Everyone can be V

Black mirror is a British TV series in which it is shown how technology has affected our life in socity in an exagerated but not completely improbable way. It is described as a "real life dystopian horror movie".

The first episode is called "The National Anthem". A terrorist threat spread in a video in youtube, the Princess of England was kidnapped by someone who was asking the PM to "make it" with a pig in nationwide broadcasting with a series of requirements in order to set the Princess free. At the end of the chapter, the PM was on nationwide broadcast with the pig, the whole nation was expecting the show but then it was not funny at all, the Princess was found in a bridge, she was released 30 minutes before the broadcasting, and the kidnapper hang himself n his place.

I related ths episode with the kidnapping of Lewis Prothero, the voice of fate. Prothero was "tortured" by V, and the Pm was obliged to do so, torturing himself so as to fulfill the expectations of the population. Without Prothero, the government would have had several problems with the social order, demonstrations, riots, and so on.

In a so technologyc society as ours, it is much easier to be an "annonymous terrorist", only uploading a video in a socialnetwork threatening a public figure and chaos is on. The influence of socialnetwroks and digital platforms that spread information, and the globalwide character of internet, fosters the "rebelion", everyone can be hear, even though there is censure on TV or Newspapers, internet is free.
At the end, we all can be the terrorist, everyone can be V



References:

http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/black-mirror-episode-1-the-national-anthem-pig-bang-theory/
http://www.endemoluk.com/news/black-mirror-a-new-drama-from-charlie-brooker

The main character is always right

In his short story The Black Cat, Edgar Allan Poe presents us with something that seems to be one of the key stones of his writing: The use of anonymous main characters. After considering this, we might be wondering: Why does he do it? Is there any purpose behind it?

First of all, it is important to remember that most of Poe’s main characters –especially in his horror stories—are murderers, rapists and other type of outlaws that could be easily deemed as socially unacceptable people; however, we do not use to judge them like that so easily, let me ask you: Why do you think is that? From my opinion, it has to do with two factors: 1. The fact that we are told the story from exactly THAT character’s perspective, which obviously make it really easy to sympathize with that character’s motivations, situation and problems; and 2. The fact that we are told the story from the point of view of a NAMELESS character gives room to thoughts like: what if any of us were in the situation of that character? Or even further, what if I was in that character’s situation?

The impact of these possibilities also deeply resonates in Alan Moore’s V for Vendetta. Why can we sympathise so easily with V’s actions despite we could –easily—call them just “terrorism” if we heard of them in “real life”? I believe it has to do with exactly the same means used by Poe to somehow redeem his characters as: 1. We are aware of V’s motivations, we are able to understand why he does what he does, and 2. By not giving us V’s true identity, the possibility of any of us being V is left open.

Although the last possibility is made forcefully explicit in the movie, I believe it does not challenge Moore’s original intention of showing us that anyone could actually have been V. These ideas clearly resonates with Poe’s in the sense that –by being able to identify with the characters, even up to the point of sharing their identities—we become able to sympathize with them at a much higher level and, for that reason, we also become able to understand, justify, and even support their actions.

Have you ever considered how much our opinion of a murder or a terrorist act could change if we could look at it from the “terrorist” eyes? Have you ever thought on how important it is to consider which side we are looking act before judging someone else’s action? I believe the title of this entry pretty much summarises it: The main character –the one whose side is closer to us—will always be the one on the right, as it is the perspective that provides us with the most information. 

Reference

Edgar Allan Poe, and Cheloniidae Press. The black cat. United Holdings Group, 1984.

The Passage… recycled literature?

I am currently in the process of enjoying Justin Cronin’s trilogy of The Passage. It is a story that spans over a 100 years, and it begins with the disintegration of society due to the manufacturing of a biological weapon gone wrong, which unleashed a virus. The story then jumps 100 years into the future and the author shows us different societies that have formed in this post -apocalyptic world: One of them is quite medieval, not just technology wise, but custom wise. The second one is more industrializes, ran by a military like group of people. The third society is ran by a single man known as The Director, whom lives in a wonderful palace, wears suits and ties, has technology at his fingertips, and his lifestyle is sustained thanks to the concentration –camp- like facilities he runs. The Director’s wife pretends that none of this is happening, that there is no virus, that she is still married to her late husband, and lives in her own delusions (Blanche Dubois?)

