I'm somewhat disappointed with the book so far. It begins with a series of false assertions.

First, it claims that consciousness alters quantum events when people observe them. It is my understanding though that "observation" alters quantum events because of the measuring tools and techniques used in experiments to observe them. So, there is a false equivalence there between how the term "observe" is used in everyday language (i.e. just perceiving something with your eyes) and how it is used in an experimental setting (i.e. using some kind of device to measure the phenomenon under study).

Second, there is the claim that in "accordance with its own rules, science must deem consciousness unreal." This strikes me as an outlandish claim given how much of cognitive science is wrapped up in the hard problem of consciousness. It is THE primary challenge of cognitive science and, although we have no concrete answers yet, there is already a diverse body in the scientific literature on the neural correlates of consciousness and possible hypothetical mechanisms by which subjective experience might arise from brain activity. The claims go from outlandish to downright outrageous when science is accused of preferring that "the mind be demonstrated to be no more than a relatively meaningless by-product of biology." Perhaps there is a fringe minority that holds this view, but I'm not aware of any prominent scientists the view the mind as "meaningless" even if they hold to it be an emergent phenomena of biology.

Lastly (at least when it comes to this first post) there is the claim that "everything in human culture...originated in the unexplained, unscientific, and...non-existent reaches of the human mind." There are many domains within entirely separate fields of study, from the philosophy of mind to psychology to cognitive neuroscience, devoted to studying the mind and regarding its structures and operations as real. So, this yet another claim that strikes me as mostly baseless.

This misunderstanding and denigration of reason and science from the outset of the book is a pretty big red flag to me. It reminds me of the New Age books I used to read that were riddled with false claims about quantum physics and consciousness that also espoused the view that science was fundamentally the enemy of any true understanding of reality. It allowed the writers to make any claims they wanted because they had given themselves the get-out-of-jail-free card of not needing to make their claims comport with the findings of modern of science even if those claims appealed to the findings of science.

I love London. I’ve been here thirty five years, a comic book fan for slightly longer than that. But this was my boozer when I first moved here.

Now a Poundland.

I had forgotten all about it.

Just in case you needed a delightful diversion from any other major news event that may have been monopolizing your television and computer monitor for the past couple of years, it's worth remembering that it's officially V for Vendetta o'clock right now.

If ever there was a night that was right for rereading this gem, it's tonight!

Remember, remember!
The fifth of November,
The Gunpowder treason and plot;
I know of no reason
Why the Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!

Hey everyone! I was wondering if I could buy this book in English. It’s my first time reading a work by Moore in English, and I’d like to compare it with the French version. For someone with an intermediate to advanced level in English, is it readable and accessible?

I assume there’s more than a few practitioners of The Art hanging around here, and this is a thing I’ve wanted to bounce off some people for a while. Something I’ve realized recently is that, on a personal level, I find Promethea to function as a much stronger symbol than a lot of traditional gods and goddesses. I know her life and her story much more completely and intimately than I do somebody like Isis, Thoth, or Hermes, and her and her story have shaped my life in a very deep way. The first time I read Sophie’s poem it felt like the first time an invocation struck a cord with me, and the idea of attempting to incorporate this into a magical practice has stuck with me for years.

Has anyone ever attempted something like this before in their own practice? I believe Moore picked Glycon as a patron deity way back when because he knew it was a fictional deity so do you think something similar would work here?

https://reddit.com/link/1ghfabx/video/eo0zg5hkpcyd1/player

Not pictured: complete single issue runs of Promethea, Providence, Tomorrow Stories, and Tom Strong.

Hi all, I just got to page 62 in the bumper book of magic and I am missing pages 63-79??? And from 79-95 is all out of order. Has anyone else experienced this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/books/review/alan-moore-the-great-when-bumper-book-of-magic.html?unlocked_article_code=1.VE4.ckry.d9Ym2yr_iID5&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Hey everybody,

I'm hosting a virtual event with Alan Moore to celebrate the publication of The Great When and we're the only Canadian bookstore to get this opportunity. I hope y'all can join me and the bearded wizard as we dive into The Long London and whatnot

A Virtual Afternoon with Alan Moore - McNally Robinson Booksellers

EDIT

Thanks everybody for attending. For those that couldn't make it, the stream will be up on our YouTube channel probably tomorrow

McNally Robinson Online Events - YouTube

Okay, so this little memory bubble just floated to the top. When he was first announcing the intention of LOEG, Moore mentioned that one of the characters featured would be the title character from THE BEETLE (1897) by Richard Marsh. While I can easily imagine that this was just an idea, and that his conception of the overall intended story evolved away from it, I was just wondering if he was ever specifically asked or noted why The Beetle did not appear?

I have been waiting for this book for 17 years. The announcement of the book roughly coincided with my interest in the occult. A lot has happened in the interim. My attention span is diminished and time is precious. I don't believe the occult is hogwash, but I wonder if I've scratched that itch to know more. I want to say that the occult is the art of extreme mindfulness. Over the past decade or two, I have been more interested in Moore's discussions on the occult than his fiction. He has very well thought out beliefs and is exceptionally good at articulating them, but after 20 or 30 years, one does tend to repeat themselves. What can I get out of this book?

Might want to listen to the second track - A Skeleton Horse. It provides answers as to who the lady is who rides the bone horse while clutching a key.

It's not essential to the story, but it's interesting.

The entire album could be seen as exploring the Great When of Highbury.

Considering the length of time its taken for Bumper Book to reach completion, it seems really curious that it's been released as almost the exact same time as The Great When. Am I over thinking this? Or do you think Mr Moore planned for both to drop at the same time? Knowing his intricate plotting, is there some meta commentary going on here? It just seems incredibly strange to bring out both at the same time by sheer coincidence

I saw one question on here asking something a long the lines of- are we basically getting a reformatted version of the poster at the end of Promethea??

I have to admit- I was a little worried about that myself, so just wanted to post this so people are aware that, if that's your concern, don't worry. It's over 300 pages long.

There's detailed breakdowns of each of the Sephira, there's a breakdown of Tarot, there's so many comic strips, all while being tied up with the Moores' personal perspective on the meaning and practice of Magic.

I'm frankly shocked at how extensive it is, for the price. Rejoice!