The Magus Strikes Back: 'Probably not a racist rapist, all things considered'.

[TordelBack]

The estimable Padraig O Mealoid brings us these words of wisdom and art from the only facial-hair wearer that rivals Chris Hadfield in my unnatural affections:  http://slovobooks.wordpress.com/2014/01/09/last-alan-moore-interview/

I'll stand by my man this time. 

If I had gone on to say, as I have on other occasions, that modern superheroes seem to mainly function as cowardice compensators for a number of their conflict-averse creators and readers, or that the origin of capes and masks as ubiquitous superhero accessories can be deduced from a close viewing of D.W. Griffiths' Birth of a Nation, then I hate to think what I might have been accused of.

(Not representative of the theme of the piece, just one more example of crystalised wit and precision prose).

Moore should be cloned, biochipped, frozen or transcribed into a Tron-like state so that his towering articulate brilliance is available to smack down future eras.

[TordelBack]

I had meant to include this excerpt as well:

This, I think, leaves us only with the herpes-like persistence of Grant Morrison himself.  The first time this name passed briefly through the forefront of my consciousness before swiftly making its way to the latrine area...

Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.

[Colin YNWA]

There's so much information there that I started to read, then had to skip read when I first came across this via Bleedign Cool, who not surprisingly have gone with a quite sensational angle of Laura Sneldon's reponse to the piece...

anyway its vast and with anything its hard to disagree with much of what Moore says, while at the same time I find some quite astonishingly silly. The point I want to raise, until I can find the 2 weeks I'm going to need to read it in full, is regardless of what he's saying by the heavens he says it in an engaging manner!

[Jimmy Baker's Assistant]

Well, anyone that messes with Alan Moore can't say they don't know what's going to happen.

I totally support him on these issues, any claims that he is racist or sexist are based on wilful misreadings of his work, and can safely be ignored.

[TordelBack]

One of the things that truly fascinates me about POM's interview is Alan's steadfast dismissal of the internet, which he refers to as a 'world of interconnected back bedrooms' (brilliant phrase*). 

For example: he mentions the 'black photographer' (presumably the author of the And We Shall March blog) at a single signing being the only negative reaction he was aware of to the Galley-Wag (and indeed he is polite and respectful of her objections, while rejecting their premise), which ignores the hundreds of pages of discussion available online, both in the immediate aftermath of the release of Black Dossier and ever since.  And We Shall March alone has a dozen intelligently-written pages on the subject. Remaining stubbornly and wilfully ignorant of the main repository of reactions to his work casts a peculiar light on his own reactions to such criticism as he does encounter.

Now I really do admire his stance, particularly in light of the all-too-believable horrors he recounts about some of online comics journalism's most visible members, and the obvious pain even the merest brushes with this world causes him, but it does have a Canute-like quality to it. 

Given all the concerns we all have about the braying of the anonymous critic, and the standards of so-called online journalism, is Alan right about the internet as a forum?  Is it all sound and fury, signifying nothing, and best ignored completely in favour of the Northampton Chronicle and Echo?


*At the same time he denigrates all print journalism on comics, including its probable apogee in The Comics Journal, as 'fanzine columns', a scene he no longer cares for.  And then moves on to The Independent...

 

[CrazyFoxMachine]

He really is quite aggressive with Sneddon isn't he? and to Dez Skinn... That's not pleasant reading in the least. Not at all.

Hmmm - that's definitely crossed some manner of line hasn't it - his good friend Stewart Lee in his own autobiography has the sense to at least comically reflect on his own bitterness - and how although he views himself as being wronged and also imitated for commercial gain he resists the urge to get doggedly stuck in fierce acidic speculation and extended bouts of mud-slinging. But in his book I suppose he had the benefit of self-editing. If I were Moore I'd be profoundly embarrassed that legions of devotees saw me at this vitriolic ebb which in other interviews he'd clearly been had the sense not to sink to. Makes him look as worthy as his detractors - and makes our whole industry and craft which he above all others claims to respect the poorer for it.

