When do books go from being Bronze age to being modern?

[jbud73]

Personally, I consider Miller's Daredevils NOT Bronze Age Books, but hey, don't ask me - I was only there buying every book in existance at the time.

 

Too bad you didn't keep them in nice condition

[divad]

Personally, I consider Miller's Daredevils NOT Bronze Age Books, but hey, don't ask me - I was only there buying every book in existance at the time.

 

Too bad you didn't keep them in nice condition

 

Au contraire mon ami, most of them were 9.4 - 9.6, and have either been slabbed and/or sold for mucho dinero

[divad]

A lot of people will argue that Conan #1 STARTED the BA

 

No shiite Sherlock

[awe4one]

A lot of people will argue that Conan #1 STARTED the BA

 

No shiite Sherlock

 

 

Oh come-on...every good revisionist knows Giant Size X-Men #1 started the Bronze Age...

 

Jim

[drbanner]

A lot of people will argue that Conan #1 STARTED the BA

 

No shiite Sherlock

 

 

Oh come-on...every good revisionist knows Giant Size X-Men #1 started the Bronze Age...

 

Jim

 

 

There's one from the GA of the forum for ya!! I wonder if that thread still survives in cyber-backup...

[mrwoogieman]

The cover price method won't work for Cerebus.

 

 

Well, once again... the logical conclusion is that the 1970s are Bronze... the 1980s aren't.

The 1990s were their own "animal", and then starting in 2000, things are "new again".

 

So, after the Silver Age...

what's the problem with just using decades instead of ages again?

 

Ummm, because the people that collect books from the seventies need to differentiate themselves from those that are enamored by 'modern dreck'. The old what I collect is great and what you collect is [#@$%!!!] syndrome.

 

Or, it's as good as anything else involving comic collecting to argue about, so why not?

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

Since I was directly involved in discussing the idea, fielding suggestions from countless e-mails, letters, etc., and writing the article that defined the new Age range, I can say with absolutely no fear of contradiction that there was never even the hint of such a motivation for making the decision. Since I not only have no involvement in the value end of things, but little to no knowledge of the market whatsoever, it could never have entered my mind. When we put the article together, we viewed it as a fun academic exercise and approached it entirely from the point of view of history. That was the only motivation; I should know.

 

Now feel free to disagree with us if you want to, but trust me, market considerations had nothing to do with it. We just thought the time was right to add another name to the end of the list, and we spent almost two years talking it over and planning it before going with Copper and the Age shifts provided by a great contributor, Douglas Gillock.

 

[mrwoogieman]

Now that's really what I was trying to say: naming comic book ages is purely an academic exercise. There is no correlation between defining a book as coming from a certain age and the price of that book.

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

Well that's how I approach it anyway, and I always thought it was fun to keep the old Age labels going and figure out a logical structure for expanding the range and justifying the choices. It's ultimately all arbitrary anyway - history doesn't stop and start in compartmentalized sections. That's why I really liked Doug's "shift" idea, that an Age can be defined as having an easing-in period so that it's not just turning on a dime and one Age stops dead while another immediately begins. But it's just all an exercise, there are lots of other ways of looking at it out there on websites and message boards and in other books. Ours admittedly carries a bit more weight sometimes due to the Guide's position in the marketplace, but I always say - disagree if you want to, offer your own opinions. This is just one approach.

[Zonker]

 

 

 

 

There's one from the GA of the forum for ya!! I wonder if that thread still survives in cyber-backup...

 

 

 

When, as we all know, the answer to the question When did the Bronze Age begin? can be found

 

here

 

or here

 

or, maybe here.

 

[awe4one]

Since I was directly involved in discussing the idea, fielding suggestions from countless e-mails, letters, etc., and writing the article that defined the new Age range, I can say with absolutely no fear of contradiction that there was never even the hint of such a motivation for making the decision.

 

Maybe not...but the impression is still out there regardless of your intentions. Coming out of the blue and shifting an Age later than the accepted norm used by a majority of collectors wasn't the wisest move in my opinion and begs for an explanation contrary to your, rather lame in my opinion, justification.

 

And as far as an Age level not having an impact on a comics desirability in the market. That's bunk in my opinion. Place a comic in the Bronze, Silver, or Golden category and collectors, usually with deeper pockets than those collecting in the more recent tier, will, at the very least, notice the book and consider it for their collections. It doesn't enter their radar beforehand.

 

Of course, this is all predicated on those collectors accepting the revised Age durations. Not going to happen immediately and not likely in the near future as far as the Bronze slide in my opinion.

 

Jim

[shadroch]

Two years of discussion to come up with "The Copper Age".Thats just sad,Bro. I'd love to hear which metals you vetoed.

[divad]

Two years of discussion to come up with "The Copper Age".Thats just sad,Bro. I'd love to hear which metals you vetoed.

 

Lead anyone? Nah, too heavy

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

I'm sorry you think our justification was "lame." Many readers seem to like it quite a bit. You can't please everyone. Our justification for the choice is explained in detail in the articles published in the Guide that focus on this topic. If you read them, you might find them enlightening. You can still disagree of course.

