Keys in Alan Moore's Swamp Thing run ??? 1 1

[shadroch]

I'd say the whole Moore run is premium and you should expect to pay for for them. 

[jdandns]

#34 is a classic cover (and story, unsurprisingly) and that certainly commanded a premium while Moore was still on the book.

Why, back then, you'd have needed at stack of #37s to trade for just one copy of  #21 or #34, assuming you could even find any takers for that.

[jimjum12]

On 12/18/2021 at 10:34 PM, jdandns said:

#34 is a classic cover (and story, unsurprisingly) and that certainly commanded a premium while Moore was still on the book.

Why, back then, you'd have needed at stack of #37s to trade for just one copy of  #21 or #34, assuming you could even find any takers for that.

 

[Tobytotts]

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2021/12/21/saga-of-the-swamp-thing-1st-john-constantine-appearance/     Well worth a read for a bit of truth 

[Lazyboy]

On 1/4/2022 at 5:22 PM, Tobytotts said:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2021/12/21/saga-of-the-swamp-thing-1st-john-constantine-appearance/     Well worth a read for a bit of truth 

Key words there. As usual, that site has a little truth and lots of... um, other stuff.

Bissette and Totleben wanted to draw Sting. They did. Alan Moore created a character who would look like Sting so they could draw him more often. Though, ironically, Bissette did not draw his first appearance.

Most of the support in that link is revisionist history. It doesn't matter how Bissette remembered things and what he said said only a few years ago (I wonder if that's influenced by his absence from the pages of #37 ). Look up the earliest accounts of Constantine's creation from decades ago.

As has been pointed out by others in the past, Sting appears in the panel right after and basically right next to the word balloon in which somebody says "police"  (what a coincidence ). Alan Moore is known for working with full, detailed scripts, though he allows the artists latitude for most artistic details. That means two things for this topic. First, anything significant (like an important new character) would be in the -script, while a lot of background stuff will be up to the artists. Second, the artists would have known what words would appear in the finished comic, and where.

[revat]

On 1/4/2022 at 5:30 PM, Lazyboy said:

On 1/4/2022 at 3:22 PM, Tobytotts said:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2021/12/21/saga-of-the-swamp-thing-1st-john-constantine-appearance/     Well worth a read for a bit of truth 

Key words there. As usual, that site has a little truth and lots of... um, other stuff.

Bissette and Totleben wanted to draw Sting. They did. Alan Moore created a character who would look like Sting so they could draw him more often. Though, ironically, Bissette did not draw his first appearance.

Most of the support in that link is revisionist history. It doesn't matter how Bissette remembered things and what he said said only a few years ago (I wonder if that's influenced by his absence from the pages of #37 ). Look up the earliest accounts of Constantine's creation from decades ago.

As has been pointed out by others in the past, Sting appears in the panel right after and basically right next to the word balloon in which somebody says "police"  (what a coincidence ). Alan Moore is known for working with full, detailed scripts, though he allows the artists latitude for most artistic details. That means two things for this topic. First, anything significant (like an important new character) would be in the --script, while a lot of background stuff will be up to the artists. Second, the artists would have known what words would appear in the finished comic, and where.

I agree that a lot of it MIGHT be revisionist, and just the natural human brain filling in gaps from memories of things that happened a long time ago.  Which doesn't mean they're not true, but I think ideally we'd get all three creators (and maybe an editor or two) to sit down for an interview with a professional investigative journalist AND all their notes/letters/practice art from the old days, preferably dated and with each person having multiple copies (like emails today).   Also handy would be copies of ALL interviews ANY of the creators have spoken on the topic.

That obviously seems unlikely, so you go with the evidence you have available and operate as close to good faith as you can. 

Rob Liefeld has in hindsight stated that Domino first appears in X-Force 11 (and most have accepted it), but who is it X-force 8?  (Understandably it's Copycat in New Mutants 98.).  Very clearly Domino is in MOST of X-force 8, though it is admittedly a flashback memory of Cable's from 10 years ago when they were all in the 'Six Pack' together.  She is featured on the cover, speaks, fights, is named by both narrator and Cable, shows up in multiple panels on multiple pages, etc.  If your question is "What about Copycat, didn't she impersonate Domino for an extended amount of time?"  Well that was more recent (NM 98-Xforce 10), certainly not 10 years ago, and was there for the purpose of helping Cable lead the New Mutants (eventually X-force) because Domino was missing/captured (Domino has not been in captivity for 10 years).  If anyone reads the comics, very clearly Rob is wrong, which is understandable because he's just drawing Domino, and he very reasonably could have gotten it mixed up, no reason for him to remember specific details of flashback storylines from the 90's.  He just remembered X-force 11 the real Domino is revealed as part of the storyline, so he assumed anything before that was Copycat Domino.  But he is very, very wrong.  Just as I was wrong when I loaded up on X-force 8 before Deadpool 2, and literally no one cared about that comic.

[Lazyboy]

On 1/4/2022 at 7:57 PM, revat said:

I agree that a lot of it MIGHT be revisionist, and just the natural human brain filling in gaps from memories of things that happened a long time ago.  Which doesn't mean they're not true, but I think ideally we'd get all three creators (and maybe an editor or two) to sit down for an interview with a professional investigative journalist AND all their notes/letters/practice art from the old days, preferably dated and with each person having multiple copies (like emails today).   Also handy would be copies of ALL interviews ANY of the creators have spoken on the topic.

That obviously seems unlikely, so you go with the evidence you have available and operate as close to good faith as you can. 

Which the person whose site was linked does not.

On 1/4/2022 at 7:57 PM, revat said:

Rob Liefeld has in hindsight stated that Domino first appears in X-Force 11 (and most have accepted it), but who is it X-force 8?  (Understandably it's Copycat in New Mutants 98.).  Very clearly Domino is in MOST of X-force 8, though it is admittedly a flashback memory of Cable's from 10 years ago when they were all in the 'Six Pack' together.  She is featured on the cover, speaks, fights, is named by both narrator and Cable, shows up in multiple panels on multiple pages, etc.  If your question is "What about Copycat, didn't she impersonate Domino for an extended amount of time?"  Well that was more recent (NM 98-Xforce 10), certainly not 10 years ago, and was there for the purpose of helping Cable lead the New Mutants (eventually X-force) because Domino was missing/captured (Domino has not been in captivity for 10 years).  If anyone reads the comics, very clearly Rob is wrong, which is understandable because he's just drawing Domino, and he very reasonably could have gotten it mixed up, no reason for him to remember specific details of flashback storylines from the 90's.  He just remembered X-force 11 the real Domino is revealed as part of the storyline, so he assumed anything before that was Copycat Domino.  But he is very, very wrong.  Just as I was wrong when I loaded up on X-force 8 before Deadpool 2, and literally no one cared about that comic.

Coincidentally, like Bissette, Liefeld did not draw the first appearance (of the real Domino). He only drew the framing sequence in X-Force 8. But he was still credited as a plotter, like the rest of his run.

[HighVoltage]

On 12/15/2021 at 4:10 PM, jimjum12 said:

That makes two of us... I guess I'm in good company.  GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

My copy of ST Annual 2 isn't for sale... probably my favorite after 21

You're only allowed to sell the Swampy Annual 2 to me, Jim...! 

[divad]

On 12/15/2021 at 2:07 PM, Lazyboy said:

Not really. Maybe issue 20.

Right. NoMan, beware of lying scumbags who will ask far too much for 25, 49, 50 and (now, apparently ) Annual 2 under false pretenses.

Dude, it's pay or play, and if you want to play you have to pay. "Lying scumbags" is a bit over the top. The market spoke for itself at different periods. I don't think people are giving away those issues. Btw, I think every issue in their run are key issues. 

[Lazyboy]

On 1/12/2022 at 9:04 PM, divad said:

Dude, it's pay or play, and if you want to play you have to pay. "Lying scumbags" is a bit over the top. The market spoke for itself at different periods. I don't think people are giving away those issues. Btw, I think every issue in their run are key issues. 

When you say something that isn't true, you're lying. When you have to deceive people to try to get more money from a sale, you're a scumbag. What's the problem here?

[divad]

On 1/12/2022 at 7:36 PM, Lazyboy said:

When you say something that isn't true, you're lying. When you have to deceive people to try to get more money from a sale, you're a scumbag. What's the problem here?

I wasn't arguing over the definition of "Lying scumbags" . . .  just that applying it to all sales of Swamp Thing

 

On 1/12/2022 at 7:04 PM, divad said:

25, 49, 50 and (now, apparently ) Annual 2

is a bit over the top. 

Now when applying to specific sellers you may have a point. 

Edited January 18, 2022 by divad

[Lazyboy]

 

On 1/17/2022 at 6:47 PM, divad said:

I wasn't arguing over the definition of "Lying scumbags" . . .  just that applying it to all sales of Swamp Thing

 

is a bit over the top. 

Now when applying to specific sellers you may have a point. 

Okay. But that's not what I said.

On 12/15/2021 at 4:07 PM, Lazyboy said:

beware of lying scumbags who will ask far too much for 25, 49, 50 and (now, apparently ) Annual 2 under false pretenses.

That doesn't say everybody selling those issues is a lying scumbag, just to beware of those who are falsely describing those issues to garner a greater sale price.

However, when most of the supposed value of an issue is based on a lie spread by , how can you really justify any sales? Why should Swamp Thing 49 be worth one cent more than 48? It shouldn't. It wasn't... before the lie.

Personally, I have always explained the truth to prospective buyers when they've told me things they wrongly believe about the issue they're looking at buying. Whether they believe me or not isn't always obvious, but all I can do is explain it to them. I can't understand it for them and, since I only really sell at shows, my time is constrained.

[Bronty]

49 does have a classic cover, and the story of all those dark heroes getting together is still cool.   But I get your point.

[jimjum12]

On 1/18/2022 at 6:04 PM, Bronty said:

49 does have a classic cover, and the story of all those dark heroes getting together is still cool.   But I get your point.

I remember talking with friends at the time, who also enjoyed the series, about what a cool concept it was and how DC seemed willing to use it more than once. The fact that it was presented in the 50th Anniversary issue was not likely a coincidence. It was meant to be important. When calling people he doesn't even know, a "lying scumbag", I can't really say that I get his point. GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Edited January 19, 2022 by jimjum12

[MAR1979]

In my personal DB this is an export of my description labels/tags for #50.

$1.25 Double-Sized, Alan Moore story, Death; Zatara and Sargon

Of course as I've mentioned at least a few times I don't sell comics. it's strictly for look-ups or my own books.

 

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by MAR1979

[Lazyboy]

On 1/19/2022 at 2:07 PM, jimjum12 said:

I remember talking with friends at the time, who also enjoyed the series, about what a cool concept it was and how DC seemed willing to use it more than once.

There are many DC books that bring together groups, small or large, of their magical/supernatural (or those who deal with such) characters.

On 1/19/2022 at 2:07 PM, jimjum12 said:

The fact that it was presented in the 50th Anniversary issue was not likely a coincidence. It was meant to be important.

There's not much coincidence with Alan Moore, no.

On 1/19/2022 at 2:07 PM, jimjum12 said:

When calling people he doesn't even know, a "lying scumbag", I can't really say that I get his point. GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

You don't get my point that people saying the Swamp Thing issues contain the first Justice League Dark appearance are lying scumbags? Even when it's blatantly untrue and they're just saying that to try to get more money from their sale? Really?

I guess I'll post this link for the second time in the thread.

Where is the line? What kind of lies can I tell to cheat others out of their money and still be a good person? Do you have any insight for me?