Brave and Bold 34 Cover

[jjonahjameson1]

and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but this comment about one of the best SA covers and one of Kubert's best work, if not best work, dumbfounds me.

 

Why does Hari's comment dumbfound you?

[comix4fun]

and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but this comment about one of the best SA covers and one of Kubert's best work, if not best work, dumbfounds me.

 

Why does Hari's comment dumbfound you?

 

 

 

 

Well it can't be Hari's comment that does it, because Hari never said it was mediocre at best. Hari just said most may not objectively call it a masterpiece. There's a long road of opinion between "mediocre at best" and "most may not consider it a masterpiece".

 

It's one of the most memorable pieces of DC Silver Age cover art. It's an iconic piece and I have seen people spend more (relatively) for a lot less than something this immediately identifiable by a legendary artist at the peak of his powers.

 

Hari has good enough taste and a keen enough eye to never ever call this piece mediocre at best. I think he got some words, unintentionally, put in his mouth.

[Galactus]

do you have a jpg of the 36 rich? that must have looked wonderful

 

I have just been told that the cover to #36 is also being made available right now. I am waiting to get a look at it, but i believe this may be a better image, if not as historicaly important.

B&B 36 is a great cover and hugely underrated, but it is neither as good nor as historically important as B&B 34.

 

I agree that it is less historic, but i'm waiting for a price to see if it is more in keeping with the price i would expect for such a piece, and therefore the better choice (IMO) of the 2 from the less historic but better art and price point perspective.

[Galactus]

and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but this comment about one of the best SA covers and one of Kubert's best work, if not best work, dumbfounds me.

 

Why does Hari's comment dumbfound you?

 

I think he meant to reply to the post by Comicartcon, that i replied to.

[CollectingFool]

Well it can't be Hari's comment that does it, because Hari never said it was mediocre at best. Hari just said most may not objectively call it a masterpiece.

 

As long as we're issuing corrections, I never said I thought it was worth 150k-200k. I said in my mind most comic OA covers aren't worth more than $25K. Only ones IMO that should even approach $100K are Action 1, Detective 27, Marvels 1, Cap 1. You know, the biggies.

 

 

 

[stinkininkin]

Well it can't be Hari's comment that does it, because Hari never said it was mediocre at best. Hari just said most may not objectively call it a masterpiece.

 

As long as we're issuing corrections, I never said I thought it was worth 150k-200k. I said in my mind most comic OA covers aren't worth more than $25K. Only ones IMO that should even approach $100K are Action 1, Detective 27, Marvels 1, Cap 1. You know, the biggies.

 

 

 

Just curious Ruben--What about the covers to AF 15, Spidey 1, FF 1, Avengers 4, Hulk 1, etc. If not, why?

 

Scott Williams

[heartened]

and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but this comment about one of the best SA covers and one of Kubert's best work, if not best work, dumbfounds me.

 

Why does Hari's comment dumbfound you?

 

 

 

 

Well it can't be Hari's comment that does it, because Hari never said it was mediocre at best. Hari just said most may not objectively call it a masterpiece. There's a long road of opinion between "mediocre at best" and "most may not consider it a masterpiece".

 

It's one of the most memorable pieces of DC Silver Age cover art. It's an iconic piece and I have seen people spend more (relatively) for a lot less than something this immediately identifiable by a legendary artist at the peak of his powers.

 

Hari has good enough taste and a keen enough eye to never ever call this piece mediocre at best. I think he got some words, unintentionally, put in his mouth.

 

Thanks Chris! To be clear, I'd be happy to own this cover. It's historic and iconic, and easily a top ten DC Silver Age comic overall. My point was more about relative values, and that you can't automatically assess relative values for the most iconic pieces across different eras; indeed, they may all be about the same, as price resistance hits at the same point regardless of eras.

 

I hope someone walks away with this one. It's nice to see these pieces actually change hands. I'm looking forward to seeing it in person at SDCC.

 

 

[CollectingFool]

I said in my mind most comic OA covers aren't worth more than $25K. Only ones IMO that should even approach $100K are Action 1, Detective 27, Marvels 1, Cap 1. You know, the biggies.

Just curious Ruben--What about the covers to AF 15, Spidey 1, FF 1, Avengers 4, Hulk 1, etc. If not, why?

 

Hey Scott,

 

Let me preface this by saying I love collecting comic art. I love collecting in general but comic art has become a life consuming thing. Most of my expendible (and some of my not-so-expendible) income goes to it or to pay down the debts I've ignored because of it. In reality though, I know collecting comic art or most things in general is a frivilous, indulgent activity. When the median household income isn't even $50K, the idea of spending $100K or more on comic art is absurd to me. That's just the way my brain is wired... for now. The limits in my head used to be lower. They've gone up over the years just haven't stayed in pace with the market.

