Next Age?

[PUNYHUMAN]

Welcome to the Boards!!!!

[dc eng]

No one said the CCA was the most important factor in the shift of one age to another, only that it is more significant as a delineator than any single issue or character.

 

When you look at the original CCA document and the 1971 revision, as well as the social environment of the times, I think there is much truth to that.

 

During the pre-CCA/SOTI period comic sales were in the millions. Storylines and content were very mature to put it mildly. The creation of the CCA literally put a stop to all this and comic books became one-dimensional and innocuous reading material. It was perfect for children, but not for the millions of adults who had been reading comics up to that time.

 

Obviously, the CCA does not operate in a vacuum. There were underlying social forces in the early 1950's that led people to believe comic books were the main cause of juvenile delinquency. The creation of the code was its unfortunate result. In my opinion the CCA at that time did not necessarily begin the Silver Age nor did it end the Atom Age, but it was a significant historical landmark that separates the two periods.

 

The original CCA's significance and legacy was not only that it killed the variety and richness of the Atom Age (or late Golden Age) but it probably turned comic book reading into a stigmatic endeavor that countless adult readers shun to this day. I personally find it difficult to talk about my comics to co-workers or strangers because of this stigma. (My only safe haven is with close friends and family, and online boards.) During the early 1950's and as early as WWII, adult readers made up a significant segment of the comics market. American servicemen were reading comics overseas in big numbers. That market was effectively destroyed after SOTI and then CCA.

 

The Civil Rights movement that you thoughtfully summarized, as well as other societal forces, heavily influenced comics of the Silver Age period. This was reflected in storylines that slowly pushed the proverbial envelope. (By the way, the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed during LBJ's tenure. JFK had already been killed.) The 1971 CCA revision was one of its significant results.

 

As a delineator the 1971 revision works as well as any single comic to symbolize or harken the arrival of the Bronze Age. Conan #1 can still be the first Bronze Age comic (which is my personal view), but the 1971 CCA revision is a noteworthy landmark to delineate the crossing from Silver to Bronze Age. Although the envelope was already being pushed, the code essentially unglued the envelope and allowed comics to become more progressive and aggresive in story content and new characters. Creators were tackling subject matter that would not have seen the light of day in the mid 1960's. Horror comics, although not the same animals they were in the 50's, made a noteworthy comeback thanks to the loosening of the code.

[joe_collector]

This general push culminated in the dual Code revisions in 1971- again, revisions made from within the industry.

 

Just an FYI that there are some pretty knowledgeable comic's people on the boards, and this aspect of the CMAA has been discussed several times, such as when Marvel dropped the Code.

[joe_collector]

Conan #1 can still be the first Bronze Age comic (which is my personal view), but the 1971 CCA revision is a noteworthy landmark to delineate the crossing from Silver to Bronze Age. Although the envelope was already being pushed, the code essentially unglued the envelope and allowed comics to become more progressive and aggresive in story content and new characters.

 

Then I don't see any reason to disagree with this assessment. I won't argue that the Code opened the doors to more Bronze comics with a far wider scope, only that it didn't start the movement.

[ghoulaid]

"All I claim is that the Code changes make a good focal point for when things officially changed across the board for all publishers and using those points in time make more sense to me than using the books from one publisher."

 

I think I understand how you like using the code "as a focal point" instead of single issues from one publisher (DC in this case) to mark the Age changes. The one problem with that is it doesn't include Dell comics which perhaps sold more comics than any other company throughout the 1940's and 1950's. It also doesn't include any other companies that weren't Code members (Classics Illustrated, for example). So, using the Code as your focal point still fails to address changes affecting the "entire" industry. It may be broader than using a single book but still falls short.

[gifflefunk]

The one problem with that is it doesn't include Dell comics which perhaps sold more comics than any other company throughout the 1940's and 1950's...

 

Dell took the position of having family content to begin with and they didn't feel that they needed to be under code subjugation (see the Dell Pledge to Parents in the eBay thread.. their own "code" basically). Now I haven't found any printed company position from CI, but the fact that their comics were based on literary classics probably gave them little room for embellishment and pushing social issues... and being part of the CMAA may have limited their ability to publish the classic horror stories of Frankenstein, Dracula, Jekyll & Hyde, etc.

