Thursday, 28 May 2020

MIGHTY MARVEL CHECKLIST - AVAILABLE NOW!

SPIDER-MAN MAGAZINE 376

Copyright MARVEL COMICS.  Published by PANINI

In this issue, Spidey’s got a price on his head, and Kraven the Hunter is determined to bring him in!  But he’s not the only one seeking ol’ Web-head out - Bullseye’s targeting him too!  Get set for an urban rumble which’ll shake you to the core!  Will Spidey prove his innocence and overcome the pursuers!  Plus: there's heaps of arachnid activities, fact-files, colouring and puzzles to check out!

Available now!

£3.99.

Wednesday, 27 May 2020

The DAY I ROBBED The BANK At MURRAY SQUARE...


Well, that's not quite true - it was an ATM, not a bank, and retrieving my own money can hardly be described as robbery (I hope).  Here's what happened for you to make up your own minds about it.

It was May 6th and I was withdrawing £250 from an ATM outside a local shop, as I didn't want to cut open another mattress.  As the money protruded from the slot, I took hold of it and pulled it towards me.  However, because modern banknotes are so smooth, the first note (a tenner) slid off the top and the remaining £240 came out partially, froze for a moment, then tipped back inside under the rollers.  Oh, you should've heard my language.

I went into the shop and asked if the ATM was anything to do with them and was told no.  "It's just swallowed my money" I said, and was told to ring the number on the machine.  I did, and was told that I'd need to speak to the RSB, so the ATM people connected me to them.  This was on a Wednesday, with a bank holiday weekend looming, but I was told that in circumstances like this, although it usually took 48 hours for money to be credited back into an account, it might take longer than usual.

However, my money hadn't been drawn back through the rollers of the ATM, it had tipped underneath them, not gone back into the bowels of the machine, so I carefully explained this to the person on the 'phone.  "Check after the bank holiday" I was told, and had to be content with that.  On the 12th, I went down to my local bank, who said they'd initiate an investigation, but that it could take up to 15 days to complete.  That 15 days expired today, and when I checked my bank account, no money had been returned to it.

So back into the bank, who told me that the ATM company had 'declined' my claim, saying that no surplus amount of £240 had  been found in the machine.  "Of course not," I said, "it didn't go back through the rollers, it slipped underneath them.  I explained all that."   I was told I'd have to talk to the ATM people again, but I hadn't kept the number, so had to go back to the offending ATM to make another note of it.  I withdrew a tenner from a second account so that I could see if my notes were still lying in the tray under the rollers.  Guess what?  They were!

Three weeks later?  Yup.  Y'see, when people are drawing out their money, the notes obscure this tray and the flap/lid closes immediately, so customers would've been unaware of my dosh's presence.  I got the manageress to come outside, withdrew another tenner from the other account, and asked her to witness that my £240 was still there, which she was perfectly happy to do.  I then went home, 'phoned the ATM people, who said they'd look into the matter, but couldn't tell me when an engineer would be out to look at the machine.  "Will it be days, weeks, or months?" I asked.  "Sorry, we can't say," I was told.

I'd been without this money for three weeks and my patience was at an end.  I went back to the ATM armed with a flexible plastic ruler, a slightly bendy plastic balloon stick, and a roll of double-side sticky tape.  I also took a small bottle with me to jam open the flap.  A guy was withdrawing money, so I asked him to hold the flap up when his money came out, jammed the bottle neck into the machine, and, one by one, retrieved £220 of my money.  The remaining £20 note slipped off to the side somewhere, out of sight and out of reach.

Luckily, one of the directors of the shop was there today and, understandably, wondered what I was doing.  When I explained the situation, he very kindly gave me my missing £20 out of his own pocket and said he would call out an engineer right away.  Turns out this could have been done three weeks ago and I could've got my money back that day, but the assistant I'd spoken to in the shop back then wasn't interested in sharing that information, saying that the machine was nothing to do with them.

Anyway, when I got home, I 'phoned the ATM company again, told them I'd retrieved most of my money and that the guy in the shop had made up the difference.  "He shouldn't have done that" I was told.  "Well, he did," I said, "so when your engineer examines the machine and retrieves my £20, give it to the shop staff so that the guy gets his money back."  "No, we can't do that" I was told.  "Well, from your point of view, it's still my £20, so if you won't give it to him, restore it to my account so that I can give it to him myself."  "We can't do that," came the retort, "any money will be returned to our head office."  (Or she might've said the bank's head office, not quite sure.)

