Alan Moore Finally Leaves Comics

[Moral_Gutpunch]

As I said before, we're talking at cross purposes. I wasn't suggesting that you were exulting in him not writing - the comment I was talking about was "Good riddance to bad rubbish", which seems myself to exult in Moore not writing. It was not your remark about Lost Girls, which that poster didn't bring up, and which I have no reason to think that he was talking about. I'm not calling disagreeing about the merits of a work "petty" - just exultation in a writer not writing. Evidently my framing my response as a reply was misleading, and I apologise for that, as you still seem to think I'm talking about Lost Girls. Rather, I was talking about your defence of the general "Good riddance to bad rubbish" comment, which was a general expression of disdain.

On the topic of Lost Girls, as I said, and as I will say again, I have not read Lost Girls. I take it that you have read it, and therefore I'm not in a position to debate it with you.

If you find my comments rude or dismissive, I regret that.

That all makes sense now. Thank you. It's rare on the internet people go 'oh that's what you meant'. I'm sorry for taking your framing that way (I've seen it a lot and it was meant sincerely. I'm sorry for lumping you with those people and letting them skew my view of your wording and intention by the way).

I honestly do wish to say him leaving is unexpected but not desired on my part. I also, and also in honesty, do reccomend you read all of his work you like as much as you can now that he's ending his career. I do say to avoid Lost Girls, unless you're rich and curious (it's around $100, probably more now).

[Coin Biter]

That all makes sense now. Thank you. It's rare on the internet people go 'oh that's what you meant'. I'm sorry for taking your framing that way (I've seen it a lot and it was meant sincerely. I'm sorry for lumping you with those people and letting them skew my view of your wording and intention by the way).

I honestly do wish to say him leaving is unexpected but not desired on my part. I also, and also in honesty, do reccomend you read all of his work you like as much as you can now that he's ending his career. I do say to avoid Lost Girls, unless you're rich and curious (it's around $100, probably more now).

Thank you for your kind and generous response, and again my apologies if I came across as dismissive. To be honest, I think my original statement was badly phrased, and I'm not sure of the sentiments I expressed, but there you go.

I definitely won't buy Lost Girls - I'm a parent, so I'd be concerned of anything of that nature. I've read much of Moore's other works, apart from his recent Avatar work. You've probably have read much of it, but just in case, I'd highly recommend some of his early 2000AD work, in particular The Ballad of Halo Jones - if you haven't read it, of course. (Not that I'm suggesting you should like it or that it should change your opinion of Moore's work.)

I feel like I've written too much about Moore recently, so to take inspiration from Moore himself, I'm going to enter into my own personal temporary moratorium on all things Moore

[Moral_Gutpunch]

I definitely won't buy Lost Girls - I'm a parent, so I'd be concerned of anything of that nature. I've read much of Moore's other works, apart from his recent Avatar work. You've probably have read much of it, but just in case, I'd highly recommend some of his early 2000AD work, in particular The Ballad of Halo Jones - if you haven't read it, of course. (Not that I'm suggesting you should like it or that it should change your opinion of Moore's work.)

I can at least check it out. I did like his Swamp Thing and his constantine is better than any TV adaptations I've seen (in my opinion)----and one scene in The Killing Joke that I fel twas badly done in the cartoon.

Thanks.

[JBatmanFan05]

Why would you need to think twice about sharing a pint with the man. I'd personally be delighted to do so. Heck I'd pay for the flight and spring for the bitter to get a chance to chat with the man.

I have to say I'd worry he'd blow up at me at some point on some topic or another about his work or whatever. I'd probably share a pint with him, but I wouldn't feel too optimistic about how it might end up. He's set up a reputation a bit as an overly angry tiptoe-around-him guy.

[Mark Thrust]

I have to say I'd worry he'd blow up at me at some point on some topic or another about his work or whatever. I'd probably share a pint with him, but I wouldn't feel too optimistic about how it might end up. He's set up a reputation a bit as an overly angry tiptoe-around-him guy.

