Unpopular Golden Age Opinions Thread! 10 10

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/7/2024 at 3:57 PM, plady69 said:

Yeah, I never understood the popularity of these books:

 

I can think of two reasons why most people like them. PL17 is OK, but I have middle school students who could produce better artwork than the 23. PL17 has long been popular; it's only recently that anyone has given a rip about 23. (And did you notice that on the 23 it looks like her left one is about three times the size of her right one? So she doesn't even have large breasts; she has one large breast and one medium-sized breast. I mean, a lot of women have that issue, but they usually use some padding on the smaller side—bathroom tissue or whatever.)

[RareHighGrade]

To each his own.  In my opinion, both covers are great.

[newshane]

On 7/7/2024 at 3:25 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

I can think of two reasons why most people like them. PL17 is OK, but I have middle school students who could produce better artwork than the 23. PL17 has long been popular; it's only recently that anyone has given a rip about 23. (And did you notice that on the 23 it looks like her left one is about three times the size of her right one? So she doesn't even have large breasts; she has one large breast and one medium-sized breast. I mean, a lot of women have that issue, but they usually use some padding on the smaller side—bathroom tissue or whatever.)

Well, the thread is called "unpopular opinions" for a reason.

[Hepcat]

On 7/7/2024 at 4:25 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

And did you notice that on the 23 it looks like her left one is about three times the size of her right one? 

Worse yet her left "breast" is just a mound jutting out of her chest. Her right one looks somewhat more like a real breast.

 

Edited July 8 by Hepcat

[plady69]

On 7/7/2024 at 10:18 PM, Hepcat said:

Worse yet her left "breast" is just a mound jutting out of her chest. Her right one looks somewhat more like a real breast.

 

I am a “wing” lover myself…

[buttock]

On 7/7/2024 at 8:18 PM, Hepcat said:

Worse yet her left "breast" is just a mound jutting out of her chest. Her right one looks somewhat more like a real breast.

 

Arms and hands are wonky, boobs are goofy looking, eyes are a little off, anatomically it's a mess.  

BUT... 

it's iconic for what it is.  And that's why it draws the big bucks.  It's probably the best representation of that whole genre.  If you want sexy 50s sleaze in a comic, you're not going to find anything better. 

[Dr. Love]

On 7/7/2024 at 9:08 PM, buttock said:

If you want sexy 50s sleaze in a comic, you're not going to find anything better. 

aint nothing like the real thing, baby

aint nothing like the real thing

 

[buttock]

On 7/7/2024 at 11:49 PM, Dr. Love said:

aint nothing like the real thing, baby

aint nothing like the real thing

 

That guy better protect his eyes!

[Ryan.]

On 7/6/2024 at 3:18 PM, skypinkblu said:

Hang on...Did I just wandered into the local middle school locker room?

 

Welcome to the boards!

[10centcomics]

On 7/6/2024 at 8:41 PM, Ryan. said:

I had a good solid dissertation ready to go but my motivation is low so I'll go with: they look nothing like Baker's other work and it baffles me that CGC notes Baker as the cover artist when it's so clearly not Baker.

I wanna hear the dissertation as this is my favorite can of worms to open up. It blows my mind that anyone thinks this is a Baker cover. It's the biggest mis-attribution in comics and I would love to know how Baker's name was attached to this cover in the first place. A hasty assumption because he drew some of the interior art? Or a way to prop up the book as folks began to collect Baker's work? (though this book hardly needs any more propping up since it's also an iconic and historically significant SOTI book).

[Hepcat]

On 7/6/2024 at 3:18 PM, skypinkblu said:

Hang on...Did I just wandered into the local middle school locker room?

We're comic collectors/fans. Comic art is one of the things we discuss here.

[vheflin]

Dedicated to 17 & 23

 

[Ryan.]

On 7/8/2024 at 11:56 AM, 10centcomics said:

I wanna hear the dissertation as this is my favorite can of worms to open up. It blows my mind that anyone thinks this is a Baker cover. It's the biggest mis-attribution in comics and I would love to know how Baker's name was attached to this cover in the first place. A hasty assumption because he drew some of the interior art? Or a way to prop up the book as folks began to collect Baker's work? (though this book hardly needs any more propping up since it's also an iconic and historically significant SOTI book).

The Art of Glamour isn't the first culprit but certainly has escalated the false belief that Baker drew those PL covers. It was either Feldstein or Kamen that are quoted as saying that Baker was known for drawing buxom broads, which he certainly was NOT known for. Suggesting that he was greatly diminishes the effort he put into the realistic figure work that is pervasive across the covers and interior art we know definitively that Baker did draw. Because one of his peers and studio-mates falsely remembered Baker as a drawer of huge jugs, people tend to fall to fall into the appeal to authority falalcy of accepting that as truth. Of course, a person's memory is almost completely unreliable for establishing truth (see: Lee, Stan). 

