Silver Age Hierarchy: Poll 8: 7th - 9th

zosocane · June 18, 2016

FF1 also was the catalyst to the MCU that has become the behemoth comic book media firm we know today -- the one Walt Disney Co. "stole" in 2009 for $4 billion. I started reading FF in the late 70s when the story and art weren't very good, and I couldn't understand why it proclaimed "World's Greatest Comics Magazine" on the top. As I became a young collector and started reading back-issues from the the Kirby era, and as John Byrne refreshed FF to its roots in the early 80s, I realized why FF1 is so incredibly important. The fact that 2 movie franchises have flopped only underscores how both producer/director teams never understood (or, more likely, never bothered to understand) FF1 and the next 90 or so issues of the run.

jjonahjameson1 · June 18, 2016

I think some people are underselling the importance of both FF #1 and Showcase #4.

I think the key thing about Showcase #4, and the reason I consider it to be the start of the Silver Age, isn't just because it revitalized the superhero genre, but why, how, and when it revitalized it. The fact that Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman were still being published is mostly irrelevant to me.

After the introduction of the comics code in 1955, the industry was in a tailspin, with entire genres eliminated overnight. The future of the comic book industry and artform in America was in question. Other than Horror books, what other genre was eliminated "overnight" due to the code? Superhero books continued along, as did funny animals, westerns, romance, Classic Illustrated, and kids books. In fact, they swelled in numbers. Just look at all of the Harvey kids titles and Archie titles that proliferated the stands since the Code's inception. Sorry, not buying your position here.

Showcase #4 is the book that showed publishers how to fill the void created by the collapse of the industry. The popularity of superheroes I think is due as much to the absence of alternatives as anything else. Without Showcase #4, though, it could have been funny animals or who knows what that filled that gap instead of superheroes. Nah, it would have been some other superhero title, and possibly from some other publisher, but we'll never know because Showcase 4 was first to market. In counterpoint, I can say that if Showcase 4 didn't come along and introduce the Silver Age Flash, there was always the possibility that another publisher would have done it.

I think there's a very good reason why Showcase #4 succeeded while other attempts at superhero revivials that took place just a year or two earlier - like the Cap revival in 1954 - failed. It's because Showcase #4 was post-code. It was seen as something new in a time when something new was needed, as opposed to something old in a time when superheroes were passe. But superheroes weren't passe. If they were, then low sales would have resulted in the decision to cancel action, adventure, superman, superboy, batman, detective, wonder woman and world's finest. Clearly, these titles were selling, and well enough to continue throughout the Atomic Age, without a book like Showcase 4. Furthermore, executives at DC were confident enough to launch another title pre-Showcase 4, and wouldn't have done so if they felt the market wouldn't sustain it. Hence, the 1954 launch of Superman's pal, Jimmy Olsen.

Without Showcase #4, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman might have continued along just fine forever. But they wouldn't have been joined by all the other superhero books from both Marvel and DC that followed. Again, that's pure speculation and nobody can state with 100% confidence that DC or some other publisher wouldn't or couldn't have gotten around to it at a later date.

Anyway. Top 3 book for me personally, along with AF #15 and FF #1.

makeminemego · June 18, 2016

AF 15, SC 4, and FF 1 are the Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, and Bobby Orr of this topic of conversation. Stack them however you want, but those are the top three books. I'm a little shocked to see suggestions otherwise.

jjonahjameson1 · June 18, 2016

AF 15, SC 4, and FF 1 are the Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, and Bobby Orr of this topic of conversation. Stack them however you want, but those are the top three books. I'm a little shocked to see suggestions otherwise.

I appreciate the hockey reference, and you've done great in listing my top 3 favourite NHL players, ever.

However, when it comes to Silver Age comics, and their rank by importance, well, that's another story. and I'm sorry to say that Showcase 4 doesn't cut it for me.

FineCollector · June 18, 2016

AF 15, SC 4, and FF 1 are the Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, and Bobby Orr of this topic of conversation. Stack them however you want, but those are the top three books. I'm a little shocked to see suggestions otherwise.

I appreciate the hockey reference, and you've done great in listing my top 3 favourite NHL players, ever.

However, when it comes to Silver Age comics, and their rank by importance, well, that's another story. and I'm sorry to say that Showcase 4 doesn't cut it for me.

