• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Post-Robin Tec club

Started by Yannis,

201 posts in this topic

Wayne-Tec

Wayne-Tec

Posted
Posted
Very good explanation. My thoughts are pretty much the same. I also believe that Clayface came first, barely. The biggest confusion to all this is due to the fact that DC had all this backup inventory that wasn't released. Then the editor was trying to decide what to use for tec 40 and Bat 1. Donot forget that 1 of the Bat stories was intended for tec 38. So their backup material goes further back then we think. That's why it makes it even more difficult to pinpoint which character came first.

 

And we may never know for sure.

 

The story in Tec #34 came before the story in Tec #33.

 

The "Tec" story in Batman #1 was written after Tec #37 but before Tec #38 (I presume).

 

It can get a little difficult to keep track of if you're not familiar with the material but I've committed most of it to memory by now.

 

But it's tougher in the case of Batman #1 vs. Tec #40 because the stories do not branch off of any prior ones and there were no last add panels to hint to the next intended story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bat-Man

Bat-Man

Posted
Posted

The argument on whether Tec 40 is a Joker cover or not will never be confirmed or denied without all question. It is at the end of the day up to the "reader" to use their imagination and determine for themselves whom it is.

 

Yannis, what confuses me even more is you asked and were granted a pic of the splash of a genuine original Tec 40. And yes Clayface is wearing purple, but so is the Joker in the Batman 1 story. Further more what really throws it all off is on the cover of Tec 40 on an original genuine Tec 40 the "Joker/Clayface Character" is wearing a brown suit! So where does that leave us now?

 

I think the face of the "Tec 40 character" can be argued either way as it looks similar to Joker and Clayface. Though I tend to feel most look at it and think Joker.

 

Again we can argue this all, together forever, but we'll never really know.

 

I cannot make a case that it is Clayface on that cover other than the fact that the Tec 40 Batman story is a Clayface story. But even that does not give any sense of a good support case for Clayface, as many and most early Tec covers had little or took a dramatic license from the story inside.

 

Now while I cannot make a true support case for Clayface, I can for the Joker.

 

The support that says it may be the Joker is 1) The suit is identical (color aside) to the one Joker is wearing in the 2nd Joker story in Batman 1 and 2) the splash panel from that 2nd Joker story is an exact match to the cover scene of Tec 40.

 

While I can never 100% claim it is the Joker on Tec 40, the evidence and facts, if given to a random bystander who call it "indisputable evidence" as I had said earlier.

 

But since we are all comic collectors, we know how things change and can appear completely opposite to what they really are.

 

 

We'll never know, but at least we can debate it for the duration.

 

 

 

(my personal opinion is that it is indeed the Joker)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wayne-Tec

Wayne-Tec

Posted
Posted
bob kane already confirmed it was intended to be the joker on tec 40, so why is it even debatable (shrug)

 

I never knew that.

 

Although I don't think it's very debatable...it is the Joker on the cover of Tec #40. (thumbs u

 

Where did you discover the Bob Kane info?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yannis

Yannis

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The argument on whether Tec 40 is a Joker cover or not will never be confirmed or denied without all question. It is at the end of the day up to the "reader" to use their imagination and determine for themselves whom it is.

 

Yannis, what confuses me even more is you asked and were granted a pic of the splash of a genuine original Tec 40. And yes Clayface is wearing purple, but so is the Joker in the Batman 1 story. Further more what really throws it all off is on the cover of Tec 40 on an original genuine Tec 40 the "Joker/Clayface Character" is wearing a brown suit! So where does that leave us now?

 

I think the face of the "Tec 40 character" can be argued either way as it looks similar to Joker and Clayface. Though I tend to feel most look at it and think Joker.

 

Again we can argue this all, together forever, but we'll never really know.

 

I cannot make a case that it is Clayface on that cover other than the fact that the Tec 40 Batman story is a Clayface story. But even that does not give any sense of a good support case for Clayface, as many and most early Tec covers had little or took a dramatic license from the story inside.

 

Now while I cannot make a true support case for Clayface, I can for the Joker.

 

The support that says it may be the Joker is 1) The suit is identical (color aside) to the one Joker is wearing in the 2nd Joker story in Batman 1 and 2) the splash panel from that 2nd Joker story is an exact match to the cover scene of Tec 40.

 

While I can never 100% claim it is the Joker on Tec 40, the evidence and facts, if given to a random bystander who call it "indisputable evidence" as I had said earlier.

 

But since we are all comic collectors, we know how things change and can appear completely opposite to what they really are.

 

 

We'll never know, but at least we can debate it for the duration.

 

 

 

(my personal opinion is that it is indeed the Joker)

 

I never really came to a conclusion my self. Second, we cant always conclude that a similar splash on another book automatically means that its the same character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yannis

Yannis

Posted
  • Author
Posted
bob kane already confirmed it was intended to be the joker on tec 40, so why is it even debatable (shrug)

 

well there is still a debate if the character on the 40 cover was altered not to look totally like Joker (which I believe was the case as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bat-Man

Bat-Man

Posted
Posted
bob kane already confirmed it was intended to be the joker on tec 40, so why is it even debatable (shrug)

 

 

Because Bob Kane might have been going :insane: when he mentioned it in his old age.

 

 

 

:insane::insane::insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman2006

Superman2006

Posted
Posted
http://www.comiclink.com/itemdetail.asp?back=%2Fitems%2Easp%3Fid%3D3855%26FROM%3D%26TO%3D&id=806544

 

well Its a Jerry Robinson cover so it would be great to ask him.

 

Its funny how CGC does not mention on their label of it being the first Joker cover.

 

I came across the following while surfing the net for comments related to the cover of Tec #40, which further seems to support that DC may not have worried too much about the villain on the cover matching any of the stories within a given issue;

 

"Early Batman comics had those kinds of weird cover problems a lot; the Joker appears on the cover of DETECTIVE #40, which is clearly based off the splash page for the second Joker story in BATMAN #1 but isn't in the story, and Doctor Death appears on the cover of DETECTIVE #35 event though he last appeared back in isue #30."

 

Given that the Joker had just recently been created around the time of Batman #1 and Tec #40, and given that the cover to Tec #40 may have been colored at a different time than the interior pages involving the Joker in Batman #1, I'm guessing that it may just not yet have been widely adopted by DC's creative team that the Joker's trademark suit is purple. This is pure speculation on my part, of course, but could be a plausible explanation for the choice of colors on the Joker on Tec #40.

 

In regards to CGC's lack of a Joker cover notation on Tec #40, since the Joker isn't in his trademark purple, rather than rely on Overstreet, since they may have had some question about it when developing their comments for inclusion on the labels, CGC may have just decided to not note it as such until such time, if ever, as they were convinced that it is a Joker cover (when they initially considered the issue, they may not have been aware of Kane's comments as recollected by Gator &/or considered the totality of the other circumstantial evidence that has been discussed in this thread).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman2006

Superman2006

Posted
Posted
bob kane already confirmed it was intended to be the joker on tec 40, so why is it even debatable (shrug)

 

 

Because Bob Kane might have been going :insane: when he mentioned it in his old age.

 

 

 

:insane::insane::insane:

 

Based on what I've read above Bob Kane, I understand that there may be some reason to question some of the things that he may have said or claimed, but in this case, I'm not sure what he would have gained to fib about who was on the cover of Tec #40. Not to say that his or anyone else's memory is always spot on years after the fact, which is why I think it's important to consider what he might have said along with the other available supporting evidence...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yannis

Yannis

Posted
  • Author
Posted
http://www.comiclink.com/itemdetail.asp?back=%2Fitems%2Easp%3Fid%3D3855%26FROM%3D%26TO%3D&id=806544

 

well Its a Jerry Robinson cover so it would be great to ask him.

 

Its funny how CGC does not mention on their label of it being the first Joker cover.

 

I came across the following while surfing the net for comments related to the cover of Tec #40, which further seems to support that DC may not have worried too much about the villain on the cover matching any of the stories within a given issue;

 

"Early Batman comics had those kinds of weird cover problems a lot; the Joker appears on the cover of DETECTIVE #40, which is clearly based off the splash page for the second Joker story in BATMAN #1 but isn't in the story, and Doctor Death appears on the cover of DETECTIVE #35 event though he last appeared back in isue #30."

 

Given that the Joker had just recently been created around the time of Batman #1 and Tec #40, and given that the cover to Tec #40 may have been colored at a different time than the interior pages involving the Joker in Batman #1, I'm guessing that it may just not yet have been widely adopted by DC's creative team that the Joker's trademark suit is purple. This is pure speculation on my part, of course, but could be a plausible explanation for the choice of colors on the Joker on Tec #40.

 

In regards to CGC's lack of a Joker cover notation on Tec #40, since the Joker isn't in his trademark purple, rather than rely on Overstreet, since they may have had some question about it when developing their comments for inclusion on the labels, CGC may have just decided to not note it as such until such time, if ever, as they were convinced that it is a Joker cover (when they initially considered the issue, they may not have been aware of Kane's comments as recollected by Gator &/or considered the totality of the other circumstantial evidence that has been discussed in this thread).

 

all sounds great but as we can see, by Bat 1, the Jokers purple garment seems to be well established in that issue. And the material for (both) the cover of 40 and the Joker story were created at the same time (if we go by the established theory).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t3quila

t3quila

Posted
Posted
bob kane already confirmed it was intended to be the joker on tec 40, so why is it even debatable (shrug)
I give up, why?
lol

 

There ya go having to ruin it. Now what are these geeks gonna have to talk about to kill their time.

 

:gossip: Pressing

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing