.jpg) |
| Copyright relevant owners |
Here's a couple of facsimile magazines I acquired recently that I don't think I've heard of before. (I've heard of similar-sounding titles, but not these two in particular.) Featuring artists such as Gray Morrow, George Tuska, Carl Burgos, Joe Orlando, Angelo Torres, Ken Battlefield, Bob Powell, and Paul Reinman, they contain some nicely illustrated strips. The interior style reminds me of Mad Magazine, what with the typeset lettering, but these aren't humour mags. Annoyingly, the 'lettering' tends to dominate the artwork in a lot of instances and the resulting look is not exactly attractive or inviting, being, in fact, rather off-putting at times.
.jpg)
Tell you what, Crivs, I'll show you some examples and you can decide for yourself. Ever have any of the originals and, if so, what did you think of them? If not, are these mags you would buy today? Let rip in the comments section if you'd be so good - it's what it was created for. (Click images to enlarge, then click again for optimum size.)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Nice looking mags. I haven't seen these books before but the art looks really nice. I will check these out next time I am in Forbidden Planet in Glasgow
ReplyDeleteI think they were released around 2020, McS, so they're not exactly current, but you might find them in the back issue bins.
DeleteI think I've seen the Eerie Tales title before but not sure about Weird Mysteries. Completely agree about the MAD style and it looks like the artwork of someone who worked on both in WM. They're not humour mags but the narrator in ET gets as many bad puns as possible in his summing up. Sometimes I find that I enjoy looking at covers just as much or more than reading the mags. I've got a few books that mainly show covers.
ReplyDeleteHave you found any instances in all these facsimiles where certain words or even frames have been changed for 'political correctness'? Or any 'trigger warnings' added? Personally I don't think that any author or artist's work should ever be reproduced incorrectly to the original. It gives a false history. If you don't like, don't read.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to these two facsimiles, I wouldn't know, M, not having seen the originals, but it annoys me when Marvel add prominent captions about racism to splash pages and destroy the archival integrity of the mags. DC are more subtle and place their woke messages in the indicias in small print.
DeleteWhen the world finally comes to its sense with this PC assault on literary properties, I do wonder what will remain, that could be classed has original copy? They're erasing, and re-writing history. I wonder who else tried to do that?
ReplyDeleteD.C. Thomson for one, with their removal of Peanut from a facsimile of The Beano #1 a few years back. And they also insisted he was removed from a book reprinting early covers he was on.
DeleteWhen did these magazines originally come out? The '50s? The '60s? The '70s?
ReplyDeleteOkay, I'll talk, copper, turn off that spotlight and stop hitting me with that rubber hose. Copyright date in the indicia of both mags is 1959, CJ.
Delete