Alan Moore’s seven most painful Grant Morrison burns

twitter Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns31facebook Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns344google Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns2pinterest Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns0tumblr Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burnsreddit Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns39stumbleupon Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns0

voldemorrison and dumblemoore2 copy2 Alan Moores seven most painful Grant Morrison burns

By now you may have heard of the latest and possibly greatest Alan Moore interview, one in which he rides blazing over the fields of glory, a one man four riders of the apocalypse, over Grant Morrison and everything and anything to do with Morrison, including sometimes Beat contributor Laura Sneddon. The interview is conducted by another Beat contributor, Padraig O’Mealoid. Fun fact: the interview itself might have run originally on The Beat. Its origins lie somewhere in a proposed roundtable on Alan Moore’s writing among Sneddon, O’Mealoid, Pam Noles—whose discussion of the Golli-Wogg touched off some of this—and film critic Will Brooker.

Padraig had already offered to conduct the interview (which really consists of typing five or six questions) and did offer it to the Beat first. Although I would have been happy for the traffic, I felt putting it out there without some context wasn’t the way to go, as that was actually FAIRER to Alan Moore than presenting it all by itself. Padraig felt it was better presented on its own and so it went to his own website.

However, I’ve offered space to Sneddon, Noles and Brooker to write their own rebuttals, or essays or what have you on the substance of the Moore interview, as regards the Golliwogg and other matters. Hopefully I can run some of that as it comes in.

There remains the breaking news that Alan Moore does not like Grant Morrison. Boy howdy, he does not like Grant Morrison. And while you can argue with his feeling on this matter what you cannot argue with is that Moore knows how to express disdain. Here are the best put-downs of Grant Morrison from the 12,000 word interview, put downs which you may find useful in your own daily activities should you need to offer the ultimate burn.

On the man himself:

…”the herpes-like persistence of Grant Morrison himself”…”

On Morrison’s continuing interest in Moore:

“…my own personal 18th century medicinal leech…”

General slams:

“…Grant Morrison and his fellow mediocrities…”

On Morrison’s career path:

“…It would appear that at one stage, as an example, he had concluded that the secret to being a big-time acclaimed comic-writer was to be found in having a memorable hairstyle.”

On Morrison’s suggestion Moore put his “todger’ on the cover of Promethea:

“…a genuine and long-sustained clammy infatuation which is (barely) sublimating its sexual component in saucy Carry On-style banter…”

On Morrison’s younger days:

“…by his own admission Grant Morrison had spent most of the Punk era in his room for fear of being spoken to roughly by some uncouth person with a pink Mohawk and a U.K. Subs t-shirt.”

On Morrison’s ongoing behavior:

“I’m afraid I didn’t see how appealing to completely unearned teen rebel credentials made any difference to the spoiled-child behaviour of a deeply unpleasant middle-aged man, and therefore once more declined the invitation to whisk him off to my Bat-cave so that we could solve mysteries together, perhaps in todger-revealing tights.”

On GM getting the MBE

“…massively privileged Tories…”

…I guess you gotta be English to get that one.

There you go. The man has a way with words, say what you will.

[Above image ripped off from Paul Cornish because it is perfect.]

Comments

  1. Michael P says:

    I see Morrison and Moore as Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell, myself.

  2. chris says:

    Oooo fun. Creators sniping like petulant children. NOT

  3. hsssh says:

    This drama is getting so ridiculous that I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point it was revealed that Morrison and Moore are best friends forever and are just trolling internet.

  4. Charles says:

    Let’s hear Moore say that shit in the skreets though.

  5. Kate Willaert says:

    Regarding the main interview:

    So Alan Moore looks down on adults who are enjoying movies based on superheroes that were originally created for children, yet he’s spent most of his career exploring adult issues in stories about superheroes and public domain characters that were originally created for children?

    Am I the only one who sees the problem here?

  6. Zeparu says:

    I find Moore’s justicication attempts to rape depictions in his works much more troubling than his continuing beef with Grant Morrison. The man has seriously lost his marbles.

    Also, his remarks that I can’t possibly like a Moore comic and a Morrison comic at the same time are just beyond stupid. What a prick!

  7. Mieli (@mieli555) says:

    Tried to leave a comment about how Padraig didn’t really challenge Moore on these issues of sexism and racism and he wouldn’t allow it.

    Guess free speech only matters when white guys want to make each other feel better about using black face characters.

  8. This made me want to buy more Grant Morrison comics.

  9. scales says:

    Say what you will about Mr. Moore, is there anyone else on planet Earth who can hold a grudge like this man? Once you are dead to him, you will not be coming back, in a special edition with variant covers or otherwise.

