Is Rorschach from Watchmen asexual or gay

Before Watchmen: Rorschach

  • JFS_No1 wrote:

    ung, but

    EDIT. When I read through my post again, I have to realize that the word ideals doesn't quite fit ... but I can't think of anything else ...


    JFS


    What ideals do you see in the action? As you find out for yourself: there aren't any. Rorschach is a complex figure, but not a positive one. (As always, this applies to all Watchmen.)

    And the mask thing had been through for 20 years. At some point it even got through to him. Only without a mask is Rorschach a nobody.
  • Rorschach is above all value conservative, and in the American sense anti-liberal and generally anti-socialist. He is a typical republican, but likes to give himself up to the illusion that with this attitude he is not defending a social elite, but advocating for the common people.

    In this respect he is politically an idealist without having critically reflected on his position. Ultimately, that's what sets him apart from the comedian, who thinks through his attitude and himself Nevertheless decided to be a fascist.

    As you said yourself, the term "ideal" can at best be used at Watchmen in a neutral sense. Rorschach is certainly completely unsuitable as a positive role model. In addition, Rorschach does not recognize that his attitude is more a symptom of the diseases of his time than that he could represent medicine with his methods. His inability to compromise ultimately determines his fate.
    "The thing's hollow. - It goes on forever - and ... oh my god... it's full of stars! "

    ~ Dave Bowman, in 2001: A Space Odyssey
  • Possibly. very briefly and fundamentally: an ideal is something that one can only strive for. Man cannot stand by him.

    Ideal (or ideal image) means the perfection of an idea or concept. Anyone who actively strives towards this ideal is an idealist.

    If at all, Rorschach stood by his principles, and one would have to ask: what were these principles?
  • Ok, principles might really be a better expression.
    And what these are can be best expressed with what he said last


    But again before you get it wrong:
    Rorschach is not a hero, certainly not. Nobody is in line.
    But from my point of view he is clearly the greatest supporter of sympathy among the Watchmen. He's doing something. He goes out and fights criminals, does what he can, in the wrong way, but without playing God and endangering innocent people like Veidt.
    And the rest?
    Well, Owl sinks into self-pity and potency complexes, Specter never really wanted to be a heroine, Dr Manhattan sits around apathetically and loses part of his humanity every day, and the comedian ..... well, rapes women, shoots demonstrators and who knows what only does because he has fun with it (as I said, I never understood why Rorschach never shot him).
  • Forenperser wrote:

    Ok, principles might really be a better expression.
    And what these are can be best expressed with what he said last


    But again before you get it wrong:
    Rorschach is not a hero, certainly not. Nobody is in line.
    But from my point of view, he is clearly the greatest supporter of sympathy among the Watchmen.


    Yeah, a sadistic, uptight, gay-hating, unfucked bastard - you have to like him.

    Is he doing something? Yes, turning his neuroses and unfulfilled sexual desires into violence.

    I must have two different issues of Watchmen hanging around here than you.

    Oh yes, why did Rorschach never kill the comedian? Bro code. You don't kill colleagues. The man works on extremely simple levels, at least when it comes to his own rules: "I can do anything, because I'm right. Except if I'm wrong. Then I want to die."
  • Self-pity? Well, he has at least used his reasonably given opportunity to question what he has done. He has shown time and time again that he has never lost his instinct for humane action. When he worked with the comedian, when he worked with Rorschach, etc.

    With his belly base and his potency problems certainly not the classic supermasculine hero, but still suitable as a role model.
    "The thing's hollow. - It goes on forever - and ... oh my god... it's full of stars! "

    ~ Dave Bowman, in 2001: A Space Odyssey
  • Yeah, a sadistic, uptight, gay-hating, unfucked bastard - you have to love him.

    Is he doing something? Yes, turning his neuroses and unfulfilled sexual desires into violence.


    It's not what makes him empathetic to the reader.
    You can empathize with him because he feels misunderstood and does his thing on his own.
    It's the outsider position, and maybe a pinch of pity for the circumstances in which he grew up.
    An antihero or underdog.
  • L.N. Muhr wrote:

    Yeah, a sadistic, uptight, gay-hating, unfucked bastard - you have to love him.

    Is he doing something? Yes, turning his neuroses and unfulfilled sexual desires into violence.

