movies, television, music, comics, animals, science, fiction, bad vibes, christopher allen.

30th December 2012

Link reblogged from Trouble with Comics with 4 notes

Trouble with Comics: Grant Morrison's Eroding Significance Apparently Bothers Him Very, Very Much →


I understand completely why Grant Morrison is so insecure about his place in comics history in comparison to Alan Moore, but someone should really explain to Morrison how much weaker and more inferior he ironically makes himself appear with such verbose defensiveness. The work of the two…

So, just so we’re clear, it’s bad to knock Alan Moore, but knocking Grant Morrison is fine. People are always willing to make excuses for the guy they like, or not treat the other guy as fairly. These are both really talented men who’ve done a lot of good work, but who still have flaws of ego and maturity and being too judgmental, like most of us. I don’t think the Comics Beat piece did Morrison a lot of favors (especially because the writer didn’t edit Morrison’s bleating about his juvenilia credits, and she has the odd notion that doing the creator-owned miniseries Happy is some sort of act of self-sacrifice for Morrison), but it’s true that Moore has often been allowed to spread a view about his impact on comics and his influence in getting work for other British writers in the U.S. in the ’80s is questionable. Morrison had some facts to back him up. It’s easy to say one should just shut up and let history decide, but…I’ve seen how history decides things. For much of my life, Ronald Reagan was considered a great President. History is written by the winners, and the winners are the ones who take hold of the narrative. Let’s face it, if Alan Moore had short hair and a trim beard and wore t-shirts and sweats, we wouldn’t listen as raptly. If he was tweeting, we’d think of him as any other comics writer. One of the best, but more of a regular guy. The wizard act is sincerely him, don’t get me wrong, but it also serves his image as the old-fashioned, principled Gandalf. Morrison’s sleek bald sex god trickster was great for his ’30s and ’40s. As a guy in his ’50s, we’re used to either a ranter or an above-it-all elder statesman. But you know, it’s hard to let old wounds go, especially when the media focuses on them so much. Aside from the Beatles vs. Stones in the ’60s or a couple of author feuds, it’s rare for media to focus so much on two elite talents who really have almost nothing to do with each other other than they work in the same field and don’t like each other. They have a lot of overlap in their fanbases, but they rarely are even covering the same ground or with similar approaches. And yet, so many articles and posts are compelled to take sides between the two. How does that not affect you, to see the other guy mentioned in so many pieces about you? I think even Morrison acknowledges in the article that people are going to see his responses as whiny if they want to. Maybe down the road he’ll just refrain from responding to the subject, and Moore will refrain from speaking on an industry he hasn’t been informed enough to speak on for 20 years. But if I was either of them, who knows if I wouldn’t take the same bait? At the end of the day, whether Alan Moore is too detached from an art form he used to love, or whether Grant Morrison is too concerned with his media presence, or whether one agrees with their opinions or would want to spend much time with either of them, is irrelevant. Watchmen and The Invisibles and Swamp Thing and Doom Patrol and New X-Men and Promethea are still going to be affecting and inspiring people. 

Christopher Allen

Tagged: posts by Christopher Allengrant morrisonalan moore

  1. christopherallen reblogged this from troublewithcomics and added:
    So, just so we’re clear, it’s bad to knock Alan Moore, but knocking Grant Morrison is fine. People are always willing to...
  2. troublewithcomics posted this