I 'phoned the shop to explain things, but though the director had left, the engineer was now on the premises, so I trotted along to speak to him.  He said he'd been unable to find the £20, but perhaps he wasn't allowed to convey that kind of information so that the ATM people could hold onto any money found.  Just think, I'd have been out of £240 if I hadn't decided to take matters into my own hands.  My notes had been lying in the tray for three whole weeks, even though someone from the ATM company had regularly been refilling the machine during that time.

Declined my claim?  Not on their bloody life, Crivs.  Take a leaf out of my book - don't let these b@st@rds mess you about and never give up.  If I hadn't rescued my money myself, at some point it would've been discovered lying in that tray and 'disappeared' without me knowing about it, never to hear about the matter again and leaving me £240 out of pocket.

At least this time the 'good guys' won.

Tuesday, 26 May 2020

IT'S ALL THERE IN BLACK AND WHITE - OR, FIFTY SHADES OF GREY, CAPTAIN AMERICA #601 STYLE...


Copyright MARVEL COMICS

My black and white variant edition of CAPTAIN AMERICA #601 turned up today, and for the £2.50 it cost me (plus £1.40 for p&p) it was an absolute steal - especially as it came in a firm cardboard mailer that would have made it difficult for even The A-TEAM to damage.  And the mag's in practically pristine condition.

Instead of just adding the b&w images to the other post, I've decided that they deserve a post of their own, so here they are.  I'll maybe add them to the first post later, as well as add the colour pages to this one so that new readers in the future won't have to jump between posts to compare the difference, but for now, GENE COLAN's pencilled pages will suffice.

So below, in their 'before' stage, are the same pages that DEAN WHITE coloured in the previous version of this comic that I showed you.  Here's a link to that other post for your convenience until I revise (if I do) both posts.  So - which ones do you prefer - the colour pages or the 'black and white'?  (More like grey, I'd say.)






This variant edition of the mag also contains ED BRUBAKER's script, so here's a little taste of it so that you can compare his panel descriptions to what Gene drew. 

SMASH! 2020 SPECIAL...


Copyright REBELLION

Just a little reminder for all you oldies out there that the SMASH! Special is due out tomorrow (27th) and can be ordered at this link.  I see that REBELLION is using a logo based on one that only ever appeared once before, on the last ever Smash! Annual for 1976.  (Just threw that in for all those Crivvies who are interested in such trivia.)

Aside from CURSITOR DOOM, none of the characters in the new Special ever actually appeared* in either the original or revamped version of Smash!, though there's a (tenuous but very welcome) connection in JOHNNY FUTURE, who appeared in FANTASTIC back in the '60s before the comic was eventually subsumed into Smash! in 1968 (though JF had been gone for 38 issues by the time that happened).

Anyway, unsurprisingly, I've already ordered a couple of issues and just can't wait for them to arrive.  If you remember Smash! from your childhood (and if you can, you're ancient) then you might like to do the same.  ('Youngsters' are also advised to buy a copy.)  Click on that above link now!  And below is the cover of the '76 Annual for you to compare the logos.

(*I suppose you could argue the point seeing as Smash! was merged into VALIANT [becoming Valiant & Smash!] and The STEEL CLAW was a Valiant character, though I'm not 100% sure whether he ever appeared in the combined title and I'm too lazy to check.  I think he might have done though.) 

Monday, 25 May 2020

STOP THE PRESSES - REVIEW NOW RESTORED IN THE 21ST CENTURY...



I see that The OFFICIAL GERRY ANDERSON site has now restored my original review of the Special Edition of TV21 #243, so as an act of goodwill, I have removed my earlier posts about its deletion.  Hopefully, my review will remain until they sell out of stock of this particular issue.

However, my resubmitted review (which was also deleted) has also popped up again, meaning it now appears twice (but on different pages), so  hopefully they will remove the most recent incarnation.

THE GREAT PRETENDERS... (Updated)



From a very early age, it was noticed and remarked upon by my parents, teachers, and peers I had a talent for drawing which was above the ordinary.  You may laugh and consider me deluded, but that was the general consensus of opinion among those who saw my drawings.  I'm sure if I could view my early efforts now, I'd be embarrassed by how bad most of them were and also resentful of the fact anything good about them was dependent on the influence of others.