I would love to tell you more about the plot but I don´t want to spoil the books in case you want to read them, and also the third and final instalment will not be released until 2015, so I don´t know how it ends.

I can however, tell you that as I read, I realized that Cronin must have been inspired by the books we read this semester (and some we read last semester too).

One of the main characters, Sara, goes into The Director´s camp. She is taken against her will. She is made to strip, her head is shaved, she is assigned a number and told she is no longer Sara Fisher. A metal plate with a number is surgically embedded on her arm, with the number: “94801. That’s who you are now, the doctor had explained” (Cronin 253).

Within this highly controlled environment, the undernourished workers have one hope and one hope only. His name is Sergio. Inside the camp, some prisoners blow themselves up, taking entire buildings with them. Before they detonate the bomb they always yell one thing “Sergio lives!”. Later in the novel we find out there is no Sergio. We are told  “People need a name. Something to focus on, a face to attach to the idea. That’s our face. Sergio”(Cronin 277). This statement reminded me of V for Vendetta:

 In Cronin’s novel, any members of the resistance can be killed and it won’t make a difference, because Sergio can never die, because he is an invention created to embody an idea. If there is no Sergio, then Sergio can live forever. Alan Moore´s V can pass on the mask, and in this way, never die, because just as in Cronin’s novel, the one man is not important, what is important is the idea he represents, and the hope that the people will rise and change the tide.

Also within The Director´s camps, the character Sara Fisher narrates the humiliation one particular Officer of Human Resources likes to inflict on the prisoners, which seems to be inspired in George Orwell’s novel 1984. She says “The only thing you could do was take it, gritting your teeth through the misery of your aching bladder or empty stomach or exhausted limbs, knowing that soon Whistler’s attention would pass to another, though this only made things worse and seemed to be the point of the entire exercise; you found yourself wishing for the suffering to befall somebody else, and thus you became complicit, part of the system, a cog in a wheel of torment that never stopped turning.”(Cronin 257)

This resonates with “Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia! I don´t care what you do to her. Tear her face off, strip her to the bones. Not me! Julia! Not me!” (Orwell 289).

In addition, the people of The Director’s camps are made to shout “One People! One Homeland! One Director!” (Cronin 260), and shout it like they mean it every morning before breakfast. In Orwell’s novel the mantra is “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength” (Orwell 6). The words are not alike, but in both cases they are drilled into people´s minds whether they like it or not.

It is natural for writers in this era (and in most of the eras) to look for inspiration in books from previous times. Cronin writes of a post -apocalyptic world, and of humans living a nightmare of their own making, just as Orwell and Moore did, so it is quite likely he used them for inspiration. And it is good. Contemporary author have the power to make relevant what has been forgotten, and bring it in a new form to new generations of readers. Recycling is never bad, it is by definition making something new out of something old. It is also important to note that literature is often a reflection of the times, so if Orwell and Moore reacted in print to their fears of a totalitarian regime, weather it was right or left wing, then Cronin is reacting to a fear that biological warfare will end us all, and those that survive will bring hell to earth. 

References:

Moore, Alan. V for Vendetta. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2006.
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: The New American Library Inc., 1983.
Cronin, Justin. The Twelve (Book Two of The Passage Trilogy): A Novel. penguen, 2012.

Room 101

The room where the Ministry of Love inflicts its worst torture subjecting you to whatever you fear the most.


There is no doubt that Room 101 represents a person's worst fears. But, more that, it also represents the subjectivity of every single thing in every human action or thought, the subjectivity driven by fear. The power that governments have by driving people through fear.

"That is, fear appeals rely on a threat to an individual’s well-being that motivates him or her toward action, e.g., increasing control over a situation or preventing an unwanted outcome."
Do you think that fear enough to give up and betray our beloved ones? Is fear enough to convince a whole world and each person on it on what must they do? Is fear that enough that we just do what we are supposed to do because there might be consequences? Are those consequences enough to keep the world moving as it has been doing so? 

and the most important: Have you ever thought that fear drives the world already?

In the classroms, at home, when we want to meet our boyfirnd's or girlfriend's mother, when we want other to have a good impression of us, when we want to pass a course, etc. Many things that we do and the way we behave is just because of FEAR.

What do you think that would have happened to Winston if he overcame his fear?
Probaly nothing else would have been a probem to him anymore because he would be stronger. Once you fight a fear nothing else seems to matter anymore.
"The use of fear appeals is common in many types of marketing communications. "

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
(FEAR HIM)

                         

"[...] there seemed to be no color in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere. The black mustachioed face gazed down from every commanding corner. There was one on the house-front immediately opposite. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption said, while the dark eyes looked deep into Winston's own." 

Many rulers in history have used fear, the third reich was build on a basis of nationalism, racism and fear. Two secret police forces were created during the reich named: the Gestao and the SS, which were similar to vision of police in 1984.

But the reason why governments make us fear them is because they fear us too:

"People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, and your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word. " p.16
The only way  in which Partys can deal with subversive people is making them disappear, and subsequently, removing them from history altogether because of FEAR. As if they were saying: "If they don't fear us, let's make them disappear, or we will suffer the consequences"


What's your room 101?






C. Williams, Kaylene . "Fear appeal theory." Research in Business and Economics Journal 6 (2012): 1.


Orwell, George. Nineteen eighty-four.  Ed. Erich Fromm.  New York: Harcourt, 1949.

V for Vendetta vs. Watchmen

Alan Moore is the author of highly recognized graphic novels, such as The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Captain Britain, Watchmen, V for Vendetta, etc. The last two graphic novels are the center of this post due to their importance and criticism against society and politics. I want to compare and contrast these comics because they are really thought-provoking and try to make us realize of our actions; also they are among the most relevant works of Moore and there is no comparison of them on the internet in a deeper level, only an analysis of the movies, their qualities and effects.

• Dystopias: What those two works have in common is the context. Their stories are based on the idea of society ruled by an authoritarian government that oppresses people in order to control them, leading to the most terrible actions against humanity at any level. Although in Watchmen is not really explicit, the division of the world and the constant fear to the midnight watch make society lose the common sense in certain occasions. In V for Vendetta, it is totally clear the oppression people suffer, injustice and abuse are part of the motivations for V to begin a revolution.  It is important to mention the historical contexts of both graphic novels: Watchmen is based on the Cold War and all its fears and implications of the arms race, the demonstration of the superiority of one country over another and the existence of only two options (black or white, there is no grey). On the other hand, V for vendetta is based on the criticism of Margaret Thatcher’s government and its characteristics of oppression, conservationism, etc.

• Heroes: After reading the comics and watching the movies, I believe that the main heroes in these two graphic novels are Rorschach, Evey and V. Albeit Rorschach and V can be considered anti-heroes because of their actions, they are the key for the change; without them and their decisions, their worlds probably would get worse. Despite their personalities and actions, Alan Moore describe them (and the rest of the super heroes in Watchmen) as more human than heroes: they were too humans rather than super heroes, their sense of humanity, justice and their way of thinking are not the conventional ones for a superhero; a superhero regularly is seen as a figure of strength, and superiority with high levels of morality and justice, they are almost perfect but V and Rorschach are commonly trapped in human situations and decisions, they tend to act first as a person and then as someone that has the power to help people (hero). In this case, V’s motivation is revenge, which is not the regular motivation of most of the superheroes we know.

• Fear of the political future: Both graphic novels reflect the possibilities of our world in a future in which politics and governments are mixed with a little of corruption, abuse and empowerment. They show us the possible reality of society if Cold War had ended with the confrontation of USA and USSR and its negative consequences (Watchmen) or the results of a government in which people depend and trust so much that it abuses of that situation and starts corrupting and controlling people for bad purposes (V for Vendetta). 

