Is Alan Moore Crazy?

[Talavar]

No, really, is Alan Moore crazy?  And, if so, when did he go off his nut? 

I don't mean in his personal life, which is somewhat...eccentric.  Or in his long, somewhat bizarre battle with DC, or even his issues with the film translations of his work (I myself can still enjoy V for Vendetta, and even the League movie to a degree).  No, I ask because I just read League of Extraordinary Gentlemen 3: The Black Dossier.  I love the first two volumes of this series, with its intricate knowledge of Victorian fiction.  I mean, Moore doesn't just borrow the characters, he really knows those stories.  His re-telling of Sherlock Holmes & Moriarty's final battle was strangely touching to this old fan of Holmes.  His work with Mina, Nemo, Griffin & Hyde - they all work so well with the original stories (except for the necessity of deciding most faked their deaths) that if you have read the stories they originate from, the comics are so much richer.  Some of the secondary characters he pulls from the Victorian era are a little obscure, but if you don't recognized them, it doesn't really hamper the story.  However, the main characters are so well known that even if you haven't read 20 000 Leagues Under the Sea, Dracula, etc., the characters still work effectively.  I also love Watchmen & V for Vendetta and some of Moore's earlier work.

I can't really say the same with Black Dossier.  Mina & Quatermain are back, but most of the new characters we spend any time with are so obscure that Moore's actually using an established character doesn't lend anything to the story; instead the new characters are virtual ciphers.  I guess part of this was that, since the story has moved up in time, these characters are still under copyright, and so must be somewhat disguised.  A thuggish "Jimmy" Bond appears (much more like his literary counterpart than the film versions), but aside from him, the book almost needs annotations.  Perhaps in Britain these characters are better known, but I was left shaking my head with confusion when certain characters appeared (namely the Gollywog), and had to look them up later to make any sense of them.

I also wasn't terribly fond of his version of the "real" world, either.  In the first two, Victorian-era stories, the society at large isn't so different from real Victorian society, with a few minor differences and the addition of these fantastic characters & their creations.  In Black Dossier, the Britain of the late 50s & early 60s is so different to the real version as to be largely unrecognizable.  Post-war Britain was ruled by Big Brother & spaceports litter the landscape.  You could argue that, based on the advances of Victorian science fiction being real, this is what the world in the 50s would have been like, but it simply doesn't gel with the tone of the first two volumes.  The setting is no longer the real, if historical world with the addition of fantastic elements - the whole place is fantasy-land.

I can't deny that Moore's use of different literary styles from different time periods is quite an achievement, but it's not enough for me to enjoy the jumbled mess that the rest of the setting has become.  I'd been wanting to check out Moore's Lost Girls; now I'm not sure if I do.  I must say though, that Prospero's closing speech on the importance of stories almost won me back over, despite my problems with the rest of the story.

[tommyboy]

Declaration of Interest. I'm A Big Alan Moore Fan.
The Black Dossier is a bit different to the other LOEG comics, in part because it's NOT all comic. I found it quite hard going in places.
Your observation about the obscurity of the characters echoes the ones I've heard from those who aren't familiar with Victorian Literature. Suffice to say, I recognize a lot of the figures in both LOEG and Black Dossiers (I read too much), but I dare say Wikipedia can fill in the gaps for us. And yes, I think that there is a barrel-scraping element to the characters of the 20th century, simply because the 20th century has produced fewer memorable archetypes, in my opinion. So Billy Bunter or Fireball XL5 or Bulldog Drummond, whilst all charming and entertaining to see referenced for Englishmen of my approximate age group will draw blank looks from everyone else.
As to the LOEG being an accurate depiction of Victorian England but BD not of post war England, I beg to differ on both counts. O'Neills fabulous but outrageous steampunk Victoriana was as inaccurate as the BD England is. The mood of both pieces is spot on, in my opinion. Remember he's depicting the literary England, not the real one. And after the war literary England was dominated by, in no particular order, cold war paranoia, George Orwell, science fiction, loss of Empire, and an unquestioning assumption that 'we', and our government, were Right. To me, BD is very much like the world of books, comics, films and TV I grew up with, or had referenced from older siblings and parents.
Perhaps I should re-read it to be fair, but it felt to me like BD was creaking under the weight of the religio-philosophical stuff Moore shoe-horns into it. LOEG, as well as benefitting from a stronger, richer source material (again IMO), doesnt have the lurid metaphysical backdrop running through BD. And whilst I've loved this stuff in Promethea, the Birth Caul etc, here it just doesnt sit right, for me.

