Definition of First Cover Appearance of a Character

[TomG]

We know as collectors and fans there is always debate on topics like the first appearance of a character. What would you consider the first cover appearance of a character?

 

According to the glossary of The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide a first appearance or debut of a character is "the first time a character appears anywhere".

 

Historically if a character who's debut didn't feature them on the cover of a comic it would create a situation where the character's first cover appearance would be significant collectors and fans.

 

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

[chrisco37]

Like TTA #27 and #35?

 

Everyone knows that #27 was the first Antman, but he first appears in costume on the cover of #35.

 

 

 

Or Hulk #180 and 181.

 

Or FF#48 and 49.

 

[TomG]

Hey Chris,

What do you think of this example?

 

The newest edition of The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide notes that Jackpot Comics #4 12/41 as having a small circle featuring Archie on it and that the first full cover appearance of Archie as Pep Comic #36 2/43. If we believe in "first cover appearances" should Jackpot Comics #4 and not Pep Comics #36 be the first cover appearance of Archie? I agree that the cover of Pep Comics #36 is a full cover image, but it can't be a first... Also, the guide's claiming the images as being a small circle isn't accurate.

 

A small image would be Superman's image found on the cover of New York World's Fair 1939. As seen below.

 

Thoughts?

 

[/img]

 

 

 

 

 

[Hado]

First cover cameo? :shrug:

[Speedy-D]

We know as collectors and fans there is always debate on topics like the first appearance of a character. What would you consider the first cover appearance of a character?

 

According to the glossary of The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide a first appearance or debut of a character is "the first time a character appears anywhere".

 

Historically if a character who's debut didn't feature them on the cover of a comic it would create a situation where the character's first cover appearance would be significant collectors and fans.

 

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

Bold, BOLD thinking there. I'm not yet ready to weigh into this minefield.

[slym2none]

We know as collectors and fans there is always debate on topics like the first appearance of a character. What would you consider the first cover appearance of a character?

 

According to the glossary of The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide a first appearance or debut of a character is "the first time a character appears anywhere".

 

Historically if a character who's debut didn't feature them on the cover of a comic it would create a situation where the character's first cover appearance would be significant collectors and fans.

 

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

Bold, BOLD thinking there. I'm not yet ready to weigh into this minefield.

 

 

...

 

 

.......

 

 

 

 

-slym

[valiantman]

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

Two interesting situations that, if they can be solved, might clear up the whole question.

 

One is the Jackpot #4 situation.

It's Archie, it even has his name and "new feature",

but he's not the focus of the cover, and Overstreet credits Pep #36 instead.

 

The other situation is Doomsday.

Man of Steel #18 shows Doomsday as a full figure and the focus of the cover,

but he is completely wrapped in cloth/goggles/bindings.

We can't actually see Doomsday... he's essentially behind a body-shaped curtain.

 

If BOTH of these situations ARE the first cover appearance of a character,

then it might solve every other debatable situation where there's

only a small or totally-obscured appearance.

[miraclemet]

Conan 23 (1st Red Sonja)

Conan 24 (1st Full Red Sonja, and 1st cover)

 

24 gets the bigger bucks...

[HeroX]

One that comes to mind for me is:

 

X-Men 49, first appearance Lorna Dane (later Polaris)

X-Men 50, first Lorna Dane in costume and presenting super powers, also first time on cover

 

I think 50 is the better book for that character even though it's not her first appearance. And, she doesn't go by Polaris until X-Men 97!

[TomG]

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

Two interesting situations that, if they can be solved, might clear up the whole question.

 

One is the Jackpot #4 situation.

It's Archie, it even has his name and "new feature",

but he's not the focus of the cover, and Overstreet credits Pep #36 instead.

 

The other situation is Doomsday.

Man of Steel #18 shows Doomsday as a full figure and the focus of the cover,

but he is completely wrapped in cloth/goggles/bindings.

We can't actually see Doomsday... he's essentially behind a body-shaped curtain.

 

If BOTH of these situations ARE the first cover appearance of a character,

then it might solve every other debatable situation where there's

only a small or totally-obscured appearance.

 

The Jackpot #4 cover clearly shows and states Archie is in the issue which was released the same month as Pep Comics #22. While he may not be the focus of the cover he is on the cover and it is his "first" cover appearance. Pep Comics #36 the focus of the cover is Archie and I have no concern with it be his first "full cover appearance", but it is truly splitting hairs that the guide has done in several examples over the years. A first is a first regardless of the market value or what we as fans or collectors determine to be more significant.

 

In regards to Man of Steel #18, it is somewhat similar to FF #66 and FF #67 in regards to Warlock. My point it not regarding value, but the usage of the word first and the definitions by which The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide uses them. Jackpot #4 clearly is the first cover appearance of Archie. It is up to the marketplace to decide on the value of Jackpot Comics #4 vs Pep Comics #36. I do think the Guide should at least correctly identify the historic notes properly for these books and for collectors who use it.

[Lazyboy]

Jackpot 4 is Archie's first cover appearance.

 

Jackpot 4 is not the first Archie cover.

 

[Ares]

Is this the Cameo vs First Apprerance argument

[143ksk]

Jackpot 4 is Archie's first cover appearance.

