In both Watchmen and Shakespeare’s King Lear we have to deal with the notion of revealing or uncovering and the idea of the disquise. Edgar in King Lear must keep his identity from his father, Gloster. Rorschach and Dan must keep their identities hidden as well in Watchmen. When R is revealed to us and goes before the therapist and to jail, something else happens. R’s story is also opened in both text and visual story: we learn who he is and “we learn who he is.”
As a murder mystery, the identity of the killer is the overarching “disguise.” It seems to me that Watchmen’s play with heroes, costumes, and the story “behind” or that is hidden is picture perfect for the form, which as Tom Servidone claimed to me after class, is like a movie on paper. I think he was pointing to the nature of the comic as sequential art in the dramatic tradition, which, of course, points us to the sense of sight and “seeing.” Thus we are back to Lear and the metaphor of sight which pervades that play.
Yeah! yeah! yeah! I’m into it now!
Phantom of the Opera?
Rorschach’s physical identity gets “revealed” at the end of Ch. 5 (although, if you pay attention to the backgrounds in previous chapters, there are many clues to his identity). I’m finding R to be phenominally intuitive to the character of each person he comes in contact with thus being himself a “revealer”. He comments so matter-of-factly his observances of one’s character revealing things one can’t or refuses to admit to about themselves. From what I’ve read so far, he seems to be always on target.
Very true, He does seem to be the one that is constantly thinking, constantly planning, constantly trying to get into other people’s heads. Strange or not, and no matter his motive, he does take the time to figure things out.