Actually, I was also inspired by searching the archives and by finding this thread, wherein much is made of V for Vendetta, Watchmen, and (to a lesser extent) Promethea, all by (IMO) the greatest writer to ever work in the comic industry. Having just finished my annual re-read of Watchmen, I was, once again, astonished by how even now I begin to see details I missed first time around- things that give me whole new insights to the book.
For example, in the last issue Jon dematerialises out of Ozymandias’s orrery (p.27, panel 6). As he does so, he leaves behind a cloud of dust- something we haven’t seen him do before when teleporting. Now, look at the shape of the dust cloud, especially with the orrery’s model of the sun at its centre. Am I crazy, or does it look like a mushroom cloud, with a tiny “sun” in the middle? Couple this with Jon’s last words “Nothing ever ends.” and Ozymandias’ obvious concern, and I think that there is a strong implication that all of the New York plot was for naught- the world will still be destroyed, the various “positive” visual cues were are given in the last two pages of the book notwithstanding. OK, the ending is still strongly ambiguous, but this appears to be a scary suggestion.
Now, looking back at the ending of V for Vendetta I see that, essentially, all V’s schemes have done very little. Oh, sure, the fascist government has fallen, Evey is set up in his place (even to the extent of recruiting, presumably, her own successor) and Evey is ready to unleash the contents of the Shadow Gallery (banned books and art, cheap medicine, science) on a benighted England. But look at the behaviour of the ordinary people in England- the group of drunks that accost what-her-name (the wife of the deposed leader-in-waiting), or Finch- turning his back on London to travel to the (presumably, based on what we hear the cabdriver tell him of Larkshill) deserted North. Is this the ordnung of which V had spoken? It seems no more than chaos, and unlikely to bloom into the utopian anarchy that he aspires to.
Just ramblings, really, without a real point- other than that, perhaps, the overall message of both V for Vendetta and Watchmen is to be wary of simple quick-fit solutions, ie. the solutions provided by a superhero. In both books, the “superheros” do no more than upset the status quo, leaving others to pick up the pieces- quite possibly with disastrous results. I notice a similar motif in parts of Swamp Thing, where the brute-force solutions of superheros make the problem worse often as not, and it is the willpower of the weak (Daniel, or whatever manifesting-evil-monkey boy was called) or persuasion (Swamp Thing vs. The Floronic Man) that solves the issue. The counterexample (?) is, obviously, Top 10 (all versions), where superheroes make a difference- but as people, cops and partners and prostitutes, not as magic men who can punch a problem into submission. Is this a genuine theme in the works I’ve mentioned, or am I reading too much into the source material?
(Oh, BTW, I’ve heard that Alan Moore is blind in one eye. If this is true, does anyone know which eye it is? I ask because there is a strong blindness motif in Watchmen, and the blinded eye is always the right. Supposedly, in Jewish mythology the right eye sees only good and the left only evil- make of that what you will. I just wondered whether the rationale might be slightly closer to heart, as it were.)