Seduction of the Innocent: New stuff discovered 0

[Sarg]

On 10/5/2020 at 9:01 PM, Electricmastro said:

Also, in 1951, Senator Capehart accused Sad Sack Goes Home as being Socialist propaganda. If people will be ready to point of Seduction of the Innocent, then they should be ready to point this out too:

 

That's a great find. Not all copies were burned, since a few are for sale on the Internet.

[SOTIcollector]

On 10/2/2020 at 7:40 PM, Sarg said:

How many more untraced/unknown references in SOTI still exist? 

I'm still amazed that so many were known by 1980. 

 

On 10/5/2020 at 12:44 PM, sfcityduck said:

Steve's website www.lostsoti.org has a list of what's left.

 

Thanks for the plug, @sfcityduck.  I need to update the site, but here are the "Lost SOTI" books that haven't been found yet.  At my site (www.LostSOTI.org), you'll find others that haven't been found, but which may not exist because they come from questionable sources (like a child telling Wertham or an assistant what they thought they read in a comic, as opposed to Wertham witnessing the comic himself.)

Page(s)	Quote from unknown SOTI comic	Notes
8	Here is the lecherous-looking bandit overpowering the attractive girl who is dressed (if that is the word) for very hot weather ("She could come in handy, then! Pretty little spitfire, eh!") in the typical pre-rape position. Later he threatens to kill her: "Yeah, it's us, you monkeys, and we got an old friend of yours here... Now unless you want to see somp'n FATAL happen to here, u're gonna kiss that gold goodbye and lam out of here!"
8-9	Here is violence galore, violence in the beginning, in the middle, at the end: ZIP! CRASH! SOCK! SPLAT! BAM! SMASH! (This is an actual sequence of six pictures illustrating brutal fighting, until in the seventh picture: "He's out cold!")
9	…graphic pictures of the white man shooting colored natives as though they were animals: "You sure must have treated these beggars rough in that last trip though here!"
106	In a typical specimen a man-eating shark changes into a girl. You are shown the gruesome picture of an arm bitten off by the shark with blood flowing from the severed stump. And the moral ending? "No one would ever believe . . . that the ghost of a lovely girl could inhabit a shark's body..."
111	In another comic book the murderer says to his victim: "I think I'll give it to yuh in the belly! Yuh get more time to enjoy it!"
111	"His body was torn to shreds, his face an unrecognizable mass of bloody and clawed flesh!"
112	In a Western comic book the "Gouger" is threatening the hero's eye with his thumb, which has a very long and pointed nail. This is called the "killer's manicure." He says: "YORE EYES ARE GONNA POP LIKE GRAPES WHEN OL' GOUGER GETS HIS HANDS ON YOU!... HERE GO THE PEEPERS!"
114-115	A four-year-old boy in Florida looked through his brother's comic books and his mother found him under a tree stark naked, with a long knife in his hands. Stunned, she asked him why he had undressed himself, and what he was doing. He replied, "The man in the comics did it." Later he showed her pictures where some "Mongols" had a white man stripped naked and one of them had a long knife to cut out the American's tongue.	In Captain Marvel #140, the villains are "Mongols", but there are no scenes in the book that match this description.
137	I can match this almost verbally [Note: Did Wertham mean 'verbatim'?]: "Let's see you try to take me, you big brave coppers!" says a comic book on my desk.	This quote sounds like a paraphrase of the most famous quote from real-life criminal "Two-Gun Crowley". His story was told in Hunted #13, Justice Traps the Guilty #4, Justice Traps the Guilty #59 and War Against Crime #2 (although E.C.'s story is about "Hank 'Two Gun' Corley" rather than "Frank 'Two Gun' Crowley", it's clear who the protagonist is). This quote comes from none of those comics. Crowley's story is also told in Crime Does Not Pay #46, Murder Incorporated #10 and Sky Sheriff v1#1.
159	In a recent comic book which has the "Seal of Approval of Comics Magazine Publishers," and is sold in New York subways, you learn that after a robbery you can escape more easily if you shoot out the source of light; you learn how to trade in guns; how to hijack ammunition; how to impersonate regular soldiers (I have had several cases of young people doing just that); and, of course, how to torture and kill a "squealer."	A search of GCD for hijacking stories returns a number of crime comics, but the only one with the ACMP seal is Justice Traps the Guilty #11. However, that comic does not contain this lost SOTI reference. GCD also shows several comics with a title that involves squealers. Based on that search, this reference is not in Crime Does Not Pay #89, Complete Mystery #4 or All True Crime Cases #34.
159	In one which has the "Seal of Approval of Comics Magazine Publishers" young men fake disease to get out of the army.
159	"Didn't I bluff my way out of the army?" says the hero-criminal. "Got a medical discharge without having anything wrong except indigestion! If you work it right, no doctor in the world can prove you're bluffing!"	It's likely this is the same one mentioned in the prior reference.
160	Another comic book shows how a youngster can murder for profit. He gets a job as a caddy, loses the ball, then kills the player when he goes searching for it.	In searching for Golden Age stories about golf, we found that this is not from Journey into Mystery #13 "Keep off the Grass"; Tales from the Crypt #36, "How Green was my Alley"
160	"Fixing" of sporting events has recently been front-page news. I have one accused boy under psychotherapy right now. In comic books that is old stuff: "Here's 500 now, and you'll get 500 when it's over!"	Although this could be a reference to any sporting event, it seems most likely this dialogue comes from a "fixed" boxing match. According to eBayer Habib, this is NOT in the boxing story in Racket Squad in Action #9. David T. Alexander was kind enough to point out that although DC's Mr. District Attorney #3 does contain a line about the "fixing" of a boxing match, it is not the book referenced here. Shock SuspenStories #4 also contains a boxing story, but not this one. Man Comics #6 contains a boxing story which has not been checked for this reference, but seems unlikely to be this one since the Man #6 story is about murder in the ring. Crime Detective v1#10 and Crime Must Pay the Penalty #31 each have a story about fixing a boxing match, but it's not the story to which Wertham was referring.
161	Forgery is, of course, also described in comic books. The preferred method is to pick up a blotter which has been used and copy the signature with the aid of a mirror.
161	From one book you can learn how to cut through the glass and break into a store and how to stop the noise when you do break in: "Pile the blankets on to smother the noise!"
162	A man's pocketbook is stolen on the subway. Millions of little boys learn how to do that: "Did someone shove a newspaper in your face? And were you shoved from the rear at the same time? I can see that's what happened. The pickpocket got it while you were upset by the shove." Lesson completed.
162	How to steal a woman's pocketbook is outlined, too. According to the stories it may be done skillfully and peacefully, but if that does not work, just hit them over the head.
162	In some comic books it is shown how the youngest tots are picked up bodily, held upside down and shaken so that the coins will fall out of their pockets.	It could be this was a scene of comic relief in a GA Daredevil book; that's one place to look, anyway.
162-163	Often comic books describe real crimes that have been featured in the newspapers. In adapting them for children the following points are stressed: the daring and success of the criminals is exalted; brutal acts are shown in detail; sordid details are emphasized; if there are any sexual episodes they are featured. In 1952 three men escaped from a penitentiary. They stole cars, evaded the police, kidnapped people, held up a bank, and were finally caught in New York where they were living with three girls. A real children's story! In the first picture there is an unmade bed, a half-nude man and a girl. The prison break is described like a heroic feat. The ease with which you can steal cars in the country from a farmer is pointed out to youngsters who do not know that yet. One of the criminals boasts to a little boy that he has killed fifteen or sixteen people, "I lost count."
163	The girls living with the criminals are featured, two of them hiding behind a shower curtain. There are seventy-six pictures of exploits; in the seventy-seventh picture the police take over with a cheap wisecrack.
178	Another boy defended Crimes by Women and showed a copy of Penalty which he said was worse. ""It shows how to commit burglaries, holdups. A gangster has a hand on a girl's shoulder. He is working his way down to her headlights.""	This is one that may never be found. All issues of Crime Must Pay the Penalty have been reviewed, and several instances have been found that involve a gangster putting his hand on a girl's shoulder and also involve holdups. It's likely that this reference comes from issue #3, because issue 3 was used in the NY State Legislature's investigation of comic books, to which Wertham contributed. Unless the information turns up in Dr. Wertham's files, we'll never know for sure which comic this is. Possible candidates: Crime Must Pay the Penalty #3 (Story also reprinted in #36) Crime Must Pay the Penalty #17 Crime Must Pay the Penalty #23 Crime Must Pay the Penalty #25 Crime Must Pay the Penalty #28
182	In one comic book with a story on "the man who shanghaied more than 1,000 men from the San Francisco docks," there is suddenly - unrelated to the story - an illustration showing large in the foreground only the lower part of a girl's legs, in net stockings and very high-heeled red shoes.	Although the following contain stories of shanghais in San Francisco, they do not fit Wertham's decscription: Buccaneers #23, Famous Crimes #8, Inside Crime #3, Outlaws #12 (which is a reprint of Western Killers #61), War Against Crime #3, Western Killers #61, or Women Outlaws #3. It could be Prize Comics Western #v9#2 (#81), which features the story "Bandits of Barbary."

 

 

 

 

[SOTIcollector]

I'm resurrecting this old thread for new information on Peter Penny and His Magic Dollar.  It's one of the hardest-to-find SOTI books.  There are only 12 copies on the census (11 regular and one "variant").  GPA shows only one sale of a graded copy (in 2017).

It appears that there are four editions:  the first two (John and George below) have three panels at the bottom of the front cover.  I've never been able to compare them side-by-side, and the only thing I know of that distinguishes them is their measurements.  Because one is narrower, the art seems to be a tiny bit smaller, leaving a significant art-free margin at the bottom.  The third edition (Ringo) has no panels at the bottom of the cover, and the fourth edition (Paul) is a modification of the third, with the art partially redrawn.

Today I added yet another version to my collection.  It could be yet another edition, but I suspect it's just a copy that was trimmed to the incorrect size. The one in the middle is my new purchase.  It appears to be identical to version Ringo (Ringo is pictured at right and left of it), except for the fact that the new one is noticeably taller at 10 3/4". 

Closer view:  New one on the left; a more typical Ringo on the right.

 

I might be inclined to think that this is a new edition of the book.  However, take a look at the bottom of the cover.  See how the extra 5/8" is blank?   

Now take a look below at the interior.  It shows the "known" Ringo version on top of the "new"/taller version.

Every page has a wide blank margin at the bottom.  The art ends, and then there's an extra 5/8" inch on every page.   I'm inclined to think that this is just a Ringo version that didn't get trimmed properly, rather than an entirely new edition.  I'd welcome any thoughts as to whether this was intentionally or accidentally produced at the larger size.

 

[Susanville]

Great thread. Have to share my Ringo(?).

[sfcityduck]

On 7/29/2022 at 10:45 PM, Susanville said:

Great thread. Have to share my Ringo(?).

Ringo? SOTIcollector has had some great ideas. His site is awesome and his passion is second to none. But naming the Peter Wheat variations out of order after the Beatles is not one of his great ideas. Just sayin'.

[LDarkseid1]

SOTI book 🙌

[SOTIcollector]

On 7/30/2022 at 3:38 AM, sfcityduck said:

Ringo? SOTIcollector has had some great ideas. His site is awesome and his passion is second to none. But naming the Peter Wheat [oops... Peter Penny] variations out of order after the Beatles is not one of his great ideas. Just sayin'.

Hmmm.  I was specifically looking for something without an order because the sequence of the books is not completely clear.  That's why I avoided "first/second/third" and "A/B/C" nomenclature.

It is clear that the John and George versions came first and second, but I have no way of knowing which of those two came first.  It's clear that version Ringo was the third of those four, and Paul was the last of the four.  So the sequence could have been

John->George->Ringo->Paul, or it could have been

George->John->Ringo->Paul.

I'm wondering what would be considered the correct sequence for this naming convention?  Does this naming convention imply a sequence of John, Paul, George, Ringo, because that's the most common sequence of those names? Would it be by birth date, earliest first:  Ringo, John, Paul, George?

Would it be by the date they joined The Beatles (or predecessor, such as the Quarrymen)?  That might work here, because John and Paul started together, then added George, then added Ringo.  This would fit with the "can't-really-say-which-of-the-first-two-was-the-first-one" narrative of the Peter Penny editions.

And then what would become of this new, taller one that I just added to my collection?  Is that George Martin?  Billy Preston? 

Edited August 2, 2022 by SOTIcollector
fixed tiny typo

[sfcityduck]

On 8/2/2022 at 11:27 AM, SOTIcollector said:

Hmmm.  I was specifically looking for something without an order because the sequence of the books is not completely clear.  That's why I avoided "first/second/third" and "A/B/C" nomenclature.

It is clear that the John and George versions came first and second, but I have no way of knowing which of those two came first.  It's clear that version Ringo was the third of those four, and Paul was the last of the four.  So the sequence could have been

John->George->Ringo->Paul, or it could have been

George->John->Ringo->Paul.

I'm wondering what would be considered the correct sequence for this naming convention?  Does this naming convention imply a sequence of John, Paul, George, Ringo, because that's the most common sequence of those names? Would it be by birth date, earliest first:  Ringo, John, Paul, George?

Would it be by the date they joined The Beatles (or predecessor, such as the Quarrymen)?  That might work here, because John and Paul started together, then added George, then added Ringo.  This would fit with the "can't-really-say-which-of-the-first-two-was-the-first-one" narrative of the Peter Penny editions.

And then what would become of this new, taller one that I just added do my collection?  Is that George Martin?  Billy Preston? 

Great questions!

Normal order is John, Paul, George and Ringo because that's how they entered the group. Used to be John, Paul, George, and Pete (and for a short time Stu).  Pete got fired and Stu left before it really took off. So they don't count.

The "fifth Beatle," that's a tough one. No doubt that George Martin was their most significant musical collaborator in the first four fifths of the 60s, but he'd never consider himself a Beatle or perform with them. Billy Preston not only contributed to Let it Be and Abby Road, but he performed in their last live performance and two singles were credited to the "Beatles with Billy Preston." Those credits, however, make it clear that Billy wasn't a Beatle. He was outside the Beatles. So he's not the fifth Beatle either. Eric Clapton played on a few songs, and John wanted to get him to replace George if George stuck with quitting, but George didn't. So that just shows they didn't think of Clapton as the fifth Beatle either.

No, the best candidate for the "fifth Beatle" is Mal Evans. He was their friend and roadie from the beginning, he stuck with them through the end and beyond as an employee, and that moment in "Get Back" when he's contributing the hammer piece to Maxwell's Silver Hammer is fantastic! An article on Mal notes:

Quote

Mal even got to be on the back cover of “Sergeant Pepper.” Paul could not make one of the photo shoots for the album, so Mal put Paul’s costume on and kept his back to the camera for the photograph. (Curiously, many fans pointed to this anomaly as proof that Paul was dead.) Being in the studio more gave Mal a chance to appear on many Beatles classics. He played the bass drum and sang in the chorus of “Yellow Submarine,” played bass harmonica on “Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite,” percussion on “Magical Mystery Tour,” trumpet on “Helter Skelter” and handclaps on “Birthday.” He struck the anvil on “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer,” rang the alarm clock on “A Day in the Life,” and he was one of three people who struck the famous E major chord on three different pianos to end that song.

So I'd call the "fifth" Peter Penny "Mal."  

Glad I could be of help straightening this all out for you!  

Edited August 2, 2022 by sfcityduck

[LDarkseid1]

Just purchased this from a local comic shop. Pretty cool find being a SOTI book, as well as L.B. Cole cover.

Edited August 7, 2022 by LDarkseid1

[aardvark88]

Long list of 136 SOTI cover pics per Comic Book Invest site including 'wholesome' Classic Comics and Classics Illustrated. Please click here.

[SOTIcollector]

On 4/20/2023 at 9:36 PM, aardvark88 said:

Long list of 136 SOTI cover pics per Comic Book Invest site including 'wholesome' Classic Comics and Classics Illustrated. Please click here.

Interesting.  Thanks for sharing.  It looks like they went to my site (lostsoti.org), took my list of SOTI books, and added their own photos.  If you compare the two, you'll see that I used the correct cover photos at my site.  The Comic Book Invest site has incorrect photos for Ideal #3 and Wild Boy #10.

[SOTIcollector]

I believe my Peter Penny collection is complete, thanks to the great comic book detective, Ken Quatro.

Ken’s selling books from his collection, and I picked up his copy of Peter Penny & his Magic Dollar.  I also have come to believe that there’s only one first edition of the book. 

For years Overstreet has stated that there are two printings of the book, one of which is “redrawn”, and the two printings can be differentiated by their size.  I long ago came to the conclusion that the Overstreet information is inaccurate.

I’ll steer clear of ascribing the word “printing” to any of these books, because unless somebody uncovers information from the book’s printer or the archives of the American Banker’s Association, we’ll never know how many different PRINTINGS there are.  In fact, each bank that purchased copies had their logo custom printed on the back.  Was each of those a separate printing?  Could it be that they printed, say, a quarter million copies with a blank back, and then ran those books through another printing process 5,000 at a time to customize the back covers with a specific bank’s logo?

There was some discussion earlier in this thread of using the term “state” to refer to the variations, but with what I know now I think “edition” better conveys items with different content.  I can state with certainty that there are three different editions of the book, since I’ve owned at least two copies of each edition.  The content varies slightly between editions, and the sequence in which the editions were created is obvious. 

The first edition is the one that has three panels at the bottom of the cover.  Subsequent editions omit those three panels.  The third edition, which has been called “redrawn”, would more accurately be described as “partially redrawn.”  The lower portion of many panels was added by somebody with a fraction of the artistic ability of the original artist, making it easy to spot the portions of the art that were added later.

Within these editions there can be variations. 

I had thought the first edition had two versions of differing sizes because Marty Mann’s first edition (a CGC 6.5) was slightly narrower than the copy I have.  I was calling these two versions "John" and "George" a few years ago in this thread.  However, now that I have two first editions in hand, I’m reluctant to say that there are different printings or versions of varying sizes.  There’s only a small variation in size (up to 1/4 inch), and one of the first edition copies I own has a right edge that wasn’t cut parallel to the spine.  As a result, the amount of difference in size between my two copies depends on where you measure.  They’re about the same size at the top, but ¼ inch different at the bottom.  So unless other information comes to light, I’d say "John" and "George" are the same book. 

I have found one copy of the second edition with a size that differs rather significantly from the size of the others I’ve found.  I haven’t found variations among the third edition.

Here’s a description of the copies I’m aware of.  This is compiled from the books I have owned plus photos, descriptions and measurements of Mary Mann’s first edition.  

• First edition: Distinguished by the three panels at the bottom of the cover.
• Second edition:  Distinguished by the fact that it doesn’t have the three panels at the bottom of the cover, the airplane on the cover is printed in solid blue, and the interior panels don’t have partial redrawing at the bottom. 
• Third edition:  Distinguished by the fact that it doesn’t have the three panels at the bottom of the cover, and the airplane is shaded with a dot pattern rather than a solid blue, and interior panels have lower portions that were clearly added by a different artist from the one who drew rest of upper portion of the panels.  

