Is Alan Moore a hypocrite?

[Jim Kelly]

But if you follow them from when you're a kid, you should give them up when you're a teen? That's the world I lived in. High school kids mocked me when they found out I still read comic books.

I think for some of us, we go back to comics--especially those we liked as little kids--because we realize they had a primal appeal that formed our character. Studying story-telling for children isn't just confined to the few writers and illustrators that stuffed-shirts have decided are good. You can study any story for children--from Stumbo to Charlie Brown--and appreciate the artistic intention.

This is one area where Alan Moore failed. I like the book FROM HELL very much. And a lot of his other work. But I think the underlying message in some of his later super-hero stories got it wrong. I was flipping through a book on Alan Moore in the store one time, and there was an essay that broke down the themes in a particular Tom Strong story. The essayist picked out all this stuff about fascism that went completely past me when I'd read it.

Yes, if you're an adult and you interpret children's fiction, it can seem fascistic. In MY DINNER WITH ANDRE, Andre makes the same observation about THE LITTLE PRINCE. But that doesn't mean kid lit is fascistic. It's rather that a child's power fantasy becomes fascistic when it's transposed to an adult context. You're reading the story wrong. To understand the work--you have to understand it from a child's level. If you're imposing your own adult feelings on a children's fantasy--that says more about you than it does about the story.

[captchuck]

It isn't being a hypocrite to have a contrary point of view, or to change your views over time. Moore has always stood up for creators as far as I can see. Good for him!

[Zelena]

But if you follow them from when you're a kid, you should give them up when you're a teen? That's the world I lived in. High school kids mocked me when they found out I still read comic books.

I think for some of us, we go back to comics--especially those we liked as little kids--because we realize they had a primal appeal that formed our character. Studying story-telling for children isn't just confined to the few writers and illustrators that stuffed-shirts have decided are good. You can study any story for children--from Stumbo to Charlie Brown--and appreciate the artistic intention.

This is one area where Alan Moore failed. I like the book FROM HELL very much. And a lot of his other work. But I think the underlying message in some of his later super-hero stories got it wrong. I was flipping through a book on Alan Moore in the store one time, and there was an essay that broke down the themes in a particular Tom Strong story. The essayist picked out all this stuff about fascism that went completely past me when I'd read it.

Yes, if you're an adult and you interpret children's fiction, it can seem fascistic. In MY DINNER WITH ANDRE, Andre makes the same observation about THE LITTLE PRINCE. But that doesn't mean kid lit is fascistic. It's rather that a child's power fantasy becomes fascistic when it's transposed to an adult context. You're reading the story wrong. To understand the work--you have to understand it from a child's level. If you're imposing your own adult feelings on a children's fantasy--that says more about you than it does about the story.

Oh I agree, sometimes it’s nice to feel like a child again… You don’t have to analyse it. It’s pleasure.

It’s the mixture of genres that doesn’t work in my opinion…

[Ishmael]

Is Alan Moore a hypocrite?

Yes. But his worst sin is that he’s pretentious about it.

Sorry to ignore all the prior posts, but that was my immediate response to the thread’s question.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

But his worst sin is that he’s pretentious about it.

What is your definition of "pretentious"?

[Ishmael]

The fact that he has acted like he raised the medium to a higher level of art, coupled with the fact that he himself has appropriated other peoples characters in ways they certainly wouldn’t have approved. He has often insulted the fans that made his career, whilst feigning indignation about his own treatment. I’ve no respect for him.

For every Watchman he wrote he also churned out a Vigilante fill-in. I can’t get enthused about him the way some do.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

The fact that he has acted like he raised the medium to a higher level of art,

Well he did do that.

...coupled with the fact that he himself has appropriated other peoples characters in ways they certainly wouldn’t have approved.

What are you referring to? Moore has parodied and satirized characters but parody/satire is fair-use and valid. That's not the same thing as protesting DC breaking faith with him. Moore doesn't object to parodies or satires of himself and his work.

He has often insulted the fans that made his career,

Which fans would that be?

