ORIGINS of the American Comic Book 0

[Cat-Man_America]

This has been an illuminating thread. Reading it from the outside, I think something of a consensus has been reached on a key question:

 

Was the appearance of Action 1/Superman crucial to the success of comic books?

 

Before reading this thread and without thinking much about it, I would have said "Yes." I now realize the answer is "No." It appears the contributors to this thread agree (although perhaps not David Merryweather).

 

The crucial evidence is the enormous popularity of non-hero comics from the late 1940s through the 1950s. Particularly funny animal (especially Disney), but also -- as Dr. Love has usefully reminded us in another thread -- romance, as well as crime, horror/sci-fi, and teen humor.

 

What the success of these other genres shows is that stories told in comic book style and sold on newsstands for 10 cents turned out to be a popular form of entertainment. It strains credulity to believe that publishers would not have stumbled on this fact even if there had been no Superman, Batman, or Captain America.

 

An interesting question is: Why was the heyday of comic books relatively fleeting? The spread of television is probably a significant part of the answer but, as I mentioned in an earlier post, in discussing the U.S. economy and U.S. culture, never underestimate the importance of the baby boom.

 

[font:Times New Roman]The reason that I'm not in full agreement on this point is that the evidence (from my perspective) points elsewhere, and it is persuasive.

 

Admittedly, comic books became a self-perpetuating success at some point and not reliant upon the superhero genre that motivated growth of the market in 1939. That's part of the natural evolution of the comic book publishing industry. IOW, cyclical trends create new markets in a constantly changing demographic, then those new markets become the driving force.

 

Trends are unpredictable, but you can almost always point to a spark that fuels growth of a market and sustains it. Superman was such a spark. Folks can speculate endlessly, but there are plenty of clues connecting the dots to bolster my position. Just look at a cross section of archived photos of newsstands and drugstore magazine racks from the early 40's. It's clear that early-on the superhero genre was a popular, driving force in the success of comics.

 

Superman alone shouldn't be credited with the success of comic books, but Superman's popularity accelerated the growth of comics at a crucial moment in time. Without the superhero genre evolving from this remarkable character it could be argued persuasively that comic books might not have reached that fissionably sustainable level of popularity which results in long term success in the magazine publishing industry.

 

I mentioned in another post about The Shadow being published twice monthly for quite awhile in the 1930's. Well, in comics it was Captain Marvel. For awhile this superhero was so popular that it justified bi-weekly publication! That's phenomenal. How many other comic book titles, regardless of genre, were doing that at any time along the comic continuum?

 

Without the superhero we wouldn't have had the popular animated cartoons, radio programs and syndicated strips, nor the serials, television series and eventually big-budget motion pictures. All of these things helped fuel the interest in comics and vice versa, allowing comic books to remain financially solvent and branch out during times when sales of one genre or another dipped.

 

My point is that costumed heroes are integral to the success of comics, not that other types of comics didn't arise as the genre evolved and expanded to reach new markets. As I stated, comic book success is cyclical due to a constantly aging demographic with broad tastes and interests. What is popular is the current trend. The same is true in genre marketing of books today.

 

One final point here. Imagine this: Without Superman, there would've been no Captain America, no Spiderman, no Spirit section, no Sandman (vintage or modern), no *spooning* Tick to parody the genre! Comic books might've gone the way of BLBs and pulps.

Regardless of sales and marketing trends, the long-underwear guys still rule!

 

The bottom line: Enormous popularity of other non-hero comics notwithstanding, I'm not persuaded that the comic book industry would've succeeded, much less become as popular as it has periodically (pun intended) without the superhero. My 10c[/font]

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob what is the 450 BCE example? Do you have an image? It sounds pretty cool.

 

Boot, in answer to your question, yes I can read the the translation and follow along more or less, but only because I've taken a number of graduate level classes on Egyptian religion, language, art, and history as well as considerable independent research (my MA thesis was on the cult of Isis in the Roman Empire). It's not really a straightforward prose-style narrative, though it does describe the journey of the deceased (in this case the scribe Ani) through the afterlife. This is depicted with a sequence of scenes or vignettes, so it is sequential art. But it also includes spells and incantations that Ani must say at certain stages in the process.

 

I would have to go in to the Plat list archives, type in some key word search trips, re-find the 450 AD word balloon example(s) some one posted there about a decade ago now, then post. Will try to get to it next day or so.