There are numerous ways to distinguish a second edition from a third edition, but the shading of the airplane on the cover is one of the easiest to describe.  Another way to distinguish second from third edition is the teacher's wrist in the first interior panel.  Her right wrist is absent in the second edition but present in the third (partially redrawn) edition.   

Here are photos of the various editions and some identifying characteristics. 

 

When I compare the wider first edition to the narrower first edition, I see that it's a small variation.  I believe these aren't separate printings.  Here's what it looks like when I place the narrower first print on top of the wider one. With the spines aligned perfectly, the difference in the cut of the right edge becomes noticeable.  At the top of the book, they are nearly the same width.  At the bottom of the book, there's a quarter inch difference.

 

 

Below is my second edition that is a good deal larger than the typical second edition. This larger one is 1/8" wider and 5/8" taller than the typical one.  It doesn't appear that the book was intended to be printed in this taller format, because the taller book just has a bunch of out-of-place-looking extra white space at the bottom of the cover and at the bottom of every page.

Keep scrolling for photos of the plane and the teacher's wrist that can be used to distinguish second edition from third edition.

 

Here are the second and third editions in the same photo, with a view of the plane on the cover of each.

Close-up of the planes.  The second edition is the plane on the left, shaded solid blue.  The third edition is the plane on the right, shaded with light blue dots.

Second edition plane:

Third edition plane:

Here's the first interior panel of the second edition, along with the first interior panel of the second edition.  The new/redrawn art is evident in the third edition.  In the second edition, the teacher's right arm is visible only to the middle of her forearm.  In the third edition, the teacher's right arm extends to the wrist.  

Second edition, teacher without a right wrist is on top.  Third edition, teacher with a right wrist, is on bottom.

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by SOTIcollector

[SOTIcollector]

And a few related items just for fun.

 

Peter Penny's 1948 sequel.

The 1958 edition.

Some Peter Penny tchotchkes.  A "Dime Saver" with Peter Penny inside, a matchbook cover, a spending calculator, and an odd little stand-up.

 

[Marty Mann]

TERRIFIC!

[vaillant]

On 9/28/2020 at 11:04 PM, SOTIcollector said:

Here's another fun SOTI-related item I just added to the collection.  Poison Peddling on America's Boulevards. It's a religious tract from the 1950's that rails against immoral comic books.

I prefer mainstream anti-comics publications to religious tracts, but this one was cheap so I couldn't resist.  This 32-page booklet attacks publications that it deems to be immoral, and pretty much conflates comic books with more adult-targeted material of the day like detective magazines.  It lumps them into one big nasty sleazy immoral they'll-rot-your-brain-and-send-you-to-hell bucket. 

I found it interesting that the author chose to obscure the titles of the real comic books displayed on the cover, replacing the titles with nonsense characters. So of course, I was dying to know what the books were.  I found one pretty easily because I recognized a character, and then I read the tract and found out what the rest of the books are because the author named the titles.

Since we have such awesome sleuths on the boards, here's a fun challenge:  how many of these books can you identify?  I'll drop hints as necessary.

These are fascinating, and they show how comics were perceived as a "danger" way before and aside of Wertham's work.
In fact, I believe in each and every country the reception of comics as children literature was so varied and different that it would be great to be able at some point to compare the views/expectations.
In Italy, for example, the anti-comics sentiment was a lot stronger at the beginning, in the 1930s, as our culture and pedagogy was still much relying on 19th century practices, and they were valued compared to children written literature or illustrated tales.
I seem to recall I already told you I have a 1939 book with a collection of articles issued concurrently to the same year congress on children literature (some may even be conferences transcription) and it's almost in general "zero tolerance" on comics.

There were comic book covers also within the article in the german "anti-Atlanticism" magazine "USA in Wort und Bild" that i sold you, right?

Edited 7 hours ago by vaillant