popular characters.
Silk Spectre I's rape issues seem a whole lot weirder and less excused by context without the constant ads for Nostalgia...
As I said in my review, I can't read this otherwise than Sally being screwed up on a massive level, just as the male characters are, in both book and film. It does help that either text makes clear she's never told Laurie who her father was because she's still so deeply conflicted about the whole thing.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:43 pm (UTC)Yes. Everyone in this book comes to the superhero gig in a different way; Laurie is the only one who is trained for it from childhood onwards while simultanously seeing what that life resulted in for her mother and the other Minutemen (the scene where they have a sort of reunion at Sally's and Laurie is thirteen and she asks her mother whether this is what she's training for? great detail), and has no choice about it until and and including the Keene Act, so of course she resents it on a massive level. It occurs to me that in a way she's a female equivalent of one of the Robins - starting the superhero life too young both not to be imprinted for life and not to have considerable conflict about it. And I don't think it's a coincidence she starts to rediscover this life for herself as an adult only after she left Jon - whom she got together with as a teenager - and not before; she had to make that choice in a state where it's really she and not the dominating figure in her life who makes it. And her last words in the story are about wanting a different costume and a new name, which underlines that it's about finding her own way and not simply repeating everyone else's. (In terms of the overall reflection on the superhero genre, it also makes Laurie the only character to make that step - change the costume and the name - which no one else does. As I said, she's Robin, Dick Grayson version.)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 01:43 pm (UTC)P.S.
Date: 2009-03-09 02:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 02:12 pm (UTC)Re: P.S.
Date: 2009-03-09 02:34 pm (UTC)Oh, and your connection between Laurie and Dick Grayson? FABULOUS. So, so fabulous.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 02:35 pm (UTC)Re: P.S.
Date: 2009-03-09 03:02 pm (UTC)I agree!
Re: P.S.
Date: 2009-03-09 03:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 03:23 pm (UTC)::thinks hard::
...no, not ANYONE.
Just got back from seeing the movie. It's a couple of years since I read the book, and my copy's back in the UK, so I didn't have any intense compare'n'contrast thing going on, and I loved the hell out of the movie.
Mind you, we didn't see Dr Manhattan's wedding tackle - I know that the Thai censors definitely pixilated a little of the gore (Rorschach chopping up that guy's head like a watermelon), but his crotch was just sort of clouded over a bit, into a vaguely Ken-Doll thing. I'm delighted to hear that they actually let him have his knob out onscreen, though, if that's the case. Nice one, movie-making chaps.
I'm very sorry to hear that Laurie has been getting hated on. She and Dan charmed me to death with their normality (even if it was Rorschach, I confess, that had me going 'OMGYouAreMadeOfFuckingWIN,YouPsycho!') It's tremendously disheartening when female fans pull this misogynist shit.
I may go and see it again, at the IMAX cinema. Tempting.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 03:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 03:49 pm (UTC)"Rorschach has been strayed away from women forever, thanks to his
neglective mother. So once he saves a girl from a couple of wretched
scum he is only reminded by his past demons. She wants no more then to
save him. Rorschach/OC . Review please."
"Melody is a girl no one respects until one day her mom introduses her
to Laurie the daughter of Sally J. Laurie understands Melody and wants
her to become a superhero like her Mother . Laurie introduces her to
the Watchmen . Is Melody falling for Rorshach"
(The last one should win some kind of special award since in addition to creating a love interest for Rorschach, it postulates Laurie would want someone to follow her mother's footsteps...)
I'm very amused to learn there is a very special Thai edition for Dr. Manhattan's privates.
Re: Rorschach paired up with anyone: my mind goes on strike as well. I mean, you can write him feeling more than friendship for Dan but he'd repress it too deeply to articulate let alone act on it, because if there is one character who has hang-ups about sex, any kind of sex, too massive to get over, it's Rorschach.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 03:58 pm (UTC)...and now I've of course checked your story out. Wow. Great idea. Including the fact Rorschach isn't sure whom to side with at first. And your voice for him rings true to Moore's version.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 04:23 pm (UTC)Of course, the other thing nobody ever points out to Jon, even in the book, is that his own existence invalidates the point of view that human beings are nothing more than a collection of atoms and molecules. After all, Jon Osterman was a human being presumably like any other, and there was some part of him that stuck around to reassemble himself after being disintegrated. Since he knows that he is living proof of some kind of spirit or soul or at least independent, disembodied consciousness, why would he not ascribe the same aspect to other human beings?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 05:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 05:36 pm (UTC)(Sure, because if you remove the Watsonian from her parentage, she's a child of the ultra-reactionary right wing element of comics AND the longing efforts for women to have a place and heroes of their own in the superhero genre. People with less knowledge of Alan Moore as an author won't realize that was purposeful.)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 06:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 07:19 pm (UTC)http://lubakmetyk.infinology.net/others/rowland/watchmen.htm
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 07:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 08:07 pm (UTC)Definitely. And if he even did... bad, violent, and not at all romantic things would happen, which would probably result in even further psychosis for everybody.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 08:26 pm (UTC)WOW, I just totally contributed SO USEFULLY to this discussion! *gives self a gold star*
no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 08:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 08:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-09 10:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-10 06:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-10 08:17 am (UTC)(ETA: Now with evidence. (http://whatever.scalzi.com/2009/03/09/the-funniest-watchman-related-photo-of-the-day/#more-6589)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-10 07:37 pm (UTC)