Obadiah Oldbuck vs. Superman

[Earl Davis]

For anyone interested the Bugpowder site again has a page devoted to the history of speech balloons with some amazing pictures of early comic strips that incorporate them...

 

Speech Balloons at...

 

 

http://www.bugpowder.com/andy/e.speechballoons.html

[BLBcomics-migration]

what i just read from gifflefink, real name unknown, choosing to hide behind pseudo-name....

 

C'mon, did you really just try to use this lame tactic? Try again, Bob. I know Gifflefunk's real name. I've seen it published. Arnold B can vouch for him too.

 

He's legit and he knows his schit.

 

One of Bob's usual tactics.

 

Ah. That explains the equally immature "gifflefink" nickname.

 

 

do you have anything to contribute to this, or are you simply a mindless gnat on the window

 

I bow down to the all-knowing comics ghod Nick Pope

 

Can't wait to read this article he purports to be writing

[BLBcomics-migration]

what i just read from gifflefink, real name unknown, choosing to hide behind pseudo-name....

 

C'mon, did you really just try to use this lame tactic? Try again, Bob. I know Gifflefunk's real name. I've seen it published. Arnold B can vouch for him too.

 

He's legit and he knows his schit.

 

One of Bob's usual tactics. Along with posting tons of information in an attempt to mask the fact that he is avoiding areas he doesn't wish to discuss such as the definition prior historians and scholars operated under with which he does not agree.

 

RB: You are a real piece of work. I have been discussing your narrow definition of what constitutes a comic strip and there are also other people on this thread besides the all-knowing Comics Ghod NickPope i have been replying to, Mr Nick, who thinks he can have a meaningful discussion about the history of the comic strip with me, all the while he is stuck on stupid to which i reply SOS SOS SOS !!

 

Debating with me without having read thru the original artifacts strikes me as disingenuous at best, dispalying lack of comics wisdom.

 

I have admitted previously on these boards that I haven't read McFadden's Flats. I don't know for certain that it contains any true comic strip material (reprints or original art). What I do know it Outcault is given credit by his contemporaries as the man that triggered the artwork revolution at the end of the 1890s. This includes Swinnerton who, as you pointed out, had a cartoon strip in San Francisco prior to the Yellow Kid ever showing up in a comic strip.

 

RB: Yellow Kid triggered an outpouring of comics energy which the newspaper publishers responded to - nothing got into those newspapers without the publisher's explicit OK. You bandy about a great many things you have not yet researched, yet boil it all down to "Bob Beerbohm" is a hack", with nerve enough to invoke such a perjorative before i entered this thread. You insufficiently_thoughtful_person. Go do your home work and READ 1800s comic strips - the thousands i have now read - before you try showing off your lack of a proper comics education here again. Swinnerton's Bear thing in the SF Examiner was not a comic strip - they were comic characters on various pages back then.

 

But I have also asked that you show to me another artist or comic strip where contemporary artists place credit for triggering the adoption of word balloons. You claim it was the newspaper bosses that triggered that revolution. But why? It was due to the success of the Yellow Kid. Perhaps the bosses did put pressure on their artists to produce such content but the Yellow Kid is still the trigger regardless of whether the artists adopted it themselves to sell a strip or if the bosses put pressure on their house artists to make a strip that could compete with Outcault's material.

 

 

RB: If there is ONE man who put all the elements on a day in day out basis all together which you subscribe to as being only what a comic strip can be was Fred Opper with Happy Hooligan, March 1900

 

Any serious comics scholar knows of Ernie Mcgee...

 

Lots of interesting information in the series of posts that follow this statement. But I don't see anything that demonstrates a comic strip w/ word balloons that can be credited for starting the artwork revolution at the end of the 1890s.

 

RB: word ballon use began centuries ago. This discussion is like the stupid concept that SHOWCASE #4 began the Silver Age of American Comic Books. No one man can be credite dwith what you ask. But if there is ONE man, that man be Fred Opper - a man Outcault paid wrritten homage to in print in 1923 - you need to study more comics history, young grasshoppa

 

"However- Swinnerton's Little Bears and Tigers of 1892 were consecutive repitition, of the same characters - but these were black and white prints..."

 

As noted above, these predate the Yellow Kid and were the same art-format as Obadiah... illustrations with captions.

 

RB: they were not even that. just illustrations vrowding around on a page - Ernie was going on what others had told him, but had not seen these early west coast pics by Swinnerton

 

 

The embedding of dialogue and narration into the artwork was the key to converting cartoons w/ captions into comics [per the Eisner defintion] and is why others have given credit to the Yellow Kid as the historical starting point to the comic industry.

 

RB: Yellow Kid was the first super star of comics, teaching news paper publishers that people would pay money just to get the color Sunday supplement. He did nto "start" the comic industry - on this concept you are a insufficiently_thoughtful_person, so sez this humble comics hack

 

 

Swinnerton gives credit to Outcault in 1934 (as you pointed out) prior to anyone compiling one of the histories you claim as being "dead wrong" (btw, you used "dead wrong" in one of your Scoop articles).

 

RB: I did not write the SCOOP articles. Those are wrtitten by Timonium people. What is the full quote used?

 

The "old" cartooning format of illustrations with captions was known to other researchers, including Gaines (of whom your opinion is noted).

 

RB: Gaines, like many pre -internet researchers, was limited to what he had on hand. My "opinion" of him is limited to the concept that he did not single-handedly "invent" the "modern" comic book format at Eastern Color. There were many other players involved. All duly noted as much as the extremely limited space in Overstreet allows me. He strikes me as a PT Barnum self-promoter, as his main thrust was trying to get a piece of Superman, i have some 18 hours of taped interviews with Irwin Donenfeld, Harry D's son.

 

It is not like these earlier artists were unknown to prior scholars; fact is, they didn't consider the material produced by the likes of Busch and Töpffer to be comic strips. You have a different view that accepts that material as being comics by the definition you use, but it doesn't make their view wrong in not accepting them as comics by their definition.

 

RB: I have never said "they" got it wrong. I have maintained and stipulated many times that narrow definition is not large enough to be inclusive of many comics formats which i include after 40+ years in serious comics comics study. You ar econfusing me with ex-co-author Doug Wheeler who was very much putting forth that there was a comics conspiracy to make Yellow Kid "first" amongst all comic strips.

 

 

...an aspect of the confining definition gifflefink neglected to conjure up in his word balloon quest, invoking the dead spirits of Swinnerton and Eisner along the way, and i suspect the Hoary Hosts of Hoggarth some time soon,

 

that being the same comics definition he clings to also stipulates in no uncertain terms that a comic strip MUST contain recurring characters, an aspect i also reject out of hand

 

Hoggarth? Only if we decide to start a discussion on the origins of word balloons (which even predate Hoggarth so he might only show up in passing). And the Eisner definition of a comic from "Graphic Storytelling" is "the printed arrangement of art and balloons in sequence, particularly in comic books". No mention of recurring characters in that definition.

 

RB: I was making a "funny" thinking of Ditko's Dr Strange - Eisner was not a consumate comics historian -he was a creator, comics sweat shop owner, publisher, but not a comics historian. The world does not revolve around Will Eisner RIP

 

And personally I don't feel that recurring characters are necessary. Any series of illustrations where dialogue or narration is rendered as part of the artwork is a comic. With only captions you have cartoons and picture-stories. And with no text related directly to the image at hand you simply have illustrations.

 

...this narrow definition devised in the 1960s by a small group of guys who twisted it all so Yellow Kid ends up becoming "first", are not to be considered comic books either

 

Swinnerton gives credit to Outcault as early as 1934. So I'm not sure what twisting was going on other than those you disagree with operating under the same definition that was later put forth by Eisner. Although I'm interested in learning more about this small group with plans to make the Yellow Kid the "first" (i.e. the conspiracy).

