Alan Moore stops being polite
Alan Moore stops being polite
Following recent kerfuffles, Alan Moore responds to the big questions about his work with some big answers. He spent all Christmas writing about the Galley-wag, sexual violence, Grant Morrison and the slipping standards of The Independent so that you didn't have to:
http://slovobooks.wordpress.com/2014/01 ... interview/
http://slovobooks.wordpress.com/2014/01 ... interview/
Damn straight, except it isn't that people don't understand it, they simply don't want to be in it most of the time.a significant section of the public, having given up on [...] the reality they are actually living in,
Every generation recycles, to the point that there's extensive shorthand meaning accreted around everything. It's fairly arbitrary (or at least led more by marketing than any supposed intrinsic worth) what pulp and ephemera sticks around in public consciousness, but no more unexpected than endless variations on Frankenstein or biblical tales, or continued estimation of Shakespeare or Greco-Roman myth.it is, potentially, culturally catastrophic to have the ephemera of a previous century squatting possessively on the cultural stage and refusing to allow this surely unprecedented era to develop a culture of its own, relevant and sufficient to its times
Talk of cultural catastrophe (as well as The End Times Being Upon Us, and Technology Bringing About The End of Civilisation) has been the pattern of every age.
More on-topic, Morrison seems to be an utter twat, Moore pretty reasonable (although some of the points touched on hold better as intellectual exercise than the way most of a potential audience might see things) and from a purely selfish point of view his focusing on creative projects is welcome.
I think that is a very good way of putting it.Denyer wrote:Moore pretty reasonable (although some of the points touched on hold better as intellectual exercise than the way most of a potential audience might see things)
Seems the Moore / Morrison feud is getting way more coverage than the pretty interesting talk about objectionable content and writing characters through the class divide. I'm a slight outsider to British culture and the class system is fascinating to me - I can understand how central it is to Moore's identity but I honestly had never up until now considered that the class in which character's grew up is potentially more fundamental than a gender, race or sexuality.
I really like how he flagged up how problematic Fu Manchu is as a concept and how unreconstructed he was (not to mention the Chinese and Arabian extras) in Volume One.
Yeah, I've never bought Moore's doom and gloom on the cultural front. He's good at talking about it and I was one of the few who really liked 2009 but I don't see a substantial difference between what he says and old folk telling me that women with tattoos are evidence of the same problem.Talk of cultural catastrophe (as well as The End Times Being Upon Us, and Technology Bringing About The End of Civilisation) has been the pattern of every age.
I do wonder what will unfold with this Laura Sneddon misadventure. I'm tempted to side with Moore out of sheer favouritism but he does have a habit of controlling the story when it comes to fall-outs.
No chance to read any of this properly now, but
http://comicsbeat.com/the-strange-case- ... -morrison/
http://www.comicbookgrrrl.com/2011/11/2 ... lan-moore/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/thalestral
Seems more than a bit impressionable and to be inclined to enter the orbit of creators, Morrison's particularly.
http://comicsbeat.com/the-strange-case- ... -morrison/
http://www.comicbookgrrrl.com/2011/11/2 ... lan-moore/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/thalestral
Seems more than a bit impressionable and to be inclined to enter the orbit of creators, Morrison's particularly.
Ah, hadn't joined the dots that she was the same who did the big Grant Morrison interview.
Seems that the 'Batman scholar' is Will Brooker, who I knew nothing about. I am reading his Twitter stream and forming opinions.
I will say that I am glad I am not currently dating anyone who studies English Lit.
Seems that the 'Batman scholar' is Will Brooker, who I knew nothing about. I am reading his Twitter stream and forming opinions.
I will say that I am glad I am not currently dating anyone who studies English Lit.
- Cyberstrike nTo
- Protoform
- Posts: 4186
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 5:48 pm
- Location: In the Dead Universe known as Indianapolis
- Contact:
I think Alan Moore is at the point in his life and career where he doesn't give a shit about what people think of him, his work, or his opinions about any thing. A person asked him what he thought Grant Morrison and he gave his opinions and memories of Morrison.