  10. that is an epically long interview. wowsers.

  11. This latest kerfuffle has made up my mind to treat anything else Alan Moore has to say outside of his comics the same way he treats all current comic book writers–I’m going to say it’s all crap without bothering to read it.

  12. As I said in my reply to you, Mieli, you are absolutely at liberty to exercise your free speech anywhere you wish, to say anything you want about whatever subject moves you. However, I’m not going to publish insults directed at me by you or by anyone else on my on blog. Surely that is not unreasonable?

    But well done on making this about race, out of a clear blue sky. That obviously contributes hugely to the debate.

  13. Simon Cooper says:

    I wish people would stoip calling it an interview. An interview would involve asking some follow-up questions or challenging some of the ridiculous passive-agressive (and at least semi-libelous) ranting.

    For someone who claims not to look at the Internet Mr Moore manages to do a very convincing impression of a particularly over verbose example of the Trolling you find in comments sections.

  14. “one in which he rides blazing over the fields of glory” you forgot “on his high horse of pretentiousness “

  15. “he’s spent most of his career exploring adult issues in stories about superheroes and public domain characters that were originally created for children”

    No, not really. Most of the public domain characters he uses (the stuff from Verne, Wells, Rohmer, Lovecraft, Poe, etc.) were definitely not originally created for children.

    Great interview. I’m eagerly awaiting his upcoming JERUSALEM and PROVIDENCE (among others).

  16. Charles Knight says:

    “Am I the only one who sees the problem here?”

    I don’t think there is a problem, you can engage in an activity and also acknowledge that activity is wrong, it makes you a bit hypocritical but I’m not sure it really impacts on the validity of the underlying point, and leaving aside his bizarre rants about various figures, I actually agree with the substance of that point – that the domination of adult culture by largely reactionary concepts intended for children is problematical and telling about society.

  17. Simon Cooper says:

    “No, not really. Most of the public domain characters he uses (the stuff from Verne, Wells, Rohmer, Lovecraft, Poe, etc.) were definitely not originally created for children.”

    He did however spend many, many years using other people’s (Corporate owned) comic-book creations without any compunctions, yet gets his knickers in a twist when any one touches any of his.

    The impression I get of the man is that he spends his life these days surrounded by men and women who constantly tell him how amazing and wonderful he is and how terrible and awful everyone else is. That naturally leads to the belief that anyone who ends up unhappy with anything he does or says must do so because they’ve got an “agenda” and not because he could be in any way at fault.

    Also, the sheer number of things he’s happy to dismiss and criticise while happily admitting never having read or seen them is really quite impressive.

  18. Johnny Memeonic says:

    Assuming all this isn’t just Moore and Morrison trolling the press, what is the supposed origin of this fued?

  19. Kate Willaert says:

    @Rodrigo:

    So what’s his excuse for the public domain children’s characters he DOES use? He says in the same interview that Golliwog was a children’s character, for instance. LEAGUE is not devoid of children’s characters.

    More importantly, what’s his excuse for LOST GIRLS, an explicitly adult book starring three public domain children’s characters, used in ways the original authors likely never intended nor would have approved?

  20. Bill Cunningham says:

    Are they going to like hurl mystical fireballs at one another, or something…?
    Because if they’re not… (yawn)

  21. Simon Cooper says:

    “More importantly, what’s his excuse for LOST GIRLS, an explicitly adult book starring three public domain children’s characters, used in ways the original authors likely never intended nor would have approved?”

    When he steals from others it’s art. When others steal from him it’s creative bankruptcy. Obviously. ;)

  22. Kate Willaert says:

    @Charles Knight:

    It’s particularly hypocritical in that he’s one of the people responsible for superheroes growing up and becoming not-for-kids, starting at the very beginning of his career when he told adult stories with a children’s character called Marvelman. He continued created superhero stories for adults, using Batman and thinly-disguised Charlton characters, and now he complains that adults enjoy superheroes. Who was he writing those stories for?

  23. Charles Knight says:

    “It’s particularly hypocritical in that he’s one of the people responsible for superheroes growing up and becoming not-for-kids, ”

    But really – so what? Yes he’s partly responsible but it’s a red herring in considering if the underlying point has validity or not.

  24. Kate Willaert says:

    @Charles Knight

    Only if he now feels he made a mistake creating adult stories using children’s characters. But he’s still proud of LOST GIRLS. If he really believe the point he’s making, the most of the work he’s done — including recent work like that — was a mistake by his logic.

  25. Simon Cooper says:

    “But really – so what? Yes he’s partly responsible but it’s a red herring in considering if the underlying point has validity or not.”

