Before Watchmen - the controversy thread - Forum 2.0

Figserello June 28, 2012 at 1:39am

Tom Spurgeon's essay is a great read on the 'controversy', as it is so bracketed.

He wrote it in February, but hits a lot of bases.

The points I find most pertinent:

16. That More Watchmen represents the triumph of brand over literary content, I think is more true than overly facile. Watchmen the work doesn't require a sequel and never did. Watchmen the collection of cool characters and isolated story moments and licensing opportunities demands one. It may really be that simple.

17. I'm also not certain how you can see this as anything but a step away from the wider cultural message of Watchmen back in the 1980s: that authors matter, that original work can be rewarded on the same level as reworking someone else's ideas, that comics have literary and culture value for their ideas and expressive force above and beyond their value as entertainment product. I might call DC foolish if they were touting these sequel books as a match for Watchmen's artistic achievement, but that this idea isn't even on the table may be scarier. This is a toy line. This is a happy meal. This is "based on." This is product.

21. Ten days or so past the official announcement, I'm thinking More Watchmen may be best understood as a blow to comics' dignity. It's product, not art. It's a limited, small series of ideas derived from a bigger, grander one. It's sad. One thing that Watchmen did a quarter century ago was to underline certain values of craft and intent and creative freedom that have helped to yield enough equivalent expressions -- to my mind even grander expressions -- that we may now see this follow-up project for what it is: nothing special. Not Moore. More.

ClarkKent_DC June 28, 2012 at 8:34am

It's been said of the Beatles, but I think it also applies to Watchmen: It's entirely possible to be the best in your field and still be overrated.

Jeff of Earth-J June 28, 2012 at 9:11am

What should Before Watchmen be trying to say?

I don’t know.

What kind of prequel or sequel could do justice to the existing book?

A well-written one.

Is Watchmen in a class by itself or simply one of a few special books?

It’s one of many special books.

If you could only pick one book to represent the comic industry, would it be Watchmen?

No. (No one single book could possibly represent the comics industry.)

How long does it take Alan Moore to brush his beard?

Trick question. (He doesn’t brush it.)

Is it right to judge Before Watchmen without reading it?

Depends on what basis one judges it. It certainly wouldn’t be right to judge its literary merit.

How many people are actually buying (reading) Before Watchmen?

I am, for one.

Rich Steeves June 28, 2012 at 9:33am

What should Before Watchmen be trying to say?

- Something about the human condition, just like any work of art.

What kind of prequel or sequel could do justice to the existing book?

- One that doesn't try to be the existing book, but finds excellence on its own merit.

Is Watchmen in a class by itself or simply one of a few special books?

- It is unique, of course, but then again, all works of art are

If you could only pick one book to represent the comic industry, would it be Watchmen?

- Probably the collected Peanuts strips

How long does it take Alan Moore to brush his beard?

- It takes him until one minute to midnight

Is it right to judge Before Watchmen without reading it?

- I don't think so, but people have and will

Is it right for Alan Moore to judge people for reading it? (Please no, I think this one's probably been gone over enough.)

- Agreed

How many people are actually buying (reading) Before Watchmen?

- I am

Border Mutt June 28, 2012 at 9:34am

I (BM) said (in reply to Figserello):

Watchmen was the superhero series that the mainstream took seriously.

If you want to disqualify Maus, that still leaves (off the top of my head), the Sandman, Dark Knight Returns, and Batman Year One; all well thought of, all have won awards.

The ambition and attempt to address the issues of the moment was part and parcel of what made Watchmen great. Doing a tie-in that didn't include those in the mix is not doing justice to the work of art they are custodians of. You claim they aren't setting out to do justice to it in that way, but that approach is exactly what I'm taking issue with.

I'm not saying any such thing. Stories are going to be told differently, they're going to have different aims and different goals. Trying to ape the specific points of Watchmen would not be doing the work justice. Expecting a prequel to compete with a well told original is just silly. That said, different types of stories could easily be set in the Watchmen milieu and be creatively successful. Assuming because they aren't shooting for the same thing that they should just be dismissed is your prerogative but its not very open minded.