• Eliminating society: In V for Vendetta, V’s final aim was to eliminate all the corrupted guys in the government in order to create and start from zero a new and free society, giving people the power to rule. In Watchmen, the antagonist was more radical and wanted to kill enormous amount of people in order to start a new society, taking people to the edge of crisis and fear to make them aware of the necessity of a change.

To conclude, Moore's the graphic novel are a revolution in the genre, not only because he changes the typical image of a superhero but also because he changes the way to express ideas and giving messages through the graphic novels, due to the several possibilities that drawings give to the author. In this way, dystopia, heroes, fear, opporesion, politics and society can all be part of one element and create the terrific comics we know nowadays.

What if the world ends like one of the realities described in Moore's graphic novels? Do you think we could do something about it in order to change it? Also, Which of the graphic novels presented in this post is your favorite one? Why?

As a bonus, here is a video in which Alan Moore talks about V for Vendetta and Watchmen, their characteristics and his motivation to create these graphic novels.

References:

Moore, Alan, and Dave Gibbons. Watchmen. DC Comics; Gph edition, 1995.

Moore, Alan, and Dave Gibbons. V for Vendetta." V for Vendetta. N.p: Vertigo, 1995. Print.

Androgynous Evey: Innocence corrupted

"First published in 1982, the comic series V for Vendetta charted a masked vigilante's attempt to bring down a fascist British government and its complicit media" (Moore).

As everybody thinks, V for Vendetta tells the story of V, this anarchist who tries to return British people what they were taken, for example freedom. In the meantime, he gets to know Evey Hammond, a 16-year-old girl who is about to be killed and abused. Thanks to V, she is rescued and from now on, they get to know each other while revolution is just starting.

The interesting part about this graphic novel is that even tough V is always recognized as the main character, Evey Hammond is the one who suffers from changes, not only physically, but also psychologically.

The purpose of this post is to show the evolution of Evey as the main character, the way she loses her fear and how she became an androgynous character with a corrupted innocence. 

At first, we are presented this girl who wears a lot of make-up and short dress. Since she needed more money, she decided to prostitute herself, despite the fact she knows the consequences of being caught. When the fingermen found her, she is absolutely terrified, until this strange man appears and kills them. Then, V takes her to his place in order to protect her. Here we are shown this innocent girl who does not even know how prostitution world works, making this clumsy attempt to get a customer. She is really naive and easily frightened. 

This combinations of panels shows V and Evey talking. She confesses her fear of not knowing where he has been while she cries on his shoulder expressing how she feels about not knowing what is happening. He hugs her while the narrator says "... and Evey Hammond sobs like the child she is" (26). Even though she does not know what to do, she realizes V is her only salvation. 

In this panel, we see Evey performing as a little girl who visits the Bishop. She is characterized as a fifteen-year-old girl who is about to be abused by him. As Lilliman says, he is astonished by her beauty and youth. Nevertheless, he changes his mind after being hit by her. Here we can see how Evey appears as an innocent girl who has learnt how to protect herself.

Here, Evey asks V why they have not slept together despite the fact they have been together quite a while. Now we can see how she was expecting something else to happen between them, maybe a kiss or something else. The innocence that she showed at the beginning of the graphic novel is starting vanishing. 

These following panels show a great contrast between what our perception of Evey was and how this character evolved, smoking and drinking. The innocence was clearly corrupted as the following pictures also show. 

After that, many things happen in the graphic novel. One of the most important moment for Evey is when she is caught. Her hair is cut, she is constantly tortured and little by little she starts being dehumanized. She leaves her fears aside and after a tough process, she gets free from her boundaries. 

Here is the climax of her transformation. She is released from the prison, V confesses that he created this situation to set her free and takes here to the roof where the rain is falling. This not-clear figure is Evey, who now is not afraid of anything, who has been able to left her innocent and child-like behavior aside in order to be free and take things seriously.

In the end, after V's death, she realized that everyone is V, even herself. That is one of the reason why she decides to continue with his legacy and becoming V. Then she asserts that she felt enthusiastic but not scared anymore, since there is no time for those useless feelings.

