dblanchard-migration

Joe Collector wrote: >> you evade the question of what post-1975, pre-Modern Age Marvel comics and new characters did GS X-Men #1 force into being? I have the list, and it's none too impressive, including gems such as Ms. Marvel, Nova, Devil Dinosaur, and Rom, among others. If that's your Bronze Age, then go back in your corner and collect them, while the rest of us concentrate on our Bronze Age (your Weird Age) and collect the 1970-80 Marvel characters and comics that Conan #1 and GL/GA #76 brought into being. << Well, at the risk of contradicting your premise of asking and answering your own questions, maybe I could ask you what key 1957 superhero comics you collect? You see, I can collect SWAMP THING and WEIRD WESTERN TALES and the O'Neil/Adams GREEN LANTERNs and be perfectly happy with them, whether somebody calls them "weird age" or "bronze age" or just plain ol' "1970s comics." My idea of great Bronze Age comics would come several years *after* the Bronze Age started, just as all the really cool Silver Age comics came quite a few years after SHOWCASE # 4. I mean, you could certainly collect stuff like PAT BOONE and NEW ADVENTURES OF CHARLIE CHAN if you wanted to limit your Silver Age collection solely to new DC titles published immediately following SHOWCASE # 4. However, just as I enjoy reading Silver Age stuff that came a decade or more after SHOWCASE # 4, like the Romita Spider-Man stuff and the Shooter & Swan Legion stuff in ADVENTURE, I similarly prefer the prime Bronze Age stuff that came several years after GIANT-SIZE X-MEN. Maybe you stopped following comics after DEVIL DINOSAUR was cancelled, but had you stayed current with the great Bronze Age comics of the 1980s, you might've enjoyed stuff like SAGA OF THE SWAMP THING, DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, NEW TEEN TITANS, AMERICAN FLAGG, Simonson's THOR, Miller's DAREDEVIL, WATCHMEN, NEXUS, ELEKTRA: ASSASSIN, THE ROCKETEER, LOVE & ROCKETS, MAUS. Those are some examples I would cite of good Bronze Age comics. But rest assured, I would never attempt to talk you out of preferring MS MARVEL, if that's your idea of the cream of the Bronze Age Dave Blanchard

Vic6string wrote: >> Why do sales keep coming into this equation. We are talking about books that changed the way the comic world works. I think that is always the main issue when people talk about GSX1 being the first bronze age book. They look at xmen sales later and say that since the book is so popular it's first issue had to be a trend setter. We are talking not about popularity (what sales measure) but significance (what history measures). << Joe Collector was mentioning sales, but my position all along is that GIANT-SIZE X-MEN *led to something bigger* just as SHOWCASE # 4 led to something bigger. Much of the history of the Silver Age centers on the creation of FANTASTIC FOUR # 1, which was Marvel's response to DC's JLA, which was a linear descendent of SHOWCASE # 4. Similarly, DC's NEW TEEN TITANS was DC's response to the growing fanbase centered on X-MEN, which dates back to that GIANT-SIZE X-MEN comic published in the summer of 1975. Just about all of DC's major output in the 1980s followed in the wake of NTT, which followed in the X-MEN's wake. Dave Blanchard

Joe Collector wrote: >> I was interested, up until the point where you dragged out the old lame duck about the Bronze Age starting in 1975, and was somehow dependant on a poor-selling, revamped Silver Age comic (you do realize that the X-Men started in the 1960's, don't you, and this was simply a revamp of the membership?) that didn't even go monthly for years after, and didn't become a best-seller until the 1980's. << You do realize that the Flash started in the 1950s, was simply a revamp of an earlier Golden Age hero with the same name, didn't go monthly for years after, and never ever became the best-selling title, don't you? You see, there is a method to my madness, cuz now I've got you making my case for me Dave Blanchard