    Partialy? I’d say as far as mainstream comics go he and Franky-boy were the people responsible for creating the modern comic-book industry. To then turn around and spend your time complaing about the fruits of your labour does nothing but reinforce the “One law for Alan. One law for Everyone Else” feeling.

  26. Charles Knight says:

    “but reinforce the “One law for Alan. One law for Everyone Else” feeling.”

    But it’s still a red herring, let’s say he is 100% responsible, every single thing since 1985 is his fault, everything – do you think his actual point is right or not?

  27. Kate Willaert says:

    @Charles Knight:

    Not only do I think his point is completely wrong, but I think he’s a hypocrite for making it sound like it’s only okay when he does it.

  28. Simon Cooper says:

    “But it’s still a red herring, let’s say he is 100% responsible, every single thing since 1985 is his fault, everything – do you think his actual point is right or not?”

    It’s a bit like Governor Christie complaining about how shocked he was by the things he, sorry his aides, did. How do you take him seriously?

  29. Erik Scott says:

    God, I hope this is his last interview. He mentions Morrison 55 times in this interview, and yet Morrison is the one obsessed with him?

  30. Kate Willaert says:

    Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t there a time when genre novels like science fiction, adventure, and horror were considered to have a primarily adolescent appeal (similar to superheroes more recently)? I’m pretty sure most of the SF/adventure/horror stories quoted in LEAGUE were originally considered adolescent escapism when they were originally published. How does he explain his own interest in old characters? Or is it only “culturally catastrophic” when it’s the culture at large who hold onto old characters, not authors?

  31. “He did however spend many, many years using other people’s (Corporate owned) comic-book creations without any compunctions, yet gets his knickers in a twist when any one touches any of his.”

    I think his complaints are a bit more specific than that. He hasn’t to my knowledge complained about the use of (to give only a couple of examples) John Constantine or Tom Strong by other writers. When he’s complained about something like BEFORE WATCHMEN, the reasons involve more than just having somebody else touch one of his creations.

  32. Simon Cooper says:

    “I think his complaints are a bit more specific than that. He hasn’t to my knowledge complained about the use of (to give only a couple of examples) John Constantine or Tom Strong by other writers. ”

    He has complaned about a Green Lantern story he wrote long ago providing the inspiration for the last few years of that part of the DCU. Building on other people’s work is part of working in a shared universe and something he’s had no qualms about doing himself.

  33. “More importantly, what’s his excuse for LOST GIRLS, an explicitly adult book starring three public domain children’s characters, used in ways the original authors likely never intended nor would have approved?”

    Kate, I guess people who like Moore’s work (and more specifically, LOST GIRLS) see this work as a valid and non-sensationalist exploration of adult themes and sexuality using characters that had already been used by dozens of other authors in the past. The use of established characters adds weight to the story, but you could enjoy it without knowing what Oz, Wonderland, or Neverland are.

  34. @ hssssh – I’ll take it one step further and suggest that Morrison and Moore are the same person, just at different points in their personal timelines. See the Doctor Who 50th special for details.

  35. Kate Willaert says:

    I do like Moore’s work (just not his various hypocritical views), but what weight did using children’s characters add to the story beyond familiarity? And why is justified for adults to enjoy stories about old children’s characters when written by Alan Moore, but “culturally catastrophic” otherwise?

    Was it culturally catastrophic when adults lined up to see MGM’s The Wizard Of Oz in theaters 40 years after the children’s book was first published? Is it culturally catastrophic that people today still continue to watch it?

  36. James V says:

    Wow… Those were just dumb. Makes me glad I have not been following this feud but I would have expected better insults from Moore.

  37. George Bush (not that one) says:

    Between Chia “the pet” Leboof and Northhampton’s hash taster I have more fun loling at these d bags than reading comics! Keep it classy Alan. KIRBY WEPT !!!

  38. Jaroslav Hasek says:

    Rebel without a scratch is also pretty good burn.

    very entertaining. moore sounded reasonable enough, and even if i knew all the details and didnt agree with a particular point, i would hope to think id still be able to enjoy that world class wit on display.