 

And no, it didn't take two years just to come up with "Copper." In fact, that term was already in pretty widespread colloquial use as the post-Bronze Age and we simply formalized it for our Age range. What took two years was publishing articles about the rationale for dividing Ages - the more specific thinking behind the entire Age range itself - and discussing the subject with readers, collectors, historians, etc., taking in all their feedback, coming up with our own ideas, bringing Douglas Gillock aboard to offer his unique ideas for the mix, and then publishing the final article about it all in #34.

 

But again, if you don't like it, that's OK. Nothing we can do about that. For our purposes, it works just fine. And I note that we now have a Copper Age section here on the boards too, so it's working for other collectors too. To each his or her own.

[awe4one]

I'm sorry you think our justification was "lame." Many readers seem to like it quite a bit. You can't please everyone. Our justification for the choice is explained in detail in the articles published in the Guide that focus on this topic. If you read them, you might find them enlightening. You can still disagree of course.

 

I have read the article, a couple of times, in #34 outlining the, proposed, changes. I still disagree...New Teen Titans #1 is the perfect 1st Copper book in my eyes.

 

And to be clear...I don't have any problems with designating a new Age after Bronze. It's the length of Bronze I have an issue with. Your rational for sliding it to 1984 reads like someone tried much too hard to find an example to meet their guidelines. Hence the "why have they done this" question and speculation on dealer preference. New Teen Titans #1 or Daredevil #158 are both fine representatives, each with their own landmark trademarks and never considered Bronze by collectors in the past, for the start of Copper. These seemed to be overlooked by the OS gang in favor of mini-series; a concept that regularly worked in the comics, Marvel especially, just not as their own series but as part of their normal storylines.

 

Jim

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

Fair enough, I certainly appreciate a well-informed opinion. And I can see where you're coming from.

 

I would also like to stress something else. When we do something like this, that doesn't mean that significant feedback over a period of time in response to this material wouldn't lead us to make changes. It's very possible that down the road we'll see that the dominant collector opinion demands an adjustment to things, and we'll be happy to make that adjustment. It keeps the whole debate alive and enables us to revisit the topic on a regular basis. So nothing is set in stone, but for right now, we *are* satisfied with how we have things set up at present.

[jbud73]

I'm sorry you think our justification was "lame." Many readers seem to like it quite a bit. You can't please everyone. Our justification for the choice is explained in detail in the articles published in the Guide that focus on this topic. If you read them, you might find them enlightening. You can still disagree of course.

 

And no, it didn't take two years just to come up with "Copper." In fact, that term was already in pretty widespread colloquial use as the post-Bronze Age and we simply formalized it for our Age range. What took two years was publishing articles about the rationale for dividing Ages - the more specific thinking behind the entire Age range itself - and discussing the subject with readers, collectors, historians, etc., taking in all their feedback, coming up with our own ideas, bringing Douglas Gillock aboard to offer his unique ideas for the mix, and then publishing the final article about it all in #34.

 

But again, if you don't like it, that's OK. Nothing we can do about that. For our purposes, it works just fine. And I note that we now have a Copper Age section here on the boards too, so it's working for other collectors too. To each his or her own.

 

Arnold while I respect the effort, the intent and accept that a Copper Age does exist (I grew up in it) Bronze to 1984 is And yes you are correct we do have a Copper Forum, however its a barren wasteland with very little traffic. Further, one of the most asked things when books are posted there is, "Is this Copper" and I have to tell you when someone posts a book from 1980-1983 the overarching opinion is YES. There is an entire THREAD in there dedicated to New Teen Titans - now I recognize that you talked to collectors, dealers etc etc. But I'll posit this to you. Start a thread entitiled "Is New Teen Titans, or SOTST 21 a BA book." I bet you dollars to Flying Donuts the consensus will be NO NO NO and the arguements illustrated will be compelling - even though I am hypothesizing over the result, I think its warranted based on the discussion I have seen on these boards with respect to Copper. With that in mind I have no other avenue than to think that your result is flawed - I will put the combined consensus on this message board up against any other resource you can muster, the knowledge base is truly that vast.

 

In addition, I would consider the scope of opinion that you consulted. What was the average age range of individuals in your expert opinion survey? Why do I ask? Because the average age of ppl who actually do frequent the Copper forum is overwhelmingly under 40 (probably under 35). If I'm going to have a SA, or GA discussion how much weight do I give to established guard in our Hobby, the heavy weights who were around when the Age in question was actually occuring? I give alot of weight to their opinion. HOWEVER the reverse is also true, the younger collector is more likely to have an aptitude and an affinity for understanding the nuances of the age, because they have nostalgic identification with it. This is a generalization, but a valid one nevertheless.

 

When I read your analogy and ideology behind the Copper initiative, I applaud the effort - but cannot accept the outcome.

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

That's why, like I said, we're certainly open to revisiting the topic and fine-tuning as more discussion about it builds in the community.

 

Just for clarification, I'm 33. And I spoke with people all up and down the age range and my strongest regular comic book buying took place between the mid-70s when I was but a wee lad in single digits to the late '80s, so I'm well acquainted with the era.

[Paul_Maul]

SOTST 21

 

I'm drawing a blank, what does this stand for?

[jbud73]

Saga of the Swamp Thing