The Big Two have a marvelous production model, where instead of putting something on the market to stand or fall on whether it is any good or not, everybody who is interested has to buy all the installments, or two-thirds of them before anyone is allowed to judge them. It does mean they get away with having huge sales on at least the early issues of series built up by the hype machine. Then they interpret the huge sales (within their little niche) as vindication of the actual content of their product, and bring out more of the same.

You can judge whatever you want by whatever criteria you like, but your agenda is showing when you don't even sample the comic.

That's a discussion for another day, but in this case, they have gone out of their way to produce a series that is pretty inaccessible to those (millions of?) people who have bought Watchmen

How?

Run DMC used the smiley-face iconography based on Watchmen. The whole Acid House scene of the late 80s often used the bloodied badge as well as the smiley face. Alan Moore was even name-checked in a pop song. Not something that happens every day to comics creators. Watchmen was a big deal.

I suppose Watchmen was the only comic book and Alan Moore the only creator that have ever been referenced in popular culture? Yes, they had some mainstream appeal but take them off their pedestal please.

So yes. Disappointing.

Got it. You're disappointed in the project for existing. Valid feelings but should probably be expressed in a thread that's not talking about the actual books.

Figserello replied:

Border Mutt I've numbered your points.

1) Ha! Just checking you are paying attention. I've used those myself recently as examples of superhero stories with a bit of artistic integruty that managed to get respect and huge sales beyond the niche market.

Watchmen is still a rare beast and stands alone in terms of its formal structure and attempt to push the superhero story as far towards 'literature' as its ever been pushed.

Sandman is a superhero story as far as I'm concerned. Don't tell the Goth girls though.

3) I've said in other threads that any sequel to Watchmen in the current circumstances is a sign of pathetic desperation and moral bankruptcy. In this thread I am just musing that the multi-series floppy format they are producing the comics in is working against the common perception of Watchmen as an accessible novelesque book, and most definitely harming how it is being perceived by the world beyond comics. If it were being released at the outset in a format more similar to the book sitting on so many bookshelves across the world, it'd get more hoo-haa out there.

I'm also noting the irony of nostalgia being such a large part of the marketing strategy when the original was virtually an anti-nostalgia tract. The preview pages of the Comedian issue were very nostalgia-focussed, with Camelot and all that.

These minis are ignoring the essential engine of Watchmen, as if they hadn't a clue what Moore was doing with it. (You say :-) that Watchmen is just a sourcebook for more product and this isn't important. There we differ. Some understanding shown of what Watchmen was doing would lift this in my estimation.)

4) My being treated like a mug for years now is showing.

5) See 2 above regarding it being released now, when there is some interest in it, as a series of floppies. When they are collected, they will first of all be in a series of short TPBs, each very different in style and content, and then in a whopper of an Omnibus or whatever, which only members of the 'superhero fan community' would feel justified in buying. There won't be the same interest in it by that stage anyhow.

6) Watchmen is very high on my personal canon of superhero literature it's true. For all sorts of reasons, not least that I respect how seriously Moore took his subject matter and I suppose, atr the time, I believed DC's own hype that this was the future of superhero comics. But it wasn't me who put it on a pedestal.

It is on a pedestal, though.

7) See 3 above. We are talking about DiDio's 'product' right here, right now.

The Debate continues:

3) I think desperation is apt, but pathetic might be pushing it a little. The way I see it, DC is desperate to have a sure fire sales success to continue the momentum of a market build up. It's not just a short term thing, (although I'm sure there's that too), but an attempt to get the new sales platform on solid footing. So, while increasing cash injections, (based on sales of all things), get the direct market back on its feet, increased publicity helps the online sales to build.

As to the new series' hurting the outside world's view of Watchmen as accessible, I don't buy it. Watchmen has had 25 years, (and a massive marketing push), to establish its reputation. Additionally, the new series' are clearly labelled "before" indicating a prequel. Maybe we don't share a similar world view, but in my world, most people aren't stupid; this one's easy to figure out.

Re: the irony of nostalgia. I don't necessarily disagree with you here, but any prequel or sequel is implicitly working on nostalgia. It is what it is.