  39. It’s interesting to me to see so many comments that would imply that Moore didn’t address the issues of rape or race at extreme lengths in this particular bit of writing. I can either concluded that they did not take the time to read them, they didn’t read them at all (many people who have put down their opinion, and I don’t mean just here, have posted TL;DR, a term I had to Google, and now find infuriatingly lazy on many levels, simply because, as someone with autism and other learning disabilities, I struggle to keep my beloved, yet shaky grasp on literacy. Then I find that most people are just throwing it out the window, but they still feel they can proceed to smear one of the most literate writers of our time?) they read it and didn’t understand it, or they read it and chose to ignore it. From my point of view, Moore has spent years providing his readers with stories more well thought out and conscientious of his subject matters then most of today’s best writers are capable of on their best days. His depictions of rape have never been to champion the action, but rather to address them in all of their horror and pain as required by the needs of the story, but Moore’s critics seem to forget that, or even worse imagine otherwise. The first example that comes to mind is the idea that he had the Joker rape Barbra Gorden in “The Killy Joke.” It never happened, yet people have decided that it did, and now we have new outrage from a very old story. The show “Killer Women” just showed one woman, very plainly shoot another woman dead, at point blank range, a horrid event that mirrors a murder that took place just a few doors down from my home, just the other day, but I see no outrage. I share Moore’s thoughts on why that is, in comparison.

    Am I an Alan Moore fan? Yes. I find it enjoyable to read works that engage me above a fourth grade level, not only in prosaic fashion, but in literary content. I am able to read these things and give them thought as an adult. I don’t need people standing by for me, with their thumbs on the speed dial button for their friends at the ACLU. I don’t need Amazon.com to change the N word to slave in Huck Fin, to keep me from being a racist when I read it because I am able to understand that racism is wrong on my own, and I don’t believe that it makes me a racist to acknowledge that there are good and profound works of literature that are flawed in their ignorant depictions of people of other ethnic origins. I don’t need people telling me that depictions of sex are somehow dirty and juvenile. If you don’t agree that I’m inelegant enough to discern these ideas in my own mind, for what they are, and you feel that Moore or any other writer likewise isn’t (but everyone seems to feel that Seth Macfarlane is, for some reason) and that these works should be oppressed by shaming or outrage, then maybe tyrannical censorship for the sake of the sensitive public, has been the side of the fence you’ve been on, without even realizing it, all along. I am reminded of a quote from Ray Bradbury, where a fireman said, “It didn’t come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God.” (it’s worthy of note that when he said “minority” the term related to an outspoken few, and not people of another “race”.) Oh, how this is coming true.

    I believe that Moore is simply fed up, after 30 years, of ignorant people misrepresenting his work, whether it be intentional, for gain, or to feed outrage that would better be spent on real world atrocities that are just to scary to confront, and then using it to publicly poke him with sharp sticks, while he has constantly stuck to the task of producing groundbreaking works, yet unmatched by his contemporaries.

    While I am not privy to the confrontations for which Moore speaks, I would urge all parties involved to consider their rebuttals very carefully, (and I’m borrowing from a comment I made on Heidie’s Facebook page, here) regardless of who’s in the right or wrong. If I were in their position, my main priority would be to make sure that things don’t escalate from this point, purely because I believe that Moore is completely capable of doing what is mentioned at the 30:30 mark of Mindescape, shown here: http://youtu.be/pwMaPcY29UE …and probably willing to do it, if provoked, more. Your time may be better spent helping out at a soup kitchen, reading a good paperback, or taking a long walk in the park. His writing is good enough (whether you are a fan or not) that no amount of Internet comment section support to the contrary would stand the test of time, like his bardic satirical spells could, to use his nomenclature. It sounds crazy, I know, but it’s a crazy world, and “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

    I don’t say these things to wound. I just see that no good can come from backing Moore, into a corner any more than he already obviously feels he has been. If you don’t like him, don’t read him. If you don’t like what he has to say, skip his interviews when you see them posted. If you don’t want to go to war with him, don’t publicly bash him. If you want to disagree with him, do it in a civil way, because I’ve seen that he is capable of being civil. He said all of this, already. I can understand that prides have been hurt, and I know what that feels like, but all anything ever seems to be on the web these days, are efforts from people to hurt one and others prides. What’s the point, if it doesn’t progress our consciousness but only invokes more anger? Where does it stop? It stops when we go back to doing and supporting what we love, and forgetting about those who we don’t agree with. If you feel someone is ignorant, create an example of what is not, and work to get it out there, into the world. If you don’t like violence, show us a better alternative. These things will always exist, and people will always need to address them, but it is up to us to chose how we maintain them.

  40. Kate Willaert says:

    @Christopher Moonlight:

    It doesn’t really matter whether Barbara was raped or not, it was still a sexual assault, and it was a sexual assault used as a plot device to motivate the male characters of the story. At no point did Moore deal with the effect this traumatic event had on Barbara herself, only the effect it had on her father and on Batman, the male characters around her. That’s the problem with The Killing Joke.

  41. Michael P says:

    Well, Moore himself has said publically that he’s not all that fond of Killing Joke in retrospect, and that he was rather surprised when DC ran with it as continuity, so he might agree with that assessment, Kate.

