The V for Vendetta Code!

I watched the DVD of V for Vendetta tonight with my father. He liked it, and didn’t think the gay-rights stuff was that big of a deal. Though, I told him that I thought the movie reflected both a political and gender anarchism. I do not agree with either of these, but that doesn’t keep me from admiring the movie. Some spoiler analysis of the Vendetta Code:

I am more convinced now than ever that V was Valerie, the lesbian actress who wrote the notes that V shared with Evie. Notice how V leaves Scarlet Carsons with his victims, which is what made the female doctor sure who was V, the terrorist. Valerie’s partner, Ruth, also grew her Scarlet Carsons during their time together.

We are told by the doctor that the subject had no memory of who he was. This suggests a tranformation prior to the fiery one that freed V. The doctor refers to the subject as a man, but that’s possibly because the sex change happened earlier due to the treatment. As I noted before, the scene when V is freed is quite conspicuous in the absence of any sign of male genitals or penis. V’s masculine form and strength could have been caused by the treatments and need not be “natural”…

Valerie writes, “I am Me. My name is Valerie…” Me rhymes with V, which is both the name on the door, the latin version of 5 and the first initial of Valerie. Valerie’s hair is shaved off just like Evie’s was by V. This makes sense if V’s purpose in subjecting Evie to the treatment was because zhe* wanted someone to understand what zhe had gone through, so she, Evie, could also be transformed into an uber-mensch. (Here it is worthwhile to note that the Wachowski bros are Gnostics, which tend to emphasize an elitism wherein some people, like Jesus or Neo, may become more God-like. This elitism also fits with them putting messages encoded in their movies for some, but not others to understand. ). It also fits with V, in V’s bizarre way telling Evie that zhe loves her, as V puts that message. Notice how when Evie touches the mannequin guard that her cell was the fifth one on the left, the one that would have been marked V, though there was no number on it.

We see how V’s hair is becoming more reddish brown like Valerie’s hair in the scenes after Evie is “freed”. It also explains why V has a memorial to Valerie, even though zhe didn’t know her. She wrote it before she died. V tells Evie, ”And I delivered the letter to you as it had been delivered to me.” So Evie says “then it really happened” to which V says, ”Yes,” but then she erroneously concludes “You were in the cell next to her” and V says nothing. V says nothing because if Evie had thought about it she would have realized that there were no other cells to the left of her cell and so the tissue paper could only have been put in the crack from within the same cell. So we see the irony of her next statement, “And that’s what this is all about. You’re getting back at tehm for what they did to her… and to you. ” To which zhe replied, “what was done to me created me.”

And so given that we are told by V that, “there are no coincidence, only the illusion of coincidences,” something that makes the inclusion of the substory about Valerie and the attention given to it in the movie unlikely to be a coincidence. And, as I said before, it even fits with the overall theme, one of political and gender anarchism. The W2 Bros wrote and produced a film with the first ever transgendered superhero. Now, I’m wondering whether this is also implicit in the original storyline from the graphic novel or not.

dlw

ps, my friend Todd writes from a more general perspective on V for Vendetta and the interrelations between Terrorism and Totalitarianism. He also points out that in the Wikipedia entry on V for Vendetta, it describes how initially V was not published because they balked at the idea of a transsexual terrorist. We now see the matter being implicitly rather than explicitly raised…

dlw

*I use zhe instead of she or he to refer to V as it avoids the male/female dichotomy.

Comments

52 Responses to “

The V for Vendetta Code!”

dhalgren » V for Vendetta on August 3rd, 2006 3:41 pm

[...] God is then fluid, changable–unlike totalitarianism? God is connected with birth, renewal–unlike totalitarianism? We will never know. I don’t think there is much beyond this statement to indicate another way of thinking about religion. I am also curious about V, the (non)name. As David has pointed out, V could be Valerie. That strikes me as a serious possibility. I’m not sure how that changes the essential core of the film however. But it also makes me wonder if Allan Moore was influenced by Thomas Pynchon’s marvelous first book, V., in which a mysterious woman known as V. is the central character. I just read the wikipedia entry on Pynchon’s V and, guess what, there is a connection: “In congruence with his V-themed speech and surroundings, the main character in the comic book series V for Vendetta reads Pynchon’s V.“ [...]
k fishburne on August 5th, 2006 1:27 am

you are so dumb..
i like love this movie…
its one of my three favs..
v is not valerie.
it showed her dead in the pit didnt it??
duh..
and there is no doubt that v
was a guy..
he left scarlet carsons bcuz
killing those ppl was also revenge for her..
they were for her memory..
it was obvious..
any idiot would know..
dlw on August 5th, 2006 2:20 am

I have to go back and see it again, but was it valerie or ruth that was shown to be dead in the pit?

