Thursday, 3 September 2015

BEANO WORLD RECORD COLLECTORS' ISSUE...


Image copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd

I'm not quite sure why the word "collector's" is rendered in the
singular as if there's only one of them in the universe, but I've made
it plural in the title of this post.  So The BEANO is now the longest-
running weekly comic in the world, but DC's monthly DETECTIVE
COMICS came out first - even before the now deceased DANDY, in
fact.  For the most part, it's pretty well drawn, 'though there are still
one or two inferior-looking strips that would be more at home in a
comic for infants and toddlers, and which let the side down.

I bought this yesterday in my local SAINSBURY'S, priced
£2.20.  Why not buy a copy for a niece or nephew today and
try and keep the old comic going for a while longer, eh?

14 comments:

DeadSpiderEye said...

You could use collectors' but the literal sense would be ascribing possession universally, to the individuals who comprise "collectors", which is a bit tacky, so you say or write collector's, because it's an object of interest to a type of person, types are always (or maybe almost always, no exceptions spring to mind at the mo.) uncountable. I'm just off now to pick up my copy to see if I can lift my mood a bit with a few giggles.

Kid said...

Well, what one is actually doing using the word in the plural is to suggest that it's an item aimed at a group, rather than an individual. However, as you say, the singular can be used to refer to a type, but it's ambiguous. Marvel Collectors' Item Classics is my guide - then it's clear and simple. However, DSE, I don't quite see how ascribing possession of an item to a group can be described as 'tacky'. I theenk you're making it up as you go along, Gringo.

TwoHeadedBoy said...

£2.20?? Wow... Congratulations to the Beano and all that, it IS my most favourite title that's ever been. Peter Gray's scanned in a few pages of the current issue on his blog, the stuff by Hunt Emerson and Andy Ryan's good, and it's great that Dave Sutherland's still doing the Bash Street Kids. Don't know what it is though, but I can't stand to look at Nigel Parkinson's stuff, and he seems VERY prominent in the title nowadays.

Not too keen on the idea of Walter as some kind of evil supervillain either, it's boggling!

Kid said...

Unfortunately, there's some lesser talents in there as well, THB, but they're not TOO prominent. I still can't get used to the new look of Dennis's parents. A completely unnecessary change, in my view. I'd say The Beano would be improved with a Billy the Cat strip in it.

DeadSpiderEye said...

Well you pay your money and take your choice, if you're happy with the plural and its implications give it an outing, I wouldn't let out the door but then again I'm still making my mind up about dropping the apostrophe in let's. I'm leaning towards leaving it in at the moment.

Kid said...

The only implications inherent in the plural are that it's intended for more than one person, DSE. Let's should have an apostrophe because it's a contraction of 'let us'. Let's argue about it and call each other nasty names, 'cos I've got a reputation to live down to. I'll start: You're a - er - person who farts in bed. (Wasn't too harsh I hope?)

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

I think apart from the first 2 strips (and cover) on Peters blog they are all strips from throughout 2015 and not issue 3,800 - Hunt Emerson's (jeez hope I got the apostrophe correct here!!) art is brilliant on little Plum (and anything he draws) - I might pick this issue up if it has any of his art -I thought the father and mother were his school teachers. when did they changed them I suppose they are more modern looking for young kids to relate to,

I don't feel the Dandy ever ended since the last weekly issue as it always seems to be in the shop with a new special every few months

http://petergraycartoonsandcomics.blogspot.co.uk/

Kid said...

That'll be exactly why the parents were changed, McS, but that's the sort of thing that only adults would think. "The parents look too old. Kids will relate better to younger looking ones." I don't believe it would ever cross the mind of a child to think that way, 'cos kids usually accept things as they are. 50-odd years of history wiped out on the whim of a young editor looking to stamp his mark on the comic. Bald dad in his pinstripe suit looked funny, and there must be plenty kids around in rteal life with bald, older dads.

Have you looked inside the current Dandy special? It's mainly awful.

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

I did look at the latest Dandy special as I was hoping it would have some reprints in it, I was wrong and it was indeed not good (I'm being kind, I have to admit I have never liked Dennis that much , the early Davey Law strips however were (imho) works of (comic strip) genius.


I have no issue with changes in characters, that's life (or "evolution" in comics) tastes, styles etc change and these were also reflected in characters /comics when I was a kid (the most obvious being the entire silver age heroes line at DC being updated until the 70s) the big big difference to me though was they were done exceptionally well by amazing creators , with real feelings for the characters and the history of them. This time its not being done so well more like taking a hammer to smash a nut (especially at DC but also in the UK) as opposed to the well thought out and considered creative changes of thee past - but I'm very new at being an old git so maybe I am just an old fart.......

Kid said...

Thing is 'though, McS, that with DC Silver Age heroes, the originals (Flash, Hawkman, etc) hadn't been around for awhile, so when the decision was taken to revive them (way back when), a new approach was decided upon. However, Dennis and Roger (the Dodger) have been in continuous publication since their inception, so to arbitrarily decide to drastically alter the age and look of the parents on a trendy whim (based on a tenuous rationale) - well, it just seems like so much p*sh to me.

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

Its probably as I have no "emotional" attachment the Dennis (or the Beano - shock horror) that its not an issue with me - I suppose what I would have done would be take the dad out the pinstripe suit and put him in a more casual gear (when he was in the house - not many folk wear their suit at home) but kept his face etc - saying that for a humour strip I probably wouldn't have changed them at all.

I assume the change was a knee jerk reaction to falling sales , rather than maybe writing funnier stories ??? I read somewhere the DCT went to schools etc and asked kids what they thought was funny in their comics, not a bad idea (in fact very good idea) but maybe the good points the kids picked up weren't that good (just the best in the comic at the time) I wonder what would have happened if they were given older comics to read and comment on (even old strips re drawn in a more modern style)?

Kid said...

They'd already done that with dad, given him more casual gear, etc., but you've hit the nail on the head. Rather than write funnier stories (ones that appeal to all ages) they tinker round the edges. As if any kid is going to start picking up The Beano because Dennis's dad suddenly looks younger, eh?

Like you say, as kids can only base their ideas on what they know, to ask them what they'd like to see in a comic (one with falling sales) is only going to result in what's already being done. Personally, I'm not convinced it's a good idea to ask kids what they want to see, as they're a fickle bunch who will give an answer because one is required from them and which might not be what they really think (if they think anything at all).

DeadSpiderEye said...

My problem with let's is that nobody says, 'Let us' except for one specific context but nobody says 'of the clock' either. They both used to be dropped as a matter of policy quite often a few years ago but that's declined lately. I suppose it comes down to the decision whether to indicate contractions based on common speech or to preserve that legacy.

The implications of any particular wording or punctuation are not universally consistent, people infer a nuance based upon their experience and habit, what to someone might seem trivial, others might baulk at. Generally though, I think I'm on safe ground with the distinction between collector's and collectors' in this context but it depends what folk read into it, I'm not gonna beat anyone over the head with a hammer if get it wrong according to my interpretation.

Kid said...

To be honest, DSE, I knew that The Beano's use of "collector's issue" meant "an issue for THE collector" - collector as in 'type' rather than in 'individual'. I was just having a little fun with it. However, it IS ambiguous because it can be interpreted as being for one collector, even if that's not the intention. Therefore, when one says "collectors' issue", there's no ambiguity there - it specifically means a group of collectors who collect whatever specific thing is being referred to. That's why I think it's better.

Now why are you holding that big hammer behind your back and giving me a strange look?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...