2004 Original Art Acquisitioins

[DESTRO-migration]

------There are precious few comic covers that could ever have shot at trading at the 100k zone...jb's Planet Comics #1 cover being one of them, maybe two or three others. As for the rest of 'em, sorry, ya'll are dreaming bigtime------

 

Hari,...I too question whether this is sustainable or not,..I think it is. I was merely responding to listers like blowout who wrote the above,..and others who cite original art prices as 'ridiculous'.

[shrunkenhead]

Don't blame blowout, I wrote the above.

 

And no, I generally don't think art prices average out in the zone of the ridiculous. Except for anything you're trying to sell me.

[blowout]

------There are precious few comic covers that could ever have shot at trading at the 100k zone...jb's Planet Comics #1 cover being one of them, maybe two or three others. As for the rest of 'em, sorry, ya'll are dreaming bigtime------

 

Hari,...I too question whether this is sustainable or not,..I think it is. I was merely responding to listers like blowout who wrote the above,..and others who cite original art prices as 'ridiculous'.

 

Of course the term 'ridiculous' is relative, but I think it applies here when talking about the growth of the original art market.

You have stated that you believe many more collectors will switch from comic books to art, but I believe the current high prices will discourage that switch. The price gap between the two fields is just too great.

From a personal point of view, there is lots of art that I would love to own, but the high price levels mean that it is just not going to happen. So aside from picking up a few cheaper pages, I will not be switching hobbies.

[COI]

No offense taken....it's an interesting discussion.

 

If you don't think that other people see this as a weird or juvenile hobby, then you're simply choosing to ignore those reactions. For my part, I'm open about the hobby and try to explain my interest in it to all who would listen. And, I can tell you, I get more positive feedback about the art than I do about the books, that's for sure!!!

 

I'm not saying those kinds of reactions don't exist, nor do I care that they do. Everyone who knows I collect has either not reacted at all, or have actually found it quite interesting and ask questions. This goes for the women I've dated as well. But the fact is, if some people feel it's juvenile, it dosen't affect me. I personally don't feel the need to share my interests, or explain them to anyone. If someone is interested in something I do, I'm more than happy to fill them in, otherwise I'm content to keep my hobbies and interests to myself.

[heartened]

------There are precious few comic covers that could ever have shot at trading at the 100k zone...jb's Planet Comics #1 cover being one of them, maybe two or three others. As for the rest of 'em, sorry, ya'll are dreaming bigtime------

 

Hari,...I too question whether this is sustainable or not,..I think it is. I was merely responding to listers like blowout who wrote the above,..and others who cite original art prices as 'ridiculous'.

 

Of course the term 'ridiculous' is relative, but I think it applies here when talking about the growth of the original art market.

You have stated that you believe many more collectors will switch from comic books to art, but I believe the current high prices will discourage that switch. The price gap between the two fields is just too great.

From a personal point of view, there is lots of art that I would love to own, but the high price levels mean that it is just not going to happen. So aside from picking up a few cheaper pages, I will not be switching hobbies.

 

I think this is a fair assessment. If I were to enter the art market now, I'd be intimidated by the high prices and I certainly would not be able to get the covers or pieces that I really wanted. That will limit the number of people that will switch from books to art, of course.

 

However, there are many art examples that are priced within reach, especially the newer artists from the past 10 years. I would imagine that most people who make the switch will gravitate towards the more modern, and hence somewhat more affordable, art. One way to "afford" the more vintage art would be to sell the CGC books and reinvest (hope I don't get banned for saying that Selling some books definitely helped give my art collection a boost!

[THE_BEYONDER]

So aside from picking up a few cheaper pages, I will not be switching hobbies.

 

 

 

I just bought this....

 

 

Here's what it looked liked when it was published...

 

 

 

 

It begins....

[COI]

One way to "afford" the more vintage art would be to sell the CGC books and reinvest (hope I don't get banned for saying that

 

I KNEW you had an agenda.

