The Secrets Behind Dr. Manhattan's Perception of the Future and Belief of Determinism (May 2020)
This post is the last on Doomsday Clock following Nathaniel Dusk, Superman, Batman and Rorschach II.
This is about Dr. Manhattan and how the DC Metaverse affected him.
Both with his powers and his beliefs.
Link to the original post on Reddit
____________________________________________________
Recently there was a post in r/Watchmen where u/Amazlingtons discussed how Dr. Manhattan (Jon Osterman) is a "Quantum Nuisance" as according to Quantum Theory, the very fact he observes the future, he himself is the reason that future comes to be.
This is something I've thought of long before too and I discuss it in that thread, which lead to me also talking about how it's also Jon's fault on a character level and discussing something about Doomsday Clock that not many people seem to appreciate. I'd like to talk about it here on a post, in greater detail.
Spoilers for both Watchmen and Doomsday Clock of course, plus potential spoilers for Before Watchmen and HBO's Watchmen series.
Disclaimer: I am not an expert on Quantum Physics or the Philosophy of Determinism. So I may make mistakes in discussing them. I am simply using them to talk more about the character of Jon Osterman and the stories he appears in.
First let's discuss the concepts behind Quantum Theory that I would relate to Jon's perception of time.
These would be:
Schrodinger's Cat
a thought experiment that basically states that an object could exist in both or all possible states and that state is determined upon observation, using a cat in a box that may or may not be dead, being both at the same time until observed.
Before Watchmen Dr. Manhattan
Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle
the idea that you can never know the exact position and the exact speed of a sub-atomic particle simultaneously.
For the latter, I'd like to propose that Jon's ability to perceive the future is similar, but instead of speed and position its his ability to change or influence the future and his awareness of what exactly occurs in the future. I'll talk more about that in a bit.
The former is linked to the Many Worlds or Multiverse theory, stating that both outcomes occur in different worlds or timelines and this has been used with Jon in Before Watchmen. But in general the book also supports the idea that by merely observing the future, he is actually deciding it.
But more than that, he may also be subconsciously or unknowingly influencing the future already.
"You did something, so you'd be assigned to her, didn't you?"
Either way this has lead to Jon having a very strong belief in Determinism, the philosophy that all events are pre-determined. This made him apathetic and a bit cynical. At first glance it seems the very reason he does not or refuses to interfere in things is because of his perception of the future which he asserts.
But I'd like to propose, that's not the entire truth.
From even long before being Dr. Manhattan, Jon Osterman was always a passive man. Fate always decided his life for him.
His father took him away from being a watchmaker and set him on a path to becoming a physicist. Janey made the first move for him. It was by coincidence that they both ended up sharing a trip together and then staying in an amusement park where her watch being stomped lead to them sharing a room where he would promise to fix the watch, which lead to their relationship.
"Other people seem to make all the moves for me."
What's my point?
Even before being the Doctor, Jon was always a man of inaction. And this is the main reason these futures occur. This combined with his powers are what lead to his apathy, not the powers alone.
To prove my point, let's look back at the scene where the Comedian kills the pregnant woman.
"...but you didn't lift a finger!"
Jon does not interfere because he knows he does not interfere, as he saw the future already.
But what if he did save her? Well then, he would observe that he did, and he would do so.
So clearly his ability to see the future is not all to blame. What would stop him simply observing the future where he does help, where he does interfere? The Comedian was ultimately right.
Jon needed to care more. And thanks to Laurie he did start to, but even in the end he abandons Earth, refusing to continue being involved with it. In the HBO series, he returns to find love again, but even still he ultimately gave someone else his abilities while letting himself be captured and killed.
The only freedom he gained, was in his blind spot, when he was a normal man.
If you're familiar with me, it's likely because of my posts on Doomsday Clock. Whether it be the theory posts, or the posts analyzing the characters and themes involving
Superman, (the meta side)
and even Batman and Rorschach II
If so you'd know that the book has plenty of underappreciated and overlooked aspects. One of the bigger themes, recurring phrases and imagery include shattered glass (shout again to u/Chance5e and his posts), broken vision, blind spots, "seeing what you want to see" and seeing beyond it.
Third choices beyond simple duality.
Here I'd like to expand on Superman and Manhattan's confrontation, but on Jon's perspective.
A big conflict in the book is that Jon has a blind spot in the future and he can't see past . He only sees Superman apparently punching him. The ultimate defender of DC comics, seeing him as the villain, and apparently punching him out.
The Man of Action and the Man of Inaction.
The unstoppable force and the immovable object.
The confrontation took place during a battle between multiple metas from different countries fighting each other (an important conflict in the story) with civilians caught in between. A battle the weakened Superman could not stop by himself and requested Jon's assistance to no avail.
"I don't help you, I've already seen it"
Jon then reveals he was responsible for the changes in Clark's life, that he took away and changed people and histories out of sheer curiosity.
"Will you destroy me for it? Or will I defend myself despite my sins?"
So which of Jon's predictions of the outcome of the blind spot turn out to be true? Did Superman destroy him? Did he destroy the DC Universe? Which two states becomes true upon observation?
Neither. Superman does not "defeat" Jon. Not even in a verbal fight no. This was not another good vs evil battle. Or a battle at all. In fact, Superman wasn't even punching Jon.
"Why would you defend me?"
Despite learning Jon was behind it all, Superman still chose to help him (he even shows compassion about Jon and asks about Janey) and continue to ask him for help. But more than that, he suggests the very reason he has a blind spot in that place, is because he decides what happens next for himself.
"Maybe you make that choice"
Combined with watching Superman's many different histories, this ultimately inspires Jon, the Man of Inaction, to act. He does something he thought he could or would never do and undoes his changes to the timeline.
"I move back the Lantern"
This is important because the whole time he never reset the DC Universe by himself. He always let others do it (Anti-Monitor, Barry Allen) and influenced history after the actions of others allowed it to be (Flashpoint). Here he's actually changing the course of time by himself for the first time. And for this to be possible he cannot precisely see that future himself (hence my comparison to the Uncertainty Principle). Afterwards, he becomes inspired by Superman's story and decides to follow it.
"I now understand Superman's true purpose"
Like Jon Kent before him, Jon adopts a child and raises him to be the Superman to his own world.
"I holed the child in my arms"
Like Clark Kent the child is given to a loving family in the hopes that he would be raised well.
"Jon calls me Clark"
Overall the key to disrupting the deterministic vision of the future that he saw, was simply caring enough to act, no matter how impossible it may seem.
As a life long DC and Superman fan, doing the impossible is a very common theme in a lot of his greatest stories. So for me, him inspiring Jon to do the same works very well. If not, then I respect that. I just want to show my appreciation for Geoff Johns' intentions here and how he does it.
Thanks for reading. If you liked this post, you may want to check the other write-ups I linked above.
Comments
Post a Comment