... because DC is lame, we get it. :insane:

zosocane · June 18, 2016

AF 15, SC 4, and FF 1 are the Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, and Bobby Orr of this topic of conversation. Stack them however you want, but those are the top three books. I'm a little shocked to see suggestions otherwise.

+1

kimik · June 18, 2016

After all...it is the self-proclaimed "WORLD'S GREATEST COMIC BOOK MAGAZINE!"

FF #1 was the World's Greatest Comic Book Magazine up until 1966, if that long. It was eclipsed by Spider-Man a long time ago.

The fact that Marvel had to add that tagline to try to sell the books in the 80s still makes me laugh as it was the worst book I bought when I started reading and collecting comics. I can remember buying an issue due to the tagline then wondering why it sucked so badly compared to the other Marvel books I was reading. lol

zosocane · June 18, 2016

After all...it is the self-proclaimed "WORLD'S GREATEST COMIC BOOK MAGAZINE!"

FF #1 was the World's Greatest Comic Book Magazine up until 1966, if that long. It was eclipsed by Spider-Man a long time ago.

The fact that Marvel had to add that tagline to try to sell the books in the 80s still makes me laugh as it was the worst book I bought when I started reading and collecting comics. I can remember buying an issue due to the tagline then wondering why it sucked so badly compared to the other Marvel books I was reading.

You miss the point entirely. Stan slapped that slogan up top because he was very good at hamming up titles, stories, etc during the earliest days of the "Marvel Age of Comics" to move books. The first time that slogan appeared was on FF3 or FF4 (I can't remember). Of course a 3- or 4-old issue title wasn't the top selling title in comics, but the BS looks cool.

kimik · June 18, 2016

After all...it is the self-proclaimed "WORLD'S GREATEST COMIC BOOK MAGAZINE!"

FF #1 was the World's Greatest Comic Book Magazine up until 1966, if that long. It was eclipsed by Spider-Man a long time ago.

The fact that Marvel had to add that tagline to try to sell the books in the 80s still makes me laugh as it was the worst book I bought when I started reading and collecting comics. I can remember buying an issue due to the tagline then wondering why it sucked so badly compared to the other Marvel books I was reading.

You miss the point entirely. Stan slapped that slogan up top because he was very good at hamming up titles, stories, etc during the earliest days of the "Marvel Age of Comics" to move books. The first time that slogan appeared was on FF3 or FF4 (I can't remember). Of course a 3- or 4-old issue title wasn't the top selling title in comics, but the BS looks cool.

Not to an 11 year old who was collecting Spidey, X-Men, Transformers and GI Joe in the mid 80s. I felt totally ripped off. lol

namisgr · June 18, 2016

Can somebody explain to me why the first appearance of the Hulk is deemed more important than the first appearance of Thor?

HighStakesComics · June 19, 2016

Can somebody explain to me why the first appearance of the Hulk is deemed more important than the first appearance of Thor?

I can't fathom how either is more important than the collective might of The X-Men? If whatever came after the Silver Age has any impact on the outcome of this poll, X-Men #1 is a top 4 Silver Age book.

I will concede it is more common than every other book left.

makeminemego · June 19, 2016

Can somebody explain to me why the first appearance of the Hulk is deemed more important than the first appearance of Thor?

I can't fathom how either is more important than the collective might of The X-Men? If whatever came after the Silver Age has any impact on the outcome of this poll, X-Men #1 is a top 4 Silver Age book.

I will concede it is more common than every other book left.

I respect X Men 1 a lot, and regardless of how common it may be, it's a major key. Having said that, I think there's a ceiling for that book due to the title's bump in popularity hinging so much on the reconstitution of the team and title in the mid 70's. If the team as originally constructed had always been wildly popular from the downbeat, then yeah, it's probably a top 5 SA key. That's not the case, so I think it landing in the 7-9 range is respectful enough to the more popular iteration's roots in that #1 issue.

HighStakesComics · June 19, 2016

Can somebody explain to me why the first appearance of the Hulk is deemed more important than the first appearance of Thor?

I can't fathom how either is more important than the collective might of The X-Men? If whatever came after the Silver Age has any impact on the outcome of this poll, X-Men #1 is a top 4 Silver Age book.

I will concede it is more common than every other book left.

I respect X Men 1 a lot, and regardless of how common it may be, it's a major key. Having said that, I think there's a ceiling for that book due to the title's bump in popularity hinging so much on the reconstitution of the team and title in the mid 70's. If the team as originally constructed had always been wildly popular from the downbeat, then yeah, it's probably a top 5 SA key. That's not the case, so I think it landing in the 7-9 range is respectful enough to the more popular iteration's roots in that #1 issue.

I feel you make a very good point, however, the original Hulk title only made it to issue #6 and Iron Man started off in a different suit. Can we not argue that each character/or team left has experienced a metamorphosis at some point in time? Do we feel different rules apply since The X-Men are a team instead of an individual?

One may even argue that the storm they weathered from 66-93 is a testament to their popularity and resiliency. Stan knew he had something. It was only a matter of time before it all came together.

Wayne-Tec · June 19, 2016

I feel you make a very good point, however, the original Hulk title only made it to issue #6 and Iron Man started off in a different suit. Can we not argue that each character/or team left has experienced a metamorphosis at some point in time? Do we feel different rules apply since The X-Men are a team instead of an individual?

One may even argue that the storm they weathered from 66-93 is a testament to their popularity and resiliency. Stan knew he had something. It was only a matter of time before it all came together.

This is a great point. Desirability, from a collecting standpoint is likely the driving force behind why people would pick Hulk #1 over X-Men #1. But for as unremarkable as many feel the original X-Men team was, they went a lot further on their own than the Hulk and his grand total of 6 issues.

So if we're going to knock X-Men #1 for some of the reasons stated, you have to do the same, but to an even larger degree, for Hulk #1.

makeminemego · June 19, 2016

I feel you make a very good point, however, the original Hulk title only made it to issue #6 and Iron Man started off in a different suit. Can we not argue that each character/or team left has experienced a metamorphosis at some point in time? Do we feel different rules apply since The X-Men are a team instead of an individual?

One may even argue that the storm they weathered from 66-93 is a testament to their popularity and resiliency. Stan knew he had something. It was only a matter of time before it all came together.

This is a great point. Desirability, from a collecting standpoint is likely the driving force behind why people would pick Hulk #1 over X-Men #1. But for as unremarkable as many feel the original X-Men team was, they went a lot further on their own than the Hulk and his grand total of 6 issues.

So if we're going to knock X-Men #1 for some of the reasons stated, you have to do the same, but to an even larger degree, for Hulk #1.

Certainly interesting to think about, but I'd honestly only put Hulk 1 a couple of spots ahead of X Men 1, which is probably likely due to the relative scarcity of Hulk 1 vs the relative common nature of X Men 1, although, the Hulk in his first issue is still likely closer to his most popular iteration than the X Men are in their first issue.

But, certainly a point worth making.

bronze johnny · June 19, 2016

I feel you make a very good point, however, the original Hulk title only made it to issue #6 and Iron Man started off in a different suit. Can we not argue that each character/or team left has experienced a metamorphosis at some point in time? Do we feel different rules apply since The X-Men are a team instead of an individual?

One may even argue that the storm they weathered from 66-93 is a testament to their popularity and resiliency. Stan knew he had something. It was only a matter of time before it all came together.

This is a great point. Desirability, from a collecting standpoint is likely the driving force behind why people would pick Hulk #1 over X-Men #1. But for as unremarkable as many feel the original X-Men team was, they went a lot further on their own than the Hulk and his grand total of 6 issues.

So if we're going to knock X-Men #1 for some of the reasons stated, you have to do the same, but to an even larger degree, for Hulk #1.

Certainly interesting to think about, but I'd honestly only put Hulk 1 a couple of spots ahead of X Men 1, which is probably likely due to the relative scarcity of Hulk 1 vs the relative common nature of X Men 1, although, the Hulk in his first issue is still likely closer to his most popular iteration than the X Men are in their first issue.

But, certainly a point worth making.

