TTA 35 vs TTA 27

[Bronty]

Shadroch, "The Return of the Ant-man" on the cover is irrelevant to those advocating for 35. But the fact that "The Man in the Ant Hill" is on the cover of 27 rather than Ant-Man, is material (to the "35ers").

 

Who said its the cover? I only hear "27ers" talking about the covers.

 

"the Man in the Ant Hill" isn't just a cover blurb. Its the title of the entire story.

 

 

Now, "Return of the Ant Man" is also the title of #35, so maybe its all irrelevant & cancels each other out, but the bottom line is the guy above ^ is only somewhat like the guy below. Just reflect on the 2 pages visually for a moment. The first guy is running for his life. The second guy is calm, in control, heroic.

 

The first guy is a very minor part of the splash to emphasize the danger he is in, the extent of the threat. The ant immediately behind him is about to strike. He's a regular joe in regular joe clothes.

 

The 2nd guy takes up way more real estate on the splash. He's got the costume, the helmet, he's in control. The ants are his friends & allies now. They pose no danger.

 

The subject matter is essentially the same (pym/ant-man running out of an ant-hill, followed/chased by ants) but the tone of the image couldn't be more different, and it just looking at these splash pages alone should make it pretty clear that Pym was intended to have a complete re-set as of #35.

 

We have to take marvel's wording with a grain of salt - if not discredit it entirely - for the reasons brought up by the "27ers"... but note that the #35 splash reads that in a previous issue they brought to us the nightmarish story of Henry Pym. Not the story of Ant-Man. And that's accurate.

 

[Comicfollower101-migration]

That is a very good point Bronty, never noticed that about the splash page, another reason y 35 is the 1ST APP OF ANT-MAN

[Foxtrot70]

TTA 35 is the first App of Pym in a costume. TTA 27 is the origin story and it is on my radar. Used to own a copy eons ago. I love the cover and high five Stan for approving its publication. All this talk has got me thinking... hmm raise cash for immediate gratification... what can I sell?

 

[MrBedrock]

This discussion is very similar to that concerning Our Army at War 81, 83 and the first appearance of Sgt. Rock. It has basically come down to 81 has A Rock. 83 has THE Sgt. Rock. Both important. But which is more important to collectors?

 

 

[bronze johnny]

Bronty, you want to take "The Man in the Ant Hill" literally - it can't be Ant-Man but rather the Man in the Ant Hill. Nevertheless, you want to read your own interpretation into the meaning of "Return of the Antman"- it's not the Return of the Antman but rather, the return of ...a character? ...Hank Pym? Moreover, your now interpreting or perhaps reinterpreting Marvel's intent by what the company meant when they wrote "Return of the Antman." You "fault" Marvel for this. If you're going to take a textual interpretation of TTA 27, then I recommend you remain consistent when interpreting TTA 35. Don't fault Marvel Comics for taking the approach you want in order to satisfy the conclusion you want. Remember what I said in my prior post about selective interpretations.

 

Respectfully,

John

(a 27er who also loves 35- the better cover and 2nd app. of the Antman)

[AGGIEZ]

Issue 35 states- The Return of Ant-Man. Find me another first appearance that says its the return of the hero and I may reconsider. Until then Pym appears in 27, and returns in 35.

 

 

Nobody is debating that Pym appears in #27...the debate is that Ant-Man does not. Ant-Man first appears in #35.

 

 

Borrowing Richard's comments...It has basically come down to 27 has A man the size of an ant. 35 has THE Ant-Man. Both important.

[bronze johnny]

And it comes down to how you interpret what each means. If you're going to take a textual interpretation of The Man in the Ant Hill then it follows that the same approach should be applied to interpreting The Return of the Ant Man.

[Bronty]

Bronty, you want to take "The Man in the Ant Hill" literally - it can't be Ant-Man but rather the Man in the Ant Hill. Nevertheless, you want to read your own interpretation into the meaning of "Return of the Antman"- it's not the Return of the Antman but rather, the return of ...a character? ...Hank Pym? Moreover, your now interpreting or perhaps reinterpreting Marvel's intent by what the company meant when they wrote "Return of the Antman." You "fault" Marvel for this. If you're going to take a textual interpretation of TTA 27, then I recommend you remain consistent when interpreting TTA 35. Don't fault Marvel Comics for taking the approach you want in order to satisfy the conclusion you want. Remember what I said in my prior post about selective interpretations.

