ORIGINS of the American Comic Book 0

[VintageComics]

The fact is, Superheroes have been the driving force of comics for the past 50+ years. There is no evidence to lead us that some other genre other than the Superhero will dominate the next 50 years.

 

West, these are two very different things.

 

1st, I don't think this discussion really has anyone disagreeing that superheroes were the driving force of the past 50 years - that's pretty much a given - but the past 50 years also have very little bearing on the origins of the American comic book.

 

2nd, I think it's impossible to know what will be popular 50 years from now. It could be disco. Again.

 

 

[Sqeggs]

Not an original observation, but contemplating again those sales numbers for Disney comics, was there any artist who made as much dough for his publisher as Barks did for Dell/Eastern during the 1940s and 1950s? I suppose Kirby and Marvel in the 1960s would be second -- but I think a distant second.

[Timely]

The fact is, Superheroes have been the driving force of comics for the past 50+ years. There is no evidence to lead us that some other genre other than the Superhero will dominate the next 50 years.

 

West, these are two very different things.

 

1st, I don't think this discussion really has anyone disagreeing that superheroes were the driving force of the past 50 years - that's pretty much a given - but the past 50 years also have very little bearing on the origins of the American comic book.

 

2nd, I think it's impossible to know what will be popular 50 years from now. It could be disco. Again.

 

 

Pretty sure disco is dead... also pretty sure strip reprints are dead too.

 

I wrote what I did because some posters here seem to minimize the superhero genre saying it is second in importance to their own favorite genre. Like I said, it's all about perspective!

[Theagenes]

The fact is, Superheroes have been the driving force of comics for the past 50+ years. There is no evidence to lead us that some other genre other than the Superhero will dominate the next 50 years.

 

West, these are two very different things.

 

1st, I don't think this discussion really has anyone disagreeing that superheroes were the driving force of the past 50 years - that's pretty much a given - but the past 50 years also have very little bearing on the origins of the American comic book.

 

2nd, I think it's impossible to know what will be popular 50 years from now. It could be disco. Again.

 

 

 

Pretty sure disco is dead... also pretty sure strip reprints are dead too.

 

I wrote what I did because some posters here seem to minimize the superhero genre saying it is second in importance to their own favorite genre. Like I said, it's all about perspective!

 

 

Actually manga outsells superhero comics today by a huge margin. The superhero genre does not dominate the comic book medium any more. It does do quite well in other media of course.

 

Look at these manga sales numbers for 2012:

 

http://www.saiyanisland.com/2012/12/top-20-manga-series-in-2012-based-on-sales/

Edited April 10, 2013 by Theagenes

[adamstrange]

The fact is, Superheroes have been the driving force of comics for the past 50+ years. There is no evidence to lead us that some other genre other than the Superhero will dominate the next 50 years.

 

West, these are two very different things.

 

1st, I don't think this discussion really has anyone disagreeing that superheroes were the driving force of the past 50 years - that's pretty much a given - but the past 50 years also have very little bearing on the origins of the American comic book.

 

2nd, I think it's impossible to know what will be popular 50 years from now. It could be disco. Again.

 

 

 

Pretty sure disco is dead... also pretty sure strip reprints are dead too.

 

I wrote what I did because some posters here seem to minimize the superhero genre saying it is second in importance to their own favorite genre. Like I said, it's all about perspective!

 

 

Actually manga outsells superhero comics today by a huge margin. The superhero genre does not dominate the comic book medium any more. It does do quite well in other media of course.

 

Look at these manga sales numbers for 2012:

 

http://www.saiyanisland.com/2012/12/top-20-manga-series-in-2012-based-on-sales/

 

If you are only interested in one genre, that's what you'll tend to notice. For example, in the 1960s super-heros were the most prolific for DC but varied from 1/3 to 1/2 of the titles published. I'm not sure how that translates into numbers but it's not everything and there were publishers (e.g Harvey and MLJ) that published next to nothing of superheros.

 

Scholastic is now selling publishing graphic novels to schoolkids but their output features Bone and Amulet rather than superheros.

[Bookery]

If you are only interested in one genre, that's what you'll tend to notice. For example, in the 1960s super-heros were the most prolific for DC but varied from 1/3 to 1/2 of the titles published. I'm not sure how that translates into numbers but it's not everything and there were publishers (e.g Harvey and MLJ) that published next to nothing of superheros.

 

Scholastic is now selling publishing graphic novels to schoolkids but their output features Bone and Amulet rather than superheros.

 

I've been at home the last couple of days recovering from the flu, which allowed me to post more than I would customarily... back at work now, so may not be able to chime in as much...