Kev wrote: >> I still find that most of these arguments are somewhat irrelevant in that at no point during the 1970's were superheroes EVER out of the sales spotlight. Sure there were a proliferation of NON or QUASI-super-hero titles that were popular during the 1970's but the same could be said of any time in the history of comic book publishing. Yes, the popularity of horror and barbarian comics could warrant a separate distinction as they rose and fell fairly quickly. << Great point, and I don't disagree with you a bit. But it's also true that superheroes weren't out of the sales spotlight in 1956, either. DC still had a bunch -- ACTION, ADVENTURE, BATMAN, DETECTIVE, SUPERBOY, SUPERMAN, SUPERMAN'S PAL JIMMY OLSEN and WONDER WOMAN. Marvel had tried reviving its big three. Jack Kirby was still out there pitching. Charlton took a couple shots at superheroes. It's the eventual onslaught of superheroes in the 1960s that led folks to back-date the start of what came to be called the Silver Age to the publication of SHOWCASE # 4. Not everybody agrees that the Barry-Flash's debut was the *real* beginning of the Silver Age, though -- some identify other titles, like the first J'onn J'onzz DETECTIVE; some identify other trends, like the adoption of the CCA seal or the collapse of EC. Since DC and Marvel both cancelled a number of their seminal Silver Age superhero titles in the late 60s/early 70s, and replaced them not with other superheroes but weird/supernatural/horror type comics, I've taken to using "weird age" as a shorthand way of referring to the period roughly lasting from 1970-75. There were certainly monster comics and sword-and-sorcery comics before then, and plenty after then, but as an industry-wide *trend* they appear to be congested in that 5-6 year period. >> I still feel quite strongly that there is a very different feel to superhero comics published after 1968-70 by Marvel and DC. Superheroes stopped interacting in worlds that "sort of" resembled our own. They began to address societal issues and began to behave a little less heroically than they did in the silver age and this carried right thru the decade and in the new heroes that came in during that time period INCLUDING the X-Men. Although Conan was not a super-hero he was definitely marketted as one and the new heroes introduced after Conan incorporated much of his attitude, especially the Wolverine - unquestionably the most popular X-Men character. << Again, no argument from me. But I think that "relevance" stuff, as I noted in an earlier post to Zonker, was very short-lived. Check out any Superman family title dated 1973 or later -- the post-Kirby era when DC tried to turn WGBS into a "Mary Tyler Moore Show" type sitcom, with Steve Lombard always playing practical jokes on Clark Kent, etc. Check out Batman during the David V. Reed/Ernie Chua years -- a far cry from O'Neil & Adams. You can't check out GREEN LANTERN/GREEN ARROW or AQUAMAN because they'd been cancelled. The Justice League stopped battling pollution and hunger and instead focused on finding as many Golden Age heroes as they could to exhume/rescue. Etc. >> I could argue that Luke Cage was the first true and unique Bronze age super-hero as he was super-powered, an anti-hero, an outsider, a man of color (preceding the inter-racial, multi-ethnic flavor of the New X-Men), dealt with social issues, and he did headline a long-running popular series and was joined by a similar hero with a strong Asian feel (although he wasn't asian) that was a big fan-favorite: Iron Fist. Perhaps "Hero for Hire 1" is the Bronze era's "Showcase 4" equivalent. I'm not convinced that it is, but it's the same argument as using the X-Men as the starting point. << I don't necessarily agree with you, but I like how you make a case for ol' Power Man. Your arguments are compelling, I'll give you that. I guess my kneejerk reaction would be, "Yeah, but was LUKE CAGE ever very popular as a title? Didn't the teaming up with IRON FIST result because neither title was selling all that well?" But then again, THE FLASH was never DC's best-selling title, either. >> Can you name one X-Men spin-off title published between 1975 and 1982? I can't. Not until the Wolverine mini-series was published in 1982. Sure, fans were hot for the X-Men appearances in Power Man and Iron Fist, Marvel Team-Up, Rom and other titles but the real X-boom started around 1980-81. << Going back to THE FLASH, though, I don't think there have *ever* been any FLASH spin-offs. And it took a number of years for THE FLASH to be spun out of SHOWCASE, and GREEN LANTERN didn't get his own title till 1960, if you want to consider GL a "spin-off." SHOWCASE # 4 is cited as the first Silver Age comic book because it eventually led to something much greater than the sum of its 32-page parts. Same deal with GIANT-SIZE X-MEN # 1. I'll have to think about that Luke Cage idea a bit more. Very interesting... Dave Blanchard

