tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24311991872873156892023-12-19T03:17:06.047-08:00The Comics DetectiveKen Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-46220216924618958672014-02-11T00:40:00.000-08:002014-03-28T11:59:37.127-07:00Josette Frank: Alone Against the Storm, Part 5 On April 27, 1953, the U.S. Senate established the Senate Special
Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency. Partly in response to public
concern and partly as a political stage in an approaching election year,
the committee was created in an attempt to determine the causes of
youthful criminal
activity. The investigation eventually got around to looking at the
effect comic
books had on this behavior, if any.<br />
The subcommitte met in
room 110 of the Foley Square on April 21, 1954. On the first day of the
hearing, the damning, anecdotal-filled testimony of Dr. Fredric Wertham
and William Gaines disastrous appearance before the committee garnered
all the headlines. The first witness the next day was a representative
of the Child Study Association. But it wasn't Josette Frank, the person
who had written more and spoken more in defense of comics who was
invited to testify. It was the executive director, Gunnar Dybwad.<br />
Dybwad was a well-respected sociologist and child-welfare expert who
had taken over as director of the CSAA in 1951, several years after most
of their comics research had been completed and published. Upon being
sworn in, Dybwad reads a prepared statement to the committee
outlining his organization's viewpoint on the subject of comic books,
emphasizing that their concern had been aimed at providing guidance to
parents regarding comic book reading, rather than how comics related to
juvenile delinquency specifically.<br />
Frank's name comes up
almost immediately when Dybwad mentions that she first wrote about comic
strips in a book back in 1937. This experience was one of the reasons
why she was invited by,"one <i>of the large publishers of comics magazines," </i>to be a consultant for them in 1941.<i><br /></i><br />
<i> "I would like to say parenthetically, Miss Frank is only part time on our staff,"</i> Dybwad was quick to add.<i><br /></i><br />
While under questioning by H<span class="st">erbert
Wilson Beaser, associate chief counsel for the committee, Dybwad offers
into evidence the several studies conducted by the CSAA over the years.
He is careful to state that the current opinion of the CSAA regarding
"crime comics" was different than it was back when these studies were
conducted.</span><br />
Dybwad takes pains to point out that the CSAA was of the opinion,<i>"that the problems of comics had called for both sociological and physicological </i>[sic] <i>research and for concerted community action."</i><br />
<i>
"As I pointed out to you, neither one was our function, and it is
regrettable that no effective action has been forthcoming from other
quarters."</i><br />
This call for "community action" seemed to
carry a more ominous connotation than the gentler community "influence"
Frank had suggested in 1949. If it wasn't apparent at the beginning, it
was now. Dybwad was trying to put as much distance between the CSAA and
its past comics research as possible. <br />
Frank and Sidonie Gruenberg are brought up again in regards to several <i>"favorable"</i> articles they had written about comics.<br />
<i> "If you want to really be fair about the matter," </i>asked Senator Estes Kefauver,<i>"and follow up your
testimony here today as to the kind of comics that we are investigating
here, the playing baseball with heads, violent murder, cutting off
people's heads with an ax, why not get out a report about these instead
of just the favorable ones?</i><br />
Dybwad replies that Frank had
written some criticisms in her 1949 report, which then led Kefauver to
dig deeper into Frank's relationship with the CSAA.<br />
<i> "Miss Frank is no longer on the staff?", asks Kefauver.</i><br />
<i> "Oh yes; she is a part-time employee of our organization," </i>replies Dybwad.<i><br /></i><br />
<i> </i>Kefauver wants more. <i>"Who heads up your staff? Who writes the reports?</i><br />
<i>"In this particular field this would be Miss Frank," </i>says Dybwad,<i>"because she is the educational associate of our children's book committee."</i><br />
<i> "Let
us stay with this for a minute," </i>Kefauver presses on,<i>"In other words, this supervising,
reading comics and giving the position of the Child Study Association of
America as to what effect they have upon children,that is in charge of
Miss Frank; is that correct?"</i><br />
Dybwad's answers that while Frank does indeed head
the staff, the reports are based upon the work of the entire book
committee and not her alone. Kefauver doesn't seem satisfied with this
answer and he tries to tie the reports to Frank herself. Dybwad
reiterates that the reports were the work of the whole book committee.
Kefauver is having none of this and gets to the point of his
questioning.<br />
<i>"Anyway, Miss Frank is the head of the staff that handles the comics and places evaluation on them?"</i><br />
<i> "That is right," </i>Dybwad agrees.<i><br /></i><br />
Kefauver briefly changes direction. He asks Dybwad about Dr. Lauretta
Bender. Dybwad replies with her credentials and mentions that she was
one of the people consulted when putting together the studies. Kefauver
loses his patience.<i> </i><br />
<i> "Well, we are beating around
the bush about this," says the senator, "In the child-study format here
you have, and let me read a little part of this which you put out to the
children." </i><br />
Kefauver then quotes a paragraph form one CSAA publication listing Frank's <i>bona fides</i>, naming her as an educational consultant with the CSAA, but leaving out something else.<br />
<i>
"Why do you not say here that Josette Frank, in addition to being with
Child Study Association,is also the consultant on the children's
reading, or consultant on the editorial advisory board of Superman,
D.C., National Comics, and is paid by the comics-book industry?"</i><br />
Dybwad responds with some urgency.<br />
<i>
"Wait a minute, sir. Please don't say that she is paid by the
comic-book industry. This is not so. She is paid by a particular
comic-book publisher. I want to put this on the record very strenuously
which is quite a difference.</i><br />
<i> When I work for the
Schlitz Brewing Co., I don't work for the beverage industry, I work for
one particular company and I may have my good reasons why I work for
Schlitz and not for Ballantine."</i><br />
Despite Dybwad's colorful example. Kefauver is not so easily dissuaded.<br />
"<i>I know, but you are giving her credentials here,"</i> Kefauver notes,<i>
You are giving her good credentials, but you do not say to the parents
that are reading this and want to be guided by her that she is also paid
by a leading comic-book publisher. Why do you not give both sides of
the picture?</i><br />
<i> </i>Dybwad had an answer for this, too.<i> </i><br />
<i> "The assumption is that there are both sides to it. Miss Frank has also been a consultant to innumerable book publishers."</i><br />
This was a fact. Frank had, for example, suggested to an author the
inclusion of minority characters in a story and encouraged the
publication of book about the labor movement to another.<br />
Kefauver also tries to paint Gruenberg the same partisan brush as Frank
by citing her lack of condemnation of objectionable comics. He then
mentions that Gruenberg, too, had a connection to the comics industry.
Dybwad points out that her association (with Fawcett) had been years
before and again, she was employed by just that one publisher and not
the industry as a whole.<br />
<i> </i> Kefauver isn't satisfied with Dybwad's answer.<br />
<i>
"Here are two principal people you are using through a find-sounding
association, which undoubtedly some good people are members of, feeling
they can do some good. Two people you are using in the comic-book field
who evaluate comic books, crime and horror books, turn out to be paid or
to have been paid by publishers of comic books themselves. Is that not
true?</i><br />
<i> </i>When Dybwad agrees with Kefauver's statement, the senator drives his point home.<br />
"<i>If
you think that is fair,then that is all I want to know about your
association. I think it is traveling under false colors. I think you
ought to at least give the fact that these people are paid or have been
paid by comic-book publishers. </i><br />
<i> I do not think it is a
fair evaluation to leave to parents of children these rather favorable
appraisals of horror and comic books written by someone who has been
paid by the publishers without you even divulging the fact."</i><br />
Kefauver then reads a portion of Wertham's recent book, <b>SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT</b>,
that commented on the connections of Frank, Gruenberg, Bender and
others to comics publishers. Kefauver concludes that while he doesn't
question the personal integrity of Dybwad,<i>"the opinion of the Child Study Association in the comic book field will have little weight with me."</i><br />
Senator Thomas Hennings starts a line of questioning about the
contributors to the CSAA. Even though Dybwad agrees to make such a list
available to the committee, Hennings doesn't seem satisfied. He implies
that the fact that such a list isn't already available means something
more.<br />
<i> "You do not feel, the, sir," </i>asks Hennings, <i>"that your organization is what might be called a front for the publishers of these crime magazines?</i><br />
Hennings implication touched on a very sensitive area. Everyone in the
hearing room was well aware that the term "front" was frequently applied
to a seemingly innocuous organization that hid its benefactors or a
shadowy purpose. In the zeitgeist of the Fifties, this suggested the
Communists and Dybwad was surely incensed by Hennings use of the word.
Not surprisingly, Kefauver agreed with Hennings.<br />
<i> "So my own observation is that in the field of comics the people you rely upon, three people,"</i> Kefauver observed,<i>
"and the only ones here I have seen that you base your study on, are
Mrs. Gruenberg, who has been in the pay of comic publications; Dr.
Bender on the pay of the advisory board, and being paid by one; Miss
Josette Frank, who is either being paid or has been paid by the comic
books.</i><br />
<i> So far as I can see, your comic book section of
your child study group is certainly colored by the fact that these
people are not working primarily for you. They are working for the comic
book publishers."</i><br />
<i> </i>Kefauver goes on to say that, "<i>this part of your study is a fraud and a deceit to the public and the public ought to know about it."</i><br />
Dybwad's tried to respond by reminding Kefauver about his earlier
statement about the findings of the CSAA coming from the work of its
Comic Book Committee and not any one person.<br />
But Kefauver was
having none of it. Since all these favorable comics studies were
conducted by the CSAA in the past, he asked, "<i>Why do you not get out a study for 1954, and talk about these books?</i><br />
<i>
My conclusion is that you are not doing this for the reason that
your people, and perhaps your association, too, are being paid by the
industry itself and that you do not want to criticize, very much,
anyway, the crime book industry." </i><br />
Dybwad cites the
relatively benign nature of the comics published by Frank's employer,
National Comics (DC). In an attempt to illustrate his point, he enters
the company's editorial code into evidence. He concludes by noting that
Frank's name appears in every DC comic, so that the fact she is a
consultant is hardly a secret arrangement.<br />
Hennings wants to
know about the fees given to the various comics consultants and whether
these fees are turned over to the CSAA. Dybwad says that they were not.
Since Frank was was only a part-time CSAA employee, she performed her
work for DC on her own time.<br />
After some back-and-forth
regarding the ownership of DC, Dybwad gets to make a point about
something that was obviously bothering him. Throughout his questioning,
it was repeatedly mentioned that the CSAA comic book surveys were
currently being distributed by the organization. As Dybwad pointed out
more than once, this was untrue. And he knew the source of this
misinformation.<br />
<i> "I said that most carelessly Mr. Wertham in his book implied that they were being distributed," </i>Dybwad says, while denying Dr.Wertham of his title.<br />
<i> "Mr. Wertham," </i>claimed Dybwad, <i>"takes stuff out of context"</i> and his book, <b>SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT</b>, <i>"has not one documented reference of our material"</i>. He goes on to call the book, <i>"an entirely unscientific study which is a mockery of research". </i>Considering the respect that Wertham and his book were given in the hearing the previous day<i>, </i>it can be assumed that Dybwad's comments fell on deaf ears.<br />
In an apparently planned move, Dybwad mentions that it just so happens
that on that day, April 22, 1954, Frank's latest book, <b>YOUR CHILDREN'S READING TODAY</b>, was being published. He reads a section of the book wherein Frank takes<i>"irresponsible" </i>comic book publishers<i> </i>to task. <i> </i><br />
<i> "There is no more excuse for licentious publishing in this field than any other," </i>writes Frank, <i>"and it is perhaps either more unconscionable here because it is more available than any other reading matter." </i>But she stops short of calling for any action other than self-regulation by the industry and parental guidance.<i><br /></i><br />
As his testimony is drawing to a close, Dybwad reminds the senators that,<i> "Children today read comics, read them in tremendous numbers, millions of them who never get in trouble."</i>
Although he warns against censorship of comic books, Dybwad finishes
with a statement at odds with Frank's earlier recommendations, but
certain to please all of his inquisitors.<br />
<i> "But we have
felt that community action should be forthcoming, civic action, action
through the trade associations, and so on.</i><br />
<i> We still
feel so today. We still hope that out of this committee's work some new
avenues of approach will come which will put a definite stop to the
publication and availability of these comics.</i><br />
<i> I will
say further that that will be a distinct contribution, not just in
general to children's welfare, but I would say more specifically that
this would be a contribution to the broad approach to delinquency
prevention."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 1</span></i></sup></b><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Dybwad and the CSAA's board of directors were worried. So much so, that
on May 10th, they met and approved a supplementary statement to send to
the Senate subcommittee and to release to the press.<br />
The statement began with the assurance that the CSAA, <i>"heartily endorses the subcommittee's objectives"</i> and then went on to explain the relationships that Gruenberg and Frank had with comic publishers.<br />
Gruenberg's 10-month tenure with Fawcett establishing editorial
criteria is briefly covered. Frank's employment by National (DC) gets
much more detail.<br />
<i>"In 1941, National Comics Publications
asked the association to help them to improve their publications and
keep them safe for young readers. The board of directors gave this
request serious consideration. It then agreed that Miss Josette Frank
should accept the major responsibility for working with this publisher. </i><br />
<i>
As a part-time member of the association's staff, the board felt that
she should be free to make her own arrangements as to fee. </i><br />
<i>
The board also decided that the association, working through its total
staff, and with the children's book committee, should assume a
supervisory relationship to this project. For this service, the
association has received $50 monthly.</i><br />
<i> The results of
this service have justified the board's decision. Miss Frank, in
consultation with others, has helped National Comics Publications to
improve the quality of their comics. She has helped also to eliminate
undesirable advertising in magazines produced by this company." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2</span></i></sup></b> <i><br /></i><br />
<i> </i> While the statement goes on to laud the <i>"numerous awards"</i>
and recognition DC had received for their public service features, it
is the financial information that the subcommittee took most interest
in. An addendum to the CSAA statement from a subcommitte investigator
revealed that Fawcett Publications had contributed $1,500 to the
organization in the mid-1940s, while DC had given $2,500 in the five
year period from 1947 to 1952. <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3</span></i></sup></b> <br />
Reactions to Dybwad's appearance before the subcommittee were swift and generally not positive.<br />
One ominous attack the following week came from a source not usually
concerned with children's reading as the virulently anti-Communist
newsletter, <b>COUNTERATTACK</b>, turned their unwanted gaze upon the Child Study Association.<i><br /></i>
<i>"The Child Study Assn was accused of deceiving the public last week because in reports it published on comic books it did not <span class="st">note
that some of its experts were in the pay of the comic-book publishers.
Sen ESTES KEFAUVER made this accusation before the Senate subcommitte
Investigating Juvenile Delinquency.</span></i><br />
<i><span class="st">
Sen KEFAUVER pointed out that Mrs SIDONIE MATSNER GRUENBERG was
formerly an adviser for Fawcett Publications and that Dr LAURETTA BENDER
and Miss JOSETTE FRANK are now on the advisory editorial board of
National Comics Publications. </span></i><br />
<i><span class="st">JOSETTE FRANK was billed by the Jefferson School of
Social Science, the Communist Party's top open school in the U S, as one
of the speakers at its book fair held in Nov. 1948.</span></i><br />
<i><span class="st">Mrs GRUENBERG, also billed as a speaker by the Jefferson School (in 1946), has a much more impressive record."</span></i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 4</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i><span class="st">Despite
the growing
animosity toward Communism following WWII, the Child Study Association
did indeed
maintain a close relationship to the Jefferson School. Founded as a
Marxist learning institution in 1944, several staff members of the CSAA
taught there, including Gruenberg. </span><span class="st"><span class="st">For her part,
Frank participated in the annual book fairs, speaking on such subjects
as <i>"Social Realism in Books for Older Children". </i>These acts were enough for the anonymous author of the article to write that the CSAA's "minimizing" of the<i> "crime and horror book problem"</i> led him to conclude that,<i> "</i></span></span><span class="st"><span class="st"><span class="st"><i>it is apparent that
some of the assn's and publishers' advisers make an interesting study in
"political" delinquency for the parents they have been advising about
children." </i></span></span></span><span class="st"><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5</span></i></sup></b></span><br />
<span class="st"> The virtually concurrent publication of <b>SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT</b> and the Senate hearings made for some convenient commentary. Book reviewer Wolcott Gibbs in the May 8th <b>NEW YORKER</b>
magazine, took the occasion of his review of Wertham's book to lash out
not only at comic books, but at groups he said opposed legislation
limiting sales of comic books in the state of New York. Dybwad took
exception to this statement in a private letter to Miraim Coffin dated June 9, 1954.</span><br />
<span class="st"><i>
"May I say unequivocally that it is an absolute and deliberate
falsehood to state that the Child Study Association of America took
action to stop legislation in the New York State Assembly designed to
curb the sale of the new type of vicious horror and crime comics. While I
have been the executive director of the Child Study Association only
recently, I have searched our files; I have searched the minutes of our
Board; I have interrogated the members of our Board, as well as our
