When reading Watchmen, I thought a lot about how it presents its heroes and their place in the society in which they exist. Alan Moore presents his heroes more as vigilantes operating on the fringe of society and often under the cover of darkness. Unlike other superhero comics, such as Superman, the Watchmen are not celebrated as heroes by the public. The Dark Knight takes a similar approach with Batman. Another aspect of heroes that Watchmen presents differently, is the sheer violence that heroes engage in. Moore presents this violence less as heroic and brave, and more as gruesome and dark. While Superman happily punches and attacks his enemies, the heroes in Watchmen fight in a much more violent way. This take a toll on some of the Watchmen who question whether or not they want to continue as heroes. I think both of these presentations of heroes in Watchmen speak to Moore’s skeptical view of Superheroes and their place in society. I think that Moore wants us to question if heroes could actually fit into society, and whether or not it would be a good thing. Furthermore, I think Moore shows that only someone without morals, such as Rorshach, could feasibly fight crime without it affecting his mental well-being. This understanding of heroes made me question whether or not heroes could actually play a positive role.
I was dealing with the same ideas while reading this text as well. Alan Moore does a great job of developing a world of cynicism where no one can truly be a hero. The extreme violence is only a complement to the sinister mental states of his characters. It is necessary to call into question whether superheroes could actually exist in a realistic American society. Moore’s genius is further elaborated upon and slightly duplicated through the modern day Batman (Christian Bale) movie series where these same themes are explored. Good point, I am glad we share a similar viewpoint on this issue!
I agree with your post; I think the dark, grittier version of superheroes is an attempt to integrate realism into the superhero world and respond to society’s actual issues. I also think from a realistic standpoint, superheroes would have to be vigilantes especially if they don’t have supernatural powers which would separate them from reality. Meaning, if they followed the rules they wouldn’t be superheroes at all, they’d be police men or soldiers or just a law-abiding citizen playing their part. By simply putting on a mask and hiding their identity, the watchmen are already separating themselves from society and ‘taking matters into their own hands’. It makes sense that this kind of attitude would manifest in more brutal, violent behavior and a more cynical outlook on the world. Their already rule-breakers by definition, so it’s understandable they wouldn’t be boy scouts in battle.
When I try to imagine super heroes being real in this reality, I imagine one conflict being the independent nature of a superhero. They aren’t affiliated by the government (lets say the US gov. as an example) and thus cannot be controlled or monitored. I could be wrong, but I think I remember this being a plot point in the Avengers: the government was encouraging collaboration of them and this was a topic of debate.
I think this idea is part of more modern comics in general. Superheroes in more recent comics, especially new superheroes, not just new versions of Golden Age heroes, tend to have a more complex relationship with the society they “protect.” They are more aware of their uniqueness, the fact that they don’t fit in with the people around them. I think this is an improvement and actually makes comics more realistic, and makes superheroes even more impressive. If there were someone in our world who had superhero powers imagine how ostracized they would feel. If, through all that pressure and loneliness, they were still able to work for the benefit of the public it would be an amazing feat. I like when comic book superheroes question their roles and seem more aware of the fact that they are “freaks,” because it seems more realistic to me.