A dystopian world where corruption rules. V, an anarchist, sets out to destroy the government.

A classic graphic novel. Great artwork and story.

This is much better than the film. A lot more depth, texture. A more nuanced political anarchism. More subplots. And a little stranger, yet more wonderful, ending.

No ha estado mal, diferente a la película, creo recordar, al menos en algunas partes.
Es cierto que el dibujo no es muy logrado (tiene al menos 33 años ya) pero lo importante aquí creo que es el mensaje.
Sinopsis: “Recuerden, recuerden el 5 de noviembre”
La historia de V de Vendetta está ambientada en Gran Bretaña durante un futuro cercano (en su época, ahora es pasado distópico) y tras una guerra nuclear parcial. En este futuro, con gran parte del mundo destruido, un partido fascista ostenta el poder en el Reino Unido. Un misterioso anarquista revolucionario apodado "V", oculto tras una máscara de Guy Fawkes, inicia una elaborada y violenta campaña con el fin de derrocar al gobierno e incitar a la población a caminar hacia una sociedad anarquista.
Valoración: 7/10
# 7- Un libro sobre una festividad que no sea Navidad. Reto Popsugar 2023.

توجه به همه ژانرهای کتاب اهمیت زیادی داره و از طرفی دوست داشتم قبل از دیدن فیلم اقتباسی از این اثر که تعریفش رو شنیده بودم ،اول کتاب رو بخونم.

ترجمه کتاب رو پیدا نکردم و هنوز نمیدونم ترجمه شده یا نه.
تجربه خوندن کتاب کمیک با چنین موضوعی ،با چنین دیالوگ های زیبایی،قطعا پیشنهاد میشه.تنها نکته مفی که میتونم اشاره کنم: شخصی که تمام نقشه هاش بدون کوچکترین نقصی پیش بره و در تمام عملیات ها موفق بشه و از قبل مطمئن باشه که موفق میشه،کمی بنظرم اغراق بود، و اوج داستان قسمتی بود که ایوی متوجه شد توسط چه کسی زندانی شده.

و یکی از قشنگ ترین جمله ها که منتظر بودم در فیلم هم همین دیالوگ رو بشنوم، که واقعا زیبا از کار در اومد:

Behind this mask there is more than just flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea... and ideas are bulletproof.

I struggled for a long time with the growing notion that conservatives simply aren't funny. At first it seemed a silly idea, since conservatism draws from sources as varied as progressivism: all levels of intelligence and wealth, all kinds of people from all walks of life--yet none of them are funny.

Certainly they can tell jokes and be charming, but not satirical, not biting. Subversion doesn't come naturally to them, and it should have been clear why: Conservatism relies on ideals, on grand heroic notions which are to be believed in. Progressives (or Liberals) rely on deconstruction of these notions, which is in itself a subversion.

That might not entirely explain the sad discrepancy between Doonesbury and Mallard Fillmore, but it's a start. I feel like this difference in mode is also to blame for some of the more common critiques of Alan Moore's work.

He's recently achieved notoriety as a Hollywood Gold Standard--and as the scowling, bearded mascot of rebranding 'Comics' as 'Graphic Novels' (despite the fact that Moore, Gaiman, and I all prefer the original term). As a product of this new visibility, he has been discovered by new readers, some of whom dismiss him as a subversive anarchist.

I agree that he is subversive, and that he is interested in exploring violent anarchism in his works, but he has too much subtlety to be saddled with the views of some of his characters. Critics can quickly identify attacks on their ideologies, but seem less skilled at seeing how an apparent 'progressive' like Moore simultaneously attacks his own representation of the agents of change.

Rorschach in Watchmen is a parody of the superhero staple of morality by violence (or is it the other way 'round?), a parody the film version completely fails to recognize. Likewise, 'V' is meant to be flawed, fraught and difficult, and Moore invites us to question his philosophies and methods.

Moore always gives his characters motives because his characters operate by their psychology: their history, their disposition, their experiences. But in 'V', Moore is giving us a background to establish a motive, which is why we might end up on V's side (beyond the David and Goliath trope).

Moore gives us this motive so that he can communicate his ideas clearly. We see that V's actions are accountable personally, which leads us to ask whether they are accountable socially, morally, or ethically. It is, after all, a story concerned with the nature of politics, power, subjugation, and resistance. Like a philosopher hashing out his ideas, Moore explores his theme by setting limits to focus the hypothesis.