[Jim_Campbell]

He really is quite aggressive with Sneddon isn't he? and to Dez Skinn... That's not pleasant reading in the least. Not at all.

Heh. There are plenty of people who would advise you to count your fingers after shaking hands with Dez Skinn...

Cheers

Jim

[TordelBack]

Sad really.

It certainly is sad, but not I think because Moore's vitriol is in any way embarrassing. 

He's had enough of all those he perceives as hanging off his coattails, twisting his words and his works: he's stating his case in a crystal-clear fashion and he's (hopefully) drawing a line under it all.  He's probably not 100% correct in his view of events (is anyone, ever?), but he's very clear about his own reactions, and how it all affects him. Others may be happy to stay and endlessly brawl in public about accusations and counter-accusations, micro-manage their fan communities or conduct two-faced vendettas against their perceived enemies, but Moore is a different sort with different standards, and he just sets out his stall and turns his back on it all.

That he delivers the message in such an eloquent yet remorseless manner is to mind a sign of strength: there's no ambiguity here at all. I'm just sorry that he finds us all so disappointing.  I still get the same thrill out of each new chapter of LoEG as I got from each episode of Skizz, my first encounter with his work, and I wish he still derived the same pleasure from his place in the industry as he appeared to then.

[Professor Bear]

"I saw a naked lady so this must be sexist, and I saw a racist thing from history so it must be racist too.  I can ask what that is about and know one way or another... or... I can slip out quietly and make insinuations on the internet without ever having to look anyone in the eye.  Decisions, decisions."

Another internet coward joining the web's cottage industry of being offended on behalf of everyone based on something they don't understand and don't want to* is hardly new, and I'm disappointed that we had to get such a considered, heartfelt and honest response from Moore in response to a catalysing incident that didn't deserve the attention it's received.  I am also disappointed that Moore addresses the Morrison feud directly, as up until now it's been something that's only ever cropped up in other conversations, but new chin-wags from the bearded one are always welcome, whatever the reason.

He's had enough of all those he perceives as hanging off his coattails, twisting his words and his works: he's stating his case in a crystal-clear fashion and he's (hopefully) drawing a line under it all.

It won't make any difference how clear he makes his position in the hope of evading being misquoted or misrepresented.  It's apt that CFM uses Stewart Lee as an example, as Lee did a bit where he told an anecdote about David Cameron and then said "that story wasn't true" and then went on to look directly into the camera and state in a deadpan fashion "just to be clear for all the Daily Mail writers out there currently cooking up a story, that was a joke.  It was not true.  It did not happen."  Sure enough, the next day the Daily Mail had a story about Lee's "lies" anyway - and bear in mind that the internet does not even have the journalistic standards of the Daily Mail.  Minds are already made up where Moore is concerned and truth will not help matters, it'll only make it worse.

We should do a betting pool about the article, though: we put money on what person or group will be offended by something Moore said, even if only offended by proxy.  I'll put a fiver on "(online) journalist being offended for non-whites."  I'll go to a tenner if they try playing the race or gender card on their own behalf.



*  The reference to Killing Joke's gender issues is very telling, as that question has been answered multiple times already by both Moore and Bolland.

[CrazyFoxMachine]

I'm just sorry that he finds us all so disappointing.

Again, to compare him with his occasional collaborator Lee who has a profound love for Marvel comics and HAS mentioned Grant Morrison positively as well as working closely with that great advocate of "creativity < money" Millar  - Lee wrote for the profoundly non-Moore publication Clint in 2010 http://www.stewartlee.co.uk/press/writtenformoney/formoney.php?page=2010-12-00-comics-clint_magazine.php - seems Moore doesn't have such high standards for people he's actively collaborated with as he does for us mindless thoughtless consumers.

I wish he still derived the same pleasure from his place in the industry as he appeared to then.

