THINGS THAT ARE ALWAYS THERE...

I suppose I was around 3 or 4 years of age when I first became aware of the Uncle Arthur's Bedtime Stories book in my bedroom.  Well, I say 'my' bedroom, but I shared it with my brother.  (It would be another 9 or 10 years before I finally got a room of my own.)  I was always dimly aware of its presence in our first three houses, but it was allocated to the attic along with a pile of other stuff in our fourth house, and was there for years before I rediscovered it one day and moved it into my bedroom cupboard.

It was written by British-born Arthur S. Maxwell, a Seventh-day Adventist and published in the UK, and is one of a series that lasted for quite a few years.  In fact, for all I know, they might still enjoy regular reprintings today.  The stories, purporting to be true, are a bit twee, and looking at them now, they paint a picture of a vanished age - or at least the perception of an age which may never truly have existed except in the minds of a certain 'class'.  I only just started reading the stories and am now around halfway through the book. They're reasonably well-written, though the children featured in them don't speak like any children I ever heard (far too keen to pray), not even when I was a nipper. 

The book was hardly in pristine condition, with scuffs and scrapes to the boards, and part of the spine was missing in the middle, plus a little bit of the cover where the absent piece of the spine folded over.  It may always have been like this, but it's hard to say with any certainty as I don't think either my brother or myself ever read it.  If we ever picked it up out of boredom, we soon put it down again the moment we remembered it was a Sunday School-type book and therefore of no interest to us.  We were both made to attend Sunday School (reluctantly), but I recall at least one occasion when me and a pal skived off and spent our 'collection' money on sweets.  (Villains!)  Where did the book come from?  Jumble sale, church, a relative?  Its source is lost to the mists of time, but it could've been 'secondhand' when we got it.

For many years, neither me nor my brother were allowed beyond the confines of our back garden on a Sunday (apart from visiting our grandparents along with mater and pater) as my mother was religiously-minded (Church of Scotland), though more from a superstitious perspective (it seemed to me) than an insightful or pious one.  She believed people shouldn't exert themselves (as kids are prone to) on a Sunday as it was the 'day of rest', not realising that, to the Jews, the Sabbath was a Saturday and the admonition to 'rest' was only for them, not Gentiles.  We were in our third house before she eventually relaxed a bit and we could get out to the field across the street to play for a while.  I'm not sure exactly when - could've been when I was 7 or 8.

Anyway, digging through my cupboard the other day, I spied the book and decided to effect a repair job on it, to sort of make up for its many decades of neglect.  I gave it a colour touch-up in places, just to make it look neater, and replaced the missing piece on the spine.  I'm slightly colour-blind so can't swear to the efficacy of my work in that department, but the book is now more secure (a touch of glue in places along the inside of the spine sorted out any looseness), and is certainly much better in appearance than it was previously.

Look at the back cover below.  One glance at that seal and I'm a child again, and the shape and dimensions of my room shift in my mind - first one room, then another, then back again, swirling through time and space like my own personal TARDIS.  To be honest, in the natural course of events, had the book not been quarantined in the loft for decades, it would likely have been dispensed with long ago by my parents or brother for being surplus to requirements.

However, I'm glad it wasn't, as it goes all the way back to my earliest days, and to be without it would be like being without some old friend from childhood who I never quite realised meant so much to me 'til I set eyes on them again after a long period, and was reminded of how far back we went before I cruelly and selfishly forgot about them on my day-to-day sojourn through life.  It's ironic to think that had Uncle Arthur still been alive, he'd probably have turned that into a quaint little morality tale for one of his books.

Any of you Crivvies own any books that you've had from infancy?  Spill the Heinz 57 in our ever-lovin' comments section. 

SPIDER-MAN/BLACK WIDOW TRUE BELIEVERS ISH...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

 

Lovers of John Romita's art will appreciate this latest True Believers issue, featuring The Black Widow in her new costume for the first time.  Romita was a master visual storyteller and his panel-to-panel layout was always easy on the eye and crystal clear to follow, which is something that some of the modern crop of comicbook artists would benefit from emulating.  Anyway, below is a few pages to show you that I ain't just whistling Dixie.  Available now from where comics are sold.

