Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

Watchmen - 20 years on...

22:13 / 28.11.05

The Watchmen comic series was released almost 20 years ago.It sent ripples through the world of funny books and was hailed as the best thing since man discovered fire.Well in certain circles it did : )
I've just re-read it for the first time in years and found it still a great story that has stood the test of time with ease.
So who's read it?Whats your favourite character/scene/dialogue?
Any comic fan who hasn't read it?
Did it open doors for more mature titles to appear....has it left a lasting legacy?
Or did you think it was complete pants?

22:20 / 28.11.05

A close analytical reading of the text in question will reveal that there's no "The" in the title.

This is significant.

22:37 / 28.11.05

Best superhero team EVAR.

Yotsuba & Benjamin!

01:11 / 29.11.05

Dude, all I know is that Absolute Watchmen is the hottest thing I've ever exchanged legal tender for. You never realize what a fantastic idea it is to blow comic book art up to an enormous size until you see it done to an absolute storytelling master like Dave Gibbons. You just get straight lost in every panel. Revelatory.

03:39 / 29.11.05

I still love Watchmen. It's so... complete. For my money, it says pretty much everything I ever wanted to hear about superheroes. I combine Watchmen with Dark Knight and Animal Man, and there's the Holy Trinity of Superhero deconstruction.

On the other hand, I still don't find the pirate comics subplot interesting in the slightest. I get it, but I don't like it. Anybody else not like the pirates?

04:19 / 29.11.05

The pirates and their overall relevance, re: aryansupercorporateraider were the only bits of 'Watchmen' I really enjoy(ed). A far too careful work.

09:13 / 29.11.05

Size and format are interesting - because the standard comics size in the UK has long been larger than that of the US, thus V for Vendetta, Miracle man, Luthor Arkwright and a load of other British comics orginally came out in a format closer to the Absolute size than the arbitary and comparatively small US comic format.

It is also probably worth pointing out that the Absolute format is closer to the size at which artwork is usually drawn at, thus this format frequently allows some of the finer detail to be more apparent than it would otherwise be.

Outside of that, I think it is difficult to overstate what a massive effect Watchmen had, and is still having, on the mainstream US comic industry. Alongside DKR, it popularized the 'fat comic' graphic novel format and brought comics into a postmodern age.

14:33 / 29.11.05

I like WATCHMEN but these days I'm a little embarrassed by how superhero-ey the whole thing is. I have great memories of it, but re-reading it I realized that a lot of it didn't hold up for me. The narrative structure, and the plot-line with the two Silk Spectres and the Comedian all hold up for me today, but the end-of-the-world stuff feels sort of empty. I still like it as a whole but I think its ability to engage non-comics readers is neglible because it's so wrapped up with superhero comics.

I can't remember who said this, but about five years ago I read a quote from a writer who said that comic books were basically just power fantasies, and ever since then I can't get into so many of them. There're so many that are just so awful, and you'd think that after WATCHMEN and DARK KNIGHT (which is a major power fantasy, but there you go) supposedly raised the bar that they would have gotten better.

I know there's the rule that 90% (or is it 95%?) of everything is crap, and that seems to be the case in comics as elsewhere but sometimes I'm astonished at how bad the crap actually is. I'm not saying all comics are bad, and there are some I really love, but having grown up on the X-Men I tried to re-read some issues recently in a Marvel Essentials and was flabbergasted at how lousy it was.

I guess that's a long way of saying that while I think WATCHMEN had influence on some people, I don't think it did a lot for the industry overall. The industry looked much the same before WATCHMEN as it did after, just the fads had changed. I don't think it brought in a lot of new readers for non-WATCHMEN material, and I think any publicity it got translated into sales of WATCHMEN not sales of other titles, although I'm speculating here. That's not to invalidate WATCHMEN but rather to say that while I think it made a difference to some individuals I'm not sure what difference it made in terms of the aesthetic quality of what was else was being published or in terms of business practices.

SANDMAN seems to have had more of an impact as does SWAMP THING on business practices.

14:41 / 29.11.05

Yes, but it's worth remembering about 60% of Sandman is predicated in Moore's Swamp Thing.

