Ever since I saw how Cuaron handled the Time Turner sequences in PoA, I’ve been more optimistic about how convincingly that sort of thing could be depicted on film. And Dr. Manhattan’s discombobulated time continuum just begs to be filmed. They may fail – chances are they will fail – but it should be a very interesting attempt.

The deconstruction of the superhero was something that comics tossed around quite a bit in the 80s. (You can get a lot of this also in Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns, one of the other most popular books that came out in this time period). As typical of Alan Moore, the theme of anarchy and appocalypse shines through it, and makes for a very dark book overall. I’m most interested to see how well this novel can be transformed into a movie. If you look up some Watchmen history, you’ll discover that it’s been tried to be made into a film several times over the years. The thing that seems most challenging to me when converting this to film are the multiple storylines going on at one time. If I remember correctly (it’s been a couple years since I’ve read it), on one page I saw 3 or 4 different panels with 3 or 4 completely separate storylines happening at once. There’s also a fair bit of time jumping, making the story hard to follow in movie form.

The previews, however, do look quite excellent. I’m very impressed with how it looks, so I’m very interested to see it put to movie form.

And Dave, I too believe in the Cubs! Woohoo!

I tend to believe there is a “Truth.” But, to this point, at the age of 30, I have never been fully convinced by one perspective on this, and my skepticism stretches back to my earliest memories from childhood. Perhaps that will change one day. But, as Travis says, we’re veering off course for the blog.

But, I do have my faiths. I root for the Cubs every year!

Dave, I’ve been hearing this for a lot of years, and it’s one of the points we discussed in one of my teaching methods classes.

Middleton & Walsh (Truth is Stranger Than it Used to Be) use the image of a big banquet table, on which the various metanarratives are dishes on the table, but to the postmodernist’s surprise, postmodern is the table, making it, in a sense, the biggest grand story of them all, relegating all others to cultural stories.

I’m sure the postmodernist has another way of looking at that, and I’m interested in response to it. But I’m just as interested, even more so, in this coming philosophical crisis (which I think most people saw ahead of time).

Postmodernism is thoroughly concerned with how disenfranchised people and perspectives are subordinated under dominant ones. We actually tend to view the postmodern project as a fairly democratic one. But, we’re also willing to seek these same problems in our own perspectives.

This is, in my view, the greatest strength and importance of postmodernism. Everything I want to say about it, though, would probably push me beyond the parameters I usually try to keep at this blog and get us into a religious discussion. Maybe I’ll riff on it over at my other blog if I get a little time.

Dave, I wasn’t thinking of relativism in terms of morality but more in terms of truth & certainty. Sorry for not being more clear on that.

I agree fully, though, with your statement regarding postmodernism “sure in its criticisms, but unsure where to begin again.” Postmodernism is great at asking questions but lousy at proposing answers, probably because any answer anyone could give would then just be subjected to another round of deconstructive questioning ad infinitum.

And yes… I chose the first-person pronoun (we) on purpose. We’ll have to disagree about Watchmen’s merit. I think it is fantastically ingenious — every panel completely loaded with potential meaning and interpretations. My next post will have links to a couple online “annotated versions” that attempt to catalogue as many allusions and textual connections as they can.

revgeorge, we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the terminology (that’s a postmodern gesture for ya…). I’ve always seen postmodernism as more an agnostic viewpoint, sure in its criticisms, but unsure where to begin again. But, what’s fascinating is that postmodern thought was never presented to me as morally relative, or “amoral.” (The most avid postmodern professors I had were also Christian.) Postmodernism is thoroughly concerned with how disenfranchised people and perspectives are subordinated under dominant ones. We actually tend to view the postmodern project as a fairly democratic one. But, we’re also willing to seek these same problems in our own perspectives.

Case in point: Just today, a fellow panel member said that “postmodernism has become the new grand narrative” — which is pomo’s worst nightmare!

In fact, there is something of a philosophical crisis simmering in academia. Postmodern thought has become so calcified and entrenched that many are questioning whether or not it has outlived its usefulness, or at least succumb (finally) to its own critique.

In any event, I’m looking forward to my first graphic novel and subsequent discussion here.