Alan Miller's "Lost Girls" and revisionist fiction

[shereads]

THE THREAD, PART ONE:

Does anyone own "Lost Girls" by Alan Miller and illutrator Melinda Gibble? Has anyone seen it? Is it worth owning?

I'm not familiar with Alan Miller's work except as the inspiration for a movie I haven't seen ("League of Extraordinary Gentlemen") and I'm not into graphic novels. But this looks intriguing. Pricey, though. "Lost Girls" is erotica based on the premise that girl characters from three Victorian-era children's books - Peter Pan's Wendy, Oz's Dorothy and Wonderland's Alice - get together as adults at an Austrian hotel to rehash the past.

A Publishers Weekly review, quoted at Amazon:

Lost Girls is a bittersweet, beautiful, exhaustive, problematic, occasionally exhausting work. It succeeded for me wonderfully as a true graphic novel. If it failed for me, it was as smut. The book, at least in large black-and-white photocopy form, was not a one-handed read. It was too heady and strange to appreciate or to experience on a visceral level. (Your mileage may vary; porn is, after all, personal.)Top Shelf has chosen to package it elegantly and expensively, presenting it to the world not as pornography, but as erotica. It is one of the tropes of pure pornography that events are without consequence. No babies, no STDs, no trauma, no memories best left unexamined. Lost Girls parts company from pure porn in precisely that place: it's all about consequences, not to mention war, music, love, lust, repression and memory.

Recommendation, anyone?

http://img.photojerk.com/uVIboSuV.jpg




THE THREAD, PART 2:


I'm also interested in your thoughts on reivisionist fiction. The novel "Wicked" is an example ("The Wizard of Oz" from the witch's pov reveals Oz to be a charismatic dictator bent on genocide, and using Dorothy his unwitting dupe).

"The Wide Sargasso Sea" by Jean Rhys is a retelling of "Jane Eyre," in which Rochester's mad wife is the heroine. A young Creole woman, raised on her family's Caribbean plantation, is sent to England to marry a man she's never met: cold, sexually repressed Mr. Rochester. Both repelled and attracted by his bride's passionate nature, Rochester rejects what he can't change. Antoinette is slowly driven to the state in which prim Miss Eyre will find her: insane with loneliness, locked away from her husband's sight and her child's affection.

Hell, who wouldn't burn down the house and hope to singe that gentlemanly bastard and his paragon, the proper little governness who's raising your kid and letting your husband paw her bodice? You go, girl.


Question: what revisionist novels have you read? What story would you retell from a different pov?

 

[FallingToFly]

THE THREAD, PART ONE:

Does anyone own "Lost Girls" by Alan Miller and illutrator Melinda Gibble? Has anyone seen it? Is it worth owning?

I'm not familiar with Alan Miller's work except as the inspiration for a movie I haven't seen ("League of Extraordinary Gentlemen") and I'm not into graphic novels. But this looks intriguing. Pricey, though. "Lost Girls" is erotica based on the premise that girl characters from three Victorian-era children's books - Peter Pan's Wendy, Oz's Dorothy and Wonderland's Alice - get together as adults at an Austrian hotel to rehash the past.

A Publishers Weekly review, quoted at Amazon:



Recommendation, anyone?

http://img.photojerk.com/uVIboSuV.jpg




THE THREAD, PART 2:


I'm also interested in your thoughts on reivisionist fiction. The novel "Wicked" is an example ("The Wizard of Oz" from the witch's pov reveals Oz to be a charismatic dictator bent on genocide, and using Dorothy his unwitting dupe).

"The Wide Sargasso Sea" by Jean Rhys is a retelling of "Jane Eyre," in which Rochester's mad wife is the heroine. A young Creole woman, raised on her family's Caribbean plantation, is sent to England to marry a man she's never met: cold, sexually repressed Mr. Rochester. Both repelled and attracted by his bride's passionate nature, Rochester rejects what he can't change. Antoinette is slowly driven to the state in which prim Miss Eyre will find her: insane with loneliness, locked away from her husband's sight and her child's affection.

Hell, who wouldn't burn down the house and hope to singe that gentlemanly bastard and his paragon, the proper little governness who's raising your kid and letting your husband paw her bodice? You go, girl.


Question: what revisionist novels have you read? What story would you retell from a different pov?

I've read "Wicked" as well as "Mirror, Mirror" and probably dozens of other revised fairy tales. "Beauty" is especially haunting. I didn't so much like Wicked as I did Son of a Witch, the sequel. They were both more political than I like my fiction.

If you want to read retold fairytales, start with Oscar Wilde and work through. But honestly, the retold fairytales are usually based on the "happily ever" type of stories. I prefer the old Hans Christian Anderson or Andrew Lang fairytales. The original "Little Mermaid" was beautiful, and I devoured the Fairy books as a young teen.

 

[rgraham666]

Isn't the authour Alan Moore though? I think you must be thinking of Frank Miller, she.

Moore does great stuff. Both of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen series were great. The movie blew great steaming chunks though.

One of the best things I ever read was his Watchmen series. It was the last time I showed up at a comic book store every 3rd Friday of the month to make sure I didn't miss an issue.

He also wrote V for Vendetta. the movie wasn't bad, but the comics were much better.

 

[Huckleman2000]

The one work of this sort I'm most familiar with is "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead", by Tom Stoppard (I believe). It's Shakespeare's "Hamlet", from the point of view of two minor characters, and it's a modern classic. I read it so long ago, though, that I don't remember much about it, except that I thought it was brilliant. Unfortunately, my copy of it is likely buried deep under piles of boxes in my ex-wife's garage. :|

I don't know if you like to read plays or not, but I would recommend it if you do.

 

[TE999]

Two excellent novels in the category of revisionist history are:

'Bring the Jubilee' By Ward Moore. The South wins the Civil War.

'The Man in the High Castle' By Philip K. Dick. Germany and Japan win WWII and occupy America.

I have the original paperbacks I bought on alibris.com.

They are both great reads and I recommend them.

Peace.

 

[3113]

Does anyone own "Lost Girls" by Alan Miller and illutrator Melinda Gibble? Has anyone seen it? Is it worth owning?

My husband owns it. He says, "If you buy it off Amazon" (aka, for about $50) then yes, it's worth it. Why? Because it's literary and beautiful.

Literary example: Alice, who is an elderly lady in the story, keeps masterbating before a mirror.

And the author is Alan Moore, who is, with little argument, one of the most amazing geniuses of modern comics. He *is* the reason and the inspiration for the literary nature of modern comics--at least in English speaking countries.

The art is pastel--and took the artist years to finish.

I'm also interested in your thoughts on reivisionist fiction.

Revisionist fiction is fan fic using literature instead of television shows. Instead of writing your own Dr. Who or Buffy story, you write your own"Jane Eyre" story. And like such fan fic, there are some very clever and good stories that come out of it, and some that are just awful. Most of these revisionist fiction stories I find pretty awful. I think they're awful because a lot of times they take themselves too seriously. They're fan fic...but they're not having any fun. They're using the story to create a message, usually a modern one. And they distort the original story in order to do so.

That is, they use the original story as a vehicle to tell their own, message-heavy story and, in the end, it seems that the ONLY reason the original story was used was because it gets the new story noticed. Who would have read the book "Mary Reilly" (or reviewed it for the newspaper) if it hadn't been a revisionst fiction tale of "Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde"?

In other words, they don't USE the story as is--they make up their own rules and ideas to fit the story they want to tell (It wasn't that poor woman's fault she burned down the house; don't believe Rodchester, she was just misunderstood!)--and they tell YOU that what you read in that original story didn't really happen or didn't happen as it was told. And they do all this for their own selfish purposes.

If they're a good enough and entertaining enough author it will work...but what if they're not? They're trying to be literature--but the "fan fic" is rarely as literary as the original. If it can't compete, then it's going to fall flat. Why should I be wowed by a story of Ahab's wife if it can't match "Moby Dick"--and how in the world is it going to match "Moby Dick"? (which, by the way, I don't like anyway, but that's not the point).

Now, Alan Moore is actually one of the few writers I trust to take on such a challenge. Why?

1) Because he wants to have fun with the story. Lots of fun! Just like all those folk who've written Sherlock Holmes novels have had fun with the character. He's not aiming to send a message, to tell the story from another view point to make a point, he's trying to give his readers and himself a GOOD READ.

2) He's done his research and while he doesn't hold the characters sacred, he doesn't bastardize them either. You can believe they exist in both books. Moore tries to be true to the characters, the story, even the time period when the story was written, it's literary themes and symbols. There are astonishing extras and details that he puts in to make sure this is no sloppy seconds. It's feels like the real thing--not a modern re-telling.

3) He's got the writing chops to take on the challenge and give a good fight--maybe even win! This is not just a gimmic to get the book sold.

Here's what I think, by the way--I think you should start with the first book of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 1. (DO NOT watch the movie, it's terrible!).

$10. Cheap. If you like Moore's writing and story telling--THEN you go for "Lost Girls."

One thing, however. "League" and "Lost" have very different...tempos and styles. Both Alan Moore, but "League" is an adventure/horror story. Wild and non-stop. "Lost" is very leisurely. Dreamy--it is erotica, and with its pastel art it has a very languid feel to it.

Alan Moore is a thinking person's writer. He has fun, but he also makes a reader work. This isn't candy, it's a feast. Layered, and layered, and layered. "Lost Girls" maybe erotica--and lovely erotica at that--but you'd better know you "Oz" and "Peter Pan" and "Alice" because Moore most certainly does know them, knows the time each was written in, the history of the author, the development of the stories, themes, etc. All that and more will be in them.

How's that for a recommendation?

 

[shereads]

Isn't the authour Alan Moore though?

You're right. Thanks, Rob.

------

The author of "Wide Sargasso Sea," a Creole woman, was motivated by Bronte's treatment of Rochester's Creole wife as a shadow character, whose mistreatment by her husband didn't need to be justified.

Rhys wrote,

"The creole in Charlotte Bronte's novel is repulsive which does not matter, and not once alive which does. . . . For me . . . she must be right on stage. She must be at least plausible with a past, the reason why Mr. Rochester treats her so abominably and feels justified, and the reason why he thinks she is mad and why of course she goes mad, even the reason why she tries to set everything on fire, and eventually succeeds. . . "

"Wide Sargasso Sea" is a beautiful book, poignant and disturbing, and stands on its own as other than a revisionist take of a classic novel. Especially if you're interested in the Victorian era with its stifling sexual and social mores, or the evolution of racial and ethnic stereotypes where slavery was outlawed.

Did anyone read "The Wind Done Gone," the controversial satire of "Gone With the Wind" that was published a decade or so ago? I adore the sheer, over-the-top melodrama of GWTW, and who hasn't wanted to be carried up those stairs by angry Rhett Butler? But if ever a story deserved to be retold from an opposing point of view, it's that one, with its fawning slaves. "Please don' let dem Yankees take us away from Tara, Mastah. We's family." Yeah, right.

 

[shereads]

My husband owns it. He says, "If you buy it off Amazon" (aka, for about $50) then yes, it's worth it. Why? Because it's literary and beautiful.

Literary example: Alice, who is an elderly lady in the story, keeps masterbating before a mirror.

And the author is Alan Moore, who is, with little argument, one of the most amazing geniuses of modern comics. He *is* the reason and the inspiration for the literary nature of modern comics--at least in English speaking countries.

The art is pastel--and took the artist years to finish.


Revisionist fiction is fan fic using literature instead of television shows. Instead of writing your own Dr. Who or Buffy story, you write your own"Jane Eyre" story. And like such fan fic, there are some very clever and good stories that come out of it, and some that are just awful. Most of these revisionist fiction stories I find pretty awful. I think they're awful because a lot of times they take themselves too seriously. They're fan fic...but they're not having any fun. They're using the story to create a message, usually a modern one. And they distort the original story in order to do so.

That is, they use the original story as a vehicle to tell their own, message-heavy story and, in the end, it seems that the ONLY reason the original story was used was because it gets the new story noticed. Who would have read the book "Mary Reilly" (or reviewed it for the newspaper) if it hadn't been a revisionst fiction tale of "Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde"?

In other words, they don't USE the story as is--they make up their own rules and ideas to fit the story they want to tell (It wasn't that poor woman's fault she burned down the house; don't believe Rodchester, she was just misunderstood!)--and they tell YOU that what you read in that original story didn't really happen or didn't happen as it was told. And they do all this for their own selfish purposes.

If they're a good enough and entertaining enough author it will work...but what if they're not? They're trying to be literature--but the "fan fic" is rarely as literary as the original. If it can't compete, then it's going to fall flat. Why should I be wowed by a story of Ahab's wife if it can't match "Moby Dick"--and how in the world is it going to match "Moby Dick"? (which, by the way, I don't like anyway, but that's not the point).

Now, Alan Moore is actually one of the few writers I trust to take on such a challenge. Why?

1) Because he wants to have fun with the story. Lots of fun! Just like all those folk who've written Sherlock Holmes novels have had fun with the character. He's not aiming to send a message, to tell the story from another view point to make a point, he's trying to give his readers and himself a GOOD READ.

2) He's done his research and while he doesn't hold the characters sacred, he doesn't bastardize them either. You can believe they exist in both books. Moore tries to be true to the characters, the story, even the time period when the story was written, it's literary themes and symbols. There are astonishing extras and details that he puts in to make sure this is no sloppy seconds. It's feels like the real thing--not a modern re-telling.

3) He's got the writing chops to take on the challenge and give a good fight--maybe even win! This is not just a gimmic to get the book sold.

Here's what I think, by the way--I think you should start with the first book of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 1. (DO NOT watch the movie, it's terrible!).

$10. Cheap. If you like Moore's writing and story telling--THEN you go for "Lost Girls."

One thing, however. "League" and "Lost" have very different...tempos and styles. Both Alan Moore, but "League" is an adventure/horror story. Wild and non-stop. "Lost" is very leisurely. Dreamy--it is erotica, and with its pastel art it has a very languid feel to it.

Alan Moore is a thinking person's writer. He has fun, but he also makes a reader work. This isn't candy, it's a feast. Layered, and layered, and layered. "Lost Girls" maybe erotica--and lovely erotica at that--but you'd better know you "Oz" and "Peter Pan" and "Alice" because Moore most certainly does know them, knows the time each was written in, the history of the author, the development of the stories, themes, etc. All that and more will be in them.

How's that for a recommendation?

But does it work as smut? I like smut.

 

[3113]

But does it work as smut? I like smut.

LOL! What kind of smut do you like?

This is VERY literary, primarily Lesbian smut (but with all cameos from just about every other category as well).

 

[shereads]

LOL! What kind of smut do you like?

This is VERY literary, primarily Lesbian smut (but with all cameos from just about every other category as well).

Are there explicit but beautifully executed illustrations of a few disturbingly smutty hetero scenes? I could go for that. I didn't much care for Borowczyk's infamous film treatment of Beauty and the Beast; too much horse phallus and the beast wasn't romantic. But I'd love to see a well done Beauty and the Beast porn story. Pastels would be nice, especially if they toned down the horse.

 

[Huckleman2000]

... too much horse phallus ...

Indeed, that pulls the plug for me as well.

 

[3113]

Are there explicit but beautifully executed illustrations of a few disturbingly smutty hetero scenes?

Okay. I've read through volume 1, and here's what I think. The kind of sex isn't the issue--there's plenty in there of all kinds. I think, however, that if you don't usually read graphic novels that you shouldn't start with this. This is Grad school smut. And the images, IMHO, while beautiful, are not...purely smut enough that you can skip the story and just enjoy the naughty pictures.

It's not that there isn't a lot of it, it's just that it's artistic and literary rather than purely smutty.

If you're interested in comic book smut--GOOD comic book smut with a fun story and plenty of explic hetero scenes, I'd recommend you start with Omaha the Cat Dancer.

Don't let the cat faces and tails fool you. The writer tells a great little story and has very sexy, very graphic sex scenes. I mean VERY sexy. What's important, however, is that it's easy for those uninitated in graphic novel reading to read. It's not elementry, but it's not difficult either.

Starting with Alan Moore is a little tough for anyone not used to graphic novels. There is a way to read them that is very different from just reading--or even from reading comic strips. Writers like Moore make full use of the word/image juxtaposition. This means that it's sometimes had to know who is saying what. It also means that you have to pay attention.

In answer to your question, "Lost Girls" does have some heterosexuality. None of it is disturbing, per se. Let me try to explain what you get with "Lost Girls"--first, for all that it is "cartoon" art, it is far more realistic in its depictions. By that I mean that the women's bodies look real. Not idealized or, again, sexy-for-sexy's sake. Alice, for example, is the oldest and tallest--she has no waist, and there is some sag to her breasts. You feel that you are watching real women engaged in these activities.

Second, all the sex scenes are related to literary themes and symbols. So, for example, Wendy is married to an older man and they're not having sex. But, relevant to the theme of Peter's shadow (remember how Peter's Shadow has a life of it's own?), while she and her husband are doing boring things, their shadows are having lurid sex. But you have to notice and pay attention or you'll miss it.

There's another scene where Alice and Dorothy get together for the first time. They smoke opium--relating to Dorothy's field of poppies and Alice's encounter with the hooka-smoking caterpiller. During the sex that they have, Alice sees the catapiller in a most unsual place. But you have to know your Alice in Wonderland to make out what she sees and why.

Is any of this helping you make up your mind?

 

[Huckleman2000]

...
It's not that there isn't a lot of it, it's just that it's artistic and literary rather than purely smutty. ...

Is it just me, or does anyone else look at this and think 'BOH-RING'!?

For porn recreations of classics, I'd look to the late '70s porn classic versions of 'Alice In Wonderland', 'Cinderella', and 'Flesh Gordon'. I think there was an X-rated 'Pinocchio' as well, but I can't vouch for that, never having seen it. 'Cinderella' is wonderful, and really imaginative. It's a musical. Cinderella is condemned to pedaling naked in the basement, propelling a machine that connects to rotating corn cobs for the enjoyment of her step-sisters two floors above. She sings a heartfelt tear-jerker for this sequence. The 'Fairy Godmother' is a black queen, and he grants Cinderella a 'snapping pussy' until midnight. Obviously, she's a sensation at the Ball . The Prince then goes on a quest to find 'the snapper'.
'Flesh Gordon' was pretty funny when I was stoned. Also pretty hot. And the special FX were neat. YMMV.

 

[3113]

Is it just me, or does anyone else look at this and think 'BOH-RING'!?

Dude, you take that back!

Alan Moore is never boring. And like I said, there's a LOT of smut in this book, and it covers just bout every AH category. By Volume 2 there's hardly a page without it. But if all you want are dirty pictures, then this isn't the book. It gives you too much more (and Moore!).

If you're going to spend the money on it, you presumably want that more. Both the writing and the beautiful art.

It's that choice we all make when we look for something to read here...quick and dirty stroke...or something more? This is way more.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Is it just me, or does anyone else look at this and think 'BOH-RING'!?

For porn recreations of classics, I'd look to the late '70s porn classic versions of 'Alice In Wonderland', 'Cinderella', and 'Flesh Gordon'. I think there was an X-rated 'Pinocchio' as well, but I can't vouch for that, never having seen it. 'Cinderella' is wonderful, and really imaginative. It's a musical. Cinderella is condemned to pedaling naked in the basement, propelling a machine that connects to rotating corn cobs for the enjoyment of her step-sisters two floors above. She sings a heartfelt tear-jerker for this sequence. The 'Fairy Godmother' is a black queen, and he grants Cinderella a 'snapping pussy' until midnight. Obviously, she's a sensation at the Ball . The Prince then goes on a quest to find 'the snapper'.
'Flesh Gordon' was pretty funny when I was stoned. Also pretty hot. And the special FX were neat. YMMV.

BWAAH! A porn musical is usch an awesome thought!

A lot of men will think "boring" though, for whatever reason. Subtle can drive a woman up the wall and through the roof, though, and if you're looking to seduce a dame, remember that


Revisionist fiction, as 3113 said, is fan fic. Some of its good, some not, and if you didn't like or don't know the original story, the new version is probably not worth your reading.
I just read ""Confessions Of An Ugly Stepsister" and enjoyed it very much. Gregory Maguire seems to do nothing but rev lit, now that I take a look at his catalogue- http://www.gregorymaguire.com/

And before him there was... Oh fuck, I can't think of the name! Some woman who re-wrote a bunch of fairy tales with some subtly erotic twists.
Rapunzel's mother had meant her for a sacrifice to the Dark Lord- who comes to get the girl early. Little Red Riding Hood's gramma WAS a wolf- it ran in the family. Snow White couldn't be seen in the mirror because vampires...

Anyone know who I'm talking about?

(edited to say) And there is a forgotten author, Eleanor Farjeon, who wrote exquisite stuff, and it's so damn hard to find her books! They are considered children's lit, but are so beautifully crafted. She wrote a couple of novellas-"The Glass Slipper" (Cinderella, obviously) and one called "The Silver Curlew" which was a retelling of the Rumpelstiltskin story.

 

[Aurora Black]

Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife: Pride & Prejudice Continues

 

[shereads]

Don't let the cat faces and tails fool you.

Too much horse phallus and now this.

 

[rgraham666]

And before him there was... Oh fuck, I can't think of the name! Some woman who re-wrote a bunch of fairy tales with some subtly erotic twists.
Rapunzel's mother had meant her for a sacrifice to the Dark Lord- who comes to get the girl early. Little Red Riding Hood's gramma WAS a wolf- it ran in the family. Snow White couldn't be seen in the mirror because vampires...

I believe that was Anne Rice. Her of the boring and melodramatic vampires.

I would know.

 

[3113]

Too much horse phallus and now this.

No horse phallus at all. The sex organs on those catpeople are purely human (if well endowed human)

Honestly, I wouldn't steer you wrong on this. If you want good, comic book smut, go for "Omaha." I can't tell you how many readers I know who swear by Omaha as one of the best examples of comic book erotica ever drawn or written.

 

[3113]

I believe that was Anne Rice. Her of the boring and melodramatic vampires.

Are you sure? The first "Snow White was a vampire" story was written by Tanith Lee ("White as Snow").

 

[rgraham666]

Are you sure? The first "Snow White was a vampire" story was written by Tanith Lee ("White as Snow").

Hadn't read that one.

I did love Lee's 'Demon Princes' series though.

Haven't read the Rice ones either. I did gather from what I've heard that they were erotic versions of fairy tales.

When writing my own vampire stories I'd often ask, "What would Anne Rice do?" Ad then I did something else.

 

[Huckleman2000]

Dude, you take that back!

Alan Moore is never boring. And like I said, there's a LOT of smut in this book, and it covers just bout every AH category. By Volume 2 there's hardly a page without it. But if all you want are dirty pictures, then this isn't the book. It gives you too much more (and Moore!).

If you're going to spend the money on it, you presumably want that more. Both the writing and the beautiful art.

It's that choice we all make when we look for something to read here...quick and dirty stroke...or something more? This is way more.

I'm Sorry, 3113, I just read that and all I can think of is that funny thread with the Victorian Sex Cries generator.