 

The COMIC ART Of REG PARLETT...

Copyright relevant owner

You Crivvies will be glad to know that there's a new guest post by Barry Pearl waiting in the wings, but in the meantime, here's a book I received today about one of my favourite cartoonists - Reg Parlett.  It has loads of great examples of Reg's work, and the book was published in 1986 when he was still a working artist at the age of 80.  (Altogether, he had a career spanning 66 years.)  Alan Clark, the book's author, was the organiser of a campaign to get an official honour (O.B.E. I think) for Reg, but sadly it never happened.  Reg died in 1991, but his art lives on in back issues of the many comics he worked for, and in books like the one pictured above.

Reg was replaced on the Buster strip in the comic of the same name by Tom Paterson, another brilliant cartoonist.  However, the change in style from Reg's gentle-but-hilarious depiction to Tom's somewhat more 'manic' interpretation wasn't as popular with readers as had been anticipated.  I remember saying to Bob Paynter (Group Editor of IPC's humour division) when I was down in King's Reach Tower one day that I wasn't too keen on the new look, and Bob admitted that, going by readers' reaction, it'd probably been a mistake to make such a pronounced change in art style.

However, Reg continued to draw the Buster strip for Scottish newspaper The Sunday Mail afterwards, so he still maintained a connection to the character, which he'd been writing and drawing since the early '70s.  Along with Angel Nadal, he's probably the artist most associated with Buster by a certain age group.  Anyway, if you're a fan of Reg, this is a book that's well-worth having in your collection.  Below, for your amusement, is another of Reg's strips - Rent-A-Ghost Ltd. - enjoy!  (And feel free to leave a comment.)

ARE YOU TRUE BELIEVERS IN THE MAN-BAT...?

Copyright DC COMICS

When you get to around my age, the things in life to which you can look forward decrease with each passing year.  Sure, you can 'look forward' to increasing deafness, failing eyesight, muscular aches and pains, sagging posture, reduced mobility, mental fatigue (and, if you're really unlucky, baldness and no teeth), as well as looming death, but those are hardly prospects from which you can extract any sense of anticipatory joy.  (As for myself, I still have the looks and vitality of a teenager - in an old photo somewhere.)

So what does that leave?  The postman striding up to your front door with a package or two, containing some of life's treasures - comicbooks!  Today's delivery included Man-Bat Vs. Batman, a 1984 Special reprinting the first three Man-Bat tales, which I already have in another couple of collections of Neal Adams' work.  However, this format is better because it's an actual comicbook and less wieldy to read when resting in either of my two favourite positions - reclining on my bed with comic in hand, or perched on the porcelain with comic on my lap.  (That's another aspect of old age - more visits to the toilet - if you can make it in time.  The delights that lay ahead of you in your golden years, eh, readers?)

The other comic I received today was one of the latest True Believers mags, this one featuring The Black Widow.  Don't be fooled by the cover of the TB, as The Inhumans strip isn't anywhere to be found inside, 'just' two Black Widow tales drawn by John Buscema, from the first two issues of the original mag.  (Readers are bound to be confused when Marvel realease an Inhumans TB with the same cover.)  Anyway, thought I'd share the covers and a page or three from these two pulsating publications, just to show you what you're missing - if you don't already have them that is.  Can't wait to see what tomorrow's delivery is going to bring.

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

My original issue alongside the TB comic

THE GORILLA HUNTERS... (Updated)

 

 

I may still have my original copy of R.M. Ballantyne's book The Gorilla Hunters up in my loft somewhere.  If so, it lost its dust-jacket long ago, but I still have an image in my mind of what it looked like.  I wouldn't even know which box to start on in search of it, which is why I bought a 'generic' copy on eBay a month or two back when I fancied re-reading it 47 or so years after the fact.  At a guess, I was given it in 1970 or '71 as a Sunday School* prize for regular attendance (not that I wanted to go), but I didn't get around to actually reading it until 1972 or '73.

