PhilipB2k17

This isn’t a court of law. Shooter would be in a position to have that conversation with Crespi. And Crespi was assistant production manager at Marvel starting in 1969. So Crespi might have knowledge of this practice. It seems credible. What’s you’re evidence this conversation never happened? Why would Shooter invent it?

Yep. And it's not me.

Per Jim Shooter: “Danny Crespi told me that covers returned from the printer to the bullpen back in the 1960's and early 1970's were routinely sold to some guy, a fan, who wanted them. He'd pay a dollar or two per cover.” http://jimshooter.com/2011/03/mystery-of-missing-box-of-marve.html/#comment-3852

Someone needs a refresher course on how logic works. Major Premise: All missing early Marvel silver age art was destroyed. Minor Premise: The covers to JIM 83, AF 15, TOS 39, FF 1 and Hulk 1 are all missing, early Marvel age art Conclusion: Therefore, the covers to JIM 83, AF 15, TOS 39, FF 1 and Hulk 1 were destroyed. This is the syllogism you are arguing. Yet, the premise is falsifiable. Or, at the very least, is unproven.

A lot of the interior art DID end up missing. AF #15 was missing for decades until it suddenly showed up as a donation to the LOC. As someone pointed out, we still don't know where FF 48-50 are. yet no one seems to doubt that these still exist. Yet, why haven't they surfaced? They are worth 7 figures! Blah, blah, blah.

The sum total of the rebuttal to my (now very plausible) argument is that I am not aware of the secret insider knowledge and legends of where all these art pieces are in this hobby. So, shut up you young whippersnapper. Yet, nobody is actually pointing out any specifics. Or, I should say, very few specifics. How in the world and I supposed to rebut or address that argument? The fact that the art has not publicly surfaced is not evidence that it doesn't exist, given the context that has been developed and explained here. Do we know where all the copies of Action Comics #1 are? It's worth hundreds of thousands, or millions. Yet, we don't have an accurate census of it? Why would anyone hide it? I mean, come on. That argument is so silly.

We keep hearing about lost renaissance or Dutch masterpieces re-surfacing after going missing for decades, or even centuries. Those are worth millions. Why would someone "hide" those if they are worth millions?

Except, maybe they got the Covers back in 1962-3, they sat on the shelf for a few years, during which those particular characters "blew up," in the popular culture and became big sellers. So, they may have gone missing in 1965-1967. Kirby started asking for his art back in the 1960;s. When" I don't know. But maybe when those characters started become super popular (meaning, mid 60's). But, everyone with access to the art knew that too. As for why (if it still exists) it has no surfaced, maybe it was lost, damaged in a fire, flood, or earthquake? Maybe the person died, and the family didn't realize what it was and tossed it. Maybe the people who have it know it is a super high profile thing, and do not want the scrutiny for whatever reason. maybe they stuck it in a safe deposit box, and developed alzheimers? Who knows? Maybe it's gone. Maybe it's not. I think some of it is still out there.

A couple were sold individually, I believe, at HA.

ASM #11 and #28 (not #30) are both Ditko covers. Has she sold any Kirby art? 1. I said the key covers were the most likely to be saved. I never meant to imply you said that. But logic dictates that if any from this period were to be "saved" through whatever means, they were the most likely candidates. 2. If Curtiss' practices were no different than Eastern's, then the covers were returned to Marvel, just as the interiors were. 3. I never claimed or implied that you believed that Marvel didn't want their covers back. I think they did. And that they were, in fact, returned. 4. Jim Shooter has no reason, at this point, to lie about his recollections on this subject, or cover for Marvel (which unceremoniously fired him decades ago). His comments on this were not unreasonable, IMHO. But that's neither here, nor there, because his statements are not particularly definitive, as most of the art in question was probably long gone before he ever became editor-in-chief at Marvel.