Whether V can be excused or praised outside his personal motivations is another argument, but the fact that Moore has isolated and located this argument at a point in narrative space shows his thoughtful, deliberate mastery of the form.

Like Watchmen, the film version mostly strips out this layer of complexity, and is content (like the majority of action films or violent dystopias) to let this personal struggle be the end of the moral question, thus reducing V to a violent hero (or antihero). This idealized 'personal morality' is common not only in action movies, but in cape comics and conservatism--yet focusing on a wholly personal response precludes observing how politics works, or any grand social scale which is necessarily defined by the impersonal.

The personal is simply not important, not viable, and in the end, gets lost in the mix. The billions of personal elements counteract one another into a kind of Brownian Motion, stirring without direction, while the real forces of power move above them and alongside them, shaping the world.

Think of all the people acting out their personal moralities, proud as peacocks. You hear people talk about turning off the water when they brush their teeth despite the fact that more than ninety percent of water use is industrial. People buy free-range organic despite the fact that the money still goes to the same five companies (and the term 'organic' is entirely unregulated). People get self-satisfied about their Prius when five shipping tankers produce as many tons of emissions as all the cars in the world.

It is not that these personal beliefs cannot change things, in fact they often come to the forefront, but this change is momentary and complex, and hence, no great theory could be made to predict it, so it cannot be harnessed, only taken for granted by the forces of power. The more people act personally, the more they will be taken advantage of, impersonally.

It isn't surprising that critiques of Moore tend to focus on these personal, symbolic journeys, but that's simply not how Moore operates. Sympathy for his characters should be mistrusted, just as we must mistrust Milton's Satan; even with all his charm, it is the utmost foolishness not to recognize him for who he is.

You don't have to look hard to see these little subversions--these clues that something isn't right--but you do have to look. There is a fast-paced, exciting, complex plot atop it all, and it's easy to get caught up in Alan Moore's stories. Unlike some authors, Moore won't spell it out for you, but calling him an Anarchist is an oversimplification.

In interviews, Moore has said that an Anarchist state is one where the powerful rule the weak by fear and force of arms, noting that this describes every government and nation in history, no matter what florid terms are used to make such governance more appealing. Moore may use V to present the ideal of the Anarchist, but we must remember: he doesn't believe in ideals.

Which is why Alan Moore is funny. When you are quite sure that he is being serious, you can be certain that he is being funny. After all, the surest sign that we have ceased to think clearly about something is that we can no longer laugh at it. So remember: if you aren't laughing, you aren't thinking; and if you aren't thinking, then you definitely won't understand Moore.

n  My Suggested Readings in Comicsn

"La felicidad es una cárcel"

"Tienes miedo porque la libertad es terrorífica"

"Las ideas son a prueba de balas"

V is for Vendetta is one of those graphic novels that I would think that everyone at least kind of knows about due to the 2005 movie with Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving or the fact that the Guy Fawkes mask from it has become a popular pop culture symbol. It has been a long time since I have seen the movie, but it feels like in many ways it followed the graphic novel closely. But, if you want the full experience of the story as it was meant to be, reading the graphic novel is a must.



This was definitely the longest it ever took me to complete a graphic novel. This is not the fault of the graphic novel itself, it just happened to be chosen as the monthly read for one of my book clubs when I was in the midst of one of the worst reading slumps of my life. Because of this, I never really gained any momentum with this one. So, do not look at the length of time it took me to read this one and it does not really reflect my experience with it at all.



However, I would not say I am in with the people who were blown away by this book or feel like the experience is life changing. I know that this story has a passionate following considering it has become the symbol of how some people feel about government in general. It is very easy to see why this is the case as this book doesn’t pull any punches in the same way that 1984 didn’t pull any punches. And, while I can 100% appreciate that, I didn’t quite connect with this as much as I had hoped. I truly think that this relates to the fact that time in my life that I met this book. Over the past few years of dealing with political debate in America, I have become quite exhausted with it all, so I think this felt like reading the news that I have been trying to avoid!



All that being said, it is a good and thought-provoking story. If you enjoy dystopian fiction and don’t mind when it doesn’t fall too far from the reality tree, then you will find something here to scratch your reading itch.

