How comics broke Alan Moore's heart 3 3

[kav]

There's a lot of Alan Moores out there that will never get anything published and fade into obscurity.  I always see the cup 1/2 full.  Moore got a LOT-but he didnt get EVERYTHING.  Most talented people get NOTHING.  

[dupont2005]

Shareholders are never left out in the cold in these deals though. If the talent who generate the wealth can’t have any, at least those who did nothing get richer than they already are

[Lazyboy]

1 minute ago, dupont2005 said:

Knowing their history with creators rights and IP, Moore thought “That wont happen to me, I’m too smart for DC’s team of corporate lawyers!”
 

I wouldn’t have been as confident 

I don't even think DC intended to screw Moore when they made the deal, but when the opportunity arose, they just couldn't resist.

[Ken Aldred]

25 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

I don't even think DC intended to screw Moore when they made the deal, but when the opportunity arose, they just couldn't resist.

The old saying and justification; nothing personal, just business.

Once trade paperback / graphic novel publishing really took off in the late 80s, Watchmen was a self-contained story of a length perfectly suited to that format, and DC wouldn't resist milking that new, very lucrative opportunity for as long as possible, to Moore's understandable, ongoing frustration.  

Edited November 25, 2019 by Ken Aldred

[Ken Aldred]

4 hours ago, kav said:

There's a lot of Alan Moores out there that will never get anything published and fade into obscurity.  I always see the cup 1/2 full.  Moore got a LOT-but he didnt get EVERYTHING.  Most talented people get NOTHING.  

Yup.  Sign a restrictive corporate contract or risk languishing in obscure, small-time, small press, independent self-publishing, at best.

Very rare at the time for the latter to become quite as lucrative and creator-controlled as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

 

Edited November 25, 2019 by Ken Aldred

[kav]

1 hour ago, Ken Aldred said:

Yup.  Sign a restrictive corporate contract or risk languishing in obscure, small-time, small press, independent self-publishing, at best.

Very rare at the time for the latter to become quite as lucrative and creator-controlled as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

 

As an artist I have had many people over the years say to me be sure to copyright that so no one steals it!  I always said the same thing-I HOPE someone steals from me one day and makes me famous-steal everything!  Once I'm famous they gotta come to me for new stuff.  R Crumb's Keep On Truckin was stolen but it made him famous in the main stream!

STEAL! STEAL! STEAL! I beg you-

[Logan510]

18 hours ago, kav said:

As an artist I have had many people over the years say to me be sure to copyright that so no one steals it!  I always said the same thing-I HOPE someone steals from me one day and makes me famous-steal everything!  Once I'm famous they gotta come to me for new stuff.  R Crumb's Keep On Truckin was stolen but it made him famous in the main stream!

STEAL! STEAL! STEAL! I beg you-

Apparently it's "ignorant" to have a different opinion of a creator than someone else

 

[kav]

1 minute ago, Logan510 said:

Apparently it's "ignorant" to have a different opinion of a creator than someone else

 

[lou_fine]

23 hours ago, kav said:

R Crumb's Keep On Truckin was stolen but it made him famous in the main stream!

Well, hopefully Crumb was wise enough to have held onto some of his OA, instead of selling them all off or trading them away ack in the day:  

Apparently Bob Beerbohm traded some old 78's to Crumb for this OA which he was able to sell through HA for $690K just last week.  

If this is true, it was definitely a wise and astute trade on Beerbohm's part.    

[kav]

1 minute ago, lou_fine said:

Well, hopefully Crumb was wise enough to have held onto some of his OA, instead of selling them all off or trading them away ack in the day:  

Apparently Bob Beerbohm traded some old 78's to Crumb for this OA which he was able to sell through HA for $690K just last week.  

If this is true, it was definitely a wise and astute trade on Beerbohm's part.    

Crumb has regretted giving away many Iconic pieces way back when.  But then again he did donate his sketchbook to museum.

[Bird]

On 11/25/2019 at 9:25 PM, lou_fine said:

Well, hopefully Crumb was wise enough to have held onto some of his OA, instead of selling them all off or trading them away ack in the day:  

Apparently Bob Beerbohm traded some old 78's to Crumb for this OA which he was able to sell through HA for $690K just last week.  

If this is true, it was definitely a wise and astute trade on Beerbohm's part.    

I think that Scott Dunbier posted himself holding this one on twitter, did he get it?

If you like Alan Moore's work but haven't read his ABC line they are really good, each one doing its' own thing. The love of the comics form is there with some crazy issue and story constructions. But the childlike wonder for superheroes was done pretty well in the early Tom Strong issues. It became a whole other type of book eventually, and that was fine but I like the "gee whiz" early issues the best.

 

[revat]

Interesting read, I really enjoyed the perspective of the daughter.  I certainly don't think Alan Moore is a crazy old man, and very very much hope that Mr. Moore and anyone else doesn't get too riled up by random internet warriors posting mean things on social media.  They almost never represent more than a small percentage of the saddest, angriest subset of the population, and should NEVER impact your emotional health (nor should their outrage be weaponized to make other people outraged).  That's especially true if you're posting something political (which Mr. Moore recently did, not that I'm not posting that or commenting on it). 

I love Alan Moore, his Swamp Thing and V for Vendetta are probably my favorite (his Swamp Thing is my favorite DC storyline ever) of his, though to be fair I haven't read much golden or silver age.  I see how he ended up heartbroken over the situation.  But it is weird, if you read his works from that time, it seems VERY CLEAR that he was weary of corporations and the power structure at large, and it sounds like he was aware of previous ethically-questionable behavior by comic book companies, AND YET somehow managed to accept money at that time for his work product, without retaining whatever rights he probably hoped for.  I do get that some artists have art literally bursting out of them, and the urge to share it with people can sometimes lead to situations where they are taken advantage of in the long run.  I can go either way on this to be honest, BUT I'm very glad that today artists have more opportunities to keep control over their own work and ideas than before.

 

One other note:  It sucks to see artists and creators you respect not get the financial (or other types of) respect we think they might deserve, especially if their personal or financial circumstances aren't great.  BUT if you asked  the most famous ones at age 25 "Would you rather have financial wealth or be remembered as a great creator, with your stories and art touching millions of people around the world for generations to come?", most of those young creators would choose the legacy in my opinion.  Of course priorities change, and the question of course could be asked "Why not both?"  But that's a choice millions of artists have made since the beginning of time (also something rich benefactors have exploited).

I'm sure there's some deeper philosophical thing to debate or explore, but I'm not smart enough to get further.