By that I mean I learned from Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, Mike Noble, Ron Embleton, Curt Swan, Murphy Anderson and others, 'borrowing' what was good about their work and infusing it into my own.  Even a poor reflection of greatness can sometimes have at least a hint of greatness about it, and that was what others saw in my sketches and doodles - the spirits of 'giants' even my ineptitude and lack of experience couldn't completely exorcise.

As I grew up I grew lazy.  Whenever I wanted recognition or approbation from my peers, all I had to do was acquiesce to their requests to dash off some doodle which, to them, seemed like a manifestation of magic on a scrap of paper or the back of a school jotter.  I later learned, as an adult, I was regarded as a bit of a 'legend' (their word, not mine) by people I didn't know because of my reputation being promoted and propagated by pupils in my class among their fellows and friends in and out of school.

Sounds like I'm full of myself, doesn't it?  However, I recall meeting one fellow who'd been at my secondary school (who I didn't know at the time) telling me many years later in adulthood my name was a 'legend' at school (remember, I'm not accountable for the perceptions or hyperbole of others) because of my ability in cartooning and also the portraits (not caricatures) of teachers I drew in my jotters instead of paying attention in class.  (Bear in mind I was only around 12 or 13 at the time, so my efforts probably seemed disproportionately good for my age.)

I'm not going to lie to you.  I was of course flattered to learn people held my talent (if not myself) in such high regard, and I allowed a little pride to swell within my heart, though I never really considered myself as anything special.  Having said that, however, sometime in the early 1980s, someone said something to me that, eventually, led me to think of myself in a different way.

I'd 'taught' myself to sign-write simply by doing it (and because I wanted to be able to), and one day, in a Glasgow exhaust-fitting and m.o.t. centre where I was doing a sign, a fellow called Tony Quinn (no, not the famous actor) told me he envied my artistic abilities because they were 'special'.  "Anyone can learn to do what I do," he said, "but what you can do is a gift which can't be taught."  (Unless one already had the spark that could be fanned into a flame, obviously.)  I always remembered that, and I must confess it initiated a gradual change in the way I saw myself.

I didn't become a bighead, but whenever someone would try to put me down for drawing superheroes and comic strips (for my own amusement), I'd often find myself thinking - and even saying - "And what can you do that's so special?  All you are is a bloody biscuit salesman!"  (Or whatever.)  Of course, I'm sure even some biscuit salesmen have talents, but for the majority of them it's probably just for selling biscuits and, let's face it - that's really not so special.

I've noticed a growing trend in society over the last few years to try and reduce what were once regarded as special (even specialist) talents or artistic abilities of gifted creative people to a lower level, so those who could never hope to attain such heights needn't feel in any way inferior to others.  (Not that they should, but some people do.)  Where once it was perfectly acceptable to look up to and admire (even envy) those who could do things we couldn't, the new agenda is we're all 'equalised', and your rough doodle is as much a legitimate expression of artistic ability and accomplishment as a landscape by Constable.

There's a certain kind of person who'll take a degree course in order to validate their artistic aspirations, ambitions, and - let's face it - pretensions, so they can consider themselves part of a talented elite.  And let's not fool ourselves - there is an artistic or creative elite who are capable of things other people aren't.  In the minds of those who covet such status but are undeserving of it, the acquisition of a degree conveys a legitimacy (pseudo as it may be) on their lacklustre, talentless daubs, and delusionally confirms their own misplaced belief in themselves.  (And let's be clear - no one is an artist, poet, writer, or whatever, merely because they wish to be.)  Incidentally, I should emphasize I'm not accusing everyone who studies for a degree of having this mentality, only some of them.  Some jobs require a degree if you wish to pursue a career in them, but studying for a degree just for the sake of having one reeks of pretension in my opinion.

However, we're no longer allowed to make that distinction.  Primary pupils in a school sports day race are all awarded prizes so no one need feel left out or inferior.  (No more winners or losers, merely participants.)  Perish forbid we recognise and reward excellence, and in so doing challenge kids to reach beyond their grasp and push themselves in pursuit of improvement in their chosen field of endeavour in later years.  And if part of that is also teaching them to know their limitations, that too is a valuable and useful lesson.  Children should know they can't be good at everything and there's no shame in acknowledging someone is better at something than they are.  Self-esteem shouldn't be founded on the fallacy of believing you're good at something you're not.

According to today's way of thinking, anyone with a camera is a 'photographer', and anyone who wields a pencil or brush is an 'artist', regardless of the merits (if any) of the results.  Anyone who tunelessly tortures their vocal chords (and the ears of their listeners) is a 'singer', despite not being able to carry a tune in a bucket.  Anyone who commits a few lines of meterless, badly rhymed jottings to paper is a 'poet', whose work deserves the same kind of respect as that of Poe.

You get the idea I'm sure.  I don't know about you, but I can't help but feel offended when someone looks at a drawing I'm proud of and says "My sister's a bit of an artist too", when their sister can't actually draw and thinks that unmade beds, or tents with names sewn on them, is the epitome of artistic achievement.  As with most people, there are more things I can't do than can, but I reserve the right to feel proud of what I'm good at without feeling guilty, and resent any attempts by certain elements to elevate the efforts of the talentless to the same standard as my own by dragging me down to their level.

The world is now full of 'pretenders' who demand to be recognised for being (in their mistaken estimation) equally capable at whatever you may be naturally good at, purely because they want to be, or because of some undeserved job title or useless 'vanity-degree' (or certificate) that isn't necessarily an accurate assessment of their abilities.  I don't have a degree in art (never sought one), but having one wouldn't enable me to draw any better than I do (whatever standard you may think that is), nor does the absence of one make me draw any worse.  (I can do that on my own.)

So, do I have an over-inflated opinion of myself, or - in your heart of hearts - do you think the same when you experience it happening in your own life in regard to some pretentious, presumptuous pretender considering themselves your equal in the area you have a special talent for?  The comments section is now open - let rip!  C'mon - who's going to be brave enough to be the first?  Even if it's just to tell me you think I'm talking mince!


******

Update: I see I've lost a 'follower', presumably because of this post.  Perhaps an insecure person with a degree?  I don't think I'm saying anything particularly controversial here.  We all believe ourselves to be good at something that others who aren't also think they're good at.  Just a shame that the former member didn't feel like having a conversation about what they've probably misunderstood.  Sad, also, that some people go off in a huff just because someone has a different opinion to them on some subject or other, eh?

Sunday, 24 May 2020

CALLING ALL CRIVS - HELP REQUIRED... (UPDATE - SORTED!)


This unfinished pencil sketch was started when I was living down in Southsea in Portsmouth back in 1985.  I copied it from an interior photograph of the author of an art book, both of which I've long since forgotten.  I never got to finish it before having to hand the book back in to the library, being too busy pursuing my career as a calligraphic artist (okay then... a letterer) in the world of comics.  I'd love to find out what the book's called and who the author is so that I can finally complete the sketch, lo, these 35 years later.  If any Crivvies can assist, I'd be much obliged.

Of course, I could just finish the drawing using my imagination, but that would leave me open to criticism that I hadn't 'captured' the original photo (if it's ever found to be compared against) so I'd much rather be as faithful to the source as possible.

At the beginning of the book was a quotation from MICHELANGELO, which I was so impressed by that I made a note of it.  Hopefully, if you harbour any artistic aspirations (and talent), it may inspire you to achieve them.

"Let this be plain to all: design, or as it is called by another name, drawing, constitutes the fountain-head and substance of painting and sculpture and architecture and every other kind of painting, and is the root of all sciences.  Let him who has attained the possession of this be assured that he possesses a great treasure;..."

MICHELANGELO.

Now - go forth and conquer!  But first, someone tell me who the author is and what the book's called.

******

Just before I pressed 'publish', I decided on a whim to Google Search the quote by Michelangelo and discovered that the book is called 'On The ART Of DRAWING' by ROBERT FAWCETT.  However, the limited preview of the book doesn't contain the photograph, so if anyone has it and can send me a scan, please let me know.

Update: Managed to find a copy of the photo by doing an image search of my own sketch.  Now, at last, I can finish the drawing when I remember where I put the original.  I'd scanned it a few years ago, and lifted the image at the top of this post from an earlier one.  That's the photo below.

Saturday, 23 May 2020

GENE COLAN'S CAPTAIN AMERICA #601...


Copyright MARVEL COMICS

I seem to remember reading somewhere that CAPTAIN AMERICA #601 was GENE COLAN's last work for MARVEL - and perhaps (private commissions aside) his last work anywhere.  Apparently it was originally intended as an Annual in 2007, but didn't appear until a couple of years later in this double-size issue of Cap's own regular monthly mag.

