Why are cartoon comics not as popular with collectors as superhero comics are? 3 3

[IngelsFan]

On 11/21/2023 at 9:09 AM, sfcityduck said:

Except that print appearances pre-dated film appearances of most major Disney Duck characters.

Nice to know-I wasn’t aware of that. I’ve been leaning more toward Looney Tunes than Disney. Disney seems daunting due to the amount of material out there. I don’t know where to start!

[Tri-Color Brian]

On 11/21/2023 at 6:19 AM, pemart1966 said:

Bugs appeared in drag MANY times in the cartoons so seeing him as such on a comic book cover - not shocking.

It wasn't meant to be shocking.  It was meant to be funny...

[pemart1966]

On 11/21/2023 at 7:28 PM, Tri-ColorBrian said:

It wasn't meant to be shocking.  It was meant to be funny...

I probably should have used "surprising".   

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

I love the classic animated cartoons, particularly DD, T & J, basically anything HB, WB or Disney....however that's animation.

The comic book derivatives are fun and some (cover-wise) are aesthetically pleasing....but let's be real...in comparison to other genres like PCH, men in questionable tights et al, there ain't much going on in terms of cover art.

OA lovers for example...a Schomberg busy cover, an EC horror classic or Bugs Bunny eating a carrot?

No contest.  

Edited November 22, 2023 by Paul (GG) © ® ™⚽️💙
ytpo

[Telegan]

On 11/21/2023 at 6:28 PM, Tri-ColorBrian said:

It wasn't meant to be shocking.  It was meant to be funny...

Milton Berle would've laughed!  Maybe ...

Edited November 22, 2023 by Telegan

[BitterOldMan]

On 11/20/2023 at 5:02 PM, Tri-ColorBrian said:

I'm fine with most collectors not appreciating cartoon character books.  Keeps the prices low for me.  Look at this...Bugs in Drag...

Bugs loved to play dress up.  Along with “Rabbit of Seville”,”What’s Opera, Doc?” Are two of the greatest cartoons ever.

[pemart1966]

On 11/21/2023 at 8:34 PM, Paul (GG) © ® ™⚽️💙 said:

I love the classic animated cartoons, particularly DD, T & J, basically anything HB, WB or Disney....however that's animation.

The comic book derivatives are fun and some (cover-wise) are aesthetically pleasing....but let's be real...in comparison to other genres like PCH, men in questionable tights et al, there ain't much going on in terms of cover art.

OA lovers for example...a Schomberg busy cover, an EC horror classic or Bugs Bunny eating a carrot?

No contest.  

Generally speaking no question about it but the original art for this cover would likely generate a lot of interest.  OK, technically he's not eating a carrot. 

 

[Jayman]

On 11/21/2023 at 7:28 PM, Tri-ColorBrian said:

It wasn't meant to be shocking.  It was meant to be funny...

 

[Bookery]

On 11/20/2023 at 8:40 PM, adamstrange said:

Golden Age represents the golden age of superheroes when they went from being 13% share of a very small market in 1938 to a 54% share of a much larger market in 1941.  In June 1941, there are 57 comics, 42 of which are arguably mostly super-hero based. 

Though their dominance didn't last long.  I think they took off 1938-1941 partially because they led the pack in being all-original material... prior to that most comics were comprised of newspaper reprints.  The demand for all-original stories certainly was explosive.  Dell's 2nd Four Color series didn't get started until 1941, WDC&S and Classics Illustrated didn't have their first full year until 1942.  The crime, horror, and romance genres didn't really get going until after WW2, so there really wasn't much competition for super-heroes in those first few years.  Comics were geared almost exclusively to kids up to and through WW2.  Afterward, companies began exploring genres to attract a bit older audience.  This expanded their audience successfully... but also led to their demise because of the Comics Code, which they couldn't have foreseen coming.  Super-heroes, of course,  didn't really flourish again until DCs silver-age re-boot, aimed at a bit older audience, and then Marvel, aimed at an even older audience still.

[Bookery]

On 11/20/2023 at 10:55 AM, Robot Man said:

Superheroes have always been top of the heap to comic collectors. There are a lot of popular genres but “men in tights” have always had the most popularity.

Yes... but comic collectors weren't really a thing until the latter 1960s... by which time I still feel the other genres had already faded away due to TV.  I think from the '60s onward, comic books became inextricably associated with the super-hero, certainly as far as news media was concerned (boosted hugely by the Batman TV show).