 

The "industry" I refer to are those companies under the approval process of the CCA. Obviously there is no code subjugation for those outside of that process, including Dell, CI, undergrounds, indy books, and magazines. Personally I think the horror trend that returned to comics of the 1970s was greatly influenced by companies like Warren, Eerie Publ., and Skywald. Drugs as well as race-relations (not to mention women's issues -- pro and con) were turning up in underground comics throughout the 1960s. All of these play a role in the changes occuring in the social fabric of the time. And these topics eventually found their way into main-stream comics, usually requiring a change in the Code before publishers could explore these topics in a socially significant, but approved, manner (certainly more fully than they could prior to the Code being altered).

 

Trying to find a suitable point to split the Ages is what this is all about... and the CCA Code adoption in 1954/55, and subsequent revisions in 1971 and 1989 make useful points for making those separations (more so than using a superhero book from a single company). Not only do the Code events occur around the time folks noticed changes in the content of the books, but there is also a clear moment in time that can be isolated for the divisions because we know when the Code started and when it was changed.

 

And while it is true that I initially took the position of the Code being the catalyst for change early on in the eBay thread, anyone bothering to read the evolution of that debate should quickly see that my position changed to using the Code as a focal point for the changes that were going on... there were clearly events that called for a change to the Code before the Code was changed. This is when we got into the Spectrum concept of change over time and using the Code as a convenient delimiter between the Ages for the more mundane aspects of the hobby.

[dc eng]

Dell refused to join the CMAA. At the time it was the leading comics seller in America. One-third of all comics sold were produced by Dell. The company took the haughty view that other comics were essentially inferior to its books and not suitable for children whereas Dell Comics were okay. Being that it had licensing agreements with Disney and Warner, this perspective was almost understandable. The Pledge to Parents campaign was a direct response to the pressure it was getting to join the CMAA and adhere to its code.

 

The publishers of Classics Illustrated maintained that their literature-derived books shouldn't be looked at as comics. As such there was no need to join. Moreover, Classics Illustrated evolved from the educational comics movement of the early 1940's. A cultural war against comics was already being waged at that early pre-CCA time by the same players: parents, educators, and journalists. A smattering of pro-family (don't know what else to call it) comics were started. One of them was Classic Comics which later became Classics Illustrated . Thus, CI was on the side of the anti-comics group and was essentially a participant in the cultural war against comics.

[dc eng]

"Then I don't see any reason to disagree with this assessment. I won't argue that the Code opened the doors to more Bronze comics with a far wider scope, only that it didn't start the movement."

 

 

Not to be argumentative, but along those same lines do you believe Detective Comics #225 was the first Silver Age book? If we're discussing single comics that started a movement or ushered us from one age into another, Detective Comics #225 with its first appearance of the Martian Manhunter could be as signficant a book as Showcase 4 .

 

(I don't want to start a debate about Det225, just trying to make a point.)

[joe_collector]

Not to be argumentative, but along those same lines do you believe Detective Comics #225 was the first Silver Age book?

 

To be totally honest, I can't really say, as I didn't live through that period. If I don't have first-hand knowledge of the times and wasn't actively buying comics, then why the heck would I think I was qualified to offer an opinion? That's why I'm so vocal on Bronze, while tending to stay out of the Silver and Gold discussions.

 

It's a problem I see a lot; people who were not buying off the racks at the time, offering up "historical perspective" of an Age catalyst without actually experiencing the reality of what was going on.

 

Or to bring up a comic-based comparison, it's like the Watcher going to sleep for 30-years, waking up, and then transcribing events from the Encyclopedia Britannica. Not quite the same thing.

[gifflefunk]

Mordo: Since 'Tec #225 was brought up again here is a comparison of the resurrection efforts by various publishers of the superhero genre.

 

For context here is what was going on during this period:

The Seduction of the Innocent, Fredric Wertham, 1953, Rinehart (New York).