Honestly I can't say I blame him saying Morrison being an Alan Moore wanna-be hack. Because other than his run on JLA and Batman: Arkham Asylem I haven't read anything else by him that didn't suck as being a Silver Age fanwank or something that was just so freaking weird and impossible to understand WTF is going on.
Honestly I can't say I blame him saying Morrison being an Alan Moore wanna-be hack. Because other than his run on JLA and Batman: Arkham Asylem I haven't read anything else by him that didn't suck as being a Silver Age fanwank or something that was just so freaking weird and impossible to understand WTF is going on.
Please visit Outlaw Colony my new message board it's a fun site for fun people.
I wondered why this was so familiar, then I remembered I'd read the Laura Sneddon article on Grant Morrison a while back.
It seems like Alan Moore baiting has become a bit of a sport. The poking and tormenting of Moore and his subsequent frustration and further withdrawal from the mainstream seem to be the point. His reactions are undoubtedly going to be as entertaining as the comics he writes; he's written a near thesis sized response on the subject for goodness sake.
Morrison loves attention of any kind and Moore hates attention of the wrong kind. I think Moore and Morrison are so polarised now in their thinking that they genuinely can't fathom the others point of view, or if they can one has been repeating the same bollocks for so long that they've started to believe it. Now is that more likely to be Morrison? I couldn't possibly say .
On a personal level I can relate more to Moore's point of view. I have a mineshaft sized working class chip on my shoulder, that I (over) developed as a research student. If I'm being honest I wish I could get rid of it. It is nearly impossible to work in a system you become so embittered against you actively hate it, I was and still am nonplussed when it comes to a solution.
That said, like Terome, I've genuinely enjoyed a lot of Morrison's work; We3 is a lovely little book. So in a quality of work sense, I don't think Morrison is a hack; he's just seems a bit of a knob.
I'm with Moore, but I'm happy for him to stop playing the game and concentrate on the writing.
It seems like Alan Moore baiting has become a bit of a sport. The poking and tormenting of Moore and his subsequent frustration and further withdrawal from the mainstream seem to be the point. His reactions are undoubtedly going to be as entertaining as the comics he writes; he's written a near thesis sized response on the subject for goodness sake.
Morrison loves attention of any kind and Moore hates attention of the wrong kind. I think Moore and Morrison are so polarised now in their thinking that they genuinely can't fathom the others point of view, or if they can one has been repeating the same bollocks for so long that they've started to believe it. Now is that more likely to be Morrison? I couldn't possibly say .
On a personal level I can relate more to Moore's point of view. I have a mineshaft sized working class chip on my shoulder, that I (over) developed as a research student. If I'm being honest I wish I could get rid of it. It is nearly impossible to work in a system you become so embittered against you actively hate it, I was and still am nonplussed when it comes to a solution.
That said, like Terome, I've genuinely enjoyed a lot of Morrison's work; We3 is a lovely little book. So in a quality of work sense, I don't think Morrison is a hack; he's just seems a bit of a knob.
This. It's a bit insulting to your reader that you feel you can dictate whether they are allowed to read your widely published work, and when they do, what they read subsequently. 'If you don't subscribe to my philosophy GTFO', this sort of thing is to be expected from the lovable curmudgeon, but it still rankles. It's like I'm not trusted to make a judgement on the worthiness of individual texts.It's funny that Moore would specify what his audience reads if he could but I don't see much point in choosing sides.
I'm with Moore, but I'm happy for him to stop playing the game and concentrate on the writing.
I'm giving Moore the benefit of the doubt that he feels he is punching up with this plea and that if he were somehow made Tyrant Of Earth (what a week that would be!) he'd think twice about being so flippantly autocratic.nhy3888 wrote: This. It's a bit insulting to your reader that you feel you can dictate whether they are allowed to read your widely published work, and when they do, what they read subsequently. 'If you don't subscribe to my philosophy GTFO', this sort of thing is to be expected from the lovable curmudgeon, but it still rankles. It's like I'm not trusted to make a judgement on the worthiness of individual texts.
I'm with Moore, but I'm happy for him to stop playing the game and concentrate on the writing.