  42. Simon Cooper says:

    That’s not the same as saying that you think you did anything wrong in dragging out the tired old trope of rape/sexual assualt (and we’ve all seen the original uncensored page now haven’t we?) as a motivation for a male character, though.

  43. “He mentions Morrison 55 times in this interview, and yet Morrison is the one obsessed with him?”

    Yes, I’m amusingly reminded of Charles Soule’s characterisation of Lex Luthor in his villain’s month one-shot. “Why isn’t he here? He *knew* I was getting out of prison today! I’m all he thinks about! WHERE IS HE?”

  44. Another Aaron says:

    If folks are going to comment on what Moore did or did not say, they should probably read the entire interview/essay first. Just saying.

    If you still have a problem with what he said, then by all means, fire away. Those upset over issues involving the representation of race, fridging, or rape, should especially do so. Those parts of the interview/essay aren’t easily quotable, so I don’t blame Heidi MacDonald for not including them above–if you want to comment on those things, though, you really should read it.

  45. Whatever says:

    Wait Barbara is raped in the Killing Joke? I don’t recall that but it’s been like 25 years, I thought she was shot? I do remember Jim Gordan stripped naked though with some weird cherub stuff.

  46. Cekrypton says:

    What’s ignored in this discussion, feelings for the two men aside, is that Moore is at his best–AND FUNNIEST–during his evisceration of Morrison. What ever the truth, what ever “side” you are on, the last third of this interview is some of the liveliest, most hilarious stuff Moore has written in years.

  47. Simon Jones says:

    That was intense. It was impressive but intense. It wasn’t very nice about Laura Sneddon either. I read somewhere that she was getting some Twitter grief as a result of this interview, so if she reads this I hope that she’s doing ok.

    I am going to rearrange my bookshelf tonight and move my Swamp Thing, LOEG and From Hell collections beside Doom Patrol, the Invisibles and the Filth to see if there is an implosion and I wake up to find a crater in my living room.

  48. Erik Scott says:

    “that Moore is at his best–AND FUNNIEST–during his evisceration of Morrison. ”

    I strongly disagree with this. Taking into consideration the interview Sneddon did with Morrison that factually contradicts some of what Moore is, being nice here, mis-remebering, about his past interactions with Morrison, it rings to as not particularly clever or funny at all. It rings to me as trite, juvenile, and petulant at best.

  49. gianni_mamas says:

    “Although I would have been happy for the traffic, I felt putting it out there without some context wasn’t the way to go, as that was actually FAIRER to Alan Moore than presenting it all by itself.”

    You mean that a post titled “Alan Moore’s seven most painful Grant Morrison burns” will not generate enough traffic?

    The title of this post is exactly what Alan Moore seems to be feed up about: if fanboy or hype sites like The Heat wouldn´t mention Alan Moore in the same sentence with Grant Morrison nobody would know about their bullshit and nobody would care; but, yet instead of posting of the thing that would matter, their works, you choose to post the bullshit. Gossip. Hype. And you promise to give space to refutals for, I´d say traffic but surely you´ll say “fairness”: more hype. And more bullshit that has nothing to do with what these creators actually create.

    I´m a little bit dissapointed that Moore finally gave in to the troll game, because he has no need to do it: he is in a whole diferent game, the man does not belong to the comic booky fanish insularity represented by this site. Yet, in spite of this unfortunate trolling, Alan Moore speaks bluntly (tough articulated) and to the point; he is not interested in self marketing and his responses are not curated by an agent to come out as “not ofensive” to his “fanbase” or posible readers. The man does not organize a self named convention and when he uses rape in his comics it´s not just for the sake of shocking and selling. He may be nuts and with short comings but he is honest and in the end, in his “wizardy” behaviour he tries to give attention where it matters: to his work, no to his fucking beard.

    By the way, his response on writing about race and rape is way more articulated and pertinent on whatever you, a feminist, could get from John Romita Jr. You wont give a shit about what I say, but for what it´s worth I´m calling your bluff: the Heat is the new Wizard. Til this moment I used to read this blog because from time to time you offered valuable and interesting info, including Padraig´s articles, but in the last year or so it´s been recurrent that your idiosincrasies coveniently stop whenever a hard topic hits somebody you know (yeah, that´s why I brough up JRJ) or you can use something to get “moore” traffic for the sake of it.

    You should stick to the Shia Labouff crap.

    Never mind if you read this, I´m not coming to this site ever again.

  50. Mark Parsons says:

    Oh dear, this isn’t going to end well, is it?
    Love Moore’s work. Love Morrison’s work. Such bright and shining minds! Such amazing interviews they give!

    I’ll chalk the AM vs GM feud up to artistic temperaments and am Loki g FWD to their next works.

