Watchmen notes from Thursday's discussion:
• Comics:
o The simpler the graphic, the more you have to interpret
o More iconic, you have to imagine more about the picture
Ex) bag that says “Goodies,” you have to imagine what’s in there. No mystery about bag that says “M&Ms”
• Idea of sequencing for panels/graphics
• Chronology in Watchmen
o General chronological framework
Most of the characters have traditional flashbacks
o Except for Jon, who seems to be in multiple places in time at once
• How does Rorschach’s journal function in the graphic novel?
o Gives inner perspective of the psyche of one of the characters
• Pirate story
o Analogous to Adrian’s story?
o Sailor moving toward his own damnation
o If he had just stopped, he would’ve saved his family and not had to get on the ship
• Adrian and Jon as foils
• Rorschach as foil for them too
o Foil for everyone since he is the one character who is uncompromising
Thanks for the notes! To
Thanks for the notes!
To address the first point or bullet I agree that the more simplistic the frame is the more the reader 'reads' the story line like a traditional novel. That is the author has given you a general frame of reference of what they are talking about but it is now the readers job to fill in the blanks.
For example when Laurie figures out that the Comedian is her father she does not come out and say "The Comedian is my father" the readers must come to that conclusion for themselves (and then dialogue confirms suspicions further down the line).
Movie
I was going to make a more in-depth comment about the movie, but thought maybe some have not seen it yet, and I wouldn't want to ruin it for you...(actually there are some big differences, but i digress).
To elaborate on simplistic frames, one thing that makes watching the movie more difficult and less involved than the graphic novel is the fact that you can't really absorb each frame and interpret what is going on. As soon as you see one frame in the movie, it's pretty much gone, unless it's a flashback. Reading the frames allows for much more interpretation, much like how we discussed the difference in reading No Country and watching the movie. Watchmen leaves more room for interpretation because of its complex art, language, and plot. The intertwining stories also are extremely hard to present in a film, leading to a separate DVD release of the Black Freighter story.
It is paradoxical that the novel is complex yet simple at the same time. By coupling simplicity and complexicity at times, the novel becomes more brilliant in its art, plot, and themes.
I heard the movie doesn't
I heard the movie doesn't present the book in its entirety. hmm....wonder if it's good.
I was wondering about the
I was wondering about the Black Freighter storyline and why it wasn't in the movie! I haven't really researched why it was omitted but I thought it was strange especially since I feel like in the novel it played a big part at least to the reader. It was something that kind of allowed for foreshadowing and it had to be important as one of the excerpts in the beginning of one of the chapters was all about the Black Freighter comics.
I agree that its harder to absorb things from the movie. Especially in the beginning when the movie shows all those different clips. If I hadn't read the book I wouldn't have picked up on many of the things that were shown (ex- my sister didn't and she hasn't read the book).
And I wont go into any more of the movie either in case someone hasn't seen it. But I also think that even though the movie followed the novel pretty close, there were a few things that were really different that maybe shouldn't have been changed for the movie.