 

Now to your specific question about the Marvel SA classics, I don't think they should be in the $100K range. It's not reality I know, just my thinking. To me that lofty price should be reserved for the books that created and defined the genre. While I personally prefer those Silver Age classics to the Golden Age founding fathers I think they should be in the $50K-$75K range. Yes they were "groundbreaking" but creating a new character or using different style of writing isn't (to me) as monumentally historic as creating a genre or culture.

 

Who knows? Maybe someday I'll have a complete disregard for money and the good fortune to have a lot of it and I'd change my tune. For now, I can't imagine it.

 

 

[Bronty]

Being a long time collector, first comics, then OA, like Ruben, it's hard for me to wrap my mind around some of these prices, both comics and art. That being said, imho, if the B &B 34 cover is priced at or around 85-90K, considering where the market is, I think both parties walk away with a fair deal. Though I personally would not purchase it for that price, Hawkman not being a character I care much for, and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best. Of course, I'll probably never know the ask price, since it is not something I am interested in, I see no sense in wasting Mitch's time.

Still the cover is deserving of respect, being significant and historic, and as Mitch mentioned, a good number of key and semi key SA covers probably do not exist. It certainly would make a nice addition to any collection, and in most cases be The feature piece of art.

If I can make it to San Diego, I am going to make a point of taking a look at it.

 

I can't think of a more desirable kubert cover off the top of my head... its just a flat out incredible piece and how many times do you get a key SA cover actually available.

 

artwise I've never been a big fan of it because, to me - please all don't burn me at the stake for heresy - but the monster is ridiculous in every way imaginable. Still a killer piece and worth megabucks no doubt, but that is one cheesy fromage of a bobblehead monster.

 

the 36 to me is far better artistically but also less desirable and worth less.

[stinkininkin]

I said in my mind most comic OA covers aren't worth more than $25K. Only ones IMO that should even approach $100K are Action 1, Detective 27, Marvels 1, Cap 1. You know, the biggies.

Just curious Ruben--What about the covers to AF 15, Spidey 1, FF 1, Avengers 4, Hulk 1, etc. If not, why?

 

Hey Scott,

 

Now to your specific question about the Marvel SA classics, I don't think they should be in the $100K range. It's not reality I know, just my thinking. To me that lofty price should be reserved for the books that created and defined the genre.

 

Hey Ruben

Just to probe a little further--

 

By your definition, shouldn't the only cover worthy of your top value of 100k be Action #1? Isn't that really the only book that "created and defined the genre"? Aren't all the other books you mention (Det 27, Marvels 1, Cap1) pretty much just as derivative of Action 1 as the SA Marvels were with what came before them?

 

I'm really not arguing with you at all. I'd already decided years ago that my pricing structure and what constitutes a "biggie" is different than yours, so I'm just wondering how you got to where you are, since I already know how I got to where I am!

 

Scott Williams

[CollectingFool]

By your definition, shouldn't the only cover worthy of your top value of 100k be Action #1? Isn't that really the only book that "created and defined the genre"? Aren't all the other books you mention (Det 27, Marvels 1, Cap1) pretty much just as derivative of Action 1 as the SA Marvels were with what came before them?

 

Well, I say $100K but I'm thinking of a range. Obviously Action #1 would be at the top of the range with the others trailing. Still, I think it would be close. Action #1 may be the most historic but it's not that good artistically. Detective 27 has Batman which is a more interesting character and Marvels 1 and Cap 1 are just better looking covers.

 

Same goes for the Silver Age books. AF15 and FF 1 at the top of the range followed by Spidey 1 and the others bringing up the rear.

 

It's all meaningless nonsense really. These numbers have nothing to do with reality and I know it. It's almost more like a psych profile than anything.

[2020-migration]

By your definition, shouldn't the only cover worthy of your top value of 100k be Action #1? Isn't that really the only book that "created and defined the genre"? Aren't all the other books you mention (Det 27, Marvels 1, Cap1) pretty much just as derivative of Action 1 as the SA Marvels were with what came before them?

 

Well, I say $100K but I'm thinking of a range. Obviously Action #1 would be at the top of the range with the others trailing. Still, I think it would be close. Action #1 may be the most historic but it's not that good artistically. Detective 27 has Batman which is a more interesting character and Marvels 1 and Cap 1 are just better looking covers.

 

Same goes for the Silver Age books. AF15 and FF 1 at the top of the range followed by Spidey 1 and the others bringing up the rear.

 

It's all meaningless nonsense really. These numbers have nothing to do with reality and I know it. It's almost more like a psych profile than anything.

 

CollectingFOOL - keep sticking your head in the sand. But reality is reality.

[heartened]

By your definition, shouldn't the only cover worthy of your top value of 100k be Action #1? Isn't that really the only book that "created and defined the genre"? Aren't all the other books you mention (Det 27, Marvels 1, Cap1) pretty much just as derivative of Action 1 as the SA Marvels were with what came before them?