Using Lee again: with "Alternative Comedy Experience" for Comedy Central he is happy to take a back seat to promote new talent. It's a sign of liking something despite yourself I suppose - if Moore could look beyond those who he feels have misused his own work - and realise that since he disconnected from comics there have been thousands of creators who are producing amazing mindblowing comics (that shockingly don't all directly relate to him) that don't get a fraction as much exposure as him. I wish he still remembered what it was like to be a struggling creator. I'm not just talking about this interview but generally - people would kill to have as much influence as him (hence all the coattail riding) - and it's given him remarkable freedom to do what he wants with it and he's used it to do creative and amazing things but it's difficult to respect him when he doesn't seem to respect anyone else outside of his immediate circles. A quick glance at Sneddon's blog (as she's now hidden her Twitter) shows that she's done more to promote new comics and new creators in the last year than Moore has done in two decades. And I think I honestly respect that more.

[Jim_Campbell]

shows that she's done more to promote new comics and new creators in the last year than Moore has done in two decades. And I think I honestly respect that more.

I don't know Laura Sneddon, but I think her recent efforts as the provisional wing of Grant Morrison's PR machine and attempts to pass the same off as legitimate journalism largely preclude 'respect' in my eyes.

And, I'm afraid, if you think Moore owes the comic industry anything, you haven't been paying attention for the last thirty years.

Cheers

Jim

[Jimmy Baker's Assistant]

A quick glance at Sneddon's blog (as she's now hidden her Twitter) shows that she's done more to promote new comics and new creators in the last year than Moore has done in two decades. And I think I honestly respect that more.

I did read her Thought Bubble coverage and it made me angry due to creators not deemed worthy of a mention. I also recall she tried to de-rail the Complete Zenith publication.

So to summarise, I'm no fan.

[Professor Bear]

Sneddon's remit is online journalism and she has to be an active part of that scene, while Moore is retired from professional comics - by CFM's rationale, Johnny Depp has done more for the cowboy movie genre than Clint Eastwood has.

edit: also Moore was quite effusive in his praise for The End is Nigh when asked for a quote, making me think that his positive comments about the medium and new creators do indeed exist, but aren't quite as widely reported as things he has to say about superhero comics.

[Jim_Campbell]

edit: also Moore was quite effusive in his praise for The End is Nigh when asked for a quote, making me think that his positive comments about the medium and new creators do indeed exist, but aren't quite as widely reported as things he has to say about superhero comics.

I know a couple of small press folks who've had occasion to deal with Moore in the last couple of years and have found him helpful, friendly and supportive. As you say, reporting that kind of thing doesn't get Rich Johnston nearly as many hits as Moore saying that superhero comics are not, perhaps, a proper genre for mature literary fiction.

Cheers

Jim

[TordelBack]

A quick glance at Sneddon's blog (as she's now hidden her Twitter) shows that she's done more to promote new comics and new creators in the last year than Moore has done in two decades. And I think I honestly respect that more.

I see and appreciate your 'two decades' proviso, but will ignore it and ask how many of us wouldn't still be buying/reading/creating comics without Alan Moore?  I'd respectfully suggest that without Moore's transatlantic trailblazing much of that great pool of '80s talent would have long since given up their costly photocopied offerings and got 'proper' jobs.  No Gaiman, no Campbell, no Morrison for starters.  Against his influence, and the kick in the arse to the entire medium in the Anglophone world that his work represents, I don't really rate Laura Sneddon's contribution - although I have enjoyed much of her writing, with some notable exceptions.

Lee's situation and attitudes are (as always) interesting, and I do take your point about Moore's somewhat variable aversion to compromise. That said, Lee has pursued a career where facing the public, and being in their direct gaze, is the essence of the thing.  Moore sits at a typewriter, surrounded by reference material, and taps away in a cloud of pleasant-smelling smoke into the wee hours, keeping the audience at a minimum distance of many months.  Expecting the two to approach the world in a similar manner is unreasonable.