    The consideration of Rorschach is a bit superficial. The different perspectives alone show how complex Rorschach is.

    On the one hand, he is sympathetic because he is uncompromising, goes his own way and starts the story through his distrust and ignoring the Keene Act.

    He gives Nite Owl a fair lecture and bully the rest of them for their ignorance. First of all, likable.

    But then in the middle of the story the only character becomes a total loser with a disgusting background story and the reader lacks a reference person, which makes the complex story impossible to notice.

    The prison part and the uncompromising consequent ending make Rorschach a secret hero again, if you can use this term at Watchmen at all.

    To judge Rorschach and the Watchmen with the zeitgeist and the moral concepts of today does not do justice to the work.

    He's a degenerate bastard and loser, but at least he does something against the "mask killer" and is not ready to give in to make sense of the sacrifice of millions of people or to prevent a nuclear war.

    He'd rather tear the mask off his face, become the loser Walter Kovacs again and let Dr. Turn Manhattan into a paint of red snow.

    Rorschach does what we don't dare to do. He's doing something like kick ass about the madness out there he's so sick of.

    That's why Rorschach rocks so much and this band is such a big disappointment.
  • Lex00 wrote:

    L.N. Muhr wrote:

    Yeah, a sadistic, uptight, gay-hating, unfucked bastard - you have to love him.

    Is he doing something? Yes, turning his neuroses and unfulfilled sexual desires into violence.

    The consideration of Rorschach is a bit superficial. The different perspectives alone show how complex Rorschach is.

    On the one hand, he is sympathetic because he is uncompromising,


    Forgive me, but I find uncompromisingness deeply unsympathetic. Fanatics are uncompromising. Uncompromising behavior is the most anti-social behavior of all.

    I find it disturbing what is found sympathetic here: extreme violence, sadism (resulting from sexual frustration and early childhood disorders) and ultimately a completely unfulfilled life?

    Possibly. can one or the other understand that, yes. (Although hopefully not from personal experience.) But likeable? That would speak for an extreme numbness towards his fellow human beings. Of all the characters in World Cup, Rorschach is the most socially disturbed. That's why he doesn't "rock". He's a poor sausage who doesn't even have the courage to face his failure in the end.
  • We're not talking about the real world, we're talking about comics!
    It can (and must) be disturbing, brutal, fanatical and uncompromising
    approach.

    Not for nothing are characters / anti-heroes like the Punisher,
    Lobo, Wolverine, Miller's dark future Batman or Spider Jerusalem so popular.

    Like Rorschach, these figures offer several approaches
    and starting points. We hate the deeds, but we laugh at them too (Lobo,
    Ennis Punisher, Spider Jerusalem). We understand them even when we understand their actions
    can only share to a limited extent. But hey, the mafia doesn't have my family either
    mowed down at a picnic in the park.

    Rorschach is such a figure and, as I said, without his
    twisted way there would be no story. His actions, his distrust and his
    They are driven by the Keene Act. (see above)

    You can condemn that as a person, but love it as a reader.
    It's not about anything else. Do I want to live next to Walter Kovacs - No. I want to
    read about those who deal with him and have to endure him - yes, of course. (But
    only if it's done better than Before Watchmen)

    Maybe I was interpreting too much in the figure, but
    Watchmen is just more fun for me.


    Now one can find out about the whole politically incorrect
    Exciting stuff, but hey, it's part of history, of that time, and makes
    the figure more believable because we know its background.

    So Rorschach keeps rocking and we probably won't
    Some.
  • Yes, due to his childhood experiences. But he never had sex either. Since sex is one of the human instincts, we can speak of a frustration that has turned into corresponding aggression. (See the connection between depression & aggression, but above all the origin of aggression in suppressed sexuality in psychology.)

    Psychologically, Rorschach is probably the schizoid type:
    de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid…%B6nlichkeitsst%C3%B6rung

    With Rorschach, the suppression of sexuality leads to aggression, it becomes a substitute act (quite in contrast to Night Owl II, by the way, where aggression / violence triggers sexual pleasure in the first place, he is impotent without violence).
  • If Rorschach were really such a hateful figure that a reasonable comic book reader shouldn't identify with, the comic wouldn't be such a huge success.
    Apparently it comes across well for many readers. Hopefully not all of them have behavioral disorders.