Maybe the same person who has the "guts" of Avengers #4 and FF# 48-50 has all (or most) of the surviving key Silver Age Marvel original covers. (One name throw around is George Lucas, but who really knows?). Or, maybe the person who donated the interior art to AF #15 still has the cover? The rumor is that the interior art was offered back to Ditko, first, who declined it. The Cover is by Kirby, so that would not have been offered to Ditko, or likely declined by the Kirby estate. And maybe the owner knew that Kirby's estate was far more litigious, and didn't want to open up that can of worms?

Glen, The original Submariner story first printed in Motion Picture Funnies Weekly was reprinted in, I think, Invaders #20. Did Marvel still have the originals at the time? It would have been different than the story printed in Marvel comics #1. This also brings to mind all of the Golden Age Timely reprints in Fantasy Masterpieces, which occurred in 1965-1966. Were those originals still around at the time?

This is a wild response. First of all, why would Jim Shooter lie about it NOW? He has no reason to make this up. He actually admitted that the Marvel OA was at various points cavalierly treated and stored on site (even mentioning a box of it that went missing), and notes the old stories about it being handed to visitors as gifts by Stan and others. Second, Glen has clarified his article (published 20 years ago) in this thread. Third, Glen noted that Mark Evanier claims that Kirby was already requesting his art back in the 1960's, several years before it was inventoried. And it wouldn't shock me if people like Ditko were also demanding it then, as well. DC had a legal reason (or opinion from their corporate counsel) for destroying art, which Marvel did not.

I think the key, important, covers were the ones most likely to be saved in this manner. (i.e. AF #15, or JIM #83). The random Rawhide Kid cover, not so much. That's my point. And I appreciate Glen adding to this discussion, but why would Curtiss' practices be any different than Eastern? I assume the handling of the OA was determined by what Marvel wanted, rather than the other way around. So, this goes back to the ultimate question of why Marvel would want the interior OA back, but not the covers.

All it takes is one or two.

My thoughts in that subject. It depends, I think, on which item sells first. If the MH Action #1 was sold first, bringing in - say - $5 million, and then the Action #1 authenticated cover was revealed, and was put on the market with a skilfull marketing campaign (which referenced the sale of the MH copy for $5 million), I can see the Action #1 cover going for more. I think the cover being revealed - after a $5 million comic sale - would get a lot of attention and publicity. And the people who want it would not just be those who collect comics or OA, but a lot of people who just love the pop culture and what the cover represents.

There was a large deal of speculation, only a couple of years ago, about why so many Kirby pages were being pulled from dealer sites and auction houses. Perhaps it was to avoid legal wrangling with the Kirby estate, etc? Moreover, reputation matters to some people. Even if legal entanglements could be sorted out and they'd prevail (eventually), they may not want their business aired in open court. And putting aside the criminal statues, there's the "ownership" issue that has to be legally resolved. Who rightfully owns the cover to Amazing Fantasy 15? Could it be said that after its arrangement to return all of its art to the artists, Marvel was only a custodian of it until it could be returned to Jack Kirby? Except, whoops! It disappeared. Has Marvel ever said to these artists (Sorry. Your art was destroyed at the printers, as you know commonly happens, etc). The fact is, Marvel doesn't know what happened to the art. Jim Shooter didn't know, as he stated on his blog (he even speculated that a flood, or water damage at have destroyed some of it at one point). Irene Vartanoff didn't know either. A lot of sturm and drang has been bandied about in this hobby (I've read it) about all the "stolen" Marvel art. Some of which has (or has it?) surfaced. Some of it still has not. People speculate that a lot of stuff found its way into some black hole collections. All I am saying is that there appears to be no good reason why these covers would be in a landfill somewhere. Your sole piece of evidence is that they have never been offered for sale. Until a few years ago, did anyone believe the AF 15 art was still around? Maybe there were "wild" speculations like mine that it was somewhere, and that person was laughed at or mocked as being silly. "If someone had the OA to Amazing fantasy 15, why in the world has something so valuable never been offered for sale? It's preposterous." The really detailed inventory of the art was not undertaken until 1974. So, who knows what happened to many of those pages in the 12-13 year interim. UPDATE: From Glen Gold’s seminal article on the missing Kirby marvel art: “I called Eastern Color Printing, which handled Marvel's comics, and talked to the man who, for over thirty years - the entire Golden and Silver Ages - saw every issue get printed. He told me that all the art, covers and interiors, went back from the engravers to Marvel in the same envelope. So no, the covers weren't destroyed.” http://www.twomorrows.com/kirby/articles/19stolen.html Assuming the above is correct, then it seems my theory that they still exist in someone's black hole collection n somewhere is much more plausible. What I find interesting is that Glen argues in his article, that the existence of the interior OA was used as evidence that the covers were destroyed by older collectors and dealers, not as evidence that they covers still existed after being returned from the printer (as I speculated, apparently, correctly).