In terms of simple style drawing, if Baker did draw the covers to PL 17 and/or 23 (and 14 and Flyin' Jenny while we're at it), they would certainly be the worst covers he ever produced. The hair, the wonky arms and hands, the strange perspective, aren't consistent with the remainder of his catalog. It's been suggested elsewhere and on these boards that Baker may have drawn some parts of those covers, as it wasn't uncommon for various members of one studio to contribute to a cover or other parts of the book. I can accept that easily enough. What I can't accept is CGC noting these non-Baker PL covers as belonging to him. That's CGC making itself a definitive authority on a subject that still has too many questions hanging over it.

With all of this said, I like PL 17 and 23 fine enough and would love to add either to my collection should the chance arise.

UPDATE: I just looked and found CGCed copies of PL 17 and 23 and neither of the examples I saw noted Baker as the cover artist; however, I saw a copy of PL 14 that does note Baker as the cover artist so who knows how these decisions are made.

Edited July 8 by Ryan.

[10centcomics]

On 7/8/2024 at 1:25 PM, Ryan. said:

The Art of Glamour isn't the first culprit but certainly has escalated the false belief that Baker drew those PL covers. It was either Feldstein or Kamen that are quoted as saying that Baker was known for drawing buxom broads, which he certainly was NOT known for. Suggesting that he was greatly diminishes the effort he put into the realistic figure work that is pervasive across the covers and interior art we know definitively that Baker did draw. Because one of his peers and studio-mates falsely remembered Baker as a drawer of huge jugs, people tend to fall to fall into the appeal to authority falalcy of accepting that as truth. Of course, a person's memory is almost completely unreliable for establishing truth (see: Lee, Stan). 

In terms of simple style drawing, if Baker did draw the covers to PL 17 and/or 23 (and 14 and Flyin' Jenny while we're at it), they would certainly be the worst covers he ever produced. The hair, the wonky arms and hands, the strange perspective, aren't consistent with the remainder of his catalog. It's been suggested elsewhere and on these boards that Baker may have drawn some parts of those covers, as it wasn't uncommon for various members of one studio to contribute to a cover or other parts of the book. I can accept that easily enough. What I can't accept is CGC noting these non-Baker PL covers as belonging to him. That's CGC making itself a definitive authority on a subject that still has too many questions hanging over it.

With all of this said, I like PL 17 and 23 fine enough and would love to add either to my collection should the chance arise.

UPDATE: I just looked and found CGCed copies of PL 17 and 23 and neither of the examples I saw noted Baker as the cover artist; however, I saw a copy of PL 14 that does note Baker as the cover artist so who knows how these decisions are made.

I looked at the edit history for PL17 at GCD (https://www.comics.org/issue/6644/history/)

Looks like Matt Baker was entered in as the cover artist back when the entry was created in 2002. Though GCD existed pre-Internet so I can't nail down when the attribution to Baker was made and by who.

[Professor K]

On 7/8/2024 at 1:49 AM, Dr. Love said:

aint nothing like the real thing, baby

aint nothing like the real thing

 

Ok now I gotta post this. 

 

Edited July 9 by Professor K

[LadyDeath]

On 7/8/2024 at 11:56 AM, 10centcomics said:

I wanna hear the dissertation as this is my favorite can of worms to open up. It blows my mind that anyone thinks this is a Baker cover. It's the biggest mis-attribution in comics and I would love to know how Baker's name was attached to this cover in the first place. A hasty assumption because he drew some of the interior art? Or a way to prop up the book as folks began to collect Baker's work? (though this book hardly needs any more propping up since it's also an iconic and historically significant SOTI book).

If you wish to go even further down the rabbit hole - https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/marvelmasterworksfansite/how-much-of-phantom-lady-fox-iger-is-drawn-by-matt-t29228.html

[10centcomics]

On 7/8/2024 at 7:55 PM, LadyDeath said:

If you wish to go even further down the rabbit hole - https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/marvelmasterworksfansite/how-much-of-phantom-lady-fox-iger-is-drawn-by-matt-t29228.html

Oh yeah I've read this many times! 

[Ryan.]

On 7/8/2024 at 7:55 PM, LadyDeath said:

If you wish to go even further down the rabbit hole - https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/marvelmasterworksfansite/how-much-of-phantom-lady-fox-iger-is-drawn-by-matt-t29228.html

I started reading this and then realized I already have, years ago. Totally forgot about that site.

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/8/2024 at 7:55 PM, LadyDeath said:

If you wish to go even further down the rabbit hole - https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/marvelmasterworksfansite/how-much-of-phantom-lady-fox-iger-is-drawn-by-matt-t29228.html

 

On 7/8/2024 at 8:34 PM, 10centcomics said:

Oh yeah I've read this many times! 

My eyes are enough to tell me that Baker didn't draw PL17. I do think that he did the first one (#13). I'll see what the article has to say.

Edited July 9 by jimbo_7071

[10centcomics]

On 7/8/2024 at 9:57 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

 

My eyes are enough to tell me that Baker didn't draw PL17. I do think that he did the first one (#13). I'll see what the article has to say.

Yeah 13 looks most like Baker. I can't believe 13 and 17 are credited to the same artist.