 

(*Actually, if I'm correct as to when I got the book, I'd have been too old for Sunday School, so it would've been something for older kids and young teenagers called 'Junior Church'.)

At least that's the way I remember things, but my memory isn't quite as sharp these days as it once was.  I enjoyed re-reading the book, though more from the perspective of revisiting a past pleasure than it being a particularly gripping book.  I remember taking it into secondary school with me one day and reading it in an annexe hut at the back end of the 'Old Block', but whether I'd started the book prior to then is now beyond my ability to recall.  (Though in memory I was back in that classroom when I started reading it again, if that counts for anything.)

As an aside, the teacher in that hut once said an interesting thing to me, though I couldn't say whether it was on that specific day or a different one.  "Gordon, you can tell you're an artist, because of your handwriting.  You've probably got the best handwriting in the school."  I find that of interest because I'd also been commended in class for my handwriting in my two primary schools, so that made my ability to produce pleasing penmanship unanimous.  Perhaps I was destined to be a calligraphic artist from an early age, eh?

(Fairness demands I mention the fact that, when I later changed my style to using loops in my writing in the way that my mother did, another teacher said "Considering you're so good at drawing, it's surprising that your handwriting is so terrible."  I immediately reverted to my previous loop-free style.)

Anyway, back to the gorillas.  In the late '70s I bought The Coral Island by the same author, published in 1857, four years before The Gorilla Hunters (which featured the same three main characters as the first book, but older).  Again, I no longer recollect (at the moment of typing, maybe it'll come back to me) whether I happened upon The Coral Island by chance, or specifically acquired it because I'd read its 'sequel' several years before.  I'd have to re-read 'Coral' before I could tell you if it's as good as I remember it to be, but my general impression is that it was superior to 'Hunters'.

(Interestingly, it's said that R.L. Stevenson was so impressed by 'Coral' that he based features of Treasure Island on parts of it.)

The word 'nigger' (singular and plural) is used quite profusely in 'Hunters' (which is set mainly in the African jungle), but not necessarily in an intentionally insulting or demeaning way, and certainly not in a way which suggests that Ballantyne may have been a racist.  In fact, I could detect no negative attitude towards Negroes in general, and the three white protagonists seem to have a fond and respectful regard for the tribes (and certain individuals) they encounter.  The book was written in 1861, so is obviously a product of its time, but probably best not to read it if you're easily offended by the language of a vanished age.

Anyway, to round this off (you'll no doubt be glad to hear), I saw a copy of the book with the dust-jacket I remember on eBay and bought it yesterday (the book, not eBay), so it's hopefully winging its way to me as I type.  (Update: Now arrived.  As always, it's good to be reunited with yet another aspect of my past.)  Anyone else ever read The Gorilla Hunters?  If so, what was your impression of it?  Hit or miss?

******

It seems that my new replacement, pictured above, of the original copy I had (and might still have) back in the early '70s is an abridged edition, as comparing it with the one I re-read a few weeks back, I notice that there are some differences.  Obviously I'm not going to read the book again to see what they all are, but at a cursory glance, I see that one chapter has had a religious allusion removed, and chapters shortened, perhaps even combined, as it has two chapters fewer than the one I bought a month or so ago.

BABE Of The DAY - VALERIE PEREZ...

Here's sexy, sultry, sensual stunner

Valerie Perez to brighten up our day,

Crivs.  Why didn't any of my old girlfriends

look like Valerie, I often wonder?  Probably

'cos they weren't Valerie I guess. (And also

'cos they were old - can't win 'em all.)

MARVEL COMICS' CONAN The BARBARIAN EPIC COLLECTION VOLUME ONE... (Updated)

Copyright MARVEL COMICS and CPI

Y'know, I've got most if not all of these Conan The Barbarian tales at least half a dozen times over in various reprints (plus the original first ish), so I don't really need another edition.  However, there's just something so compelling about the Marvel Epic Collections which makes them hard to resist.

