Comic people on Frank Miller's rant

[Theagenes]

I saw the From Hell movie. It was kinda so-so, I suppose. I liked the Freemasonry angle because I am charmed by secret society occultism. I recall it was nicely atmospheric. I enjoy movies about London. I don't think I have much else to say about it other than I understand Moore doesn't watch his movies; which I find admirable.

 

You should give it a chance. Having an prior interest in and/or basic knowledge of pagan mysticism, hermetic philosophy, sacred geometry, Victorian-era occultism, secret societies, and of course the Whitechapel murders is defintely a plus and will make it even more enjoyable. The movie only bears the slightest resemblance to the book. In many ways I think this work is his magnum opus---not Watchmen.

[Theagenes]

Also, I very much enjoyed the first LOEG, though in fairness I love Victorian and Edwardian era pop culture. The second one was weak and the later ones have pretty much jumped the shark, but the first one was good though.

[DailySuperpower]

I love Alan Moore. I'm assuming you have read V for Vendetta, my favorite work by him. Also recommend Promethea for a crash course in chaos magic, or From Hell for a most interesting look at Jack the Ripper, the unfortunate ladies in his care, Freemasonry, and the architecture of the churches of the area. A brilliant use of endnotes as narrative fleshes out a great story on a subject I otherwise had no interest in.

 

I have read Moore's Watchmen & Swamp Thing. What else I can't recall off the top of my head. Maybe that says something about my view of him. I've studied the occult my entire life & don't feel compelled to read his comics to learn about anything related to the subject. I don't care for his satanism nor that he recently experimented with comic book pornography. I think he is a great talent but am a little bored by him. Isn't he a relic of the '80's?

 

 

Has anyone read Lost Girls or do you guys just dismiss it immediately as dirty picture stories?

 

I'm about 1/3rd of the way through and, though my reading preferences are probably less traditional than the majority of people, I wouldn't call it pornography.

 

The artist, Melinda Gebbie (now Moore's wife), came up through the feminist underground comix scene. Also, as a connection to the OWS portion of the thread, she contributed stories to all four issues of Anarchy Comics.

[rjpb]

Also, I very much enjoyed the first LOEG, though in fairness I love Victorian and Edwardian era pop culture. The second one was weak and the later ones have pretty much jumped the shark, but the first one was good though.

Agreed

[TupennyConan]

I love Alan Moore. I'm assuming you have read V for Vendetta, my favorite work by him. Also recommend Promethea for a crash course in chaos magic, or From Hell for a most interesting look at Jack the Ripper, the unfortunate ladies in his care, Freemasonry, and the architecture of the churches of the area. A brilliant use of endnotes as narrative fleshes out a great story on a subject I otherwise had no interest in.

 

I have read Moore's Watchmen & Swamp Thing. What else I can't recall off the top of my head. Maybe that says something about my view of him. I've studied the occult my entire life & don't feel compelled to read his comics to learn about anything related to the subject. I don't care for his satanism nor that he recently experimented with comic book pornography. I think he is a great talent but am a little bored by him. Isn't he a relic of the '80's?

 

 

Has anyone read Lost Girls or do you guys just dismiss it immediately as dirty picture stories?

 

I'm about 1/3rd of the way through and, though my reading preferences are probably less traditional than the majority of people, I wouldn't call it pornography.

 

The artist, Melinda Gebbie (now Moore's wife), came up through the feminist underground comix scene. Also, as a connection to the OWS portion of the thread, she contributed stories to all four issues of Anarchy Comics.

 

I dismiss it. I dismiss it in the same way I dismiss Underground Comix. For me, those books aren't comic books. They are something else. Something else that I have no interest in & therefore dismiss. Many others might find them grand. That's their business. I'm occupied with my own business.

[jjonahjameson1]

Everyone raves about Watchmen, and so do I, but Moore's greatest work is From Hell. It's one of the finest pieces of literature I have ever read, period.

 

+1 Totally agree. Absolutely brilliant.

 

I've read a lot of Alan Moore's stuff and I'm of age to have appreciated the impact some of the stories had when they first appeared some 25 years ago. However, there has been a grand total of two pieces of work from Alan that I thought were above and beyond what was being published during the day:

1. The Killing Joke - best self contained single issue Batman (or should I say, Joker) story ever. How many printings did the comic go through? And the TPB also went through several printing, too.

2. From Hell. The art matched the dark, dreary, and suspenseful story perfectly.

 

Everything else by Mr. Moore, from Swamp Thing to Watchmen was/is .

 

Frank Miller, on the other hand, has offered much more.

 

Granted, neither have made major contributions in over a decade.

 

Everyone knows 'em so there's no need to name them.

 

Such as?

