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

A trascendental Holocaust

Maus by Spiegelman illustrates the story of his father, a Holocaust survivor using mice to represent the Jews and Cats to represent the Nazis. 

In Maus  the holocaust is the central theme describing the story of someone who lived the consequences of the Holocaus. The relationship between the story and the historical event is direct. 

The story of V for Vendetta can be summarized as a man who quests for revenge in a world changed by war. The story takes place in England, 1997.  V comes as a hero to save the country, no matter what the consequences are, as when he sais: 

"Remember remember the fifth of November 

Gunpowder, treason and plot.

 I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot..."

(Moore, 1988)

V is a version of previous heroes, since the words of the poem refer to Guy Fawkes (17th Century English history). On  November 5th 1605 Fawkes was caught in the cellars of the Parliament with barrels of gunpowder and sentenced to death and executed in one of the most horrendous ways (hung, drawn and quartered) for plotting against the government.
V of Vendetta by Alan Moore, is also written and inspired in a post -war world where the government of England becomes a fascist dictatorship, it is a sort of parallel reality of the Holocaust. It is not a direct relation but it is inevitable to think of it while reading the novel. 

V for Vendetta by Alan Moore and Maus by Art Spiegelman can be related because both are graphic novels and both tell a story of a dictatorship. But, there are three novels that have a line that unites them.

Orwell's 1984 takes place in a futuristic society where people are controled through propaganda and are submissive to the wishes of the government. 1984 by Orwell is inspired by that very fact and the creation of the USSR to create the story. as he stated in his letter to Noel Willmett, where can be found the explanation ond /or idea for writting 1984:

"Hitler can say that the Jews started the war, and if he survives that will become official history. He can’t say that two and two are five, because for the purposes of, say, ballistics they have to make four. But if the sort of world that I am afraid of arrives, a world of two or three great superstates which are unable to conquer one another, two and two could become five if the fuhrer wished it. That, so far as I can see, is the direction in which we are actually moving, though, of course, the process is reversible." (Orwell, 1944)

Although he was not a big fan of Hitlet, he had strong and deep thoughts that lead him to write this book, as we can see in his review of Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler:

(Brownell, 1968)

The works define a different kind of holocaust, that according to the context, varies in its manifestation. The three novels are contextualized in dictatorships, but one tells a past story (Maus), another makes a possible parralel story in present time of the historical event (V for Vendetta) and Orwell makes a futuritic vision of what the world could be if the governments in general hold too much power and allows people only certain information.

As in Maus, the historical event has passed, Spiegelman showns that there is nothing else to do but Orwell and Moore present a possible sollution :

Orwell, George. "A Life in Letters." Letter to Noel Willmett. 18 May 1944. MS.Lloyd, David. 1. V for Vendetta. By Alan Moore. Vol. 1. New York: DC Comics, 1988. 9. Print.

The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, Volume 2, edited by Sonia Onvell and Ian Angus, copyright 0 1968 by Sonia Brownell Onvell. Reprinted by permission of Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.