Anyway, sorry for knocking things off-topic a bit for this thread!
I have nothing this week so I’m using the current Comixology sales to go back and catch up on Action Comics #1000, as well as the first issue of that new Terminator book that ChrisS mentioned a while back.
I remembering hearing a lot of comparisons to Gull Ascending with that one sequence near the end, for sure. Not as all encompassing, that’s a given, but there’s still that magnetic quality of cross-throughs that Moore is very capable of depicting in his books.
It is definitely close in spirit to that book. The difference would be that book felt like it led with the story and the research followed, and this one feels like it leads with the research and the story follows.
That’s not getting into the prose sections which I find to be weirdly bland, and written in that faux-handwritten script which I personally find as corny as using comic sans or papyrus.
(These posts are making it look like I hate the book whereas I’m actually enjoying it quite a lot)
That I agree with.
It’s really more about the world, the history, and the impact rather than a narrative about the characters introduced. I found all of that very interesting and liked how Moore played with some things we know/take as fact. Reading Joshi’s long biography helped haha. But I agree that it’s not something with a very active internal story.
I’ve also never tried to read it through all in one go, I only ever read it monthly as it came out. I can imagine the slowness of some of the early issues being compounded by reading them in quick succession.
I have a few friends who write nonfiction books for a living and they say the biggest challenge is knowing what research to leave out. It’s very hard for them as they worked hard on the research and it is genuinely fascinating stuff but a lot of it has to go to service the narrative.
Moore struggles with this too. I’d say From Hell is the one where he threaded the needle perfectly. Promethea and LOEG were/are a little up and down but mostly got the balance right (I know the former has its critics). I think with Providence some of his research could have been cut.
For me, Burrows was a big reason why that trilogy worked. There was a lot of unsettling stuff I couldn’t really put my finger on and I have difficulty explaining, a bit like how I felt about the second season of Channel Zero.
To me that is something that must be incredibly difficult to pull off in a comic book and providence is one of the few times I’ve seen it done and probably the best example I can think of.