I thought it was Ruth, because Valerie had her hair shaved off…

dlw
rufus on August 6th, 2006 5:42 am

The point of the story is that V is V. That is, he is not any character that has ever been mentioned except for “the man in room five.” His purpose is that he is anyone and everyone, and that every person has V’s power, the potential to escape fear and become free. Look at the story holistically and it will apply to as much as you want. With it, you have a story of transformation, solidarity, freedom and brotherhood. Lock it down to Valerie, all you have is a cheap story of revenge with easy twist — “why, he was a she all along!”

Valerie’s story is there to provide a sympathetic experience of the fascism and ethnic cleansing that occurred in this future Britain, a story element which is subdued in the film version but is nonetheless still quite visible in the Larkhill scenes. Her story is there so that V can provide Evey his experience of being imprisoned and becoming free. It’s an important but small part of the novel, and within the length of a film, it’ll appear more loaded than it really is.

Why isn’t V unmasked? Because it doesn’t matter. He says so himself.

The graphic novel makes this abundantly clear.
dlw on August 6th, 2006 12:30 pm

I don’t see how “locking it down to Valerie” in any way reduces the heroism of V. And the revenge theme is there, whether we like it or not.

Why does V have to be unmasked to be revealed as to who zhe was before the treatments?

Why is Valerie so important to V? Is it just a coincidence V was in the same cell as her with her having a V as the first letter of her name, or doesn’t this film not believe in coincidences?

I don’t care what the graphic novel makes “abundantly clear”, the W2 bros are not per se held to follow the graphic novel exactly….

dlw
lilaznfighter on August 6th, 2006 7:50 pm

ummm, did you notice that valerie is within the crowd of guy fawke’d citizens? When everyone takes off the masks, there are countless faces revealed, including the senior citizens, the people at the pub, and including VALERIE and her lover. But of course this does create ambiguity with the fact that she did die; this does however, prove that V is not Valerie. As Evey said, V is everyone of us, he is an idea, and ideas do not die.
dlw on August 6th, 2006 8:15 pm

I did notice that she, along with the other people who died during the film, was in the crowd.

I don’t see how this disproves the notion that Valerie became V. V may be an idea, but that doesn’t mean V wasn’t someone else before being created.

As I pointed out, the Wikipedia of V for Vendetta says that V was a transsexual superhero from the beginning. If V was transsexual that makes it possible V could have been Valerie before. It would explain why V found Valerie’s diary in the cell and why V has a memorial for Valerie in the lair and why V’s hair had a reddish tint after Evie was released from her imprisonment.

dlw
Josh on August 8th, 2006 3:17 am

All of you who think that V was Valerie, or that Valerie was dead, are STUPID! Do you know why? Go to the end of the movie, when V has finally succeded in blowing up parlimant, and watch as everyone takes their masks off, if you look closely you will see Valerie, the camera goes right past her! How can you miss it?!?!? Also, it never accuatly said Valerie died, she said “Im probably going to die here”, it never said she, or her lover did.
dlw on August 8th, 2006 11:19 am

notice also how everyone else of th good “guys” who died during the movie also appeared at the end.

This shows absolutely nothing….
Can we please avoid calling each other stupid?
dlw
dw on August 8th, 2006 12:51 pm

I just saw this movie last night, and I’m confused… V being Valerie makes sense, but the muscular masculine form shown as V escapes the fire makes this difficult for me to believe. And the people who died in the story were in the masked crowd at the end - Was this just a symbolic message meaning “the people” are made up of those that have died for the cause?
TheCheze on August 8th, 2006 2:00 pm

Valerie was thrown into the pit, dead. She also responded to the virus at Larkhill n a negative manner. This is proven by her continuously decreasing condition in images throughout the movie. The prisoner in cell V, which is quite aparently how the main character of this movie got his name, just responded because of different cell anomalies within himself. Never did the good doctor say that it changed said prisoner was changed, just that that prisoner reacted differently. I greatly admire your aim to analyze this movie, but i no longer believe your analysis is sensible. Also, Wikipedia pages are easily manipulated if enough people vote for it to be changed one or another, therefore Wikipedia is hardly ever a constant and reliable source.
TheCheze on August 8th, 2006 2:10 pm

oh and Valerie died, there, Josh. No reason for hostilities in text or speech, so don;t use them. She is merely at the end to present the ideal that everyone who stood up and believed in the ideals of freedom, even those that died for the thought, were there when parliament was destroyed. Remember, Josh, that near the end of the movie you also see the little girl that had died take her mask off in the crowd, along with Daddy Deitrich, who was shot and killed when he was captured. Now, dlw, the other thing i wanted to mention is that the hair V has on is not his original hair. Note, when Evey is in the jail/dungeon cell thing when V is torturing her, of sorts, he has no long hair, hence his not being Valerie and taking down that section of your justification.
dlw on August 8th, 2006 2:30 pm

dw,
Valerie, and all of the other “patients” at Larkhill were being given a special treatment, the one patient that became V underwent a transformation that made “him” no longer remember who “he” was before. The muscular masculine form of V is a result of the treatment, but notice the prominent absence of a male reproductive organ in the same scene?

TheCheze, I am not convinced it was Valerie, as opposed to Ruth, who is shown to be dumped into the pit. I plan to revisit that scene to make sure.

I trust the Wikipedia as there is no good reason to fabricate about V for Vendetta having a hard time getting started because of the wariness of the Comic Book producers to have a transexual superhero.

Cheze, V is also a master of disguise. V could easily have masked his hair and other appearances during the interrogations. What doesn’t seem to fit is that V’s hair takes on an unmistakable reddish tinge after Evie emerges from imprisonment. This seems to imply that V dyes his hair to fit with the persona and that during the period of Evies confinement, V may have had no need to make outside excursions and so the hair began to return to its natural color. The red tinge is removed later.

All of this is better accounted if V’s hair is natural, it grew back after V’s dramatic escape from Larkhill in it’s original color, but V dyes it to fit with the dramatis personae of Guy Fawkes.
dlw
anonymous passion on August 10th, 2006 10:19 pm

It always suprises me how many people actually get the point of this movie. OPEN UP YOUR EYES!! V is a masked character because he shares the potential virtues of all men and women. He is not Valerie, it doesnt even matter. All I see is someone who has such a fixation on the gender of the character when (as you said yourself, the movie having gender-anarchism) the gender means absolutly nothing. You are simply categorizing someone into a label that is placed in your mind since childhood, and creates an unneccesary segregation. QUIT BEING SO JUDGEMENTAL AND JUST BE!! Be someone that doesnt identify who they are by whats inbetween their legs. Whats important is inside your head!!!!

So stop, think, and maybe consider that some of the things youve grown up in life to believe are not truth. QUESTION. There are many things we are all wrong about. But not questioning them and considering other ideas is just puposful ignorance.
dlw on August 11th, 2006 12:30 am

AP, yes, the gender of V and who was V ultimately does not matter, but for me I like puzzles and I expect puzzles from W2 bros films.

thankyou for the post.

dlw
APrejean on August 11th, 2006 5:43 pm

I thoroughly enjoyed the analysis of the film’s main character. I do not believe that you are wrong in your endeavors or in your attempts (to identify the character as female) for the very reason the last pretentious person attempted to call you close minded.

Your analysis is NOT close minded and forces to the front, what I considered an important theme in the movie, to be analyzed. Whether or not the main character is a female, any bigot that enjoys the movie enough to come to find this forum and read your analysis and then take the time to write an angry post stating HOW DARE YOU call this wonderfully MALISH superhero a woman has obviously missed out on much depth in this movie.

So it is that I thank you for this analysis, I admonish the close minded people that rage against such well thought out and (admittedly) convincing arguments and I admonish those who tell you that you have a closed mind.

Do the people that become irate at this post honestly think that V him(her)self would become irate if he came to believe that people considered him to be Valerie? In the same concept that I believe he would be honored (conceptually) if some REMEMBERED Valerie (that’s the point isn’t it?) and with his(her) open-mindedness (obviously) about such gendered matters – I believe in the justness of this person’s analysis and belief to such.

Thank you again DLW for bringing out a great deal of the heart of this movie. Lastly, Fishburn and Rufus and all other people that take the time to read all of these things and become distraught and angry – are you sure it is V that has wound you so tightly into the depths of this movie that you found this forum – or is it the tyrannical government that went out of its way to expunge homosexuals(etc) as so many weeds.

APrejean
Merry on August 11th, 2006 6:39 pm

It does not matter whether or not V was Valerie just enjoy the movie you are just confusing your selves! And i agree with everyone who think that v is not Valerie because it shows valerie dead in the pit. So therefore V cannot be Valerie!
The Move was fantastic!
Merry
Merry on August 11th, 2006 6:58 pm

Oh and i just looked back at the movie and v has a very very small redish tint to his hair the whole movie!
dlw on August 11th, 2006 7:28 pm

AP, thankyou for your post.

Merry, The red tint is far more noticeable right after Evie comes out of confinement. It varies, implying maybe that V dies his(her) hair… Are you dead certain it was Valerie, not Ruth or someone else, that was dumped in the pit? I plan to rent the film again and check for myself.

dlw
Merry on August 11th, 2006 8:41 pm

i own the film and while valerie is telling her story it shows her getting needles etc. thn when they throw someone into the pit the person lands on top of valerie and it pauses on her face. So yes i am dead certain. And the tint in v’s hair could also be the camera angle and the lighting.
Merry
Merry on August 11th, 2006 8:43 pm

Question, on the v for vendetta web site it askes you for codes would u happen to know some by any chance? There are ten in total and i so far have found 2.
Merry
dlw on August 11th, 2006 11:39 pm

I just rewatched the film. When the detective read the doctor’s diary, it shows valerie before and after her hair got shaved off. She had lesions on her face. They showed someone being thrown in the pit and then they focused on a woman’s face. However, the lesions are different, though they show a different side of the face. Either way, it is definitely not clear that Valerie died in the way most of the patients died.

As for V’s hair having a red tint, remember this is a movie by the W2 bros who are known for their attention to detail and the movie itself said that it does not believe in coincidences, just the appearance of coincidences…

I don’t know anything about the codes for the website, sorry… Why don’t you ask them about my theory?
dlw
Yazza on August 14th, 2006 3:49 am

If you review the movie to the original comics there is (I believe) evidence to suggest that V is Ruth. Ruth “dies” but we do not see her dead, we do know that V is “no longer who I was.” If the treatment in the hospital involved turning lesbian’s into men, then it is reasonable to conclude that V is the result of that procedure “working.”

The only evidence we have of Ruth’s death is in Valerie’s letter, who would have told Valerie about Ruth’s death? The people torturing her, the people who wanted to break her, of course they would lie.

When V discovered that Valerie died in that hospital he decided to exact revenge on the hospital for what they did to his/her lover. If you hurt me I may be angry, but if you hurt my wife, my lover, I will kill you!

Ruth grew roses for Valerie, V built a shrine to Valerie, and grew roses for her shrine. Why would Valerie do that?

ALSO no coincidences? Why is Ruth dressed in men’s clothing the first time we see her?

Ruth is also an actress.

Valerie had curly hair, Ruth had straight hair. V wore wig with straight hair.

Ruth as a gardener would know more about fertilizer than Valerie, V used a fertilizer bomb to blow up the hospital (read the comic books).

V wore all black, because he was in morning?

In Valerie’s letter (http://www.shadowgalaxy.net/Vendetta/valerie.html) she says she would like to kiss who ever is reading the letter, but V avoids kissing Evie.

Consider the psychological mess that Ruth would be in having told the authorities about her lover (Valerie) and then learning that Valerie had died. Could that be enough to set her on her 10 year revenge-killing spree?

Ultimately this does add a nice twist to the story, wether it is accurate or not.
dlw on August 14th, 2006 8:31 pm

Thanks for writing, perhaps the W2 Bros adapted the original comic book where Ruth became V so that Valerie became V?

For me, the comments by V to Evie about the letter and how zhe found it are what are key. I think the female we see dumped outside was Ruth, not Valerie, but that’s hard to prove…

dlw
Merry on August 15th, 2006 4:56 pm

About the redish tint in v’s hair i dont think that it has anything o do with it b/c when v first takes evey back to is home after she has just saved him and she is standing in front of the juke box V’s hair has a very redish tint to it more so in that scene then after evey comes out of being tortured
Merry
Merry on August 15th, 2006 5:00 pm

Also if anything i think that vazza has an excellent i think that if anything v would be ruth. b/c it NEVER shows her body valerie just explains that they took her while she was out buying food. and if v was valeris why would she/ he build a shrine to herself/himself? but i could understand if v was ruth and then v/ruth building a shrine for valerie b/c ruth and valerie were lovers.
Merry on August 15th, 2006 5:15 pm

And vazza the link to the letter you gave i went to it and read it and it didn’t sound right so i went and got the movie went to the scene where valerie reads the letter and while she was talking i was looking @ the letter you found and it was not even close to the actual letter in v for vendetta!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dlw on August 15th, 2006 8:24 pm

Okay Merry, let’s sort the evidence. It seems the reddish tint is present and noticeable at different points in the movie. I see that as supporting Valerie having become V as Valerie had reddish hair that was died black for her acting roles.

The movie never per se shows Valerie’s body either. The woman we are shown in the pit is not clearly identified as Valerie. It’s simply easy to assume that she was Valerie.

Why would V build a shrine to her/himself? That was who zhe was before they transformed him/her. Remember, as Evie points out, it’s why zhe was doing what zhe was doing, in revenge for (Valerie and V). What was done to create V was monstrous.

The letter differs in some specifics, but not its critical features. It’s interesting that she says Ruth killed herself in her cell. If Ruth actually was V then how would V find the letter in his cell after he was created, why would be on the left corner of the 5th Cell, with no adjoining cell to the left. (I checked for these details when I watched the film.)

And is it a coincidence that V and Veronica start with the same letter, I think not…

dlw
sheep4tw on August 17th, 2006 9:00 pm

Hi,

interesting analysis. I started to go ‘OMG’ when someone suggested V might be Ruth - remember how his introductory speech to Evey in the alley started with ‘in view, a humble vaudevillian veteran’ - vaudevillian is a stage actor if I recall correctly.

However, the letter which Valerie writes says something like ‘poor Ruth she gave up that last inch’ or something similar - why then would V allow such lies about himself (assuming he is Ruth) be perpetuated?

And another thing - why does the good doctor that V murders with lethal injection (and also Prothero) identify V as the MAN in room 5? I just think it’s odd that they would reference him as such if he wasn’t a male in the first place. Especially in a society so intolerant of deviants, to address a female to male transexual as a MAN - equivalent to other ‘normal’ males like Prothero just seems unlikely. Throughout the doctor’s diary, she also refers to him as a male multiple times.

