Portrait of a Hero

    The graphic novel Watchmen, created by writer Alan Moore and artist Dave Gibbons, with its rich language, its dense and interwoven themes, and its relationship between words and images, serve to question our notions of what is heroic. In short, the story is set in 1985 and accounts the alternative history of the United States where the U.S. moves alarmingly closer to nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Within this world exists regular individuals who, by motive or chance, decide to wear costumes, fight crime in New York City, and try to eliminate the catastrophes that could possibly strike the city. However, some of these characters, like Rorschach and the Comedian, often appear more violent than the criminals they battle, ultimately, correlating an idea of what constitutes justice, and whether a vigilante can really represent justice and an emblematic ‘hero.’

    The word ‘hero’ conjures up a very particular image in the mind of many readers: a Superman type figure, flying high, and performing heroic acts, ultimately, creating an individual regarded as a model or ideal. Many people, such as myself, have viewed superheroes in the traditional sense; individuals who supplement law enforcement efforts to fight crime by using their extraordinary ability to protect the public and the greater good. Whether one looks at Batman, Superman, or Spiderman, each one of these heroes stands for ideals greater than themselves. “All of these characters, despite their various powers and realms, have one thing in common - they are model visions of ‘the good guy,’” says Jamie A. Hughes, author of “’Who Watches the Watchmen?’: Ideology and ‘Real World’ Superheroes.” That is to say, many of these ‘heroes’ virtually fight crime and corruption in the name of perfect justice (Hughes 546). They use their fervor and determination to defy the odds and strive to make things better for the community around them, ultimately, making selflessness a key trait for a hero (Hughes 547). Contrary to that, can a character whose passion in life is geared towards benefiting the greater society, but who often appears more violent than the vigilantes he or she seizes, still be considered a ‘hero‘?

    While Watchmen follows the perspectives of several vigilantes, the most fascinating may be Walter Kovacs, or Rorschach; a man with a mysterious ink-blot mask and even more mysterious persona, who will go to any length to make sure justice is carried out, even if it means jeopardizing one’s well being. Every so often, characters such as Rorschach are criticized for their heroic display to eradicate the world of evil and corruption, because of the jeopardizing of other peoples’ well-being and legacy. In his view, criminals escape justice in its purest form, whether its because of failed police work or corruption, ultimately, causing him to hunt down these criminals himself. “Rorschach does not disregard the law, but works above it,” says Christian Gibney, student at University of Connecticut, and author of “Profile of a Hero: Rorschach” (1). In other words, society has established their morals in relationship to the laws developed; Rorschach, however, goes beyond that by praising good and punishing bad (Gibney 2). Undoubtedly, Rorschach’s heroism stems from his resistance from public corruption and opinion. Although, Rorschach’s enforcement for justice might at times seem cruel because of the way he hunts down vigilantes, he still maintains a passion in life geared towards benefiting the greater society.

    Throughout Watchmen, Rorschach, wanted by the police for his murder of several criminals, investigates the killing of another former vigilante, the Comedian. In chorus, Rorschach makes it his duty to warn several other fellow retired masked heroes that their lives may be in danger. Amongst these masked heroes are, the Nite Owl, Silk Specter, Dr. Manhattan, and Ozymandias. Unsurprisingly, the former superheroes do not take Rorschach’s warnings seriously. Thus, complicating matters further, because soon after this, an assassination attempt is made against Dr. Manhattan’s life, the novel’s only actual super-powered being and America’s main nuclear preventative. Afterwards, Dr. Manhattan decides to leave Earth for Mars after being suspected of causing the cancer of his old friends. Around this time Rorschach is set up for the murder of a retired villain and ends up getting arrested. Consequently, making him powerless, but still persistent on halting the havoc that could possibly hit the world. He resiliently ignores the corrupt authority and the criticism he receives from the public in order to do what he knows is right. Also, around this time, the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union mounts and nuclear war becomes more of a noticeable possibility. As a result, Nite Owl and Silk Specter decide to persist with Rorschach’s investigation and bust him out of prison. Furthermore, all three trace the web of conspiracy of the superhero killer to its center. By the end, the characters learn of Ozymandius’s plan to prevent nuclear war and create the world in his ideal way; therefore causing him to try to take out the Watchmen.

    In the midst of all this, Rorschach demonstrated how he would sacrifice the whole world if it meant punishing the actions of one wicked man: Ozymandius. In the end, although Rorschach had to make some dubious decisions and had to act violently, his concentration and determination were irrefutably geared towards the greater good. From the beginning of the story Rorschach makes his responsibility to warn the several other fellow retired masked heroes that not only their lives may be in danger, but the fate of New York. Within this, he works diligently to stop either from occurring, and because of this he encounters some difficulties, ultimately, causing him to associate his persistence with some violent forcefulness.