And I think there is the hinge of all this: the benefit of the doubt and where anyone wants to plant it. I think that is why the Morrison stuff is getting the most attention and also why so many stalwarts were willing to side against Furman in that Windblade situation so many years ago. The work really does stand for itself at the end of the day and if you're defending Lost Girls you're on a very different footing from someone defending Spotlight: Arcee. Using a TFW2005 poster's words.
It might also be the difference between being satisfied with handing out a public savaging or feeling around to see if one has a case for libel, which I understand is what Sneddon has been talking about. But I might be overreaching there.
It's very interesting to me because where I'm from, the class divide is much much less important than the racial and language divide though they function in much the same way. When I am asked by British what I am I struggle to comprehend that I am not White/English but Middle Class. But people of my age were very firmly instructed that invoking these divides was no way to behave and was actively despicable. When I hear my British friends using very similar language to describe other classes as I am accustomed to hearing South Africans describe other races I perform no shortage of spit-takes.On a personal level I can relate more to Moore's point of view. I have a mineshaft sized working class chip on my shoulder, that I (over) developed as a research student. If I'm being honest I wish I could get rid of it. It is nearly impossible to work in a system you become so embittered against you actively hate it, I was and still am nonplussed when it comes to a solution.
So I agree with Moore - from his point of view, writing characters across the class divide probably is more delicate ground than any other single division. This might be lost on his non-British critics as it was lost on me and probably was something he had to spell out very clearly as he has done here.
Yep, the defenses of their work were poles apart. It makes Furman's response all the more laughable really.The work really does stand for itself at the end of the day and if you're defending Lost Girls you're on a very different footing from someone defending Spotlight: Arcee. Using a TFW2005 poster's words.
For me it's more of a nagging thought in my mind that chimes in unvited on occasion, something I would never give voice to as I agree it's offensive. Extremely so in some cases. I think for me when I feel utterly out of place I'm weak minded enough to let paranoia take hold and my self confidence takes a nose dive. I could be confusing class with general feeling of inadequacy though, teamed with general PhD misery ha!people of my age were very firmly instructed that invoking these divides was no way to behave and was actively despicable. When I hear my British friends using very similar language to describe other classes as I am accustomed to hearing South Africans describe other races I perform no shortage of spit-takes.
I suppose the debate on class overlaps somewhat with that of poverty and the plight of the working or non-working poor, but what is dogma and what is fact I couldn't say.
I would be pleased though if Furman were to now come out swinging that Morrison announced working on Zoids shortly after he began making headway on Transformers.nhy3888 wrote:Yep, the defenses of their work were poles apart. It makes Furman's response all the more laughable really.
I think that probably is an accurate description of the plight of all citizens on some level.For me it's more of a nagging thought in my mind that chimes in unvited on occasion, something I would never give voice to as I agree it's offensive. Extremely so in some cases. I think for me when I feel utterly out of place I'm weak minded enough to let paranoia take hold and my self confidence takes a nose dive. I could be confusing class with general feeling of inadequacy though, teamed with general PhD misery ha!
I'm facing down some PhD application deadlines this week and I can't say that anyone is selling it to me as a great way to spend four years. I might get back to the cartoons instead as no one sends me fan mail or money for being a student. What's your field?
- inflatable dalek
- Posts: 24000
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Kidderminster UK
I am probably revealing myself to be a cultural ignoramus, but I don't really know enough about Morrison to comment on the pluses and negatives of both himself as a person and as a writer (though he did reveal the Cybermen were the Voord all along, which surely wins some sort of points...)
As far as Moore goes, my long standing issue with him is that he'll happily take out of copyright characters created by other people and do what the hell he likes with them, safe in the knowledge the original creator is long dead and will never object (though the more recent League stuff has moved into characters who are both still in copyright and have creators still alive. It's rather sweet he'll go "No, honestly, it's not Harry Potter" but at the same time basically admit Bond is in it. Does he not realise how litigious the Bond copyright holders are? They successfully stopped any repeats in the US of a DS9 episode just because of the name "Dr. Noah..."), but if anyone does the same with any character he has created- be it film adaptations or sequel comics- he screams blue murder. That's a huge double standard.