Parade of Pleasure, Geoffrey Wagner, 1954

CMAA adopts Comics Code: October 26, 1954

1954 Senate Interim Report - Comic Books and Juvenile Delinquency, 1955

(The Senate report is a good read for any researcher)

 

Ajax:

Black Cobra #1 (Nov 1954)

Black Cobra #6/2 (Jan 1955)

Black Cobra #3 (Mar 1955)

The Flame #1 (Jan 1955)

The Flame #2 (Mar 1955)

The Flame #3 (May 1955)

The Flame #4 (Jul 1955)

Phantom Lady #5/1 (Jan 1955)

Phantom Lady #2 (Mar 1955)

Phantom Lady #3 (Apr 1955)

Phantom Lady #4 (Jun 1955)

Samson #12 (Apr 1955)

Samson #13 (Jun 1955)

Samson #14 (Aug 1955)

Wonder Boy #17 (May 1955)

Wonder Boy #18 (Jul 1955)

 

 

Charlton:

Space Adventures #13 (Nov 1954) Blue Beetle

Space Adventures #14 (Jan 1955) Blue Beetle

Blue Beetle #18 (Feb 1955)

Blue Beetle #19 (Apr 1955)

Blue Beetle #20 (Jun 1955)

Blue Beetle #21 (Aug 1955)

Nature Boy #3 (Mar 1956)

Nature Boy #4

Nature Boy #5 (Feb 1957)

 

Atlas/Marvel

Captain America #76 (May 1954)

Captain America #77 (Jul 1954)

Captain America #78 (Sep 1954)

Human Torch #36 (Apr 1954)

Human Torch #37 (Jun 1954)

Human Torch #38 (Aug 1954)

Men's Adventures #27 (May 1954)

Men's Adventures #28 (Jul 1954)

Sub-Mariner #33 (Apr 1954)

Sub-Mariner #34 (Jun 1954)

Sub-Mariner #35 (Aug 1954)

Sub-Mariner #36 (Nov 1954)

Sub-Mariner #37 (Dec 1954)

Sub-Mariner #38 (Feb 1955)

Sub-Mariner #39 (Apr 1955)

Sub-Mariner #40 (Jun 1955)

Sub-Mariner #41 (Aug 1955)

Sub-Mariner #42 (Oct 1955)

Young Men #24 (Dec 1953)

Young Men #25 (Feb 1954)

Young Men #26 (Mar 1954)

Young Men #27 (Apr 1954)

Young Men #28 (Jun 1954)

 

National/DC:

Detective #225 (Nov 1955) Martian Manhunter

Detective #233 (Jul 1956) Batwoman

Showcase #4 (Oct 1956) Flash

Showcase #8 (Jun 1957) Flash

Showcase #13 (Apr 1958) Flash

Showcase #14 (Jun 1958) Flash

 

---

 

Just a side-bar here:

During my research this morning I found something that scares the heck out of me... from the Concerned Women for America, if this eveer catches on we could be looking at a Code rebirth instead of a post-Code Age... *shudder*

[Zonker]

So of course I wasn't around at the dawn of the Silver Age, so I'm offering an opinion based on what I've read, not a first-hand account.

 

Thanks gifflefunk for the timeline. The way I read the Marvel/Atlas/Timely timeline, it seems to have spanned both the pre-Code and post-Code periods, and did not lead to anything lasting. The Ajax and Charlton experiments similarly did not lead to anything lasting, with Blue Beetle only being revived as part of the later post-Marvel Age Charlton Action Hero line.

 

Super-heroes never disappeared, of course. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and associated backup features carried on. One book you left off the timeline is Jimmy Olsen #1 September/October 1954, an unusual expansion of DC's super-hero line at the time, but likely driven by the George Reeves TV show.

 

As for Detective 225, the early Martian Manhunter stories read like just another in a series of gimmick lawmen of the times:

 

- Roy Raymond, the TV detective

- Sierra Smith, the western lawman

- John Jones, the martian manhunter

 

If J'onn J'onzz had not made it into the early JLA with B&B 28, it's doubtful we'd remember him with any special significance.

 

Contrast that with Showcase #4, which did lead to something, at least on the DC side.

 

It is IMHO something of an accident that we talk of the 1960s books as a common "Silver Age," since up until 1968 or so the style of the DC Silver Age was completely different from the "Marvel Age." I'd be equally happy speaking of a "DC Revival Age" from 1956 to 1961, immediately followed by the Marvel Age from 1961-1969. In retrospect, from the vantage point of the 1970s, you can see similarities between the generally more-innocent approach of the previous decade, but my guess is that at the time there were more differences between Marvel & DC seen by fans/readers than there were similarities. My speculation is that the whole Golden Age terminology was spawned by 1960s super-hero fans to distinguish then-vintage comics from then-current comics. Once the Golden Age was labelled, then it probably just invited the Silver Age label to be applied to contrast the then-current hero books.

 

Anybody who was actually there at the time care to chime in?