Funny how relative scarcity is applied by some in their criteria for defining this current SA hierarchy but not for others? No Marvel title has had a greater impact on comic books since 1975 than the X-Men. This was a team book that dominated comic books in terms of sales and popularity since the '70s. As mentioned before, Hulk 1 and X-Men 1 were relatively unsuccessful SA Marvel books given their initial limited success as individual titles. However, X-Men 1 is a '63 Marvel first appearance book that is relatively available to collectors. The '62 titles like JIM 83 and Hulk 1 are scarcer keys- would they be more sought after than X-Men 1 if there were as many of these books available to collectors? Does anyone think the current difference in value between X-Men 1 and Hulk 1 is not being taken into account by some who are comparing the place these to keys hold in this small sample of collectors voting on this SA hierarchy?

makeminemego · June 19, 2016

I feel you make a very good point, however, the original Hulk title only made it to issue #6 and Iron Man started off in a different suit. Can we not argue that each character/or team left has experienced a metamorphosis at some point in time? Do we feel different rules apply since The X-Men are a team instead of an individual?

One may even argue that the storm they weathered from 66-93 is a testament to their popularity and resiliency. Stan knew he had something. It was only a matter of time before it all came together.

This is a great point. Desirability, from a collecting standpoint is likely the driving force behind why people would pick Hulk #1 over X-Men #1. But for as unremarkable as many feel the original X-Men team was, they went a lot further on their own than the Hulk and his grand total of 6 issues.

So if we're going to knock X-Men #1 for some of the reasons stated, you have to do the same, but to an even larger degree, for Hulk #1.

Certainly interesting to think about, but I'd honestly only put Hulk 1 a couple of spots ahead of X Men 1, which is probably likely due to the relative scarcity of Hulk 1 vs the relative common nature of X Men 1, although, the Hulk in his first issue is still likely closer to his most popular iteration than the X Men are in their first issue.

But, certainly a point worth making.

Funny how relative scarcity is applied by some in their criteria for defining this current SA hierarchy but not for others? No Marvel title has had a greater impact on comic books since 1975 than the X-Men. This was a team book that dominated comic books in terms of sales and popularity since the '70s. As mentioned before, Hulk 1 and X-Men 1 were relatively unsuccessful SA Marvel books given their initial limited success as individual titles. However, X-Men 1 is a '63 Marvel first appearance book that is relatively available to collectors. The '62 titles like JIM 83 and Hulk 1 are scarcer keys- would they be more sought after than X-Men 1 if there were as many of these books available to collectors? Does anyone think the current difference in value between X-Men 1 and Hulk 1 is not being taken into account by some who are comparing the place these to keys hold in this small sample of collectors voting on this SA hierarchy?

Those are all fine points. For myself, relative scarcity means something, but probably not that much in the grand scheme of things, at least with regards to this poll. In a "tie-breaker" (which I guess this entire poll is tie-breaker/elimination based) I could see it coming into play, but otherwise, not that big of a deal. In terms of value affecting the way people cast their votes, probably right. Although you could get into a chicken or egg thing there, as in is it the free market dictating where the books land, or is it historical significance?

I agree with a great deal of what you're saying here, especially with regards to the popularity of the X-titles from the 70's on, but I don't think it's an affront to the X Men in general to say that it was a weaker title/franchise for the first dozen years of existence. When they flipped the switch, the title took off, but not before it was overhauled.

Regardless, it's a great book. I think it would be slighting the book to put it on even footing with Avengers 1, another late 63 key that turns up fairly often. Rather, I think it's right there in the TOS 39/JIM 83/ASM 1 neighborhood. No shame in that, at least to me.

oakman29 · June 19, 2016

Are you guys kidding with Hulk #1? I see it as the third most important Marvel key of the S.A.

Right behind F.F.#1 and AF#15 respectively.

makeminemego · June 19, 2016

Are you guys kidding with Hulk #1? I see it as the third most important Marvel key of the S.A.
Right behind F.F.#1 and AF#15 respectively.

I'd be willing to bet that Hulk #1 ends up in the 4 spot by a healthy margin. The cluster is going to be 5-7 between TOS39/JIM83/XMEN1. 8 and 9 are already settled with the DC books.

trmoore54 · June 19, 2016

Are you guys kidding with Hulk #1? I see it as the third most important Marvel key of the S.A.
Right behind F.F.#1 and AF#15 respectively.

Dave...you're delusional...but I'll give you a pass cause you're a Hulk-freak... lol ... :makepoint: :baiting: :blahblah: :sumo: :tonofbricks: :insane: doh! :boo: :frustrated: :signfunny: :preach: