But of course, there's the fact that he and Kevin are reflecting the societal attitudes and Western canon of the various periods they're writing about

He does try to address this somewhat by having Nemo be unequivocally Not Western.

I think, if anything, Moore is hyperconscious about the tropes of genre. Particularly the historical (problematic) tropes.

Though he's been less focused in dealing with racial tropes than he has with sexist ones.

the Bertie Wooster Meets Cthulu section made me laugh out loud

When we first got our copy of The Black Dossier, Pete read that part out loud to me. Yes, doing character voices. He had to pause at one point while I tried to catch my breath because I was laughing so much.

I love the League of Extraordinary Gentlmen but I haven't yet picked up The Black Dossier... and now I gotta!

I'm not sure that "rehabilitate" is the right word for what Moore's doing with any of the characters. The Fu Manchu storyline in the first volume isn't subverting the idea of The Sinister Oriental, y'know? I think that a some of his interest is based on the idea that the pop culture gives you a grounds-eye view of the world that a factual description doesn't.

And the rest of his interest is in taboos, and making what is implied into something explicit... so as soon as you say he shouldn't do that, it's guaranteed he will.

Black Dossier has its moments but I feel that the narrative quality was hampered by the experimental nature of the book. Or to put it simply, I preferred books 1 & 2.

I'm looking forward to book 4 though, which I believe is called 'Century'.

Ah, bollocks - I just wrote a great long reply, and the interpipe ate it.

Ngah.

Potted version: The Black Dossier is set in 1950s Britain, but it gives centuries of backstory for the LoEG-verse. Nemo only crops up fleetingly in flashbacks - it's pretty much All About White People. Which is understandable, since most of the Western Canon is all about white people, and a fair bit is overtly racist too - which Moore shows, and fair play to him.

But the Gollywog? I can see why they've done it - he's a fitting inhabitant of The Blazing World, not least because most white Brits genuinely weren't consciously seeing gollywogs as representations of black people - that's how totally and utterly Other the blackface dolls are. It didn't occur to me that they were supposed to be human.

But I found this blogger's perspective quite compelling.

Notwithstanding that, though, my GOD, it's a fabulous creation. (I've found Jass Nevins' annotations invaluable.)

eta

I'm not sure that "rehabilitate" is the right word for what Moore's doing with any of the characters

My understanding is that he's explicitly stated that this is his intention wrt the gollywog, a figure which has fallen into considerable disrepute in my lifetime. When I was a child, it was generally perceived (by white people) as an innocuous toy, on a par with a teddy bear. It was an iconic figure associated with Robinson's Jam, and you could send off for shiny enamel gollywog badges. Now it's generally seen as an expressly racist figure, and the gollywogs have been removed from new editions of Enid Blyton's Noddy books, and Robinson's Jam have kicked Golly to the curb as a figurehead. He is persona non grata.

I really DO think that rehabilitate is the appropriate word for what Moore is attempting to do with this character. I wouldn't use that term to describe his depiction of anyone else - and indeed, I enjoy the fact that he ISN'T whitewashing James Bond, or Bulldog Drummond. But I think that the gollywog is a problematic figure.

As such, of course, it does fit in very well with the whole idea of censorship and becoming an unperson.

With "wog" still being bandied around as an insult on a par with "nigger", I'm actually good with today's children NOT growing up with golliwogs, or being read Little Black Sambo. So...yeah. Problematic, I think.

My understanding is that he's explicitly stated that this is his intention

If you could find a link I'd certainly be interested. I don't know; again, all I can do is repeat my general sense that when something is designated unmentionable, Moore will want to mention it. I'm certainly not denying that the character is rooted in repellent ideas, but... there are a lot of repellent ideas presented in LoEG. And I don't think The Black Dossier is aimed at children, so I'm not sure what the specific concern is.

I suspect that Moore was very aware that it'd be uncomfortable for some readers, and that we'd rather not run into that kind of character, and that was at least part of why he included it. I mean... we saw rape presented as comedic in vol 1, and as (more or less) just punishment in vol 2.

To be clear: I don't think it's silly for readers to find it uncomfortable and I'm not dismissing your personal reaction. I just think part of what makes him tick is an interest in figuring out what makes people go "Oh dear, you can't DO that."

Salon has an excellent interview with Stephen King about the 30th anniversary of the release of The Stand and some details on his new collection of short stories.

I remember reading The Stand in 1979 when I was about 13 and really getting freaked out by it. I did a paper on King that year for 8th grade Language Arts that tied in The Stand, The Dead Zone, and Carrie.

Tony Hillerman died [link]

Sad now.

His autobiography, Seldom Disappointed, is fascinating. His mother drove by herself in the Oklahoma land rush.

Reimagined book covers. I'm very fond of the two Cormac McCarthy covers.