WI: Watchmen Never Written?

I've had a bit of an interest in Graphic Novels lately, and I was thinking about the high place Watchmen stands at for many people, some even going as far as to call it the greatest Graphic Novel of all time. Many people also think Watchmen helped gives the comic industry a darker and more mature feel. It is also seen as paving the way for more serious takes on the superhereo genre, which can in the Batman franchise (disregarding the Schumacher films), and the more serious tone superhero films over the past decade have taken.

How much, if any, did the impact of Watchmen really have in this? Would comics and superheros have taken the darker more serious route without it? Would Graphic Novels still be as popular as they are today with out it? What certain things about comic and superhereo stories would change?

I'm just curious. :)
 
A side effect which was negative was that it helped lead to the Dark Age of Comics. DC and Marvel interpreted the book (along with "Dark Knight") incorrectly; rather than viewing this as superheroes being mature and deep, they took it to mean "Oh, so people like superheroes who are dark and hardcore and brooding" and thus led to an age of whiny emo superheroes who were unsure of themselves ridiculously and/or were uber-mega machine gun wielding assholes.

Watchmen not being written could avoid this, but, DK would still be there.
 
Both Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns are usually compared with each other as extremely good Graphic Novels which together caused that whole Dark Age fiasco.

Because of that, if you remove one of them, there's still the other. If Watchmen was removed, I actually don't see much changing. The Dark Knight Returns would still exist and be well regarded, only this time it wouldn't have any competition for "Best Ever" which isn't really important as far as the development in comics goes.
 
Losing Watchmen would have plenty of effects on how the Dark Age of Comics plays out, though. The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen do play around with different themes, and without Watchmen DKR's themes will have much more influence. Watchmen's misinterpretation in particular produced a lot of the nasty anti-"hero" characters who lacked any heroic qualities, whereas DKR knock-offs tended more towards characters that tried to hard to be grim-and-gritty badasses.

There's also the effects this is likely to have on Moore and Miller's careers in the comics industry.
 
But we'd also still have Wolverine and Punisher, both of who predate DKR and Watchmen as "dark" and "grim and gritty" characters.
 
But we'd also still have Wolverine and Punisher, both of who predate DKR and Watchmen as "dark" and "grim and gritty" characters.

Punisher didn't really become a major character until after Watchmen. Yeah, his series started just before Watchmen came out, but he didn't really take off as a character until after it when people thought that being "mature" was all about body count. Wolverine was popular prior to Watchmen, but he took off too after Watchmen, with Marvel literally gloating proudly about the bocy count in Wolverine's first book of his stand alone series.

Torqumada
 
But we'd also still have Wolverine and Punisher, both of who predate DKR and Watchmen as "dark" and "grim and gritty" characters.

True, except that while Punisher and Wolverine were both around, they were not the major characters they would come to be until right around the time DKR and Watchmen came out. Punisher might have existed since 1974, but he didn't get his own comic until 1987 (and a large chunk of Punisher's popularity was due to how well Miller used him during his run on Daredevil). Wolverine had the same arc; he had been around for a while, but the Dark Age was responsible for him going from just another X-man to the star of the series.

All things considered, sans Watchmen I think we'd end up with a Dark Age that's grittier, but also not as morally ambiguous. We're still likely to end up with characters like this, but the whole issue of "heroes" who aren't remotely heroic wouldn't be around. The heroes would be grim-and-gritty, but still generally working for a good cause.
 
To start with, I don't think you can avoid it. Moore would still be around...

That said, I wonder if it wouldn't inhibit the "adult" or "mature" comics. Watchmen proved comics could be literate. Would it mean Morrison's DP never happen?

As for the Dark Age, I'd say it was going to happen regardless. Scout, frex, was already on that road. And Wolvie was already the most popular X-Man; it got insane after Watchmen, but... So it's likely Miller's Bats is as popular as OTL & the "dark" trend catches on anyhow. These books weren't selling because they were dark, they were selling because they were good, & because they offered a radically new view. (I was never a fan of Miller, myself, but I know a lot of people who were, & not just of the DK Bats.)
 
A side effect which was negative was that it helped lead to the Dark Age of Comics. DC and Marvel interpreted the book (along with "Dark Knight") incorrectly; rather than viewing this as superheroes being mature and deep, they took it to mean "Oh, so people like superheroes who are dark and hardcore and brooding" and thus led to an age of whiny emo superheroes who were unsure of themselves ridiculously and/or were uber-mega machine gun wielding assholes.

So... by Marvel/DC logic, mature superheroes= over the top flanderization and angst.

Does not compute. :confused:
 
While WM was certainly "pivotal", it alone (or DKR either) IMO didn't "create" the Dark Age. That was part of the same zeitgeist of the 80s underground and 90s-00s mainstream that produced Cyberpunk, Vampire mania, Edward Scissorhands, Goth/Emo, etc. There was already a major ongoing cultural shift away from the yuppie neon materialism of the 80s mainstream into a more dark, emotional, violent, deconstructive world of antiheroes and anarchists, so this shift will bleed into comics at some level. If not Miller and Moore then some other writer will make a dystopic graphic novel that will strike that zeitgeist and set off the chain reaction.

If anything removing WM removes any literary/philosophical/deconstructive tendencies from the coming Dark Age and leaves us with an even emptier Dark Age, if you can imagine such a thing. :(
 
While WM was certainly "pivotal", it alone (or DKR either) IMO didn't "create" the Dark Age. That was part of the same zeitgeist of the 80s underground and 90s-00s mainstream that produced Cyberpunk, Vampire mania, Edward Scissorhands, Goth/Emo, etc. There was already a major ongoing cultural shift away from the yuppie neon materialism of the 80s mainstream into a more dark, emotional, violent, deconstructive world of antiheroes and anarchists, so this shift will bleed into comics at some level. If not Miller and Moore then some other writer will make a dystopic graphic novel that will strike that zeitgeist and set off the chain reaction. (

You're right about that. Back around 1992 or so, VH1 was running reruns of American Bandstand. The episode was from some time in 1985. The song they were playing was Katrina and the Waves "Walking on Sunshine." The kids dancing were dressed in bright colors: white, yellows, oranges, greens, pinks etc, much of it neon. They were dancing around, all having a good time on the camera. The next channel over was MTV, who was at that exact moment playing "Smells like Teen Spirit." You couldn't have a greater contrast of the changes in that short period of time. It wasn't just comics, but everything cultural at that time. It's just easier in comics to point at a work to say when it got really started.

Torqumada
 
Top