Rorschach was very conservative and anti sex, much like the maga base. The attractive thing about that is that there’s a clear right and wrong.
Later on he’d rather be killed than to admit ozymandias being right. His diary field the hateful marginal right-wing maga-crowd that had their anger taken away by the world peace that had materialized.
He wanted power over a world scared of an “outside” threat that didn’t exist. As soon as anyone with any knowledge was able to debunk the ‘attack’, regardless of how, it would get even worse. The difference was only how far in the future. Rorschach didn’t die because Ozy was right. He died because he couldn’t be complicit in a world where evil got to win.
Ozymandias wanted to believe a heroic ideal as much as Rorschach - one that’s just as self-deluded. He wanted to believe that there was an end to “history”. He wanted to decide when the future began. But he forgot just one fact that Rorschach at least was cognizant of:
Totally agree with this. It’s part of why I dislike that DC writers sometimes import traits from the Watchmen into their Charlton counterparts. Obviously, if you scratch the surface of Rorschach, you find the Question staring back. If you look at Silk Spectre the right way, you see Black Canary. Nite Owl 1 & 2 are the Blue Beetle (I’m glad that Moore never got to adapt Jaime).
I want most of my superheroes to be clean and honest. I want to know that when I read a story, the Question follows leads responsibly (even if they do sometimes involve aglets) - whether that’s Vic or Renee under the no-face. I want to know that Dinah Lance comes from a loving family, has a man she loves and trusts, and is dedicated to being a hero and a mentor to those who aren’t in the same place. And so it goes for all of them. I want those characters to be heroes and in the right - or at least, in the realm of responsibility.
Didn’t say Ozymandias was right, I said Rorschach chose to die rather than submit to Ozymandias. And, like Ozymandias, he had already put into play his trump card, but he couldn’t tell him that, so he decided to take it to his grave.
Both are cases of misplaced heroïsm. Neither are sure what the future will bring.
You’re right, it’s a small difference. Rorschach couldn’t admit that there was a point, there was a path to harmony. Like oz he’d put his plan into working before too.
He couldn’t admit to oz being right, because he morally was disagreeing with the method. But in fact he disagreed because it made himself unviable. He counts in humanity to find conflict to disturb peace.
He also basically tortured Moloch for no reason. No matter how many times Moloch told him he didn’t have the information. He just repeatedly beat the shit out of a dying old man for information the old man didn’t have.
A dying old man yes, but no less an evil bastard for it. The problem is that Rorschach was deluded by Ozymandias. The evidence he had about the death of a friend pointed to Moloch. He pursued the lead. And like any human, he got angry because someone he’d respected had been murdered and thought he had a lead on the murderer. And the murderer was someone who’d killed in the past.
Rorschach was very conservative and anti sex, much like the maga base. The attractive thing about that is that there’s a clear right and wrong.
Later on he’d rather be killed than to admit ozymandias being right. His diary field the hateful marginal right-wing maga-crowd that had their anger taken away by the world peace that had materialized.
Ozymandias was wrong.
He wanted power over a world scared of an “outside” threat that didn’t exist. As soon as anyone with any knowledge was able to debunk the ‘attack’, regardless of how, it would get even worse. The difference was only how far in the future. Rorschach didn’t die because Ozy was right. He died because he couldn’t be complicit in a world where evil got to win.
Ozymandias wanted to believe a heroic ideal as much as Rorschach - one that’s just as self-deluded. He wanted to believe that there was an end to “history”. He wanted to decide when the future began. But he forgot just one fact that Rorschach at least was cognizant of:
Nothing ever ends, Adrian.
None of those characters were right.
that’s the magic of it, to me.
Totally agree with this. It’s part of why I dislike that DC writers sometimes import traits from the Watchmen into their Charlton counterparts. Obviously, if you scratch the surface of Rorschach, you find the Question staring back. If you look at Silk Spectre the right way, you see Black Canary. Nite Owl 1 & 2 are the Blue Beetle (I’m glad that Moore never got to adapt Jaime).
I want most of my superheroes to be clean and honest. I want to know that when I read a story, the Question follows leads responsibly (even if they do sometimes involve aglets) - whether that’s Vic or Renee under the no-face. I want to know that Dinah Lance comes from a loving family, has a man she loves and trusts, and is dedicated to being a hero and a mentor to those who aren’t in the same place. And so it goes for all of them. I want those characters to be heroes and in the right - or at least, in the realm of responsibility.
Their true purpose is sinister…
well put
Didn’t say Ozymandias was right, I said Rorschach chose to die rather than submit to Ozymandias. And, like Ozymandias, he had already put into play his trump card, but he couldn’t tell him that, so he decided to take it to his grave.
Both are cases of misplaced heroïsm. Neither are sure what the future will bring.
The way you said “rather die than admit ozy was right” was stated quite matter of fact-ly
You’re right, it’s a small difference. Rorschach couldn’t admit that there was a point, there was a path to harmony. Like oz he’d put his plan into working before too.
He couldn’t admit to oz being right, because he morally was disagreeing with the method. But in fact he disagreed because it made himself unviable. He counts in humanity to find conflict to disturb peace.
So ultimately Rorschach is right.
He also basically tortured Moloch for no reason. No matter how many times Moloch told him he didn’t have the information. He just repeatedly beat the shit out of a dying old man for information the old man didn’t have.
A dying old man yes, but no less an evil bastard for it. The problem is that Rorschach was deluded by Ozymandias. The evidence he had about the death of a friend pointed to Moloch. He pursued the lead. And like any human, he got angry because someone he’d respected had been murdered and thought he had a lead on the murderer. And the murderer was someone who’d killed in the past.
“Any human” would not repeatedly beat the shit out of a guy who kept insisting he had no information.
Also, The Comedian was not his friend. In any way.