She-Geeks discussion

"Good evening, London." It's nine o'clock and this is The Voice of Fate... It is the Fifth of the Eleventh, Nineteen-Ninety-Seven...

"The people of London are advised that the Brixton and Streatham areas are quarantine zones as of today. It is suggested that these areas be avoided for reasons of health and safety...

Police raided seventeen homes in the Birmingham area early this morning, uncovering what is believed to be a major terrorist ring. Twenty people, either of them women, are currently in detention awaiting trial...

The weather will be fine until 12:07 A.M. when a shower will commence, lasting until 1:30 A.M...

Have a pleasant evening."

A frightening and powerful tale of the loss of freedom and identity in a chillingly believable totalitarian world, V for Vendetta stands as one of the highest achievements of the comics medium and a defining work for creators Alan Moore and David Lloyd.

Set in an imagined future England that has given itself over to fascism, this groundbreaking story captures both the suffocating nature of life in an authoritarian police state and the redemptive power of the human spirit which rebels against it. Crafted with sterling clarity and intelligence, V for Vendetta brings an unequaled depth of characterization and verisimilitude to its unflinching account of oppression and resistance.

"Remember, remember the fifth of November..."

just got hold of a copy and will check in as soon as I have read a few pages

I've read this book before and it's one of my favourites. It was an early piece of Alan Moore's work, and you can see how he's learning the format of storytelling via long-form comics, which he's of course gone on to perfect (in my opinion!).

It's much, much different than the movie, so if any of you have seen the movie before reading the comic, be prepared.

Can we have a role-call with who will be reading this this month? I'll definitely be reading it again.

I read this in December so it is too soon for me to want to reread. I'm one of those that saw the film instead of read it, I think both have their merits.

I didn't like Evey so much in the comic but I loved V more, even though he was brilliantly acted in the film I felt like the page was where he belonged and he was a perfect creation on the page.

Stefani - Cheshire Cat. wrote: "
I didn't like Evey so much in the comic but I loved V more, even though he was brilliantly acted in the film I felt like the page was where he belonged and he was a perfect creation on the page. "

I agree - V is definitely meant for the page, rather than the movie. Hugo Weaving gave it his best shot, and did well with what he had, but the real brilliance of V as a character comes from the comic.

I'm not entirely sure you're supposed to like Evey all that much in the comic - she's a shell of a human, more of a metaphor for the society as a whole I think.

My biggest problem with the movie is that they completely changed the whole purpose and message that Alan Moore created in the comic.

We all know how much Alan Moore hates his books being turned into comics, but his thoughts on V for Vendetta were particularly scathing:

"[The movie] has been "turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country.... It's a thwarted and frustrated and largely impotent American liberal fantasy of someone with American liberal values standing up against a state run by neoconservatives — which is not what the comic V for Vendetta was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about England."

I can't say I disagree.

Might be controversial but I don't like Alan Moore. His comics are great but as a person he comes off awfully. He hates all of his films yet continues to sell the rights, that reeks of money grabbing to me.

I think he has some points about the V film but I think it was a modern generation of Americans not fully understanding the world Moore experienced under Thatcherism that would propel him into writing the comic. I don't know how he expected Americans to fully understand how close Britain came to Facism under Thatcher.

I think they did the best to modernise the material, parts of it failed but living in Britain I also have a great understanding of how easy it would be to see my country become that which was reflected on the screen, now more than when the film first came out because now we have Thatcher's boys taking over the country with their special modern version of her ideology.

Stefani - Cheshire Cat. wrote: "He hates all of his films yet continues to sell the rights, that reeks of money grabbing to me."

I think the dude's a bit of a whack job personally (although I do LOVE his comics), but to be fair, DC owns the rights to all those comics, and have made the movies without his permission (because they didn't need it). That's why if you watch those movies, his name doesn't actually appear on any of them (the artist often does though), and he gives up all rights to monies earned from said movies.

At least the man is consistent with his beliefs!

Regarding modernising the story - I just don't think it's needed. You can still have a story about anarchism vs. fascism in that context, and people will get it, whether or not they lived in Thatcher-ruled Britain. If the story is constructed well enough (as it was in the comic), people will understand.

Saying people wouldn't understand that is like saying they can't possibly understand any sci-fi story, because they haven't lived in that world. Tell the story well enough, and people will get it.

And if you want to talk toeing the line of fascism, there's lots within the current American political climate (and Canadian, the one I can obviously speak to most) that is teetering on the brink of fascist principles as well. I know you guys have some really screwy shit over the in UK, but the two of us are not far behind.

