Obadiah Oldbuck vs. Superman

[CentaurMan]

I said if you don't appreciate history, Obadiah is not going to do much for you...big difference

 

Congratulations, that comment is both arrogant AND ignorant. Well done.

 

I should stop writing now before I start channeling buttock.

[showcase4]

Victorian and Platinum Age comics are a niche..... The niche markets never command the prices or attention of the mainstream issues, but they are a viable, active segment of the marketplace as a whole. Within the "niche" of Vic/Plat books, Obadiah Oldbuck is a Mega-key...it is the Action #1 of 19th century. The Yellow Kid in McFadden's Flats is the Detective #27 of the 20th century.

 

Although these 2 books may not be for everybody, they are EXTREMELY desirable for collectors of comics from this time period. Action #1 will always be the king....but I think old Obadiah deserves a little more respect as the original US comic book....just as Superman has his place as the original superhero.

[shiverbones]

I have to agree, its not a comic book. Its a book with an early comic story in it. Hold up a comic book to anyone and ask what it is, they'll say a comic book. Hold up a victorian comic strip in a book format and ask what it is and they'll say a book. Comic book implies a magazine format paper cover stapled periodical. You don't call a graphic novel a comic book, because it isn't. Its a book. 2 different things. Historically important OO is, for what it is, but its not a comic book.

 

Open a comic book, smell the paper & ink, feel the cheap and immediate entertainment, fold it and put it in your back pocket, do it again next month, trade with a friend at recess, thats a comic book.

 

OH, and I am incredibly interested in the history of comic books, and have been for 20 years. I would take funnies on parade over OO for historical importance as a COMIC BOOK any day.

[gifflefunk]

Obadiah Oldbuck for the FINAL time ( at least by me ) is DEFINATELY a comic book! Here are this COMIC BOOKS characteristics:

 

1. comic art by Topffer

So it is illustrated. Many books are including BLBs.

2. comic art tells a story in a sequential series of single panels

I'll agree with that.

3. each panel contains Toppfer art and tells a story ( in English ) with printed words at the bottom of each indivual panel, corresponding to the art.

No word balloons eh? So basically its an illustrated story then... much like a BLB which has sequential illustrations on alternate pages and text on the opposite pages; and a BLB is not a comic book.

4. 40 pages - made of hemp paper / hemp cover

Page count doesn't mean anything... not sure why you list it as a characteristic.

5. 8 1/2" by 11" ( roughly )

Again, not sure why you list it as a characteristic.

6. has a spine , front and rear cover, and publishers info

So do BLBs and those are books.

7. published by Wilson and Co. of New York City

A noted book publisher.

8. was distributed after printing to the public

Distributed through book sellers... comic books were distibuted as magazines on newsstands...

9. story has a beginning, middle, and end - told in pictures and words

Again, this holds true for BLBs also.

10. is dated --- September 14th, 1842

My God, you've discovered the first BLB!

 

IF THIS IS NOT A COMIC BOOK, THEN WHAT IS IT ????

 

Are you saying that you can't tell the difference between a comicbook and a book containing comic art???

[CentaurMan]

Nicely done, sir.

[mica]

My God, you've discovered the first BLB!

Very convincing.

[agro23]

My God, you've discovered the first BLB!

Game. Set. Match. Well done.

[selegue]

Why are you people so absolutely and passionately pro or con OO being called a comic book? In my opinion there's a gradient of formats and it's all a matter of where to draw the line. Think about these and tell me whether there's an absolutely right answer for every case.

 

Standard US pamphlet

80-page giant

Big All-American Comic Book

Marvel Treasury Edition

DC Famous First Edition (tabloid)

Superman: Peace on Earth

Asterix book (album)

Tintin book (album)

Archie supermarket digest

Beautiful Stories for Ugly Children

Some issues of Cerebus (with lots of illustrated text)

Cerebus "phonebook"

TPB collection of a running "pamphlet" arc

Marvel Masterworks, DC Archives

World's Best Comics: Golden Age Sampler

"Graphic novel" of original material like Maus or one of Eisner's books

A Spirit Sunday section

Spider-Man and the Dallas Cowboys

Collection of Dilbert strips

Big Little Book

Warren magazines like Creepy

Whitman Dynabrite format books

GE Adventures in Science (or thousands of other promo comic books)

...on and on...

 

Now tell me that you and only you know which of those are REAL comic books!

 

Jack

[shiverbones]

seleque, I think part of it is all the examples you mentioned are post comicbook, as it is universally excepted, so that they all become variations of that single theme, that can be personally interpreted as ether a comic, or too far removed to be a comic book anymore.