I don't know, according to people that have met him, they have found him charming, intelligent and funny.
Out of context quotes from interviews isn't the best way to form an opinion of the man.
Warren Ellis has a great bit about him, it's on youtube, you should look it up.

[mathew101281]

I have news for Mister Moore. Kids don't read ( anything) in large enough numbers anymore to talior comics ( or books outside of phenomonons like Harry Potter) in general or superheroes specifically to them. Kids stopped reading comics in large numbers, thus comic companies started supplementing their traditional audience with adults who have the income and still have the desire to read comics. The market determined the demographic. I doubt kids will ever be the primary demographic for comics again. Comics didn't leave kids, kids left comics.

[Spike-X]

I have to say I'd worry he'd blow up at me at some point on some topic or another about his work or whatever. I'd probably share a pint with him, but I wouldn't feel too optimistic about how it might end up. He's set up a reputation a bit as an overly angry tiptoe-around-him guy.

The only reason he'd do that is if you were stupid enough to bring up something you know damn well would piss him off, like asking what he thinks about Before Watchmen.

[Crazy Diamond]

I have news for Mister Moore. Kids don't read ( anything) in large enough numbers anymore to talior comics ( or books outside of phenomonons like Harry Potter) in general or superheroes specifically to them. Kids stopped reading comics in large numbers, thus comic companies started supplementing their traditional audience with adults who have the income and still have the desire to read comics. The market determined the demographic. I doubt kids will ever be the primary demographic for comics again. Comics didn't leave kids, kids left comics.

Kids read comics. What they don't read are most of the superhero comics DC and Marvel put out. There are kids reading manga, webcomics, comic strips, and stuff like Diary of a Wimpy Kid but why spend 2.99 - 4.99 to read a comic when you can just watch the movie, borrow (or download) the trade from the library, or catch an episode of the cartoon on TV? So long as DC and Marvel decide to keep catering to the direct market, they won't be able to reach out much to larger audiences and they'll have to keep putting out crossovers, doing reboots, and other gimmicks. Not to mention their reliance on IP. To blame kids for stuff like the speculation of the 90s, Diamond, increasing cost of floppies, and the like is quite a stretch.

There's something to be said about markets and their affect on art but that's a whole another discussion right there.

[codystarbuck]

I have news for Mister Moore. Kids don't read ( anything) in large enough numbers anymore to talior comics ( or books outside of phenomonons like Harry Potter) in general or superheroes specifically to them. Kids stopped reading comics in large numbers, thus comic companies started supplementing their traditional audience with adults who have the income and still have the desire to read comics. The market determined the demographic. I doubt kids will ever be the primary demographic for comics again. Comics didn't leave kids, kids left comics.

In the words of Col. Sherman T. Potter: "Horse Hockey!" Kids read comics by the tons. They just don't read DC and Marvel. They read Raina Telgemeier, whose works are filled with comics; they read Big Nate, which is comics, they read Diary of a Wimpy Kid, which is comics, they read Bone, which is a comic. They read manga, they read Garfield and Calvin & Hobbes. They read comics; just not the ones being published by comic book companies. Comics did abandon kids. They went elsewhere, and found what they liked. DC has dabbled with making comics for kids, but didn't do much to actually market them to kids. Same with Marvel, though to a far lesser extent. Archie has a better track record in that field; but, then, they always had.

The fallacy is that kids read via the direct market, like the adults. They don't; they read via the mass market. That is where comics are failing. They haven't reached a mass audience since the 70s. They abandoned it for the safe bet of selling (mostly) non-returnable product to comic shops, run by comics fans, many of whom created exclusive environments, where kids and women were not invited; yet, those are the audiences that manga found, in bookstores. Not all retailers; but more than a few.

