|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 7, 2015 1:25:12 GMT -5
Moore couldn't have that much respect for Morrison when he was again being ripped off with Zenith, a childish take on Miracleman, and probably the last work of Morrison he actually bothered to read. Moore is a very accessible person, generous with his time. Yet, he still lives in Northhampton, doesn't travel (doesn't own a passport), and constantly gets asked questions. He doesn't uses social medias and therfore couldn't be fully aware of the tabloid tactics of those medias. Grant Morrison is living in LA most of the time, pimping his work to Holywood as much as he can, constantly seeking new ways to be relevant, when Moore doesn't even try. He's always been very concerned about being in the shadow of the man. And I'm pretty sure he was very happy with Moore's retirement from mainstream comics so he could take the role of the mystic magus. Except, most of his writing is insufferable and too heavy on the symbolism... But sadly for him People love Moore's work so much that they make big budget movies out of it, despite his reluctance to it! In that fashion, he is the greatest defender of comics in te mainstream since he constantly says that if a comic is good, people should read it and not wait for the screen adaptation. This is particulary true of Mark Millar, who despite his real qualities has gained a bad rep for his constant Holywood obsession... But that's all besides the point as those are personnal grudges. What I'm interested to know is your critical opinion on Lost Girls since you read it, and other Moore works that are widly celebrated, far beyond the comic book world borders. When you read all of Moore's DC work, it's just obvious he has affection for htose characters, and that he took them seriously enough to research them all he could (no internet, no preservation) to avoid continuity issues and respect the readers inteligence...
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 7, 2015 3:09:38 GMT -5
Aaron's comments in the linked article merely confirm that he chose to be personally insulted by one of Moore's rants. Another writer quoted in that article makes more sense to me: Ivan Brandon (whose work I have not read):
'though i love my friends, still funny to me that some have taken a really vague rant & managed to find a way to be personally insulted by it[.] “alan moore said i suck!” well, first of all, no, he didn’t. second of all: alan moore likely has no opinion at all about you or your work.'
I like a lot of Morrison's work, but it does seem clear that he suffered a long time from "an anxiety of influence" in regards to Moore - as has perhaps that entire generation of comics writers. By the time he managed to get over it and tried to hold out an olive branch it was years too late and Moore was having none of it.
I like superheroes myself but feel in no way insulted or diminished by Moore's comments about the genre: on the contrary, I think they contain a lot of truth that all we superhero fans would do well to face up to. This doesn't equate to putting Moore on a pedestal. His work speaks for itself, and his comments about comics can be judged dispassionately.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Dec 7, 2015 5:19:43 GMT -5
I like superheroes myself but feel in no way insulted or diminished by Moore's comments about the genre: on the contrary, I think they contain a lot of truth that all we superhero fans would do well to face up to. This doesn't equate to putting Moore on a pedestal. His work speaks for itself, and his comments about comics can be judged dispassionately. Agreed. I think it's pretty clear that Moore has a great love of superhero comics, which is precisely why he so passionately points out the genre's inherent flaws and the shortcomings of the mainstream, superhero comic industry.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2015 8:36:31 GMT -5
I kind of find it extremely unprofessional and tacky when artists publicly air negative opinions about other artists and/or their work. I feel the same way when they go on a political rant.
Not to say these people are not entitled to have opinions, just don't be tacky and unprofessional about it. Because that can detract from, and create a bias towards what should be important to fans. And what should be important to fans is their art. Not their opinion outside of their art.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 7, 2015 9:18:07 GMT -5
So "being rubbished" is slang for "people disagreed with me"?
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Dec 7, 2015 9:18:45 GMT -5
I like superheroes myself but feel in no way insulted or diminished by Moore's comments about the genre: on the contrary, I think they contain a lot of truth that all we superhero fans would do well to face up to. This doesn't equate to putting Moore on a pedestal. His work speaks for itself, and his comments about comics can be judged dispassionately. Agreed. I think it's pretty clear that Moore has a great love of superhero comics, which is precisely why he so passionately points out the genre's inherent flaws and the shortcomings of the mainstream, superhero comic industry. If he didn't love superheroes, I'm sure he wouldn't have written some of the best super-hero comics ever (and not only deconstructionist ones either). That he finds the medium's near-total fixation on that sub-genre incestuous and limiting is no condemnation of super-hero comics as a concept; but you can't only have whipped cream at every meal forever either!