 

Jackpot 4 is not the first Archie cover.

 

Works for me

[143ksk]

I would believe that the first cover appearance of a character would be defined as the first time a specific character initially appeared on a comic book cover for the first time ever. Thoughts?

Two interesting situations that, if they can be solved, might clear up the whole question.

 

One is the Jackpot #4 situation.

It's Archie, it even has his name and "new feature",

but he's not the focus of the cover, and Overstreet credits Pep #36 instead.

 

The other situation is Doomsday.

Man of Steel #18 shows Doomsday as a full figure and the focus of the cover,

but he is completely wrapped in cloth/goggles/bindings.

We can't actually see Doomsday... he's essentially behind a body-shaped curtain.

 

If BOTH of these situations ARE the first cover appearance of a character,

then it might solve every other debatable situation where there's

only a small or totally-obscured appearance.

 

The Jackpot #4 cover clearly shows and states Archie is in the issue which was released the same month as Pep Comics #22.

 

Arrival date analysis has shown that Jackpot 4 came out more or less contemporaneously with Pep 24, not Pep 22. Overstreet and CGC have it wrong...

[wizardseye311]

One that comes to mind for me is:

 

X-Men 49, first appearance Lorna Dane (later Polaris)

X-Men 50, first Lorna Dane in costume and presenting super powers, also first time on cover

 

I think 50 is the better book for that character even though it's not her first appearance. And, she doesn't go by Polaris until X-Men 97!

 

 

X-Men #50

[chrisco37]

Hey Tom...I was half goofing on my response (there's a big TTA#27 vs #35 discussion over in Sliver).

 

If Jackpot came out before Pep, than I'd say that's the first cover appearance. I haven't read it, but it looks like there's an Archie story within.

 

As someone else said, it's the same full-appearance vs "cameo" argument.

 

As for desirability, I'm sure the content of the cover app is what is important. Using something much more recent, ASM #315 really isn't a Venom cover the way that #316 is. You get a little headshot, but I wouldn't really call it a "venom cover".

 

 

[HeroX]

One that comes to mind for me is:

 

X-Men 49, first appearance Lorna Dane (later Polaris)

X-Men 50, first Lorna Dane in costume and presenting super powers, also first time on cover

 

I think 50 is the better book for that character even though it's not her first appearance. And, she doesn't go by Polaris until X-Men 97!

 

 

X-Men #50

 

Definitely. One of my favorite covers.

[comicwiz]

Hey Tom...I was half goofing on my response (there's a big TTA#27 vs #35 discussion over in Sliver).

 

If Jackpot came out before Pep, than I'd say that's the first cover appearance. I haven't read it, but it looks like there's an Archie story within.

 

As someone else said, it's the same full-appearance vs "cameo" argument.

 

As for desirability, I'm sure the content of the cover app is what is important. Using something much more recent, ASM #315 really isn't a Venom cover the way that #316 is. You get a little headshot, but I wouldn't really call it a "venom cover".

 

 

 

I get this kind of thinking (and Lazyboy's/143ksk's comparison between cover appearance and full cover). It's debatable whether a caption box/marquee is an attention grabbing way to pull in readers, or whether a full cover appearance is what better defines a characters first cover appearance.

 

As a comparable outside of the comic hobby, "offers" on carded figures, whose primary function is to promote a new character (appearing as either an artist rendition, or photograph of first shot/prototype) and which might find itself falling into a discussion of chronologically pinpointing when that characters name first appeared, historically tend to garner less attention and interest (as well as value) when compared to when the character first appeared as a carded/boxed toy.

 

Keeping with the comic hobby, ASM 252, MTU 141 and PPSP 90 all share the claim of first Spider-Man black costume, even though trailing not too far behind in the discussion are SW 8 and Marvel Age 12. If preference were a factor in settling the debate on which book is the flagship cover appearance, I'd say ASM 252 fits the true first appearance claim best.

 

Understanding TomG's opinion of consistency, I think when we look at the Jackpot #4 example, the takeaway for me is that even if Overstreet might not have done the proper hair-splitting to determine which book made it past the post first, what's important to take into account is that most collectors who have taken up the task of collecting "first" Archie's would make it one of the must issues to own. And yet, Jackpot 4 has always in my mind been a later appearance (the claims I recall where that it was tied with Pep 24, which I see 143ksk has claimed in this thread already).

[dgarthwaite-migration]

I think the first cover appearance should be defined as the 3rd time a character appears on a cover.

 

DG

[wizardseye311]

One that comes to mind for me is:

 

X-Men 49, first appearance Lorna Dane (later Polaris)

X-Men 50, first Lorna Dane in costume and presenting super powers, also first time on cover

 

I think 50 is the better book for that character even though it's not her first appearance. And, she doesn't go by Polaris until X-Men 97!

 

 

X-Men #50

 

Definitely. One of my favorite covers.

 

 

 

Yes, full of Steranko goodness. Love his Shanna covers too. Back to the topic though, how about FF #45 and #46? First Inhumans vs. first Black Bolt cover. I always thought #46 had the better cover. Same with #48 and #49 with Silver Surfer. #49 blows away #48 as far as cover design goes to me.