Warren Magazine Reading Club! 6 6

[Axe Elf]

CREEPY #18 - January 1968

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

Warren’s Dark Age

18. cover: Vic Prezo (Jan. 1968)

1) Creepy’s Loathsome Lore: Giant Man-Apes! [Archie Goodwin/Roy G. Krenkel] 1p [frontis] reprinted from Creepy #9 (June 1966)

2) Mountain Of The Monster Gods! [Ron White/Roger Brand] 8p

3) The Rescue Of The Morning Maid! [Raymond Marais/Pat Boyette & Rocco Mastroserio] 10p [art is credited solely to Mastroserio.]

4) Act, Three! [Johnny Craig] 8p

5) Footsteps Of Frankenstein! [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 8p reprinted from Eerie #2 (Mar. 1966)

6) Out Of Her Head! [Clark Dimond & Terry Bisson/Jack Sparling] 8p

Notes: Editor: James Warren, although Clark Dimond states that both this and Eerie were ghost edited during this time by an editor friend of Jim Warren’s at Gold Key.  This came out a month late but, actually, isn’t too bad of an issue.  The amount of content vs. ads was clearly down but the new material here was quite good.  Raymond Marais’ story was easily the best story so it’s too bad he only wrote one other ----script for Warren.  He did do quite a number of stories for DC’s mystery books.  The Boyette/Mastroserio art team was a good combo as well.  Most of the stories were leftovers from the Goodwin Era since Warren had initiated a freeze on buying new stories or art until his finances became less shaky.  However, the Dimond/Bisson was purchased by the nameless Gold Key editor before the freeze took place.  The headless woman named Rachel in that story was based on Dimond’s fiancé!  Terry Bisson would edit the Warren rival Web Of Horror in 1969-1970 and later would become a major award-winning science fiction writer.  Cover artist Vic Prezio had done a number of covers for Famous Monsters Of Filmland and would be the main cover artist during the Dark Age.  Future comic writer Tony Isabella sent in a letter stating he “was less than wildly enthusiastic about Tom Sutton’s art while still noting that he was a talented newcomer”.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And perhaps the first sign that things were getting tight at Warren Publishing is the fact that for the first month in two years--since December of 1965--there was no magazine published in December of 1967!  And so we are straight on into January of 1968...

I always thought the "CREEPY JAN. #18" in the upper left box on the cover looked really funky on this issue--like someone had hand-lettered it with a Sharpie rather than being printed by typeset.  I guess now I can see that it's because of the change in editors.

And a lot more is changing too.  We have a new cover artist, and new writers and artists on the inside as well.  There's another oddly-punctuated Johnny Craig piece as well.  I think maybe I read some of Terry Bisson's science fiction back in my high school days.  I wouldn't know who Tony Isabella is.

So there are some things to look forward to for me, despite being a rather abbreviated issue with a reprint to boot.

You know why they call it "The Dark Ages," don't you?

Because it was knight time...

Edited December 25, 2022 by Axe Elf

[OtherEric]

Creepy 18 thoughts:

Cover:  The first cover for the comic magazines by Vic Prezio, coming over from Famous Monsters.  The Warren index credits him as both Prezo and Prezio, apparently Prezio is correct.  Several of his covers are good, and there's at least one outright classic he did (Creepy #29).  This one is decent, although it would be better if it wasn't such a blatant swipe of the third issue of Amazing Stories.  To be fair, it's probably far easier today to see the swipe than it was in the pre-internet era of 1968.  (Not my copy, I've got all of three of the Bedsheet size issues of Amazing and this isn't one of them.)

Loathsome Lore:  Krenkel art remains great, but it seems odd that they used a relatively recent lore page (from #9) so quickly.

Mountain of the Monster Gods:  The story feels unfinished, at least in terms of art and lettering.  I think the bones of a decent story are here... but I can also clearly see why people opening the book felt this was such a drop from the previous issue.

The Rescue of the Morning Maid:  Why didn't they lead with this story, instead?  A good ----script (by a writer who only did two pieces for Warren), good art by Boyette and Mastroserio, and an effectively played twist at the end.  Boyette will go on to do quite a few stories for Warren, and even some covers.  He's one of those creators who does a ton of work all over the place but never really gets mentioned as one of the greats.  Maybe not a masterpiece, but a very solid story overall that's the highlight of the issue.

