Suggestions for Overstreet #35

[*paull*]

What is the criteria for a "classic cover"? There are a number of books with what most people would consider to be "classic covers" and not only are they not specified as such in Guide, but in some cases, aren't even broken out value wise, yet they are the most sought-after issues in the run and are priced higher than others in the run.

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

A lot of these kinds of things were broken out and established by Bob many moons ago, and although there are many more such distinctions that should be made, time and manpower require that such changes be made when brought to our attention or when we can devote some extra time to evaluating them, which is why many bits of info of that sort remain as they have been for years. As I've said before, the book is a constantly evolving historical reference and it's only with time and the patience and input of readers that we can continue to refine it and make it more accurate with every edition.

 

It ain't as easy as it looks .

 

Arnold

[*paull*]

I value the work that is put into the guide, but there are still many oversights. One of my problems with the guide is that no raw Golden Age books should be selling for 2x-3x guide. If they are, someone isn't doing enough research. I could give numerous examples of books that I couldn't find for anything less than multiples of guide, and even dealers that said they didn't have these books for sale told me that they would charge the same.

 

I can't help but laugh when I look at some of these guide values. I'll give you one as an example: Weird Mysteries #5, which is quite possibly the most recognizable and desirable pre-code horror cover, not some obscure unknown book that no one understands the importance of. I spent months looking for this book, and the copies I saw were WAY over guide. Two of them had amateur restoration and were STILL 2x guide. This book is listed as $216 in VG and $675 in VF. I would buy every single copy that I could get my hands on at those prices, and probably more. I could easily see a raw VF copy of this book selling for $2000.

 

I consider the non-EC pre-code keys (WM #5, Horrific #3, Mister Mystery #12, etc.) to be seriously undervalued in the guide. There simply is no supply of these books on the market. They sell for crazy prices when they are available.

[Forbush-Man]

How about an Arabic edition? Maybe ancient Sand -script? Greek would be cool too, you know, for the high-brow collector?

 

Bow down before the Dancing Banana!

 

[PovertyRow]

It *is* in all the books multiple times, but here it is for convenience's sake:

 

Thank you for your response with a touch a sarcastic chastisement added. It is most appreciated. Since I DID write to that address last year I thought it would be good to get a confirmation.

 

I apologize if I have put you out with redundancy.

 

Weird thing though. I posted a fairly lengthy post about the whole horror, supernatural, weird thing and you didn;t even reply to it. But I will make a more learned and less emotional appeal in a letter.

 

There is definite precedence set for, for example, FRANKENSTEIN being not Horror but Sci-Fi.

 

However, my dear fellow - there is one quesiton that I genuinely would like an answer to:

 

Who is it that makes the definition of horror, supernatural and weird?

 

I thank you!

 

 

::typo edit - I messed up "thank"

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

I like to add a healthy dose of sarcasm to everything I do. But you're welcome, seriously.

 

And I *did* reply to that whole horror etc. thing by saying that those distinctions go waaay back before me and ultimately come down to Bob making his decisions, so there's really nothing I can offer about that topic.

 

But personally, although I agree with that there are elements in Frankenstein and the tale of Jekyll and Hyde that certainly have science about them, I can't imagine many people saying that they think those are science fiction stories as opposed to horror stories. Those have been classics of the horror genre for a very long time, science elements or no. But I can see what you mean.

[Aman619]

How about an Arabic edition? Maybe ancient Sand -script? Greek would be cool too, you know, for the high-brow collector?

 

Bow down before the Dancing Banana!

 

 

unless youre talking about the little robed people in STAR WARS I think its sanscrit youre talking about!!

[Forbush-Man]

How about an Arabic edition? Maybe ancient Sand -script? Greek would be cool too, you know, for the high-brow collector?

 

Bow down before the Dancing Banana!

 

 

unless youre talking about the little robed people in STAR WARS I think its sanscrit youre talking about!!

 

Why, yes, I was,.........not really.

[PovertyRow]

But personally, although I agree with that there are elements in Frankenstein and the tale of Jekyll and Hyde that certainly have science about them, I can't imagine many people saying that they think those are science fiction stories as opposed to horror stories. Those have been classics of the horror genre for a very long time, science elements or no. But I can see what you mean.

 

Actually they, along with stories like The Invisible Man, have been lumped into the horror genre by generalists, so to speak.

 

In point of fact, Shelley's Frankenstein is actually considered to be the first science fiction novel. In the film world, those who are actually writing genre will usually put these works into the science fiction category. Take the excellent and very extensive Overlook Film Encyclopedia. They have a volume dedicated to Horror and a volume dedicated to Science Ficiton. So where do you find Frankenstein, Invisible Man, Dr. Jekyll? In the Science Fiction volume.

 

Arnold, knowing you are the film buff I know you to be, I am betting you have a copy of the Overlook books. Page xi of the 3rd ed of the Science Fiction volume actually goes into some detail on the difference between the two genres, contrasting the 1931 DRACULA with the 1931 FRANKENSTEIN and citing the reasons for the former to be horror and the latter sci-fi. That is just one example. There are many others, which I will incorporate into my letter to your fine publication!