[blowout]

Is that John Byrne's sig I can see at the bottom of the page...

[THE_BEYONDER]

Is that John Byrne's sig I can see at the bottom of the page...

 

This drawing by the great comic book artist John Byrne is totally unique. Back in 1978 when the two characters Iron Fist and Luke Cage joined together in a book drawn by John Byne, he did this artwork which was (to quote the note under the signature) "from an idea by Roger Stern with apologies to Don Martin." On the back, it says "Tho't you guys might like to 'preview' Marvel's newest super-team - John."

[blowout]

Is that John Byrne's sig I can see at the bottom of the page...

 

This drawing by the great comic book artist John Byrne is totally unique. Back in 1978 when the two characters Iron Fist and Luke Cage joined together in a book drawn by John Byne, he did this artwork which was (to quote the note under the signature) "from an idea by Roger Stern with apologies to Don Martin." On the back, it says "Tho't you guys might like to 'preview' Marvel's newest super-team - John."

 

Nice piece.

 

How much did you pick it up for?

[THE_BEYONDER]

How much did you pick it up for?

 

 

Same price as an X-MEN 108 in 9.6...

 

I'm also a huge Don Martin fan, so I just bid whatever I had left in my paypal account.

[blowout]

How much did you pick it up for?

 

 

Same price as an X-MEN 108 in 9.6...

 

I'm also a huge Don Martin fan, so I just bid whatever I had left in my paypal account.

 

Congrats on a nice pickup.

[comicartfan]

Also agreed. There are precious few comic covers that could ever have shot at trading at the 100k zone...jb's Planet Comics #1 cover being one of them, maybe two or three others. As for the rest of 'em, sorry, ya'll are dreaming bigtime. The art world OPENLY LAUGHS at original art comic-stuff, with a few exceptions...you'll sometimes see R. Crumb in the galleries, for example. Other times you'll see a "comic art" display but it's almost purely for novelty or kitch.

 

I'm not saying that's fair or right, just the way it is, and it ain't changing anytime soon. The "fine art" world is notoriously stubborn. So those of you who collect comic cover art and pride yourselves on being "less geeky," it totally ain't so.

 

Come on, man, I didn't say I was less geeky, nor did I say this hobby is geeky! I mentioned the perception that OTHERS have about us. Don't be so quick to be defensive.

 

 

I have to agree with Andrew and Hari about this. I have found that 99% of the people don't give me a second look when i talk about comics or art...especially being that i have three super hero tattoos. that opens up converstaion without me saying a word....and unlike some of the reactions that i have gotten on these boards about my tattoos (you guys know who you are !) , I usually get a very postive reaction, followed by : " i used to collect comics...." and when i am at work, where it is all female, and most likely to slap the "geek " label on me, they tend to take a glance when i am on line and see the prices commanded for items and they are floored ! - course, i am usually looking at Doug's site or Josh's or Mark Wilson's....they don't know that the X Men 1 9.6 is a unique item....they just see a comic book that is priced at $100,000 -

 

Secondly, i don't give a rat's [#@$%!!!] if someone thinks i am a "geek" or a nerd, or childish for collecting.....i love the hobby...the interaction with other collectors and of course, the chase of getting a certian item. -

[shrunkenhead]

I think I got misinterpreted here, or maybe I didn't make my position very clear. I too agree that the public at large doesn't necessarily holler "geek" as soon as we holler "comic" or "comic art." I've been known to show a few golden age slabs to non-collecting friends (male and female) , and they're always well received. I was talking about the fine art community and its rather cool response to comic art. (with some exceptions, which naturally I'm glad to hear about, nice to hear about your gallery offer, heartened!)

