BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Alan Moore and Melinda Gebbie's 'Lost Girls'

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
electric monk
19:09 / 23.06.06
Hospital with copyright objects to books

From the article:

The hospital, which was bequeathed the rights to the "Peter Pan" books by Barrie, said: "In order to be published or distributed in these territories, Alan Moore's title would need our permission or license. From press coverage, we understand it deals with sensitive subject matter which does not initially seem appropriate to be associated with the hospital and with J.M. Barrie's legacy to us."

Stephen Cox, the hospital's spokesman, said Friday that it has not taken legal action against Moore and is was waiting to see whether the author will contact the institution to discuss its objections.

The hospital didn't know about the "Lost Girls" books until Moore was recently interviewed about them by the British Broadcasting Corp., Cox said.


I'm wondering, honestly, if they have a leg to stand on with this. Is the Wendy that appears in 'Lost Girls' the same Wendy that appears in the Peter Pan stories from a legal standpoint? I don't recall any great outcries over LOEG, but that's probably an apples/oranges comparision WRT subject matter and the public domain status of the characters.

This might be as easy to to smooth over as donating a portion of the proceeds from UK sales to the G.O.S.H., but I suppose that's dependent whether the G.O.S.H. would see it as "durty money". Seems like a nice compromise to liberal liberal me, tho.
 
 
sleazenation
21:24 / 23.06.06
It's a storm in a tabloid teacup, which unfortunately won't mean that it won't have financial fallout for publishers and retailers.

I guess when it comes to pornography with artistic merit you can either chose a shoftly softly approach, quietly publishing and distributing the material to render any questions about whether or not it should be published moot.

Or you can decide to approach dissenting opinions on the relative merits of pornography with artistic merit head on. The trouble is that this is a high risk strategy and there is no guarentee that the book in question will be viewed on its own merits. In the Today Programme interview, which features Moore, Gebbie and Rich Johnston, Johnston opined that Lost Girls was something akin to Lady Chatterley's Lover - an obscene book with artistic merit. Unfortunately, not all cases defended in terms of artistic merits or freedom of expression end so well. The Air Pirates famously lost out to Disney.

There is another side to this story too. G.O.S.H. (not to be confused by the nearby comic shop, GOSH) only holds the copyright for Great Britain and possibly the EU. Whichever the case, it is not going to prevent the publication of Lost Girls in the US.

As we saw in the 1980s with Peter Wright's Spycatcher, it is becoming increasingly less possible to prevent the public from getting hold of books. It will just make it more difficult to get hold of in this country.

This last point leaves me feeling a little annoyed with Rich Johnston for the part he has played a part in stoking this story, (and also the part he played in stoking taboild headlines that eventually lead to the altering of what would have been an entertaining X-Statix storyline) .

Of course, the filpside to any damage Johnston might be accused of doing to various parts of the comics industry is the amount of he has done to promote the industry, and various of its publications, publishers and creators.

So, yeah. It's a complex and interesting situation. The worst that will happen is that it will be harder for me to pick up a copy of Lost Girls and Top Shelf might conceivibly take something of a hit in terms of lost sales because of it. I guess it's also possible that Top Shelf might be under pressure to defend against lawsuits for obscenity from a variety of quarters.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
07:22 / 24.06.06
I have to agree with Sleaze, Moore is a clever feller and wouldn't have forgotten about the copyright situation, I'm not entirely sure but my brain is insisting that he drew attention to this in one of the interviews he did for lost girls and how it was being published outside of the UK for precisely this reason.

What is more of a danger right now I think is The Scum or the Daily Hate Mail picking up on this non-story and conflating it with their current state of high alert about paedophiles and creating some cock-and-bull story about 'Satanist Alan writing fairy stories for nonces'.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
08:37 / 24.06.06
BBC Radio 4: Today. There's a link to a twenty minute interview with Moore. It'll be up there for at least this weekend, I'm not sure whether it'll be there after that, but it covers most of the concerns.
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
14:30 / 25.06.06
The odd thing about the copyright situation is that Peter Pan was in public domain when the first issues came out, then went back into copyright with the new copyright laws. I'm sure that there have been other issues around this (and the retroactive putting things back into copyright that was in the last version of the law), but there is a part of me that wished that this book could have "passed under the radar".

Why?

This book seems almost tailor made for politicians to hold up and decry for cheap attention and political points. I can easily see some prosecutor who is 10 or so points behind in the polls going after someone selling this book to "porotect the children".
 
 
Mario
15:02 / 25.06.06
Then there's this little bit of British law:

"301. The provisions of Schedule 6 have effect for conferring on trustees for the benefit of the Hospital for Sick Children, Great Ormond Street, London, a right to a royalty in respect of the public performance, commercial publication, broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service of the play 'Peter Pan' by Sir James Matthew Barrie, or of any adaptation of that work, notwithstanding that copyright in the work expired on 31 December 1987. "
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
06:25 / 28.06.06
Hmmm, the Daily Mail of comics fora, Byrne Robotics, really don't like this book, and aren't afraid to state this without waiting for it to be published. Is there any reason John Byrne doesn't like Alan Moore or is it just because Uncle Grumpy doesn't like anyone and is bitter none of his comics last two years before being cancelled?
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
06:29 / 28.06.06
Byrne dislikes everything Alan Moore has done because he feels it "debases" characters and he is destorying super-hero books and such.

I think it's more that when Moore makes changes to books, people say "Wow, that was cool" and when Byrne does it, editors say "Change that back as soon as he leaves the room, ok?"
 
 
DaveBCooper
09:46 / 28.06.06
Lazy, I’m inclined to agree, though a mischievous part of me kinda hopes that it escalates insanely and leads to a rerun of the Wertham-inspired hearings, with Scott McCloud, Alan Moore, Chris Ware, Chris Staros and many other articulate creators called to the stand. And to get it right this time, none of them taking appetite suppressants.

That Byrne board dialogue was terrific in its insanity – people conflating the copyright and obscenity arguments, and loads of people demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the item in question. And the likelihood of it being used for ‘grooming’ by child molesters… well, wasn’t the same allegation levelled at the Brasseye special?

In all honesty, I echo Solitaire Rose re the reason Byrne seems to dislike Moore; and the constant harping on about Moore tramping over the original intent of characters etc appears to rather overlook the story ‘Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow?’, in which Moore wrote a story respectfully tying up all the loose ends of Superman continuity in the 1980s… before John Byrne made substantial changes to the Superman origin tale. Wonder why that got overlooked in the discussion?

Anyway, on topic: read the first few chapters of Lost Girls years ago, thought it interesting, and yes, quite arousing. Interested to see more, hope that questionable legal issues (it’s not a play) and questions of obscenity don’t stand in the way of me making up my own mind about it, and others having the right to choose not to read it.
 
 
DavidXBrunt
10:53 / 28.06.06
I was posting in that thread over at Feel the Byrne! and it was interesting to see it go round in circles. At one point a boarder gives a calm, logical defence of Lost Girls citing direct quotes and saying where they came from. Byrne responded by quibbling over a date, calling him a dickweed, declaring himself victorious and eventually closing the thread down becuase a certain section wouldn't bow to his view.

Byrne is now top of a list called 'I used to like you but then you got a website".
 
 
electric monk
12:23 / 28.06.06
TBH with y'all, that BR thread inspired this thread (and I was wondering if David Brunt and DavidXBrunt were one and the same! Nice work over there, DXB. I'm sure you'll be banned in short order. ;-) )

This article seems to cast a shadow on the copyright status of Peter Pan and co., at least in the US and Australia.

I've only read two chapters of 'Lost Girls' and that was years ago. Further, I certainly wasn't mature enough at the time to appreciate, or indeed recognize, the subtext. I'd be interested to read the completed work. I actually think this is a GN that I can share with the wife (who's very cold on a majority of the GNs I've shared with her). Something we can read on our own at our leisure, but also read together for kicks and fun.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
12:36 / 28.06.06
I also liked the part where Byrne called somebody a "asshole" simply for saying that they were quite looking forward to Lost Girls.

That kind of reasoned debate is certainly what the internet was created for.
 
 
DavidXBrunt
13:02 / 28.06.06
Yeah, that was a highlight for me too.

Banned? Me? Whyever would they do that?
 
 
electric monk
13:44 / 28.06.06
The pressure to groupthink is amazing over there. All that worry about 'Lost Girls' and porn-a-lyzing children's lit. Yet everyone there gathers around and applauds for Johnny's sexy sexy Sue Storm photoshoppery? I just don't get it.
 
 
BrianFitzgerald
23:57 / 06.08.06
Alan Moore talks Lost Girls with The Onion

"I'd recommend to anybody working on their relationship that they should try embarking on a 16-year elaborate pornography together. I think they'll find it works wonders."
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
10:46 / 08.08.06
Well, it's apparently shipping a bit late, Gosh comics haven't got it yet but expect to be getting it, so it would seem GOSH aren't going to prevent it coming to this country.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
12:10 / 08.08.06
From Lying in the Gutters:

Alan Moore. Melinda Gebbie. Interviewed by Stewart Lee about "Lost Girls." Thursday, October the 12th, 7pm at the Logan Hall, Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL. £7 tickets, concessions £5, call 0845 456 9876 to book tickets, lines open from 9am to 6pm BST, weekdays.
 
 
Janean Patience
09:12 / 06.09.06
I was expecting Lost Girls from Amazon this week, having preordered last month, and this morning got an email saying it's going to be delayed for 1-2 weeks. Is this because it's going into a second printing to satisfy demand, or are there problems with customs? Will I soon be dodging out of work every other Thursday morning not just to sign on illegally but to sign the Sexual Offender's Register?

Anyone else waiting? Anyone got copies? Any information welcome.
 
 
alexsheers
11:19 / 06.09.06
My Amazon order still says delivery estimate is 15 Aug 2006 - 28 Aug 2006 on the site, but I got the same '2-week delay' message around the beginning of August, and haven't heard anything since.
 
 
Essential Dazzler
12:01 / 06.09.06
My partner and I are both waiting on copies from Forbidden Planet, neither of has heard from them about delays. Rich Johnston mentioned it'd be delayed worldwide, but was uncertain as to the length of time.
 
 
ghadis
12:46 / 06.09.06
Top Shelf seem to think it's 'hitting stores everywhere right now'. No sign of it in the uk yet though. Gosh comics are not clear what is causing the delay on import. Hopefully arrive soon. Been waiting bloody years to read the rest of this. Fingers crossed etc
 
 
Janean Patience
13:44 / 06.09.06
From Newsarama:

NRAMA: There was word that the hospital in London which owns the rights to Peter Pan was making, or preparing to make waves. Has anything come of that?

Chris Staros: Yes, we have received correspondence from the Great Ormonds Street Hospital - the owners of Peter Pan in the UK, and as a result, UK/EU distribution of the book has been delayed until the matter is resolved. It has been a very cordial exchange, and one we are glad to participate in. As soon as the matter is resolved, we'll make a formal announcement about it.
 
 
Janean Patience
13:47 / 06.09.06
May as well forget about that for the time being, then.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
17:20 / 06.09.06
So what happens if I order it from Amazon.com as opposed to dot uk? Dot com claim they'll ship in three days, I know it'll take longer for no very good reason but will they refuse to ship it over the ocean?
 
 
Spatula Clarke
17:28 / 06.09.06
Doubt it. I've ordered plenty of books from amazon.com before now and never had a problem. It's highly doubtful that the GOSH business has registered with them and it's almost as doubtful that they'd care even if it did.
 
 
ghadis
17:33 / 06.09.06
That's a very good idea. May try that myself.
 
 
Malio
18:09 / 06.09.06
I contacted Amazon.co.uk to moan about the delay and got a £3 gift voucher.
 
 
EvskiG
20:27 / 06.09.06
I preordered a copy from Top Shelf a few months ago. Got it yesterday.