 

The real crux? I don't care what the "popular" opinion is. I think, in a book like the OSPG, an accurate assessment based not on what most people think. but on objective facts and analysis, should be what comprises the definition of a genre.

[Forbush-Man]

But personally, although I agree with that there are elements in Frankenstein and the tale of Jekyll and Hyde that certainly have science about them, I can't imagine many people saying that they think those are science fiction stories as opposed to horror stories. Those have been classics of the horror genre for a very long time, science elements or no. But I can see what you mean.

 

Actually they, along with stories like The Invisible Man, have been lumped into the horror genre by generalists, so to speak.

 

In point of fact, Shelley's Frankenstein is actually considered to be the first science fiction novel. In the film world, those who are actually writing genre will usually put these works into the science fiction category. Take the excellent and very extensive Overlook Film Encyclopedia. They have a volume dedicated to Horror and a volume dedicated to Science Ficiton. So where do you find Frankenstein, Invisible Man, Dr. Jekyll? In the Science Fiction volume.

 

Arnold, knowing you are the film buff I know you to be, I am betting you have a copy of the Overlook books. Page xi of the 3rd ed of the Science Fiction volume actually goes into some detail on the difference between the two genres, contrasting the 1931 DRACULA with the 1931 FRANKENSTEIN and citing the reasons for the former to be horror and the latter sci-fi. That is just one example. There are many others, which I will incorporate into my letter to your fine publication!

 

The real crux? I don't care what the "popular" opinion is. I think, in a book like the OSPG, an accurate assessment based not on what most people think. but on objective facts and analysis, should be what comprises the definition of a genre.

 

Arnold,

POV's got a point there (but it doesn't show because of the way he combs his hair)!

 

But he's spot on!

[PovertyRow]

POV's got a point there (but it doesn't show because of the way he combs his hair)!

 

Hair? Moi?

[Forbush-Man]

POV's got a point there (but it doesn't show because of the way he combs his hair)!

 

Hair? Moi?

 

Poverty's Rows Hair Salon: "Home of the "Comb-Over" for over 25 years!"

 

[PovertyRow]

POV's got a point there (but it doesn't show because of the way he combs his hair)!

 

Hair? Moi?

 

Poverty's Rows Hair Salon: "Home of the "Comb-Over" for over 25 years!"

 

 

Our new slogan: "Don't be a Hold-Over! Have a Comb-Over Sleep-Over!!!"

[Forbush-Man]

POV's got a point there (but it doesn't show because of the way he combs his hair)!

 

Hair? Moi?

 

Poverty's Rows Hair Salon: "Home of the "Comb-Over" for over 25 years!"

 

 

Our new slogan: "Don't be a Hold-Over! Have a Comb-Over Sleep-Over!!!"

 

[sterlingcomics]

I'm honestly not sure but I think there may be some specific reasons why they aren't included in the electronic version. I just don't know what the story is *shrug*.

 

Arnold

 

Do you know who would know the story?

 

Here's a dancing banana for you while you are pondering...

BTW, did I ever tell you that you are my #1 fan?

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

Oh absolutely, and like I said, I'm not disputing it. I *am* in fact talking about the popular opinion, so if we're eschewing that, then yes I'd have to say you're right on this one. I did my undergrad English Honors thesis on American fears about technological progress and dehumanization as reflected in literary and media depictions of the robot in science fiction. Naturally the first major novel and film I used was FRANKENSTEIN. So I gotcha.

[PovertyRow]

Oh absolutely, and like I said, I'm not disputing it. I *am* in fact talking about the popular opinion, so if we're eschewing that, then yes I'd have to say you're right on this one. I did my undergrad English Honors thesis on American fears about technological progress and dehumanization as reflected in literary and media depictions of the robot in science fiction. Naturally the first major novel and film I used was FRANKENSTEIN. So I gotcha.

 

Thank you, Arnold. I am, in fact, eschewing the popular opinion in favor of OSPG being a more definitive work! (BTW - did you use METROPOLIS in your thesis? Sounds ideal! And perhaps THE GHOLEM may have offered a more horror-related slant as well (being rooted in the non-scientific)?

 

I never went to college so tend to lack the more formal training and focus the college environment can offer. But I HAVE read a ton and watched a ton and thought a ton and written a ton!

 

I doubt my letter to OSPG will make it in time for this year, considering the lead time required for such a book. But I have hopes for the following issue! And that letter will be more factual and a bit less emotional than my previous missive!

 

Sorry for the missive type speak - been having a Fox/Universal marathon watching session of the Rathbone/Bruce Holmes films. They put one in a kind of mood! Oh Arnold! The needle!

[*paull*]

Arnold, I hope that the suggestions on this thread are taken into account. If only written letters are considered, I will write one.

[shadroch]

A similar thread last year brought some results. Some but not all of the suggestions and correctionswere incorperated into the new edition.

[Forbush-Man]

A similar thread last year brought some results. Some but not all of the suggestions and correctionswere incorperated into the new edition.

 

Well, if they just change Eerrie # 1 to first Horror Comics, I'll be satisfied!