[Zonker]

My speculation is that the whole Golden Age terminology was spawned by 1960s super-hero fans to distinguish then-vintage comics from then-current comics. Once the Golden Age was labelled, then it probably just invited the Silver Age label to be applied to contrast the then-current hero books.

 

Anybody who was actually there at the time care to chime in?

 

Decided to try to answer my own question. A Google Search revealed this page. in which Bill Schelly is quoted: "The first use of the words "golden age" pertaining to the comics of the 1940s was by Richard A. Lupoff in an article called "Re-Birth" in COMIC ART #1 (April 1960)."

 

 

Comics ur-fan Jerry Bails is also quoted: "I did not prefer the terms Golden & Silver Age because the term Golden Age was already in use by fans of syndicated strips. "Golden Age" referred to the late 1920s and 1930s, when some many of the great newspaper strips were thriving. I recall at the first significant fan gathering at my house, the Alley Tally, I posted banners using the terms "Second Heroic Age" in a gallery of original art I set up. I think that was 1964??? I preferred the terms First Heroic Age and Second Heroic Age to refer to the 1940s and the emerging phenomenon of the 1960s, which I hoped would not fade out again.

 

Also on the link above you can see Ken Quattro's preferred timeline of the Ages. Lotsa folks got opinions on this matter! ...

[gifflefunk]

Interesting article Ken Quattro has... seems like he may have been reading the eBay thread in 2003.

 

I think we should definitely keep the traditional metallic names. Cartoon strips and books containing comic material are different creatures from the standard comic format (started with Funnies on Parade) and those pre-comicbook formats can have their own Ages without disrupting the comicbook Ages (same with Big Little Books, they already have their own Ages, not sure how Overstreet handled that). Creating a flurry of new names seems to over-complicate the issue by creating Ages to explain different genre popularities, which is a big reason I lobbied to have "Atom Age" dropped from the OPG. Atom Age was nothing more than a filler-Age to explain the gap between the Golden Age of Superheroes and the Silver Age of Superheroes.

 

I do think the Code-Ages are a cleaner approach for defining the larger Age picture (maybe we should should use the term Era like Overstreet did in the first OPG). Within these Eras you can still have genre specific periods, such as the Golden Age of Westerns, Golden Age of Superheroes (aka. First Heroic Age), the Golden Age of Crime, the Golden Age of Romance, Golden Age of Horror, etc., where each genre was at its peak of popularity (again, Gerber had done a lot of ground work in this area and I used his data in the eBay thread). For me this is a far more elegant solution than creating a bunch of genre based "main" Ages. The Age/Era gets defined by the Code events and are basically used as a modifier for the genre being discussed in that time-frame.

 

Using the Code as a focal point (i.e. a point of convergence; no claim being made that the Code is the reason things changed) helps to unify various concepts and terms collectors use (i.e. pre-Code comics vs. Golden Age comics, etc.). Now we can still talk about the minutia of when certain genre periods began... did the Golden Age of Superheroes really begin with Action #1 or was it with the appearance of Dr. Occult? Does the Silver Age of Superheroes being with Showcase #4 or Flash #105 or does it not begin until superheroes dominate the market in 1964? Should Swamp Thing really be considered a factor in explaining the rise of the Bronze Age of Horror? Etc.

[dc eng]

"To be totally honest, I can't really say, as I didn't live through that period. If I don't have first-hand knowledge of the times and wasn't actively buying comics, then why the heck would I think I was qualified to offer an opinion?"

 

Geez, then how the heck are you qualified to talk about the Civil Rights Movement as it pertained to the 1950's? You uttered the names of Thurgood Marshall, Rosa Parks, and others in one of your posts yesterday as if you were a bonafide expert in that area. I know you aren't because of you erroneously thought the Civil Rights Bill was passed during JFK's watch. Any first year history major would've caught that error.

 

You stated that someone who does not have first-hand knowledge of a historical period does not qualify to offer an opinion. If you truly believe that, then perhaps you should not be making comparisons of comic book history with 1950's U.S. history in the first place.

 

"It's a problem I see a lot; people who were not buying off the racks at the time, offering up "historical perspective" of an Age catalyst without actually experiencing the reality of what was going on."