Act, Three:  Another good story by Craig, but I'm wondering if production fell through in some way, and some shading or other elements that were intended weren't added.  There's some shading on the splash panel that just isn't there in the rest of the story, and I think there are quite a few places where something like that was intended.  I can't believe Craig meant for, say, the bottom panel on page 28 to be printed without SOMETHING filling in the vast white space on the left of the page.

Footsteps of Frankenstein:  Somebody was awake enough to change Cousin Eerie to Uncle Creepy to intro and outro the story, but missed the reference to the first issue (in this case, Eerie #2) in the opening caption.  

Out of Her Head:  Jack Sparling joins the Warren crew here, he does about 20 stories for Warren over the years.  Which is probably less than 1% of his total comic work.  He was an insanely prolific artist, although I believe much of his stuff was actually done by a studio he ran.  The stuff he and his studio produced was always very well done technically, although to my mind frequently a bit stiff.  This actually paid off with the large number of features he did that used the likenesses of real people- he did a lot of TV or Movie adaptations, where the ability to keep stars on model without looking it's continual tracing of the same single photo is a desperately needed skill.  The story is good but not great  It looks better than either Mountain of the Monster Gods or what we actually got from Craig this issue, but it also feels somewhat too slick for a horror book.

So, overall, I thought this issue was much better than its reputation had me expecting.  I have the feeling the reason this fell so flat was down to production matters... I feel that at least two of the stories were genuinely not ready for publication in the form they got printed, and one of them I feel is very much not the creator's fault.  Let's see how it goes once they run out of inventory material for the books...

 

Edited December 25, 2022 by OtherEric

[Axe Elf]

On 12/25/2022 at 12:04 AM, OtherEric said:

Footsteps of Frankenstein:  Somebody was awake enough to change Cousin Eerie to Uncle Creepy to intro and outro the story, but missed the reference to the first issue (in this case, Eerie #2) in the opening caption.  

Heh, you're beating me to the punch on my editing gripes!

[OtherEric]

On 12/24/2022 at 10:09 PM, Axe Elf said:

Heh, you're beating me to the punch on my editing gripes!

I gave you a full five minutes to post your comments on the book before mine went up!

I had to find something new to say about the reprint, didn't I?

[Axe Elf]

Welp, I guess we've arrived at the Dark Ages.  I totally agree with @OtherEric's assessment of the first story, "The Mountain of the Monster Gods," being such an obvious drop in quality right off the bat.  And it's hard to say which is worse, the story or the art?  The story makes no sense--the bad guy was mad because his victim-to-be let all the native guides (i.e., murder witnesses) go?  And there's no explanation for how the victim came back from the dead--he didn't even fall in the ooze--but he came back with extra dynamite to seal the cave again, and then somehow, the two became one when they both fell into the ooze?  Whatevs.

It was interesting that @OtherEric mentioned the lettering on this piece, because my eye was drawn to the lightning bolt "s"s throughout the text--like the Nazi SS logo that KISS was always criticized for incorporating into their logo.  This was closer to WWII than KISS was; didn't anyone take offense at these "s"s?  And I kept thinking how much better Ditko would have rendered a cave full of goo-spawned monsters than Roger Brand did.  I mean, these "monsters" are really minimalistic and cartoonish to my eye, like they belong in a kid's book or something.

I would also agree that the second story "The Rescue of the Morning Maid" would have made a better lead--but only nominally, as it's not THAT great either.  There's really no explanation for the main character--this "creature of darkness" that "nature had rendered unable to mingle with other men by the full light of day--lest they run from him in abject terror" who roams deserted rooftops by night and just happened to stumble across this witch's little revenge plot.  But I guess if you don't ask too many questions, the story of the witch's revenge plot is about the most entertaining -script in the issue.  At least the Mastroserio art is comfortingly familiar--and I even got some rats!