The version shown here is the one coloured by DEAN WHITE, and it has to be admitted that the art is very atmospheric.  There's also a black and white variant version printed from Colan's pencils, which I'm still waiting for despite ordering it (from a different seller) within minutes of the colour one on display before you.

Colan won an EISNER Award for this issue, but despite the reviews extolling his art, it isn't really the best thing he's ever done.  Dodgy perspectives, banana fingers, contorted anatomy, and stretched composition are occasionally in evidence, but remember that Colan suffered from poor eyesight so it's almost a miracle that he could even see to draw anything.  And he was also 82 when he produced this ish.

However, like I said, this mag has mood and atmosphere in spades, and no one did those qualities better than Colan.  When the black and white version arrives, I'll post some pages so that you can compare them against White's coloured examples and you can judge for yourself which ones you like best.  In the meantime, feel free to leave a comment saying just what Gene Colan's art means to you.






I'll show you the interiors soon - promise!

Thursday, 21 May 2020

COMBINED - PART TWELVE & THIRTEEN Of DON STARR'S APPOINTMENT With FEAR...

Copyright relevant owner

At last!  The gripping conclusion of DON STARR's penultimate adventure from the pages of '60s POWER periodical, the titanic TERRIFIC.  Two episodes for the price of one this time out, Crivs, so you can't accuse me of being mean to you.

Daring Don had only one more adventure to go before he vanished into oblivion, in the exact same week that superhero JOHNNY FUTURE (from sister publication FANTASTIC) also disappeared (aside from one last, pre-produced, full-colour appearance in an Annual).

'Twas no coincidence, because the two comics were merged into one, necessitating the removal of both home-grown strips to leave room for the MARVEL reprints.

Want to see Don's final adventure, Crivvies?  Then let me know. 





THAT'S THE WONDER OF WOOLIES...



One shop which features in the childhood memories of many people of a certain age is undoubtedly WOOLWORTHS.  Which of us can think back to our early days and not see Woolworths loom large in our personal history?  Of course, there will be other shops, some local, some national, that we also hold in great affection, but Woolworths is the 'daddy', isn't it?  Or one of the daddies at least, especially when it came to toys (and PIC 'n' MIX).

To be honest, I wasn't always 100% certain about its name.  I, along with most people I knew, called it Woolworths (or Woolworse was the way I pronounced it as a kid), but it was actually known as F.W. WOOLWORTH & Co. Ltd when I was a boy, only switching to WOOLWORTHS in the early or mid- '80s after a management buyout in the UK.  So whether you called it Woolworth, Woolworth's or Woolworths, you were right at least some of the time.

Amazingly, the British incarnation outlasted the American one (from which it had sprung) by quite a few years, and there has been talk about the name returning to the UK high street a number of times over the last few years, which I for one would love to see.  I suppose HOME BARGAINS is the modern equivalent of 'Woolies', but it would be great to see the original resurrected.

I own a number of goodies bought from Woolworths over the years before its demise, some of which bear the company's name on the packaging.  However, those 'branded' products are mostly generic items made by a variety of manufacturers and were doubtless also available in other stores in different packaging.  Now, though, thanks to the generosity of American reader Terranova47, today I became the proud owner of a MATTEL HOT WHEELS lorry bearing the iconic name of Woolworth on the product itself.

This is an American toy, hence the US version of the name, but hey - whether Woolworth, Woolworth's or Woolworths, it's essentially the same thing.  And remember, Woolworths was actually known as Woolworth in Britain at one time too, prior to the addition of the 's'.

So, many thanks to Terranova47 for reminding me of a much-missed part of my past.  Woolworths may be gone (for the moment), but it'll never be forgotten, regardless of whatever version of its name is the one you remember.

Any fond memories of Woolies that you'd care to share with your fellow Crivs?  Then the comments section awaits your presence.   

Monday, 18 May 2020

VIVA TOBC! The REBELS HAVE COME THROUGH For ME...

Copyright REBELLION

Sometimes something happens that restores your faith in human nature.  Or even 'business' nature for that matter.  REBELLION's TREASURY Of BRITISH COMICS have just sent me a free replacement for The COMPLETE JOHNNY FUTURE volume that every superhero comic strip fan in the world should have, and it's about as perfect as I could wish for.  (My previous copy was slightly damaged.)  Consequently, I'm as happy as a pig in the soft smelly brown stuff.