 

The examples were drawn on a wall dating to late Roman Empire period. The words were there with lines drawn around them with a pointed end pointing at who ever was speaking. The wheel is constantly re-invented, what is "new" is most always quite old, is how I see most "innovations" some generations seek to present.

 

Anyway, the comic strip comic books have been around a ga-zillion years now. Obadiah Oldbuck remains more important than Superman. A collector dealer friend pointed out to me last night that I think he said it was on a recent Comic Connect auction which had a Flash Comics #1 sell for approx $70K that a number of Silver Age comics sold for more. The price of some thing has zero to do with its "importance" as an aercheological artifact. But that is all in the eye of the beholder and what one might deem "important" - just an opine from this dinosaur comic book dealer collector working in a hobby which got way out of hand a very long time ago now.

 

 

Ah, AD, not BC. I missread. I'll see if I can track it down.

 

 

Bob, on your second paragraph, I would very much agree that a higher monetary value does not necessarily equate with greater historical significance. I would also suggest, however, that being older or even first does not necessarily equate with greater historical significance either.

 

So I would disagree with your statement that OO is more "important" than Superman, simply because Superman has had a far greater impact on popular culture than OO.

 

OO is important and much more important than the character has been given credit for. And you should be given credit for bringing attention to that importance. But that importance is not due to one American bootleg version in 1842, but rather to the fact that it was one of Töpffer's more important comic strip works and due to his influence on the later European comic strip artists like Wilhelm Busch. You can trace a direct line from Töpffer to the Katzenjammer Kids, so there is no doubt he was an important pioneer. But to say OO is more historical significant than Superman is really over-reaching.

 

Obadiah Oldbuck remains more important than Superman.

 

After seven years, you've got to admire his dedication to his position, as untenable as it is.

 

and showcase4 is already gutted; no $ need to hew that line any longer.

 

as annoying as this whole debate is and as unlikely (frankly Bob) as it was that you were a "reluctant dragon in this passion play" (50k tends to erase reluctance) who cares if Steve paid too much or didn't pay too much. It happens every day, we are all big boys and it is upon us to know and understand what we are buying. As long as Bob didn't lie about what it was he was selling, overpaying is Steve's problem alone and Bob got a nice sale. Even if Bob convinced it was Steve that OO was the first american comic book, well maybe it is, maybe it isn't, that's the subject of debate and it was on Steve to satisfy himself on that front.

 

As long as he was honest I say good for Bob on a nice sale.

 

There is zero doubt after some 15 years of intensive research by a host of interested souls that The Adventures of Obadiah Oldbuck was is and will always be the "first" American published comic book.

 

It is NOT the "first" comic book "published" - that honor falls to Topffer himself in the 1830s over in Geneva, Switzerland, where the Swiss have long had an entire museum dedicated to Rodolphe Topffer which I one day wish to pay a visit. The original art to his comic strip books still exists and one can see it there, so I am told by euro friends who have been to it.

 

ALL the heavy lifitng of making a proper time line resides in Comic Art #3 published in 2003 a decade ago now which I now publicly IMPLORE publisher Tod Hignite to REPRINT so as those of you reading here, as well as other potential persons interested in such mundane matters, may satisfy for themselves as to the impact Topffer's sequential comic art books had on the world of comic books beginning in as many as six countries just in the 1830s and 1840s alone.

 

Not just here in the USA. Americans need to get such petty nationalistic fervor out of their systems once and for all. I can write those words because I used to resemble that remark myself until irrefutable proof hit my over the head.

 

Regarding Steve Myer and his 2005 Oldbuck offers, he came at me unrelenting for some months as I kept telling him back then I did not want to sell my Oldbuck treasures. He told me back then he also paid $20K to a southern Calif collector for that guy's copy as well. I would have to research very old emails to figure out who that guy was. That collector was on the Plat list for a long time.

 

Steve told me at the time of these purchases one seemed to have to make a "big buy" splash to get noticed in the vintage funny book mercantiling marketng world. Seems million dollar sales stirred up some interest a couple years ago as well, last i checked.

 

Steve also was "hot" then buying up ie overpaying for the reputed "rarest" Big Little Book which is listed in OPG as one of the Mickey Mouse Mail Pilot variants.

 

Steve told me he had tons of spare cash to invest that year 2005 as he had made half a million dollars in "extra" bonus money being #3 guy then in Wells Fargo Bank's real estate division.