The observation that V dosen’t have any noticeable genitals in the aftermath of the fire is a moot point - if your face and eye sockets can be burnt out your genitals certainly can too.

I don’t think the hair is of any significance. I mean, you saw V’s hands. I don’t think any hair could grow back on his head after the fire, so it was just a wig.

It just seems unlikely too that the government would put a pair of lesbian lovers in adjacent cells in the same detention center, where they could communicate by passing notes.
sheep4tw on August 17th, 2006 9:05 pm

Sorry for the double post. I just thought of something else.

When Evey tells V she would keep the letter but figures it was written by him anyway, and V tells her it wasn’t, why would V lie (assuming V was Valerie). I think if the W brothers wanted to play up on the Valerie –> V idea then V would have said yes I wrote the letter - which would be the truth if V was Valerie
dlw on August 17th, 2006 9:21 pm

no problems.

Both Ruth and Valerie were actresses, so the Vaudevillan bit doesn’t distinguish between them.

As for the doctor referring to V as male, it seems that a side effect of the treatments was a sex change so that Valerie became male and lost her memories, all of which were kept on the biography she wrote for her new self…

The lack of genitals due to the fire bit does make sense and the hair could be a wig, but why pick a wig that black with a reddish tinge if not as memory to one’s former self. Valerie had red hair that was dyed black for her acting.

I agree that Ruth and Valerie having adjacent cells is unlikely and if I’m right about V’s cell not having a cell to the left, impossible.

When V tells Evie tha the letter wasnt’ written by him, that merely shows zhe dissociates him/herself from Valerie. Valerie was for all extensive purposes dead as V lost all memories of who he was, as noted by the doctor. So it simply doesn’t follow that V was lying if V had been Valerie.

There are no conincidences, just the appearance of coincidence…

dlw
yazza on August 21st, 2006 8:02 pm

Merry (your comment from Aug. 15) - Valerie’s note from the movie does not match Valerie’s note from the books. The web link I posted is the book version of the letter.

Someone raised a very good point - V claims to have been a vaudevillian actor, when we first see Ruth she is dressed in vaudevillian garb. Check Valerie’s history - she never did vaudeville.

ALSO
V simply said he found the note - he did not say where or how. BUT consider this if you were V and you found the note - a not from your dead lover, and how she had died - that would certainly be inspiration to go nuts and blow the place up.

ALSO
sheep4tw said “…the letter which Valerie writes says something like ‘poor Ruth she gave up that last inch’ or something similar - why then would V allow such lies about himself (assuming he is Ruth) be perpetuated?”
V spend the entire move trying to apologize to Valerie for what he/she did. Consider the psychology of it - if V had given up “that last inch” and betrayed Valerie, he/she would feel responsoble for what happened to Valerie, and would be more likely to spend the rest of his/her life trying to make up for that. V could never apoligize to Valerie for what he/she did, Valerie is dead. He/she would also be more likely to build a shrine to the person he/she had betrayed, rather than to whom he/she was.

ALSO
Look carefully at the woman thrown into the mass grave - it is clearly Valerie, we never see Ruth’s dead body.
dlw on August 21st, 2006 9:50 pm

Y,
I fail to see why Ruth having done Vaudevillian, unlike Valerie, matters.

In the movie, V does say that zhe found the note in the same way Evie found it. This would imply that he zhe found it in the corner of the cell.

Your ruth-being V and getting upset over the death of Valerie doesn’t make sense when we remember that the nurse pointed out that V had no memory of who he was. V cannot get upset over the death of a dead lover if V no longer remembered that V was Ruth. On the other hand, if V had no memory but found a note he had written prior to the transformation then that would have also provoked a strong reaction.

I don’t recall the ‘poor Ruth she gave up that last inch’ being in the movie and so it must come from the book. I have not read the book, but I think it’s possible that V might have been Ruth in the book, and Valerie in the film. Either way, it’s an act of subterfuge with V being implied as a transgendered superhero(ine).

I have looked very carefully at the woman thrown into the mass gave, it is not clearly Valerie. A different side of the face is shown and the lesions are not exactly the same. If you want to cut and paste the relevant frames from the DVD onto a website where we can make a better comparison or inquire with the official websites then that might help…

dlw
yazza on August 22nd, 2006 1:50 am

dlw said: “Y, I fail to see why Ruth having done Vaudevillian, unlike Valerie, matters.”

- when V first introduces him/her self in he/she claims to be a former Vaudvillian. Not an actor.

and what he/she really remembers and would admit to remembering to the hospital staff is questionable.

Probably, ultimately, V is really just some un-named gay male who just got messed-up in both the movie and the book. The ultimate explaination is that he’s lashing out against a corrupt system using Valerie as a sort of motto or excuse to stand behind. We’re just really clutching at straws, reading more into the story that is there, but it is fun and it does make the story more interseting.

