SMASH ! COVER GALLERY - PART NINE...

Copyright REBELLION

With the above issue of SMASH!, adventurer SIMON TEST assumed cover star status for the rest of the comic's run.  This resulted in some impressive images from artist ERIC BRADBURY, but I'd have liked to see JANUS STARK and perhaps some other characters appearing on the cover from time to time.  Eventually, of course, Smash! was merged into VALIANT, but while it lasted, it was one of Britain's best comics - featuring 40 pages for only 7d (old money).

Any of these covers ring the bells in memory's belfry?  Then let's hear all about it, chums.  Your comments are often far more interesting than anything I write (though I'd deny it in court).

And don't forget to come back for part ten.

As you can see, the first few issues above contained football cards as free gifts.  Other companion papers also had cards, and one I had at the time was GORDON BANKS (which I re-acquired last year), presented with SCORCHER during my last six months at primary school.  This surprises me, because until I bought the replacement and checked, I'd always associated it with some time in 1967 or '68, rather than the start of 1970, which seems kind of late.  (Not that it matters much I suppose, because the area was exactly the same over that time period.)

Funny how the mind plays tricks like that though, eh?  Just over two years later, I was living in another house in another neighbourhood, but back then, the future lay stretched out in front of me, and I had no inkling that I'd be living it anywhere other than the home I'd known for almost the previous five years.  Ah, the memories contained in just that one card.  As someone once said - "The only thing to look forward to's the past!"

 

IS THE ISSUE OF 'DIVERSITY' IN COMICBOOKS AND THE MEDIA AS BLACK AND WHITE AS IT'S PAINTED?

Image copyright MARVEL COMICS

Okay, here's the scoop, Crivvies!  Of necessity, it'll have to be the Reader's Digest version or I'll be here all night.  On someone else's blog, someone commented on recent internet speculation about a new SPIDER-MAN movie featuring MILES MORALES as Spidey instead of PETER PARKER.  The idea was proposed that it might be a good thing, diversity-wise, as the MARVEL universe apparently has only three African-American characters.  (I playfully assume that different races, like The KREE, The SKRULLS, The WATCHERS, The INHUMANS, and whatever other various species that exist, don't already demonstrate the lack of any anti-diversity sentiment in the MU.)

I expressed a wish that movie-makers would give us the heroes we grew up with, and, if not, they had another reason than merely ticking some politically-correct boxes (if such was the case) in order to appear acceptably multi-cultural and appease the seemingly modern 'need' to embrace every single living being on the entire planet so that no one feels excluded.  That's why I'd be just as against producers making The BLACK PANTHER or LUKE CAGE white in any proposed celluloid incarnations as I am against The HUMAN TORCH being black in the upcoming FF movie.  My objections are the same in each case, there's nothing racially-motivated in my comments, merely a desire to see the characters as originally created.

So up pops some numpty who accuses me of being a bigot, even saying that "The fact that you equate a black T'Challa and a black Power Man on equal grounds as a white Peter Parker further demonstrates the ingrained bigotry of your argument."  How's that again?  Believing that the integrity of a person's skin colour should be maintained, whether white or black (treating them equally, in other words), is proof of my alleged racial bigotry?  Obviously joined-up thinking isn't this guy's (or gal's) strong point.   

Laying my cards on the table, I'm not a fan of so-called 'positive-discrimination'.  Personally, if I never saw another Scots person on TV or in a movie, I wouldn't be upset by it, or complain that the Scots were being excluded, or that their absence made it difficult to relate to the hero or his situation.  If other Scots were bothered by it, I'd expect them to create their own outlets for expression, rather than insist that existing English, Welsh or Irish media should include and represent them.  Therefore, if any other race (and I use the word in accordance with the definition of 'A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: The Celtic race' for example), feels excluded from any form of entertainment, whether it be books, movies, TV, comic mags, etc., then I don't consider it a big deal.

As I also said: "If colour isn't supposed to matter, then it really should make no difference what skin colour someone is.  Once you start saying 'We need more Blacks, we need more Asians... more Mexicans [*or any other Latinos or group of people you care to name], etc.,' then you're making colour an issue.  However, if colour isn't an issue then ethnic origin shouldn't matter a hoot.  When I watched SHAFT back in the day, I didn't think 'Hey, I need a white guy here to identify with.'  Once you suggest that black kids [*or any colour of kids] need their own superhero because SUPERMAN is white, then you're saying that colour matters, which is the wrong thing to say,  There's absolutely nothing wrong with black kids hero-worshipping BATMAN, any more than white kids hero-worshipping The BLACK PANTHER.  Let's leave out these attempts at social engineering and societal manipulation and just all be colour-blind.  Please?"

(*Asterisk-marked inserts added for clarification on what should be implicit, but seemingly isn't to some people.)

Now, maybe it's me who's the thicko, but where's the alleged bigotry?  (Unless it's against idiots, which I'll put my hands up to - but then it's not actual bigotry, because wilful stupidity is deserving of our ire.)  If you can generate any enthusiasm for what should be a non-issue, perhaps you can point it out to me, because I sure as hell can't see it.

Feel free.

******

Sad to see that some deluded t*sser is still trying to stir things up on that other blog in an attempt to provoke me.  Sadder still to see that it's being allowed.  Why's that, I wonder?  H'mm?

The FRANKLY FABULOUS FANTASTIC FOUR COVER GALLERY...

All images copyright MARVEL COMICS

These are a bundle of comics that have been lying around in my room for years, having become separated from my other FFs at some stage, for reasons unknown or forgotten.  The first eight covers are by Big JOHN BUSCEMA, and the second eight by Rampagin' RON FRENZ.  I purchased most of them when I lived in my previous home, and the last two or three in my present one, but they've been in the same pile for so long that I associate all of them with my former abode.  None of that is of any interest to you, I'm sure, but I feel moved to share it with you anyway - unselfish of me or what?

Right, you've got sixteen covers to work through, so what are you waiting for - a gilt-edged invitation from STAN LEE?  Go to it, Melvin! 

TALES To ASTONISH COVER GALLERY - PART ONE...

All images copyright MARVEL COMICS

As most everyone knows, The HULK's own mag lasted for only six issues when it first came out, cover-dated March 1963.  However, he was kept alive through guest-spots in other comics, as well as being one of the founding members of The AVENGERS when their magazine was launched later the same year (cover-dated September).  Eventually, he was given one half of TALES To ASTONISH (in #59), until it was renamed The INCREDIBLE HULK with its 102nd ish.

Here then is the first part of a series showcasing the covers of that estimable title (TOS), when readers got two tales for the price of one.  They weren't as complex (or as confusing) as today's comics, but they were far more entertaining in my famously humble opinion.  Ah, for such simpler times again.  Wait until I win that Lottery!

Anyway, enjoy these covers from another era, and keep your peepers peeled for part two.

******

What?  You want a bit of my personal reminiscing?  Okay then, seeing as you insist.  I first read the above tale in a British comic, but as it appeared in two different titles - SMASH!, and then in its companion paper TERRIFIC not too long after - I associate it with both of them.  At least one of those times was around the festive period, so whenever I see the story, I can't help but think of the snow-bedecked environs of the house and neighbourhood in which I lived at the time, which makes me yearn for the days of my boyhood back in the '60s with an even greater intensity than usual.  Okay, now it's your turn.  What are your memories of this tale, Crivs - or any of the other ones?  Don't be shy now - get typing!

BABE Of The DAY - KATE WINSLET...

There's no sinking feeling whenever

kissable KATE WINSLET is around.  She

may be a titanically talented actress, but it's

her stunningly attractive looks we mere men

are here to appreciate today.  So - all hail

 the most magnificent Kate.  Yeah.

PART SIX Of The CRUNCH COVER GALLERY...

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

It's a dreich day outside, but luxuriating in the interior warmth of CASTEL ROBSONO, I've decided to persevere with presenting The CRUNCH Cover Gallery.  There hasn't been much interest in this series to be completely honest, but, taking my cue from the late MAGNUS MAGNUSSON (and JOHN HUMPHRIES), I'm determined to finish what I started several posts back.

The majority of these comics have survived pretty well for having been stored in an old cheese box for 35-plus years.  Only a few have some age spots, which makes me wonder why some comics in the same bundle exhibit the passage of time and others don't.  I've got two cheese boxes, which I got back in 1975 when I worked in a CO-OP shop just down the road from me, and they're very sturdy and robust, having originally housed huge, single blocks of cheddar in each one.

In case you're interested, the second box is home to my complete collection of MIGHTY TV COMIC, plus a few other odds'n'sods, like MARVEL U.K. POCKET BOOKS and Oor WULLIE and The BROONS Holiday Specials.

Anyway, in the absence of anything illuminating about The Crunch to write about, the above preamble has filled a bit of a space, so now let's get down to the nitty-gritty - the covers themselves.  And should you feel like making a comment, then don't let anything stop you.

RULES ARE RULES - AREN'T THEY?

I can't recall if I've told this story before (though I've meant to for a while now), but it illustrates what having a bit of authority can do to some folks.  Tell me if you disagree with the following statement: Rules are for a reason, and if the reason for a particular rule doesn't exist in a specific case, then it's redundant.  Case in point: I used to work in my local central library, and within a few years of leaving (but still a regular visitor), I decided to join the library's record department, so I filled out the form and submitted it to the female assistant behind the desk.

She'd worked there when I did and knew me, but asked "Do you have any ID?"  I was taken slightly aback by her question and replied "No, but you know who I am and have my relevant personal details on file as a former employee, so isn't that enough?"  "Rules are rules!" she responded flatly.  I tried approaching the matter from a logical standpoint (often a difficult thing with a woman).  "Yes," I said, "but rules are usually for a reason.  In this case, it's so that a complete stranger can't give you a false name and address and walk out with a couple of LPs which you'll never see again.  As you already know who I am and have my information on file because I once worked here, then surely that particular rule isn't applicable in this case?".

She stuck to her guns, so I asked for one of the chief librarians, who, when I explained the situation, said "Nae bother, Gordie!" and approved my application.  I'd say that was simply a triumph for common sense, but perhaps some of you are thinking "The woman was only doing her job, there was no need to go over her head!"  However, you weren't there!  I could see that she was enjoying having power over me and was being a complete jobsworth merely for the sake of it.  I call it the 'traffic warden mentality' - someone with a wee bit of power who abuses it simply to feed their ego and to feel important.

Ever been in a similar situation?  The comments section eagerly awaits your rapid response. 

BABE Of The DAY - CATRIONA SHEARER...

BBC newsreader CATRIONA SHEARER sure

is one hot totttie, so here she is as today's 'Babe', fellas.

When it comes to fronting the news, she beats TREVOR

McDONALD or JEREMY PAXMAN hands down any

day of the week.  Do you agree?  Then don't keep it all

 to yourselves, Crivvies - tell the rest of the world.