 

I think the other major point here is showcase-4 has publicly stated he intends to cash in on the eventual acknoweldgement OO being universally excepted as the 1st comic book. This leads to his arguement being slanted by financial interest. I don't care for funnies on parade or OO when it comes down to it, so I have no stake in my agenda being realized. I have stated what I believe is the first comic book as recognizable in the pop culture medium of print called a comic book. I believe if he never made the post about investing in which it came across like he was acting like an in-the-know pioneer amongst fools the backlash would not have been so great.

[shiverbones]

The other point I forgot to mention, is I think most people would be happy to admit OO is an important book at the beginning of a chain of publications that led to the development of the Comic book as we know it. Doesn't mean it was the 1st comic book, more of a prototype. Doesn't mean its not important, its just not the 1st comic book.

[gifflefunk]

Why are you people so absolutely and passionately pro or con OO being called a comic book? In my opinion there's a gradient of formats and it's all a matter of where to draw the line. Think about these and tell me whether there's an absolutely right answer for every case.

 

Standard US pamphlet

80-page giant

Big All-American Comic Book

Marvel Treasury Edition

DC Famous First Edition (tabloid)

Superman: Peace on Earth

Asterix book (album)

Tintin book (album)

Archie supermarket digest

Beautiful Stories for Ugly Children

Some issues of Cerebus (with lots of illustrated text)

Cerebus "phonebook"

TPB collection of a running "pamphlet" arc

Marvel Masterworks, DC Archives

World's Best Comics: Golden Age Sampler

"Graphic novel" of original material like Maus or one of Eisner's books

A Spirit Sunday section

Spider-Man and the Dallas Cowboys

Collection of Dilbert strips

Big Little Book

Warren magazines like Creepy

Whitman Dynabrite format books

GE Adventures in Science (or thousands of other promo comic books)

...on and on...

 

Now tell me that you and only you know which of those are REAL comic books!

 

Jack

 

If it has an ISBN number its a book.

If it qualifies for Periodical mail (US Post Office Second Class Mailing) then it is a magazine.

 

Comic books (aka comic magazines) are periodicals.... how does the Library of Congress classify the material above? I'm betting those items with ISBNs are books and the magazines are periodicals. I'm also betting that if the item would have qualified for an ISBN prior to the International convention that the LOC still classifies the item as a book.

 

If you want to claim that a "comic book" in its broadest definition includes books that contain comic material then I will concede your point and retreat to calling what I collect comic magazines. The magazine format grew into the general term "comic book", but if a large portion of the collecting community wants to loosen the definition to include books I can live with my long boxes of comic magazines. No problem.

[Weird Paper]

I'll contend again that the desirability of a vintage comic has more to do with its nostalgia factor and what it evokes personally in a collector than with its historical significance. It's a lot easier to feel connected to something from the mid 20th century than something from the mid 19th century. Its historical significance will give it a certain value, but it will never approach the value of the sort of comics which have a bloodline that's meaningful to collectors.

This might not be true of all items, but I think comic collectors have a different mentality.

[shiverbones]

thats a very good point.

[comicdonna]

Obadiah Oldbuck is a Mega-key...it is the Action #1 of 19th century. The Yellow Kid in McFadden's Flats is the Detective #27 of the 20th century.

How could you make such a statement.

 

OO has a BV in Fine condition of $4,500

Action Comics #1 in Fine condition $115,500

 

Yellow Kid has a BV in Fine condition of $8,700

Detective Conics #27 in Fine condition $94,500

 

As far as rhe collecting aspects,their is no comparison

 

BV quotes are from the 35th edition of OS

[selegue]

I hope it was clear that I meant "you all" -- both sides of the discussion -- not anyone specific. I thought that using "quick reply" might not point to a specific message.

 

seleque, I think part of it is all the examples you mentioned are post comicbook, as it is universally excepted, so that they all become variations of that single theme, that can be personally interpreted as ether a comic, or too far removed to be a comic book anymore.

 

True, but there are plenty of "pre comicbook" (whatever that means in this context) examples too.

Conventional wisdom is to call Action 1 the "first comic book", right?

 

Then clearly collections of Mutt & Jeff, Bringing Up Father, etc. become "not comic books".

 

Yellow Kid 1-9 (stapled magazine, sold for 5¢ presumably at newsstands) meets lots of criteria

 

Famous Funnies is "rejected" below, but which one(s)?

Famous Funnies, 1933 giveaway?

Famous Funnnies, 1934 sold in chain stores?

Famous Funnies, 1934 newsstand comics?

 

Then how about

Detective Comics 1?