Yes. That’s an accurate description of what you’re doing. My premise isn’t false, and has yet to be falsified. So I am not making an a priori argument. You are. You argue they don’t exist, but have no proof other than that they haven’t surfaced, or were not recorded some 13 years after their creation when first inventoried. We know the covers existed at one point. We know the interiors survived. We know that you don’t need the OA to make reprints, so that explanation for why the interiors survived has been falsified. The next question is why the interiors were saved, but the covers were not. Since “future reproduction” has been eliminated as a reason, there must be another. We also know plenty of people had access to those covers and they could have been saved. We also know that if they survived, the current owners have some serious legal splainin’ to do, which may explain why they have not surfaced. So, again, you’re the one trying to rationalize your theory that they no longer exist, without any evidence except absence, which can be explained.

No I’m not. You don’t need the OA to reprint it. You only need a stat or a photo negative. So, there would be no reason to keep the OA or the covers. Yet, we know the OA for several of of the key 1st appearances of Marvel Silver Age heroes still exists. Someone decided they were worth saving. But not the covers? It makes no sense. If all or most of the OA from those issues didn’t survive, I’d agree that the covers probably don’t. But, they did. And that makes it likely the covers were saved too. By whom, I don’t know. Who has them now? I don’t know. Did anyone know the AF #15 art survived until it was donated to the LOC? If they do still exist, there are any reasons why the current owner would not want anyone to know.

Again, why make stats of covers, but not the interior pages? You don’t need the originals to reprint the material. This is why I think the covers were saved, and are not surfacing because the people who have them know they aren’t supposed to have them. Or, they acquired them from someone who wasn’t supposed to have them, and don’t want the massive legal mess that may ensue.

I think we can dispense with the “they saved the interiors for reprinting” argument. Since Marvel could reprint from stats or photos, they had no reason to keep the interior art for that purpose. It must have been for some other reason. In which case, it increases the mystery for why they would supposedly discard the covers, but not the interiors.

Irene Vartanoff inventoried all of Marvel’s art in 1974, and kept it updated until 1978 when Marvel decided to give the new art back to the creators. She says she was meticulous and inventoried everything.

That’s my point. The argument that they saved the interiors for reprinting makes no sense. They had Stats or photos of them they could use. Just like the covers. So we are supposed to believe they tossed the covers but not the interior art, when there was no reason to keep the interior art. I don’t buy it.

I hate to use logic, but why would they make a “stat” of the covers but not the interiors? Why keep the interiors for “reprints,” then make a stat of covers you don’t ever intend to reprint. Irene Vartanoff says they were making photo negatives of the covers and archiving those (at least one person was). But where were the originals? If you can use the photo negatives or stats to make printing plates, why even send the original covers to the printer at all?

This fascinating post by Irene Vartanoff on her blog sheds some light on the subject. She thinks there may still be some photo negatives of the original cover art out there, at least. https://irenevartanoff.com/about-marvel-comics-original-artwork-in-the-1960s/ Irene also takes issue with Glen Gold’s claim that her Marvel art inventory list wasn’t accurate. https://irenevartanoff.com/marvel-comics-original-art-the-topic-that-keeps-on-giving/