Is this a literary masterpiece?

yes or no?

It's more of a masterpiece in the comic medium.

From Hell is a literary masterpiece though.

but i often see the general consensus be that Watchmen is the greatest graphic novel of all time?more so than From Hell

no
go back to

Well if you go by general consensus why did you make this thread?

Get this comic book shit off my board

Fuck you! This isn't your board..

Top 10 is a masterpeace.

From Hell is miles better than Watchmen, but it's no masterpiece.

This is still more relevant to this board than your rap threads.
>Watchmen
no, though

No.
Watchmen is just a glorified fanfic.

I disagree, but I was wondering what you think detracts it from such a title? Not trying to shitpost I'm genuinely curious, Moore's work is sort of divisive.

terrible argument. most of the canon could be described as glorified fanfic; it's better to say fanfic is degenerate fiction.

note: i don't care whether or not watchmen can into the canon

>tfw people try to judge a work without knowing about the medium

a lot of retards say that Watchmen is the greatest graphic novel because some shitty magazine said so, but you have greater works like Corto Maltese, Metabarons, that Spiegelman-curated comic anthology, Zap Comix, Miracleman, The Sandman, etc.

>Metabarons
Metabarons is entertaining but literally garbage with well-done art, has nothing on Watchmen, no matter how many plebs wrongly stick onto the latter

The Sandman is just shitty Swamp thing fanfic for girls.

Can't think of much in common between them. I'm guessing they're the only two Vertigo you've read and the house style art makes you think they're similar. kek @ you

>Can't think of much in common between them

Other than that, gr8 b8

Neil Gaiman is moderately good writer for the fantasy genre, and it translated well to comics. Sandman has literally nothing on Watchmen. On top of the deconstruction of superheroes (which can seem boring now, but it's the seinfeld isn't funny effect) it's use of the comic medium for the exploration of time and perception is incredible.

On the other hand, From Hell is better in just about every way. I also think Maus is better, but less entertaining.

Miracleman is better

Lot of truth here, but it's still in the top 1%.

>Neil Gaiman is moderately good writer for the fantasy genre, and it translated well to comics.
Other way round though, he started in comics.

OFFICIAL MOORE POWER RANKINGS

GOD TIER
>From Hell
>Voice of the Fire
>A Small Killing
>spoken word pieces

GREAT TIER
>Watchmen
>V For Vendetta
>Swamp Thing
>Marvelman/Miracleman

GOOD TIER
>Captain Britain
>The Killing Joke
>The Mirror of Love
>Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?
>Providence

OK TIER
>Supreme
>League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
>Promethea
>Top 10

LEWD TIER
>Neonomicon
>Lost Girls

No, it's not literature. It's in another medium and can be the top of that medium, if you wish.

Stop the stupid inferiority complex threads.

I understand that's where he started. I'm saying his writing style/ability lends itself well to comics, where even moderately good writing stands out against the masses. I still consider sandman part of the fantasy genre, and there's no question that it is an excellent comic. Meanwhile, Anansi Boys is merely a good fantasy novel, and American Gods slightly worse than that. I haven't read neverwhere or his newer novels. His children's stuff is really good though.

>American Gods
>Good
>Shadow had done three years in prison. He
was big enough and looked don’t-fuck-withme
enough that his biggest problem was
killing time. So he kept himself in shape, and
taught himself coin tricks, and thought a lot
about how much he loved his wife.

>Slightly worse than good
>for the fantasy genre
Lots of qualifiers there. At the very least, it explores some interesting concepts of belief and American culture.

Marquez and Borges also wrote fantasy. Fantasy doesn't just mean elves and wizards. Are you saying Gaiman is slightly worse than good in comparison to them?

Hows Metabarons hold up to the The Incal?

Marquez and Borges wrote magical realist works- literally a subgenre of pomo lit is dedicated to the type of lit fic they wrote. Gaiman is on the other side of the genre fic line, where he is a solid author, but behind writers like Gene Wolfe, China Mieville, Tolkien, and Mervyn Peake who all more closely straddle the line of genre fiction. He is obviously not as good a writer as Marquez, Borges, Bolano, or Murakami, all of whom use fantasy elements, but are solidly literature.

Love this one for some reason.

inb4 pleb

Just like all literature OP, if people don't like it, they think it's shit. Its complex themes and thoughtfulness mean nothing to someone who doesn't care.

To answer your question though, graphic novels aren't actually novels. It's a comic. You can have a compelling beautiful written comic book if you want, but the word literary is a false idol word that people believe likens to "the greatest story ever told."

That's why it's best to not take what these fucks believe seriously, unless what they say is backed up with a thoughtful analysis.

You haven't read borges have you? He's very, very different from marquez, i'd barely call him a magical realist.
In fact, sandman is in a lot of aspects inspired by borges.

Probably one of the best comics, yes. People should look into the comedian more, its genius.

what about comedian?

Yes Marquez did write magical realist works, and guess what, that make him a fantasy writer. I have no idea what the fuck you are on about with Borges though. He most certainly did not write magical realism. For you to even say that makes me think you have never read him.

Then why the fuck do you ask you piece of shit go back to

I only read some of the first chapters and frankly Watchmen falls into the trap of

A) Simplistic comic book characters and dialogue; and

B) Moore's childish understanding of human beings.

I don't think this could be summed up better than when Rorschach enters a bar and starts interrogating people, breaking some guys finger then proceeding to do what he did since the beginning of the comic, spew random nonsense about immorality.

Like, did he just come off of /r9k/ or something? Wtf? Throwing in an elaborate, awful, sympathetic back-story later on does not excuse such retardation. Why does he even think there is a serial killer going after superheros specifically?

