I'm writing an English paper on V for Vendetta

[Omar 382]

Would you guys say that V has a moral code? Why or why not? Thanks.

[t hedge coke]

I tend to find V to be a son of a bitch. He's just targeting even bigger bastards.

But, most people have a moral code, whether explicitly planned out or just reflexively understood. Doesn't mean much of anything to have a moral code.

[Arvandor]

Yes. But it is a twisted and insane code. It isn't rational.

[Brigonos Chomhgaill]

No. Everything is a means to an end for V - including people - in his/her need for revenge. Even replacing him/herself with Evey is an act of spite.

[JLS Comics]

Veritable and vociferous, values of V are verily vacant, vacuous and void.

[bholderman]

Best of Luck. I've recommended V to my daughter, based on her love of the Walking Dead. While I know they arent directly related, they are comics and film/tv that have caused her to really look at and question society in a critical format. There are certainly more comics out there on the same level worth a thesis or two.

[FanboyStranger]

I tend to find V to be a son of a bitch. He's just targeting even bigger bastards.

But, most people have a moral code, whether explicitly planned out or just reflexively understood. Doesn't mean much of anything to have a moral code.

At a certain level, I'd say that V follows one essential moral rule, which is the Golden Rule-- Do unto others as you would do unto yourself. V is a tricky character because he/she is ostensibly a "villain" in a world where law has been corrupted, which makes he/she a "hero" because he/she is the lesser of two evils. Ultimately, V's journey is one of revenge, but he/she rationalizes it through pursuing a better world. At core, it's a victim's morality, which critiques the institutions that produced his/her victimization, but is somewhat blind to his/her own atrocities. V is by no means ideologically pure. Once the revenge is finished, it's on Evie to produce a better world. The politics in the series may be writ large, but I'm not sure they are written by V. The politial ends coenside with V's goals, but they aren't necessary something that V would plan. In other words, V's crusade ends up having major political consequences, but ultimately it's about V settling scores. It's up to Evie to change the world. It's important to remember that changing the world isn't an inherently moral act, but in this case, it's hard not to see that way with the information presented in the story. It's Evie (unknown) actions that will or won't provide liberation. V just wants to make his oppressors suffer; anything else is gravy.

(Obviously, I have some confusion about the gender roles in V for Vendetta. I've traditionally read V as a gay male thrown into a concentration camp, but I'm not sure that's how V would truly identify with his/her self. I don't think that what Moore intended when he originally wrote V, but in today's criticism, it's hard not to question that V's gender identifaction The wigs, the makeup, etc, suggest some kind of symbolic "drag" "played" big. Only using "played" because I don't know the right terminology-- I certainly don't want to suggest that trans people are acting in any way, but that V's presence is some kind of political theatre. Actually, lit majors, you owe me a beer, 'cause that's a solid thesis topic.)

Can't wait to see T Hedge Coke tear my argument to feces.

[Mister Mets]

He has his own moral code, but as others have noted, it's a very flawed one.

[FanboyStranger]

Yes. But it is a twisted and insane code. It isn't rational.

While I don't necessarily see V's ends as "insane", I do think your post raises an interesting question about the dichotomy between morality and rationality. Morality isn't necessarily rational or utilitarian. It's one of those completely amorphous societal constructs that shifts from situation to situation, although it does have certain pillars that form a commonly accepted structure, even if that "acceptance" is not traditionally codified. V isn't particular interested in a moral way of life or governance, but wants the hypocrites to suffer like he did at their hands. We see V as moral because we've been lead to believe in certain universal rights and justice (if only in a metaphysical sense), but the only true immorality we see in the story is the actions of a handful of men who did V wrong, the men who attacked Evie, and aspects of Evie's indoctrination to V's cause. We're supposed to extrapolate an immoral society from the story, but other than the assault on Evie early in book and V's imprisonment, we don't see immorality outside of the cloistered hypocrites that run English society. We assume that V is building a better, more moral and compassionate society by his/her actions, but we don't really know that at the end of the story. (That ambigularity is one of the reasons I like the book so much. It's not actually politically didactic, but it can be read as such if you insert your own biases.

[FanboyStranger]

No. Everything is a means to an end for V - including people - in his/her need for revenge. Even replacing him/herself with Evey is an act of spite.

I'm not sure it's an act of spite so much as an acknowledgement that V's ultimate goal is revenge, but he/see'd also like a better world where someone like him/her doesn't need to suffer the same indignities. He/she can't put his anger behind the greater good, but maybe his successor can.

[t hedge coke]

AObviously, I have some confusion about the gender roles in V for Vendetta. I've traditionally read V as a gay male thrown into a concentration camp, but I'm not sure that's how V would truly identify with his/her self. I don't think that what Moore intended when he originally wrote V, but in today's criticism, it's hard not to question that V's gender identifaction The wigs, the makeup, etc, suggest some kind of symbolic "drag" "played" big. Only using "played" because I don't know the right terminology-- I certainly don't want to suggest that trans people are acting in any way, but that V's presence is some kind of political theatre. Actually, lit majors, you owe me a beer, 'cause that's a solid thesis topic.