[Ishmael]

Moore only "raised the medium to art" for people who have no knowledge about the history of the genre. Start with Eisener and his colleagues during the '40's, or the work of Milt Caniff or Hal Foster, familiarize yourself with EC comics in the '50's, and immerse yourself in the allegories of Gardner Fox and you'll change your tune if you have any genuine honesty about the medium. Moore is just the writer's version of Roy Lichtenstein.

Satire is a lame excuse to pretend he hasn't done to others' characters what he cries about with his own. Parody is not a word typically associated with Moore. "Serious". "Mature". "Adult". These are the terms used to describe his work. Except for his fill-ins, at which point everyone politely looks away and pretends they never happened. People only say he's engaging in pardoy to deflect from how he approrpiates others' creations and uses them in way their creators probably wouldn't approve.

And which fans? I suppose all of them give how he's referred to comic fans as "emotionally subnormal." But maybe there was a subtext there that I missed out on and he didn't mean for that comment to apply to his own fans.

[JackDaw]

Alan Moore’s comics have given pleasure to millions over the years.

Against that he’s made some “dodgy” statements over the years. Basically like 99.99 percent of people who are continually asked for their views time after time after time and get the replies documented.

I think the balance is clear...he’s overall a force for the good.

I really don’t see why we continually get threads like this..which basically seem designed to have a pop at him personally. This is quite different to most threads about other creators which critique their work. (With a few exceptions where creators have done something really heinous.)

[Zelena]

I really don’t see why we continually get threads like this..which basically seem designed to have a pop at him personally. This is quite different to most threads about other creators which critique their work. (With a few exceptions where creators have done something really heinous.)

Price of the success?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Moore only "raised the medium to art" for people who have no knowledge about the history of the genre.

And you reflexively assume that I don't have familiarity?

Start with Eisener

It's Will Eisner.

Moore is just the writer's version of Roy Lichtenstein.

Can you explain what you mean by this sentence a bit more in detail, precisely I mean?

Satire is a lame excuse to pretend he hasn't done to others' characters what he cries about with his own.

What exactly are you referring to specifically?

Parody is not a word typically associated with Moore.

Moore is associated with Deconstruction, and parody is one of the forms Deconstruction takes. Watchmen is definitely a parody of superheroes, a spoof of the genre, among many other things.

Except for his fill-ins,

What do you mean by "fill-ins"? Your entire post is vague and suggestive, making airy references to stuff that feels insinuating in the McCarthyist fashion. If you can make specific charges and give examples and so on, then it might actually give something to respond to.

[Johnny Thunders!]

They say Jack Kerouac hated hippies, so it doesn’t surprise me when people hate the crowd they helped create.
I think he elevated the art form and I loved that video by Leah Moore. Alan Moore’s superhero comics are amazing.
I get his criticism but so what? Disney Marvel, worth my time and money. The Boys, I think the show tops
the comic. CW Stargirl, that stuff is good too. I don’t think he’s a hypocrite, some stuff is lousy but so much is great.
The idea that we are more adolescent violent and fascistic as a culture? Comics are too blame? I guess Wertham was right!

[Revolutionary_Jack]

They say Jack Kerouac hated hippies, so it doesn’t surprise me when people hate the crowd they helped create.

Well Kerouac always was a very right wing Republican. The hippies were the ones who misread him. Not the same thing.

[Johnny Thunders!]

Well Kerouac always was a very right wing Republican. The hippies were the ones who misread him. Not the same thing.

Right Wing Republican has come a long way. And don’t people always accuse other writers of misreading Watchmen? Learning all the wrong lessons?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Right Wing Republican has come a long way.

Kerouac was a racist, an anti-communist, who supported the war in Vietnam. Kerouac also liked smoking pot and having sex with guys so there's that, but the latter doesn't cancel the former.

And don’t people always accuse other writers of misreading Watchmen? Learning all the wrong lessons?

That's getting further away from this issue. The point is that people who read Watchmen and like Watchmen don't have any doubts where Moore stands on politics and other issues. That's not comparable to Kerouac because his relatively apolitical tribute to personal experimentation and drugs won over people who totally didn't get Kerouac's political opinions and views (which he cynically kept to himself by and large).