[TupennyConan]

I saw the From Hell movie. It was kinda so-so, I suppose. I liked the Freemasonry angle because I am charmed by secret society occultism. I recall it was nicely atmospheric. I enjoy movies about London. I don't think I have much else to say about it other than I understand Moore doesn't watch his movies; which I find admirable.

 

You should give it a chance. Having an prior interest in and/or basic knowledge of pagan mysticism, hermetic philosophy, sacred geometry, Victorian-era occultism, secret societies, and of course the Whitechapel murders is defintely a plus and will make it even more enjoyable. The movie only bears the slightest resemblance to the book. In many ways I think this work is his magnum opus---not Watchmen.

 

Okay, Jeff. I was discussing Moore's books & many other comics in PM with my Boardie bud in an effort to identify what comics I was going to schedule for 2012 reading. No decision was made. Your list of subjects conforms to my interests, except for the murders. I don't give a damn about true crime, serial killers, or JtR. Here too I dismiss our culture's fascination with something.

[RickL]

The thing with Alan Moore`s and Frank Miller`s stuff is most of their popular work was read by us when we were either teens or in our early twentys. If you went back and read their stuff now you will find it was aimed at the male adolescent reader.

I do go back and read their stuff frequently and disagree with the idea that their work is aimed at adolescent boys. Some of it is, no doubt. But not the best of it.

 

Both of them have secured a lasting place within movements of popular literature. Miller belongs in the same lineage with Hammett and Chandler, while Moore inhabits a more esoteric sphere with the Lovecrafts and Poes of the world.

 

Some of their work is lesser but they have produced fiction that will endure and so even their lesser works will be pulled along on the coat tails of those crucial writings. They will endure when Bendis and Byrne and many others are minor curiosities.

 

The fact that they are both larger than life, Moore, a dotty warlock and Miller, bitter and super angry (or whatever you want to call him), is not going to hurt their future fame. It's going to make them that much more fascinating and enigmatic to the future fan of literature.

[holy_carp-migration]

Everyone raves about Watchmen, and so do I, but Moore's greatest work is From Hell. It's one of the finest pieces of literature I have ever read, period.

 

+1 Totally agree. Absolutely brilliant.

 

I've read a lot of Alan Moore's stuff and I'm of age to have appreciated the impact some of the stories had when they first appeared some 25 years ago. However, there has been a grand total of two pieces of work from Alan that I thought were above and beyond what was being published during the day:

1. The Killing Joke - best self contained single issue Batman (or should I say, Joker) story ever. How many printings did the comic go through? And the TPB also went through several printing, too.

2. From Hell. The art matched the dark, dreary, and suspenseful story perfectly.

 

Everything else by Mr. Moore, from Swamp Thing to Watchmen was/is .

 

Frank Miller, on the other hand, has offered much more.

 

Granted, neither have made major contributions in over a decade.

 

Everyone knows 'em so there's no need to name them.

 

Such as?

 

Hello. I'm new to comics, so could you name them for me please? Thanks!

[delekkerste]

I saw the From Hell movie. It was kinda so-so, I suppose. I liked the Freemasonry angle because I am charmed by secret society occultism. I recall it was nicely atmospheric. I enjoy movies about London. I don't think I have much else to say about it other than I understand Moore doesn't watch his movies; which I find admirable.

 

"From Hell" was a bad joke. I was so angered by its IQ-lowering story that, after I finished reading it, I immediately sold my copy of the TPB on eBay (this was many years ago before everybody was using Amazon to buy trades). As a bit of a Ripperologist myself, I found the story to be mind-numbingly infantile and completely ridiculous on the surface of it (though, one certainly does not need to be a Ripperologist to find the story to be so preposterous to the point where disbelief cannot be suspended).

 

When I read Moore in the afterword expounding his story as truth, my esteem for the man plummeted. The theory proposed in the comic, uh, I mean, "graphic novel", is widely discredited and, on the surface, wholly implausible and unbelievable. I thought the art was decent and suited the story well, but the story was just so, so bad that I couldn't get over it and felt that my intelligence had been insulted and time wasted.

[BlowUpTheMoon]

Hello. I'm new to comics, so could you name them for me please? Thanks!

 

Welcome to the Boards?

[TupennyConan]

I saw the From Hell movie. It was kinda so-so, I suppose. I liked the Freemasonry angle because I am charmed by secret society occultism. I recall it was nicely atmospheric. I enjoy movies about London. I don't think I have much else to say about it other than I understand Moore doesn't watch his movies; which I find admirable.

 

"From Hell" was a bad joke. I was so angered by its IQ-lowering story that, after I finished reading it, I immediately sold my copy of the TPB on eBay (this was many years ago before everybody was using Amazon to buy trades). As a bit of a Ripperologist myself, I found the story to be mind-numbingly infantile and completely ridiculous on the surface of it (though, one certainly does not need to be a Ripperologist to find the story to be so preposterous to the point where disbelief cannot be suspended).