After seeing these panels, we can confirm one main fact:

As we discussed in class, Moore shows us how Evey evolved surprisingly fast from the naive and innocent girl who hid from danger to a strong, astute and clever woman, after passing through a process who made her an androgynous being. 

To finish this post, I encourage you to read more about gender in V for Vendetta. I found this interesting post called Gender Binary in V for Vendetta. The author analyzes women and men roles within the whole graphic novel and their importance. 

http://genderlitutopiadystopia.wikia.com/wiki/Gender_Binary_in_V_for_Vendetta_by_Zach_Rolfs

As a final question, would you agree with the innocence corruption that happens in the graphic novel? Are there other instances in which Evey evolves as either an androgynous character or as strong woman? 

In order to end, here there is a joke I found some time ago.

References:

Moore, Alan. Viewpoint: V for Vendetta and the rise of  Anonymous. BBC News, 2012, 22 Nov 2014. <http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-16968689>
Moore, Alan. V for Vendetta. DC Comics, 1988. PDF file.

Corruption: V for Vendetta vs Reality

After having reading 1984 and V for Vendetta I realized that truth is stranger than fiction and it is not necessary that we would be under a totalitarianism regime for some things to happen. 

One of the events that caught my attention the most when reading V for Vendetta was the part in which there is this priest that actually is a pedophile, and I was glad that this panel was shown in class because I was able to understand some details that I could not get when I was first reading the graphic novel.

It caught my attention because it was a well known secret the behavior of this priest and what he was used to do and with whom. However, it was accepted anyway by the government. Maybe I was not that surprised when I was reading the book, but in a way it still shocked me. Today happens something similar in that matter. Everybody knows that the Catholic Church has been through hard times due to cases of pedophilia among some of its members. The similarity here is that even though it is not morally correct, some of those cases have been hidden from the public eye by the Church itself.

So in a way, even though we are not inside of a totalitarian system, we are able to see how different manisfestations of corruption occurs in our democratic society.

References

Moore, Alan and Lloyd. V for Vendetta. New York: Vertigo, DC Comics, 1982. Print.

Is V a real terrorist?

I have been thinking of the V being a terrorist considering the etymology of the word terrorism which stands for “the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion”. Moreover, if we give room for the definition in Spanish, terrorism stands for “domination through terror”.

Taking into account the definitions provided and in spite of V using violence and committing murders, I believe that he is not a terrorist since his purpose is to make a statement of anarchy which is an act of liberation which is totally opposite to domination.

It is true that his actions are morally incorrect according to our society but it seems that he is ruled by his own moral code.

What do you think?

 

www.merriam-webster.com/. November 2014. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism>.

www.rae.es. November 2014. <http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=terrorismo>.

Freedom Hurts

"The greatest mistake of the movement has been trying to organize a sleeping people around specific goals. You have to wake the people up first, then you'll get action."

Malcolm X

Freedom is a process of terrible pain, but necessary for us. Realizing how things really are is such a painful experience, but eventually liberates us from the invisible boundaries that can't makes us really self-empowered.

Before you continue reading this entry, I suggest you to watch this extract from Slavoj Zizek's "The Pervert's Guide to Ideology":

Of course we can go deeper with this extract and what is shown there, like the dictatorship within Democracy, a possible comparison between George Orwell and Aldous Huxley and so on. But this entry is specifically referring to the fact that you must have a sufferred to achieve Freedom.

This path from conformity to liberty, is, as shown in the video and the graphic novel, completely painful and full of negation. At first, it won't be tolerable that freedom may be imposed because that person would be living in complete conformity. And that's why I think some authors may be wrong about totalitarian imposition of certain beliefs: we, in a way are comfortable by following the current ideological structure. Thus, we will reject any attempt to makes us see the ugly truth.

If we take a closer look to Evey process into her time being imprisoned and tortured, we can see that she must accept this process in order to be compeletely free. To finally feel herself in total freedom and observe her environment beyond ideology.