 

"Or to bring up a comic-based comparison, it's like the Watcher going to sleep for 30-years, waking up, and then transcribing events from the Encyclopedia Britannica. Not quite the same thing. "

 

When you were in high school or college, history must've been your worst subject. You show no appreciation for the study of history and its tools and processes. A well-balanced historical perspective is best achieved when a number of years have passed. Everybody knows that. Interviews may be conducted, books and articles have to be read, and conclusions are usually drawn. Of course if you lived during that period, your personal perspective would be added to the mix.

 

Arnold and the OPG are utilizing the sliding Modern Age scale because they correctly recognize that a number of years has to pass before we can achieve the perspective needed to confidently name a comic age and its general boundaries. If the Watcher were a historian of comics, he too would wait several years or more (but not necessarily 30 years) before naming and defining a comic age. I don't know what his view of CCA as a focal point would be, but I'm sure he would not summarily dismiss it as you have done.

[joe_collector]

I know you aren't because of you erroneously thought the Civil Rights Bill was passed during JFK's watch. Any first year history major would've caught that error.

 

You know, I really hate like you, who take one small true sidebar statement (JFK initiating the Civil Rights Bill) and then start in on "errors" simply because I didn't type out a 50-page document detailing its passage.

 

Jesus, anyone who's watched a Kennedy A&E Special knows he died before his Bill finally passed, and JFK and other popular movies even goes into Bobby's role in civil rights as Attorney General, and "possible motives" for LBJ to pass it after the Kennedy's were gone.

 

Picking gnat from pepper is how fanboys act when someone disagrees with their "pet theories", so it's really not surprising you're acting so childishly. If you're willing to stoop this low to insult those who disagree, you need a new hobby.

[joe_collector]

Geez, then how the heck are you qualified to talk about the Civil Rights Movement as it pertained to the 1950's? You uttered the names of Thurgood Marshall, Rosa Parks, and others in one of your posts yesterday as if you were a bonafide expert in that area.

 

What the are you talking about? I simply listed several well-known civil rights activists as a comparison to what you are trying to do with the Comics Code. Never once did I make the error you are, and mistake my "book reading" for actual real-life experience, and try to enforce my view of an era I have only read about or watched on TV.

 

Now if I had stated "Martin Luthor King started the civil rights movement in the US, and everyone who thinks differently is DEAD WRONG", then I'd be doing what you are, and you'd have a point. But of course, being an intelligent man, I did not.

 

That you would miss such an obvious comparison speaks volumes of your intelligence.

 

P.S. What I'm really getting at is that book knowledge is no replacement for real-life experiences,especially when you're talking about something as biased and open to interpretation as the historical account. I've watched documentaries where fresh-faced academics offer opinions on world events that they have only read and researched about, and disagree vehemently with people who were actually there.

 

The ego of these chumps simply boggles the mind, and when you've got a group of WWII officers stating how D-Day progressed, the orders they received, the enemy positions, etc. and some pimply-faced academic is yelling at them, telling them they're all wrong (simply because it deflates their latest research paper), it's pure comedy. Simply pure comedy.

 

So yes, I take a back-seat to those who actually bought Golden and Silver Age comics, and lived through the times, and can offer a lot more real-life facts than I possibly could. My ego isn't that big.

[CompleteRunComics]

 

Lawyer or salesman?

 

 

CRC

[joe_collector]

Lawyer or salesman?

 

Neither, just a guy who may have an ego, but not one big enough to argue WW2 strategy against a 5-star General.

[Deathlok]

Lawyer or salesman?

 

Neither, just a guy who may have an ego, but not one big enough to argue WW2 strategy against a 5-star General.

[dc eng]

"You know, I really hate like you, who take one small true sidebar statement (JFK initiating the Civil Rights Bill) and then start in on "errors" simply because I didn't type out a 50-page document detailing its passage."

 

 

What's with the profanity icon? Did I use profanity or direct a profanity icon towards you?

 

 

"Jesus, anyone who's watched a Kennedy A&E Special knows he died before his Bill finally passed, and JFK and other popular movies even goes into Bobby's role in civil rights as Attorney General, and "possible motives" for LBJ to pass it after the Kennedy's were gone."

 

 

Believe it or not, I never saw JFK. That's an Oliver Stone movie, right? Although movies can be educational, you shouldn't believe everything you see when you're watching them. Some directors have political leanings that are reflected in their films.

 

I'm sure there were political motives involved in LBJ's support of the bill, but the Civil Rights Movement had a life of its own and IMO it would've inevitably passed with or without LBJ and JFK.