 

Well, I say $100K but I'm thinking of a range. Obviously Action #1 would be at the top of the range with the others trailing. Still, I think it would be close. Action #1 may be the most historic but it's not that good artistically. Detective 27 has Batman which is a more interesting character and Marvels 1 and Cap 1 are just better looking covers.

 

Same goes for the Silver Age books. AF15 and FF 1 at the top of the range followed by Spidey 1 and the others bringing up the rear.

 

It's all meaningless nonsense really. These numbers have nothing to do with reality and I know it. It's almost more like a psych profile than anything.

 

CollectingFOOL - keep sticking your head in the sand. But reality is reality.

 

Please don't take a nice thread that is bringing out some interesting ideas and make it into a name-calling thread. Ruben freely admits his pricing structure is not where the market is, and also admits he doesn't play in this price sandbox. However, he is a long-time collector and one of the early ones who helped move this hobby to where it is today, so his opinions will always be relevant.

 

Let's keep the discussion moving in a positive fashion.

 

Thanks,

 

[CollectingFool]

Please don't take a nice thread that is bringing out some interesting ideas and make it into a name-calling thread.

 

Hey Hari,

 

I don't know who 2020 is but he obviously has a problem with my opinion as if it somehow should matter to him what I think. He purposely misquoted me earlier so that my quote meant the exact opposite of what I was saying. We know some people have a vested interest in prices continuing to rise and maybe he feels threatened by my saying I don't think that stuff is worth it. You know all my friends in this hobby and none of them agree with me either but I guess they have the self confidence not to be offended by me not agreeing with them.

 

Just because I don't personally buy stuff at the levels we're discussing doesn't mean I don't have a hand in it. I get calls regularly asking advice on finding artwork or to get involved in a negotiation or for references or to put a couple of people together for a deal from both collectors and dealers. I know the reality well enough and I deal with it almost daily. You know that and a couple of dozen other collectors out there that are buying and selling every day know that. Besides, by now anyone who reads my posts here should know unless you sign your posts with your real name, I don't pay attention.

[stinkininkin]

By your definition, shouldn't the only cover worthy of your top value of 100k be Action #1? Isn't that really the only book that "created and defined the genre"? Aren't all the other books you mention (Det 27, Marvels 1, Cap1) pretty much just as derivative of Action 1 as the SA Marvels were with what came before them?

 

Well, I say $100K but I'm thinking of a range. Obviously Action #1 would be at the top of the range with the others trailing. Still, I think it would be close. Action #1 may be the most historic but it's not that good artistically. Detective 27 has Batman which is a more interesting character and Marvels 1 and Cap 1 are just better looking covers.

 

Same goes for the Silver Age books. AF15 and FF 1 at the top of the range followed by Spidey 1 and the others bringing up the rear.

 

It's all meaningless nonsense really. These numbers have nothing to do with reality and I know it. It's almost more like a psych profile than anything.

 

Hey Ruben

 

Yeah, I wasn't thinking of 100k as a hard number either. Just a number you had indicated at the top of the range. And I agree that I was looking to get inside your head, since you are a serious collector and I am a serious collector, and I was just trying to nail down where our split in perspectives come from. I think an argument can be made that the prices paid for art is too high (though I am willing and have spent those inflated sums). I have more of a problem with what you consider worthy of top dollar and what I consider worthy of top dollar. Happy to agree to disagree.

 

Thanks for being a good sport.

 

Scott Williams

[CollectingFool]

Thanks for being a good sport.

 

No problem! Always happy to talk about this stuff. I'm just surprised anyone actually wants to hear it?

 

 

 

[fc]

That was a comic book I could not resist getting rid off as fast as I could

when I was younger and owned it. It had a nice trade price connected with

it and I found it terribly dull except that I could get a lot for it.

 

I still feel that way today towards seeing the cover. I think, gee, if I could

get a hold of that for the right price I may be able to make some money.

Keeping it would never cross my mind.

 

 

[tth2]

and as Hari mentioned, art wise, this cover is mediocre at best.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but this comment about one of the best SA covers and one of Kubert's best work, if not best work, dumbfounds me.

 

Why does Hari's comment dumbfound you?

 

I think he meant to reply to the post by Comicartcon, that i replied to.

I was really responding to Joe's comment that the cover is mediocre at best.

[otherworldsj33]

I should have been more accurate. Hari did not say it was mediocre at best. I interperted his comment that way, and I should have stated that. Joe Kubert is an artist I admire, and who's work I enjoy, a icon. But I just belive that this cover, while being historic, is not up to his usual stamdards, and is mediocre art wise.

Joe

[jjonahjameson1]

I'm not one for DC characters, but I think its relatively safe to consider Hawkman a third tier character.

 

With all the talk around artistic merit, nostalgia, and historical significance attached to the B&B 34 cover, I was just wondering how folks would compare it against a Marvel cover from roughly the same time, say the Daredevil #1 cover?