I would be way more interested in discussing Jesus Christ with you than this movie anyway…
dlw on August 22nd, 2006 5:10 pm

V does not use the word former Vaudevillian. V describes himself as a Vaudevillian. And a Vaudevillian is a type of actor.

I’m not willing to 2nd guess that V was lying to the hospital staff.

Well, I think that there are several coincidences in the film that make V having been Valerie make sense…

But yes, it isn’t that important in the great scheme of things. And if you’d like discuss Jesus Christ with me or others, why don’t you join and start a thread at TheologyWeb and pm Da Lone-Warrior to join you. Even if I can’t always respond promptly, there’ll be others who can.

dlw
sheep4tw on August 22nd, 2006 9:39 pm

Ok. My biggest bone of contention is the way the female doctor documented things.

1. We know that she was the one who performed the experiments. No prior experiments had been done, because she said ‘my first batch of test subjects arrived today’

2. She refers to V as the man in room 5, and notes how he is still alive and seems to be reacting well to whatever they injected in him. Why wouldn’t she document a female to male transformation then?

3. I believe the doctor when she says V has no memory. Drawing parallels between the scarlet carson roses is fine, but it does not prove that ruth/valerie = v. The way I see it, V finds Valeries note which she hid in the wall (I assume Valerie was the previous occupant of room 5, and she is now dead), reads about Ruth and the life they had together, and is inspired by all that. He calls himself V after Valerie and room 5, grows those roses as a homage to Valerie and plants them on those he kills. Finally, his superhuman power lets him break out and burn down the place. So there is no coincidence - V does all that he does AFTER reading the note and being inspired (including naming himself V, growing roses etc.)

In my opinion, the Valerie-V relationship is paralled by the V-Evey relationship - they each hand down the ‘mantle’ of preserving freedom of speech (”that choice belongs to the people who will shape the world of tomorrow). So you could very well draw parallels between V-Evey (hey, she inherits the shadow gallery, and is probably going to grow roses as well, and she already has a protege - the inspector) but V is not Evey just as Valerie is not V.

So, just to reiterate - I believe that everything took place in one cell - room 5. It is possible that there are holes in the wall, but how could they allow there to be contact between adjacent cells? The filmography also suggests this, it superimposes Evey and Valerie both reading and writing the note in the cell, quickly switching between them without switching the camera view.

Maybe:
1. Valerie is V. She lost her memory, came back and found her own note. V dosen’t know he used to be Valerie though. Dosen’t explain the fact that there is no documentation AT ALL of any gender change
2. Ruth is V. Ruth was imprisoned in that same cell after Valerie wrote her note and died and left, and got pissed off and became V. That dosen’t explain the ‘no memory’ part though. Also, Ruth was ‘taken’ first, then she confessed to being a lesbian, hence it is unlikely that Ruth would be imprisoned after Valerie.
3. V was imprisoned in the same cell after Valerie died. He adopted the name V after the cell and grew roses, all to commerate Valerie.
yazza on August 23rd, 2006 12:13 am

In the book Evey takes over for V after he dies, she even dresses like hm, mask and all.
dlw on August 23rd, 2006 5:29 am

1. We know that she was the one who performed the experiments. No prior experiments had been done, because she said ‘my first batch of test subjects arrived today’

I fail to see significance.

2. She refers to V as the man in room 5, and notes how he is still alive and seems to be reacting well to whatever they injected in him. Why wouldn’t she document a female to male transformation then?

Maybe she hadn’t kept track of the gender of the inmate? It wasn’t important. Or maybe that’d make things too obvious for the movie and they wanted to be secretive about it?

3. I believe the doctor when she says V has no memory. Drawing parallels between the scarlet carson roses is fine, but it does not prove that ruth/valerie = v. The way I see it, V finds Valeries note which she hid in the wall (I assume Valerie was the previous occupant of room 5, and she is now dead), reads about Ruth and the life they had together, and is inspired by all that. He calls himself V after Valerie and room 5, grows those roses as a homage to Valerie and plants them on those he kills.

Well, it was a whole host of stuff, the 5th of November, the room no and Valerie. As V says, zhe doesn’t believe in coincidences. What you’re saying is that V being put in Valerie’s former cell is just a coincidence.

We know that all the patients were being treated and dying, why would they replace Valerie with someone else at the last minute after she died?

Finally, his superhuman power lets him break out and burn down the place. So there is no coincidence - V does all that he does AFTER reading the note and being inspired (including naming himself V, growing roses etc.)

I’ve no doubt the note spawned V’s rebellion.

In my opinion, the Valerie-V relationship is paralled by the V-Evey relationship - they each hand down the ‘mantle’ of preserving freedom of speech (”that choice belongs to the people who will shape the world of tomorrow). So you could very well draw parallels between V-Evey (hey, she inherits the shadow gallery, and is probably going to grow roses as well, and she already has a protege - the inspector) but V is not Evey just as Valerie is not V.

