Watchmen: a bystander’s review of the graphic novel.

Spoiler Warning!!!

Believe it or not, I had never read Alan Moore’s Watchmen. I was already on board the fan wagon for the movie regardless of what I would've ultimately thought of the source material after reading it. I had acquired a lot of knowledge on that novel with the help of past acquaintances even though I had never read it before. I knew exactly what it was about or what was going to happen but was lacking all the major details. Having read a lot of heated debates and even participating in some, it made me want to read it to finally understand what the whole "Hoopla" was about the infamous squid. I already knew the purpose of it in Moore’s storyline and couldn't possibly understand why some fans were so adamant about Snyder, choosing to exclude it from his film.

After reading it, I understood why this novel was so popular. What caught my attention was the "way" it was written with many vantage points kind of like the TV show of "Heroes". But, and there is a massive "but" to bring up on Moore's work, I found his creation incredibly “flawed” or rather “illogical”. I can just hear you all now screaming "WHAT, WHAT, WHAAAATT???" in the same fashion as Kyle's mother in South Park. Don’t get me wrong, this novel is a brilliant showcase of Moore’s versatility as a writer but a few concepts in his storyline were lacking in my honest opinion. Don’t worry, I’m not just all bark and no bite, I will evidently explain why and I will expect all you’re “constructive” contributions to enlighten me as to what my critical mind might have missed. After all, perception IS relative.

I had heard a great deal about the “tales of the Black Freighter” which I knew nothing about. This parallel storyline that accompanied the graphic novel left me wondering what the purpose behind it was. The only thing I could get out of it was that it had to do with the relativity of perception. It had very little purpose in the actual story other than maybe linking Veidt's actions and saying that we should keep an open mind and to explain that the most horrid actions committed could all have an honourable and logical reason behind them. How one's life experience can alter one's perception. It could have been a smart idea for the 80's but today, it wasn’t that innovative and the story seemed to be nothing more than just filling space. Unless like I stated above, I might have missed the real meaning behind it. Maybe it was just there to provide the vendor an audience which would be us represented by the kid who was reading the comic. Either way, it is obviously not an important part to the whole of the story which also explains it’s exclusion from the movie adaptation. An animated feature of the Black Freighter is said to be accompanying the release of the film.

The biggest lack of logic came from the concept behind Dr. Manhattan’s existentialism. I'm not sure if Moore knew what that actually implied when he thought of his creation. He tried to explain how quasi-omniscient he had become (meaning he was aware of anything that his body would experience at any point in time in his existence), but neglected to realise that his character was in total contradiction of a very important fact. One of the aspects of this character seemed to be an attempt to explain “Fate” and the futility behind our will to alter it. But the very existence of the concept of omniscience defies the philosophy that Moore created for his story or rather wished to elaborate how he thought of the matter. He completely disregarded our own free will which would make us chose our own fate if we were omniscient. Omniscience cannot exist alongside fate which is why well trained and experienced psychics see various possibilities and outcomes depending on one’s choices and not just the very narrow and linear road of fate. Dr. Manhattan seemed nothing more than a whore who said yes to any event on account of a lack of interest. It was also illogical for him to accept the event of the squid but then contest Rorschach’s intentions of reporting Veidt’s actions. Because of the tachyon emissions, he wasn’t aware of the reason behind the event in N.Y. but didn’t make anything of it either. Logically, he wouldn’t have gone after Rorschach at the end. You’re either existential or not. Now before any of you start quoting me on my “free will” statement, an existential being doesn’t experience human emotions and Moore didn’t provide logical reasoning behind Rorschach’s destruction. It would have been more logical for Veidt to have shot a heat seeker missile at him and have Dr. Manhattan not interfere on account of existentialism.

As for the concept of Omniscience, which is in part knowing exactly what is to come, instead of letting your body experience what you know will happen, logically you’d just “know” and have fully experienced the phenomenon without the “need” to physically go. To "know" without having to "physically experience" is also in part existentialism. So he wouldn't or shouldn't have felt the "need" or “want” to leave for another galaxy, he would have already knew what awaited him unless of course that galaxy had high tachyon emissions which prevented him to know off hand but that wasn’t really explained now was it?


Also, I do of course have to give my review on the “squid issue” since it is the main cause for debate. What I knew of the squid was merely her purpose which was to “represent” an alien threat that would force nations to cooperate and finally unify. The very idea is not only distinguished but also brilliant. However, I wasn’t aware of her origins or the details surrounding it. The only details I knew of were that Veidt was behind it and that the Comedian had found out about it, hence why he was murdered in the opening. I had heard that what he had found on that secret island owned by Veidt were the writers and artists that were apparently reported missing months ago. I was confused as to what purpose would artists have in the squid’s origins. I was disappointed to learn after reading the novel that the squid was actually “created” by Veidt through biogenetic alterations which made it an earth based creature and not an alien. The “creation” of this massive being also never logically explained the purpose behind a gathering of writers and artists. Veidt being a biogenetics expert in my opinion would be talented enough to create this being on his own without anyone’s “crayoned rendition”. The only obvious kidnapping/murder required for his creation would have simply been the psychic who involuntarily lent his brain to the cause so to speak.

I was also unaware of Moore’s creative details surrounding the issue of teleportation. I was surprised to find out that teleportation required Dr. Manhattan’s highly careful and attentive mind to execute without harm, or else the being at hand would die upon arrival to destination. This concept seemed odd but wasn’t overwhelming since I already knew that the squid was doomed to eminent destruction in the heart of N.Y. Only the details varied but I thought the reason behind her death was that two objects cannot occupy the same space, and by teleporting a being of monumental mass in a narrow street or even directly where a building would have already been located, the creature would obviously perish initiating the shockwave generated by the stress level of the psychic brain.

What is overwhelming is the lack of logic behind the predestined death of the creature. Seeing as how the threat is actually self neutralised, all that was left is casualty and collateral damage. Surely this event wouldn’t cause worldwide unification for there would simply be no logical reason behind it. Radars never picked up any signals of orbiting alien ships which would create panic and logically force the world to unite itself for an attempt at survival. History has proven that people at war take a drastic turn to spiritualism in desperation. The Russian’s would have perceived nothing else from this event than a helping hand from an act of god and a confirming sign to continue their attack and ultimately conquer. Which made the concept of unification from the movie “Independence Day”, that much more brilliant and logically acceptable. If the squid had been alive and kickin’, destroying half the city “physically” or with “psyonic bursts”, then the world would’ve united to defeat the threat at hand and realise that they were fundamentally “brothers in arms” obliterating any prior source of conflict.

We could only hope that all it would take is an event instead of an actual threat but reality seems to be sitting this one out on the fence. Even though a realistic approach is mandatory for success at the box office as history has proven time and time again which is probably the very reason why Snyder decided to exclude the squid in his adaptation. I concluded that Veidt did not create a “squid” but an actual event that could be presented in any way shape or form provided it couldn’t be linked to human hands. I will wait in anticipation for the release of his “vision” to discover the logical reason behind his perception. In the mean time, feel free to explain to me in any possible way how my analysis is wrong. I will reply as soon as possible.