    Heroes will work tirelessly to improve the greater good even when it comes at a deadly cost to those that stand in their way, and throughout the graphic-novel; Rorschach embodies this trait of an emblematic hero. He is the person who, despite the circumstances, does not walk way from confrontation or the mystery of who is killing the Watchmen, but continues to find out. “While some other characters view him as a half crazed man who cares little for society, the reverse can be true” (Hughes 552). His persistence of saving the world from utter chaos, in a way, sacrifices his life, and for that idea it brings about his heroism.

    To fully understand Rorschach, it is essential to analyze the incident that turned him into the aggressive vigilante that he became. During the wee hours of March 13, 1964, Kitty Genovese was coming back from work when she unexpectedly ran into a killer on the street, a few feet from her apartment. She was repeatedly stabbed as she yelled out for help; but among the thirty-eight witnesses that viewed the event, not one did a thing to help her. Kitty Genovese died that night from her numerous injuries. In Watchmen, Rorschach asserts how he was enraged by the murder of Kitty Genovese, and the unresponsiveness and selfishness of the thirty-eight witnesses that watched her die (Gibney 2). How could there be thirty-eight witnesses to this ruthless murder and not one of them called for help? From that moment on, Rorschach pledged to bring criminals and those who allowed this chaos in society to justice. In this sense, although Rorschach often appears more violent than the criminals he battles, he isn’t simply just a character that is mentally ill, morally uncompromising, and filled with immoral behavior, but rather an unanticipated hero, who’s fighting for justice.

    To understand Rorschach’s view of the law; we must understand how law does not limit his moral boundaries, and how “morality supersedes law” (Gibney 4). In Rorschach’s eyes, if there is any type of wrongdoing, the wrongdoing, under any circumstances, must be punished. In today’s world, Rorschach would firmly disagree with the “innocent before proven guilt” laws; where possible offenders must be tried in court before a jury, and if there is not sufficient considerable evidence to prove them guilty, then they’re free. In Rorschach’s view this is ridiculous, if he knows someone has committed a crime, they must be subject to punishment. His mantra is best demonstrated as “there is good and there is evil, and evil must be punished. Even in the face of Armageddon I shall not compromise” (Moore Ch. 1 pg. 24). In essence, “if the law must be broken to preserve justice, then so be it” (Gibney 4). No crime can go unnoticed; therefore, Rorschach demonstrates how morality must supersede law, while maintaining the intentions for the greater society.

    Ultimately, heroes will fight for justice and will voluntarily risk their lives to protect all of those that justice protects, the good people in society; despite having to often act more violent than their enemies. A hero, such as Rorschach, will do the unpopular task in order to make sure justice prevails. Rather than going out in the world and trying to encapsulate “good,” Rorschach instead went out and made a change. He saw that something was wrong with the world, and decided to not succumb to the public corruption and the wrongness that the world encapsulated. Rorschach lived and died by his own rules; never compromising to the unjust political system whatsoever. While his sense of morality provoked his radical ideals, fighting for his ideas and risking his life brings about his heroism. Not only did he uphold his own freedoms, but he protected the rights of everyone who had been living in nearby harmony. “All of his motivations and intentions were directed for the good of society, which is the essence of heroism” (Gibney 7). In the end, Rorschach served to question our notions of what a hero really is, by often appearing more violent than the criminals he battled, but still keeping the interest of the rest of the world as his primary motive.

Works Cited:

Gibney, Christian. “Profile of a Hero: Rorschach.” University of Connecticut. 23 April 2012.     Web. <freshmanenglish.uconn.edu/student0s/10.Gibney.PDF>

Hughes, Jamie A. " ‘Who Watches the Watchmen?’: Ideology and ‘Real World’ Superheroes "     The Journal of Popular Culture 39.4 (2006): 546-57. Print.

Moore, Alan, and Dave Gibbons. Watchmen. New York: DC Comics, 1987. Print.

Project Text Homework One: Compare & Contrast - Book vs. Film Adaptation

In the graphic novel Watchmen, words on the page go so far in giving the characters personalities; as oppose to the version in the film seeming less nuanced, because the characters are missing bits of back story. The film version by Zack Snyder, is constantly in motion, and a lot of the subtleties get lost; especially considering the time constraints of the film. With that in mind, the Watchmen graphic novel, created by writer Alan Moore and artist Dave Gibbons, give more history, more complexity, and more of Moore’s patented insane cleverness. Ultimately, the Watchmen graphic novel, gives characters more of a personality, a tone, and an overall nature; while the version in the film removes the majority of the psychology, because of the lack of character background.

It’s said that Alan Moore, creator and writer of Watchmen, has distanced himself from watching any movie adaptations of his books, and specifically of Watchmen, because of his long-held assertion that it is impossible to make movies out of his work (Rose NP). When interviewed by Steve Rose, writer for The Guardian newspaper, Moore said that he designed Watchmen as a comic book to explore the medium, and that this would not translate to film (Rose NP). That, to my mind, says a lot, because he was perhaps right. Simply put, each character, from the sociopath Rorschach to the conflicted Nite Owl to the inhuman Dr. Manhattan, has such a detailed back story and course of action that any cuts would undermine from the characters. In essence, while the film adaptation did translate the story and images to the screen; it was not able to translate the ideas and depth quite as well.

For instance, the character of Rorschach, a violent anti-hero who wears a constantly shifting inkblot mask which he considers to be his true face, is modestly described and perhaps misunderstood in the film version. Throughout the film, someone new to Watchmen would feel that Rorschach is simply a character that is mentally ill, morally uncompromising, and filled with immoral behavior. Such as in the way he is awfully resourceful, adapting everyday household objects into tools or weapons, such as pepper spray to blind a police officer and the use of hairspray in combination with a match to set fire to a different police officer. He’s portrayed as a good for nothing, wreaking havoc criminal. In my opinion, he is made out to seem like a character whose actions couldn’t possibly be justified; because there’s a lack of his past background - which makes it seem unimportant. In the sense that the film doesn’t necessarily give a background story to why Rorschach turned out the way he is. Its quite difficult in the film to pinpoint why Rorschach has taken on the persona of Rorschach in every part of his life and hates being referred to by his birth name. Also, why he has profound levels of hatred for immoral behavior and is openly disapproving of any other vigilante who does not share his steadfast views. In the long run, the film was not able to translate the background, ideas, and depth quite as well.

In chorus, the graphic novel version of Watchmen, paints a clearer picture of Rorschach’s background, ideas, and depth quite well; as oppose to the film version. Throughout the book you get into Rorschach’s psychology, and why he considers his mask his true "face" and his unmasked persona to be his "disguise.” Also the explanation of Rorschach's life and his justifications for his uncompromising worldview in the book help explain a lot. From the film a viewer might get the impression that Rorschach has always been good for nothing, but reeking havoc. Contrary to that, during his childhood he was described as bright, and excelled in literature, mathematics, and religious education. In this sense, Rorschach must not be completely “mentally ill” as he’s portrayed, but moreover just isolated from the rest of society. Also, as a young boy his mother was frequently abusive and condescending towards him; perhaps initiating his low tolerance for immorality. It might have also in a way triggered the continuation of his one-man battle against crime long after superheroes have become both detested and illegal. His views on right and wrong are starkly black and white with no room for compromise or exception. Ultimately, he has taken on the persona of Rorschach in every part of his life and hates being referred to by his birth name for many reasons, which are near impossible to depict in film.

In the end, the book is complete with inside references that would never survive the book to film transition, and recurring themes that demand multiple readings that a three-hour film couldn’t possibly replicate. One must only consider an example like the one I stated above. Rorschach at times seems to be two different characters; whether you’re looking at him through the book or through the film. One could argue that the film version drags his name through a dark-mixture of mud, ultimately giving him a bad standing. In essence, the graphic novel version of Watchmen touched on ethics and human nature of characters that are seized in a subtle way, as oppose to the film version that loses some of the ethics and nature because of the lack of background that the book provides.

Works Cited:

Moore, Alan, and Dave Gibbons. Watchmen. New York: Warner Books, 1987. Print.

Rose, Steve. "Alan Moore: An Extraordinary Gentleman." The Guardian.co.uk. Guardian News and Media, 16 Mar. 2009. Web. 10 Apr. 2012. .

Watchmen. Dir. Zack Snyder. Prod. Lawrence Gordon, Lloyd Levin, and Deborah Snyder. Warner Bros., 2009. DVD.

Project Space: Essay Two

The Significance of Analyzing Front Yards and Their Function

Analyzing and being aware of front yards and porches around us can benefit us as individuals, because we can gain a better sense of how public and private spaces in certain neighborhoods are being created by residents for social interaction. In a larger scope of things, it can also benefit our larger society by filling some of the social voids of suburban America. Whether one looks at the well-orchestrated street life of East Los Angeles where people have created a receiving environment for local residents by using their front yards and porches. Whether it’s analyzing front yard fences that assert ownership, and or unexpectedly bring people together. The significance of the front porch and yard as both an architectural place and a social space, serve the essential function in allowing people to interact in a neutral area. In short, not having an outlook guided by scrutiny and awareness towards public and private space, such as a front yard, could harvest negative behaviors towards people and the ways in which they choose to occupy their space.

Traditionally, yards are considered the public area of the residence, where they enter and leave their homes but spend very little time in. The landscape also reflects something of the character of those who live there, serving as somewhat of a status symbol. For instance, if someone has healthy green grass on their lawn, people might think they’re financially stable and of high stature, because they’re spending money on something as simple as fertilizer. As oppose, to those people who have yellowish green grass on their lawn, could be viewed as lazy and poor. Ultimately, “The yard has two primary functions: presenting an attractive appearance to the neighborhood and getting people safely and easily from the street to the front door,” says Karen Ellersieck, professor of Plant Sciences at the University of Missouri, and author of “Landscaping Your Front Yard.” In other words, typically front yards are a very impersonal space, where no one really sits and no personal objects are left lying, ultimately ceasing the extension of home life towards the street. In chorus, front yards usually act as a psychological barrier separating the private space of the home from the public space of the street (Ellersieck NP). Having a well-maintained, traditional front yard that lacks social interaction has become the norm, yet not everyone goes along with it; by choosing to use their yards as a social statement with many societal ramifications (Ellersieck NP).

In order to see the benefits of analyzing nontraditional yards and the behaviors they yield, once must only view the well-orchestrated street life of East Los Angeles; where people walk, talk, water their grass, and play on their front lawns in a unrestricted manner. In this area, yards evolved into a new vernacular form as residents have made changes to suit their needs. As the Chicano urban planner James Rojas explains it in his article “The Enacted Environment: Examining the Streets and Yards of East Los Angeles,” “The streets and front yards were accessible at all time to us; they were the public spaces where we would gather daily to become part of the larger community” (276). It became a place where children could play, teenagers hang out, and the elderly watch. Since so many of the residents chose to extend their home life to their front yards, as oppose to the traditional form of using the backyard, a larger community was created. Ultimately, transforming the traditional landscape and serving as a social catalyst where people could roam around in a welcoming environment. In making this comment, Rojas urges us to see how Latinos in his neighborhood used their front yards, in a nontraditional form, but yet constructively formed a larger community. Since people occupied their yards in Rojas’s neighborhood, the yards didn’t act as psychological barriers separating the private space of the home from the public space of the street. In this sense, just because someone doesn’t have healthy green grass on their lawn, it doesn’t make them irresponsible, it just shows how people dictate their space in different forms. Thus, analyzing front yards can benefit individuals by helping them gain a clear understanding between traditional and nontraditional forms of yards, and the certain behaviors they yield.

In chorus, even something as simple as analyzing a front yard fence could tell you something about space and social interaction; which in some cases could be either good or bad. In general fences define borders between public and private space; they form secure spaces and predicate ownership (Rojas 282). However, if you take a trip around the Eastern part of Los Angeles, you would notice that fences also serve additional purposes, such as, a place to hang wet towels, dry clothes, and even to talk to neighbors. Fences ultimately serve as the problem solver of what is called “the problem of the front door.” When visitors cross an East Los Angeles front yard and reach the front door of a house, they have reached a pivotal part of the home. The front door marks a boundary between an open, public space and a closed inaccessible one. Thus, when a visitor and resident meet at the front door, there is this immense pressure of whether or not the visitor is going to get invited in. The fence solves this problem. Ultimately, the residents of the fenced home stay within the semiprivate comfort and security of their outdoor room. While visitors may feel more comfortable not having to walk up to the front door of the house, feeling concerned of whether or not they‘re going to get invited in. As a result, the fence can be used as a social catalyst, bringing people together, but that’s not what everyone thinks (Rojas 282).

On the contrary to the belief that fences can serve as a social catalyst, some people, such as myself at times might feel unwelcome by fences. Simply because fences in a peculiar, imaginative way yell out “stay out.“ In this case, I once believed that fences meant the owners of the house didn’t want people entering their space, let alone interacting with them. Simply put, I personally didn’t want to be somewhat of a nuisance knocking on someone’s door; making the owners feel obligated to let me in. In this sense, not understanding the exact use and meaning of the public space of the fence, could loosen ties with neighbors and local residents, simply because of the constraints a fence signifies and not feeling compelled to enter their space. Also, because ever since my inception, like many others, I’ve been taught that boundaries are not meant to be crossed, and when they are there‘s always negative consequences. In this case, that’s not necessarily true, people have created an upbeat social life by redefining the boundaries that once stood. In short, the fence is not only an identifier of private ownership, but also a social catalyst that could either strengthen your ties with people or weaken them, it all depends on your awareness and the circumstances on how you view a fence.

To understand the importance of awareness of porches, one must examine people as users and creators of a place through their behavior patterns, and as being suppliers of the urban landscape (Rojas 278). People are both users and creators of a place and thus become suppliers in the urban landscape. “A front porch is immediate and visible to neighbors, fostering interaction that is spontaneous, and allowing a community to come together in a casual way,” says Kendra Juskus, contributor of Flourish Magazine. In this sense, people utilize their porches to say something about their individual identity (Juskus).As a patriot – of East Los Angeles, where Rojas was raised, life indoors was dreary and indifferent compared to the outdoors and the vivacious street life manipulated by the community as they pleased (275). Since all the activity occurred in the front yard, the front porch became the focal point of the house (Rojas 281). In East Los Angeles, the front porch gained a new significance as residents enlarged and expand it for heavy use. Rojas himself writes, “people in east Los Angeles graciously extend their home life toward the street and bring the street’s party, work space, and conversation into the front yard” (281). For instance, the residents used their front yards and porches at times as a reflection of their struggles, conquests, and everyday values of the working class, by at times placing a statue of the Virgin Mary in the yard (Rojas 281). In this case, porches, reflect Mexican cultural values as applied to American suburban practice. Therefore, examining how people as users and creators adapt their cultural values in their front yards, could give you a better sense of how they can become thresholds for communities.

Although cultural values are often portrayed in front yards, it often gets tricky when people place sofas on their front porches, because from my personal experience sofas on front porches denote laziness and being “ghetto.” In this sense, the front entry sets the stage for your home.” First impressions make a huge difference in how your family, friends and neighbors view your home,” says Jackie Braitman, owner and principal of Braitman Design/Build, and author of “The Front Porch - An Extension of Your Living Room” (NP). From my personal experience, some people simply feel that a couch on a porch pushes people away. Although, the people that have told me that have never justified their opinion. I think they feel that way because its just not part of the norm to place a sofa on the porch. Also, a covered front porch, may turn away people from trying to socialize, catch up on the latest news or just relax and enjoy the company. (Braitman NP). For instance, if someone from a different neighborhood were to visit the area where porches are somewhat being used as storage rooms ,they might be puzzled why so many people are using porches in ways that are contrarily foreign to them, and perchance seems disorderly. Which might cause them to maybe avoid sticking up a casual conversation. I know I’d probably deliver uncalled for criticism, because I’d feel that it provides no opportunities welcoming to strangers (Juskus NP). Anyway, while life in these neighborhood streets might seem unordered and chaotic to outsiders, its systematic because the residents understand it (Rojas 276). In this sense, average pedestrians and the urban planners examining social issues and policies in areas similar to these might criticize the areas and feel the need for a transformation, without actually understanding the use of a porch by real people (Rojas 278).

In conclusion, analyzing and being aware of the front yards and porches around us can benefit us as individuals, and our greater society, because we can gain a better understanding of how public and private spaces in certain neighborhoods are being created by residents for social interaction, whether positively or negatively. In this fashion, the outdoor environment is a graceful place, composed of front yards and commercial streets, of private and public spaces unified by human behavior and ideas (Rojas 292). Lastly, it’s important to remember that observing and analyzing a space could often equipped you with the constraints and benefits of that particular space. While, many people still remain unaware of how these spaces function in our lives, its critical to understand that people have created something many veteran Americans desire: a vivacious street life, communal public spaces, and the sense of belonging to a community. To conclude, analyzing and being aware of how people tailor and occupy their space as they please can ultimately benefit you by telling you a bit about social interaction, as oppose to creating overriding assumptions pertaining to peoples’ lifestyle and occupation.

Works Cited:

Braitman, Jackie. "The Front Porch – An Extension of Your Living Room." Braitmandesign.com. Braitman Design/Build, 30 July 2010. Web. 27 Mar. 2012. .

Ellersieck, Karen. "Landscaping Your Front Yard." Extension.missouri.edu. University of Missouri, June 2006. Web. 27 Mar. 2012. .

Juskus, Kendra L. "Front Porch Revival: The Past, Present, and Possibility of a Neighborhood Mainstay." Flourishonline.org. Flourish Magazine, 10 Feb. 2010. Web. 27 Mar. 2012. .

Rojas, James. “The Enacted Environment: Examining the Streets and Yards of East Los Angeles.” Everyday America: Cultural Landscape Studies After J.B. Jackson. Eds. Chris Wilson and Paul Groth. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. 275-292. Print.