Zonker wrote: >> While much of the groundbreaking work of the period (including Conan, Kull, Swamp Thing, Tomb of Dracula) lay outside the super-hero genre, there were some truly revolutionary takes on the super-hero in this period: I'm thinking of Green Lantern / Green Arrow, the O'Neil/Adams Batman, Steve Englehart's Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man around the time of Gwen Stacey's death & the intro of the Punisher. Not sure in which category to place the Kirby Fourth World books. But definitely the weird/bronze age had a lot of cross-fertilization between the hero books and other genres. << You're absolutely right, and I erred if I left the impression I felt otherwise. I'm thinking, though, that that period of "relevance" was very, very shortlived, almost like an age-within-an-age. GL/GA lasted, what, about two years? That outstanding "sandman Superman" sequence by Denny O'Neil didn't even last a year. The O'Neil/Adams Batman stories were great, no doubt about it, but they were more like the exception than the rule (there are a whole lot of Irv Novick and Bob Brown stories sandwiched around the occasional Adams gem). FANTASTIC FOUR after Lee & Kirby settled into a solid but unspectacular comic, and in fact you could say that for any number of mainstream Marvel titles -- DAREDEVIL, THOR, IRON MAN, INCREDIBLE HULK, and of course the X-MEN was merely a reprint title. I wish there had been *more* cross-fertilization between the "weird" stuff and the other genres. Imagine Wrightson or Ploog or Brunner or Kaluta on a mainstream superhero title, for instance. Now that would've been something to see -- but then again, maybe they'd never have made a name for themselves during an era when Marvel wanted all superheroes to look Kirbyesque and DC wanted Superman to look like Swan and Anderson drew every panel. Frankly, I wish the "weird age" had lasted longer than it did, but when you look at the last couple issues of SWAMP THING, for instance, and see how DC was trying to turn it into a superhero book, it's probably just as well that the worm turned back in favor of the long underwear crowd. Dave Blanchard

Joe Collector wrote: >> LMOA! That's it for me, as dragging old DC books out in a Marvel conversation shows me that debate is useless. You'll believe what you want to believe, however illogical and inane it is. << I guess my mistake was taking you seriously when you asked me to check how many superhero comics were published in the timeframes specified -- you didn't specify a company, and I hope you don't seriously think only Marvel comics are part of the Bronze Age discussion. As I said, I had data on DC readily handy, so that's what I looked up. If you have similar data on Marvel available, by all means, I'd be interested in looking at it. I've always found that debate works best if both parties are interested -- I'd be happy to continue, since I don't think it's any secret this stuff fascinates me and I think it's a fun diversion from other things we could occupy our Internet time focusing on. But if you see no value in looking at what types of comics DC was publishing before and after 1975, then you're absolutely right, further debate on this topic between us will be useless. I'm glad I gave you a good laugh, at an event. And you still owe me a doughnut. Dave Blanchard

Vic6string wrote: >> Comparing books introduced between 70-75 to 75-80 makes no sense because the general thought behind the bronze age starting at 70 (or at Conan 1) does not say it ended at 1975. << It only makes sense if the contention is that the Bronze Age starts in 1975, which is what I'm saying. If the general theory is that "Bronze Age" is synonymous for "1970s comics" then you're absolutely right. But I don't think there's a consensus about *any* of this stuff right now, which is why you're seeing so many articles in COMIC BOOK MARKETPLACE, COMICS BUYER'S GUIDE, etc., trying to pin this stuff down by using the same kind of reasoning and yardsticks that were used to pin down the Golden and Silver Ages. Dave Blanchard

Vic6string wrote: >> The bronze age was about trying new, different things (most of which didn't work very well, or did for just a while). And to use only superhero books as a basis ignores the fact that much of what the bronze age is about is non-traditional books like Werewolf by night or Ghost Rider, or the Nurse books. Also there were the experimental books with tryouts like Spotlight and Premiere. << My point all along has been that the years 1970-75 should be called The Weird Age, as the comics of that brief era are exactly as you described, i.e, just about everything interesting was anything *but* superheroes. The next great era of superheroes commenced with the publication of GIANT-SIZE X-MEN # 1 in 1975, hence the Bronze Age can be said to begin then. You seem to be operating from a different premise than me. Your premise seems to be: Whatever immediately follows the Silver Age should be called the Bronze Age, just cuz. My premise is: The Golden and Silver Ages are so defined because those were eras defined by the superhero genre. Remaining consistent with the Greek mythology ages of metal, the Bronze Age (as well as a subsequent Iron Age) ought to start with superheroes, not Conan and Swamp Thing. You don't have to *agree* with my premise, but that's why I'm advocating the designation of "Weird Age" or something else, similar to "Atomic Age" in the 1950s, to refer to that interregnum between superhero ages of comics. Dave Blanchard