 

Generally speaking, when you're talking about people with dough who collect big buck, big name paintings, or even some of the warholite pop-art collectors out there, they are going to give you a blank stare when you say "romita" or even "ditko" for that matter. It's just not their bag, and I don't see this necessarily changing. So to a fine art collector, comics and comic art are pretty much an interchangeable subgenre. Not to speak for an entire collecting community, but in my limited experience, those sort of folks see us all under one genre umbrella.

Again, I don't think this is the right way to look at things, as I'm obviously a fan of comics and hope that all of us with comics and comic art can command nice prices should we ever wish to sell. But it won't be to the fine art folks. There's no x-over there...just callin' 'em as I see 'em.

[delekkerste]

I'm one of the "five" ComicArt-L members on the Boards (actually, I can probably name 10-15 crossovers), so let me weigh in with a few thoughts.

 

First, I do not believe that all is rosy in the world of comic book art. Perhaps the very high end sandbox where Hari plays remained strong in 2004 (though, I question how much actual new money is flowing into this segment and how much is just trading one over-inflated piece for another - Hari seems to be one of the very few all-cash types out there), but the same cannot be said for the general market. Several dealers (including one very major one) or dealer reps have told me, off the record, that 2004 was a very bad year for business. I'm talking flat-out bad, not just so-so.

 

And, frankly, I'm not surprised - the turnover rate on many dealer websites seems to have slowed to a crawl and, as was debated on the ComicArt-L forum, the eBay market completely imploded in 2004. The reason why hardly anything good is being sold on eBay anymore is not just because everyone has shifted to doing "private deals", but also because the overwhelming majority of listings was embarrassingly ending up "Reserve Not Met" with the huge disconnect between what the sellers think their pieces are worth and what buyers are willing to pay. Furthermore, one dealer source told me that after the spending orgy and huge price appreciation of 2002-2003, collectors were both jaded and tapped out last year (not surprising - most comic art collectors are not heart surgeons - why should they be immune to the falling real wages and record debt level trends sweeping the nation?)

 

No one can doubt that original comic art has proved to be an exceptionally good investment over the past couple of decades. However, it is much easier for something to go from $100 to $1000 than $10,000 to $100,000 in price. Also, I don't see where the fundamentals would support such a move. I don't believe there will ever be a mass influx of comic collectors to the comic art world and certainly not if prices remain anywhere near where they are. Not many ordinary people start a hobby that's guaranteed to drain them of many thousands of dollars in a very short amount of time (especially since there are so many other hobbies, things, pastimes where they can get much more bang for their buck). Also, the demographic, income and macroeconomic trends are not looking very favorable to me - I can picture some scenarios where even doctors, lawyers and bankers will be forced to tighten their belts in the not-too-distant future.

 

Also, all this talk in the art community about Hollywood money and strong euro/pound wielding foreigners entering the market is a classic example of, I feel, the proverbial canard. I don't think there is enough true new blood coming in at the margin from these sources to account for more than a blip in the run-up we've seen in the market - all these big sales seem to end up within the existing community, which tells me that it's just the same clubby group of collectors, maxing out their credit cards and paychecks and/or selling their wildly inflated art that they were fortunate enough to buy before prices went parabolic, driving the market.

 

And, speaking of markets, it is absolutely wrong to say that predicting them is futile. If that were true, perhaps I should just quit my job as a hedge fund trader (while I'm at it, I should just throw our fund's top-rated performance record out the window as well). Anyway, people should realize that trees don't grow to the sky (i.e., prices cannot keep compounding at 20% a year when real income levels are falling). Mean reversion of returns in this market is going to burn a lot of people who are buying at inflated prices now, hoping to ring the register in 20 years' time.

 

(to be continued)

[delekkerste]

Moving away from the art market and back to the art itself, many of you know that I have collected original comic art in the past. However, I pretty much stopped collecting after about a year and a half. Part of that is because I think the prices are way out of line with reality, but part of that is also because, even as a comic book fan, I couldn't view them the way the "true believer" crowd does. A lot of them seem to believe that white-out, bluelines, editors' notes, etc. add to the "character" of a piece. To me, these just add to my conception of comic art as collectible by-products of the comic book making process, not substantive art.

