sfcityduck

Anyone seen this one?

Can't tell if that is a comic in the background:

Not sure if these photos from LA Public Library database have been posted before:

Bangzoom, You need to vacuum your billiards table or stop practicing the trick shots around that dragon.

I think you miss the most important edited dialogue: The substitution of the word "desires" with "hopes." I also think the deletion of "I shut my eyes" can be explained not as censorship of an offending phrase, but of making the story conform to the new picture. I'd say that change is incidental to the wholesale re-drawing of the panel.

Except, it's not an example of "censorship," but of an editorial choice. That issue was never submitted to an industry watchdog as it pre-dated the CCA and post-dated the earlier (weak) regime. The publisher may have been motivated to delete that panel because of the public scrutiny the comic industry was under, or maybe it was an independent editorial decision. We'll never know.

Cool graphics. Interesting stuff. You might want to add to your research that the history of industry self-censorship of comics began in 1948 with the adoption of the ACMP Publisher's Code. It basically was the template for the CMAA's Comic Code Authoity started in 1954. Of course, there are a lot of instances of publishers "self-censoring" or, more accurately stated, using their editorial perogative in response to public complaint. A notable example is Fawcett's discontinuance of the use of the racist character "Steamboat" in response to complaints by the NAACP. So not all "self-censorship" was bad. One other point: You assert that "We all know the result of the CCA, which was (IMO) more than a decade of lame product with art and writing to match." I would not characterize the comics produced from 1954 to 1964 in that fashion. First, vast swaths of comic titles were largely unaffected by adoption of the CCA. You may not like Barks' Ducks, but many of us do. Second, while I won't dispute that the CCA had a profround negative effect on horror and crime comics, leading to the demise of many titles and even publishers (most notably EC), it also probably should be credited for helping to spur the re-birth of popularity for superhero comics (most notably Marvel).

This is why I love this forum, and this thread in particular. Never heard of Doolin. Always loved Planet covers. Absolute agree with BZ that this guy deserves recognition!

Does More Fun 51 trump 52?

Also Super Comics 49

On the Tule Lake rack: Target v.3 #2 (26) (April 1942). Buck Rogers No. 4 (1942). Also, a Field & Stream with the "flag cover."

Can anyone identify the Boy Comics or, what appears to me to be, the Laugh Comics?

Tule Lake Internment Camp: Manzanar Internment Camp:

(thumbs u I think I can arrange that in the next few days! Brilliant!

Interesting how the logo changed from the ashcan of Action 1 to actual Action 1 -- e.g. got rid of thin and squiggly lines top and bottom of logo for bolder border. Does the similarity between the as published "Action" logo and the "Action Funnies" logo mean the "Action Funnies" ash-can post-dated the publication of Action 1?

I wish Moondog (and Zaid and whoever else has Ashcans) would doe a separate post your Ashcans thread with all those rare beauties none of us will ever see in person on one thread. Those are the coolest!

Court copy This may be my favorite O'Mealia cover. It's a great and dramatic composition, the rendering of the main figure is as good as Foster or Frazetta, the colors are spectacular with the yellows contrasting against the blue sky, and, maybe best of all, the way it breaks the third plane and the main figure extends into the logo heightens the drama and emphasizes the main figure's expression of determination.

I'm asking about the value of PLODs, and I assume that DG's copy is not blue. The Court copy went for a little under $150K right? And I don't think that copy is nearly as nice as DG's, although the Court copy does have a certain cache due to its history that might bump up its price a little bit. The reason I keeping asking for opinons on DG's book, is that I wonder what affects value more when it comes to a restored book: (1) How much it is restored, or (2) How good it looks. DG's copy has white pages and not a lot of restoration, but it is not going to present as well as some more restored copies, at least to a casual viewer, because of the discoloration on the top edge. For restorted copies is it all about the "Apparent" rating, or will a more structurally sound and less altered restored book trump a higher rated "apparent" book?

I recall seeing this book when DG first got it and he had it on display for one day in his store. And I recall the picture in the catologue that you are referring to -- which is somewhere on this site in the 2 to 3 years ago timeframe. What Gator is calling "color wash" was on the book before DG got it, as was the now absent grease stain. In any event, if a heavily taped poor looking bad page quality restored book is worth 51K, what's DG's copy worth? What's the most a restored book has sold for?

no doubt (thumbs u but how much restoration has been done to it? we will only know if it is "professionally" graded/checked. The owner, who is an upstanding guy, says not much at all.

If that thing's worth $51K, what's this white paged comic worth?

Is there any doubt that Leo O'Mealia's run of Action Covers, 2-6, is one of the greatest consecutive runs of covers by any GA artist?

Is that Captain George Hendersen of Captain George's Whizbang fame?

Do they include the first Superman issue? Heritage and Sotheby's think that's a rarity.

Marvel Mystery #1 came out last year, and it wasn't a reprint. See here: http://marvel.com/catalog/?id=11832