 

However, I was curious about number of titles published in various genres at dufferent times. I did some quickie (ie, non-complete) research choosing mid-summer in 1945, 1954 (couldn't find 1955 for some reason) and 1965. I used mycomicshop.com's website, as you could sort them this way. This is incomplete, because it misses some things... especially a number of Dell/Gold Key one-shots, etc. But it gives an idea...

 

I will say that I was surprised that super-hero titles were bigger than I would have thought, even by summer 1945, though I am including anthology titles as long as a super-hero was emphasized on the cover (ie, the selling point of the issue). Likewise if an anthology title had Katzenjammer Kids on the cover, it went into the humor category, even though Mandrake might be on the inside somewhere.

 

1945:

 

Super-Heroes = 37

Humor = 37

Misc. Adventure = 19

Western = 1

 

1954

 

Humor = 60

Horror/SF = 33

Western = 24

Romance = 19

Super-Hero = 13

Crime = 11

War = 7

Misc. Adventure = 6

 

1965

 

Humor = 52

Super-Hero = 29

Horror/SF = 9

War = 9

Romance = 8

Western = 8

Adventure = 6

 

It is interesting to note that in 1954, the genre of horror and crime, totaling 44 titles, were soon taken away from the public, not by consumers losing interest, but by censorship demands. One wonders what the dominant genre(s) of the '60s might have been like had not this artificial impediment to natural growth processes not taken place? Again, this is what makes the complications of pop culture history so fascinating.

 

[MrBedrock]

That 1965 number is a little skewed. Of the 52 humor titles I bet 40 of them were Richie Rich spin-offs.

[adamstrange]

That 1965 number is a little skewed. Of the 52 humor titles I bet 40 of them were Richie Rich spin-offs.

 

Richie Rich dominance was a phenomenon of the early 70s.

 

Here's Harvey in summer 1965

http://www.dcindexes.com/features/timemachine.php?site=harvey&type=cover&month=6&year=1965&sort=alpha

[MrBedrock]

That 1965 number is a little skewed. Of the 52 humor titles I bet 40 of them were Richie Rich spin-offs.

 

Richie Rich dominance was a phenomenon of the early 70s.

 

Here's Harvey in summer 1965

http://www.dcindexes.com/features/timemachine.php?site=harvey&type=cover&month=6&year=1965&sort=alpha

Another joke crushed by reality.

[Theagenes]

I think in truth the idea that the superhero genre dominated (to use West's term) comics is very much overstated. If there was a period where comics were dominated by superheros it was probably the late 70s through the 80s and into the 90s until the implosion. There were other times when the superhero had a large chunk of the market (early 40s, 60s to early 70s) but didn't dominate. But still that's enough to say to it's up there with only the funny animal genre as far as importance to the comic book medium (and by funny animal I would include Disney, WB, up through TMNT and Sonic the Hedgehog).

 

The importance of the superhero genre in popular culture as a whole is a different issue. I do think it's important to note, as Tim pointed out, that the times in which the superhero genre had the most impact on popular culture came not from superhero comics, but when the superhero genre appeared in other media like film and television. Of course that's true for the funny animal genre too.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Theagenes

[Bookery]

That 1965 number is a little skewed. Of the 52 humor titles I bet 40 of them were Richie Rich spin-offs.

 

Richie Rich dominance was a phenomenon of the early 70s.

 

Here's Harvey in summer 1965

http://www.dcindexes.com/features/timemachine.php?site=harvey&type=cover&month=6&year=1965&sort=alpha

Another joke crushed by reality.

 

 

Actually, without looking them up again, probably a dozen each were Harvey or Archie titles.

 

Although, to be fair, of the 29 super-hero titles that month, 12 had either Superman or Batman in them!

 

[Timely]

Okay, I concede. Obadiah Oldbuck was the inspiration for every comic ever printed. I just read an interview where Todd McFarlane said Spawn was a direct creation inspired by Oldbuck. The Superhero genre is almost meaningless. They are a dead concept that only TV & movies could keep afloat. RIP Superman.

 

I'm going to the Salvation Army now... gotta find me some disco pants! Stayin' Alive!

[Theagenes]

That 1965 number is a little skewed. Of the 52 humor titles I bet 40 of them were Richie Rich spin-offs.

 

Richie Rich dominance was a phenomenon of the early 70s.

 

Here's Harvey in summer 1965

http://www.dcindexes.com/features/timemachine.php?site=harvey&type=cover&month=6&year=1965&sort=alpha

Another joke crushed by reality.

 

 

Actually, without looking them up again, probably a dozen each were Harvey or Archie titles.

