Nickie's Reviews > Lost Girls

Lost Girls by Alan Moore
Rate this book
Clear rating

F 50x66
's review
Jan 12, 2008

liked it
Recommended for: anyone who likes their graphic novels graphic
Read in January, 2008

Alice, Dorothy and Wendy meet up in 1913 and do A LOT OF RUDE THINGS, written/drawn by Moore and his missus.

It's very expensive and comes in a presentation box containing all three volumes. But considering how fancy this sounds, it isn't the beautiful object that you would hope it to be. The animation is really changeable - from frame to frame a single character can look completely different. Sometimes the angles are really crappy and faces become warped. Considering the stunning Aubrey Beardsley style frames that she sometimes offers, Gebbie can definitely do it. So why did she not bother? It's hard to get lost in the stories, when you're so aware of the changing quality of the illustration.

Moore's text is OK, but the shoehorning of Alice/Dorothy/Wendy's stories into erotic situations are sometimes really clumsy - especially Alice's. They say that all tales of young girls in fantasy are actually about their growth into sexual beings. It should have been easy then to write this without it becoming the equivalent of those school essays where you squeeze all of the songtitles of your favourite band into a single story. Subtlety Moore! Subtlety! Methinks he might have been allowing the ants in his pants to steer the story rather than allowing his head to have a bit of sway over it. Perhaps he and his missus were aroused to states of gymnastic sauciness and that's the reason why they couldn't be bothered doing a proper job of it.

Also, it refers to the Rites of Spring, modernism, the beginning of the Great War, and it could really have made more of that too. So there!
2 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Lost Girls.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-2 of 2) (2 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Grania (last edited Jan 16, 2008 07:52AM) (new)

Grania Ooh. Is there lady drawing-on-drawing action? I've just read the other reviews, and they all contain the phrase 'This is not erotica, this is PORN'. What is the clear difference between the two genre?

message 2: by Nickie (last edited Jan 16, 2008 12:37PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Nickie Well that annoys me when people make stupid distinctions like that. This is erotica as I'd define it, but I don't think it's denigrating if it's porn either. I mean, who cares? Woohoo *nudge nudge* honk honk! Homana Homana! Am I right? Am I right!?

This is what Alan Moore said about it (off of wikipedia): "it seemed to us [Moore and Gebbie] that sex, as a genre, was woefully under-represented in literature. Every other field of human experience—even rarefied ones like detective, spaceman or cowboy—have got whole genres dedicated to them. Whereas the only genre in which sex can be discussed is a disreputable, seamy, under-the-counter genre with absolutely no standards: [the pornography industry]—which is a kind of Bollywood for hip, sleazy ugliness."

I'm not sure I completely agree with him there, But yes, the ladies do... *cough* enjoy each others company *splutter* a great deal

back to top