I could even see leading the magazine with the enigmatically entitled "Act, Three" because it's fairly entertaining to read--with the starlet's over-the-top egomania and all ("I know you love me!  EVERYONE loves me!")--even if the story itself doesn't really stand out from other entries in the lycanthropic genre.  But that's two issues in a row with an oddly-titled piece written and illustrated by Johnny Craig.  I still don't know what the title refers to here, any more than I was able to grasp the "...Nor Custom, Stale..." Shakespearean title last week, but other than the weird titles, Craig also provides some comforting continuity from the glory days.

I thought "Footsteps of Frankenstein" was a little weak the first time around, so I guess it fits in perfectly here.  It's not BAD, but it just stretches credulity to think that the monster would be struck by lightning the moment he steps foot outside the castle.

"Out of Her Head" had questions too--how did her head get cut off while she was riding on the car?  And how did her head get back inside the haunted house so quickly?  I could live with the art, though it seemed a little "light" for the subject matter, like a crossover episode of Josie and the Pussycats on Scooby Doo or something.

So yeah, drop in quality to be sure--but at least it wasn't all reprints... yet.

Speaking of reprints, I once again had to struggle to remember seeing the "Loathsome Lore" on ape-men the first time around--and the first time around wasn't that long ago.  I guess they're just not that memorable for me.

I have to give them credit for not brushing their troubles under the rug on the Letters page; the first letter right off the bat complains about the reprinted Loathsome Lore in the previous issue.  But they don't really address that issue, either; Uncle Creepy's response is more flippant than apologetic.  And someone else is allowed to complain that Famous Monsters of Filmland is terrible.  I will also give them credit for expanding the letters section to two pages this issue, to help make up for fewer stories I suppose.

Some people drew a parallel between "The Invitation" (CREEPY #8 and EERIE #1) and "A Night's Lod(g)ing" (CREEPY #17) that I hadn't noticed before, but yeah, the stories are similar.

And finally, Uncle Creepy hints that a new Adam Link is in the works, and we should watch for it in the next issue--but it looks like that never came to fruition (I looked ahead).

At least we're back to having descriptions of the stories on the Contents page.

[The Lions Den]

On 12/30/2022 at 7:00 PM, Axe Elf said:

I could live with the art, though it seemed a little "light" for the subject matter, like a crossover episode of Josie and the Pussycats on Scooby Doo or something.

   That's a good one!

Even Jim Warren must have been pretty disheartened at the measures he had to take to keep his head above water during this period. Thankfully, even a bad Warren book usually has a few bright spots...   

 

[Axe Elf]

EERIE #13 - February 1968

(A hard-sought-after upgrade from my original 2.5ish copy that landed me solidly into 6.0 territory!)

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

13. cover: Vic Prezio (Feb. 1968)

1) Wentworth’s Day [Russ Jones/Russ Jones & Frank Bolle] 9p from the story by H. P. Lovecraft & August Derleth, reprinted from Christopher Lee’s Treasury Of Terror (Sept. 1966)

2) Ogre’s Castle [Archie Goodwin/Angelo Torres] 6p reprinted from Creepy #2 (Apr. 1965)

3) Tell-Tale Heart! [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 8p from the story by Edgar Allan Poe, reprinted from Creepy #3 (June 1965)

4) Voodoo! [Bill Pearson/Joe Orlando] 6p reprinted from Creepy #1 (Jan. 1965)

5) Spawn Of The Cat People [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 6p reprinted from Creepy #2 (Apr. 1965)

6) The Success Story [Archie Goodwin/Al Williamson] 6p reprinted from Creepy #1 (Jan. 1965)

Notes:  There were three months between issues here, reflecting Warren’s shaky financial status.  Size reduction to 48 pages.  Oddly enough, Russ Jones’ name was dropped from ‘Wentworth’s Day’ which he did work on but was still included on ‘Voodoo!’ which he did not.  An all-reprint issue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's kind of fortuitous timing that we start our new year of 2023 about the same time that EERIE was starting its new year of 1968--and it's "dark ages" run of largely reprint issues.  And being a largely reprint issue, it will also be kind of a timely vacation from the pressures of a full-blown book report this week--but as always, any comments, new or old, are welcomed!

As I mentioned above, I have an undercopy of this issue due to upgrading my original copy--so I can actually read a physical copy again this week--there just isn't that much of it that I haven't read already!  I have a few musings about this issue in general, but if I don't save them for my actual review, I won't have much of anything to talk about then!

[OtherEric]

You seriously expect me to have something ready to post rather than ringing in the New Year?

A perfectly reasonable expectation, honestly.     Just playing games online with friends, and it's only 10PM here.

Eerie #13 thoughts:

A general note:  I'm convinced this issue and Creepy #19 were somewhat lower distribution than the surrounding issues.  I got the two issues very last minute relative to the rest of the issues I needed up to April for the reading club. 

Cover: An excellent cover by Prezio.  For some reason, I actually find the text on the cover quite appealing in this case, which is unusual.  It gives the piece a retro poster feel that works here, and whoever laid it out took great care to make sure it works with the image, not against it.

The ad on the inside cover, rather than the monster gallery, feels very weird.  But it is what it is, I suppose.

Wentworth's Day:  Based on the story by August Derleth.  Despite what Derleth claimed, there's really no Lovecraft in this story.  For more details, see here:

https://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/derleth.aspx

The story itself is pretty good, although the adaptation of the layout from the paperback completely fails on the last page.  I think we would have been better served by a blank spot at the bottom than the pointless rotation.  This is, I believe, the first appearance of Frank Bolle in the Warren mags, he's another incredibly prolific artist with a decades long career that you don't hear much about, and his work here is well suited to the story.

The rest of the book is all reprints from early issues of Creepy, generally first-rate choices if you hadn't seen them before, at least.  Cousin Eerie is statted in replacing Uncle Creepy, except for one place where they just left a hole, but they miss correcting the text at least twice that I spotted.

Overall, I think this does a pretty good job given it's starting from a place of desperation... as a reprint annual it would be fine.  But for a regular reader it doesn't have much to offer, although the cover and the one story from the Chirstopher Lee book are both good.

 

[Axe Elf]

On 1/1/2023 at 12:14 AM, OtherEric said:

A general note:  I'm convinced this issue and Creepy #19 were somewhat lower distribution than the surrounding issues.  I got the two issues very last minute relative to the rest of the issues I needed up to April for the reading club.

Ok, this was one of those things I was going to save for my review, but since you brought it up...

I don't know if the distribution was lower, but it does seem like EERIE #13 and the next chronological issue, CREEPY #19, are disproportionately harder to find (at least in good shape) than the issues before them, especially knowing now that they are both basically reprint issues.  As I noted, my pictured copy was a long sought-after upgrade--it was kind of hard to find a good-looking copy at a reasonable price (that one cost me $25 + fees).

So I wonder if the fact that they WERE basically reprint issues meant that a lot less issues were sold, and resultingly, a lot less issues are out there in circulation than the issues with fresh stories that sold more copies.

Someone out there probably knows how to look up old distribution numbers and can confirm whether or not the actual printing/distribution was lower--but if those numbers are comparable, I would suggest that the actual number of issues that entered into circulation might be lower for these reprint issues.

[OtherEric]

On 12/31/2022 at 10:32 PM, Axe Elf said:

Ok, this was one of those things I was going to save for my review, but since you brought it up...

I don't know if the distribution was lower, but it does seem like EERIE #13 and the next chronological issue, CREEPY #19, are disproportionately harder to find (at least in good shape) than the issues before them, especially knowing now that they are both basically reprint issues.  As I noted, my pictured copy was a long sought-after upgrade--it was kind of hard to find a good-looking copy at a reasonable price (that one cost me $25 + fees).

So I wonder if the fact that they WERE basically reprint issues meant that a lot less issues were sold, and resultingly, a lot less issues are out there in circulation than the issues with fresh stories that sold more copies.

One thing I'm also wondering is if they were somehow printed differently, or by a different printer.  The Creepy #19, in particular, seems incredibly vulnerable to ink transfer and cover loss on the cover.  When we see my copy next week, I obviously have a worst case scenario, but it seems like nearly every copy out there has the problem to a greater or lesser extent.  It may not be low distribution so much as poor production quality.

I just checked the ad in Eerie #139, the #13 was still available, and wasn't broken out as a more expensive issue compared to those around it.

[Axe Elf]

On 1/2/2023 at 11:35 PM, OtherEric said:

I just checked the ad in Eerie #139, the #13 was still available, and wasn't broken out as a more expensive issue compared to those around it.

Which would add credibility to the theory that there was no shortage of them printed/distributed--but there could still have been a lower number of those issues entering into consumer hands due to fewer of the reprint issues being purchased by consumers, which would in turn lead to fewer copies available in the consumer market now, especially copies in good condition.

As far as the color loss issue, mine isn't too bad (I won't post it until next week, but THIS is its Gallery link)--but then it is one that I paid $40 to acquire (because it wasn't included in the large CREEPY collection I bought), so I felt the scarcity in looking for it.

[Axe Elf]

I definitely like this Vic Prezio cover much better than I liked the sea-snakey cover of CREEPY #18.  I was pretty sure the cover content must relate to the one new story in this issue, since it didn't seem to have anything to do with any of the reprint stories with which I was already familiar.  The colors really looks sharp in high grade, which is perhaps another reason why good copies of this issue seem to be somewhat paradoxically at a premium, despite the mostly-recycled nature of its content.

And it really does suit the story well--even down to the shotgun blast to the back of the skull (which I hadn't really noticed as a detail on the cover before reading the story)--except for strangling the guy with a long scarf?  Where did THAT come from?  Oh well, it otherwise matches the story really well; the guy being attacked even looks just like the guy in the story, only done in oil paints instead of ink pens!

I'm not sure what the "Read Why the Number 13 Scares You" text is supposed to refer to; I realize it's issue #13, but that's it?  It sounds like there should be an article/story about triskaidekaphobia inside the issue somewhere.

Anyway, I thought that "Wentworth's Day" was well-written (though I agree that it doesn't sound much like Lovecraft), but it bookended the issue with two tales of the wronged dead returning to take their revenge.  I mean c'mon, if you're going to do reprints, you have all those stories to choose from--you don't have to print two that are basically the same genre!

The other criticism I have of it is that the art seemed more suited to a comic book than to the quality we've seen in previous Warren magazines--and that contrast was only heightened by the reprinted masterpieces that followed from Torres, Crandall and Orlando.  "Success Story" by Williamson was the most 'comic-book-y' of the Warren reprints--but that can almost be forgiven because the subject matter of the story is comic strips to begin with.

But just as I was starting to form that impression of comic book art for the first piece, the guy says something that ties it even closer to the comics...

Is that the same Arkham where the Asylum is in the Batman video game lore?  And his response is so out of left field too--"Oh, by the way, I drove my car into your barn." 

Since I had an undercopy of this issue to physically handle, I basically went through and read all the reprints again anyway.  It was great to see Sylvia Prentiss American Bandstanding her way through the "Voodoo" ceremony again--and hold her in my hands this time!  "Ogre's Castle" is one of the stories that was last to be cut from my "Yearbook" selections.  It's a really fine story--I love the foreshadowing in the beginning (which I also had not noticed the first time around):

And it's really painstakingly drawn by Torres.  The powers that be at Warren must have liked it a lot too; it's not only reprinted here, it's also eventually the cover story for EERIE #42!

@OtherEric mentioned the various superpositions of Cousin Eerie where Uncle Creepy had been in the originals, so I was watching out for that--otherwise I probably wouldn't have noticed!  (Well, except maybe when Cousin Eerie said something about "the last tale that Uncle Creepy told you," which probably would have clued me in.)

@OtherEric also mentioned that the inside of the cover was ads this time, rather than a Monster Gallery or something; I probably wouldn't have noticed that either--but being aware of it ahead of time, it was kind of strange.  I was a little surprised there was no letters page this issue; you'd think fan letters is one thing there would be no shortage of, even in the Dark Ages.

But even though @OtherEric did also mention the layout fail on the last page of the first story, I wasn't prepared for how BADLY it failed!  Turning that page was the biggest WTF moment I've had in the Reading Club so far!  Yeah, just use half a page and run another ad for a live monkey under that or something.

 

[OtherEric]

On 1/5/2023 at 7:15 PM, Axe Elf said:

But just as I was starting to form that impression of comic book art for the first piece, the guy says something that ties it even closer to the comics...

Is that the same Arkham where the Asylum is in the Batman video game lore?  And his response is so out of left field too--"Oh, by the way, I drove my car into your barn." 

The name comes from Lovecraft; the Asylum took the name from the same source but wasn't used by DC until 1974.  In the Lovecraft (and Derleth) stories it's a town, not a person. 

Back in the day it wasn't unusual to park cars in barns, apparently. Most people probably didn't have garages then.  The phrasing is slightly archaic and amusing, though.  But I've encountered it enough in older stories I didn't notice it until you pointed it out.

There probably wasn't a letter column because there was barely an editor to put the book together in time at all...

Edited January 6, 2023 by OtherEric

[Axe Elf]

On 1/6/2023 at 1:34 AM, OtherEric said:

In the Lovecraft (and Derleth) stories it's a town, not a person. 

I never played the Arkham Asylum (Batman) video games, but I bought a couple of them for the PS3 way back when.  I guess I assumed Arkham was a town too, or at least a district of Gotham City or something (like the Brooklyn Asylum).  I never considered it could have been named after a person!

Amazing what I learn here.

I think part of why I found the barn line so amusing is that I recently saw a pic of a Christmas nativity scene, but instead of looking at the baby Jesus, they were all looking at the toy DeLorean that had burst through the barn wall.  So I was primed to hear it the funny way.

[Axe Elf]

On 1/5/2023 at 9:15 PM, Axe Elf said:

It was great to see Sylvia Prentiss American Bandstanding her way through the "Voodoo" ceremony again--and hold her in my hands this time!

Before the Week of EERIE #13 is over, I just want to emphasize how much fun it was to revisit this opening panel "in the flesh" so to speak.  I really hate the story, but I am in love with that opening splash panel, which is at once silly and sinister, visually beautiful and dramatically engaging--that first panel from the first story in the first issue we read exemplifies everything that Warren would be at its best.

I salute you for setting the tone way back then, Joe Orlando--and for the chance to read it again now, in my scruffy 2.5ish undercopy of EERIE #13.

[Axe Elf]

CREEPY #19 - March 1968

(I paid up a little bit for this issue, but other than a slight spine roll, it's a pretty good-looking copy!)

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

19. cover: Vic Prezo (Mar. 1968)

1) Creepy’s Loathsome Lore: Mummy’s Curse! [Archie Goodwin/Roy G. Krenkel] 1p [frontis] reprinted from Creepy #6 (Dec. 1965)

2) The Mark Of The Beast! [Craig Tennis/Johnny Craig] 9p from the story by Rudyard Kipling, reprinted from Christopher Lee’s Treasury Of Terror (Sept. 1966)

3) Carmilla [John Benson/Bob Jenney] 20p from the story by Sheridan Le Fanu

4) Monsterwork! [Archie Goodwin/Rocco Mastroserio] 6p reprinted from Eerie #3 (May 1966)

5) Eye Of The Beholder! [Archie Goodwin/Johnny Craig] 6p reprinted from Eerie #2 (Mar. 1966)

Notes:  Prezo’s cover for the Kipling story was one of his best.  Magazine size reduced to 48 pages. This was largely a reprint issue.  ‘Carmilla’ was the longest stand alone story that Warren would publish for many years and was originally intended for the never published second paperback collection of Christopher Lee’s Treasury Of Terror, packaged by Warren’s persona non grata former editor, Russ Jones.  All the stories that appeared in the first, published volume were reformatted for the larger magazine size and ended up appearing in either Creepy or Eerie.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to calling him "Vic Prezo" again eh...?

I actually hadn't thought of this as a Prezio cover until I saw it credited, but it makes sense now that I know it.  All three Prezio covers over the past 3 issues have all been a little different, but they do share some commonalities as well, so I'm growing in my appreciation of his work.  I think I have liked each of his covers better than the last, and I find this one to be really attractive in high grade (in spite of the funky lettering for the issue # again).  Prezio seems to have taken over as the new Frazetta for the Warren covers on a budget.

Even though this is largely a reprint issue, I haven't seen "The Mark of the Beast" before, and I'm kinda looking forward to immersing myself in an all-new 20 page (!) story as well, so it should still be a pretty good issue/week.

[OtherEric]

Creepy 19 thoughts:

Cover: A great cover by Prezio.  We've already discussed how vulnerable the cover is to color loss; @Axe Elf has one of the better ones I've seen but it's still got some visible wear on the bottom and right sides.  My copy, meanwhile, is one of the worst, to the point where it looks like water damage or mold.  It's just ink loss, and feels like a normal book in hand.

Loathsome Lore:  Most if not all the reprinted inside front covers have been Krenkel.  Not that I'm complaining, but it does seem oddly consistent.  

The Mark of the Beast:  The -script seems to be assuming the reader is familiar with the original version of the story, which I am not. As shown here there are simply gaps that make it borderline incoherent.  Nice Craig artwork, though.

Carmilla:  This does a much better job of making the adaptation work for somebody who hasn't read the original.  Although that might be helped by the fact that, while I haven't read it, I'm at least aware of the original, unlike the Kipling story.  Interrupting the story and continuing on a later page is something that's all too common in older magazines, but I think this is the only time Warren ever did it.  I wonder if they were originally planning to split this story over two issues but realized they didn't have anything better to fill out this one.

The reprints are both quite good, although I slightly question having two Johnny Craig stories.  Although, given that they didn't change the "Jay Taycee" credit, I wonder if whoever put this together didn't realize they actually had two.

Overall, a surprisingly good issue given that, other than the cover, there was no new material actually intended for the magazine.  I'm starting to think the whole "Dark Age" rep is a bit overrated, but we'll see how it goes when we've been dealing with it for a while longer.

[The Lions Den]

On 1/8/2023 at 1:20 AM, OtherEric said:

Overall, a surprisingly good issue given that, other than the cover, there was no new material actually intended for the magazine.  I'm starting to think the whole "Dark Age" rep is a bit overrated, but we'll see how it goes when we've been dealing with it for a while longer.

For me, these issues do hold a certain fascination. And as Warren slowly rebuilds, it's nice to see certain artists and writers actually grow and mature in this new environment... 

[The Lions Den]

On 1/5/2023 at 10:15 PM, Axe Elf said:

I'm not sure what the "Read Why the Number 13 Scares You" text is supposed to refer to; I realize it's issue #13, but that's it?  It sounds like there should be an article/story about triskaidekaphobia inside the issue somewhere.

Given the situation at the time, I think this may have been an editorial oversight. For a possible explanation, please refer to Eerie #16.

And I do believe that's the first time I remember seeing the word triskaidekaphobia (fear of the number 13) in a sentence...  

[FoggyNelson]

On 1/8/2023 at 1:20 AM, OtherEric said:

Creepy 19 thoughts:

Cover: A great cover by Prezio.  We've already discussed how vulnerable the cover is to color loss; @Axe Elf has one of the better ones I've seen but it's still got some visible wear on the bottom and right sides.  My copy, meanwhile, is one of the worst, to the point where it looks like water damage or mold.  It's just ink loss, and feels like a normal book in hand.

Loathsome Lore:  Most if not all the reprinted inside front covers have been Krenkel.  Not that I'm complaining, but it does seem oddly consistent.  

The Mark of the Beast:  The --script seems to be assuming the reader is familiar with the original version of the story, which I am not. As shown here there are simply gaps that make it borderline incoherent.  Nice Craig artwork, though.

Carmilla:  This does a much better job of making the adaptation work for somebody who hasn't read the original.  Although that might be helped by the fact that, while I haven't read it, I'm at least aware of the original, unlike the Kipling story.  Interrupting the story and continuing on a later page is something that's all too common in older magazines, but I think this is the only time Warren ever did it.  I wonder if they were originally planning to split this story over two issues but realized they didn't have anything better to fill out this one.

The reprints are both quite good, although I slightly question having two Johnny Craig stories.  Although, given that they didn't change the "Jay Taycee" credit, I wonder if whoever put this together didn't realize they actually had two.

Overall, a surprisingly good issue given that, other than the cover, there was no new material actually intended for the magazine.  I'm starting to think the whole "Dark Age" rep is a bit overrated, but we'll see how it goes when we've been dealing with it for a while longer.

Never saw a cover looks so bad but structural strong