Me da mucha pena darle un cuatro sobre cinco, porque realmente la historia de V y cómo se desarrolla es de cinco estrellas. Sin embargo, tengo que juzgar a la novela gráfica como a un todo, y por tanto, creo que algunas tramas secundarias no acompañan a la principal. La mayoría de los personajes que se nos presentan en segundo plano sirven como exploración de algunos de los temas a tratar, como la búsqueda del sentido de la vida o la venganza, pero no consiguen terminar de encajar con la trama de V y su meta. Creo que, por tanto, V de Vendetta es una lectura espectacular que te hace pensar y que además, está perfectamente ambientada y narrada. La construcción de la trama principal, como comento, es magistral y el tratamiento de los personajes de V y Evey son de los mejores tratamientos que he tenido el placer de leer en mucho tiempo. Además, tiene un ritmo endiablado que consigue llevarte a historias del pasado y del presente con una facilidad asombrosa, conectando ambas para formar un marco de la historia aún mayor. Pero el fallo es ese, el añadir tramas que realmente sirven para crear algo más grande, pero que queda en un proyecto ambicioso. Y ME DA PENA, VALE. Pero es lo que hay. Sin duda, voy a repetir autores. El dibujo me ha gustado y el hecho de que tuviese cambios radicales de colores para ambientar diferentes escenas o ambientes, así como que en general se usasen colores poco saturados me ha parecido interesante. En cuanto a la historia en sí, creo que es increíblemente buena, consiguiendo gustarme más que el dibujo. Sin duda, una lectura imprescindible.

"فکر کردی میتونی منو بکشی؟ زیر این شنل گوشت و پوستی وجود نداره تا با گلوله از بین بره؛ زیر این شنل فقط یه آرمانه و آرمان ها ضد گلوله ن."

یکی دیگه از کمیک های معروف و خیلی خوب "آلن مور" نویسنده ی افسانه ای کمیک.
داستان این کمیک در انگلستانی مشابه آنچه جورج اورول در 1984 توصیف میکنه اتفاق میفته و به شرح مبارزات یه هرج و مرج طلب با نام مستعار "وی" میپردازه.

مقایسه با فیلم
کمیک خیلی از فیلم بهتره. شیوه ی روایت آلن مور، شیوه ی کنار هم گذاشتن تصاویر و ترکیب دیالوگ ها با صحنه ها، خیلی هنرمندانه است. اوج این شیوه ی روایت رو توی کمیک دیگه از همین نویسنده، "نگهبانان" میتونید ببینید.
علاوه بر شیوه ی روایت، پایان کمیک به کلی با پایان فیلم متفاوته. پایان بندی فیلم شدیداً هالیوودی و کلیشه ایه و اصولاً فایده ی "ایوی" (دختری که پیش "وی" زندگی میکنه) چیزی جز فایده ی عنصر زن در فیلم های قهرمانی هالیوودی نیست: نقش معشوقه یا موجودی ضعیف تر که با تکیه کردن به قهرمان، قهرمان رو قوی جلوه میده.
ولی در کمیک نقش ایوی به کلی متفاوته و بودنش توی کمیک، هدف داره.

وی
شخصیت "وی" که قهرمان داستانه، زیادی قدرتمند و باهوشه. بدون هیچ مشکلی هر کس رو که میخواد میکشه، هر ساختمانی رو که میخواد منفجر میکنه و به ابررایانه ی دولت نفوذ میکنه و پلیس ها مدام دور خودشون میگردن، بدون این که بفهمن چه اتفاقی افتاده. این که هیچ چالشی سر راهش نیست، از جذابیت داستان کم میکنه.

ثانیاً "وی" زیادی شعار میده که باعث میشه تک جمله های نابی که بعضی وقت ها میگه، بین انبوه سخنرانی هاش به چشم نیان و هدر برن.

جدای از این ها، شخصیت شوخ طبع، قدرتمند و حکیم "وی" خوب و به یاد موندنی بود و "هیو ویوینگ" خیلی خوب نقشش رو توی فیلم در آورده بود (هر چند فقط صداش شنیده میشد.)