Detective Comics 16 (same month as Action 1)?

Detective Comics 27 (superhero, so obviously yes)

 

I'm not really advocating any particular viewpoint, just that there's more than one valid way to look at "first comic book". I can understand a very inclusive view that includes OO or a very exclusive view that starts at Famous Funnies, Action 1 or even Detective 1, but any in-between position seems arbitrary to me.

 

I think the other major point here is showcase-4 has publicly stated he intends to cash in on the eventual acknoweldgement OO being universally excepted as the 1st comic book. This leads to his arguement being slanted by financial interest. I don't care for funnies on parade or OO when it comes down to it, so I have no stake in my agenda being realized. I have stated what I believe is the first comic book as recognizable in the pop culture medium of print called a comic book. I believe if he never made the post about investing in which it came across like he was acting like an in-the-know pioneer amongst fools the backlash would not have been so great.

 

[You mean accepted, not excepted, right?]

 

I agree that the "investment value" has nothing to do with "firstness". I certainly wouldn't pay $20K for a copy of Obadiah. I like the $15 reprint though -- and it looks like a comic book to me.

 

Jack

[CentaurMan]

I believe if he never made the post about investing in which it came across like he was acting like an in-the-know pioneer amongst fools the backlash would not have been so great.

 

This is exactly it. I'm not antagonistic by nature, but when someone comes out with a strong and ill-supported opinion of being correct/superior, I'm naturally drawn to taking the other side.

 

This hobby is already filled with social misfits, and when that's what comprises the middle of the bell curve, the extremes are going to be a bit hard to take.

[selegue]

...

 

Now tell me that you and only you know which of those are REAL comic books!

 

 

If it has an ISBN number its a book.

If it qualifies for Periodical mail (US Post Office Second Class Mailing) then it is a magazine.

 

 

That's a very rational criterion that can be applied consistently, esp. extended back before ISBN existed as you do below. I could live with it, but the reason it doesn't work well for me is trying to classify the below as some comic books, some not. They look a lot alike, were published in the same decade by the same company, deal with the same character in the same graphic format, were all sold in comic book shops, etc.

Batman 525

Batman: Penguin Triumphant (arbitrarily chosen, has ISBN)

Batman: No Man's Land (I think one-shot without ISBN -- if it has one I could find a better example)

 

If your criterion says that of these, only Penguin is "not a comic book" and you can apply that reasoning consistently, OK by me.

 

 

Comic books (aka comic magazines) are periodicals.... how does the Library of Congress classify the material above? I'm betting those items with ISBNs are books and the magazines are periodicals. I'm also betting that if the item would have qualified for an ISBN prior to the International convention that the LOC still classifies the item as a book.

 

If you want to claim that a "comic book" in its broadest definition includes books that contain comic material then I will concede your point and retreat to calling what I collect comic magazines. The magazine format grew into the general term "comic book", but if a large portion of the collecting community wants to loosen the definition to include books I can live with my long boxes of comic magazines. No problem.

 

I do lean to the more inclusive view because I don't want to deal with the borderline cases like some kind of Maxwell's demon -- IN! OUT!

 

Jack

[showcase4]

Obadiah Oldbuck is a Mega-key...it is the Action #1 of 19th century. The Yellow Kid in McFadden's Flats is the Detective #27 of the 20th century.

How could you make such a statement.

 

OO has a BV in Fine condition of $4,500

Action Comics #1 in Fine condition $115,500

 

Yellow Kid has a BV in Fine condition of $8,700

Detective Conics #27 in Fine condition $94,500

 

As far as rhe collecting aspects,their is no comparison

 

BV quotes are from the 35th edition of OS

 

Man, the Boards are full of people manipulating words for their own agenda. Did I say the values of Obadiah and Action are the same? ...no. I said obadiah is the Action 1 of the Victorian Age...as in most desirable, high profile, etc etc

[showcase4]

My God, you've discovered the first BLB!

Very convincing.

 

 

oh yeah...one more thing...Obadiah has 5 - 8 panels per page....never seen a BLB like that!

[gifflefunk]

My God, you've discovered the first BLB!

Very convincing.

 

 

oh yeah...one more thing...Obadiah has 5 - 8 panels per page....never seen a BLB like that!

 

I'll concede that it has 5-8 panels per page.... but it has more characteristics in common with BLBs than with a comic book... it is an illustrated text story that happens to have more illustrations per page.

 

If you "expanded" the story such that there was a single panel per page it would look far more like a BLB than any comic book, one illustration accompanied by text... but if you take any comic book and expand it such that there is only one panel per page it would still look like a comic book.