14:56 / 29.11.05

Creatively, yes. But in terms of the business model, I think Grady's spot-on. SANDMAN saw the birth of the "creator-participation" deal that gives Neil Gaiman et al a much more favorable royalty structure and, if not formal control over their creations, a right to consultation (albeit that consultation may or may not be meaningless).

Gaiman was able to negotiate that for SANDMAN in 1988, whereas Alan Moore was unable to do the same for WATCHMEN in 1985. What was it that changed in the intervening years?

14:59 / 29.11.05

Oh, yeah, absolutely. I like SANDMAN but I think the really important things it established (in descending order):

- proving that girls really do read comics
- showing that comics about non-superheroes could be viable
- demonstrating how lucrative an established back catalogue could be - those licensed SANDMAN products and trade paperbacks are consistent moneymakers for DC
- making the writer a real superstar (Gaiman was SANDMAN, the artists rotated and he seemd to have a lot of say in not only who drew the book but in how the art was reproduced for publication, most notably in THE WAKE when he insisted that DC try to use the uninked pencils of Michael Zulli)
- it gave comics much more contemporary cool with goths getting into the scene and Tori Amos fans hopping on as well
- proving that a series didn't have to be ongoing to make money. Gaiman bailed out of SANDMAN at the top of its success and by stopping the series there DC demonstrated a commitment to quality that ABC, CBS and NBC still haven't learned: better to end on a high note and sell DVDs or trades for the rest of your days than to jump the shark

I think SWAMP THING was important because:
- it made Alan Moore a superstar in the States and he was the first real writer/star in modern comics
- it led to the creation of Vertigo
- it led to the dropping of the Comics Code from "Mature Readers" titles (which led to Gaiman and Morrison down the road)
- it led to horror being revitalized in comics
- it created the enormously lucrative John Constantine

15:11 / 29.11.05

it may be hard for people loking back to remember just what a goddam explosion watchmen seemed at the time, i remember putting down the last monthly when it came out and thinking 'ill never buy another superhero comic again', and i didn't for about 15 years,

at the time it seemed so complete and breathtaking, all those icons and archetypes exposed and considered i a light that comics didn't seem to have managed up until that point (except miracleman maybe) and done i an art style that was both totally of the genre but somehow just left of centre of it too, making me look at the comics world with new eyes

now looking back, the pirate bit sucked, and some of the narrative elements seem old hat (but only because they have been used by so many since) but the use of flashbacks, spill over of dialogue between panels, the cool introductory quotes, the back story and depth of the world created, all brilliant. best. superhero. comic. ever.

15:50 / 29.11.05

I wouldn't really disagree that Swamp Thing and Sandman also had a significant effect on the DC and Marvel comics mainstream - but I don't think that negates the impact that Watchmen itself had.

And Watchmen itself had quite an impact on bringing creators rights into the field of play - IIRC the rights on Watchmen revert to Gibbons and Moore if it goes out of print for a certain amount of time (ten years is the figure that springs to mind).

That Watchmen has never gone out of print for this period says something significant about the book's longevity and success. It showed that a longform comic from DC's back catalogue (because Watchmen: the 'fat comic' was, and is, a collection of 12 serialized issues) was a viable proposition.

So, yes, I'd argue that through Sandman and careful negotiation Gaiman managed to achieve much, possibly more than Moore was able to achieve with Watchmen, Sandman built on the successes in form, content and subject matter that Moore had achieved in his work on both Swamp Thing AND Watchmen.

Incidently, does anyone have a date for when the first Swamp Thing collections were first published? I have a feeling that they were after Watchmen, but don't know for sure...

16:24 / 29.11.05

Heidi MacDonald wrote a piece recently touching on the so-called WATCHMEN paradox (among other things): looking at WATCHMEN's continued steady sales, twenty years on, amid what we're all told is an imploding comics market...

It's been noted that enough copies of the Watchmen trade have been sold to reach every known comic book fan.

And yet, year in and year out, the book keeps selling.

Why? How? Who? WHO??? Who would suddenly decide to purchase this book if they weren't already comics fans?