(I'm located in NYC.)

Read through Book I, which seems to reprint the previously-released issues, and a little bit of Book II, which seems to have been written and drawn more recently.

Interesting to see the changes in Moore's writing style from Swamp Thing-esque to Promethea-esque.

(For example, there's a classic bit of modern Moore-ish formalism in Book II:

Each of seven pages deals with a different one of the Seven Sins. There's a Mucha-esque illustration of the sin in question, a short Victorian-style love poem about the sin, and the events in the ongoing narrative reflect the sin.)
 
 
Haloquin
22:21 / 06.09.06
reprints the previous issues? I'd assumed they'd been changed over the years. It just seems weird that a book that took 16 years to fully complete would keep the opening chapters unaltered.

That said, I'm so jealous I'm close to tears.

(post by "Fighting a Fire-Crew", not Haloquin. Sorry, we share a pc and it has decided to randomly switch users on occasion, will sort this asap - Haloquin)
 
 
Janean Patience
06:55 / 07.09.06
I contacted Amazon.co.uk to moan about the delay and got a £3 gift voucher.

I'm going to tell them the delay is driving me to the brink of self-castration and/or immolation. That should be worth at least a fiver.
 
 
Dan Fish - @Fish1k
07:08 / 07.09.06

NRAMA: There was word that the hospital in London which owns the rights to Peter Pan was making, or preparing to make waves. Has anything come of that?

CS: Yes, we have received correspondence from the Great Ormonds Street Hospital - the owners of Peter Pan in the UK, and as a result, UK/EU distribution of the book has been delayed until the matter is resolved. It has been a very cordial exchange, and one we are glad to participate in. As soon as the matter is resolved, we'll make a formal announcement about it.


Still waiting for mine from Amazon.co.uk too.
 
 
Ron Stoppable
09:02 / 07.09.06
spoke to Gosh (the comicbook store, not the hospital)myself yesterday and they confirmed that they have no idea when or even if it'll be shipped to retailers in the UK.

Looks like the internet is your friend on this one. Any UK 'lithers had joy from amazon.com / .co.uk yet?

And fascinated by Ev KG's description. The idea of seeing the evolution of Moore's style throughout this labour of love is just more grist to the fan-mill. I'm really hoping (like everyone, natch) that the dispute doesn't escalate into a Morrison vs Rebellion-type impasse. While that will certainly add to the Moore legend, it doesn't do us any favours.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
13:09 / 07.09.06
Well, I'm going to have to regretfully cancel my order with Gosh for it, then see what happens if I order it from dotcom rather than dotcodotuk.
 
 
MattShepherd: I WEDDED KALI!
20:06 / 07.09.06
For the record, dot-ca also says 1-3 weeks. But I am patient (and hate duty, tacked-on taxes and the $5 Customs "handling fee").
 
 
EvskiG
14:04 / 08.09.06
Finished.

My conclusion, if anyone's interested:

Eh.

(And I say that as someone who has followed Moore's work since D.R. & Quinch, Marvelman, and Swamp Thing, and thinks he's the best comics writer of all time. And who can recite huge chunks of the Alice books from memory.)

Moore pulls off a few excellent formal tricks (the Seven Sins bit I mentioned above, some bits involving Alice's mirror, and some twists on the Oz, Peter Pan, and Alice stories), but the writing is over-florid, the plot's a bit dull, and the points he's trying to make seem pretty obvious (women need to understand their own sexuality, war is bad, sex is usually good). And Moore has interesting ideas of how a early 20th century Kansas farm girl talks.

I have to admit that at times I found myself wanting much less sex and much more plot.

And Gebbie's artistic skill is . . . limited. She does beautiful pastiches (Schiele, Mucha, and Beardsley, among others), and her color sense is fantastic, but she seems to have serious problems with proportion, anatomy, perspective, and simple illustration that can't just be chalked up to her distinctive style.

An interesting experiment, but not worth waiting 16 years for.

Of course, everyone here will have to judge it for him- or herself.
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply