"Classic Cover" pulps 2 2

[CGC Mike]

On 6/30/2024 at 7:58 PM, Cushing Fan said:

Thank you so much Mike for passing this along. As some members mentioned here, there are certain covers that the collecting community have considered classic which have not been recognized by CGC and it would be great public relations if the collecting community would be allowed to have a say.

I have a tiny bit of pull with our database specialist, and our President.  I expect that they would consider a list of classic cover selections from our community.

[Bookery]

For what it's worth, I did a word-search of the pulp guide document, and the word "classic" appears 259 times.  Now this isn't all necessarily describing covers... often it refers to classic story, or the pulp boasting a number of classic authors, etc.  (However, I would think that it is a wee-bit possible I might have gotten carried away with the term-???).  I'd have to go through each one to see why I labeled it so... and I'm not going to go back and do that.

But, to be fair, a guide represents an author's opinion as well as those accepted by the larger community.  If there was an "official" list of truly "classic" covers, I'm sure some of my own listings would not make even my cut.  I used it sometimes to signify standout covers within a title.  It's possible the community-at-large might not consider any Blue Book cover a classic... but there are issues within that huge run that pop out against the others.  Likewise, I think there is a tendency to designate far too many Spicy nudes and skeleton covers as important, when they really are just par for the course for those titles.  Personally, I have, and still do, consider other subjects beside just gore and salaciousness to have "classic" potential.  Can a photo-cover be a classic?  How about Rockwell Kent's woodcut covers?  

One of the problems with using only what traditional pulp collectors have considered classic over time is that until fairly recently, most collectors were unaware of huge swaths of issues (and even titles).  Covers were deemed classic based on what was seen... typically at the few pulp shows that existed, mixed in with flea-market finds.  Weird Tales and even Spicys are actually more common (or at less less-scarce) than people realize, and they were runs sought by many collectors, and so they have a perhaps undue influence on such designations.  Now, with Galactic Central, Heritage scans, and eBay, we have access to a massive increase in potential images, resulting in what should be, at least, a reevaluation of traditional classifications, and a new willingness to be a bit more inclusive.

Edited Monday at 12:59 PM by Bookery

[Flex Mentallo]

I agree, it would be difficult to separate one Spicy cover from another and say one is classic and another is not - otherwise, 'generic' and 'classic' are the same. And not all robots are created equal, so the bar needs to be very high and rigorously applied.

So what makes a cover stand out from the rest?

 

 

[Flex Mentallo]

[jimjum12]

On 7/1/2024 at 8:58 AM, Bookery said:

It's possible the community-at-large might not consider any Blue Book cover a classic...

This goes to show what they say about taste, but I always considered Blue Book to have some of the best covers of the genre, but not necessarily ones that appeal to comic collectors of GGA or PCH. You'll get a lot of bang for your buck with Blue Book. They're slightly more common than some Pulps, primarily due to the immense popularity generated by their quality content. A whole lot of ERB's classics first saw the light of day within their pages. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

NOT A CLASSIC BUT NOT BAD ...

 

Edited Monday at 07:14 PM by jimjum12

[MrBedrock]

[Darwination]

Woo! Gorgeous copy.

CLASSIC

I think the black cat Leach did is classic, too, but you gotta at least give one of em classic status, and this one would be it

Edited Monday at 10:04 PM by Darwination

[Sarg]

On 7/1/2024 at 10:13 AM, Flex Mentallo said:

I agree, it would be difficult to separate one Spicy cover from another and say one is classic and another is not - otherwise, 'generic' and 'classic' are the same. And not all robots are created equal, so the bar needs to be very high and rigorously applied.

Indeed. Something that apparently hasn't occurred to CGC's pulp division.

[Sarg]

On 7/1/2024 at 11:45 AM, jimjum12 said:

This goes to show what they say about taste, but I always considered Blue Book to have some of the best covers of the genre, but not necessarily ones that appeal to comic collectors of GGA or PCH. You'll get a lot of bang for your buck with Blue Book. They're slightly more common than some Pulps, primarily due to the immense popularity generated by their quality content. A whole lot of ERB's classics first saw the light of day within their pages. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Yep. Blue Book had some fine cover art -- occasionally -- though the title (like Weird Tales and Adventure) greatly underperformed in that area, relative to dynamic content that could have made for smashing covers. Personally, I cannot think of a single Blue Book cover that I'd qualify as classic.

[Sarg]

On 7/1/2024 at 7:58 AM, Bookery said:

For what it's worth, I did a word-search of the pulp guide document, and the word "classic" appears 259 times.  Now this isn't all necessarily describing covers... often it refers to classic story, or the pulp boasting a number of classic authors, etc.  (However, I would think that it is a wee-bit possible I might have gotten carried away with the term-???).  I'd have to go through each one to see why I labeled it so... and I'm not going to go back and do that.

But, to be fair, a guide represents an author's opinion as well as those accepted by the larger community.  If there was an "official" list of truly "classic" covers, I'm sure some of my own listings would not make even my cut.  I used it sometimes to signify standout covers within a title.  It's possible the community-at-large might not consider any Blue Book cover a classic... but there are issues within that huge run that pop out against the others.  Likewise, I think there is a tendency to designate far too many Spicy nudes and skeleton covers as important, when they really are just par for the course for those titles.  Personally, I have, and still do, consider other subjects beside just gore and salaciousness to have "classic" potential.  Can a photo-cover be a classic?  How about Rockwell Kent's woodcut covers?  

