Overview, Methodology, Thesis
The analysis of Watchmen S1:E6 and S1:E8 begins with an understanding of the texts that provide a theoretical framework for such analysis. The first text is Jacques Lacan’s “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I,” which theorizes that an infant can recognize itself in the mirror, proving that a sense of self is possible without the language to describe it.[1] This sense of “I” will also be the most authentic self, as language inherently dilutes the idea through inaccuracies in speech. The second text, “Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators,” is bell hook’s work synthesizing Mulvey’s ideas about the male gaze in cinema and viewing it through a Black female perspective. The oppositional gaze, as hooks describes, is choosing “not to identify with either the victim or the perpetrator;”[2] it is a way for Black women to view cinema in an active manner, refusing to be content with stereotyped and victimized representation. Audre Lorde’s “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference” is the third text. This work discusses the way Western society separates us by our defining characteristics so that we can categorize ourselves by dominating groups and subordinating groups. Lorde suggests we must recognize our differences in order to overcome our joint struggles, and at the same time we must unlearn the programming inside ourselves as we go about changing the structures and systems around us.[3] Stuart Hall’s “What is this ‘Black’ in Black Popular Culture?” is the fourth text, which highlights the reasons for inaccurate and shallow representation of Black communities in popular culture, despite Black popular culture often being co-opted for the popular culture.[4]
The theories presented in these texts can be used to analyze how well Watchmen portrays the relationships between the Black men and women in S1:E6 and S1:E8. Before I discuss the applications of the theorists to the episodes, I will parse through the commonalities and differences between the ideas each theorist presents. In episode 8, “A God Walks into Abar,” Angela and Doctor Manhattan—in the body of her husband, Cal—get into an argument about free will and agency where Manhattan insinuates and proves that Angela acts in a predetermined way. Angela refuses to accept this reality, and their relationship begins its crumble to an inevitable end. On the other hand, episode 6, “This Extraordinary Being,” highlights the agency June acts upon in her relationship with William, standing firm in her beliefs as she effectively ends their marriage and takes their son with her to Tulsa. The inability to recognize and understand another’s differences results in a breakdown of the relationship, including the misplacement of trust and empathy, which is fundamentally different from the refusal to accept someone’s actions that have a negative impact on the lives of those around them.
Commonalities and Comparisons
The theorists presented discuss common elements in their works, especially concerning identity, awareness and difference. In Lorde’s work, she elaborates on the way Black lesbians find themselves caught between white women’s racism and Black women’s homophobia. She writes how she is “constantly being encouraged to pluck out some one aspect of [her]self and present this as the meaningful whole, eclipsing or denying the other parts of self.”[5] The desire for people to separate themselves based solely on one category of difference in this way is incredibly isolating and deprives them of connection with any other aspect of their identity. This is similar to hook’s statement on Black women’s inability to find themselves represented in cinema because they face objectification from the Black male gaze when there are Black people represented, or they face erasure by white women being upheld as the peak of femininity in film.[6] As a result, Black women are often forced to turn to independent cinema or other ways of looking at films in order to find positive representations, which is where we get the oppositional gaze. In both cases, differences are used to separate and isolate people from connecting with a group that comprises their identity, which forces these isolated groups to the outside of the canon of representation. Lorde covers this, mentioning how Black women often discredit or do not even recognize the contributions of Black lesbians to Black communities. Part of this discrediting comes from pure homophobia, as being mistaken for a lesbian is not an ideal accusation to face.[7] However, part of it is rooted in the patriarchy, with Black women being fearful that Black men won’t pay them attention.[8] This system works intentionally to keep groups that should be working together from standing in solidarity with each other. This can lead to even further divisions between and within marginalized communities, which doesn’t allow for people to work with each other and might lead to poor representations. Hall’s work expands on this idea, as he postulates that the popular culture that comes out of Black communities is somewhat shallow and inauthentic.[9] The popular culture is dominant, which means that culture coming out of marginalized communities is inevitably homogenized, commodified and stereotyped. Popular culture coming out of the Black community, Hall writes, may have drawn upon Black experiences in its creation, but he asks us to “note how, within the black repertoire, style—which mainstream cultural critics often believe to be the mere husk, the wrapping, the sugar-coating on the pill—has become itself the subject of what is going on.”[10] The shallow, inauthenticity should not be our primary focus; instead, we must continue to look for the lived experiences within these representations. Without going beyond the surface level representation, there could result in what Lacan might call an impure “I.” Within his work, Lacan mentions the “ideal I,” which involves the recognition of oneself as a whole being.[11] Where this comes into conversation with Hall is in Black popular culture; if the generalized and inauthentic representation of the Black community is the only representation out there, what becomes of the “I?” Is it always impure because the recognition, even with the purest intentions, is always of a hollow representation?