 

I took all those bucks and spent it all buying up a host of original early comics artifacts to further my reserch efforts. I had nothing left to learn from owning 1842 oldbucks and have always planned to acquire one again down the road, but then the hip joints "blew out" summer of 2006 at the Chicago Wizard show changing my life style completely, possibly forever, but am working hard these days of daZe to pull out of that nose dive.

 

Steve only sold out soon thereafter when the real estate concept took a nose dive some may have noticed soon thereafter which caught him more than very short as his world collapsed as he then knew it. I felt badly for him at the time. Then again, he was not alone in losing out then big time in that field of finance.

[BangZoom]

I mentioned in another post about The Shadow being published twice monthly for quite awhile in the 1930's.

 

 

Just to put that fact into perspective tho, it should be noted that many other pulps of different genres were being published more frequently than any of the hero pulps.

 

Argosy, Detective Fiction Weekly, Love Story Magazine, and Western Story Magazine were all published weekly. There are many other examples but those titles come immediately to mind.

[Bronty]

A) yes there is doubt; it all depemds on how you define comic book - its the blanket statements like this that pizz people off

B) you dont need to justify the OO sale, he wanted them, you sold them, I would have done the same, shame he los money afterwards

C) see what I did here? A post under 1000 words?

[BLBcomics-migration]

No one is "forced" to read what eve I post in this thread. If they get to be a bit lengthy, well, there is a lot of ground to cover and am not a Sound Byte slogan kind of researcher. This is serious stuff being covered, and I surely did not mean to re-discover that 1842 Oldbuck, but it is what it is.

 

The only thing truly "different" from the 1842 Oldbuck and a Famous Funnies type of comic book is staples had not yet been invented.

 

And, yes, it is a shame he lost money caught up as he was in the real estate implosion vortex which consumed a lot of souls. Me, i ponder to whom those seven figure purchase guys are going to sell their Action #1, Tec 27 and now AF #15 "investments" to in order to make "profit" - same potential scenario in slow motion

[MrBedrock]

No one is "forced" to read what eve I post in this thread.

(thumbs u And you aren't "forced" to read anyone's responses. Have fun!

[BLBcomics-migration]

No one is "forced" to read what eve I post in this thread.

(thumbs u And you aren't "forced" to read anyone's responses. Have fun!

 

expanding the consciousness of some of the hard heads in this crowd is "fun" to be sure, especially those who "think" they know, yet, choose to remain severely under-educated in proper comics history. Must have been doing some thing right to be re-invited back every year in to OPG for some 15+ years teaching this stuff. Hard Heads Die Hard, wot?

[Bronty]

Wow, nothing as crowd pleasing as calling everyone stupid (and/or uneducated) Nicely done Bob. I guess you calling everyone stupid several times on this thread makes you smart. Me derr I caant tink so guud

[Cat-Man_America]

I mentioned in another post about The Shadow being published twice monthly for quite awhile in the 1930's.

 

 

Just to put that fact into perspective tho, it should be noted that many other pulps of different genres were being published more frequently than any of the hero pulps.

 

Argosy, Detective Fiction Weekly, Love Story Magazine, and Western Story Magazine were all published weekly. There are many other examples but those titles come immediately to mind.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's a valid point. However, each title you've mentioned is an anthology publication devoted to a specific genre of fiction (adventure, detective, romance, western), not a solo character.

 

In comic books, can you think of any similar examples of weekly or even bi-weekly anthologies? [/font]

[Straw-Man]

Wow, nothing as crowd pleasing as calling everyone stupid (and/or uneducated) Nicely done Bob. I guess you calling everyone stupid several times on this thread makes you smart. Me derr I caant tink so guud

 

 

he needs to sell some of those over-graded, over-priced museum-quality books of his, cull out a little of the money that's earmarked for medical expenses, and get in a dale carnegie course or two.

[MrBedrock]

Wow, nothing as crowd pleasing as calling everyone stupid (and/or uneducated) Nicely done Bob. I guess you calling everyone stupid several times on this thread makes you smart. Me derr I caant tink so guud

I wouldn't know. I choose not to read 'em.

[Cat-Man_America]

No one is "forced" to read what eve I post in this thread.

(thumbs u And you aren't "forced" to read anyone's responses. Have fun!

 

expanding the consciousness of some of the hard heads in this crowd is "fun" to be sure, especially those who "think" they know, yet, choose to remain severely under-educated in proper comics history. Must have been doing some thing right to be re-invited back every year in to OPG for some 15+ years teaching this stuff. Hard Heads Die Hard, wot?

 

[font:Times New Roman]Is that what is meant by grandfathering-in?