 

Although, to be fair, of the 29 super-hero titles that month, 12 had either Superman or Batman in them!

 

I did love Richie Rich when I was a wee thing in the early 70s.

[Theagenes]

Okay, I concede. Obadiah Oldbuck was the inspiration for every comic ever printed. I just read an interview where Todd McFarlane said Spawn was a direct creation inspired by Oldbuck. The Superhero genre is almost meaningless. They are a dead concept that only TV & movies could keep afloat. RIP Superman.

 

I'm going to the Salvation Army now... gotta find me some disco pants! Stayin' Alive!

 

Oh come on now. Nobody's going that far (well, maybe Bob).

 

I think it would probably be accurate to say that superheroes have dominated comic book collecting for the last 50 years.

 

And since we're all collectors isn't it reasonable to think that maybe that's colored our judgement a little bit?

Edited April 10, 2013 by Theagenes

[DeliBebek]

Everybody here loves comics. Why all the contentiousness?

 

…

 

And by the way, Obadiah Oldbuck was the first comic book superhero (invulnerability, super strength, super speed).

…

I have learned a number of things on this thread I never knew before. I can impart a few tidbits here and there of which a few others may be unaware. Opinions, if based on fact and not emotion, should all be worthy of consideration and honest debate, and if derived honestly, should be above ridicule even if disagreed with. Despite a couple of moments, I think for the most part this thread achieves that.

And Bob, the reason people don't take your history posts seriously and treat you like a huckster is because you keep acting like a huckster. Try making a post on comics history without including a link to your eBay store or appealing to us to buy something. There are dedicated places on this forum to hawk your wares -- this isn't it. You can't wear both your dealer hat and your historian hat at the same time and expect people to take your conclusions seriously when they relate to products you are selling.

…

 

I'm not trying to pick on you. I am truly interested in this subject and I simply want to see formulate your arguments in way that allows us to truly weigh their merit.

I'll add to this that BLBcomics should re-read before posting. Sentences that twist into each other are avoidable on a second reading. Statements that are presented as facts shouldn't have lavish metaphors which render them non-factual. I'd love to be able to look at the facts and understand what the poster means, rather than to unravel a sentence that isn't really a sentence, and assume that I have deciphered the meaning correctly.

 

Otherwise, it's good enough for me at this point to know that comic books developed out of a long tradition of illustrated text and captioned drawings.

[Bookery]

Okay, I concede. Obadiah Oldbuck was the inspiration for every comic ever printed. I just read an interview where Todd McFarlane said Spawn was a direct creation inspired by Oldbuck. The Superhero genre is almost meaningless. They are a dead concept that only TV & movies could keep afloat. RIP Superman.

 

I'm going to the Salvation Army now... gotta find me some disco pants! Stayin' Alive!

 

Oh come on now. Nobody's going that far (well, maybe Bob).

 

I think it would probably be accurate to say that superheroes have dominated comic book collecting for the last 50 years.

 

And since we're all collectors isn't it reasonable to think that maybe that's colored our judgement a little bit?

 

It's similar with the pulps, though even more exagerrated. There are probably only about a dozen or so Hero Pulps, yet hero pulp collectors have traditionally dominated that marketplace. And despite the fact the hero pulp didn't exist for the first 40 years of pulp production, died out in less than 20 years, and produced only a few titles, there are many in that environment who would contend that the hero pulp was the defining genre of that form.

 

Edited April 10, 2013 by Bookery

[BLBcomics-migration]

Everybody here loves comics. Why all the contentiousness?

 

How in the world do you measure the overall "importance" of a particular comic? Facts are facts, while importance is a judgment.

 

The Walking Dead has broken all kinds of rating records. It's from a comic book. It's not about superheroes. How do you measure that importance?

 

Comic books have been a great medium for telling stories of superheroes. But such stories did not start in comic books. Heroes with superhuman abilities have been mythologized as long as humans have told stories.

 

And by the way, Obadiah Oldbuck was the first comic book superhero (invulnerability, super strength, super speed).

 

I agree to a point, though for my part I don't think I'm being especially contentious. David MerryWeather and Ciorac and I have differing viewpoints (and I don't think we're always arguing on the same topics), but I have no hard feelings toward them because of it... in fact I think this is one of the best threads in GA for some time.

 

I think there is clear animosity toward Bob Beerbohm by some, but it seems it has to do with stuff outside what he is really presenting here, and that is unfortunate because his timelines and data are quite fascinating (and for the most part indisputable). People may disagree with his opinions or conclusions drawn, but even these aren't hysterically out of bounds, as presented, and his information is quite interesting and revealing. And all historians eventually draw conclusions from their research that spark debate and criticism.