Joe Collector wrote: >> I'll easily take that bet if you're interested in reality, and using the same timeframe. 1970-75 for COnan #1, and 1975-80 for GS X-Men. Using 5 years for Conan and 28 years (to present) for X-Men is unrealistic and illogical. << I can taste that doughnut already I had data from DC readily available, so here's the breakdowns (I ran it 1970-summer 75, and summer 75-1980): Basically in order of appearance, here are the superhero books launched 1970-75 (reprints are designated *): NEW GODS, FOREVER PEOPLE, MR MIRACLE, THE DEMON, SUPERGIRL, WANTED*, DOOM PATROL*, INFERIOR FIVE*, LEGION*, SECRET ORIGINS*, THE SHADOW, SHAZAM!, OMAC, SANDMAN, SUPERMAN FAMILY, THE JOKER -- 16 titles From 1975-1980: ALL-STAR COMICS, DC SUPER-STARS*, FOUR-STAR SPECTACULAR*, FREEDOM FIGHTERS, GREEN LANTERN, ISIS, KARATE KID, KOBRA, METAL MEN, PLASTIC MAN, RAGMAN, SECRET SOCIETY OF SUPER-VILLAINS, SUPER FRIENDS, SUPER HEROES BATTLE SUPER GORILLAS*, TEEN TITANS, AQUAMAN, BLACK LIGHTNING, NEW GODS, MR MIRACLE, SHADE THE CHANGING MAN, SHOWCASE, DC COMICS PRESENTS, DYNAMIC CLASSICS*, FIRESTORM, STEEL THE INDESTRUCTIBLE MAN, WORLD OF KRYPTON, UNTOLD LEGEND OF BATMAN, SUPERBOY SPECTACULAR*, NEW ADVENTURES OF SUPERBOY, NEW TEEN TITANS -- 30 titles I'm probably omitting a few revivals or one-shots, but you get the gist. The most successful superhero titles launched by DC prior to GS X-MEN # 1 were SUPERMAN FAMILY (which wasn't really a launch so much as a consolidation), and SHAZAM!, with MR MIRACLE a distant third (this title, like NEW GODS, was revived post GS X-MEN). Post-GS X-MEN, GREEN LANTERN was successfully revived and continues to this day, as does NEW TEEN TITANS (in one form or another). DC COMICS PRESENTS ran for nearly 100 issues. FIRESTORM was imploded but revived within a couple years and ran for 100 issues. Just as significant were the creation of direct market comics (SUPERBOY SPECTACULAR) and limited-run series (WORLD OF KRYPTON). Dave Blanchard

Zonker wrote: >> Dave, you state your case very well. While I still think the requirement that a "metal age" must necessarily be super-hero-centric is arbitrary, and I think you're climbing up-hill to reverse the common bronze-age terminology in use the last 20 years, I do want to salute your efforts.<< Thanks! I'm not sure that "Bronze Age" dates back quite that far in terms of common usage. I dug up an Overstreet from 1992 and the term isn't even mentioned, although at some point during the speculator hype phase of the early 90s, the term started popping up as a way for dealers to unload a bunch of once-stale 1970s comics that started to have some nostalgic buzz to them (it still boggles my mind that drek that used to sit unwanted and unloved in the quarter bargain boxes all through the 1980s, like NIGHT NURSE and WEIRD WAR TALES, all of a sudden became "scarce" and "hot." However, that craze seems to have cooled, and I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to rely on my copy of NIGHT NURSE # 1 to put my kids through college >> Weird War Tales (CBM once published an article claiming WWT #1 started the Bronze Age) << I know that article well, because mine immediately follows it where I, natch, argue in favor of GIANT-SIZE X-MEN # 1. Those who aren't already sick of this topic can check out the current issue of COMICS BUYER'S GUIDE, # 1533, wherein Mr. Silver Age and I debate this topic even further, and I suggest that, while I figure GS X-MEN was the most influential comic of the 1970s -- indeed of the past 25 years -- an argument could certainly be made that SUPERBOY # 197 sort of blazed that trail first. Maybe those Legion stories are kind of the analogue to the false start Marvel Age revival attempted by YOUNG MEN # 24. Maybe. Dave Blanchard

Joe Collector wrote: >> I honestly don't understand where this "X-Men are popular now, so they must have been ultra-hot since 1975" mentality comes from. Must be something in the water. << The X-MEN didn't actually get to be ultra-hot till towards the end of the Byrne/Austin era, several years deep into the run. By way of analogy, it took more than two years for THE FLASH to get his own title after the SHOWCASE # 4 debut, and in fact THE FLASH was *never* DC's best-selling title. Your original question was, what influence did X-Men have that was comparable to the Flash's, which is what I attempted to address. Another way of looking at that question might be: How many superhero comics were launched in the five years between CONAN # 1 and GS X-MEN # 1, how long did they last, and what similar titles were spun off from them? Now, ask the same question: How many superhero comics were launched in the years following GS X-MEN, how long did they last, and how many spin-offs resulted? Dave Blanchard Dave Blanchard