I like that a lot. Something Moore did with Fantomas and Shimako Sato did with her V-inspired K-20: Legend of the Mask, makes me wonder how V plays if it's a woman in drag on top of how deliberately campy V is. But, I haven't read V recent enough to know if it works out at all.

I've never been comfortable lionizing what V does to Evie, but that sentiment seems to really be dying off anyway, so maybe it was more of an 80s/90s (American comic book reader) expectation and now we've all got a different headspace or something.

Moore's been fairly open that the comics' anxieties were his anxieties since his government was actively threatening his family and type of family at the time. Moore's engagement with homosexuality in his comics has always been interesting to me, especially where/when it gets really stilted or descends into high camp. I wonder if V is, in part, a great early intersection of those, but also how much of it is Moore and what's Lloyd.

I'm not sure it's an act of spite so much as an acknowledgement that V's ultimate goal is revenge, but he/see'd also like a better world where someone like him/her doesn't need to suffer the same indignities. He/she can't put his anger behind the greater good, but maybe his successor can.

I think V exhibits some self-loathing, in that. Self-awareness, but beyond that, V needs someone "better" to hurt into empathy and then let run with the ball.

[FanboyStranger]

II think V exhibits some self-loathing, in that. Self-awareness, but beyond that, V needs someone "better" to hurt into empathy and then let run with the ball.

I've always read it as survivor's guilt. V feels he/she doesn't deserve a better world, but wouldn't mind hanging on a cross if it gets the world there.

[FanboyStranger]

Kinda tangential, but who do you see under the V mask? And no, wise-asses, Elrond is not a valid answer.

I've always had this vague sense of a certain appearance and body language, but once I saw Richard Armitage play Francis Dolarhyde in Hannibal, I couldn't picture anyone else as V. Armitage plays Dolarhyde as a series of contrasts, alternating expressions of extreme doubt/fear manifested in bodily contortions and shrinking away from people paired with grandiose posing that displays his remarkable physique. He is uncomfortably awkward in a social sense unless he is acting as the Great Red Dragon. That's kinda the feel I get out of V-- you wouldn't notice him/her out of the costume-- which is an intentional game that Moore and Lloyd play to make you identify with the character-- but you'd sure notice the grandiosity of V striking a pose in cloak, hat, and mask. V desperately wants to be touched, but is too afraid to accept that someone would want to touch him/her ever again, something that is common among victims of abuse. So, you have this theatrical expression of power while internally feeling quite powerless, regardless of how many people you kill or scores you settle. It's part of being something bigger than yourself, but you can't accept that someone as small and insignificant as yourself could truly matter, so you create an identity that does. (Getting us back to survivor's guilt.) I think back to the dancing with Evie, a true moment of tenderness in a completely messed up relationship, and it's no accident he/she is in full regalia, totally in control of his/her image in a moment that should be a moment of vulnerability.

I am thoroughly convinced I think too much about this things.

[johnmahananda]

(Obviously, I have some confusion about the gender roles in V for Vendetta. I've traditionally read V as a gay male thrown into a concentration camp, but I'm not sure that's how V would truly identify with his/her self. I don't think that what Moore intended when he originally wrote V, but in today's criticism, it's hard not to question that V's gender identifaction The wigs, the makeup, etc, suggest some kind of symbolic "drag" "played" big. Only using "played" because I don't know the right terminology-- I certainly don't want to suggest that trans people are acting in any way, but that V's presence is some kind of political theatre. Actually, lit majors, you owe me a beer, 'cause that's a solid thesis topic.)

This seems like a stretch. But you do say "in today's criticism" and it's certainly true that a major trend in literary criticism is to interpret along gender identification lines. I've never really bought into that hermeneutic as it often involves a very superficial, one-sided Freudian emphasis. I'd rather discuss V from the standpoint of Jungian archetypes. But, just my preference...

I don't really read a lot of sexuality into V. He's obviously male and there's a current of attraction to Evie. His costume is pure theater, no question, but is it tranny camp? More like historical shock value. And, regardless, I was never prompted to wonder about V's sexual orientation --- it doesn't seem especially relevant to the story.

More than anything, I'd say that the story is an existential-political thriller. V realizes what's been done to him and enlarges that to include the world's evil. He's not that far removed from Rorschach, in some ways, and Rorschach certainly has a moral compass, whether we agree with it or not. They're both reminiscent of Anton Sugor in No Country for Old Men --- he has a strict code of morality that he follows but it deviates so much from standard cultural mores that the best we can do to identify him is to label him a "villain".

[Brigonos Chomhgaill]

I don't really read a lot of sexuality into V. He's obviously male and there's a current of attraction to Evie. His costume is pure theater, no question, but is it tranny camp? More like historical shock value. And, regardless, I was never prompted to wonder about V's sexual orientation --- it doesn't seem especially relevant to the story.

Depends how far down the rabbit-hole you want to go, really, but Moore is notorious for playing around with the identity and lineage of his characters - especially in his 1980s period -and he openly acknowledges V as a transsexual in the forward to the trade, so it's possible V is Valerie or the man from room 5 (or maybe even both), and V's sexuality can arguably be important to the story if "he" is just a fiction being played out by an actress (Valerie) in the role of Guy Fawkes as revenge for how she and her lover were treated by the government.