In terms of his claim about cultural bankruptcy... Firstly he's ignoring the big audience for Avengers/Batman/Doctor Who are children rather than middle aged men. Secondly, what exactly is the difference from middle aged men being deeply interested in 70 year old pulp/kids characters as their main focus of interest, and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen which is a comic written by a middle aged man who is clearly deeply interested in 200 odd year old pulp/kids characters? And is presumably best enjoyed by people of a similar bent?
And he refuses to do an interview with any publication that has ever (how far back?!) interviewed Morrison? That's just pure dickishness (as well as a pointless gesture as nothing Moore has to sell will ever suffer from him being difficult as that's sort of what fans expect).
I would love it to be the case that Moore's entire persona is a carefully crafted cynical attempt to increase sales, and as soon as no one's looking he peels the beard off and sits down to watch TOWIE.
As far as Moore goes, my long standing issue with him is that he'll happily take out of copyright characters created by other people and do what the hell he likes with them, safe in the knowledge the original creator is long dead and will never object (though the more recent League stuff has moved into characters who are both still in copyright and have creators still alive. It's rather sweet he'll go "No, honestly, it's not Harry Potter" but at the same time basically admit Bond is in it. Does he not realise how litigious the Bond copyright holders are? They successfully stopped any repeats in the US of a DS9 episode just because of the name "Dr. Noah..."), but if anyone does the same with any character he has created- be it film adaptations or sequel comics- he screams blue murder. That's a huge double standard.
In terms of his claim about cultural bankruptcy... Firstly he's ignoring the big audience for Avengers/Batman/Doctor Who are children rather than middle aged men. Secondly, what exactly is the difference from middle aged men being deeply interested in 70 year old pulp/kids characters as their main focus of interest, and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen which is a comic written by a middle aged man who is clearly deeply interested in 200 odd year old pulp/kids characters? And is presumably best enjoyed by people of a similar bent?
And he refuses to do an interview with any publication that has ever (how far back?!) interviewed Morrison? That's just pure dickishness (as well as a pointless gesture as nothing Moore has to sell will ever suffer from him being difficult as that's sort of what fans expect).
I would love it to be the case that Moore's entire persona is a carefully crafted cynical attempt to increase sales, and as soon as no one's looking he peels the beard off and sits down to watch TOWIE.
REVIISITATION: THE HOLE TRUTH
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
Thus starting a comic feud chain reaction that engulfs the industry, or everyone versus Grant Morrison ...pile on! I wonder who had the idea to use Geoff Senior first?I would be pleased though if Furman were to now come out swinging that Morrison announced working on Zoids shortly after he began making headway on Transformers.
Zoology, but really it takes in all sorts: behaviour, physiology and molecular biology. What are you applying for? No doubt the structure of a humanities PhD is very different to that of something from the sciences. The right supervisor and student combination can make for a wonderful time and it'll be plain sailing and a love for the subject is a given really, but it can be so intense it can kill it for you. I could probably write a thesis on the events of my PhD, nevermind the work itself.I'm facing down some PhD application deadlines this week and I can't say that anyone is selling it to me as a great way to spend four years. I might get back to the cartoons instead as no one sends me fan mail or money for being a student. What's your field?
I have no doubt that much of Moore's persona is a front, but a removable beard? Is Grant Morrison actually Alan Moore in disguise? That would be the king of all Scooby Doo reveals.I would love it to be the case that Moore's entire persona is a carefully crafted cynical attempt to increase sales, and as soon as no one's looking he peels the beard off and sits down to watch TOWIE.
- inflatable dalek
- Posts: 24000
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Kidderminster UK
What a twist!nhy3888 wrote:
I have no doubt that much of Moore's persona is a front, but a removable beard? Is Grant Morrison actually Alan Moore in disguise? That would be the king of all Scooby Doo reveals.
Of course, the big advantage Moore has (well, other than still knocking out highly regarded work, which is impressive in and of itself. Not many writers can keep up a constant standard over 30 years) is that people like the fact he's a bit of a grumpy old git- or as I think Cliffy put it once, "A crazy old man who thinks he's a wizard". It gives him a lot more leeway in terms of what he can get away with saying and have people still love him, if he went around with a live and let live lets all be mates attitude it would just be disappointing.