Hell, our Minister of Public Safety basically called the Canadian public pedophiles, because there was a backlash against his over-reaching policies on internet surveillance. That's when Anonymous (speaking of V for Vendetta!) actually launched a campaign against him.

He definitely profited from the first two (From Hell and the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). He said that as long as he could distance himself by not seeing them then he could profit from them and his comics would be untouched and separate to everyone else. He also admitted that he was incredibly naive to think that.

I agree though that the comics and films should be separate in people's mind because they all had dramatic alterations, sometimes for the better (the ending of Watchmen actually makes sense in the film) but sometimes for the worse (I don't even know what they tried to do with the League, but it is almost so bad it's good, only almost though).

When I read V I felt like I was reading an intelligent commentary on Facism in a Thatcherite Britain but when I watched the film I was watching something very different and modernised and both were brilliant to me.

Stefani - Cheshire Cat. wrote: "He definitely profited from the first two (From Hell and the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). "

I stand corrected! Although I do believe is naivete was the culprit. Much like when he entered into his original comic book deal with DC (he'd get the rights back if it was ever out of print for longer than a year). It seems ridiculous now (the movies and the comic), but that being said, a lot of what he's been through has paved the way for much more equitable deals with comic artists.

You know, I don't know how I feel about the ending of the Watchmen movie vs. the comic. I see what you mean about it making "sense", but in the world of the comic that ending also made sense.

I think it's too bad that Terry Gilliam didn't get to do that movie - he was the only person Alan Moore said could ever adapt it properly.

I like the movie in a way, and if it's on TV and nothing else is on I'll watch it, but it's almost not even the same thing. Maybe I can just empathize more with the ideology in the comic?

Although, I do think Hugo Weaving did a great job. Not many actors could pull off a part where their face is covered the whole time. That man does have an amazing voice.

I'd like to hear what other people thought of Evey's character in the comic too, hers was probably the most difficult to digest for me when I first read it.

Thanks for the great conversation so far Stefani! :)

I almost feel sorry for Alan Moore when he set up ABC under one of his friend's companies just for his friend to sell the rights of the parent company to DC, that must've hurt!

I think part of what made Evey so difficult to digest (very accurate phrasing) was how young she was. Her age made a lot of the content quite hard. I loved how she was (view spoiler)[ sure he was her Father despite how many times he said he wasn't. I also like how they left that part unresolved and it was kind of up to us to decide (hide spoiler)]

Totally agreed Stefani with your spoiler!

My library doesn't have this so I had to order a copy from BN. I'll catch up then!

You know, my partner and I were talking about this last night, and he describes the motivation for the differences of the book vs. movie as one of fear. The idea of anarchism scares a lot of people. Not just government officials, but people in general. He thought it was purposefully changed for that reason alone.

I've only looked into it so far and the art looks great! Of course I've watched the film. And I liked it.
But, honestly, most films don't live up to the books that they're based on. Or quite a lot of things are changed or left out even if they might be seen as crucial to the plot.

I kind of wish I hadn't looked into this thread already cause I would've wanted to see if I'd actually notice that it's set in a Thatcherite Britain not knowing much about the real "era". :) (btw I find this slightly ironic that we're reading this NOW of all times.)

I agree Rebecca, every time I wrote Thatcherite I winced slightly hoping no one would take it the wrong way.

I misspoke when I said it was set in a Thatcherite (wince) Britain, just written when she was ruling and her time in power had a great impact on Moore's writing.

I noticed that he said that in the foreword, too, so I guess it doesn't matter that much.

On some other aspect: I think it's interesting that the girl is supposed to be born in the same year as Moore's own daughter. He probably thought about her a lot while he was writing.

I'm halfway through re-reading.

I'd forgotten how intricate and confusing V for Vendetta really is since I most recently watched the film. I've had to make a list of the character's names and positions, and also often backtrack to re-read pages to make sure I understand everything.

Such complexity is a two edged sword.

On the one hand, I love that the world in this book is complex because life is complex. It's a place where villains and heroes can be grey. I mean V is the 'hero' but he's also a killer. Whether his kills are justified can be debated many ways which I won't get into here, but it proves my point that complexity adds intellectual excitement and intense moral debate.

On the other hand, a complex book with such detail and nuance is hard to read, it takes effort and interpretation. There doesn't seem to be one unified message to the book. With so many competing ideas, the reader can be left feeling confused and overwhelmed.

I'm anxious to finish re-reading and perhaps taking a look at the film again to refresh my memory there as well before commenting further.