Finally, I would say that V's mask acts like John Nada's sunglasses. What V did in the novel is to give/impose his mask in order to make us see how ideology really works and open our eyes, so in that way twe could react against what we possibly consider as true. People will never be awake by themselves, we must be forced to be free.

For you to think:

- Do you consider yourself as partially or fully awaken person? If so, why? Which circumstances made what you are in this moment?

- Do you consider violence as a way of liberation? Why?/Why not?

References:

• Fiennes, Sophie. The Pervert's Guide to Ideology. United Kingdom: P. Guide Productions, 2012.
• Moore, Alan and Lloyd. V for Vendetta. New York: Vertigo, DC Comics, 1982.
• X, Malcolm, and George Breitman. Malcolm X Speaks: Selected Speeches and Statements. New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1990. Print.

How concerned are we about privacy?

1984 is a novel written by George Orwell between 1947 and 1948 in which the author present us a dystopian society ruled by a totalitarianism regime. One of the things that caught my attention the most is the fact that everyone is under surveillance, and most of the civilians have no privacy which can lead to prevent individualism to be developed. But, how are both the concept of totalitarianism and the lack of privacy and the absence of individualism related?

Under totalitarianism the government controls every aspect of the individual’s life. They do so by having secret police, propaganda that is spread through the media and not allowing the population to think critically, using different tactics and threats to provoke fear within the people.  

In the novel, you can clearly see how these features are represented. For example, there is such an efficient surveillance system that consists on having in every citizen’s home a giant telescreen from which the Party can watch every move of its members. Of course, this has a considerable negative effect on the way people behave, because being under surveillance will prevent them from doing whatever they want. As the government does not allow its population to think about anything, any act that implies that will be considered against the law. 

If we consider our contemporary society in which there are all these social media and most of us share whatever we want on the internet, it is like we are giving all of our information for free. Even if there are privacy terms, up to what point can we take for granted that actually all these social networks are not going to use our information against us or for their own benefit?

Apart from what it was mentioned before, why is it so important to safeguard our privacy? First of all, sharing every detail of our lives makes us more vulnerable to many abuses, for example if it is known that someone has a mental illnes, that person might be target of discrimination or harassment. In addition, another important thing is related to the fact that if we are not careful enough, we might lose our human dignitity if personal information is taken from us against our will. 

To conclude, in the novel, the loss of privacy was something imposed by the government, however, if 1984 was a kind of warning of what might happen in the future if we let some people to keep commiting injustices, by sharing our information the way we do, we are probably making them the things easier. 

References

McFarland, Michael. Why We Care about Privacy. (n.d). Santa Clara University. Retrieved from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/technology/internet/privacy/why-care-about-privacy.html 

Charles' George Orwell links. Totalitarianism. (n.d). Retrieved from http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles/col-totalitarianism.htm 

The New Idol

"A state is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth:

"I, the state, am the people"."

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Friederich NIetzsche

George Orwell's "1984" is one of the most valuable books of XXth century inside the Distopic and Science Fiction genres. This book gives us, as we saw in class, a real warning for us to be prepared and cautious of the policies that our governments could be doing to suppress our freedom and individuality.

While reading Friederich Nietzsche's most famous book "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" I encountered with one of his most famous quotes: "God is Dead". As mentioned in other entries, this phrase means that the Human being must destroy his inner conceptions and prejudices, to step away from conventional morals and ethics imposed by authorities and thus, be completely free by being beyond what we know as "Good and Evil".

In one chapter, Zarathustra, the ancient prophet that Nietzsche selected as main character for his book because of his personal story and evolution, stated to his disciples that there was a New Idol, an eternal and cold monster who was constructed, created based on pure lies: The State. The shepherd that want to control and domain its sheeps by declaring: "I am the people". The State acts like a new God who must be killed as any other one who wants to impose its vision among human beings.

While reading "Thus Spoke..." I found a certain connection between Winston's process of self-discovery and what it can be read in Nietzsche's work, since Winston started to begin its journey by doubting and strongly criticizing the government, his job and his life in an existential way. Maybe this can be connected to what Nietzsche/Zarathustra wanted to say by the process of being "Der Übermsnch" or "The Superman", the one that can't be dominated anymore and starts to think by himself.