Re: ignoring the engine of watchmen. I would argue that this is a good thing. As you say yourself Figs, Watchmen was a revolutionary, complete, work of art. Why would you want prequels/sequels trying to go to the same well? At best it would be redundant, at worst it might cheapen people's appreciation for the original story. (I don't really see that as a major problem but the Dark Knight Strikes Again did change some people's appreciation for DKR... myself, I prefer to just ignore it.) Furthermore, it seems like a conflict to have a sequel try to be both an extrapolation of Watchmen and speak about our times; a new original work would seem a better venue for that platform. Meanwhile, series' that use familiar characters to tell different types of stories can be both respectful to the source material and have something interesting to impart, (whether they will or not is all about the execution). So, again, I don't see telling a different type of story as being an automatic strike against a project. Writers take inspiration from all sorts of sources, and often go very different directions from the source material, who's to say that won't happen here?

4)I'm unfamiliar with this expression but if I've offended you, I apologize.

6)There's no denying that Watchmen stands high... but it's not the only thing that does. (Ironically, I think the only reason that Watchmen has an edge over Maus in the public consciousness is because of DC's marketing, which Alan Moore deplores.)

7)Contrary to how it might seem, I'm not trying to shut you up Figs, but this seems like a more appropriate venue.

Now how about Alan Moore's beard? :)

Philip Portelli June 28, 2012 at 7:26pm

I feel that the Before Watchmen books will be financially successful. Critically successful is another story. I fully agree that DC is pushing whatever concepts will have the strongest reaction. If every comic book reader worth his salt has read/owns Watchmen, then that's a LOT of people who know the characters. That's a built-in, guaranteed audience. So after making money, the main point seems to be top creators wanting to tell more stories with these heroes before the events that derailed them. We'll have to see if they produce any memorable comics.

But just suppose, say, Nite Owl sells like hotcakes and everyone (including Alan Moore and Figs) loves it, far more than the rest. Will we see a Nite Owl ongoing series on its own without the others? Is that a desired result by DC to continue using these characters or is it just a one-time deal? How much are these creators commited to the hero they picked?

Again, great or terrible, Before Watchmen will never impact the legacy of Watchmen much like the Star Wars prequels could not diminish the grandeur of the the first trilogy.

We should judge each title as a seperate entity from Watchmen. Compare it to today's comics and see if you are enjoying them on their own merits. That's what I'm going to do!

Still does Alan Moore's beard feel the same way he does? Has it been quoted?

Jason Marconnet (Pint sized mod) June 30, 2012 at 8:45am

What should Before Watchmen be trying to say?

Clearly the world Watchmen took place in is even a darker place than we live in. It should be about the human condition and how humanity in that world ended up like they did.

What kind of prequel or sequel could do justice to the existing book?

Entertaining. For all the acclaim Watchmen receives it was entertaining while making a statement. The prequels should be fun while conveying whatever message it wants to.

Is Watchmen in a class by itself or simply one of a few special books?

It's pretty good. I'd say it ranks high on my personal list of all time favorites.

If you could only pick one book to represent the comic industry, would it be Watchmen?

I don't know what I'd pick.

How long does it take Alan Moore to brush his beard?

He brushed it ten minutes ago

Is it right to judge Before Watchmen without reading it?

Maybe to judge the reasoning of launching the series. I think judging the story itself should be reserved for people who actually read it.

How many people are actually buying (reading) Before Watchmen?

I am. So far I like all of them. I think it fleshes out the world and characters without taking away or contradicting the original.

The Baron June 30, 2012 at 2:16pm

How long does it take Alan Moore to brush his beard?

He brushed it ten minutes ago

Awesome.

Jason Marconnet (Pint sized mod) June 30, 2012 at 7:34pm

I have enjoyed all of the miniseries so far. Say what you will about the controversy with DC and Moore. I thought this when the lineup was announced and now it's confirmed after reading the first four issues. DC genuinely put thought into the venture. They gathered the top talent in the industry for this venture. It's too early to tell how this will all end up when it's all said and done. I won't say that the first four Before Watchmen issues are the best comics I've ever read. They are however all solid and I can tell much thought has been put into these.

Jason Marconnet (Pint sized mod) June 30, 2012 at 8:17pm

I figured someone before me would've made that joke

The Baron said:

How long does it take Alan Moore to brush his beard?

He brushed it ten minutes ago

Awesome.

Replies