Laurel wrote: On the one hand, I love that the world in this book is complex because life is complex. It's a place where villains and heroes can be grey. I mean V is the 'hero' but he's also a killer.

I'm about half way through my first read, and this comment jumped out at me. I live near and work in Boston and as many of you probably know, it's been a rough week! We're working on getting back to normal now, but every time I pick up this book I feel a little sick, becuase in real life (like in the book) the good guys and the bad guys aren't always "white and black" and sometimes people think they are doing the right thing... but if you're the one impacted, you know it isn't...

I'm working hard to finish this before the end of the month, but I feel a little queasy each time they mention V bombing something or if there is an image of him with TNT strapped to his belly...

Robyn, I am so sorry for what you and everyone effected by the bombing in Boston are going through. I apologize if my comments upset you. I honestly was not thinking of the Boston attack when I wrote them. How that's possible, I don't know. Please accept my wishes for your continued well being.

No no! Your comments didn't upset me - reading the book upsets me. Sorry for being confusing...

Your comment was right on - it's exactly what I was feeling and just hadn't found a way to express it yet.

I like reading this kind of dark stories. I guess there was always corruption and alwalys will be.
I have created a short simple quiz about it:
http://www.goodreads.com/quizzes/by_u...

Oh I didn't do very well on that quiz. :) Thanks for sharing Senem.

We've talked a little about V here but what about Evey? I've never liked her very well in the book. I just get annoyed with her very easily.

Part of that is her is her obvious dependance and a bit of petulance. Maybe that's a teenager thing?

She's not exactly quick witted either. She's willing to play the little girl prostitute to trap the church guy but doesn't realize V is going to kill him? What did she think he was going to do!

She is young and has had a rough life. People use her all the time, including V. So is my annoyance unfair?

Finally, if her role is supposed to be some sort of coming of age story, it doesn't work for me. After the ultimate growing experience, her 'detainment', Evey still doesn't seem independent. She remains with V and follows his plans for her in the end. Was she so desperate for a father figure? Why fall in line with his plans for her?

I like the movie because Evey does leave after the 'detainment' and become independent for a time. Of course I think she's older in the movie so perhaps it's not a fair comparison. In that version, she has a job, a few friends, a life - at least until meeting V. She makes an independent decision to return to V but doesn't 'become' V.

Laurel -

I think the points you bring up about Evey in the book are spot on, but I think she was meant to raise those kinds of questions. I'm not even sure it's meant to be a coming of age story.

Specifically about her following V's plans to the end. First she was manipulated by the state, and then, in the end, she just ends up being manipulated by V in much the same way. She's a tool for somebody else, she's not her own person. She never was.

I think it's a poignant way to show we're all being manipulated by the system, and I always came away with the idea that that was the point of her character.

Oddly enough, my sister is just reading the book for the first time and had a lengthy conversation about this two days ago!

Kelly - I think your right. Evey was a great way to show how we're manipulated without being aware of it.

Something else we didn’t cover yet: as a graphic novel, the visuals are just as important as the story.

In a text only version, V in the Guy Fawkes outfit, especially the mask, could not possibly have elicited the same complex visceral emotions. The mask leaves V’s emotions and motivations up to interpretation by the reader. And it’s also darn creepy!

Although I had some trouble telling characters apart and the colors are muddy (partly due to the technology of comics at the time) I would like to give kudos to some effects that did work such as color washes for various scenes. For example, a rainbow-like effect at the club.

I also appreciated the intercutting of panels in scenes like (in my version) page 133 when Evey and Gordon are talking about having a sexual relationship and the red washed panels of them in bed in the future are intercut.

In Chapter 3 of Book 3 (p. 202) the climax of each storyline is approaching and at the end of each page, V sets up another domino until all are in place, heightening the tension as each one added. Then he readies to knock over the last domino: “Your pretty empire took so long to build, now with a snap of history’s fingers down it goes.” The impact is lost without artwork.

One effect I am unsure of – does the sideways art with musical score in This Vicious Cabaret take away from the flow of the book? I’m torn. On the one hand, great idea creatively, on the other, eh it’s annoying.

It's the last day of the month so I'm posting this too:

I wanted to mention my favorite character: Detective Almond. To me, he’s the most honest man in the book. He doesn’t want to manipulate anyone or get ahead in the world or even really worry over his job. He wants to stop a killer. He eventually realizes he must understand and see the world as V does in order to stop him. (I definitely think taking the meds was a better way to accomplish this than the ‘detainment’ torture method used on Evey. Just sayin’) V is complex and convoluted, where Almond is straight forward. I like his honesty.

Anyone else have a favorite character?