ماذا كان يدور بعقل الان مور حين كتب هذه الرواية؟

كيف تخدع الحكومات الشعوب؟ و تصنع لهم الامل الزائف؟

المرض الذي نشروه ثم انهوا الحكومة الحالية به ثم عن طريق استثمار العلاج اصبحوا من ملاك الملايين ثم اصبحوا هم الحكومة


لكن شخص واحد قرر ان يفضحهم "في الذي اصبح رمز للثورة في كل مكان الان, الذي تحول من ضحيه لهم الى منتقم جبار قرر القضاء على كل من ساهم بالمؤامرة عن طريق حقنهم بالسم

الموت الرحيم بطريقة (في)

رواية ذات خيال خصب و شخوص متعددة الاوجة و الرموز و حبكة متقنة

تستحق الخمس نجوم بلا تردد

الغريب ان الرواية لم تلاق نجاحا في الثمانينات حين كتبت و حتى حين ظهر الفيلم في 2005 و لكن حين استخدمه (المجهولين) لمحاربة كبريات الشركة المسيطرة على الاقتصاد في وول ستريت و اصبح المتظاهرون يرتدونه في نيويورك ظهر هذا القناع في كل مكان في العالم و منها انطلقت نحو العالمية

من سخرية القدر ان قناع في الذي كان مجانا في الرواية اصبح دون حقوق تجارية في الواقع


هل هي رواية خالية ؟لا اعتقد. بل واقعية كواقع الالام الحقن

Hacía mucho tiempo que quería leerlo. Como tantos otros, vi primero la película, de modo que ya tenía una idea de la historia antes de comenzar la lectura. Sin embargo, cabe aclarar que hay divergencias entre el material original y la adaptación al cine. El cómic nos presenta una Gran Bretaña controlada por un gobierno fascista y totalitario que a grandes rasgos exterminó todas las minorías étnicas y sexuales del país: negros, judíos, paquistaníes, gays, etc. Es importante leer la historia tomando en cuenta el contexto de la época en que fue escrita: la Gran Bretaña de los años 80, en plena época de Margaret Thatcher. En aquella época, también irrumpió el SIDA como enfermedad que cargaba un gran estigma y era asociada principalmente a la comunidad gay. Cuando tomamos en cuenta esas cosas, muchos de los aspectos más distópicos de la historia cobran sentido. Por otro lado, tristemente, muchas cosas que se cuentan no son tan irreales. El personaje de V también difiere de la adaptación: está más enfocado en crear la anarquía pura, no en restaurar las libertades democráticas. Una obra subversiva y provocadora que todo amante de los cómics debe leer alguna vez en su vida.

Maybe my expectation were too high after reading my first graphic novel "Watchmen," but I was rather underwhelmed by this critically acclaimed story.

The concept was intriguing. Moore once again creates a clever political dystopia. The novel is set in 1990s UK which is under the rule of the fascist party. The party came to power after a nuclear war which eradicated Africa and Europe and drastically changed climate which in turn caused various natural disasters, hunger, and chaos in the country. V is a masked vigilante whose goal is to overthrow the totalitarian government and to bring the country into a state of anarchy which, in his opinion, will help people of England to establish a new fair and honest regime.

I did like the idea of the book (BTW I wonder what was so special about 1970s that gave Moore these crazy dystopian ideas), as for the execution, it definitely lacked. First of all, I think this book should have been longer to provide better background for both characters and events. For instance, it was said that UK was under totalitarian regime, but it was not really shown what exactly was bad about it aside from surveillance and arrests of minorities which had happened decades prior. What I mean is, the everyday struggles of people under this supposedly oppressive regime were never described, and therefore I didn’t really come to care for this regime to be overthrown. In regards to characters, I would really want to know more about them if just to be able to distinguish numerous men in suits from one another. Seriously, there were so many of them, they all played some significant role, but I was always lost. If I am honest, I was able to completely understand the book only after reading plot summary on wikipedia. Until I did that, I was a little confused who did what and why. This brings me to my next concern - the story itself wasn't structured very well, it was choppy, story lines ended abruptly, and many questions were left unanswered in the end. Finally, my probably biggest disappointment had to do with the fact that identity of V was never revealed. He had such a great background story, but I felt I never knew him enough.

Overall, a great idea, but poorly executed. I'll try other graphic novels in future, hopefully "Watchmen" is not the only one which is worth reading.

Reading challenge: #2