I agree that there are parallels. V is making Evie less feminine and stronger. But I think that fits better with V having been Valerie…

So, just to reiterate - I believe that everything took place in one cell - room 5. It is possible that there are holes in the wall, but how could they allow there to be contact between adjacent cells? The filmography also suggests this, it superimposes Evey and Valerie both reading and writing the note in the cell, quickly switching between them without switching the camera view.

Maybe:
1. Valerie is V. She lost her memory, came back and found her own note. V dosen’t know he used to be Valerie though. Dosen’t explain the fact that there is no documentation AT ALL of any gender change

Don’t you think V might have inferred that he was Valerie, but also believes that Valerie was effectively killed upon the transformation?

As for the lack of documentation, the Wachowski Bros are Gnostics, this is a heretical form of Christianity that also was somewhat elitist. Their elitism includes ladening their films with deeper messages that only some are bound to find out(see my comments on the Matrix Trilogy). It also is an act of subterfuge to make a film with a hero and simply garner attention for the hero without explicitly saying the hero is transgendered and was lesbian. As Gay-rights activists, it would make sense for them to do such a thing.

2. Ruth is V. Ruth was imprisoned in that same cell after Valerie wrote her note and died and left, and got pissed off and became V. That dosen’t explain the ‘no memory’ part though. Also, Ruth was ‘taken’ first, then she confessed to being a lesbian, hence it is unlikely that Ruth would be imprisoned after Valerie.
3. V was imprisoned in the same cell after Valerie died. He adopted the name V after the cell and grew roses, all to commerate Valerie.

Can you say Coincidence?

dlw
The Anti-Manichaeist » Blog Archive » Ask me ’bout Jesus Christ! on August 23rd, 2006 5:36 am

[...] Over at the thread where I posted about my theory that the Wachowski Bros implied in V for Vendetta that V had been Valerie and is the first transgendered superhero to make the big screen, I had a repeat poster Yazza make the important point that it might be more important for us to write more about Jesus Christ than whether V was Valerie, Ruth or just some guy before the transformation. [...]
dlw on August 23rd, 2006 5:37 am

ps, Yazza and other readers and commentors on this thread, I have now started up a new thread where y’all can ask me questions about Jesus Christ or Christianity.

dlw
Crystal on August 30th, 2006 1:19 am

I enjoyed your analysis; you make good points.
Chad on October 17th, 2006 11:33 pm

We The People Congress is organizing a V for Vendetta inspired march on Washington DC on November 14th. More details can be found at this site:

http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTP2/UPDATES/Update2006-10-17.htm

It’s time to remind our government that it must be our servant and we the people are to be their master.

“V”
Michelle on May 28th, 2007 10:07 pm

I thought that at first too but now i’m doing an anaylzation on it for english and the doctor totaly talks about v as a him so i don’t think so but it would make tons of sense if V was you could even come up with some very interesting arugements but still…. we have to go with the doc and say V is a he
dlw on May 29th, 2007 1:14 pm

Well, Michelle, under this hypothesis, Veronica did undergo a sex-change to become a him when she became he as V!!!

I’m not saying it’s a good thing, V himself referred to what was done as terrible/horrific, I believe. But I don’t find the doc referring to V as a he as refuting my argument.

dlw
michelle on June 5th, 2007 3:33 am

i do think you are right~ at first i thought V was valerie then i didn’t and again i do
ps who is veronica
dlw on June 7th, 2007 5:53 pm

Shows how long ago I watched the movie, I forget it was Valerie, instead of Veronica…

dlw
Anonymous on June 15th, 2007 4:33 pm

holy crap!
personaly I HATE the idea of V “being” anyone that you see in the movie. That would just ruin it. Get over it V is not Valerie. I had a friend that thought V was Evey’s father,

he didn’t remember anything so he wouldn’t know he was her father.

he likes the same books and art as her father once did.

her father disipeared at lark hill. (i think i remember right)

which i do not like but it is more obvious than, “oh! V’s hair is RED TINTED!!!!! it is valerie!!! omg!! oh im so smart!
juan Carlos on June 15th, 2007 4:33 pm

holy crap!
personaly I HATE the idea of V “being” anyone that you see in the movie. That would just ruin it. Get over it V is not Valerie. I had a friend that thought V was Evey’s father,

he didn’t remember anything so he wouldn’t know he was her father.

he likes the same books and art as her father once did.

her father disipeared at lark hill. (i think i remember right)

which i do not like but it is more obvious than, “oh! V’s hair is RED TINTED!!!!! it is valerie!!! omg!! oh im so smart!
dlw on June 16th, 2007 4:27 pm

it’s a mystery dude. And even if V didn’t remember anything from his past life, he can still piece the pieces together from the clues left him, such as the letter that was in his cell at the end of the prison cell. There was no adjacent cell on the left side. The only person who could have left the toilet roll there was V before V became V or the she became a he.

dlw
Fall on June 18th, 2007 8:50 am

Although others have said it, the purpose and message of the movie only makes sense by not thinking of V as an individual, but taken over and sacrificed to the ideas of the people of England.