 

When I read Moore in the afterword expounding his story as truth, my esteem for the man plummeted. The theory proposed in the comic, uh, I mean, "graphic novel", is widely discredited and, on the surface, wholly implausible and unbelievable. I thought the art was decent and suited the story well, but the story was just so, so bad that I couldn't get over it and felt that my intelligence had been insulted and time wasted.

 

But wait. Are you saying it fails as a work of historical fiction on the historical side of the equation or that it fails as a work of fiction? I can live with the former but if it fails as fantasy by the criteria you offer then that wouldn't be such easy livin' for me.

[RickL]

When I read Moore in the afterword expounding his story as truth, my esteem for the man plummeted.

Moore said the total opposite. He said the story was a total fiction and was baffled by people who made contact with him and told him he had solved the mystery. Part of the point of the epilogue was that the mystery will never be solved and there will be endless plausible explanations that will, nevertheless, be wrong.

 

He made that point so startlingly obvious, I don't know how you drew your conclusion that he thought it was a factual account. In fact he mocked all ripperologists and included himself in the mockery.

[delekkerste]

But wait. Are you saying it fails as a work of historical fiction on the historical side of the equation or that it fails as a work of fiction? I can live with the former but if it fails as fantasy by the criteria you offer then that wouldn't be such easy livin' for me.

 

I would say that it fails on both counts. First, from Moore's own afterward, I got the impression that he believes his well-researched story to be plausible, if not true, so it's clear that it's meant to be historical (and, on that count, it fails miserably). As a work of fiction, it's not particularly inventive at all - it's basically the same unbelievable story from the Michael Caine made-for-television Ripper movie that I saw as a kid in the 1980s, and I don't recall anyone hailing that as anyone's magnum opus.

 

I just thought it was terrible, no matter which way to slice it. Watchmen I thought was very good, though it seems a bit dated to me now. I still think Moore's best work was his "Swamp Thing" run, which I thought was brilliant and terrifying.

[delekkerste]

When I read Moore in the afterword expounding his story as truth, my esteem for the man plummeted.

Moore said the total opposite. He said the story was a total fiction and was baffled by people who made contact with him and told him he had solved the mystery. Part of the point of the epilogue was that the mystery will never be solved and there will be endless plausible explanations that will, nevertheless, be wrong.

 

He made that point so startlingly obvious, I don't know how you drew your conclusion that he thought it was a factual account. In fact he mocked all ripperologists and included himself in the mockery.

 

I no longer have my copy of the trade (I'm not talking about the epilogue, I'm talking about the typewritten afterward), but that is not my recollection. In any case, if I'm wrong about that part, it does not alter the fact that the theory expounded in the book is absurd and made for a bad story, yet Moore gave it a serious airing anyway.

[RickL]

A couple of quotes from the From Hell afterword to support the above:

 

Slowly it dawns on me that despite the Gull theories' obvious attractions, the idea of a solution, any solution, is inane... Jack's not Gull or Druitt. Jack is a super position.

 

...

 

The complex phantom we project. that alone, we know is real. The actual killer's gone, unglimpsed.

In that same afterword he calls his book, "Dodgy pseudo-history."

 

I could continue.

[delekkerste]

A couple of quotes from the From Hell afterword to support the above:

 

Slowly it dawns on me that despite the Gull theories' obvious attractions, the idea of a solution, any solution, is inane... Jack's not Gull or Druitt. Jack is a super position.

 

...

 

The complex phantom we project. that alone, we know is real. The actual killer's gone, unglimpsed.

In that same afterword he calls his book, "Dodgy pseudo-history."

 

I could continue.

 

You lost me after "despite the Gull theories' obvious attractions..." If I still had my copy, I'm sure I could cherry pick some other lines which supported my initial impression, but the one you provided will suffice nicely.

 

Again, it's the same story as the Michael Caine made-for-TV movie which preceded "From Hell" by several years. Nothing to write home about.

[RickL]

I no longer have my copy of the trade (I'm not talking about the epilogue, I'm talking about the typewritten afterward), but that is not my recollection.

That's written by Campbell and in the first sentence he says "Dr Gull... I don't think he done it."

 

In any case, if I'm wrong about that part, it does not alter the fact that the theory expounded in the book is absurd and made for a bad story, yet Moore gave it a serious airing anyway.

Moore saw the theory as making for good fiction not a credible factual account. His intent was to make a powerful statement on class and power in Victorian Britain and he did just that.

[RickL]

You lost me after "despite the Gull theories' obvious attractions..."

As the topic for a fictional work, not a factual one. You seemed lost when you read the actual book it appears.

[RickL]

If I still had my copy, I'm sure I could cherry pick some other lines which supported my initial impression.

No, you couldn't.