 

RB: There are 100s upon 100s of other comics comics historians. So far you have invoked Eisner and Swinnerton. The quote from Swinnerton is such a small one in the limited confines of an edited down conversation - who knows what Swinnerton really thought or knew. he spent most of his time out in the desert painting desert land scapes.

 

I accept that you operate under a more inclusive definition and I only wish that you could understand that others operate under a more exclusive definition including scholars, historians, and artists that came before you. Their research is correct under the definition they used and if you are going to prove them "dead wrong" you should do it under their own definition or make it clear that they used a definition that is different from your own and then give your views on the matter. But to continually use straw man tactics to make it appear that you've uncovered something they've overlooked makes you a hack in my eyes and if you take offense to that then so be it.

 

I posted a very few of Ernie McGee's thoughts because he was one of the men behind the curtain who was "there" long before any one i know of in the world of comics. He had the goods carefully collected, archived, researched. I place his thoughts before ANY ONE in the world of comics, bar none, especially Eisner, Swinnerton, or....you.

 

Let it go, Nick - you have not proved a damn thing here yet

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob keep the history on this coming, very interesting stuff.

 

Thanks, glad people are getting something positive out of this material.

 

so who wants to see more? There are some 300 Ernie McGee letters in the trove i have posted from, of which his niece and myself have transcribed about 50 of them to date from his hand written monologues teaching his friend Joe Campbell

 

I actually enjoyed those letters quite a bit. I'd enjoy seeing more.

 

About the only other thing I have to add on this thread, besides that I've been enjoying it from day one, is that I can vouch for both Steve and Gifflefunk. I received an enquiry from Steve last year and sent a package to Gifflefunk as well. Plus I got an order from the guy who people said was a krazycat shill (Haman) and it certainly wasn't Steve.

 

Marc

 

Hi marc

 

one can read thru dozens more Ernie Mcge letters by going to the PlatinumAgeComcsi home page, click onto FILES on the left side, scroll down to ERNIE McGEE letters, placed there in PC as well as Mac versions - work began transcribing this body of comics knowldge almost ten years ago now - over 50 are there now - one day soon i hope to come back to them and transcribe more - Ernie's niece did about half of them and then got bogged down in raising her kids.

[gifflefunk]

Let it go, Nick - you have not proved a damn thing here yet

 

I have yet to see you prove anything here either... so perhaps you should let it go Bob. All I plan to do is offer a rebuttal against what I consider revisionist history when it comes to the comic book medium.

 

The only defense that I've seen you provide is stating that "those others are not historians". And I have yet to see any logical reason from you as to why Swinnerton would credit Outcault in 1934. You just seem to gloss over this fact repeatedly. The Woman/Dog/Pedlar topic is still open... your two attempted swings at it were "it is in verse" and "it is a reprint". It does seem to fit your criteria of sequential images that tell a story so I'm curious what the next reason will be in regards to why it is not a comic in your eyes.

 

Also, to deny Outcault credit for the revolution in the late 1890s is as silly as someone claiming that Siegel and Shuster deserve no credit for triggering the boom in the superhero genre. Are we supposed to believe that it wasn't them, it was the guys like Victor Fox, Busy Arnold, Martin Goodman, et. al., that told their artists to create something to compete with Superman. I don't think anyone would buy that nor should they buy the claim that Outcault/Yellow Kid wasn't anything noteworthy in triggering the comic strip format.

 

And as you like to bring up Henry and that issue of GI Joe I will now bring up my own extreme example in regards to word balloons being a critical component of comic dialogue and narration:

 

First view as a picture-story

 

Second view as a real comic

 

Does anyone here really think that the first view is anywhere close to being a comic? Now how many would be willing to call the second version a comic? Sure, this is an extreme example, but no more extreme than you finding a wordless issue in an attempt to prove your own point.

 

Dialogue and narration rendered as part of the art is a crucial component in making a comic something different than a captioned cartoon or picture-tale. You may keep trying to blur the lines between comics, picture-tales, and illustration, but some of us can still tell the difference between these formats and have not yet succumbed to the revisionist view-point.

[showcase4]

He Bob,

thanks again for your historical input on this thread. I am a collector---not a historian, so you nicley fill in some of the "holes" for me.

[gifflefunk]

For the interested fan, here is some further information on early comics:

 

In December 1999 I started a discussion list directly inspired by the Belgian University book published in English FORGING A NEW MEDIUM. This book is a highly recommended must-have tool for the serious comics scholar. It contains essays by a wide range of comics expert to their particular country.

 

One can subscribe at:

www.Yahoogroups.com/subscribe/PlatinumAgeComics

 

We have a passionate crew on board there - the hardest core of the hard core "comics as an art form" assemblage - we all need to keep in mind that the "definition" of comics is in movement-mode the past few years. Where that will lead us as a collective unit is hard to say this early into the comics archeology game - we have decades of neglect to uncover and share with each other.

 

To back away from Yellow Kid as the "first" comic strip in USA nationalistic comics consciousness, which has been perpetrated for decades onto Americans, is a hard step for some. Education is an ongoing never ending process of accepting and/or eliminating input data. We all base our perceptions on what we have seen as well as read in previous history books.

 

I have been on a quest searching thru all known (to me) history books as i took it upon myself to learn the "origins" of the Yellow Kid myth. I have studied scores upon scores of history books pertaining to aspects of comics origins and history dating back to the first one published in the USA Caricature and Other Comic Art by Jim Parton (Harpers, 1877). There is indeed a general consensus amongst USA nationalistic tomes which say Yellow Kid was "first" - but they are dead wrong.

[BLBcomics-migration]

For the interested fan, here is some further information on early comics:

 

In December 1999 I started a discussion list directly inspired by the Belgian University book published in English FORGING A NEW MEDIUM. This book is a highly recommended must-have tool for the serious comics scholar. It contains essays by a wide range of comics expert to their particular country.

 

One can subscribe at:

www.Yahoogroups.com/subscribe/PlatinumAgeComics

 

We have a passionate crew on board there - the hardest core of the hard core "comics as an art form" assemblage - we all need to keep in mind that the "definition" of comics is in movement-mode the past few years. Where that will lead us as a collective unit is hard to say this early into the comics archeology game - we have decades of neglect to uncover and share with each other.

 

To back away from Yellow Kid as the "first" comic strip in USA nationalistic comics consciousness, which has been perpetrated for decades onto Americans, is a hard step for some. Education is an ongoing never ending process of accepting and/or eliminating input data. We all base our perceptions on what we have seen as well as read in previous history books.

 

I have been on a quest searching thru all known (to me) history books as i took it upon myself to learn the "origins" of the Yellow Kid myth. I have studied scores upon scores of history books pertaining to aspects of comics origins and history dating back to the first one published in the USA Caricature and Other Comic Art by Jim Parton (Harpers, 1877). There is indeed a general consensus amongst USA nationalistic tomes which say Yellow Kid was "first" - but they are dead wrong.

 

It is getting rather silly repeating myself to some one who has a lot to learn about comics & their myriad origins yet in his short life involving thousands of creators over centuries. Jerry Bails' WHO'S WHO IN AMERICAN COMICBOOKS lists over 19,000 people involved in creating comics - and this is just in the area of Action #1 type comic books.

 

My My, youngster Nick, you think you know, i admire your enthusiasm for the world of comics, but what you have is nuggets of knowledge without the wisdom as of yet, you need more study of the art form beyond what ever level you think you have attained as of yet. I was studying comics before you were born. Does that make me know everything? of course not, but i have a couple decades of more study than you or most every one reading this thread.

 

yes, i stand very much with those last few words that The Yellow Kid is not "first" of comic strips, news paper strips, first using word balloons, first being a recurring character, that many historians got it wrong because they did not do proper home work.

 

What, did you think you "got? me? ha!