Then later it turns out Sally loved the Comedian even after he almost raped her, and this somehow makes Dr Manhattan sympathetic towards man-kind. I haven't read these parts but if its as handled as well as the parts that I have, count me out.

>Like, did he just come off of /r9k/ or something?
Pretty much you idiot

>Pretty much
Then why should I, or anyone else, give a fuck looking at this graphic novel retrospectively? Its clearly not a masterpiece and in many ways is overrated unless you live in the 80's and/or are a /robot/

The whole point of Rorschach is that, like the test he's named after, you respond to him differently depending on your own thoughts/perspective. Plenty of people think he's supposed to be a cool antihero, not realizing that Moore was taking the piss out of that concept by making him completely mentally disturbed.

>Simplistic comic book characters and dialogue; and

what's complex for you? and what do you mean childish understanding of human beings?

genuinely curious. give me examples. any medium.

>Simplistic comic book characters and dialogue

What do you mean? Regardless, the whole thing is a deconstruction of superheros. I thought this was common knowledge.

>Moore's childish understanding of human beings.

If you mean the Humans Are Bastards thing, it gets more nuanced towards the end, and that development is the thematic crux of the whole book.

Fucking "muh genre ghetto" autists itt that need to get euthanized. That being said, comics are a different medium from literature (read Scott McCloud if you haven't) but I'd say it's a masterpiece, yeah.

I believe I know about comics, and Watchmen is nonetheless a great work. There were no comics before it (correct me if I'm wrong) with that level of narrative complexity and philosophical aspirations. It also explicitly explored the possibilities of comics as more than a sum of narrative and visual arts (seen in the juxtaposition of text and images in the fight between Nite Owl, Spectre and the thugs, for example).

If some comic is overrated, that would be Sandman, which practically rips off Watchmen and The Swamp Thing, with only occasional moments of actual innovation (A Midsummer Night's Dream) and rather nebulous philosophy.

By the way, which Corto comics have you read? I'm looking for other people's interpretations of Mu, that thing is really confusing me.

to correct myself first: *it's.

anyways, Comedian is Nietzsche's nobleman (i just translated that from translation in which i read Nietzsche in). And the amazing thing is how he's such a complex figure, he dies for the mankind, eventhough seemingly trying to destroy it before. I always feel like he knew the system was corrupt and instead of fighting it, he brought it to its limits, seemingly taking it seriously, where it crumbled.
Depends on how you percieve him tho

>I only read some of the first chapters
You need to read it all to understand it. Yes, some parts are bad (the ones with Comedian and Manhattan are great tho) but the whole story, the ideas make the book so good.

>rap threads
?

It should be noted that Gibbons was a co-plotter to Watchmen when we have these discussions.

You're supposed to be disgusted by Rorschach and feel a little bit of empathy for him by the end of the series. Moore has said numerous times he was flabbergasted by the character's popularity.

I can't find the exact quote but there's an interview where Moore says (and I'm quoting almost word for word) "if you want to act like Rorschach, fine. You won't get much pussy though"

yeah but Moore did the writing lets be real

I think it's a general "libertarians and neo-liberals have grabbed onto yet another incredibly flawed character of mine" thing. Rorschach isn't what a lot of people want him to be.

You can't measure the quality of a writer by how people read the work either. That's dumb.

>Regardless, the whole thing is a deconstruction of superheros.
I posted this a few years back and had an user spam >deconstruction >implying shit back.

And while Moore at least goes someway towards a deconstruction of the superhero genre, he himself doesn't actually understand what deconstruction is from what he's said in interviews (he believes it to be a destructive process for some reason, I don't know what that means for how he views Watchmen tho).

No, Moore is a hack.

>great work
>writer dictates how you should feel about a character
Nope, Moore can suck a fat one.

I'm pretty sure he means in relation to superhero comics. After watchmen and dkr deconstruction became the go-to for wannabe deep comics writers.

No thats a comic book you retard, you can generally tell by the abundance of pictures and the use of word balloons

Holy shit how much of a cretin do you have to be to consider FUCKING SANDMAN to be at the pinnacle of the medium. And do you really think the artists of varying skill that worked shifts on miracleman are comparable to dave gibbons consistent excellence on watchmen? Zap and RAW are good anthologies but its painfully obvious that you have never picked up anything else related to UG Comix in your life, let alone modern alternative comics

Chuck crossed +100 in good tier and bump killing joke up to great

Not sure if youre joking or a fucking imbecile desu

I think the 17 years X-Men run by Claremont is greater, as in, more influential for modern western culture.

From all those stories of people traveling to the past to change a post-apocalyptic future without it, like Terminator, to the post-modern sexual fetishes common in 4 chan.

I dont think comics can be masterpieces, especially single issues or short runs, and that they are better enjoyed not when they are released, but years later when you can read a whole long run by an author.

>Corto Maltese, Miracleman, The Sandman
Those are all good, but sometimes they're hit or miss. Watchmen is a more unified and better constructed work, with a consistent and very characteristic style.

>I'm pretty sure he means in relation to superhero comics.
Maybe. I seem to remember it was in a more general literary sense tho. I'm not sure he recognises what he did with Watchmen as deconstruction, but you could be right that he thinks it's all just eternal criticisms and teardowns because of how most comic book writers were influenced by his work and call it all deconstruction.

Goddamn you fucking nerds.

>rap threads
?

Have you even read Watchmen? Moore never explicitly says how you should feel about anything in the work, it's entirely up to the reader to decide. If your statement was true, no one would ever consider Rorschach to be a hero, for example.

I'm sure the two of you simpletons have seen the 'do any rappers have literary merit LOL' threads

No, I haven't. I've seen general song lyrics threads, but none for rap specifically.

Well I've seen one within the last few days. I swear, this place is becoming /black people general/