Also, it was a book before it was a movie, and those who produced the movie would not have taken something great, and completely removed its inner meaning. So basing your ideas upon knowledge of the Wachowski Bros is hardly relevent. Admitedly, they would have made some changes, but not to the core purpose of the story.

V’s “hair” I thought look pretty obviously like a wig. I may be wrong, but I think I recall an earlier part in the film where he was not wearing a wig.

When Delia is recalling the explosion and V is standing in the middle, yes genitals are not shown - that kind of thing gets censored in a lot of modern films to avoid distraction. Courtesy of our wonderful society.

V says he found the note the same way Evey did. The SAME way. Evey didn’t write it.

All the “coincidences” between V and Valerie (the Roses, his motive and reasoning, etc) would have derived from the fact that V read her note because she was in the cell before he was. Cell V. There was not a single day where everyone died and seeing as V didn’t react as the others did, and ultimately did not die, there’s no reason why he wasn’t moved to another cell. This has been said as well, but he had no memory of his past. He wouldn’t have remembered if he was Valerie anyway so the possibility serves no purpose.

Valerie and Ruth look very different. The body that was dumped was most definitely Valerie’s. I too thought V would be Valerie initially (before the end of the film) but the scene in which her body is dumped among other facts (including the meaning of the film) led me to realise they couldn’t be the same person.

Last but not least, the author has explicitly said that V is not Valerie. V is not Ruth. V is not Evey’s father. In fact, V is not anyone previously seen in the film at all. “Modernising” what the author originally intending, destroys any meaning or purpose the story holds.

Like I said, I thought V was Valerie at first too, but that got shot down by facts, and I’m not any less of a person for changing my mind about it.
dlw on June 19th, 2007 8:43 pm

I don’t see why knowledge of the W2 bros doesn’t give us clues on what to expect in their movies. And, as noted by my friend Todd above, there is evidence that the original book also intended V as a transsexual superhero.

No doubt, V’s hair is stylized, but I believe it is the real thing, simply dyed.

“V says he found the note the same way Evey did. The SAME way. Evey didn’t write it.”

dlw: I feel to see how the fact they found the note in the same way has any bearing whatsoever on whom wrote it…

“All the “coincidences” between V and Valerie (the Roses, his motive and reasoning, etc) would have derived from the fact that V read her note because she was in the cell before he was. Cell V. There was not a single day where everyone died and seeing as V didn’t react as the others did, and ultimately did not die, there’s no reason why he wasn’t moved to another cell. This has been said as well, but he had no memory of his past. He wouldn’t have remembered if he was Valerie anyway so the possibility serves no purpose.”

dlw: Why wd we have any reason to believe that V wd be moved because of the fact that others were dying in their cells?

It does not matter if he was unable to remember being Valerie, so long as V was able to infer that V must have been Valerie. The doctor’s remark does corroborate that V had a very different identity prior to the transformation.

“Valerie and Ruth look very different.”

irrelevant to the matter at hand.

” The body that was dumped was most definitely Valerie’s.”

watch it again, the scars on the faces are different. They may lead you to associate the two, but it is by no means implied.

” I too thought V would be Valerie initially (before the end of the film) but the scene in which her body is dumped among other facts (including the meaning of the film) led me to realise they couldn’t be the same person.”

dlw: I fail to see how V comes to symbolize the sufferings of so many at the hands of a tyrannical gov’t implies anything for V’s former identity.

“Valerie and Ruth look very different. The body that was dumped was most definitely Valerie’s. I too thought V would be Valerie initially (before the end of the film) but the scene in which her body is dumped among other facts (including the meaning of the film) led me to realise they couldn’t be the same person.

“Last but not least, the author has explicitly said that V is not Valerie. V is not Ruth. V is not Evey’s father. In fact, V is not anyone previously seen in the film at all. “Modernising” what the author originally intending, destroys any meaning or purpose the story holds.”

dlw: V is not Valerie. The issue is whether V was Valerie. Provide a link to the author’s statement and read over what the author says more carefully.

I’m open to being wrong, but you have not dissuaded me, as yet.
dlw on January 16th, 2010 6:32 pm

I think the “code” is an embellishment that the W2 siblings added to the original story.

They have the right to do that as well…

In the end, it’s clever to get folks to like a superhero and then let them figure out that he was a she. If the original writer doesn’t like this strategy then that’s his anal-retentive opinion. It doesn’t really matter…
dlw

Leave a Reply

Recently Written

Categories

Archives

Admin

Search

Aug

2

The V for Vendetta Code!

Comments

Recently Written

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Admin

Search

Aug

2

The V for Vendetta Code!

Comments