 

I love comics, but I love historical fact even more. In fact, I treasure accuracy. Myths are often oversimplifications and shortcuts... the truth is far more complicated and therefore far more interesting. Too often today we see history shredded by media and politicians who have a vested interest in altering the historical record. If we can't at least have truth in something that should be as inoccuous as pop culture, then the world is indeed a sadder place.

 

I have learned a number of things on this thread I never knew before. I can impart a few tidbits here and there of which a few others may be unaware. Opinions, if based on fact and not emotion, should all be worthy of consideration and honest debate, and if derived honestly, should be above ridicule even if disagreed with. Despite a couple of moments, I think for the most part this thread achieves that.

 

 

Bob, I have a lot of respect and appreciation for the research you have done, but your posting style makes it very difficult to tease out the interesting factual nuggets from the stream-of-consciouness wall-of-texts posts filled with non-sequitor anecdotes and appeals to authority that, while interesting, are ones we have all heard before.

 

This is pretty savvy and knowledgeable crowd. The reason they aren't convinced by the arguments you're making isn't because they are unaware of your research or haven't read your essays in OPG and CBM -- it's because you haven't made a convincing argument.

 

You like to call yourself a "comic book archaeologist." Well, as someone who is an actual archaeologist and who also does academic work on popular culture, let me tell you what I would like to see in order to be convinced. In archaeology, the artifacts themselves rarely have any intrinsic value -- what matters is context. So far you haven't given us any context with which we can judge your statement that the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck "launched the American comic book industry." Just pointing to it's existence isn't enough.

 

So how do you know that this book had any significance at all? What is your evidence for that? Töpffer was important and influential as an artist in Europe, sure. But how do you know that this US bootleg of one of his books had any impact over here at all?

 

Do you know how many copies were printed? Where was it sold and distributed? How many people would have actually seen it?

 

Was it reprinted? If so when and how many editions did it go through? You said it was sold in NY up until 1904 -- did you mean it was continually in print until 1904 or that there was a reprint of it in 1904 with no other editions in between? That's a big difference.

 

You said this 1842 edition had a direct influence on the creation of Jeremiah Saddlebags and the other US books from the 1850s. What is your evidence for this?

 

Do you have any secondary sources that refer to this 1842 edition? Are there any reviews of it or mentions of it in trade publications from the 1800s? How about advertisements? Do any of the later comic strip creators from the late 1800s and early 1900s discuss it anywhere (I'm sure Töpffer in general gets mentioned, but what about this 1842 edition in particular)?

 

Bob, these are the kinds of contextual questions that need to be answered before anyone can judge just how important this particular book is. I suspect you have answers to some of these questions, but if no one has seen them outside of a highly-specialized email listserv, then you can't expect people to just accept your conclusions with no evidence.

 

I'm not trying to pick on you. I am truly interested in this subject and I simply want to see formulate your arguments in way that allows us to truly weigh their merit.

 

Regarding the first part of your missive, I have thousands of friends in the comics world. Any one who has been at some thing pretty much full time 40+ years is bound to also pick up some baggage along the way. Nuff said there.

 

Almost every question you posed above are all answered in the Victorian articles as they evolved over time in Overstreet.

 

During the early to mid 00s on the yahoo Plat list there was, still is for that matter, a world wide "team" of interested comics scholars wherein we fleshed out placing the artifacts from all over the world in to context.

 

I find it almost amusing that comics scholars in Italy's Alfredo Castellli, Alberto Bacatinni, France's Thierry Groensteen, Jean-Pierre Mercier, Thierry Smolderen, England's Paul Gravett, elsewhere in Europe like Sweden's Fred Stromburg, as well as American ones like David Kunzle, the late Bill Blackbeard, many others, "get it," or in Bill's case, "got it" before passing on.

 

whereas people seemingly financially vested in simply "the spawn of MC Gaines" do not, or refuse to.

 

CONTEXT is all laid out in the unfolding Victorian era OPG articles using the price index which immediately folllows as reference. Some have already voiced some of these posts of mine are some what lengthy. There are thousands of comic strips in hundreds of publications from the 1800s.

 

There are some 45,000 archived posts made there since 1999. which any one is free to scroll thru to learn the world wide impact of comic strips and books going back centuries.

 

When the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck was first announced circa OPG #32, there were comic book dealers, shall we say, upset, because they had solf FamousFunnies #1 to "investers" for thousands of dollars who all of a sudden wanted refunds. That blow back did come my way for a spell. It is what is is, I lose zero sleep over such silly antics.

 

By 2006 they held the sections I worked on many hundreds of hours to 72 pages.

 

The last years I was enthused before the hip joint thing took over and I lost pretty much half a decade of my life, I had to cajole the Gemstone powers that be in to squeezing more pages as more and more data was being unearthed.

 

Towards "the end" when my section I was laying out the pages on peaked at the aforementioned 72 pages, Jeff Vaughn went to Geppi and they went so far as to drop a few of their internal "house" adverts much to their credit.

 

So, when the amount of data went well over 72 pages, in order to fit in some thing "new" recently rediscovered, some thing which had beein the the articles had to be ejected. Visual aid for the text was dropped slowly

 

I have also typed the above before quite a few times. In order to get the bigger more complete picture as presented in Overstreet one simply has to acquire one each of OPG #27 thru #39.

 

Since that number I have not added to the Victorian and/or Plat lexicon there at all. I was otherwise occupied healing from surgeries and regaining "life". The Gemstone people have picked the visual aid in OPG #41 and #42. I lost interest when supplanted by Marvel cover price variants as seemingly more important.

 

with the #40 anniversary OPG they wanted to run a special 31 page article by Jon McClure on mainly Marvel, but also other companies, cover price "variants" so the texts of both the Vict and Plat articles were completely dropped.

 

I was offered a bone to expand the Origins of the Modern Comic Book piece which i did do. #40 contains the best version I compiled on the "modern" comic book origins.

 

Seems like OPG is trying an end run to secure the copyrights on the Vict and Plat price index data I worked so hard compiling for free. Then again, while I was seekign surgeries and then healing, I was not the most cogent pebble on the beach.

 

Let me take just a few of your queries and answer them:

 

1) re OO inspiring Saddlebags. That is all fleshed out in the Plat list archives. We examined both, one can see the Read Bros copying aspects of Oldbuck.

 

2) regarding your wanting to see a time line of reprints, all one needs to do there is scope out the Victorian Price Index I oversaw compilation of.

 

All known reprints of ANY 1800s comic book are all laid out there.

 

I see little need to rejurgitate such data here. I assume this "savy" crowd has the basic "tools of the trade" at their disposal. If not, well, then one has no business even worrying about reading this thread at all. I am not going to reprint the Victorian price index here.

 

Suffice to say using just the one example of Obadiah Oldbuck, there are quite a few reprints done between 1842 until I see no more mention of that comic book as being in print after a NY Times 1904 article on it still being for sale. One also might keep in mind that by 1904 it was 60 years old. Compared to later technology advances, of course the art of "newer" cartoonists at the turn of the 20th century would look "better"

 

3) I took the trouble to show three comic strips earlier here in this thread from WILD OATS, a very rare, almost forgotten weekly newspaper which began running MANY sequential comic strips beginning in 1870. Those were almost completely ignored by this crowd. I thought to myself "why bother" - they are S.O.S., some might say Stuck On Superman, a more apt wording would be Stuck On Stupid, but I digress....

 

Other daily, weekly and/or monthly periodical newspapers carrying fully developed sequential comic art long before the Yellow Kid include

 

The Lantern 1852-53

Yankee Notions 1852-1875

The Home Circle 1854-1856

Frank Leslie's Budget of Fun 1859-1878

The Daily Graphic 1873-1889

The Illustrated Weekly 1876

The Illustrated San Francisco Wasp 1876-1941

Texas Siftings 1881-1887

and many more. The examples here re-typed out of OPG's V index

 

4) In the Overstreet V article i showed catalogs having OO for sale from Wilson & Co as well as later D i c k & Fitgerald reprints.

 

D&F seem to take over in the 1860s for Wilson, as well as Garrett, another NYC based 1850s comic book publisher.

 

By the 1890s it is just Fitzgerald left, who seems to disappear in the early 20th century. Some thing no one seems to have bothered to investigate yet

 

5) I have 1842 bound volumes of Brother Jonathan weekly newspaper. It is discussed for sale in there. I also have Bro Jon stand alone catalogs of wares dating as early as 1853 with OO and other comic books for sale.

 

But back to my original statement, most all you bring up is already covered in OPG. The interested party is also directed to Comic Art #3, Summer, 2003, published by Tod Hignite, now of Heritage Auction House,

 

containing an article called "Topffer in America"

by Doug Wheeler, Robert L. Beerbohm and Leonardo De Sa.

 

Next posts coming up I took it upon myselfto scan the pages of said article. I trust they come out well enough to read here, as it has dawned on me that NO ONE reading this thread has this issue done a decade ago now. Otherwise, most all the queries directed at this writer would not have been asked in the first place.

 

 

[BLBcomics-migration]

[BLBcomics-migration]

[BLBcomics-migration]