 

Many history books were compiled merely citing previous history books. you insufficiently_thoughtful_person, sez this hack writer who don't know nuttin. Read the section of COMIC ART #3 i have refered to previously which disspells the Yellow Kid myth -what do i have to do, post the whole damn thing here?

 

As a salient super star of the comics, YK was super highly most important teaching news paper publishers that people like this stuff and will pay money for it.

 

YKstill is still not "first", Outcault still is not "first" in the creation of comic strips.

 

His importance comes with news paper comic strips, which is not where comics were invented

 

What part of that do you not under stand?

[BLBcomics-migration]

Let it go, Nick - you have not proved a damn thing here yet

 

Also, to deny Outcault credit for the revolution in the late 1890s is as silly as someone claiming that Siegel and Shuster deserve no credit for triggering the boom in the superhero genre. Are we supposed to believe that it wasn't them, it was the guys like Victor Fox, Busy Arnold, Martin Goodman, et. al., that told their artists to create something to compete with Superman. I don't think anyone would buy that nor should they buy the claim that Outcault/Yellow Kid wasn't anything noteworthy in triggering the comic strip format.

 

OK, now we are discussing revolution of consciousness, not origins of comics re word balloons and recurring characters or even being the first newspaper comic strip.

 

I have stated here quite a few times that Yellow Kid and RFO are indeed responsible for a "revolution" (your word) as far as newspaper comics goes. That has never been somehting i have denied, but rather, you keep trying to make it seem like i wrote. You are boring me.

 

He did not CREATE anything orginal as a "first" in the origin/evolution of the comic strip, which is what i have been stating since i re-joined this happy fizzies party a couple weeks ago, fueled mainly because you threw out some insults my way, which is why i came at you when i first got here.

 

You started it, and guess what, you will not be finishing this. And others here think they can simply pile on? I have been in this hobby since before you were born, you arrogant insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

Re Siegel and Shuster inventing Superman, check out my Big Bang Theory of Comic Book History about Jerry, Joe, Julie and Mort as teen age fan boys circa 1929-35, edited by Julie, in COMIC BOOK MARKETPLACE #50 almost a decade ago now. Interested parties may be intersted in leaning this is being expanded into a full-fledged book with tns mroe stuff Gary Carter left out because it was the San Diego give away issue that year, and 4000 words plus almost 4 dozen visual aid pics were left out - no room gary Carter said so he could squeeze in more ads - i pleaded with him to put it in a later issue, but, nope, cut cut cut was the order of the day.

 

I have stated over and over that yellow Kid did "trigger" the popularity of newspaper comics, but that is not the be-all end-all of what constitutes comic strips in America, much less the world

 

Maybe one day you will not be so nationalistic USA-centric that comic strips were invented in America - and i was the guy who some 35 years ago coined the phrase that comics were the two indigeneous American art forms, with jazz being the other. And as my comics consciousness gre wover the decades, i realized i was wrong, that i had believed that which i read from American comics historians.

 

Outcault did not trigger the comic strip format

 

the newspaper PUBLISHERS did - to put them in newspapers

 

The comic strip had long previously been invented - every aspect of it

 

centuries before

 

[showcase4]

Let it go, Nick - you have not proved a damn thing here yet

 

You started it, and guess what, you will not be finishing this. And others here think they can simply pile on? I have been in this hobby since before you were born, you arrogant insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

well for my money, it just doesn't get any better than this!

[infinite_comics-migration]

I have been in this hobby since before you were born, you arrogant insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

Pot + kettle = black.

[BLBcomics-migration]

The above definition was from an encyclopedia web site...note there is no mention of word balloons as a criteria...only a sequential word/picture story.

 

Which just proves that after five years of attempting to brainwash the public, Beerbohm has made some progress. I, however, go with the classical view held by most comic book collectors and not the revisionist definition being spun by a cartoon book dealer trying to sell off his cartoon book collection to poor unsuspecting saps for outragous sums of money... er, how you doing?