[ouroboros]

Kids read comics. What they don't read are most of the superhero comics DC and Marvel put out. There are kids reading manga, webcomics, comic strips, and stuff like Diary of a Wimpy Kid but why spend 2.99 - 4.99 to read a comic when you can just watch the movie, borrow (or download) the trade from the library, or catch an episode of the cartoon on TV? So long as DC and Marvel decide to keep catering to the direct market, they won't be able to reach out much to larger audiences and they'll have to keep putting out crossovers, doing reboots, and other gimmicks. Not to mention their reliance on IP. To blame kids for stuff like the speculation of the 90s, Diamond, increasing cost of floppies, and the like is quite a stretch.

There's something to be said about markets and their affect on art but that's a whole another discussion right there.

Mathew's analysis is still accurate despite all of these qualifications. As I recall kids starting deserting Big Two comics way back in the 1970s, when the only competitors were TV and videogames, with no manga and precious few "comics-like" children's books. Kids of the period were extremely resistant to even the most minor cost increases: that's why it's been stated-- by Roy Thomas, among others-- that Marvel only started outselling DC when DC went to 25 cents and Marvel stuck to 20. DC was offering more pages, but kids didn't want four new adventures and various reprints for their dollar, they preferred getting five completely new adventures, even if it was fewer overall pages.

Now, if you want to criticize modern DC and Marvel for not being able to outbid the big New York publishers for the latest Raina Tagtmeier, I guess it's possible that they could do better on that score. But that wouldn't change one aspect of their status: the Big Two are in the business of exploiting franchises that they already control. When a lot of kids turned away from buying pamphlet-comics in the 1970s-- and that's at a time when the majority of the titles hadn't yet been "adult-erated"-- the companies naturally began orienting more of their product toward adult audiences. So, yeah, you can say that kids still read comics, but they won't devote a lot of their income to pamphlet-comics. Adults will. That's why Alan Moore is merely fantasizing when he says that he thinks comics still ought to be about flying dogs in little red capes.

[judaspaladin]

People happy he's going? Who knew people could have such bad taste.

Honestly I'm glad he's going, Watchmen was an incredible work of fiction but I don't really how it spawned the dark age of comics and to quote a blog I read "poisoned the well" for a generation of comic book writers afterwards. And I find it a little hypocritical that he bashes super heroes despite making his living for so long off of super hero comics, talk about biting the hand.

Edit* That said I do wish him well in whatever comes next.

[Mark Thrust]

Honestly I'm glad he's going, Watchmen was an incredible work of fiction but I don't really how it spawned the dark age of comics and to quote a blog I read "poisoned the well" for a generation of comic book writers afterwards. And I find it a little hypocritical that he bashes super heroes despite making his living for so long off of super hero comics, talk about biting the hand.

Edit* That said I do wish him well in whatever comes next.

To be fair, it really isn't Moore's (or Miller's or Chaykin's, for that matter) fault that lesser talents took what he did and missed the point.
It was like film students watching The Godfather and then making a bunch of films about people getting gunned down at toll booths.

[Coin Biter]

Message removed.

[ouroboros]

To be fair, it really isn't Moore's (or Miller's or Chaykin's, for that matter) fault that lesser talents took what he did and missed the point.
It was like film students watching The Godfather and then making a bunch of films about people getting gunned down at toll booths.

Not only that, but so-called "lesser talents" don't need the Big Shots to emulate; they'll produce work, good or bad, because they're trying to 'sing for their supper." There were dozens upon of gangster films before the Godfather, some decent, some very bad, with very few earning the "classic" status of Godfather, but gangster films kept being made because there was money in it, not because Coppola re-invented the wheel. Same thing in comics: I could point to other professionals doing some of the same experimental things that Moore and the others did. They just didn't get famous because they didn't do it well.

[Jwyatt]

The extended rape/fish masturbation scene in Moore's Lovecraft thing left me shaking my head. That seemed to put the cherry on top of a long journey to self-parody and self-indulgence.

If that's what he needs to say to be interested in comics, it's best he find something else to do.