One of the problems with using only what traditional pulp collectors have considered classic over time is that until fairly recently, most collectors were unaware of huge swaths of issues (and even titles).  Covers were deemed classic based on what was seen... typically at the few pulp shows that existed, mixed in with flea-market finds.  Weird Tales and even Spicys are actually more common (or at less less-scarce) than people realize, and they were runs sought by many collectors, and so they have a perhaps undue influence on such designations.  Now, with Galactic Central, Heritage scans, and eBay, we have access to a massive increase in potential images, resulting in what should be, at least, a reevaluation of traditional classifications, and a new willingness to be a bit more inclusive.

All good points. I hope CGC is taking notes. But then, I wonder why they wouldn't have consulted with you to begin with ...

[PhantomLadyKiller]

Grrrrr, and always, grrrrrr...

[Darwination]

I've come to defend the honor of Blue Book cover art

Sarg and Bookery may be right in that there's not a huge number of classic covers (if any???), but I'd argue the covers were at least consistently good and maybe not quite as appreciated by the modern pulpster because of the intentionally subdued style of cover art and the often historical subjects. 

Blue Book is still held in high regard for interior illustration, calibre of the fiction, and let's-face-it superior production values, but the covers just don't get much love.  Herbert Morton Stoops has to be the painter most associated with the title, but there were other very able painters as well.

A handful of fellow pulp scanner Saskia's cover restorations of Blue Book paintings I like.  I think Stoops' "The Wolf Woman" is a classic, but I don't know if I've ever heard somebody else call it that

Edited 23 hours ago by Darwination

[Bookery]

One of the problems with this discussion is that there is never going to be an "official" list of something so nebulous as the term "classic".  It's completely subjective.  And it will change with each new collector generation.  Heck, I might disagree with my own designations from one year to the next, depending upon mood and what covers I've seen next to each other at a given time.  We tend to forget that at its core, CGC is just an opinion service.  It isn't a scientific survey.  People pay for their opinion of a grade.  Any "classic" labels they decide to afix to an issue is their opinion, and they are entitled to it.  So I'm not sure how much it really matters.  If you aren't impressed with a piece of cover art, you still aren't going to bid it up no matter who else tells you it's "classic".  I think today's collectors will be shocked by what future generations deem to be good art.  Are people who have grown up exclusively on CGI photo-realistic fantasy art going to look back at the Schomburgs and Saunders and Belarskis and Kirbys and Frazettas we admire and dismiss it as so much "stick-figure" drawing?  How many of today's collectors would want to see Renaissance-style covers on their comic books despite everyone agreeing the art is "classic"?  Is the "Yellow Kid" art classic?  Compared to what?  DaVinci?  Dave Stevens?  It's all way way too relative for me.  Makes me head hurt.

[MrBedrock]

On 7/2/2024 at 8:04 AM, Bookery said:

One of the problems with this discussion is that there is never going to be an "official" list of something so nebulous as the term "classic".  It's completely subjective.  And it will change with each new collector generation.  Heck, I might disagree with my own designations from one year to the next, depending upon mood and what covers I've seen next to each other at a given time.  We tend to forget that at its core, CGC is just an opinion service.  It isn't a scientific survey.  People pay for their opinion of a grade.  Any "classic" labels they decide to afix to an issue is their opinion, and they are entitled to it.  So I'm not sure how much it really matters.  If you aren't impressed with a piece of cover art, you still aren't going to bid it up no matter who else tells you it's "classic".  I think today's collectors will be shocked by what future generations deem to be good art.  Are people who have grown up exclusively on CGI photo-realistic fantasy art going to look back at the Schomburgs and Saunders and Belarskis and Kirbys and Frazettas we admire and dismiss it as so much "stick-figure" drawing?  How many of today's collectors would want to see Renaissance-style covers on their comic books despite everyone agreeing the art is "classic"?  Is the "Yellow Kid" art classic?  Compared to what?  DaVinci?  Dave Stevens?  It's all way way too relative for me.  Makes me head hurt.

Classic post

[Flex Mentallo]

On 7/1/2024 at 10:48 PM, MrBedrock said:

My goodness, Richard. If that's 'only' a 7.5, what would a 9.4 look like?

[Flex Mentallo]

On 7/2/2024 at 3:20 AM, Darwination said:

I've come to defend the honor of Blue Book cover art

Sarg and Bookery may be right in that there's not a huge number of classic covers (if any???), but I'd argue the covers were at least consistently good and maybe not quite as appreciated by the modern pulpster because of the intentionally subdued style of cover art and the often historical subjects. 

Blue Book is still held in high regard for interior illustration, calibre of the fiction, and let's-face-it superior production values, but the covers just don't get much love.  Herbert Morton Stoops has to be the painter most associated with the title, but there were other very able painters as well.

A handful of fellow pulp scanner Saskia's cover restorations of Blue Book paintings I like.  I think Stoops' "The Wolf Woman" is a classic, but I don't know if I've ever heard somebody else call it that

FWIW, The Wolf Woman gets my vote!

[MrBedrock]

On 7/2/2024 at 10:53 AM, Flex Mentallo said:

My goodness, Richard. If that's 'only' a 7.5, what would a 9.4 look like?

better