 

Owning 1/22nd of something used to make a commercial publication geared towards adolescents and where you have glued on word balloons, drawn-in sound effects, scribbled notes, yellowing paper and pictures of sweaty men in tights is not exactly high art in my book. Don't get me wrong, as a comic fan I like and appreciate comic art for what it is, but let's not make more of it than that. I am a big fan of fine art (my passion is 17th century Netherlandish art) and visit museums and galleries in Europe and the U.S. on a very regular basis. I think Rubens and Van Dyck would roll over in their graves if they knew that a Romita Sr. ASM cover could be hanging in the same building as one of their masterpieces (and I think they would probably prefer to stay dead than be reborn into a world in which a not insignificant number of ComicArt-L posters would probably think more highly of a Jack Kirby F.F. cover, even a Kirby "Kamandi" cover, than of one of their works).

 

Also, I must vociferously object to all this talk about comic art being "one of a kind" (which is really just a phrase invented to justify ludicrous prices). OK, technically, each piece is one of a kind and, in some cases like Burkey's ASM 42 last page, there really is no substitute at all (however, there probably wasn't another buyer willing to give that much for it, either and you'd be hard-pressed to tell me that the value of that pieces is based on anything other than nostalgia - "Face it Tiger, you just hit the jackpot!" is not ever going to find its way into any art textbooks). However, there are generally close substitutes for many pieces - it's not like these artists haven't had long careers and produced substantial bodies of work. OK, maybe the first comic you bought off the newsstand was X-Men #109 and you really want a particular Byrne page from that issue but the owner won't sell it for anything less than insane money. Well, it's not like Byrne didn't produce a ton of X-Men pages and, chances are, you probably have good memories from a lot of issues - though we may not always get exactly what we want, I think a lot of us get close to what we want and find that it hasn't killed us.

 

As for the inherent "geekiness" of the hobby, perhaps original art collecting is viewed a little less so given the general public's equating of any kind of art collecting with big $$$. But that is also precisely why it will never have the mass appeal of the books themselves, where it really doesn't take a lot of money to buy something enjoyable and collectible. And, I have to say that I know more than a few people (including myself) who have largely tuned out of the ComicArt-L list because what passes for "normal" thinking and behavior in the comic art world is viewed by those of us who haven't completely imbibed from the Kool-Aid punch bowl as being downright silly. People beating their chests about their latest purchases like regular guys might brag about their latest conquest in bed, people touting comic art as rock-solid investments and people generally acting like, as Anthony Michael-Hall self-deprecatingly described himself in Sixteen Candles, "the King of the Dip$hits".

 

With all that said, I do enjoy the original comic art that I currently own (mostly covers, splashes and commissions/pin-ups of more recent vintage - I like "drawings" and don't care much for panel pages). I do not, however, plan to acquire additional regular comic art in the foreseeable future as I think there are much better things for this non-obsessed collector to invest in and spend my money on. I do still collect painted illustration/fantasy art on a selective basis because it serves a decorative function and I enjoy it, but not because I expect to earn a rate of return on it or because I hope to ever sell it. I think the "buy what you like at a price you can afford to lose" maxim works equally well in the art world as it does in the comic world.

[heartened]

I'm one of the "five" ComicArt-L members on the Boards (actually, I can probably name 10-15 crossovers), so let me weigh in with a few thoughts.

 

First, I do not believe that all is rosy in the world of comic book art. Perhaps the very high end sandbox where Hari plays remained strong in 2004 (though, I question how much actual new money is flowing into this segment and how much is just trading one over-inflated piece for another - Hari seems to be one of the very few all-cash types out there), but the same cannot be said for the general market. Several dealers (including one very major one) or dealer reps have told me, off the record, that 2004 was a very bad year for business. I'm talking flat-out bad, not just so-so.

 

And, frankly, I'm not surprised - the turnover rate on many dealer websites seems to have slowed to a crawl and, as was debated on the ComicArt-L forum, the eBay market completely imploded in 2004. The reason why hardly anything good is being sold on eBay anymore is not just because everyone has shifted to doing "private deals", but also because the overwhelming majority of listings was embarrassingly ending up "Reserve Not Met" with the huge disconnect between what the sellers think their pieces are worth and what buyers are willing to pay. Furthermore, one dealer source told me that after the spending orgy and huge price appreciation of 2002-2003, collectors were both jaded and tapped out last year (not surprising - most comic art collectors are not heart surgeons - why should they be immune to the falling real wages and record debt level trends sweeping the nation?)

 

No one can doubt that original comic art has proved to be an exceptionally good investment over the past couple of decades. However, it is much easier for something to go from $100 to $1000 than $10,000 to $100,000 in price. Also, I don't see where the fundamentals would support such a move. I don't believe there will ever be a mass influx of comic collectors to the comic art world and certainly not if prices remain anywhere near where they are. Not many ordinary people start a hobby that's guaranteed to drain them of many thousands of dollars in a very short amount of time (especially since there are so many other hobbies, things, pastimes where they can get much more bang for their buck). Also, the demographic, income and macroeconomic trends are not looking very favorable to me - I can picture some scenarios where even doctors, lawyers and bankers will be forced to tighten their belts in the not-too-distant future.

 

Also, all this talk in the art community about Hollywood money and strong euro/pound wielding foreigners entering the market is a classic example of, I feel, the proverbial canard. I don't think there is enough true new blood coming in at the margin from these sources to account for more than a blip in the run-up we've seen in the market - all these big sales seem to end up within the existing community, which tells me that it's just the same clubby group of collectors, maxing out their credit cards and paychecks and/or selling their wildly inflated art that they were fortunate enough to buy before prices went parabolic, driving the market.

 

And, speaking of markets, it is absolutely wrong to say that predicting them is futile. If that were true, perhaps I should just quit my job as a hedge fund trader (while I'm at it, I should just throw our fund's top-rated performance record out the window as well). Anyway, people should realize that trees don't grow to the sky (i.e., prices cannot keep compounding at 20% a year when real income levels are falling). Mean reversion of returns in this market is going to burn a lot of people who are buying at inflated prices now, hoping to ring the register in 20 years' time.

 

(to be continued)

 

Hi Gene,

 

A truly excellent post, as always! You make some very good points.

 

The original art market certainly slowed down a little the past year, but I think not as much as other hobbies. The one-of-a-kind nature and the fact that most high-end collectors didn't need to sell anything kept the market strong (at least for high-end art). Dealer websites are not the gauge to be looking at. I haven't bought from a dealer in 3 years now, so it doesn't suprise me that the mediocre art that is offered to them remains sitting. Everyone knows that dealers do not pay the most, in general, because they need to make a profit on it. Collectors pay the most, and with ebay, the personal websites, the comicart-l list community, there's no need to go to a dealer unless it's something they may want personally for their own collection.

 

I don't think you can predict hobbies as well as stocks and bonds. Those things are rooted in our economy, so on some level if you believe America will be successful then the major stocks will too. If you really could predict it so well, then the #1 rule wouldn't be to diversify your investments, right?!

 

I agree that it's easier to go from 100 to 1000, than from 10000 to 100000. There is certainly more resistance at this level, personally for me and in general for our community.

 

I also agree that a lot of what's going on is simply through trading, and that artificially escalates values. With prices this high, I don't see any way around this, except for being careful with reports in this amount unless it's all-cash. The Northland Hulk 1 was a trade deal, as a previous thread talked about. Trading or partial trading is becoming commonplace, and will likely dominate both the comic book and comic art markets.

 

Thanks again for responding, Gene. I'm enjoying this thread, although I feel like I'm behind enemy lines

[heartened]

Moving away from the art market and back to the art itself, many of you know that I have collected original comic art in the past. However, I pretty much stopped collecting after about a year and a half. Part of that is because I think the prices are way out of line with reality, but part of that is also because, even as a comic book fan, I couldn't view them the way the "true believer" crowd does. A lot of them seem to believe that white-out, bluelines, editors' notes, etc. add to the "character" of a piece. To me, these just add to my conception of comic art as collectible by-products of the comic book making process, not substantive art.

 

Owning 1/22nd of something used to make a commercial publication geared towards adolescents and where you have glued on word balloons, drawn-in sound effects, scribbled notes, yellowing paper and pictures of sweaty men in tights is not exactly high art in my book. Don't get me wrong, as a comic fan I like and appreciate comic art for what it is, but let's not make more of it than that. I am a big fan of fine art (my passion is 17th century Netherlandic paintings) and visit museums and galleries in Europe and the U.S. on a very regular basis. I think Rubens and Van Dyck would roll over in their graves if they knew that a Romita Sr. ASM cover could be hanging in the same building as one of their masterpieces (and I think they would probably prefer to stay dead than be reborn into a world in which a not insignificant number of ComicArt-L posters would probably think more highly of a Jack Kirby F.F. cover, even a Kirby "Kamandi" cover, than of one of their works).

 

Also, I must vociferously object to all this talk about comic art being "one of a kind" (which is really just a phrase invented to justify ludicrous prices). OK, technically, each piece is one of a kind and, in some cases like Burkey's ASM 42 last page, there really is no substitute at all (however, there probably wasn't another buyer willing to give that much for it, either and you'd be hard-pressed to tell me that the value of that pieces is based on anything other than nostalgia - "Face it Tiger, you just hit the jackpot!" is not ever going to find its way into any art textbooks). However, there are generally close substitutes for many pieces - it's not like these artists haven't had long careers and produced substantial bodies of work. OK, maybe the first comic you bought off the newsstand was X-Men #109 and you really want a particular Byrne page from that issue but the owner won't sell it for anything less than insane money. Well, it's not like Byrne didn't produce a ton of X-Men pages and, chances are, you probably have good memories from a lot of issues - though we may not always get exactly what we want, I think a lot of us get close to what we want and find that it hasn't killed us.

 

As for the inherent "geekiness" of the hobby, perhaps original art collecting is viewed a little less so given the general public's equating of any kind of art collecting with big $$$. But that is also precisely why it will never have the mass appeal of the books themselves, where it really doesn't take a lot of money to buy something enjoyable and collectible. And, I have to say that I know more than a few people (including myself) who have largely tuned out of the ComicArt-L list because what passes for "normal" thinking and behavior in the comic art world is viewed by those of us who haven't completely imbibed from the Kool-Aid punch bowl as being downright silly. People beating their chests about their latest purchases like regular guys might brag about their latest conquest in bed, people touting comic art as rock-solid investments and people generally acting like, as Anthony Michael-Hall self-deprecatingly described himself in Sixteen Candles, "the King of the Dip$hits".

 

With all that said, I do enjoy the original comic art that I currently own (mostly covers, splashes and commissions/pin-ups of more recent vintage - I like "drawings" and don't care much for panel pages). I do not, however, plan to acquire additional regular comic art in the foreseeable future as I think there are much better things for this non-obsessed collector to invest in and spend my money on. I do still collect painted illustration/fantasy art on a selective basis because it serves a decorative function and I enjoy it, but not because I expect to earn a rate of return on it or because I hope to ever sell it. I think the "buy what you like at a price you can afford to lose" maxim works equally well in the art world as it does in the comic world.

 

Hi Gene (again),

 

Honestly, I don't think that the members of the comicart-l are any more or less juvenile than members of these forums. I've been reading the forums here for two years now, and there are certainly the same personalities. On the comic art list, it's slightly more obvious because the nature of the way the list is published to us makes it necessary for you to read every post. So, you can't ignore the ridiculous personalities like you can on these forums, where you see who the post is by or what the post is about before you click on it. I've been discouraged by the in-fighting and the bickering on the comicart list too, and feel that people need to grow up. But, this is part and parcel to a hobby that focuses on memories from childhood. There are many "children" on the CGC forums and on the comicart list, regardless of our occupations or how much cash we spend.

 

I too only buy art that is "clean". I view it as an art form, and those things detract from the aesthetic appeal. I think many people feel the same way that you and I do.

 

I'll say it: If you take the resale values and the prejudices out of it, I'd rather have a ASM Romita cover than a Matisse or a Renoir. I buy what I like, and frankly the only thing those things offer is "status" and resale value. How many people who buy fine art actually do it because they like it? I suspect most buy them as status symbols to show off, whether they really like them or not. History has deemed those artists to be important and great, and the masses agree. Is it so hard to believe that if museums and art historians push comic art as "fine" art, with high price tags, that the masses won't similarly agree?

 

I know what you'll say: fine art historians and curators are not comic fans. Give it time. The stodgy old curators will move on, and will be replaced by more open-minded souls like ourselves. This is already happening, as many museums do have comic art exhibits now.

[Foolkiller]

Hari,

The problem is that while fine art has gained a universal acceptance (although every artist has not) and been granted an established place in WORLDWIDE culture, the same cannot be said of comic book art. It is primarily dominated in interest by the United States, and slightly in Europe.

 

Of course, that's not really the main obstacle to me. Original comic book art is the only one piece of its kind. However, comic book art was meant to be reproduced. It was meant to be reproduced in color. It's "original" state to me is the colored version. The one that is published. I think original comic book art is less desirable to a lot of people at most price levels that they're at now because in essence, the original form is really the published version. Of course, Norman Rockwell's Saturday Evening Post paintings are extremely valuable, but the difference there is a large disparity in quality. I don't John Romita or Jack Kirby in the same universe talent wise as Norman Rockwell. Nor do I find the subject matter to be on the same par. Rockwell's paintings capture slices of both American life and the subtleties of life in general that everyone can relate to. That can hardly be said about the Amazing Spider Man. I think it's important to examine why certain art and artists have become popular before we start believing that comic art will have similar appreciation and value. While cool conceptually, I've felt that the prices, like on comic books, are escalating beyond what can be supported long term.

 

Super heroes and comic books are experiencing a momentary "fad" like favor with the mass public. This happened for Batman in the 60s and 80s, and with Hollywood paying attention to super heroes, super heroes are becoming en vogue to read and develop. This will eventually end. It's cyclical. When that happens, I certainly think that a great deal of interest will be lost in comic books and super heroes in general.

 

Since the upper end of original comic book art is such a small, finite group of people, I think it's easier for the prices to stay relatively high. Galleries would support comic book art if they felt it would generate interest. Right now, super heroes are popular. Be careful when we're back to the small numbers of fans with deep pockets... then we'll see how well these prices continue to be supported.

[heartened]

The problem is that while fine art has gained a universal acceptance (although every artist has not) and been granted an established place in WORLDWIDE culture, the same cannot be said of comic book art. It is primarily dominated in interest by the United States, and slightly in Europe.

 

Hi Brian,

 

How are things in my old neighborhood?

 

What do you consider worldwide?? Isn't worldwide really the US and Europe in your definition?? Find me someone in Asia who cares one bit about those artists. And, as we all know, Asia is the majority of the world's population.

 

So, I would say that comic books could appeal to everyone in the Western world. Moreover, with the globalization in culture, I'd daresay more people have heard of Spider-man in India than have heard of Dali. Would you really argue this?

 

Something to consider......