Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] re: gaiman and Moore, serial killers etc

Expand Messages
  • David S. Bratman
    ... Since Ernest appears disinclined to respond, I ll say that it seems to me this is relevant and not disingenuous, because one of your criticisms of Gaiman
    Message 1 of 4 , May 15, 2003
      At 02:35 AM 5/15/2003 , Steve wrote:

      >""Darkly poetic" these guys weren't."
      >Now that's REAL killers you were talking about, and
      >you're making it sound as if I described those people
      >are 'darkly poetic'. Which is pretty much the opposite
      >of everything I've ever said on the subject. I praised
      >the 'dark poetry' of Alan Moore's piece of dark
      >fantasy. You're being disingenuous now.

      Since Ernest appears disinclined to respond, I'll say that it seems to me
      this is relevant and not disingenuous, because one of your criticisms of
      Gaiman was his lack of realism. (The improbability of a serial-killer
      convention.) And you were contrasting Gaiman with Moore, of whom you were
      more approving. Therefore an observation that Moore is also unrealistic
      (you say he writes fictional serial killers with "dark poetry", Ernest says
      real killers aren't like that) is relevant.

      >I thought I'd backed down enough on my Gaiman
      >critique, which I think was probably overstated, but
      >composed of my sincere opinions. As I've said I wasn't
      >aware Gaiman was so highly thought of.

      I'll disagree with you on specifics, but you're absolutely entitled to hold
      a low opinion of Gaiman's work, and don't let his high ranking by other
      people convince you otherwise.

      >Ernest, this response of yours seems to be little more
      >than a tit-for-tat attack throwing back at Alan Moore
      >pretty much everything I originally said about Gaiman.

      That's pretty much the point. Ernest thinks your criticisms of Gaiman, as
      contrasted with Moore, also are applicable to Moore. I haven't read
      Moore's serial-killer stuff, but I can say this:

      [spoiler warning]

      that in both "Watchmen" and "V for Vendetta", Moore depicts killings as
      bloody and (certainly the "alien attack" in "Watchmen") more massive than
      anything Gaiman writes in the serial-killer convention story. But while
      Gaiman shows the characters' own mistaken pretensions to "dark poetry"
      (e.g. the nebbish killer who calls himself Nimrod), Moore is interested in
      how Adrian and V justify their deeds on a practical basis: and in the
      latter case he leaves the reader with the distinct impression that the deed
      _is_ justified, for V is fighting true evil, Evey carries on V's work, and
      Finch (V's honorable opponent) abdicates responsibility at the end;
      "Watchmen" is more ambiguous in that regard, but of the other characters
      it's only Rorschach who is absolutely convinced that Adrian is wrong, and
      willing to sacrifice himself to prove it.

      Gaiman thinks his killers are delusionally poetic; Moore either thinks his
      killers are justified, or is willing to let the reader think it.

      - David Bratman
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.