I wrote before about The Watchmen, in particular its role as a measure of the spread of the true anti-hero into popular culture. However, I think there are two more interesting aspects of that particular comic, which I want to examine here.

First, it is interesting that it is held in such high esteem. Over and over one hears about the narrative complexity, the "dense" and "mature" storyline, and so on. It is the prime example held forth whenever someone wants to argue that graphic novels are not mere comic books but pieces of literature. However, when one points out that the "mature themes" and "deep plot" (eg that single-minded pursuit of a rigid goal may make a hero a villain) have been done, not only many times before, but much, much better, the defense offered is "yes, but not in a graphic novel". In other words, while holding forth the "graphic novel" as literature worthy of respect, they also expect to be graded on a curve. While we cannot dismiss comics as mere child's playthings we are to judge their accomplishments entirely by comparing the modern output to the old children's comics of the past.

Which leads me to my second problem, why should we hold graphic novels in such esteem? It is clear from those grading them so leniently that there is a strong urge to see in them something valuable, but why? Yes, you can make comics "dark" and "troubled" and "adult", but why? I can make children's toys with strong sexual themes, but everyone would understand that "Bondage Barbie" or "Corprophage Rainbow Brite" would be wrong. So why do we think that taking the children's diversion of comics and turning them "adult" is a good thing?

Well,  as with most such questions, the answer is obvious, just not very comfortable for those of us who realize it. We want comics to become "graphic novels" so we don't have to admit that we have maintained a childish affectation into adulthood. While our culture idolizes the childish, raises the immature to something to be emulated, we still maintain enough of the traditions of the past that we don't want to seem childish. So, for example, I feel a bit silly wasting time playing strategy games on my computer. I recognize it is a childish pastime. However, unlike those trying to elevate "graphic novels" into an adult pastime, I admit I have a childish hobby, and simply deal with it. Others are not happy to do so, and so they elevate their childish interests into a "new kind" of maturity.

Which means the attitudes that once were the realm of a few geeks, the obsession with pop culture references, the fascination with comics, the whole Quentin Tarrantino mindset, has been rehabilitated, and such interests have been given respectability by those who are unwilling to give up the fixations of their youth.

Fortunately this particular variety of immaturity seems to be somewhat limited in scope. While the "geek chic" era of the 90's gave it more currency, the number of people willing to confess to being fascinated with "graphic novels" are still outnumbered by those who are fascinated with their iPhone. However, it is just one more sign of the way our culture is making perpetual immaturity normal. Once more, rather than asking that we grow up, we are elevating youth, making a cult of childish pursuits, and trying to grant them respectability.

I do not object to adults having juvenile interests. Many otherwise mature individuals fill their idle hours with relatively childish interests. I have no problem with such pursuits so long as we recognize them as indulgences. What I find troubling is the need to grant childishness respectability, to turn it into something profound. By pretending that pursuing the juvenile is mature we end up dragging children into adulthood too soon, but only half-way. Instead of childish children and mature adults, we end up with a mass of half-matured eternal juveniles, jaded at far too young an age, but never moving beyond that point. And that is truly troubling.

POSTSCRIPT

I need to develop that final paragraph a bit more, but at the moment I don't have the time. My thought is that by creating "dark" and "mature" and "profound" objects out of childish things, we end up with something not quite adult or childish. As these "mature" comics show, we end up with something half way between juvenile and adult. But by adding adult themes to something essentially childish, we end up forcing children to grow too fast, while allowing adults to remain in many ways quite childish. In the end, we create a perpetual adolescence stretching from the end of toddler-hood right through to death, with children growing up far too young, but never quite completing the process.(My mental image is a six year old playing Grand Theft Auto, who slowly ages into a withered old man, still laughing as he beats up a digital hooker, just a she did four decades earlier.) But that is something I will explore in more detail later.