Logicomix has nearly no mathematical content. The most technical part is a quick description of Hilbert's Hotel, but I thought it was very shallow, since there was no explanation. It did not even try to define infinity, or suggest how to distinguish several kinds of infinity. And, at least in the French edition, the Barber Paradox is wrongly stated!
Logicomix is mostly about people, especially Russell, with the postulate that everyone that worked on the foundations of logic was insane. But if you scrutinize the story, many details are wrong (IIRC, the young years of Russel, Frege's aggressive bursts, the last years of Cantor, …). They bent the reality to obtain the cliché that most people expected: genius mathematicians are mad.
I agree, the graphic novel was entertaining, but not an accurate portrayal of their lives.
If you're looking for something more factual, then Russell's own autobiography is a good place to start. Also "The Cambridge Companion to Bertrand Russell" (edited by Nicholas Griffin) is a source I can vouch for.
I think there is an issue of mismatched expectations. Logicomix is just a divulgative effort that briefly surveys Russell’s life. As somebody with little knowledge of post-Enlightenment philosophy, I honestly did not come away from it thinking philosophers were mad, but simply that his gallant effort in logicism reached the end of the line once Gödel entered the scene - which is what happened, by all accounts. He looked extremely reasonable, particularly considering how his whole prestige and career depended on the methods Gödel wiped away.
If i remember correctly (been a while since I read it), Logicomix really failed to explain how Russell went on to become relevant in public discourse at large, basically assuming that philosophers are interesting by default... I bought it mostly to find that out (he was very influential on my parents’ generation, as one of the classic intellectuals mentioned in ‘68 movements) and was somehow disappointed to just get the story of a logician instead. Still, it was a coherent story with great reverence for its subject, IMHO. Had it been trying even harder to delve into logic, as you expected, I would have probably thrown it out of the window.
It has little mathematical content and as anaphor pointed out in a sibling comment is is not even an accurate portrayal of Russel's and his contemporaries lives.
I think trained mathematicians and the philosophically educated are probably just not the right target audience for the book.
I still found it an interesting and entertaining read. Just a few days ago I gave it to my eight year old and she came up with a lot of good questions while reading it. It is not a children's comic though and it is definitely a book that needs guidance, especially because of the artistic liberty it takes in many respects. For example, the first thing I had to set straight is that Russel's brother was nothing like he was portrayed in the book.
Logicomix has nearly no mathematical content. The most technical part is a quick description of Hilbert's Hotel, but I thought it was very shallow, since there was no explanation. It did not even try to define infinity, or suggest how to distinguish several kinds of infinity. And, at least in the French edition, the Barber Paradox is wrongly stated!
Logicomix is mostly about people, especially Russell, with the postulate that everyone that worked on the foundations of logic was insane. But if you scrutinize the story, many details are wrong (IIRC, the young years of Russel, Frege's aggressive bursts, the last years of Cantor, …). They bent the reality to obtain the cliché that most people expected: genius mathematicians are mad.