First, the page size is pretty close to the initial newsprint editions, and the reproduction is usually clearer, with near-perfect colour registration.  Next, the paper* is more like 'comics' paper (when comics were comics) than the type used in the Omnibus volumes, and the book isn't too wieldly or heavy when it comes to taking it into the smallest room in the house for a quick read while you're in there.

(*It's better quality than comics paper though.  In fact, I wish that Marvel would print their Facsimile Editions on it.)

The colours are vibrant and a feast to the eyes, and though I love the Omnibus editions (and the Masterworks), I think I prefer the Epic and Complete books because the experience of reading them is more akin to reading a comic than a book.  All Conan fans who don't already own the material reprinted within (and, like me, even some who do) are bound to love this valiant volume as much as I do, so grab a copy while you can.

Undoubtedly the best way to experience the first 13 issues, short of owning the actual originals!  And there's loads of bonus material in the back of the book.

 

And below is the cover to the book by Roy Thomas that Barry Pearl mentions in the comments section, which Conan fans may be interested in.  I believe there are three volumes in all so far.

 

DC SUPER-STARS #17 FACSIMILE EDITION...

Copyright DC COMICS

To be honest, this one's a little disappointing -  at least partially so.  The first strip is scanned from a printed issue and is really quite washed out and anaemic-looking, as are some of the ads.  The other stories, though, have obviously been reprinted before, as they're from nice bright proofs and probably even better than DC Super-Stars #17's original printing back in 1977.  (Which has an extremely high asking price from some eBay sellers, it has to be said.)

It's a shame that DC are going down the most expedient route when it comes to sourcing some of the material for these facsimile editions.  Instead of creating new, high-quality proofs when they need to, they're resorting to the least expensive option.  The debut of The Huntress is the tale that most buyers will be grabbing this mag for, which thankfully hasn't been compromised in its reproduction, so that's a plus.  Overall, nice to have, so grab it while you can - if you're not already too late.

FOUR NEW TITANIC TRUE BELIEVERS FROM MARVEL...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

I've been a little remiss in showing you some of the recent True Believers issues that are available, so I'll remedy that right away by showing you these four cracking comics classics that now grace my collection.  Because of the pandemic, other titles that I ordered a while ago were delayed, but it shouldn't be too long before they're finally with me.  Once I've got my mitts on them, I'll present them for your pulsating peepers to savour - so stay tuned.

Another poorly composed cover from Jack, alas.  Crimson Dynamo
looks like a dwarf in comparison to the Black Widow and Iron Man

THE TOMB OF CONFUSION... (Updated)

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

A kind and generous Crivvie gave me the above Facsimile Edition comic - The Tomb Of Dracula #10, featuring the first appearance of Blade.  The kind Crivvie shall remain anonymous unless he wants to identify himself, but all Crivvies could do a lot worse than follow his example by likewise donating their unwanted comics to me.  Not every comic they don't want, mind, just ones that I would, not any old pish.  (Valuable pristine condition comics preferred.) 

Note the clever way in which I cunningly contrived to pad out this post with pointless preamble just so it appears more effort was put into it than actually was.  (I'm clever that way.)  Anyway, that's enough 'filler', I'll now get to the point - such as it is.  Take a look at the splash page below.  Try reading it so that you go from the captions at the top of the page into the smaller panel in a way that makes sequential sense.  Not easy, is it?  At least, not if you read the captions and dialogue in the larger panel in the order they're presented.

 

Presumably the smaller panel (as in picture) should be assimilated into the reader's consciousness before he moves onto the second, even though the first four captions (three running above with one dropped slightly) should be read before reading the caption and speech balloons in the first panel, before then moving on to the balloons in the second.  However, the placement of the lettering is confusing.  I finally managed to work out the intended order after studying the page and re-reading it a few times.  The fourth sequential caption appears to be a later addition, presumably to clarify things, but it does the opposite.

Things aren't helped by the positioning of the vampire's first speech balloon, which I'd have placed lower and nearer to the man's balloon in the larger panel so that one would lead into the other.  In fact, that fourth caption seems superfluous and the page would read better without it.  Or the man's second balloon could have been partially positioned in the lower portion of the first panel, overlapping into the second, with the vampire's first balloon  following it.

What do you think, Crivs, am I talking out of my @rse, or do you see the merit in what I'm saying?  Can you remember any other examples of confusingly-placed speech balloons or captions that impeded your grasp of what was happening, rather than making it clear to you?  If so, the comments section awaits.  However, before you start typing, below is an amended version which, in my humble view, 'scans' just a little more smoothly.  (Incidentally, in the credits below, Jack Abel's name has been misspelled.)

WHOOPEE! It's COMPETITION TIME... (And The WINNER Is...)

As I now own much better copies of the two Frankie Stein books seen above, I've decided to offer these two as a prize to the first person who can answer the following question correctly.  In what comic periodical did my first published freelance lettering job for IPC appear, and what was the name of the strip?  There's even a runner-up prize - namely a second spare copy I have of the 1977 book.  I'll announce the winners (assuming that anyone participates) in a week, and they can then send me their address to post the books to them.

Fear not, addresses won't be published, nor used for any other purpose (no passing on to anyone else), and will be deleted from my files once books are sent out.  You've got nothing to lose, so why not give it a go?  Despite their less-than-perfect condition, these books cost me a pretty penny, I can tell you, and they could be yours for free!  You certainly don't get a chance like this every day.  Obviously, I'd prefer them to go to someone who really wants them, as opposed to someone who's just going to put them up for sale on eBay.  (I could do that myself.)

Here's a clue - the answer is in a post on the blog somewhere.  Competition open only to UK residents.

HOW TO LOSE 45 YEARS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING... (Updated)

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Perhaps I should apologise for showing the above cover again so soon after last time, but just look at it.  Surely it would be a crime to apologise for such a great illustration.  So that means you're stuck with it!  Anyway, as I previously explained, someone gave me this issue recently (I won't say who in case he's shy) and when I got my hands on it (only today actually, but thanks to the magic of the 'edit' button on my earlier post, you'd think I'd had it for a few days) and when I opened its pages it was all extremely familiar to me.  I remembered certain panels in the b&w, grey tone way in which they appear inside and it seems, in memory, that I last read this specific comic only within the recent past, not 45 years ago when I first bought my original.

Thing is, I still have some of my original issues on either side of this number, so I really can't understand why I didn't have this one and the following issue too.  I always enjoyed 'The Inheritor!' (published over two issues) and I could've sworn I still had them, because, as I say, I recall looking at them in what feels like relatively recent history.  I can only assume that I gave them to a pal (who may well yet have them) amongst a pile of other comics, but at precisely which point in time I'm unsure of.  Anywhere between 1975 and '79, I'd say.  Can it really be so long since I last owned them?  I think I've got colour reprints of the stories in collected editions, but it's these 'monochrome' versions which are uppermost in my memory.

Well, anyway, I can't very well have #129 and not also have #130 in which the three stories (Hulk, Daredevil, and FF) continue, so I've just bought one on eBay.  It'll always be a mystery to me why I ever gave them away to begin with, so it'll be good to see the second comic reunited with the first, both back where they belong.  As I say, it's hard to believe that it's been 45 years since I first bought my original copies, but having them again will allow me to step back in time to that exact point in my youth, even if it's for far too short a period.

Honestly - it seems like only a few months at most since I last browsed through them, but how can such a thing be?!  Well, look at the cover of MWOM #124 below.  One possible explanation is that, as the cover for The Inheritor tale appeared several issues earlier (even though it had nothing to do with the Hulk story inside), whenever I looked at 124's cover down through the years, I subconsciously thought of the b&w reprint of the tale it represented.  That might account for why I believed I still had the issues in which the story appeared, long after I'd given them away.  That's the only explanation that seems to make any sense to me.  What do you think?

WIND-UP ROBOTS GALLERY...

 

I've been meaning to do a post on my wind-up (or clockwork if you prefer) toys for a good while now, but some of them are stored in big boxes and I have no idea which ones.  There's no way to ascertain precisely where they are without taking several days to look through them all (and there are loads) and locate them.  (I really do have a lot of stuff.)

So I've decided to compromise.  The definitive post on all my wind-up toys will have to wait, but in the meantime, I've decided to do one on just my robot wind-ups, as opposed to my 'character' ones.  That's to say, exclude ones such as Tom & Jerry, Paddington Bear, Noddy & Big Ears, Fred & Barney, Daleks (as they're not robots) and whatever others I've got in that category.

So there's no point in further preamble from me.  Here are a few wind up robots to tide you over 'til I find all my other clockwork toys.  Don't know when that'll be though.  Incidentally, there are three 'odd ones out' in this group - can you spot which ones?  Take a close look.

Aw, wee Frankie was hanging around wanting to get his photie taken, so because parents sometimes tell their kids that 'The Monster' is a robot so as not to scare them with the notion of sewn-together bits of corpses, I've decided to include the wee fella anyway.  (We don't want him sulking, do we?  That would never do!)

BABE Of The DAY - VALERIE PEREZ...

 

As many of you probably know by now, I'm not a big fan of current attempts to diminish (if not abolish) the distinction between genders, or being told what to think by those on a mission to remould society in their own minority image, so a female Doctor Who who was once a man but is now a woman is a load of old pants to my way of thinking.  (I can't help it, it's the way I was made - so I have no control over who I am, what I do, or how I think.  Well that argument seems to work for some!)

Actually, I have nothing against a female Doctor per se, it's only the gender agenda I'm against, and if the lady Doc wasn't a 'reassigned' man, it wouldn't bother me.  If 'The Doctor' was a title which could be transferred from one person to another, with the original title-holder retaining it in an honorary capacity in the same way as 'Mr. President', then that would be the ideal way of having a woman in the role.  And my first choice (even though she probably wouldn't be in accord with the views I've just expressed) would be the delightful, delicious, and delectable Valerie Perez.  (No relation to George as far as I know.)

She could take my temperature any time.  Which would only be fair as she constantly raises it every time I look at her.  Sigh.  (Yeah, okay, I know - different type of doctor, but I thought it was a good line.)

HE'S NUTHIN' BUT A TWO-FACED HULK... (GUESS WHAT? UPDATED, YESSIREE!)

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

It's a wet, rainy Saturday and - STOP!  Hold on a minute.  It could hardly be a dry, rainy Saturday (or any other day of the week) could it?  So when you think about it, qualifying a rainy day as 'wet' is a bit redundant.  However, sentences need rhythm, and 'It's a rainy Saturday' lacks a beat to my ears (and eyes).  So as you were then.

It's a wet, rainy Saturday and I'm in the comfy confines of my back room (once used as my 'studio'), desperately trying to think of something worth writing about.  Or at least something that you Crivs think might be worth reading, which may or may not be the same thing.  What should it be - comics, toys, TV shows, personal nostalgia - or something else entirely?  My repertoire is somewhat limited by my own interests, and on the few occasions when I've touched on subjects that lie beyond those parameters, then I'm usually out of my comfort zone.

So what'll it be?  48 years ago, October the 3rd was a Tuesday.  I couldn't say with any certainty whether it likewise rained back then, but my general impression of that whole week was that it was mild and sunny.  Well, it had been the previous Saturday (September 30th), and was again the following Friday (6th) and Saturday (7th), and if it ever rained in between, I have no memory of it.  But that doesn't solve the problem of what I should write about, does it?

Tell you what then.  I'll cop out by showing you a pretty picture, which sits at the top of this post.  However, as I type these very words, I haven't yet inserted the image into the designated space.  That's the thing about blog posts; the reader gets to see each post after it's composed and published, but the writer (that'll be me then) doesn't necessarily always construct it in the same order or sequence that the reader finally sees it.  But enough waffle!

Recently, someone gave me a comic I'd been thinking of acquiring.  (Once thought I still had it, turns out I didn't.)  Back when this image was first seen, it was in a comics ad for The Incredible Hulk King-Size Special #1.  In the half-page ad, Jim Steranko's Hulk face remained unchanged, though when the Special was published, a Marie Severin-drawn Hulk face had replaced it.

We Brits were lucky, because when the image turned up on the cover of MWOM #129 in 1975, Steranko's original Hulk fizzog was intact.  However, it had previously been used as a pin-up in MWOM #31 in 1973 (above), but was in b&w with grey 'Zipatone', not colour .

Anyway, feast your awestruck orbs, you Merry Marvel Maniacs!  And just in case you were wondering, below is how it appeared on the actual published Hulk Special.  Why'd they change it?  Your guess is as good as mine.  (And it's not often I say that.)  Perhaps Stan just wanted the Hulk's face to look the same on the cover as in the interior story, which Marie illustrated.

Y'know, someone once said that they could see I wasn't two-faced.  When I asked how they knew, they pointed at my kipper and answered "Because you wouldn't be wearing that one if you were!"  I just can't win, eh?

And below, as mentioned by CJ in the comments section, is the ad for the patch of the cover to MWOM #129, from the back page of The Super-Heroes #17, 1975 - a mere 3 months later.  It also appeared on the back cover of MWOM #150 and probably other Marvel weeklies.  Look at that badly redrawn right arm and hand on the larger Hulk figure holding the patch.  Ugh!  I hope Herb Trimpe never saw it - he wouldn't have been happy.

Ah, but hold on - there's more!  The cover was used again as a pin-up in The Mighty World Of Marvel Annual for 1977, as shown below.  As far as I know, this post includes all appearances of this illustration in Marvel UK mags and books of the '70s, but if you're aware of any other ones, be sure to let me know in our ever-lovin' comments section, effendis.

The MIGHTY MARVEL MAILBAG STRIKES AGAIN! (Or: 'NORMAN MAILER')...

Every comics fan in the world has surely heard of Frank Bellamy, right?  That being the case, many of them will know of Norman Boyd, who has a site devoted to Bellamy which can be found in my bloglist.  Norman is a longtime reader and collector of comics from back in the '60s, and it should therefore have come as no surprise to me to see a letter from a Norman Boyd in a back issue of The Mighty World Of Marvel (#85), when he'd have been a teenager.  However, I had no way of knowing for sure whether it was from the same Norman without first checking with him, so I contacted him to ask.

Norman couldn't remember if it might be one of his letters, so I scanned the page and sent it to him.  He was astounded to see (going by the location) that it was indeed written by him, as he had absolutely no recollection of it.  The same thing happened to me once.  I knew I'd written a few letters to Marvel UK back in the '70s, but I remembered the details of only one of them as I'd photocopied it at the time.  Imagine my surprise, then, when a Crivens reader (Duncan, I believe) commented to say that he'd read a letter by me in an issue of MWOM (I think) that I'd completely forgotten.  In fact, when he sent me a copy of it, I still couldn't fully recall it right away, though there was a hint of something vaguely familiar about it.

And so it was with Norman.  He was so thrilled at being reminded of his moment of glory in MWOM that he said I could write about it if I wanted to.  So I have.  Trouble is, my deteriorating memory is getting so bad that I'll probably have forgotten publishing this post in a couple of weeks and write it again.  Then you can all write in to remind me.  In the meantime, let's take a look at the letter which established Norman's near immortality in Marvel literary history for many years to come - probably for eternity, in fact.  (Well, you can't have one without the other, can you?  Immortality and eternity I mean.)

This ever happened to you?  Being reminded by someone of a letter you'd written to one of your favourite childhood comics that you'd completely forgotten about?  (The letter, not the comic.)  If so, tell all in the comments section.