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>.
I have been thinking about the same thing that you have just presented and the first thing that comes to my mind is: Does the end justify the means? In a way, I don't see V as a terrorist in the book considering all the context surrounding the story, and because sometimes I feel that "V's victims" deserve that punishment, even if it's not morally corrrect, but I feel free to think that because that is fiction. However, if V existed in our current society, I would consider him a terrorist, taking into consideration that this is real life, and I think that if you want to make changes, we should not follow the same game as the one that people in power play, otherwise it would be an endless circle.
ResponderEliminaryeah, it is true that if you react the same way the government does, it would become and endless circle. However, it seems to me that governments want us to think that way and at the same time Moore wants us to think that governments are the true terrorists. The problems is that you cannot report it because the kind of terrorism that governments use is "untouchable". Thus, V's actions work as the only way in which society can overcome that invisible violence. People know it is morally incorrect but they also acknowledge it as the ultimate way. Maybe that acknowledgment justifies wearing a mask as well.
EliminarI agree with you in the sense that --because of the information we are given in the graphic novel-- it is expected of us not to consider V a terrorist; however, I believe this also raises a different issue. What is a key difference between a "fictional" character like V and a real terrorist? From my perspective, the difference has to do with how much we know about V's motivations and perspectives, whereas when it comes to "real" terrorists we are lucky if we get to know their names or an organization they could be linked to.
ResponderEliminarTaking all this into account, I believe the reason why we can justify and even support V's actions has to do with all the information we have about him, which we wouldn't have in the case of real terrorists.
that's medias job to prevent us to know the truth, isn't it?
EliminarFor me, V is more an anti-hero rather than a hero but it all depends on which side you are. As you mentioned, V's actions are not morally correct according to the social conventions but that is why he is an anti-hero: as he is not the common super hero we expected him to be, he has flaws and he acts as a human, making mistakes or acting by instinct (or in this case for revenge). For the government, he is the bad one; for himself, he is the good one; but for Evey he is the key to change and to freedom, he is what society needs to make a change and take the power in their own hands.
ResponderEliminar