You all know that I'm quick to point out when some companies don't live up to expectations, but I hope I'm at least just as quick to say when other companies do the right thing - or even better than the right thing as Rebellion have done in this case.  So far I've bought three copies of this book (one from Rebellion, two from AMAZON) in my quest for a pristine copy, meaning I've now spent just over £60 (actually £70 counting postage) on the same tome, but I've been waiting decades for this book and wasn't prepared to accept anything less than near-perfection.

Well, I've now got my almost-perfect copy and I wanted everyone to know what a great service Rebellion provides in rectifying matters when things go wrong.  They now have a fresh supply of this very handsome volume, which can be obtained by clicking on this link.  If you don't have this book, you should have, so order yourself a copy today!  You'll be glad you did.   

BABE Of The DAY - HUDSON LEICK...



HUDSON LEICK smiles like a psycho
in this photo, but what can I say?  My kinda
woman!  Okay, Crivs, here's a simple question
for you.  XENA or CALLISTO - which cutie
rings your bell loudest?  You know where
to leave your answers so fire away.

Saturday, 16 May 2020

COMICBOOK CLANGERS - BETWEEN HAMMER And ANVIL...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Okay, so here's what happens in the above ish.  Two criminals escape from a prison chain gang, manacled to one another with only a few feet between them.  An alien (in mistaken gratitude for them inadvertently helping him when their intention was the opposite) replaces their chain with what he describes as an 'Energy Synthicon', giving them undreamt of power which the two then use to take on The HULK.

They lose of course, but that's par for the course with ol' Hulkie.  What strikes me though, is the patent absurdity of the whole premise of having two guys 'bonded' together, presumably for life (until Greenskin solves that problem), and unable to go their separate ways.  Maybe it's just me, but I can't help but wonder why LEN WEIN didn't reject the idea when it occurred to him, on the grounds that neither of the two men would be able to go to the toilet on their own, and would have to sleep in close proximity to one another because of their 'Synthicon'.


Take the clothes they're wearing too.  HAMMER's topless, ANVIL wears a shirt, but how will Hammer put on a shirt (if he wants to), and how will Anvil be able to change his?  Things like that bother me - or the adult me anyway, as such details wouldn't have occurred to me when I was a kid or teenager.  Most youngsters wouldn't consider them either, which tends to suggest (not that there was much doubt) that these tales were written mainly for teenagers, not adults.  (I should say, however, that The Hulk's friendship with a character called CRACKAJACK JACKSON is quite touching, and the poignant ending redeems the more absurd aspects of the story to a large extent.)

Anyway, just thought I'd run that by you Crivs and see what your reactions are, if any.  Have I got too much time on my hands that I notice these kind of problems, or do they bug you too (even in a minor way)?  Let loose in the comments section.

Friday, 15 May 2020

AT LAST! TRUE BELIEVERS FINALLY ARRIVE...


Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Lovely stuff!  Six new titanic TRUE BELIEVERS comics arrived this morning, and being the unselfish paragon of genial generosity that I am, I've decided to share the cataclysmic covers with all you crazy Crivs.  There's no point identifying each title individually when you can see which ones they are for yourselves, though I'd like to draw your attention to The AVENGERS issue with CAPTAIN MARVEL on the cracking (and crackling) cover above.


This ish (originally Avengers #89) was previously reprinted as a True Believers mag (smaller image above) around 14 months ago, but with the original masthead (and subtitle) removed and replaced with a far less impressive one.  I've included the cover to remind you, so that you can compare the difference and see how much better the covers are when they're not altered too much.  Hopefully MARVEL will continue on this course with all future issues.

Any, enough waffle from me - enjoy the covers!





Thursday, 14 May 2020

FROM THIS - TO THIS... A PICTORIAL TRANSFORMATION...


We're told to recycle all the time these days so, for this post, I thought I'd follow that particular advice and 'recycle' some of the old strips I restored from a rather dilapidated state in order to brighten up the walls they adorned in my room.  I never kept copies of every stage of the restoration process, so the 'before' examples will vary from one strip to another, but the difference will be obvious (I hope).  Every 'To This...' strip you see in this post is the transformed result arrived at from working on the 'From This -' example, not lifted from another source.  Are you all ready?  Then let's go!

FROM THIS -


TO THIS...


******
FROM THIS -


TO THIS...


******
FROM THIS -


TO THIS...


******
FROM THIS -


TO THIS...