vic6string wrote: >> I love the X-men too, but at that time, they weren't even the hottest comic around. Spidey was still the king at the time, and X-men weren't nearly as hot as Star Wars or ROM. Take a look at any price guide or back issue catalog from around 1980 or so and compare back issue prices if you don't believe me. << Well, of course STAR WARS came two years after GS X-MEN # 1, and ROM about four years after. I wasn't discussing contemporary back issue prices, though -- I was talking about what comics got people into the shops month after month after month (after year after year...) to buy the next issue. And not just to buy the current issue, but to buy it the very same day it came out. Sure, kids used to haunt drug stores and mom and pop stores back in the 1960s waiting for clerk to finally clip open that string binding copies of the next Spidey or Batman, but with the advent of the comics shops, now you didn't have to endure some surly drug store clerk's nasty looks while we waited patiently for him to finally stuff those comics on the spinner rack -- now we get surly comic shop owners' nasty looks instead . Dave Blanchard

Joe Collector wrote: >> The re-intro of The Flash led to more DC superheroes being re-introduced, which led to the Justice League, which led to the Fantastic Four, which led to Hulk, Spider-man, Avengers, etc. << No argument there, except that I'd widen the scope a bit and mention that the Flash also led to ADVENTURES OF THE FLY and ADVENTURES OF THE JAGUAR and DOUBLE LIFE OF PRIVATE STRONG and Dr. Droom and all the rest of the stuff in between SHOWCASE # 4 and FANTASTIC FOUR # 1. >> The most important Silver Age books? Probably Spider-man (AF 15) and The Justice League (B&B 28), but it all started with Flash. Now try the same thing with GS X-Men #1; what new and innovative characters sprung from that fountainhead? It's an important Bronze Age comic (al la Spider-man) but not even close to the first. << Surely you jest. The late 1970s resurgence in interest in comic books that led to the proliferation of comic book shops carrying new comics and the whole direct market was largely due to the overwhelming popularity of the X-MEN, which drew fans to the shops like flies to butter every month -- everybody had to see what was going on in the latest issue of X-MEN. It was a phenomenon that, for reasons that defy logic, still continues to this day (although it's now ULTIMATE X-MEN that's getting most of the attention these days). GS X-MEN not only spawned TONS of X-titles from Marvel, and copycat stuff from DC like ALL-STAR COMICS and NEW TEEN TITANS and OMEGA MEN, et al, but in a very real sense it also led to Pacific Comics and Eclipse Comics and First Comics and Capital Comics and Comico and Dark Horse and of course Image. You can draw a line from GS X-MEN # 1 to just about every superhero comic -- and just about every superhero comic book *publisher* -- since 1975. It's not always a straight line, just like it's not a straight line from SHOWCASE # 4 to HERBIE # 1, but that line is there, all the same. >> Be a chum and list your favorite Bronze Age characters and then consult the year they were introduced. Betcha a donut the vast majority pre-dated GS X-Men #1. << Well, why don't we buy each other a donut, because I take your point but I wouldn't agree that characters who debuted before 1975 are Bronze Agers -- I'd call 'em Weird Agers. Anyway, my two favorites from those in-between years would be Swamp Thing and Jonah Hex. But my point has been all along that the years 1970-75 are mostly notable for characters who *weren't* superheroes, hence using the logic that coined the Golden and Silver Ages as eras predominated by superheroes, the Bronze Age logically would start with GS X-MEN # 1, and the in-between years we can just call the Weird Age (CONAN, SWAMP THING, WEIRD WESTERN, et al). Dave Blanchard

Arnold T wrote (quite a while ago, I'm afraid): >> I think no matter what date, comic, and/or comics we note in the article for the start of the Bronze Age, I can probably say with no fear of contradiction that Giant-Size X-Men will NOT be one of them. 1975 is simply too late by any stretch of the imagination. << 1975 is too late for what, exactly? I don't follow this logic. Was 1956 "too late" for the Silver Age to start? The logic behind the ages of comics, if historical precedent has any bearing at all, suggests that if the Golden Age started with ACTION COMICS # 1 (first superhero), and the Silver Age started with SHOWCASE # 4 (first successful revival of Golden Age superheroes), then the Bronze Age -- by definition -- ought to also start with a launch or revival of superheroes. For that reason, GIANT-SIZE X-MEN # 1 represents the most successful revival AND launch of superheroes in the 1970s, post-Silver Age era. Frankly, I think what we should really be seeking is the proper designation for the interregnum period *between* the Silver Age and the Bronze Age. Some wag came up with Atom Age for the interregnum between Golden and Silver, and I'll toss out Weird Age as a moniker for that 1970-1975 period where superheroes took a backseat to lots of other stuff, much of fantasy/horror based. Best, Dave Blanchard