 

Respectfully,

John

(a 27er who also loves 35- the better cover and 2nd app. of the Antman)

 

Johnny, I get it, you're a 27er and that's fine. But don't misinterpret what I said. What I said is pretty clear. IMO you don't have the first appearance of a hero until he is in fact a hero, its not hard to understand and there is nothing inconsistent about my approach. He is simply not a hero in 27, he is, as we've said ad nauseum, a "mad scientist."

 

Heck you don't have the origin of the hero until you have the hero either. After all origin means beginning and at the end of 27 you don't have a hero yet. So it could certainly be argued that 27 is just an experience of Henry Pym's and that the actual origin of the hero is in 35 with the work and study that went into delving into the ant world, creating the keen helmet, etc.

 

That's too subtle a distinction to ever gain traction with the world at large, and some of you will probably unsuccessfully attack that logic, but its perfectly sound.

 

Anyways, as others have said, 27 is still an important book to the ant-man collector, but to me its just not the first appearance of anyone other than Henry Pym.

[Killgrave]

And it comes down to how you interpret what each means. If you're going to take a textual interpretation of The Man in the Ant Hill then it follows that the same approach should be applied to interpreting The Return of the Ant Man.

 

Doing so actually only serves to further support the 35ers argument that 'return of' is a Marvel error/oversight as the 27ers have pointed out you can't return from something that didn't exist.

 

Imagine how much easier it all would have been had it been accurately worded "The Return of Pym"

 

[Bronty]

ha! nice photoshop

[Bronty]

I just realized this is basically an abortion debate "27ers" believe you have life at the twinkle in Papa's eye with the conversation over dinner. 35ers think life begins months later. No wonder we are getting nowhere with this debate

[TheGeneral]

Is there a poll somewhere in this thread?

[Bronty]

No

[spidrvacc]

A poll would be cool.

[shadroch]

[qc.

 

That's too subtle a distinction to ever gain traction with the world at large, and some of you will probably unsuccessfully attack that logic, but its perfectly sound.

 

That sounds like a Dr Doom speech if i ever heard one.

" The rest of you lack the mental facilities to recognize the subtle differences I alone can see. The world will never recognize my genius, you poor sheep. collectors everywhere will put their money on TTa 27 never realizing that I have solved the equation."

Best of luck with that.

[AGGIEZ]

Ask and ye shall receive...

 

 

[oakman29]

[qc.

 

That's too subtle a distinction to ever gain traction with the world at large, and some of you will probably unsuccessfully attack that logic, but its perfectly sound.

 

That sounds like a Dr Doom speech if i ever heard one.

" The rest of you lack the mental facilities to recognize the subtle differences I alone can see. The world will never recognize my genius, you poor sheep. collectors everywhere will put their money on TTa 27 never realizing that I have solved the equation."

Best of luck with that.

 

Mental masturbation,bah bah!

[KirbyJack]

From the original post;

which one is the REAL first app of Ant man, which do u think is more collectible? And why?

 

Real 1st app. of Ant-Man - Tales To Astonish #35

More collectible - Tales To Astonish #27

 

Why?

I feel that Hank Pym, over the years, has become just as important as his Formicidae-loving alter ego, but mostly just because pre-hero Marvels absolutely rule.

 

 

[rjpb]

From the original post;

which one is the REAL first app of Ant man, which do u think is more collectible? And why?

 

Real 1st app. of Ant-Man - Tales To Astonish #35

More collectible - Tales To Astonish #27

 

Why?

I feel that Hank Pym, over the years, has become just as important as his Formicidae-loving alter ego, but mostly just because pre-hero Marvels absolutely rule.

 

 

Absent the recent hype over the anticipated movie, this has long been true. While Pym in his many costumed incarnations, was never able to sustain an ongoing series for very long, the man himself is a mainstay of the Marvel Universe ( largely due to longevity and his association with the Avengers). Probably the main reason TTA 35 wasn't considered of much importance for so long, while TTA 27 was always a "key", is that historically few really cared that much about the Ant-Man persona, as the character wasn't around much after the metamorphosis into Giant-Man, while Pym in one identity or another was.

[Bronty]

I can only speak for myself but I never felt that way. It was just never that popular a character and before the Internet and forums you really couldn't debate these points. Overstreet said it was 27 so it was 27 and that was as far as it went