Greater Demand - 1938 Amazing Fantasy 15 or 1962 Action 1 ?

[Theagenes]

Yes, if you handicap it by stripping away everything that makes Action 1 what is it, then okay, AF 15 would then be more desirible. But I'm not sure what that is supposed to prove.

[Bookery]

Action has two things going for it, both of which cannot be touched. Number one, it's the first superhero comic. There's no getting around the importance of that. It's the first.

 

While I agree with you and RMA on the significance of Action #1... Superman is not the first super-hero, and a case could be made that Action #1 is not the first super-hero comic (the first Popeye Feature Book came out in 1937, and the character first appeared in 1929, and his first platinum book in 1931). Mandrake's Feature Book came out in 1938, but I'm not sure what month. Both characters appeared in earlier BLBs. I'm not sure if Tarzan qualifies as a super-hero... but his ability to communicate with animals could certainly be considered a super power.

 

Olga Mesmer-- The Girl with the X-Ray Eyes was a comic strip within the pulp magazine Spicy Mystery (a DC company) which premiered in Aug. 1937, and should probably be far better known and more historically significant than it is so far.

 

[Speedy-D]

Yeah, I know it's a grey area for some folks, and that Superman had his ancestors. He's still the first Superhero, the first time all the pieces of a comic book superhero were put together into a single package.

[VintageComics]

The point is moot.

 

Without Supes, superheroes may not have existed, or may not have done all that well. Without Supes, Stan Lee may have never gotten involved in comics. Without Supes, there may have been no Timely/Atlas/Marvel.

 

Yet, without Spiderman, nothing changes about Superman, at the very least from 1938-1962..

 

Sure, we can hypothesize all day long IF they came out at the same time...but they didn't.

 

The choice is clear: without Supes, Spiderman may not even have been.

 

Without Spiderman, Supes remains Supes.

 

No contest.

 

Captain Marvel was in much greater demand than Superman during the Golden Age. That is a fact based on actual sales data. Captain Marvel was outselling Superman hand over fist during the 1940's.

 

If DC hadn't quashed Captain Marvel with a law suit against Fawcett, who knows where either Supes or CM would be today.

 

I could hypothesize and say that without Captain Marvel to provride strong and steady competition to all other publishers, forcing them to up the quality of work and stories, there wouldn't be a hobby today.

 

We can always hypothesize.

[Mark 1]

Spiderman wouldn't have become spiderman in 1938 because technology wasn't advanced enough for the spider to become radioactive and eventually bite Peter. The technology was new to Peter's HS scientists and had it been 1938 it would not have existed. That's my story and I'm sticking to it (although maybe radioactivity was around in 1938...I tend to associate it with nuclear developments and that occured in later years.). Its all make believe anyway as we all know...

 

Action 1 will always have more demand among collectors.

[COI]

Let's say both books came out in the same month, same year. Either June 1938 or August, 1962. The are in the exact same supply in all grades. Which do you think would be worth more, and ergo in greater demand?

 

None of this - which book has been around longer or was the start of the hobby BS. Just... holding all other factors the same. Which has greater demand. The boy scout that more people forget about with every passing day? Or the character on pretty much a continuous upward trajectory since 1962?

 

You rock.

[RockMyAmadeus]

The pain of reading Comics General posts is really getting to be too much.

 

Oh my. Well, you DO know there's a simple solution to that, right...?

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Spiderman wouldn't have become spiderman in 1938 because technology wasn't advanced enough for the spider to become radioactive and eventually bite Peter. The technology was new to Peter's HS scientists and had it been 1938 it would not have existed. That's my story and I'm sticking to it (although maybe radioactivity was around in 1938...I tend to associate it with nuclear developments and that occured in later years.). Its all make believe anyway as we all know...

 

Action 1 will always have more demand among collectors.

 

Radioactivity was discovered in 1896 by Henri Becquerel.

 

By 1938, the phenomena was well documented.

[Mark 1]

Spiderman wouldn't have become spiderman in 1938 because technology wasn't advanced enough for the spider to become radioactive and eventually bite Peter. The technology was new to Peter's HS scientists and had it been 1938 it would not have existed. That's my story and I'm sticking to it (although maybe radioactivity was around in 1938...I tend to associate it with nuclear developments and that occured in later years.). Its all make believe anyway as we all know...

 

Action 1 will always have more demand among collectors.

 

Radioactivity was discovered in 1896 by Henri Becquerel.

 

By 1938, the phenomena was well documented.

 

Ok fair enough.

[Bronty]

Let's say both books came out in the same month, same year. Either June 1938 or August, 1962. The are in the exact same supply in all grades. Which do you think would be worth more, and ergo in greater demand?

 

None of this - which book has been around longer or was the start of the hobby BS. Just... holding all other factors the same. Which has greater demand. The boy scout that more people forget about with every passing day? Or the character on pretty much a continuous upward trajectory since 1962?

 

You rock.

 

I can't take credit for the truth it simply is what it is

[EastEnd]

If Spiderman had come out in 1938, it's a pretty safe bet that he would have been canceled. No way an angst-ridden superhero nerd would have played while Hitler's tanks were rolling across Europe.

 

BTW, I may be wrong about this but didn't Superman outsell Spiderman in the 1960s?

 

 

 

[Bronty]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

BTW, I may be wrong about this but didn't Superman outsell Spiderman in the 1960s?

 

 

 

All the way until 1971.

[EastEnd]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

[RockMyAmadeus]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

 

[showcase22gr1959]

Without Superman, there would have been no super-heroes and without Spiderman, superheroes would not have continue.

[whomerjay]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

 

So if Superman hadn't been first, then his inherent appeal couldn't carry him. Is that what you are implying? OR JUST MAYBE that was what the OP was essentially asking, but of course his question was inane so he had to be straightened out.

[EastEnd]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

 

So if Superman hadn't been first, then his inherent appeal couldn't carry him. Is that what you are implying? OR JUST MAYBE that was what the OP was essentially asking, but of course his question was inane so he had to be straightened out.

 

I wasn't "straightening anyone out"... just trying to discuss civily.

 

What I'm saying is that Spiderman would not have existed without Superman... and the only reason he was endowed with the angst that made him popular was the very fact that Superman DIDN'T have any. All Lee and Ditko did with the character was put a new twist on what had preceded them... but Spiderman himself owes quite a bit to the Man of Steel that inspired him. Even Lee and Ditko recognized that... they gave his costume the same color scheme as Supes!

 

Re: this issue of "appeal," I've never said that Superman is more popular today than Spiderman (I'd agree he's not among the under-40 crowd; over-40 is more debatable)... but Supes is clearly more important.

[whomerjay]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

 

So if Superman hadn't been first, then his inherent appeal couldn't carry him. Is that what you are implying? OR JUST MAYBE that was what the OP was essentially asking, but of course his question was inane so he had to be straightened out.

 

I wasn't "straightening anyone out"... just trying to discuss civily.

 

What I'm saying is that Spiderman would not have existed without Superman... and the only reason he was endowed with the angst that made him popular was the very fact that Superman DIDN'T have any. All Lee and Ditko did with the character was put a new twist on what had preceded them... but Spiderman himself owes quite a bit to the Man of Steel that inspired him. Even Lee and Ditko recognized that... they gave his costume the same color scheme as Supes!

 

Re: this issue of "appeal," I've never said that Superman is more popular today than Spiderman (I'd agree he's not among the under-40 crowd; over-40 is more debatable)... but Supes is clearly more important.

 

actually, I wasn't referring to you. But...

 

"Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical."

 

sure sounds like you're trying to straighten him out. And what exactly is an "irrelevant hypothetical"?

 

 

[Bronty]

^^^ and if superman had come out in 1962 after dozens and dozens of similar characters had already debuted, he'd be about as important as Black Goliath. Obviously there is an unspoken assumption that had character popularity would not change. Changing the dates is merely an attempt to equate eras, and supply.

 

 

Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical. The characters are what they are and are viewed how they're viewed. I suppose Mickey Mouse wouldn't have meant much either had he come out after Topo Gigio. So what? At the end of the day, none of those hundreds and hundreds of characters you allude to would have existed if Superman hadn't preceded them... that is his greatest contribution to Americana and pop culture... that is why he's so iconic. What relevance is it to evaluate Superman stripped of his greatest asset?

 

So if Superman hadn't been first, then his inherent appeal couldn't carry him. Is that what you are implying? OR JUST MAYBE that was what the OP was essentially asking, but of course his question was inane so he had to be straightened out.

 

I wasn't "straightening anyone out"... just trying to discuss civily.

 

What I'm saying is that Spiderman would not have existed without Superman... and the only reason he was endowed with the angst that made him popular was the very fact that Superman DIDN'T have any. All Lee and Ditko did with the character was put a new twist on what had preceded them... but Spiderman himself owes quite a bit to the Man of Steel that inspired him. Even Lee and Ditko recognized that... they gave his costume the same color scheme as Supes!

 

Re: this issue of "appeal," I've never said that Superman is more popular today than Spiderman (I'd agree he's not among the under-40 crowd; over-40 is more debatable)... but Supes is clearly more important.

 

actually, I wasn't referring to you. But...

 

"Can't say I understand what that sort of analysis accomplishes... it's an irrelevant hypothetical."

 

sure sounds like you're trying to straighten him out. And what exactly is an "irrelevant hypothetical"?