 

I've seen that word used in grading policy threads over in General.[/font]

 

 

 

v

v

v

v

v

v

[Straw-Man]

he needs to stop trumpeting that consecutive-years invitation from o'street thing; hell, don't they invite g.a.tor back year after year, as well???

[Bronty]

[BangZoom]

I mentioned in another post about The Shadow being published twice monthly for quite awhile in the 1930's.

 

 

Just to put that fact into perspective tho, it should be noted that many other pulps of different genres were being published more frequently than any of the hero pulps.

 

Argosy, Detective Fiction Weekly, Love Story Magazine, and Western Story Magazine were all published weekly. There are many other examples but those titles come immediately to mind.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's a valid point. However, each title you've mentioned is an anthology publication devoted to a specific genre of fiction (adventure, detective, romance, western), not a solo character.

 

In comic books, can you think of any similar examples of weekly or even bi-weekly anthologies? [/font]

 

No, but I wasn't talking about comics.

 

I just wanted to make a point about the breadth of tastes among the pulp readership.

[MrBedrock]

he needs to stop trumpeting that consecutve-years invitation from o'street thing; hell, don't they invite g.a.tor back year after year, as well???

[BLBcomics-migration]

Wow, nothing as crowd pleasing as calling everyone stupid (and/or uneducated) Nicely done Bob. I guess you calling everyone stupid several times on this thread makes you smart. Me derr I caant tink so guud

 

under-uneducated is NOT calling some one "stupid"

- I do not believe i have called any one "stupid"

- unfair to alter one's exact words, but tis OK. It is what it is.

 

Stupid is when some one refuses to accept documented proof once said proof is established by the "peer" review it underwent from a consortium of world class comics history experts. There are very few such "experts" in slab land here,

 

Read what is contained in Comic Art #3 published by Todd Hignite in 2003 and then get back with me.

 

"Under-educated" is what I stipulate once I realized vistually no one here has that issue, or even seemed to know of its existence.

 

Under-educated is what one might describe not getting past 8th grade.

 

Stupid is believing the planet earth is less than 10,000 years old and dinosaurs roamed the planet same time with humans cuz supposedly the bible sez so

[sacentaur]

Wow, nothing as crowd pleasing as calling everyone stupid (and/or uneducated) Nicely done Bob. I guess you calling everyone stupid several times on this thread makes you smart. Me derr I caant tink so guud

 

he needs to sell some of those over-graded, over-priced museum-quality books of his, cull out a little of the money that's earmarked for medical expenses, and get in a dale carnegie course or two.

 

You forgot the part about the funding necessary to bring this unbiased and magnificent research (i.e., keep telling the myths enough times and people will start to believe them) to our fingertips.

 

There's really nothing quite as pathetic as someone who actually believes that they are entitled to other peoples' money, and who will use any method necessary to get it.

[comicdonna]

under-uneducated is NOT calling some one "stupid"

- I do not believe i have called any one "stupid"

- unfair to alter one's exact words, but tis OK. It is what it is.

 

Stupid is when some one refuses to accept documented proof once said proof is established by the "peer" review it underwent from a consortium of world class comics history experts. There are very few such "experts" in slab land here,

 

Read what is contained in Comic Art #3 published by Todd Hignite in 2003 and then get back with me.

 

"Under-educated" is what I stipulate once I realized vistually no one here has that issue, or even seemed to know of its existence.

 

Under-educated is what one might describe not getting past 8th grade.

 

Stupid is believing the planet earth is less than 10,000 years old and dinosaurs roamed the planet same time with humans cuz supposedly the bible sez so

I figure it will take me quite some time to desifer this post.

[Timely]

under-uneducated is NOT calling some one "stupid"

- I do not believe i have called any one "stupid"

- unfair to alter one's exact words, but tis OK. It is what it is.

 

Stupid is when some one refuses to accept documented proof once said proof is established by the "peer" review it underwent from a consortium of world class comics history experts. There are very few such "experts" in slab land here,

 

Read what is contained in Comic Art #3 published by Todd Hignite in 2003 and then get back with me.

 

"Under-educated" is what I stipulate once I realized vistually no one here has that issue, or even seemed to know of its existence.

 

Under-educated is what one might describe not getting past 8th grade.

 

Stupid is believing the planet earth is less than 10,000 years old and dinosaurs roamed the planet same time with humans cuz supposedly the bible sez so

I figure it will take me quite some time to desifer this post.

 

Mama always says, "Stupid is as stupid does."