 

However, there is one difference that separates Winston's process with the Superman one: His idealism. Nietzsche/Zarathustra isolated himself from the rest of the world and invoked two of his main characteristics which made him superior: his Pride and his Cleverness (represented with two animals: Eagle and Serpent). He didn't fight something that he knew he couldn't win nor fought directly against the imposed system. On the other hand, Winston joined "The Brotherhood", following his most idealist intentions and dreams, being capable of doing acts such as sabotage, espionage or even kills someone if necessary. Where Winston failed was to trust in people almost blindly.

To conclude, I strongly believe that nowadays the State is one big monster that can consume our bodies and souls. Although, this entity could not be the only Idol that people could worship... Personally I think that George Orwell and many others have become what they wanted to avoid: people who impose certain ways to behave and react against oppression, and those are the New Idols that lots of people, seduced by their "hunger for rebellion" venerate.

For you to think, what would you do in a moment of crisis, where tyranny is controlling everything that surrounds you? Would you rebel against the dominant power? If so, how?

References:

• Caspar, Friederich D. Wanderer above the Sea of fog. 1818. Kunsthalle Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
• Nietzsche, Friederich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Madrid : Iberica Grafic, S.A., 1993.
• Orwell, George. Nineteen Eighty-four. London : Penguin Books, 1954.

Shared topic: betrayal.

As you all know by now, 1984 and V for Vendetta share some important topics such as totalitarian system, oppression, repression, complete submission, propaganda, and the use of technology to monitor people and maintain control.

"The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought."

The concept of rebellion is also shared but it differs because Winston, as the hero and figure of rebellion is just one person against the system and whose actions are being closely observed; whereas V has made himself an idea, a shadow that cannot be stopped.

There is another relevant topic shared, which is betrayal. Within V for Vendetta it obeys a purpose and you can take something good from it.

-The first instance is when V goes to talk with Madam Justice and explains that her infidelity has taken him away from her.

“You are no longer my justice, you are his justice now. You have bedded 

another.”

And says that he is now with Anarchy.

“Her name is Anarchy and she has taught me more as a mistress than you ever did! She has taught me that justice is meaningless without freedom. She is honest. She makes no promises and breaks none. Unlike you, Jezebel.” 

-A second instance is the process to set Evey completely free. She felt betrayed by V but eventually realizes his motive to do it.

-Finally, there is an implicit betrayal subtly presented which is the one that people made against themselves as they did nothing to keep control of their own lives.

When it comes to 1984, it seems to me that the notion of betrayal is stronger.

While reading we begin noticing that the strength of the Party lies on this sort of fanaticism that came from the people which implies a loyalty for the system. Family and friend relations have been destroyed, and children are encouraged to report any suspicious activity made by their parents. An example: Parsons was denounced by his daughter.

Sexual desires and every natural human impulse are being suppressed hence throughout the whole novel it is perceived a betrayal of people against themselves in form of deprivation of their selves.

Then comes the most noteworthy betrayal, which came from the relation between Winston and O'Brien, and was the one that motivated me to choose this topic.

Winston and O'Brien

-First conceptions: At the beginning Winston does not know much about O'Brien, but naively believes that he is somehow a partner (actually we all believe it for a while; at least I did).

"Winston had seen O'Brien perhaps a dozen times in almost as many years. He felt deeply drawn to him, and not solely because he was intrigued by the contrast between O'Brien's urbane manner and his prize-fighter's physique. Much more it was because of a secretly held belief -or perhaps not even a belief, merely a hope- that O'Brien's political orthodoxy was not perfect. Something in his face suggested it irresistibly. And again, perhaps it was not even unorthodoxy that was written in his face, but simply intelligence. But at any rate he had the appearance of being a person that you could talk of if somehow you could cheat the telescreen and get him alone."

-Deceit: O'Brien takes advantage of the attraction that Winston feels for him, and presents himself as a friend, a confident, and a partner against the Party.   

-Revelation: Truth eventually comes out when Winston sees O'Brien in the Ministry of Love.

" 'Don't deceive yourself. You did know it -you have always known it.' Yes, he saw now, he had always known it."

Winston ends up emotionally compromised towards O'Brien and (it seems to me) a bit of Stockholm syndrome can be perceived.

"He felt very cold, he was shaking uncontrollably, his teeth were chattering, the tears were rolling down his cheeks. For a moment he clung to O'Brien like a baby, curiously comforted by the heavy arm round his shoulders. He had the feeling that O'Brien was his protector, that the pain was something that came from outside, from some other source, and that it was O'Brien who would save him from it."

As a final thought, we can agree  that betrayal has a lot of ways to manifest itself, and there is no need for an oppressive system for you to betray yourself:

How many times have you done things you dislike just because society tells you to?

How many times have you pretend to be something different that you are just to try to fit among the rest?

How long can you deny your own true nature?

Though no explicit, there is always a subtle repression from ourselves as a society: are you brave enough to live your life following your own pace, or you betray yourself everyday in order to fit?

References.

Orwell, George. 1984. Ed. Erich Fromm. New York: Harcourt, 1949.

Moore, Alan, and Dave Gibbons. V for Vendetta." V for Vendetta. N.p: Vertigo, 1995. Print.

Coloring V

The are many elements that can make a Graphic novel a complete success, not just in terms of money but also in terms of the cultural repercussions that it can have. And one of those elements is color and the use of the same. V for Vendetta is a great example of being able to express emotions and ideas just by the right use of colors or dimensions.

However, we need to remember that when V for Vendetta was first published in 1982 the episodes were just black and white strips. Therefore, Alan Moore and David Lloyd had to play a lot more with shadows and edges, so as to express the intensity of emotions of the characters and the intensity of the dystopian world that V for Vendetta was placed in. For many critics “The Warrior version of the story, colorless, is a blade to your throat, and the sound of jackboots in the distance.” (Callahan, 2011) According to some, that solid black and white version was the one which better project that feeling of unease that V for Vendetta should project. Let’s not forget that one of the main inspirations that Alan Moore had to write V was George Orwell’s decadent and colorless 1984.

But at the same time, there are many others, including David Lloyd,  that argue that using the right amount of color was necessary to project V for Vendetta as one of the most influential graphic novel of all times. Even though, V for Vendetta was later coloured when published by DC comics, David Lloyd did not do something extremely opposite to what he did at the beginning. He followed the same line of using solid and dark colours, faithful to the message and emotions of the graphic novel.

In V for Vendetta, the color was used to represent the different stages of the day, the different situations or scenes that were about to happen, and the different emotions of each character. For instance, every time there was an scene in which Evey was in, the colors change to vibrant representations of Evey’s emotions and changing process. However, if it was a scene dominated by V the colors become less vibrant and with more dark and brownish tones, so as to represent his powerful and dangerous vibes. Besides there is the use of gray clouds representing emotional turmoil from the characters, from the earth, and from the Totalitarian world that was crumbling in front of everyone.  

The use of color is important for any type of art. It was important for Sin City, it was important for The Dark Knight Returns, and it was important for V for Vendetta. Through colors the artist has the opportunity to deliver implicit messages that could not be carried out with any other resources. Having said that, I would like to ask all of you: How important do you think color is? Do you think coloring V for Vendetta makes a big difference? What other graphic novels do you know about that the use of color is so important?.

References

Callahan, T. (2011, December 5). The Great Alan Moore Reread: V for Vendetta, Part 1. Retrieved from http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/12/the-great-alan-moore-reread-v-for-vendetta-part-1

Essays, U. (n.d.). V for Vendetta. Retrieved from http://www.ukessays.co.uk/essays/english-literature/v-for-vendetta.php

Steiner, T. (n.d.). Colour in Graphic Novels - Tristan J Steiner. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/betweenmesses/Portfolio/prose/essays/colour-in-graphic-novels