 

See, Nicky, beginning on July 19, whilst i was outbound to yet another San Diego comicon (every SD show since #1 in 1970) to set up yet another booth (most likely to brainwash more unsuspecting naive comics rubes) it was BS like the above which was brought to my attention - every aspect of what you spun above out of thin air i found to be beyond insulting, you ignorant insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

For the first years of the existence of the Plat section, then especially so when it was spun into a Plat and Victorian sections, anything pre-1870 was listed with for prices. I actually fought a bit with my Timonium masters, especially John Snyder, to not list prices for anything pre-1870 so we could get the scholarship down before any aspect of market making was attempted.

 

I am not paid by Steve Geppi for the research i share each year, honed by a group of collector friends listed in the credits at the begiining of each Vict and Plat price index, a list which grows every year as my friends inform me of their newest discoveries. I have invested over $30,000 into this particular research which has been ongoing for over a decade now.

 

You came onto this thread seemingly with an agenda, making slip-slidding BS up out of your comics history-uneducated brain and proceeded to set yourself up as some sort of comics expert, calling me a hack no less, which i assume translates into some one who does something only for the money, assuming you are not referring to basketball or falcons.

 

And as far as "most comic book collectors" goes, i take it you have conducted some sort of scientific field survey?

 

Stick with your math formula about how to ascertain if a comic book is rare or not

 

http://howrareismycomic.blogspot.com/

http://home.mn.rr.com/avc/Nickrare.htm

 

you might be onto something there.

 

I knew Ernie Gerber RIP, and his ultimately-bogus Scarcity Ratio Index was weighted against the couple hundred collectors listed at the beginning of one of the books

 

- and the amount of the pics used out of any individual collection weighted where you appear on the list. I am a couple inches down in the first column.

 

Ernie came to me and took many hundreds of pics back in the early 1980s.

 

I wrote a piece in Comic BookMarketplace a decade ago debunking the accuracy of his SRI concept and followup letters Carter published concurred with the concept.

 

Ernie's Photo Journal Guide set remains the most ambitious publishing project our little world of comics will ever likely see - and the 22,000+ pics opened a hwole new world for many collectors.

 

But his data is wrong, his sampling was too small - a couple hun collectors out of thousands of collections.

 

His "data" on the Tom Reilly (San Francisco) collection is 100% wrong except he got Reilly's name correct.

 

Robert Beerbohm

[mica]

See, Nicky,

Stuff like this makes your ramblings difficult to appreciate.

You stoop low numerous times. The mocking of gifflefunk is lame.

Is blbcomic your legal name?

You also tell everyone here about the gobs of experience, and years of research you have.

Where I come from that's called "tootin your own horn" and it's usually frowned upon.

And when you do grace us with your presence it's often to remind us that you are "too busy" to wade through all of the previous posts in this thread.

Obviously what has transpired before your arrival is unimportant as you proceed to start off our lessons with Chapter One of your wisdom.

You balance this by quoting yourself, and referring to articles that you wrote.

Throw in a steady supply of name dropping to offset the veiled insults and total disregard for typing words correctly and I would be able to pick your posts out of a hat without the help of a user ID.

 

Please clean this up, so that the sources you cite can be read and appreciated.

Then maybe I would be able to use this graemlin as much as showcase4 does after each of your posts.

 

Regards

[BLBcomics-migration]

Yes, i was too busy when i was brought up in this thread, being a couple thousand miles away from my cpomuter, as some of us were involved with doing San Diego, then high-tailing it across country, pit-stopping to rework boxes of comics, then onto Chicago Wizard. Since i posted earlier i was "busy", I have gone back thru many of the posts in this hellish thread.

 

The fellow you refer to, Mister Nick Pope, some other posters say he be "legit" as well as knows his "schit", made untrue comments about my comics research and then proceeded to want to enter a [embarrassing lack of self control]-ing contest. I had ample opportunity to stew on this while running my comics booths, but i am back home, all the new stuff I picked up has been pretty much processed, my new list is at the printers now, and my focus is on protecting my good name and the published results of my comics research, a way of life for some, a hobby to others.

 

Name dropping? I can't help it if i know a lot of people in this hobby, presently living as well as deceased. It be an accident of birth - being one of the old dinosaurs.

 

The man was mocking my research before i ever came onto the set with this thread. It was this BS which was brought to my attention. If this offends you, i do apologize.

 

When some one disparges my comics research, i will hit back like for like, and if i am wrong about something i am the first to admit the concept.

 

What did Truman say about kitchens?

 

Robert Beerbohm

[showcase4]

 

Then maybe I would be able to use this graemlin as much as showcase4 does after each of your posts.

 

Regards

 

Mica,

I appreciate your contributions to this post, and you have a track record of bringing up great points.

 

Just to clarify, I don't give Bob a every time he posts something. I like Bob -- we get along great, and I do find many of his posts and choice of words amusing, but he does not walk on water....he obviously does not think The Yellow Kid in McFadden's Flats is one of the greatest comic books ever printed, and that is required for me to put someone in "walk on water" status.The Yellow Kid is the 1st comic strip superstar, and McFadden's Flats is the ONLY comic book featuring him....I typically don't associate with people who do not love McFadden's Flats, but in Bob's case, I make an exception. My 17 month old son goes to bed in a sleep sack that is yellow, and every night my wife says "hey, he looks just like The Yellow Kid! "...that is how I know I married the right woman.

 

What may suprise you is I'm also quit fond of Gifflefunk.....he and I may not agree on what is and what is not, but he's an excellent communicator, and obviously very intelligent. Without Gifflefunk, this thread may have lost steam a long time ago.

 

So to you Mica, and Bob Beerbohm, and Gifflefunk....and even Sho'-nuff, I would like to give all of you an appreciative and

[BLBcomics-migration]

I still don't see anything that makes me want to call it something other than a book containing a text story with cartoon illustrations... no matter how much Bob Beerbohm pisses and moans that it is a comic book.

 

And the commentary from Mister Nick Pope back in July just keeps cropping up in this thread

 

One wonders why i posts such "lame" needles to such a insufficiently_thoughtful_person?

 

He's got me P-ing and M-ing - :)

[gifflefunk]

Actually Bob, I do owe you a public apology. I know nothing about your business practices or what your motives are, and by God, if you can pull $30k out of Mr. Meyer for those books then God bless you and your salesmanship!

 

As for your views that Oldbuck is a comic, well, you and I shall remain at odds over this issue. I have every intention of writing a rebuttal article to your view-point that picture-stories are comics (and I’m sure you’ll attempt to refute my research – so be it, that’s the way research is supposed to work).

 

Again, good job on selling those books for, what I am certain was, a significant profit.

[BLBcomics-migration]

I also struggled to find a single 'comic book' in the Pioneer Section' of the guide and Bob B has already spoken negatively on the boards about the current Pioneer Age part of the guide.

 

It's kind of funny since I find it so ironic that Bob B looks down at the Pioneer Age with such disdain and yet seems to have no problems at all hyping and glorifying the Victorian Age. At least, he should now have some appreciation of how collectors feel towards his Victorian Age books.

 

Based upon my glancing through the two sections, I don't really see that much of a difference between the two ages until you hit the section on the Yellow Kid. In fact, both sections even comment on the same Shooting of the Italian Concini strip from 1617.

 

Bob is probably more upset with the Pioneer Age due to the fact that somebody else was able to go further back in history before he managed to get there. As I have mentioned beforein previous postings, at this rate we'll probably have a piece on the Neanderthal Age analyzing sequential cave drawings in the OS before long.

 

AM continuing going thru this long thread for the first time,this post from July 23

 

There is a huge difference between the Pioneer section and the "Victorian" section.

 

The 1600s strip i use also used in the Pioneer section also appeared last year as a double-up.

 

I pulled the copy i use from David Kunzle's first volume of his THE HISTORY OF THE COMIC STRIP published by the Univ of Calif in 1971, long out of print. I could have easily used something else from David's book.

 

I could easily go back further in time in comics origin evolution scenarios, but did not as i was limited in the space they let me have. While I enjoyed reading the Pioneer section, i found it had little to do with sequential comic strips, especially as published in America. The thing i am "upset" about, if that even be the correct word to use here, is i could have presented 10 pages of sequential comic strips from the 1800s as the proof is in the pudding so they say.

 

I have been dealing with collector back lash re 1800s comics material ever since the section was inagurated. Thick skin, no prob. Hold up the mirror is what i do if some one gets to moronic on me.

 

Ultimately I do not go that much further back in comics origins in America than 1842 because that is when the first comic book in America was printed and distributed in a mass way.

[BLBcomics-migration]

The moral to the story is: you shouldn't blindly believe everything you read on the Boards to be true

 

So I checked all the comic price guides and comic book histories in my local big chain bookstore (Wizard, Krause, Comic Buyer's Guide, Standard Catalog, etc.). Only one had any mention of some picture book mistakenly listed as a comic book... the OPG. None of the other publications have fallen victim to the charade that Overstreet has been victimized by... seems very strange that Oldbuck isn't listed as a comic book if it is obviously a comic book.... what are these other publications thinking? Don't they know that Beerbohm needs to sell picture books to suckers?!

 

And the uplifting commentary from Nick Pope just keeps on coming - all the while i am out hacking & hewing in my comics booth at the San Diego Comicon - the above posted here July 20th thereabouts - this man insulted me over and over on this thread, all the while i am not in a position to respond.

 

So, i got back from the two largest USA comic shows, re-set up my comics business, read a bit of this thread, began responding, more than a little livid this insufficiently_thoughtful_person makes this stuff up in the fantasy land he calls a brain.

 

Wizard's idea of an old timer comics creator is the likes of Frank Miller or Jim Lee.

 

The other three you list are all the same company: Krause, CBG, Standard

 

You make it seem like there are mountains of "other" comic book price guides out there, yet only OPG is the "victimized" price guide?

 

Again, i bring up the concept that some of you out there in CGC-Boards crazy land seem to think i have some sort of power over Steve Geppi, John Snyder, Bob Overstreet and the others who work at Gemstone.

 

I was asked by John Snyder and Bob Overstreet to build these sections coming up on a decade ago. My services were solicited. It ain't my price guide, though i am damn proud to be a contributor. I have little control over what they ultimately print.

 

And i get doubly incensed when some insufficiently_thoughtful_person refers to my collector customer friends as "suckers". Me, i say baseball bats at ten paces

 

Robert Beerbohm

[BLBcomics-migration]

Actually Bob, I do owe you a public apology. I know nothing about your business practices or what your motives are, and by God, if you can pull $30k out of Mr. Meyer for those books then God bless you and your salesmanship!

 

As for your views that Oldbuck is a comic, well, you and I shall remain at odds over this issue. I have every intention of writing a rebuttal article to your view-point that picture-stories are comics (and I’m sure you’ll attempt to refute my research – so be it, that’s the way research is supposed to work).

 

Again, good job on selling those books for, what I am certain was, a significant profit.

 

This is not quite a public apology, just apologize and this will all be over.

 

You were in violation, you came at me while i was away from a computer to respond timely, you disparaged my serious comics research, you insulted my collector customer friends as suckers.

 

Simply apolgize with zero disclaimers attached thereto, you still choosing to make digs.

 

I did not hustle Steve Meyer on these Obadiah Oldbucks. He came at me relentless when he discovered i had copies until i caved in. I did nothing to "sell" those copies. I miss my Obadiah Oldbuck 1842 editons - a lot.

 

Write your article, I will continue with my research as i have for four decades now. Re-education is slow moving process, there are decades of mis-info out there to undo

 

Peace, young grasshoppa

 

Robert Beerbohm