Sarg

This is kind of interesting if you're into comics and "true crime" http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/7089/Found-it-By-Fire-By-Gun-By-Knife-By-Rope?page=1#.U4podCjt020 One of the Zodiac Killer's cards to the San Francisco newspaper had the words "by gun" ... "by knife" ... "by fire" ... "by rope" -- meaning, he was murdering people by these methods. These exact same words are found on the "death wheel" cover of Tim Holt Comics #30 (1952). Zodiac also painted a red mask on the skeleton of his card, and the character on the cover is the Red Mask. Coincidence? It would certainly be bizarre if a 1952 western comic book in any way inspired a serial killer in 1968-70. But the Zodiac Killer was not your average person.

You're a herpetologist, too? Cool. I currently have an adult pair of Striped Mud turtles! Raised them from hatchlings. Yes, a herpetologist and author with 4 snake books under my belt. I took 160 photos of Western Pond Turtles while in CA a week ago. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=brian+hubbs Awesome photo! So you really are a herpetologist. My favorite turtle genus has always been Clemmys (now Glyptemys). I've raised Wood and Spotted, but never had the chance to acquire a Western Pond hatchling. Now if somebody can just locate a Baker drawing of a turtle ...

Interesting about Woolrich being interpreted as an existentialist. I'd never heard that. Then again, Sartre's "Nausea" wouldn't have been too out of place as a 1940s Popular Library PB. The larger point worth dwelling on is how unpredictable the future market for any "collectible" will be. Just because there is still interest in super-heroes that is lifting all boats in comic fandom now, does not mean that this interest will still be there in the next generation. I remember that doowop records used to be super expensive and coveted items, because the '50s and '60s east coast generation loved them. But they have long since been overtaken by '60s rock and soul records which the younger collectors (worldwide) love much more than doowop.

Great observations. The sprawling book shelves of yesteryear have been replaced by wide screen TVs and computers. People still read books, but it's increasingly on a tablet. Most people don't have room for shelves and shelves of books. I'm the only person I know who has an entire wall of shelves, in which I keep hardcovers, comics, paperbacks, and pulps (though not on the same shelves).

"Good girl art" doesn't get any more "good" than this!

Fox's covers from 1947-1949 are some of my favorites of all time. Kamen, Baker, and bosomy brunettes with almost nothing on. I can't believe they got away with this stuff, and of course this "outrageous!" factor has always been a huge part of their appeal.

Zombie rag dolls from the tomb? I'm so scared! The brainstorming must have been really dry that day at Atlas.

One of the greatest Classics covers.

You don't usually see Classics Illustrated along with the rest of the comics in these photos.

Oh dear God, there was a "Barbie and Ken" comic book? That will send anyone screaming back into the arms of the Golden Age.

I guess I need to get out to more coffee shops...

PS Artbooks is reprinting the entire run of The Thing within the next few months. The series hosts some of the finest covers on horror comics, so I hope the inside contents are half as good. Very nice colors on that one.Congrats!

Heh, heh. Somebody should've submitted that cover to the CCA as a joke.

I've got a later printing of Ivahoe. Probably the worst art I've ever seen in any comic book. Just unbelievably amateurish.

I like the early covers with the borders.

You're probably right. There's a running gag of Tubby always suspecting Lulu's father of foul play and donning the role of "The Spider" to uncover the plot. That's usually pretty fun. I don't understand the comparison between Stanley and Barks. Barks's rep is built on him being a writer and artist. Stanley did not draw 99% of the Lulu comics, Irving Tripp did. Plus, the drawings are so simple anyone could have drawn them.

I picked up Volume 6 of the "Little Lulu Library," which reprints issues from the mid-1950s. They are OK. Comparisons between Stanley and Barks or Schulz leave me dumbfounded. There is no Snoopy character in Lulu, no depth like you have in Peanuts. It's all pretty one-dimensional comics for kids. Fun enough, sure, but I don't quite get the hype. Is there really much demand for original copies?

First time I've seen this in color. Probably the most "shocking" of all EC shock stories. Even by EC standards, I can't believe they thought this story was appropriate for a comic book.

It looks like what was the western comics' strongest selling point after 1949 is the same thing that makes them so unappealing to many of us today: photo covers. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding these as repellant as Krytonite. That, plus the fact that so many of them were centered around Hollywood cowboys, rather than historic fiction about the old West.

You can tell it's a Code cover right away. Baker would have never allowed those legs to be covered pre-Code!

I think most Harvey horror covers are pretty lame, but they went completely gonzo with this one! Great looking 1.0 and great cover, grats.

That was an amazingly good Photoshop job. Fooled me!

Is this real? Were they really doing variant covers like this?

Love those Mandrake covers. Could we see a scan or photo of one of the "bone white pages"?

I didn't know MAD was still being published. CRACKED survives at least on the web, with a couple of clever writers carrying on the spirit of Kurtzman. I don't know if they have an actual magazine though. Anybody got scans to the early MAD magazine (not comic) imitators? Lunatickle was one.