I have to admit, this is the kind of question that my brain doesn't readily absorb. I'm always trying new things, myself, a new band, a new soda, a new way to get to Brooklyn. However, I'm well aware that in the world of market research and so on, the buying habits of the public at large are constantly being monitored, and the vast number of consumers are not easily swayed from pre-established buying patterns.

Looked at that way, the Watchman Paradox does seem worthy of study. It is possible that the universe of literary thrill-seekers is larger than the subset of comics readers. People may have heard the hype, liked the looks of Alan Moore's beard or just decided this was worth trying.

Much more in link.

18:05 / 29.11.05

I'm actually in the middle of a reread now. When I read Watchmen for the first time I was a casual comics fan, reading a couple of X-books and the like, but Watchmen was the first thing that showed me the amazing storytelling power of the medium. Reading this thing is like getting a tutorial in the unique attributes of comics, the layering, double meaning of images and juxtaposition of text and image is done better in this book than in anything else I've read. The book is like a perfectly constructed diamond and reading it makes it seem like everyone else out there isn't even trying.

But, I don't think it's a cold book. Even without the perfect structure, the character arcs are still very interesting, I love Dan and Laurie going out in the ship in VII, and it's deeply sad when Hollis is killed in the next issue. And one of the most affecting moments in comics for me is when the old Bernard tries to protect the younger Bernard from the blast and you watch them both get wiped away. It's the fact that Moore developed this whole street culture that makes the last issue so affectng and makes it really difficult to morally assess Veidt's decision. Perhaps his points are true in theory, but if it means losing people we know, it's not worth it.

I'd consider the second best work in comics history, behind only Watchmen, and one of the best pieces of fiction in any medium. And it's certainly still relevant twenty years later.

18:24 / 29.11.05

I'd consider the second best work in comics history, behind only Watchmen

I assume this was a brain-fart? What do you actually rank above it?

02:54 / 30.11.05

Ah, oops. I meant to say second behind only The Invisibles.

02:56 / 30.11.05

thanks doctorbeck. I was worried I was the only one who thought the pirates "sucked"

08:15 / 30.11.05

Actually, I think it is interesting and significant that many people, particularly those who have a massive investment in the superhero genre, think that the sections speculating on comics becoming dominated by a different genre 'sucked'.

As for ranking comic series as to which is the 'best', your mileage will almost certainly vary with personal preferences, but I'd certainly have a hard time believing that The Invisibles had as much of an impact on the comics industry, and popular culture itself, as Watchmen has already had...

09:06 / 30.11.05

i suppose the only interesting thing about the pirates was a 'what would happen to superhero comics if superheroes were real'

answer - no one would be interested, but you could say that in a line from the back story about the creators of the pirates comics that moore did, which i believe brillaintly slotted into veidts plans as one of them was on the island. clever.

what moore did there, i think, was show that plotting over 12 issues could be rich and complex and precise whilst still being a white knuckle thriller of a mystery, then just subvert it all with veidt saying 'you think i am some comic book villian who would explain the plan if there was still a chance you could stop me'. brilliant.

the only superhero comic that could possibly be said to have had more influence on comic WRITERS rather than the industry and readers is Miracleman as far as i can see.

yawn - thing's buddy

09:32 / 30.11.05

also SWAMP THING gave Gaiman a career - he's been riffing on Moore's American Gothic saga for his entire working life in fiction.

09:34 / 30.11.05

answer - no one would be interested, but you could say that in a line from the back story about the creators of the pirates comics that moore did, which i believe brillaintly slotted into veidts plans as one of them was on the island. clever.

I think part of the point that Moore is making with the pirates is that an explosion of the singlular genre of pirate comics (rather than superheroes) would lead to he same sort of creative cul-de-sac that dogged mainstream American comics until the mid-80s.

He is demonstrating to superhero comic readers how alientating and insular many of the conventions of their most beloved form are and could be when viewed through the eyes of a non-initiate, despite various elements of artistry that the form can hold for afficionadoes.

The Natural Way

11:40 / 30.11.05

And I think the idea that "nobody would be interested...." is pushing it. Celebs? Spies?