Differences and Disagreements
Some of the differences between the theorists emerge in how they discuss the structures and systems that dominate our society. In hook’s work, she draws on Friedberg’s idea of identification replicating the structures of power that created these delineations to pose the question: why is feminist film criticism, having claimed to understand the totality of the female identity, “remains aggressively silent on the subject of blackness and specifically representations of black womanhood?”[12] There should be no reason for such aggressive silence, as hooks puts it, but there is a prevalent phenomenon of the most privileged women being the ones receiving the benefits of the activism, typically rich, white women. This idea that mainstream feminism fails to include and advocate for all women is not a new one. Lorde discusses it while also pushing back against the category of Black women that hooks highlights. She writes that Black women often discount or discredit the contributions of Black lesbians because there is a fear that a) they will be accused of being a lesbian, and b) they will be seen as unworthy of support and attention from Black men.[13] Here, there is a clear difference in how those that fall under the identity of Black women find themselves marginalized; hooks acknowledges the exclusion from feminism while Lorde focuses on the divisions that occur between Black women of different sexualities. Lorde also focuses on the idea of ‘difference’ as a way for society to separate its people into different categories, with those in dominant groups having more mobility and power than those in the so-called subordinate groups. She writes, “It is not those differences between us that are separating us. It is rather our refusal to recognize those differences, and to examine the distortions which result from our misnaming them and their effects upon human behavior and expectation.”[14] The way difference has been stigmatized and sensationalized is just one reason why we fail to recognize and come to an understanding about our differences. It is also our refusal to break the patterns laid out by the systems that keep us from connecting, systems that keep those at the top of the difference hierarchy—rich white men—in power. Hall expands on the idea of difference in our postmodern world. He specifically cites the postmodern’s “deep and ambivalent fascination with difference”[15] as a method of co-opting and synthesizing cultures of marginalized groups. As opposed to the inherent discriminatory tactics that the exclusion hooks and Lorde write about, Hall proposes that difference can be seen as a positive thing when it is beneficial for the popular culture. This then results in shallow and inauthentic representation, as Hall later discusses, because the experiences drawn upon are hiding under the surface of whatever representation Black people have in popular culture. Lacan’s idea that the mirror stage is somehow corrupted by the time language factors into our lives contrasts the idea that Hall has about Black popular culture. Though Lacan would have it that there is a stark difference between the inner “I” and the social “I,”[16] Hall concludes that there is, in fact, enough drawn from Black communities regarding Black popular culture that, despite how shallow it may seem, the authentic and lived experiences make it a product of the Black community—however commodified it may be.[17]
Theorists in Conversation about Watchmen
Both scenes from Watchmen that I will analyze consist of arguments between the couples in each episode. Episode 6, “This Extraordinary Being,” shows a righteously angry June protecting her son from his father, having been upset and wronged by his identity as a crime-fighting vigilante.
Episode 8, “A God Walks into Abar,” shows a righteously angry Angela defending her emotions from Doctor Manhattan’s reminders about his powers, having been upset and wronged by his identity as a time-transcending god.
Both scenes portray the way a Black woman advocates for herself in the relationship, refusing to allow her partner to direct her opinions and emotions. Both scenes also end with one member of the relationship leaving the room, simultaneously leaving their partner in shambles. Surprisingly enough, it is the scene set in the 1920s where the woman has more agency in the relationship; June rejects Will because of his commitment—or addiction—to fighting crime behind a mask and face paint, while in the more modern setting, Manhattan walks away from Angela because of her inability to understand his plight and his powers. The main difference is Angela’s inability to reconcile hers and Manhattan’s differences—how they experience time, for example—versus June’s refusal to accept how Will’s actions were becoming detrimental to their lives, including that of their son.
In “This Extraordinary Being,” the scene consists of what appears to be a long take—the cutting within the scene is primarily used to make it appear as though it is shot in one take. The unnoticeable cutting enhances the speed with which the scene moves along, making it so the camera can pan back and forth between Will and June. The panning motions gradually get slower as the scene goes on, with more lulls in conversation, lingering gazes and drawn out, emphatic lines from June.
The gradual slowing down of the pacing in the scene matches June’s dialogue and actions, showing that she is in control of the scene. When she enters, she interrupts Will wiping off the paint on his son’s face, simultaneously interrupting the instrumental in the soundtrack. When she leaves with her son, Will is forced to come to terms with his actions. If we position the Black woman as the subject of the gaze, hooks rejects Mulvey’s theory of visual pleasure, the ‘active/male’ and ‘passive/female,’ and “Placing ourselves outside that pleasure in looking, Mulvey argues, was determined by a ‘split between active/male and passive/female. Black female spectators actively chose not to identify with the film’s imaginary subject because such identification was disenabling.”[18] June exemplifies this by being the one to leave the relationship, refusing to be seen within the constraints of the male gaze. There is also a lot of emphasis placed on Will and June’s son, Marcus, and the implications his actions have in the scene.
His desire to copy his father is reminiscent of Lorde’s writing about our responses to difference: “Ignore it, and if that is not possible, copy it if we think it is dominant, or destroy it if we think it is subordinate.”[19] Seeing that his father paints his face white and dons a hood every night to fight crime, Marcus identifies that difference and tries to copy it, and this very act is what scares June into leaving Will. He has become so consumed by his alter identity as Hooded Justice that his image of self is unclear. June asks him “Which me?” because she doesn’t know which of his identities is the primal one.
Lacan theorizes that even with a successful dialectical synthesis of the primordial “I” and the discordant image in reality, there is still a difference between these two senses of self.[20] Because Will is unable to grapple with the two identities he balances his life with, his relationships suffer. June is unable to see him for the man she once knew, only seeing the way his vigilante identity has fed the anger that resides deep in his heart. Despite June’s self-advocacy generally being a good thing, her fear that Will’s anger will negatively impact her and her son is a product of what Hall names “aggressive resistance to difference”[21] that occurs during the opening up of society to accept difference. Perhaps it is a result of vigilante crime-fighters becoming more commonplace and less stigmatized that Though it could be that June’s resistance to Will is a result of vigilante crime-fighters becoming more commonplace and less stigmatized, she already resisted Will’s line of work—the police force, just the daytime version of his vigilante activities—because she knew he held onto all of his anger. It is important to consider that June’s resistance to difference comes from a place of understanding how her positionality as a Black woman affects how she moves through the world. Being someone that faces multiple kinds of marginalization, she may find that the best course of action when faced with someone who is filling her life with more hardship is to pack up and leave.
The scene from “A God Walks into Abar” flips the script and ends with Angela, the woman, being left rather than the other way around. It begins with the two characters having sex as Doctor Manhattan tells Angela about the night they met in the bar, except Manhattan is currently experiencing the moment; for Angela, that moment happened six months ago. Angela is upset when Manhattan tells her about the fight they will get into because she still doesn’t want to believe that it’s true. From here, the scene plays out as a conversation, with reaction shots for each character.
She rolls over in bed because she doesn’t want to hear this from him, the camera alternating depths of field so that only she is in focus. Even when the camera cuts to an angle on the other side of the bed, she is still in focus.
Her side of the story is getting more attention from the camera. However, Manhattan continues to push and push, telling Angela about the fight they’re going to have. It turns out that Angela denying that fight is what spurs it on. The camera no longer focuses its depth of field on Angela, now Manhattan is included in the picture.
This is literally and figuratively the camera taking focus away from Angela, the woman, in order to focus more on the man’s side of the story. This shift in focus is akin to the shift in power that occurs to ensure cultural hegemony. Hall writes, “It is always about shifting the balance of power in the relations of culture; it is always about changing the dispositions and the configurations of cultural power, not getting out of it.”[22] Though Angela is attempting to assert herself in the relationship, there is a shift in order to maintain cultural hegemony that keeps power away from her and more in the hands of Manhattan.
Both Angela and Manhattan sit up over the course of the argument’s progression, but when Angela sits up, the camera moves position to a low angle, whereas with Manhattan it stays at a neutral angle.
This implies the emotions each character has. From a low angle, Angela’s anger and distrust is apparent, but the neutral angle on Manhattan mirrors the sterilized attitude he approaches his nonlinear experience of time with. Lorde writes about the imbalance that occurs between those with different levels of marginalization. “Traditionally, in american society, it is the members of oppressed, objectified groups who are expected to stretch out and bridge the gap between the actualities of our lives and the consciousness of our oppressor.”[23] The difference in camera angles once the argument exemplifies the way Angela is forced to bear more of the communicative burden in the relationship; she has to do more of the heavy lifting. This puts such a strain on their relationship that eventually boils over at the end of their argument, resulting in Manhattan leaving Angela. His rigidity and unemotional manner of speaking about events he knows will come to pass is part of what angers her.
The first shot of Manhattan sitting up is a medium-close shot, but the next reaction shot on him is a close-up, indicating that his side of the story is becoming increasingly important and relevant.
Once they sit up—or stand, in Angela’s case—the over-the-shoulder shots are used more frequently. For the most part, these shots obey the 180-degree rule, which makes the cutting back and forth in the conversation easier to follow for the viewer. However, when Manhattan leans forward, the over-the-shoulder shot on him goes from his right to his left shoulder, allowing his back to take up a majority of the screen. This dominance over the screen also implies his dominance in the conversation, as well as his dominance over her. hooks writes, “In their role as spectators, black men could enter an imaginative space of phallocentric power that mediated racial negation,”[24] which perfectly exemplifies the dominance with which Manhattan is acting upon, leaving no room—literally and figuratively—for Angela’s perspective. In contrast, when there is a shot of Angela’s back turned towards Manhattan, it is done through a medium shot, and she barely takes up a third of the frame.
In the last shot of the scene—a medium shot on Angela—Manhattan gets up from the bed and leaves, out of focus in the background. Even though the story has come back to focus on her like it had at the beginning of the scene, she is not the one with agency.
When she advocates for herself, she is shut down, and ultimately is the one to be left, not doing the leaving. Lacan writes about the moment that the “I” goes from inner identification to synthesis with the outwardly perceived identity is the start of personal identities being “mediated by the other’s desire.”[25] In other words, our identity is shaped by those around us rather than coming from within. Angela is exerting this pressure upon Manhattan to conform to humanity since she is intimidated by his abilities, which has damaged their relationship since Manhattan can’t live up to her expectations. Ultimately, it is Angela and Manhattan’s inability to meet each other where they are, in a way that they can begin to understand how to live with each other’s differences that tears their relationship apart.
To conclude this literature review and application, I would like to affirm that the fact that these two relationships are presented differently is inherently a good thing. If representation were to consist solely of one experience, it would become, as Hall writes, invisibility replaced by “regulated, segregated visibility.”[26] Marginalized groups being represented as a monolith in our popular culture is one of the biggest plagues in the fight for progress as we know it, for there can be no progress if we cannot understand and recognize our differences, as Lorde would have it. June and Angela having different experiences navigating their relationships as Black women is much needed in our media landscape. However, there is something to be said for the way each episode approaches the conflict each woman faces. June is forced to deal with a husband falling deeper and deeper into a workaholic obsession with his night job—fighting crime—to the point that it has begun to seep into every facet of his life. Both parents realize they have to draw the line when their son tries to emulate what his father does, June just so happens to have a drastically different idea of how to draw that line than Will does. Her taking control of the situation is emblematic of refusing to be victim or perpetrator, as hooks writes of the oppositional gaze. Angela, on the other hand, is dealing with someone so different from herself on such a grand scale that these differences are nearly impossible to understand. Though she does have a right to defend herself and stand firm in her beliefs, there is something to be said for her stark refusal to accept these differences between herself and Manhattan leading to her having less of a say in their relationship. Shutting off the connection between the two of them impedes both of their ability to come to an understanding of each other, as they will only be able to see each other for their differences, not as fully realized people. This is precisely the difference between the inner and the social "I" that Lacan writes about, the synthesis of which would lead to a fundamental understanding of each other. Ultimately, we are bettered by our understanding of each other’s differences, and we must strive to endeavor to hold our differences in high regard when moving through our society that so desperately wishes to tear us apart. Only when we are united, fighting against all our collective struggles, can we begin to build a society without a hierarchical system based on which identities are seen as valuable or dominant and which ones are not, where difference can simply exist as a defining characteristic of a human being.
Hall, Stuart. "Three What Is This “Black” in Black Popular Culture? [1992]" In Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity and Diaspora edited by David Morley, 83-94. New York, USA: Duke University Press, 2018.
hooks, b. "Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators." In Feminist Film Theory. Edited by Sue Thornham. New York University Press: New York (2009).
Lacan, Jacques. 2006. The Mirror Stage as Formative of the I Function. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Lorde, A. 1997. “Age Race Class and Sex : Women Redefining Difference.” Dangerous Liaisons S.
[1] Lacan, The Mirror Stage
[2] hooks, The Oppositional Gaze
[3] Lorde, Age, Race, Sex and Class
[4] Hall, What is this ‘Black’ in Black Popular Culture?