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Dec 7, 2015 9:33:23 GMT -5
I kind of find it extremely unprofessional and tacky when artists publicly air negative opinions about other artists and/or their work. I feel the same way when they go on a political rant. Not to say these people are not entitled to have opinions, just don't be tacky and unprofessional about it. Because that can detract from, and create a bias towards what should be important to fans. And what should be important to fans is their art. Not their opinion outside of their art. I kinda know what you mean. I feel the same when musicians slag each other off. It's especially unwelcome when two musicians or bands that I really like publicly air negative opinions of each other, like when the members of The Doors slag off The Byrds (and visa versa). The only time it's acceptable in music is when it's clearly part of a marketing scheme, a la Blur vs. Oasis.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 7, 2015 10:06:22 GMT -5
Maybe, but yet, Moore, Morrison and Aaron here argumented their attacks. Moore may have been more level headed and hoest, you can still make up your mind with background if you wish to. The trick is just to not be a fan. Fan is contraction for fanatic, which means one who dismiss rationality and critique on the sole basis of his love for hte subject of said critique, without needing to argument. With my political views, If I wanted everything to fit my ways, I would never be able to enjoy comics from right wing mysogynist Bill Willingham, nor would I be with the work of politicly correct supreme Brian K. Vaughn... Yet, I have a very extended library of both's work. Loui-Ferdinand Celine was a racist fascist antisemit in his politics, yet, "Journey till the end of the night" is one of the 20th century literature's highlights, one that can still be vastly enjoyed. When critics critique artists people like, you hear "what do they know? They're just critics, bitter failed-arists whose opinions do not matter more than anyone's else." When Artists critique artists, you often get this "they are bitter/jealous/unprofessionnal/full-of-themselves". Well... how can we get critique then??? I'm sorry but critique is usefull, a good critique sees beyond the fanatism or the unquestioned popular tropes. And remember, all Alan Moore did was answer questions he never asked for, being the polite being he is, while Most of his attackers all went for a tribune...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2015 10:21:07 GMT -5
Maybe, but yet, Moore, Morrison and Aaron here argumented their attacks. Moore may have been more level headed and hoest, you can still make up your mind with background if you wish to. The trick is just to not be a fan. Fan is contraction for fanatic, which means one who dismiss rationality and critique on the sole basis of his love for hte subject of said critique, without needing to argument. With my political views, If I wanted everything to fit my ways, I would never be able to enjoy comics from right wing mysogynist Bill Willingham, nor would I be with the work of politicly correct supreme Brian K. Vaughn... Yet, I have a very extended library of both's work. Loui-Ferdinand Celine was a racist fascist antisemit in his politics, yet, "Journey till the end of the night" is one of the 20th century literature's highlights, one that can still be vastly enjoyed. When critics critique artists people like, you hear "what do they know? They're just critics, bitter failed-arists whose opinions do not matter more than anyone's else." When Artists critique artists, you often get this "they are bitter/jealous/unprofessionnal/full-of-themselves". Well... how can we get critique then??? I'm sorry but critique is usefull, a good critique sees beyond the fanatism or the unquestioned popular tropes. And remember, all Alan Moore did was answer questions he never asked for, being the polite being he is, while Most of his attackers all went for a tribune... Who are you addressing?
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 7, 2015 10:30:43 GMT -5
? Confessor of course. Then it's just general thoughts on he body of currently discussed matter. Are you again feeling an attack?
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Dec 7, 2015 10:42:07 GMT -5
Maybe, but yet, Moore, Morrison and Aaron here argumented their attacks. Moore may have been more level headed and hoest, you can still make up your mind with background if you wish to. The trick is just to not be a fan. Fan is contraction for fanatic, which means one who dismiss rationality and critique on the sole basis of his love for hte subject of said critique, without needing to argument. With my political views, If I wanted everything to fit my ways, I would never be able to enjoy comics from right wing mysogynist Bill Willingham, nor would I be with the work of politicly correct supreme Brian K. Vaughn... Yet, I have a very extended library of both's work. Loui-Ferdinand Celine was a racist fascist antisemit in his politics, yet, "Journey till the end of the night" is one of the 20th century literature's highlights, one that can still be vastly enjoyed. When critics critique artists people like, you hear "what do they know? They're just critics, bitter failed-arists whose opinions do not matter more than anyone's else." When Artists critique artists, you often get this "they are bitter/jealous/unprofessionnal/full-of-themselves". Well... how can we get critique then??? I'm sorry but critique is usefull, a good critique sees beyond the fanatism or the unquestioned popular tropes. And remember, all Alan Moore did was answer questions he never asked for, being the polite being he is, while Most of his attackers all went for a tribune... Oh yeah, sure...I personally have no problem separating the artist from the art, and then judging said art on its own merits. That's not really what I was saying though. I was just agreeing with coldwater that, as a fan (and I use that word in its most common application, as someone who likes or enjoys something, rather than a "fanatic"), it's annoying when you see the objects of your fandom slinging muck at each other.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2015 10:43:37 GMT -5
? Confessor of course. Then it's just general thoughts on he body of currently discussed matter. Are you again feeling an attpack? No, not at all. I was just not sure, so I asked.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Dec 7, 2015 13:32:48 GMT -5
The current conversation is why I try not to read anything artists say about anything but their fiction. It also why I avoid social media and some comic book message boards like a plague. I just happen to hear from my wife what people tweet the two guys in Supernatural, cause she follows them. I remember the hate Whedon got for Avengers 2. And I dunno if it is generational, too much free time, easy access (the internet) or what, but it does seem some are preoccupied to a detrimental level about what people think about them or what they've done. Perhaps it hasn't changed any in generations, we can just observe it more easily and voice it more easily. I am quite hesitant, but curious where the internet takes us in future years. I think it's become so household, like cellphones, TV's, cars, VCR/DVD, that people even living before the internet have assimilated it in their lives that they still have to stop and think what life was like before it. I dunno I do myself sometimes, when I think twice about opening my mouth on the world wide web. But as I have said many times, this group is a diamond in the rough.
It's also the reason why, even early in my collecting before having a family, when I had more time and money, I didn't frequent conventions. Sometimes not knowing the people whose creative work you admire, are just as flawed and selfish at times, as any other human being, is fine by me.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 7, 2015 13:52:59 GMT -5
I have zero problem separating an artists opinions from their work. Now...sometimes their opinions are so odious that I refuse to put money in their pocket (see Orson Scott Card) but I'm fine with reading their work for free.
And I can count of the fingers of one hand the number of people whose opinion of me actually matters. So I'm simply not going to get butt-hurt if Writer A makes some off-hand comment that could be construed as insulting to me. He doesn't know me...and frankly I could give a hairy rats ass what his opinion of me might be. Just write stuff I like.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2015 14:28:31 GMT -5
Maybe, but yet, Moore, Morrison and Aaron here argumented their attacks. Moore may have been more level headed and hoest, you can still make up your mind with background if you wish to. The trick is just to not be a fan. Fan is contraction for fanatic, which means one who dismiss rationality and critique on the sole basis of his love for hte subject of said critique, without needing to argument. With my political views, If I wanted everything to fit my ways, I would never be able to enjoy comics from right wing mysogynist Bill Willingham, nor would I be with the work of politicly correct supreme Brian K. Vaughn... Yet, I have a very extended library of both's work. Loui-Ferdinand Celine was a racist fascist antisemit in his politics, yet, "Journey till the end of the night" is one of the 20th century literature's highlights, one that can still be vastly enjoyed. When critics critique artists people like, you hear "what do they know? They're just critics, bitter failed-arists whose opinions do not matter more than anyone's else." When Artists critique artists, you often get this "they are bitter/jealous/unprofessionnal/full-of-themselves". Well... how can we get critique then??? I'm sorry but critique is usefull, a good critique sees beyond the fanatism or the unquestioned popular tropes. And remember, all Alan Moore did was answer questions he never asked for, being the polite being he is, while Most of his attackers all went for a tribune... Oh yeah, sure...I personally have no problem separating the artist from the art, and then judging said art on its own merits. That's not really what I was saying though. I was just agreeing with coldwater that, as a fan (and I use that word in its most common application, as someone who likes or enjoys something, rather than a "fanatic"), it's annoying when you see the objects of your fandom slinging muck at each other. It is distasteful, and, imo, should be kept out of the public's eye as much as possible. No one needs to see your dirty drawers, nor do they care. Am I right? Just keep making art you like, and your fans like, and share your pissy moments in private.
|
|