REVIISITATION: THE HOLE TRUTH
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
- Cyberstrike nTo
- Protoform
- Posts: 4186
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 5:48 pm
- Location: In the Dead Universe known as Indianapolis
- Contact:
One thing about Moore that bugs me is even if DC gave him the rights to Watchmen on silver platter what exactly would he do with it? Would he write a sequal or a spin-off, order the no more TPBs or HCs to be made and demand to have the movie pulled and not to be shown anymore? Just sit on his ass and collect a big fat paychecks based off the royalities to it?
While I do respect Alan Moore is a man of his word that he hasn't written anything for Marvel (other than an introduction to the Captain Britan TPB years ago) because they treated him bad 20-30 years ago. Most if not all of the people who treated him bad either don't work at Marvel anymore.
His grudge with Paul Levitz over the Watchmen rights, Levitz is just a writer for DC now. He's no longer the publisher or president of the company (and ironically it was Levitz that was the one that did everything in his power not to sequals or prequals to it). Moore's grudges to me has not only cost him money but costed readers chances to see what he could have done with other DC characters and stories we were denied because of problems with Marvel.
I will say that one of the things I've enjoyed most with Alan Moore is after reading his best work I feel like I've become a better person and even his worst work I'm highly entertained.
Grant Morrison on the other hand it's exact oppisite, with the exceptions of his brillant run on JLA and the excellant Batman: Arkham Asylem everything else I've read by Grant Morrison I feel dumb and that I'm became a worse person. I refuse to feel like that to please Grant Morrison and/or his fans.
While I do respect Alan Moore is a man of his word that he hasn't written anything for Marvel (other than an introduction to the Captain Britan TPB years ago) because they treated him bad 20-30 years ago. Most if not all of the people who treated him bad either don't work at Marvel anymore.
His grudge with Paul Levitz over the Watchmen rights, Levitz is just a writer for DC now. He's no longer the publisher or president of the company (and ironically it was Levitz that was the one that did everything in his power not to sequals or prequals to it). Moore's grudges to me has not only cost him money but costed readers chances to see what he could have done with other DC characters and stories we were denied because of problems with Marvel.
I will say that one of the things I've enjoyed most with Alan Moore is after reading his best work I feel like I've become a better person and even his worst work I'm highly entertained.
Grant Morrison on the other hand it's exact oppisite, with the exceptions of his brillant run on JLA and the excellant Batman: Arkham Asylem everything else I've read by Grant Morrison I feel dumb and that I'm became a worse person. I refuse to feel like that to please Grant Morrison and/or his fans.
Please visit Outlaw Colony my new message board it's a fun site for fun people.
AFAICT he'd appreciate a slightly better percentage, be happy that people can still read and enjoy and not want others to write "extension" material to a standalone piece. He always has other projects and would never just be sitting around waiting for royalties to come in.
Morrison doesn't seem to be particularly clever, just media-savvy and able to drag along enough potential readers by cult of personality. It frequently comes off as trying very hard to be deep and meaningful. Moore, by comparison, plays entertaining games within the actual fiction, and people are welcome to tag along irrespective of how many references they get or can infer.
Morrison doesn't seem to be particularly clever, just media-savvy and able to drag along enough potential readers by cult of personality. It frequently comes off as trying very hard to be deep and meaningful. Moore, by comparison, plays entertaining games within the actual fiction, and people are welcome to tag along irrespective of how many references they get or can infer.
-
- Posts: 32206
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am
- Auntie Slag
- Posts: 4859
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 4:00 am
- Custom Title: Satisfaction guaranteed!
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Contact:
I'm reading Watchmen for the first time. I'm about to start chapter eight and I think the film (which I saw at the cinema and on TV since), has done a really good job of adapting it. Not sure why it gets such a slating from the fans. Maybe it's more sensible that I make a comment once I've read the whole thing but so far the two mostly mirror each other.
Love all the extra gumpf in the book though, as in the text stuff that usually accompanies each issue. In future editions I feel like they should have the film in a little plastic sleeve at the back of the book.
Love all the extra gumpf in the book though, as in the text stuff that usually accompanies each issue. In future editions I feel like they should have the film in a little plastic sleeve at the back of the book.