In answer to the thread's question, I think not, maybe, I don't know, can you repeat the question...

[Talavar]

I guess part of the issue for me is that the literary landscape of Victorian England is old enough to have been studied & rediscovered, even the pop-literature, while the same sort of stuff for the '50s & '60s is largely unfamiliar to me, being neither English nor old enough to remember any of these characters.  The mood of Post-war England is difficult for me, a Canadian born in 1980, to really get a feel for, so I just get the impression that these League stories are getting more and more exclusive and insular.  I would get more enjoyment out of the stories about the earlier incarnations of the League, with Prospero & Elizabethan England, because, somewhat strangely, that era is probably better known outside of England than relatively recent history of the country.

I see what you're saying about the tonal differance between the steampunk Victorian era & the space-age '60s, but it still feels a little jarring to me.  In the Victorian era stories most of the steampunk is the exception - you get the feeling that to the average citizen of that era it would still feel unusual.  Having spaceports in the '60s is a wider divergence from the real world, just as the fiction of the '60s could be farther removed from the real world.  And while I'm familiar with Orwell & a lot of distopian fiction, I guess since I came to it much after the fact, and since most of it, though written after WWII it wasn't set immediately after WWII, I don't associate it with that specific time period.

Have you read Lost Girls?  I'd be interested in your take on it if you have before trying to get a copy of it myself.  I've just been finding that Moore's writing seems to be spiralling in a direction where fewer and fewer readers are going to be able, or even want to follow.  He's immensely talented, but the focus for his more recent work seems to be curving inward, dealing more and more with his personal fixations & religio-philosophical musings, until I wonder if finally he'll be his only audience who appreciates the work.  He wouldn't be the first extremely talented writer to eventually lose his focus and his audience to his own personal obsessions after all, and I just wonder if we're seeing the beginning of that process now.  I hope not.

[tommyboy]

I have read Lost Girls, and my feelings on it are mixed, to say the least.
Warning: grown up stuff ahoy:
[spoiler]
The art is gorgeous, but that style doesn't especially appeal to me.
Although there are surface similarities between Lost Girls and LOEG (ie using pre-existing literary figures from separate sources all mixed in to one 'universe'/story), the stated goal (and this is my interpretation of stuff I've read him say of LG, so could be wide of the mark) of 'intelligent pornography' takes us into waters not comfortable for many.
LG is explicit, and unapologetically deals with sex, sex, and a bit more sex for good measure. And while this sort of 'sexual samizdat' is pretty widely known in many genres (see a million 'Star Trek' fanfics where Kirk and Spock are lovers), and I'd pretty much ignore it if it were any other author, Moore for me rarely misses so I gave it a try.
And it is porn. Clever, entertaining, thoughtful, thought-provoking, well executed and everything else they set out to do. However, all of this is as much importance as the set up in any porn, which is to say, whether its the plumber and the housewife, or much loved literary characters, it's all just set up for the porn. And the trouble with that is, porn is functional. You read or watch it under certain...fairly specific circumstances....not to be intellectually engaged. So either the porn is pointless, or the rest is pointless.
To illustrate this point, imagine a TV guide, brilliantly written, lovingly illustrated. In the end, the basic, no-frills TV guide does the functional stuff without needing the clever artsy stuff. And the clever artsy stuff is hampered by having to list all the TV programmes within it. It doesn't work very well as either of its components.
It's a brave project, but for me one that fails because of its very nature. If I want porn I tend not to want to think too much, and if I want to think, then porn isn't a rich source of intellectual stimulation.
I hope this doesn't breach the 'family friendly' nature of the forums here.[/spoiler]

[RTTingle]

If I want porn I tend not to want to think too much, and if I want to think, then porn isn't a rich source of intellectual stimulation.

I find this interesting.

I guess what stimulates one, doesn't stimulate another.

I could honestly not raise an eyebrow over any woman stepping out of the pages of a centerfold.

However, I thought one woman I loved more beautiful fully dressed than any woman was naked.  The more intellectual she was, the more stimulated I became.

RTT

[BentonGrey]

Yes.  Alan Moore is a looney.  He's brilliant, but at the same time I can only stand to read about half of what he writes.  I'll say this, in comment to RTT, love has nothing to do with that particular...pastime.

[tommyboy]

If I want porn I tend not to want to think too much, and if I want to think, then porn isn't a rich source of intellectual stimulation.

I find this interesting.

I guess what stimulates one, doesn't stimulate another.

I could honestly not raise an eyebrow over any woman stepping out of the pages of a centerfold.

However, I thought one woman I loved more beautiful fully dressed than any woman was naked.  The more intellectual she was, the more stimulated I became.

RTT

Yes, but *ahem*.....'erotica' is not about real people, it's virtual. With real people of course intelligence and personality count, but even with a real person you seldom stop in flagrante to discuss philosophy. Before and after, for sure, but not during. Or at least, that's my preference...

[RTTingle]

Before and after, for sure, but not during. Or at least, that's my preference...

It wasn't hers.   :lol:

Yes, she was... different

Anyways.  I'm the same about Moore.  Can give or take depending on whats what.  I've heard about Lost Girls and was curious.  Have yet to be curious enough to look and buy it.  I think there is a huge difference in erotica and porn --- depending on whos writing of course.  One I think is often mistake for the other.  Occasionally cracking open the romance books my girlfriend tears through I think "romance" is mistaken for the others as well.  :P

I think Moore is eccentric indeed.  It certainly makes him more interesting.  When he is good.... he's damn good.  When he's bad?  Well --- sometimes the concepts fall flat.

RTT

[Talavar]

In a way he's beginning to remind me of Philip K. Dick.  Dick was brilliant but eccentric for sure, and he just started to go off the rails late in his career, as he focused more and more on his major defining themes of identity and belief.  Moore's focus is different, but I'm beginning to think the result is the same.

[GrizzlyBearTalon]

Yes Alan Moore is crazy. I see the word eccentric being tossed around but to me that word seems like the nice way to say "yeah he is crazy but he is also either rich or talented" so he becomes eccentric, heh.

He is probably one of my all time favorite comic writers but like others have mentioned he now seems more inclined to focus on bringing out his own personal feelings on religion and other esoteric topics in his work than he is about creating well written fiction. It seems that the comics have gone from being a story he is writing to almost becoming his own personal thinly veiled soapbox. While he has always had a bit of that in his work it seems (and I'm merely mirroring others comments) to be getting progressively more prevalent.

[Ajax]

In a way he's beginning to remind me of Philip K. Dick.  Dick was brilliant but eccentric for sure, and he just started to go off the rails late in his career, as he focused more and more on his major defining themes of identity and belief.  Moore's focus is different, but I'm beginning to think the result is the same.

The difference being Dick had taken so many drugs during his lifetime that his mind was mush. Kinda like Hunter S Thompson in his later years. From what I've read and seen of Alan Moore he isn't a heavy drug user.

As far as Alan Moore being crazy. I think he has proven time and time again that he can tell a great story. Look at stuff like Smax and that series which was like Superheroes + NYPD (name eludes me). Right now he is feeding his own interests and he has reached the point in his career where he can do so. Eventually he will come back to do some less "Black Dossier-esque" work.

[GrizzlyBearTalon]

Look at stuff like Smax and that series which was like Superheroes + NYPD (name eludes me). Right now he is feeding his own interests and he has reached the point in his career where he can do so. Eventually he will come back to do some less "Black Dossier-esque" work.

Top 10

[Ajax]

Look at stuff like Smax and that series which was like Superheroes + NYPD (name eludes me). Right now he is feeding his own interests and he has reached the point in his career where he can do so. Eventually he will come back to do some less "Black Dossier-esque" work.

Top 10

Thank you.

[DrMike2000]

I havent read either Black Dossier or Lost Girls, but I do know that Alan Moore is crazy.
The good sort of crazy :)

Why does a writer write?

I think Moore made a very conscious decision at some point to address a limited target audience. He doesnt need the money, and to him writing has become a soapbox from which to air his views on the world. If Moore sold 100 copies of a project and touched 100 souls deeply, I expect he'd be happy. Full power to him in my book for doing so, particular for his stance on intelligent pornography.

Mark Millar, in comparison, decided to write populist fiction, and openly mentions his enjoyment of the money it brings in on Millarworld. He writes knockout superhero stuff that doesnt stretch the envelope too far, but nevertheless engages and often carries a vague political edge.

Neither's crazy or superior in their approach (maybe in the execution, thats a matter of opinion.. :) ). Both have stated their target goals and ran with them.

[lugaru]

And it is porn. Clever, entertaining, thoughtful, thought-provoking, well executed and everything else they set out to do.

For me it pretty much felt like anything from the catalog in the back of an issue of heavy metal. Now if you do want some smart porn I recomend a movie called "short bus" which is basically a really good drama set in new york following multiple characters... that happens to have non simulated sex. What I like though is that the sex is often funny, sad or touching... not just arousing. It's pretty much the only time in my life I've seen actual narrative and character development taking place while people fool around.