12:16 / 30.11.05

sleaznation: Actually, I think it is interesting and significant that many people, particularly those who have a massive investment in the superhero genre, think that the sections speculating on comics becoming dominated by a different genre 'sucked'.

I still to this day don't find the pirate thing interesting. I still read it and every other word, just so I don't miss anything, but I just can't get into it. Its relevance to the whole story is questionable, but its relevance to the narrative structure is necessary, so I guess it's got that going for it.

Was Moore trying to say it was a bad thing that superheroes had dominated comic books with this? This is something I admit, I'm a little hazy about. Was Moore trying to be anti-superhero?

12:41 / 30.11.05

I still to this day don't find the pirate thing interesting. I still read it and every other word, just so I don't miss anything, but I just can't get into it.

Now you know how a non-fanboy feels when attempting to read a superhero comic. Which is kind of the point.

It's not necessarily pro- or anti-superhero, but it is certainly about the market dominance of superhero comics. But because it is presented in the context of a superhero story—and presumably written (at least initially) for an audience of fanboys, although that audience has expanded and diversified suring the years the book has been in print—it needs to be presented in this slightly off-putting way, I think, to have its full effect: to make superhero fanboys examine their own assumptions about the role of superhero comics, about their market dominance and their storytelling tropes ("What the hell? Damn ripoff story doesn't have an ending, man"), and their relative impenetrability to new readers.

Metafiction is a hard line to walk anyway—when using the trappings of a genre story to examine the substance of that genre, there's always the danger that the critical elements will simply be absorbed by the context of the story—but it's particularly tough for superhero comics, where the tropes go so ludicrously over-the-top that the genre is effectively satire-proof.

For instance: although PLANETARY may be intended primarily as a metafictive exercise, it is possible to read and enjoy it as a "straight" (if twisted) superhero book—thereby defeating its own purpose. Same with Larry Young's PLANET OF THE CAPES, or Millar's WANTED. FLEX MENTALLO pulled it off pretty well, but it used its distancing device even more heavily than WATCHMEN.

23:17 / 30.11.05

Now you know how a non-fanboy feels when attempting to read a superhero comic. Which is kind of the point.

Ahhh, I see. Enlightening. It's hard to walk in another man's shoes, as the cliche goes.

This really changes my experience of reading Watchmen. Apparently, I'm due for a re-read with this new perspective. Thanks, Jack Fear.

23:51 / 30.11.05

This guy, for the record, is not so impressed. Money graf:

Whether you take this self-reflexivity as evidence of a newfound sophistication on behalf of the comic book, or as self-hatred tricked out as superiority—that old adolescent standby—is up to you. .... Before Moore came along, comic books were not generally in the habit of quoting Nietzsche, or scrambling their time schemes, or berating their heroes for their crypto-fascist politics, or their readers for reading them. It was Moore's slightly self-negating triumph to have allowed it to do so. But did the comic book have to "grow up"? The last time I looked, the only ones reading Ulysses and quoting Nietzsche were teenagers. No adult has time for aesthetic "difficulty" or "self-consciousness." Life is too short.

Man, talk about self-loathing posing as superiority...

08:27 / 01.12.05

Quite.

08:56 / 01.12.05

I'm a comics newbie. Only ever read random issues of the Phantom and the daily strips. About five years ago a friend lent me some of his Preacher books, and I loved it, but I didn't stick with it and never bought any. But recently I've started to take a genuine interest.

Anyway, where is this going, and how is it relevant to the thread?

I picked up Watchmen the other day. I knew nothing about it except that it is a seminal work, this release is a very convenient collection, and I figured now's as good a time as any to start reading some of those. When I cracked it open and realised it was a superhero book, I was a bit disappointed, but since then I've only put it down while I've been asleep or at work. And I've picked it up at work a couple of times, too. Brilliant stuff.

Anyway, I just thought y'all might like to know what a newcomer thinks about it.

(And Tom Shone is an idiot. The "elaborate flashback structure" is not hard to keep up with, and I think it makes a case for superheroes, rather than against them. Or it has so far. I should get back to it.)