[Bookery]

On 11/21/2023 at 3:49 AM, Cat-Man_America said:

George Reeves starring in The Adventures of Superman was very successful from 1951 through '57 (in color by '54), with outstanding FX for the time though clearly on a tight budget. What changed was that superheroes ...with about a half dozen exceptions... were almost a dead genre between the end of the war and late 1950's; these exceptions hung on while crime, horror, romance, western and science fiction dominated comic market readership until public outrage and the CCA almost wiped comics out completely.

I watched the TV Superman in the mid-60s on re-runs, but even as a kid by that point it seemed pretty hokey.  It was certainly never a substitute for the Legion of Super-Heroes flying around the galaxy, or the fascination I had at the time with the quirkier heroes like Metal Men, Metamorpho, Sea Devils (or even the Fat Fury!).  I watched "Batman" for laughs, but never confused it with the "real" (New Direction) Batman in the comics.  Horror is an interesting comic genre.  I really believe, were it not for the Code, horror would have become co-dominant with heroes in the '60s, as again it's a genre that TV wasn't allowed to do in anything other than very tame versions (compare "Twilight Zone" with the Hammer movies for example, or even with what was developing in the b&w magazines exempt from the code).

[Robot Man]

On 11/22/2023 at 7:08 AM, Bookery said:

I watched the TV Superman in the mid-60s on re-runs, but even as a kid by that point it seemed pretty hokey.  It was certainly never a substitute for the Legion of Super-Heroes flying around the galaxy, or the fascination I had at the time with the quirkier heroes like Metal Men, Metamorpho, Sea Devils (or even the Fat Fury!).  I watched "Batman" for laughs, but never confused it with the "real" (New Direction) Batman in the comics.  Horror is an interesting comic genre.  I really believe, were it not for the Code, horror would have become co-dominant with heroes in the '60s, as again it's a genre that TV wasn't allowed to do in anything other than very tame versions (compare "Twilight Zone" with the Hammer movies for example, or even with what was developing in the b&w magazines exempt from the code).

 

[adamstrange]

On 11/22/2023 at 9:54 AM, Bookery said:

Though their dominance didn't last long.  I think they took off 1938-1941 partially because they led the pack in being all-original material... prior to that most comics were comprised of newspaper reprints.  The demand for all-original stories certainly was explosive.  Dell's 2nd Four Color series didn't get started until 1941, WDC&S and Classics Illustrated didn't have their first full year until 1942.  The crime, horror, and romance genres didn't really get going until after WW2, so there really wasn't much competition for super-heroes in those first few years.  Comics were geared almost exclusively to kids up to and through WW2.  Afterward, companies began exploring genres to attract a bit older audience.  This expanded their audience successfully... but also led to their demise because of the Comics Code, which they couldn't have foreseen coming.  Super-heroes, of course,  didn't really flourish again until DCs silver-age re-boot, aimed at a bit older audience, and then Marvel, aimed at an even older audience still.

I pulled my comments from a longer explanation of GA and Atomic Ages.  I posted it because not everyone realizes that superheros, started by Superman, were the key to the explosion of American comic book publishing, without which the entire medium would not have developed the way it did. 

Through WWII, comics were widely read by young adults, up to and including those of military age, and this was understood by publishers.  The end of the war marked the end of that first age of superheros, though it was a gradual decline.

It is not useful to think about the GA of comics without acknowledging the supremene influence of the superhero genre.

[sfcityduck]

On 11/22/2023 at 6:59 AM, Bookery said:

Yes... but comic collectors weren't really a thing until the latter 1960s... by which time I still feel the other genres had already faded away due to TV.  

Comic collecting started as soon as there were comics. But it did not evolve into modern organized fandom until 1960.  But there were comic collectors and dealers earlier. 

 

[sfcityduck]

On 11/22/2023 at 7:20 AM, adamstrange said:

I pulled my comments from a longer explanation of GA and Atomic Ages.  I posted it because not everyone realizes that superheros, started by Superman, were the key to the explosion of American comic book publishing, without which the entire medium would not have developed the way it did. 

Through WWII, comics were widely read by young adults, up to and including those of military age, and this was understood by publishers.  The end of the war marked the end of that first age of superheros, though it was a gradual decline.

It is not useful to think about the GA of comics without acknowledging the supremene influence of the superhero genre.

As a matter of nomenclature the term “Golden Age” as used by fans at the birth of modern fandom around 1960 or so referred to the “Golden Age of super hero comics” (really DC) and the later term “Silver Age” referred to the reboot of GA heroes and a second flurry of superhero dominance.

Terms like “Atomic Age” are not really useful because they bear no relationship too and contradict decades of the shared history and understanding by fandom of the term Golden Age. 

The reality also is that the decline of the market share of superhero comics also corresponded to the increase of adult comic readers, proliferation of other genres, and probably the biggest overall comic market. It was not until the backlash against comics hit full flower and the CCA was adopted that the superhero revival occurred. 

Superheroes never went away. New superheroes and revivals occurred throughout the 1950s before and after Showcase 4.

PS The first documented use of the term “Golden Age” by a comic collector in writing was in 1948.

 

Edited November 22, 2023 by sfcityduck

[goldust40]

On 11/22/2023 at 4:23 PM, sfcityduck said:

PS The first documented use of the term “Golden Age” by a comic collector in writing was in 1948.

Never knew that. I always thought it was Will Eisner who coined that term.

[sfcityduck]

On 11/22/2023 at 8:28 AM, goldust40 said:

Never knew that. I always thought it was Will Eisner who coined that term.

It was Dave Wigransky.

[stormflora]

On 11/22/2023 at 9:54 AM, Bookery said:

Though their dominance didn't last long.  I think they took off 1938-1941 partially because they led the pack in being all-original material... prior to that most comics were comprised of newspaper reprints.  The demand for all-original stories certainly was explosive.  Dell's 2nd Four Color series didn't get started until 1941, WDC&S and Classics Illustrated didn't have their first full year until 1942.  The crime, horror, and romance genres didn't really get going until after WW2, so there really wasn't much competition for super-heroes in those first few years.  Comics were geared almost exclusively to kids up to and through WW2.  Afterward, companies began exploring genres to attract a bit older audience.  This expanded their audience successfully... but also led to their demise because of the Comics Code, which they couldn't have foreseen coming.  Super-heroes, of course,  didn't really flourish again until DCs silver-age re-boot, aimed at a bit older audience, and then Marvel, aimed at an even older audience still.

For someone who is an amateur to the comic scene, what exactly is the Comics Code and how did it influence the entire scene?

On 11/22/2023 at 11:23 AM, sfcityduck said:

As a matter of nomenclature the term “Golden Age” as used by fans at the birth of modern fandom around 1960 or so referred to the “Golden Age of super hero comics” (really DC) and the later term “Silver Age” referred to the reboot of GA heroes and a second flurry of superhero dominance.

Terms like “Atomic Age” are not really useful because they bear no relationship too and contradict decades of the shared history and understanding by fandom of the term Golden Age. 

The reality also is that the decline of the market share of superhero comics also corresponded to the increase of adult comic readers, proliferation of other genres, and probably the biggest overall comic market. It was not until the backlash against comics hit full flower and the CCA was adopted that the superhero revival occurred. 

Superheroes never went away. New superheroes and revivals occurred throughout the 1950s before and after Showcase 4.

PS The first documented use of the term “Golden Age” by a comic collector in writing was in 1948.

 

What are the Comic Book Ages? | The Nerd Hoard

I personally feel that the Modern Age should really be broken up. There has just been so much that's happened over the last 40 years compared to the last 100 that it cannot simply be condensed into a single period of time. Comics post-2000 and possibly even post-2010 are nothing like post-1985. Comics nowadays are designed with higher artistic quality bars to be met, and there are a lot more indie/independent series introduced to the scene instead of solely superheroes.

[Bronty]

On 11/20/2023 at 8:40 PM, adamstrange said:

Golden Age represents the golden age of superheroes when they went from being 13% share of a very small market in 1938 to a 54% share of a much larger market in 1941.  In June 1941, there are 57 comics, 42 of which are arguably mostly super-hero based. 

1938 and even 1939 are pointless years to use because there was almost no superheroes being published yet.  

Your point about 1941 is fair, but what's that look like in 1951?  I think the point he's making is that after the initial boom during the war years, superheroes weren't that popular - again - until the 60s/70s.

[adamstrange]

On 11/22/2023 at 11:23 AM, sfcityduck said:

Terms like “Atomic Age” are not really useful because they bear no relationship too and contradict decades of the shared history and understanding by fandom of the term Golden Age. 

You were doing fine until you knocked the Atomic Age.  I was restricting my comments to avoid straying to far from the original topic, but, as much as I am a fan of super-hero comics, there is an overemphasis on them when discussing the general history of comic books and comic art.

The greatest quantity of published comics, widest variety of comic art, and deepest readership among the population occurred when superheros were at their lowest point.  It is entirely inappropriate to have a set of ages, therefore, that only aligned with when superheros were, relatively speaking, the most popular genre.