"Rarest GA DC Publication" (?) Roll Call 4 4

[sfcityduck]

1 minute ago, pemart1966 said:

To me this book has way more Gaines solo effort written on it than being a DC product.  Even the topic was not what DC was doing at the time.  BUT...what do I know?  

The one thing we do know is that it is NOT a Gaines solo effort because it was published by a publisher, Jolaine Publications, that Gaines co-owned with Jack Liebowitz.  Any receipts for "Defend" would have been split between Gaines and Liebowitz according to their partnership agreements.

 

[pemart1966]

1 hour ago, sfcityduck said:

The one thing we do know is that it is NOT a Gaines solo effort because it was published by a publisher, Jolaine Publications, that Gaines co-owned with Jack Liebowitz.  Any receipts for "Defend" would have been split between Gaines and Liebowitz according to their partnership agreements.

 

I probably used the wrong word here.  What I meant was that this book looks to me as if it was the brainchild of Gaines and his doing and that any connection with DC was in name only.

This is not an EC book but it would be interesting to hear the take of EC completists as to how they regard the book.

[eccomic]

Which begs the question :

The MC Gaines publications “Narrative Illustration”  and “Good Triumphs over evil“ Would not be considered to be the first EC comics or are they lumped in with all American?

[Tri-Color Brian]

14 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

There are two questions most long time collectors on this forum will ask:

1) Is it rare?

2) Does Bob Beerbohm consider this book to be unique and of indisputable importance in the history of comic books?

You forgot the 3rd and most important question:

Did Bob sell a copy at his Comix and Comix store? 

[EC ed]

2 hours ago, pemart1966 said:

This is not an EC book but it would be interesting to hear the take of EC completists as to how they regard the book.

I agree that it is not an EC. In my view, it is impossible for anything published before 1945 to be considered an "EC" comic book…the company literally did not yet exist. As an aside, I have seen some of Max Gaines’ other early work incorrectly referenced as an EC publication. For example, Narrative Illustration (1942) is often referenced as an EC publication– this is just flat wrong. EC literally did not exist until 3 years later. It’s an awesome book, and a grail for a “Max Gaines completist,” but it’s not an EC publication. Same thing with Max’s book Good Triumphs Over Evil (1943), etc.

Also, here's my take on All-American - I think you could make an argument that pre-1945 All-American books are "DCs" - after all, the DC logo was on the cover! However, beginning in February 1945 Max put an All-American Publication logo on his books, after he had his falling out with the National/DC crew. In my opinion, those 1945 books with the "All-American Publication" logo on the cover are not DC books. In December, 1945, all of the former All-American titles except for Picture Stories (e.g., Sensation Comics, All-Flash) were once again published under the DC logo...DC officially owned them at that point...so, after 1945 they became DC books "again." 

[sfcityduck]

2 hours ago, EC ed said:

 

Also, here's my take on All-American - I think you could make an argument that pre-1945 All-American books are "DCs" - after all, the DC logo was on the cover! However, beginning in February 1945 Max put an All-American Publication logo on his books, after he had his falling out with the National/DC crew. In my opinion, those 1945 books with the "All-American Publication" logo on the cover are not DC books. In December, 1945, all of the former All-American titles except for Picture Stories (e.g., Sensation Comics, All-Flash) were once again published under the DC logo...DC officially owned them at that point...so, after 1945 they became DC books "again." 

It's a valid opinion.  But, since Jack L. still was his partner and a partner in DC, I think the branding of the books was more of a negotiating strategy than something that would disqualify them from being DC comics.  The AA and DC characters still were co-existing in the JSA.

[OtherEric]

@EC ed- What do you personally consider the first EC?  The two major contenders I'm aware of are Picture Stories from the Bible NT 2 (AA on cover, Educational Comics in indicia) and Picture Stories from American History #1 (EC logo on cover), but both those guesses are based on what I've personally seen, not a comprehensive knowledge of the publisher.

Here's the other oddball question:  Who was the publisher of each different printing of Picture Stories from the Bible (Complete OT edition)?  The earliest was DC, as it is generally dated 1943.  But at some point it must have moved to EC, possibly stopping at AA on the way.

 

 

[OtherEric]

7 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

It's a valid opinion.  But, since Jack L. still was his partner and a partner in DC, I think the branding of the books was more of a negotiating strategy than something that would disqualify them from being DC comics.  The AA and DC characters still were co-existing in the JSA.

They actually were not.  When All-Star went to the AA branding, the heroes from the DC side left, and Green Lantern & the Flash returned.  You can see where the art was rather clumsily doctored to turn, for example, a Starman chapter into a GL chapter.

[sfcityduck]

2 hours ago, OtherEric said:

They actually were not.  When All-Star went to the AA branding, the heroes from the DC side left, and Green Lantern & the Flash returned.  You can see where the art was rather clumsily doctored to turn, for example, a Starman chapter into a GL chapter.

You learn something new every day!  Thanks for the correction.  That's fascinating!

[Cat-Man_America]

The "Rarest GA DC Publication" is actually a trick question.  Personally, I'd think an ashcan copy of FLASH Comics featuring the origin of Captain Thunder deserves consideration. 

[pemart1966]

8 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

The "Rarest GA DC Publication" is actually a trick question.  Personally, I'd think an ashcan copy of FLASH Comics featuring the origin of Captain Thunder deserves consideration. 

That doesn't really qualify as a "publication" though - i.e. it was not "published" for the purpose of sales...

Edited August 26, 2020 by pemart1966

[telerites]

I think the best part of this thread is @sfcityduck finding the book in the wild. 

 

[PeterPark]

Double Action 1?

[sfcityduck]

3 minutes ago, PeterPark said:

Double Action 1?

Ashcans are production or legal artifacts not published books.  But, there is no doubt that the ashcans of which there is one known copy (there are more than Double Action 1) are among the rarest DC items.  If you are going for published items or newsstand items (which is what Ian counted), then you don't need the ashcans to get a complete collection.

[Cat-Man_America]

4 hours ago, pemart1966 said:

That doesn't really qualify as a "publication" though - i.e. it was not "published" for the purpose of sales...

IMO, this is a grey area in both cases.  Both titles apparently received limited distribution.  

Publication is a technical term as applied here.  Both are publications, the question becomes whether which if either were mass produced and widely distributed. One was published as a civil defense primer with limited distribution, the other as a comic to establish title registration, albeit not intended for distribution.  Both exist in very limited quantity.

Which one is for all intent and purposes a comic book? B&W verses color has never been an issue for that determination.  Page count has never been an issue nor has distribution.

Of course, FLASH Comics became a DC title and Captain Thunder became Fawcett’s Captain Marvel which is now a DC character. That is the very reason that it would be a desirable rarity appealing to comic collectors focusing on either publisher’s books.  Just sayin’.

[sfcityduck]

10 minutes ago, Cat-Man_America said:

.

Publication is a technical term as applied here.  Both are publications, the question becomes whether which if either were mass produced and widely distributed. One was published as a civil defense primer with limited distribution, the other as a comic to establish title registration, albeit not intended for distribution.  Both exist in very limited quantity.

 

"How You Can Defend Your Home" was advertised in house ads in multiple DC Comics from April to June 1942.  It was officially published, with an indicia, by Jolaine Publications - the publisher of All-Flash Comics, Green Lantern Comics, and Comic Calvacade.  It was distributed.  We do not know how widespread the distribution was or how extensive the print runs were.  We do know that not many exist today (victim of paper drives and lack of interest in preserving a seemingly entirely un-useful publication perhaps?) and only three exist in institutional collections (which is a very very small amount - less than other incredibly rare items like Gaines' Narrative Illustration or Wertham's pick for the "one good comic" The Nightingale).

In contrast, the ashcans were not, to my knowledge, ever advertised, officially published, or distributed outside of the DC or Fawcett offices.  They are production artifacts, like proofs, color guides, and copyright/trademark submissions, which predate the publication of the titles they relate to.  

 

[sfcityduck]

22 minutes ago, Cat-Man_America said:

 

Of course, FLASH Comics became a DC title and Captain Thunder became Fawcett’s Captain Marvel which is now a DC character. That is the very reason that it would be a desirable rarity appealing to comic collectors focusing on either publisher’s books.  Just sayin’.

Here we completely agree.  I'd rather have the DC Flash ashcan or the Fawcett Flash/Thrill ashcan than "Defend."  

[sfcityduck]

Worth noting that one one of the top ashcan experts also is one of the few who has a copy of "Defend."  Since he's apparently wrapped up in other things, here's Mark Zaid's copy as a reference:

P.S. It is always makes me happy when anything I have looks better than the copy owned by an advanced collector like Zaid - LoL!    

Edited August 26, 2020 by sfcityduck

[IngelsFan]

1 hour ago, sfcityduck said:

Ashcans are production or legal artifacts not published books.  But, there is no doubt that the ashcans of which there is one known copy (there are more than Double Action 1) are among the rarest DC items.  If you are going for published items or newsstand items (which is what Ian counted), then you don't need the ashcans to get a complete collection.

When did a second copy of Double Action 1 turn up?  

[sfcityduck]

3 minutes ago, IngelsFan said:

When did a second copy of Double Action 1 turn up?  

Apologies if I was unclear, but I am saying that there are more ashcans than just Double Action 1 for which only one copy is known to exist.  I think a number of those are more desirable than the Double Action 1.