suspense39

The European auction is in Dallas? 

2 minutes ago, vodou said:

oh, so the good stuff

2 minutes ago, vodou said:

oh, so the good stuff

Ha! yes!

3 hours ago, vodou said:

http://www.arpla.fr/canal2/figureblog/?p=683 ?

Thanks, thats a VERY summarized version, but the essay is actually twenty something pages with images (images that might get pulled on this board ;)

4 hours ago, Peter G said:

https://reason.com/2019/04/29/cancel-culture-comes-for-count/

Thanks for posting that, I’m only about 1/2 way through, but I immediately thought of Klaus Theweleit’s amazing essay where he posits that underground comix were America’s last transgressive artform. If i could find it online I’d post it here. 

Haha!  

Since ive been in this hobby I’ve been amazed how many people “know” with confidence, what things are worth.....

It seems that here’s an idea that that every time it changes hands the seller has to make some money on it.....so it’s value is more than you or the other guy paid for it. The only time I hear about people selling at a loss is at auction. Does anyone try to sell for less than they paid? 

8 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Huh: https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/herb-trimpe-and-jack-abel-incredible-hulk-180-lot-of-15-pages-original-art-marv/p/7209-106001.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

Interesting choice.  15 pages of Hulk 180 in one lot. 

“Not a misprint -- we are offering fifteen pages of original art from this issue as one lot, with an additional two stat production pages included in the bargain. Alas, the one page from the book that featured Wolverine is not included here, but you do get the memorable face-off of those behemoths Wendigo and the Hulk, as well as some dramatic subplots.”

From description

7 hours ago, furthur said:

In general, I loved the original show-and made it a point to see both exhibits in LA during a lucky visit to LA while it was up, but I  will admit that I  was surprised by the inclusion of Feininger, for whom comics was a tiny part of a much larger career in art, and Panter, who I just didn't think belonged in the pantheon. I would absolutely have subbed in Foster, or  more likely Raymond, on the strip side and though I am not the Carl Barks fan that some are, I think he probably deserved inclusion-but  if the point was to include that "punk" sensibility that Panter brought in and to show contemporary cartoonists deserved a place at the table, I would have gone with Lynda Barry and killed two birds with one stone by making the show both more inclusive and having someone I thought was a better and more interesting comic artist. I really like Chris Ware's work and could certainly see why he was included, but I could absolutely make the argument that the show was way too  short on mainstream cartoonists and that Neal Adams might better have been added (or Jack Davis if I was in charge-the sheer  breadth of his cartooning talent still amazes me)

I don’t understand Barks either, but he seems to rate high with quite a few people in a crossover way....Lynda Barry would have been great.

7 hours ago, buttock said:

Sorry, I wasn't arguing with you, more continuing your line of reason. 

No worries  

47 minutes ago, buttock said:

I get that, but do any of those trump Eisner? 

I didn’t include Eisner because I was just responding to RRichard with my takeaways from the show.....Eisner was one of the all time greats in my opinion.

I’ve only used it for comics, which is between the cover and the newsprint pages. So I would say you are correct with your guess 

3 hours ago, rrichards said:

I saw the exhibition when it came to the NY area and have the book .These are all good artists but I'm not so sure about Art Spiegelman, Gary Panter, Chris Ware who seem to be the darlings of the "I don't read comics but I find these artists interesting" pseudo intellectual gang.Don't get me wrong ,Maus was a classic and probably reserves Spiegelman's spot,but Chris Ware, whose work I love, just hasn't produced enough work and Panter who works in a variety of genres (loved his Pee-Wee playhouse designs) would be a definite no. His comic art drawing skills are minimal  and strikes me as a low budget Crumb. 

Spiegelman also started RAW, which supported new voices And experimentation which opened up new avenues and innovations for Comics. Crumb folded in the hippy counterculture into comics (though he wasn’t the first, but he made it popular) and Panter did the same with the Punk counterculture, that’s why I believe he is there. Ware is a stellar draftsman and has a unique way of putting the whole history of comics into a singe Page (when he’s on) and making it something personal at the same time. To me Ware is comics entry into post-modernism. 

Anyway, that is what I took away from their inclusion, just my opinion.

Rumor is.....they tried to improve/correct some of the poor restoration and and really messed it up.

The show took up two museums here in LA, I personally thought they could have included less work by a few more artists. I think they were also trying to show movement in the medium and content which is why it moves, for example, from superheroes (Kirby) to underground (crumb) to contemporary (ware/Panter). I don’t think it was necessarily about who the “best” artists are but more along the lines of who twisted the genre in a new direction.

 There are also artists mentioned in the catalog that weren’t in the show. 

I enjoyed the show, and thought it was definitely a good start. I also was a bit annoyed there were no women. I also think it wasnt expansive enough, they should have included more artists, maybe double. but hey, I think as these types of shows progress we will see them morph into something better.

1 hour ago, glendgold said:

I think if you start with Kirby, Eisner, Moebius & Crumb (my picks this morning) and give it some time you eventually get Miller.  The influences might not be obvious (except Eisner) but I think the other three offered a lot of freedoms that Frank ran with, including anger.   

I'd have essentially the same, swap Ware and Herriman for Miller on mine.

http://www.artnews.com/2019/03/11/r-crumb-interview-david-zwirner/

https://www.davidzwirner.com/exhibitions/drawing-print-mind--kultur-klashes-pulp-fiction-pulp-fact-illustrious-r-crumb#/installation-views

looks like a great show

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/mar/07/robert-crumb-i-am-no-longer-a-slave-to-a-raging-libido

35 minutes ago, drdroom said:

for some reason nobody cares about the writer whose word balloon was also referenced).

Hahahahaha!

Yes paste

31 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Wow, this Eisner result is uh, unexpected:  https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/panel-pages/will-eisner-the-spirit-weekly-newspaper-section-story-page-3-original-art-dated-4-6-47-register-and-tribune/a/7204-93043.s

A really nice page, but about 7k over where i’d Have guessed 

“This one is interesting, as it seems a lot more self-assured than the rest:”

they are getting better for sure

i've had problems with "Tales to Astonish"

13 minutes ago, vodou said:

I'll admit that I did not know that one still existed. Cool.

me neither. mot too many Peter WW covers out there!

1 hour ago, tth2 said:

Some people aren't willing to take the gamble, others are. 

I certainly haven't had a 100% success rate, but the wins have more than made up for the losses so it will continue to be the primary way I sell.

Yes, it is a gamble and I came out on the short end of the stick. I know others who’ve done well like yourself. I was even approached by heritage to consign a couple times, being told how well my items would do and they didn’t.....actually going for way less than offers I turned down. Anyway, last time I sold there I lost some thousands, since then I’ve been mostly selling or trading on my own just taking the safer bet to the home run.