  51. Urbanlegend says:

    What IF Moore (without hair) is Morrison in his secret identity :)

  52. Chinhead says:

    To those saying Paidrag didn’t challenge Moore – He took accusations, charges and sniping only previously confined to threads and comment sections straight to the man himself! ‘Are you racist’, ‘Are you a misogynist’ – You don’t think that took balls on Paidrag’s part?
    As for Morrison, Moore nails him. Sorry to play the ‘Wise Old Man’ (I’m 31 and, it seems, the only comic fan with a memory that stretches past breakfast) of the comments section, but before the internet we had things called fanzines. And Grant Morrison used these fanzines to, by turns, bash or profess his love (but mainly bash) his hero Alan Moore. When fanzines died he took his sniping to the internet. Morrison always had something to say about Moore. You may say that’s harmless, but the fact is Moore held his tongue regarding Morrison for 20+ years! (only passing comment on Grant when asked about him specificity as part of a Q&A that he only did as a favour to a friend’s widow) His behaviour towards Grant (and strangely, ONLY Grant) could not have been more dignified.
    As for that thing that appeared on The Beat previously? That Morrison fans still cite as his finest hour? Where he said that he was an ‘established writer’ before Moore came along, (When Moore has halfway through Watchmen, Morrison was still writing Zoids) and that ‘Moore couldn’t have had anything to do with Vertigo because it wasn’t even called Vertigo by the time Moore left the company’? Do me a favour. He came off as a right div. And contradicted so much of what he said in the past.

  53. Pessoa says:

    It isn’t an interview, it’s a monologue. When Paidrag asked if Mr. Moore is a misogynist, it’s a candid question that allowed the grouchy old man to talk anything he wanted without any more questioning. Mr. Paidrag isn’t interested in arguing with his idol.
    But followers of Saint Alan always will defend their guru. Some even say his behaviour is dignified. Go figure.
    If the young Grant Morrison bashed Mr. Moore it’s something typical of youth, I’ve seen this kind of behavior in other artists. Now what justifies the behavior of Mr. Moore? Is he becoming senil? Lack of good manners?

  54. George Bush (not that one) says:

    At 31 you are still decades younger than me and others here so perhaps you should reconsider playing the “wise old man” sonny.At least GM has grown up. AM does not even want fans of GM to even read his work! What dignity !!! LOL ‘To be brutally honest, I’d prefer it if, as with the Before Watchmen re-creators, their associates and their readers, admirers of Grant Morrison’s work would please stop reading mine, as I don’t think it fair that my respect and affection for my own readership should be compromised in any way by people that I largely believe to be shallow and undiscriminating. ‘

  55. Alex Mann says:

    I didn’t see any glory in that “interview” (as already pointed out, it was more of a monologue). Moore comes out extremely diminished: bitter, vindicative, resentful, enable to let go. He is the one obsessing with Morrison. You know: never trust a hippie.

  56. Chinhead says:

    I’m not particularly wise, but as I said, I DO have a memory and that seems to be something that sets me apart in the fan community. Does Moore come off as reasonable all through the interview? Of course not. But on his relationship with Grant Morrison he is spot on. Morrison did riff on Moore’s work, almost exclusively, for the first part of his career and he did send out barbs to Moore through public forums with no retaliation for 20+ years. Pessoa – He may have been young when he started, but he never stopped! Morrison has to mention Moore in every other interview. As Moore said in the interview ‘its creepy’. Alex Mann – You’re not the only one to say this is a one sided feud on the side of Moore and it annoys me. Its simply not true.

  57. Chinhead says:

    Hm. If no one managed to read my comment properly, then I wonder how many actually bothered to read all of Moore’s interview before commenting on it…

  58. Zaragosa says:

    This all makes me very sad. It seems like Alan is his “highest self” when he is writing a story — large-hearted, empathetic, deeply humanist. As opposed to his personality in “normal life” these days, which, as noted above, comes off as shockingly bitter, petty,delusional, etc. The fact that he calls GM a “narcissist” is rich, especially in the context of such a long-ass, self-absorbed screed. The crazy thing is, if Alan or his buddy Michael Moorcock ever actually took the time to give Grant Morrison’s work more than the most cursory of glances, they would have seen thay Grant’s work actually has very little in common with theirs. No one would mistake THE INVISIBLES or WE3 or SEAGUY as being Alan Moore stories. For better or for worse, Grant is in fact a far sloppier and less disciplined writer, but with his own very real virtues and strengths, chief among them being the frankly more original story ideas brings to the table. Alan has been in large part riffing on other peoples’ characters for decades now (LOEG, LOST GIRLS, TOM STRONG, etc). Anyway, this is all really quite sad, but it does not affect the amazing stories that are Alan’s truest legacy. “POG” from SWAMP THING still makes me cry like a baby.

  59. All outta bubble gum says:

    Wait. Grant who?

  60. brain says:

    So the people that *loves* to read on a monthly bases comics that shows women in bikini showing their asses in the more ridicolous poses made by workers of one of the more chauvinist industries in the world want to criticize Moore as a morbid mysoginist because he has shown rapes in works that are the only reason why american comics are not seen as for children only.

    Yes, right.

  61. Martin says:

    This is a fascinating interview. Really, really fascinating. It’s a shame people just read the hot-button quotes taken out of context and label it hogwash. There’s a lot for any educated lover of literature to ponder on and reconsider in regards to the issues brought up.

    So I’ll just reiterate what some others above have said: guys, read the whole interview before you comment.

  62. horatio weisfeld says:

    This drama is getting so ridiculous that I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point it was revealed that Morrison and Moore are best friends forever ..
    >>
    @hsssh:
    I can see them right now in the back corner booth (by the men’s room). They’re laughing it up w Clowes and LaBeouf.

  63. SAIPAman says:

    I found the tract to be well written and very entertaining. Alan Moore delivers again.

  64. Pessoa says:

    Mr. Moore fans think anything his idol says is fascinating and they think he’s misunderstood. Mr. Paidrag allowed his long rambling against Morrison and Laura Snedon without any questioning and I doubt Mr. Moore would hold up if a real journalist refute his arguments. Mr. Moore loves to monologue but he doesn’t like to dialogue with someone with different opinions and viewpoints.
    When Mr. Moore says ” I’d prefer it if, as with the Before Watchmen re-creators, their associates and their readers, admirers of Grant Morrison’s work would please stop reading mine” it’s a childish attitude. Someone can’t like Morrison, Moore, Azzarello, Cooke, for instance?
    Some say people get wise with age, that isn’t the case of Mr. Moore.

  65. SAIPAman says:

    I didn’t say I agreed with any of his points just that they were well presented and entertaining.

  66. Bob Acid says:

    Voice of the Fire was a much better first book than Morrison’s book about superheroes thing. I mean, there is no comparison. Moore’s recorded works are also better. Morrison comes across as more likable in interviews, for sure, though.

  67. Bob Acid says:

    But all this stuff from both of them about being a warlock or wizard and performing magic rituals is just very silly and immature, more so than reading or writing superhero comics.

  68. horatio weisfeld says:

    “..stuff from both of them about being a warlock or wizard and performing magic rituals is just very silly..”
    >>
    @Bob Acid:
    FYI: I have personally seen both turn swiss into gorgonzola.

  69. This stuff is so entertaining, I will continue to buy everything Alan and Grant do, and this type of thing just puts a smile on my face.

    Is there another person like Alan Moore? He is so well written. The responses he gives to the questions are better than most published works. By the end of Alan telling us his points regarding sexual violence, I was wondering; man, why isn’t there more sexual violence in comics? (I mean I snapped out of that way of thinking almost immediately, but the thought was there just because Alan is such a good writer) And Grant Morrison is just an absurdly awesome dude.

    Comics need more personalities like these guys.

    And for all the other comic fans getting worked up, take this as entertainment, and realize that creators that make the truly moving pieces of art, are usually messed up in a lot of ways. So don’t let there personal self affect what you think of there work. (it’s hard I know)

  70. “The only thing that I’d previously heard concerning this person was Kevin’s brief account of someone he’d apparently encountered at an American signing for The Black Dossier, an African-American woman (if that is still an acceptable U.S. term) who had seemed upset by our inclusion of the Golliwog/Galley-Wag. ”

    That parenthetical comment is the kind of passive-aggressive, vaguely racist comment that I would expect to come out of Rush Limbaugh’s gullet. That he wrote it while dismissing legitimate questions about his use of a racially-charged character makes it even sadder.

  71. George Bush (not that one) says:

    Yes Dan,it is sad. Moore’s anger and arrogance is blatant. I never thought of Moore as racist, but I wonder about how clear he is thinking. The back story of the Gwog coming from a DARK MATTER universe seems like a Fuck You to the PC crowd or a hateful joke. Black person comes from dark matter WTF!!! I am not sure white people can understand how personally hurtful and offensive the Gwog is. Furthermore, AM calls out GM for being a fake radical, but he himself, a self proclaimed ANARCHIST, which has an inherent spiritual quality, profits from hateful ,violent ,sexist and racist imagery all under the big justification of art.Bullshit Alan, I would have more respect for you now if you were still cleaning toilets, rather than the arrogant ass you have become. Wear your ego, don’t let it wear you.

  72. Madeley says:

    Just a quick correction of an attribution error- no idea who Dylan Tern is, but he isn’t the originator of the “perfect” image at the head of the article. Paul Cornish is. The original is taken from this page:

    http://famousfanboy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/dumble-moore-vs-volde-morrison.html

  73. George Bush (not that one) says:

    It was my understanding that the “proposed roundtable” never happened. Did it? At least 2 people( else where on the internet) are claiming it did with one saying there is a 60 page transcription to which Moore is responding. This is not true is it?

  74. I should clarify that although the roundtable was proposed, there are some 22,000 words of emails between the four participants, but it never got to a publishable shape. I was attempting to get at least statements edited out of that, but things moved on on other fronts.

  75. George Bush (not that one) says:

    (my computer doesn’t seem to like wordpress so I am posting this here) As a long time follower of Alan Moore, from Maxwell the magic cat to Loeg, his answers have raised more questions . Why does AM imply to his American audience that Kevin ‘stumbled upon’ the Golli when it is a well and currently know artifact of Britian with a long racist history. Why is he surprised that some people would object to him using a racially charged icon when there is a movement in Britian to reclaim the Golli? Why does he now deny ‘reclaiming’ the Golli when he is previously quoted saying they were reclaiming it?

  76. George Bush (not that one) says:

    How is giving the Golli a large todger any thing but a racist joke? Why if AM wants his work to be thought of as Art does he shy away from criticism and go on a rant for 2/3 of his piece? Why does he think his past work prevents him from being racist or making a mistake in the present ? Why if racism is a serious issue does he make a joke about his racist Irish collaborator and make a massive aggressive remark about ‘african american’ as an acceptable term?

  77. George Bush (not that one) says:

    Why does he point out that not many people complained about the Golli before? Is this an indication that his predominately white audience doesn’t care about racism or that it did not sell well? Is there a statue of limitations on racism ? Is it the place of white people to tell black people what is offensive to them? Is it the place of men to tell women what is offensive to them? Is it spiritually and morally right to profit from racist or sexist thought? Does not every one make mistakes ?

  78. George Bush (not that one) says:

    Again, how is giving the Golli a large todger anything but a racist joke? How does this Art help society? Is it just entertainment? Why are people entertaining themselves with racially offensive images and rape? Do people think that maybe AM put the rant in his ‘interview’ to distract from the real issues? Do people care more about Grant Morrison than racism? Do people realize that infighting between male and female, white and black ,and backlash against political correctness and feminism is a divide and conquer tactic?

  79. George Bush (not that one) says:

    If Anarchy is about group rule, wouldn’t AM, as an anarchist, welcome some discussion about serious issues? How does class war invalidate racism? If one profits from radical anarchist thought, should one be exempt from critical examination? Make no mistake, I believe in freedom of speech and do not think Alan Moore is a monster.Rather,I find him and his thought typical. Sadly typical. If we want to progress as a society we must discuss,learn and admit our mistakes.

  80. My take on the appearance of the Golliwog– and I’m assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that he hasn’t appeared anywhere but BLACK DOSSIER– is that Moore is in part invoking racial stereotypes to lay them to rest. Remember that in the same story, Moore present Hugo Drummond, a working-class English agent of the bad guys, who happens to be massively racist, anti-Semitic, etc. This character– based very loosely on the 20s character Bulldog Drummond– is caricatured as an absurd, albeit dangerous, fellow. I can’t speak to Moore’s precise meaning in putting the two characters in the same story, but I don’t think it’s coincidence.

  81. I’ve added another installment of my series ALAN MOORE ELITIST NEOPURITAN.

    http://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2014/01/alan-moore-elitist-neopuritan-pt-3.html

  82. Charles Knight said:

    “I actually agree with the substance of that point – that the domination of adult culture by largely reactionary concepts intended for children is problematical and telling about society.”

    Could not disagree more. A lot of the concepts that have seen success in the cinema are not explicitly reactionary, and some of them– such as HELLBOY– were not intended for children.

    I don’t think it means anything about society except that people like spectacle. They liked it in METROPOLIS, they liked it in SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARVES, they liked it in 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA, and now they like in THE AVENGERS. Big deal.

  83. Gavin Bell says:

    I love a lot of Mr Moore’s work, but having read that ‘interview’, I’m off to read a shitload of Grant Morrison comics and start an e-petition to Time Warner asking them to demolish Northampton town centre to build Watchmenland.

  84. Alan Moore is a shit says:

    Alan Moore is such a fucking baby who think’s he’s better than everyone. I’m ashamed he’s affiliated with comic books.

  85. Paul R says:

    Pfft. Magicians eh ?

Speak Your Mind

*