staff, and there is nothing on record here at the Association to the
effect that we took action as described in Mr. Gibb's article, nor can
anyone remember that such action even was contemplated by us."</i> </span><br />
Dybwad was frustrated that his protest to the editorial staff of the <b>NEW YORKER</b> went nowhere. He was angered as well by the reception he received when he appeared before the Senate subcommittee.<br />
<i>
"Senator Kefauver, for reasons best known to him, chose to ignore the
statement I read in his presence, and suddenly attacked us in the most
vicious and slanderous form (including, for instance, specifically an
attack on the integrity of our Board of Directors, describing them as a
"front"), refusing to let me answer his attacks, and then leaving the
hearing room "to go to another appointment"."</i><br />
Not mentioned and likely of less concern to Dybwad, was the constant
scrutiny and attack upon the character of Josette Frank. <br />
Frank, however, continued to appear in forums and discussions of "the comics problem".<br />
In a September 22th memo to Dybwad, Frank gives her impressions of a
juvenile delinquency meeting she attended. It also gives some insight
into her personal views.<br />
<i> "I found most of the material at
this meeting very stereotyped. The three religious presentations were
what one would have had expected--a plea for more spiritual education in
the home. There was considerable applause whenever anyone spoke of the
money-earning aspect of the mass media. It seems to be very
reprehensible to make money! Yet I am sure all of the speakers would
have been horrified at any suggestion that the state take over the
entertainment field on a non-profit basis.</i><br />
<i> For me, the
only bright note in the session was Dr. Charles Glock's presentation of
the findings or rather the lack of findings of social research in this
field. He quoted the Wolfe-Fiske study with which we are familiar and
mentioned several attempts to study the affects of the mass media on
children, none of which were conclusive. While conceding that each of us
must use his own judgment in relation to his own children, Glock
pleaded that no legislation could be based on current prejudices without
more knowledge at hand. The audience practically tore him limb from
limb. They were not interested in information but in action, no matter
what kind."</i><br />
Contrary to Dybwad's statements to the
subcommittee and to the public at large, Frank still seemed to favor
parental guidance of comic book reading over a governmental crackdown on
them.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
With the handwriting on the wall, the collective attention of the
comic book industry took notice and formed a self-regulating
organization to assuage their critics and hopefully stave off any
governmental actions.<br />
On September 16, 1954, the newly-formed
Comics Magazine Association of America announced retiring magistrate
Charles F. Murphy would take over as the administrator of their Comics
Code Authority and its code of ethics at the beginning of October.
Beginning later that month, Murphy and his staff of five reviewers began
blue-penciling out anything they deemed objectionable based upon the
Comics Code standards and the personal opinion of Murphy himself. By
December, they boasted they had removed, <i>"5,500 lurid drawings and 126 "unsuitable" stories"</i> from the comics they had reviewed.<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6</span></i></sup></b><br />
Such quick implementation of the Comics Code, however, didn't
immediately result in a cease fire. Dr. Wertham penned one more scathing
article a year after the Senate subcommittee hearings. Dramatically
titled,<i> "It's Still Murder"</i>, the piece goes after the, <i>"parents, educators, doctors, child psychologists, moral teachers, and religious leaders,"</i> who, in Wertham's belief, <i>"permitted good children to be exposed to this kind of reading,"</i>. Including, apparently, the U.S. Senate itself.<br />
<i> "The Kefauver Senate Committee to investigate organized crime whitewashed the crime comic book industry,"</i> Wertham charged, <i>"The
Hendrickson Senate Subcommittee on juvenile delinquency, although
admitting that many comic books "stress sadistic degeneracy," also
specifically rejects legislation."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7</span></i></sup></b><i><br /></i><br />
And most emphatically, he goes after the Comics Code Authority. <br />
<i> "Seven months ago--more than half a year--it </i>[the comic book industry]<i> proclaimed that it was appointing a commissioner with full authority to apply a code of ethics,"</i> Wertham then asks, <i>"Has anything resembling the vaunted clean-up actually taken place?" </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 8</span></i></sup></b><br />
Despite his continuing outrage, more and more people began seeing cracks in Wertham's crusade against comics.<br />
In a review of Wertham's latest book, <b>THE CIRCLE OF GUILT</b>, social historian Albert Deutsch points out how the psychiatrist can't leave the topic of, <i>"the menace of crime comic books"</i>, alone.<br />
<i>
"Some of us have criticized Wertham's tendency to exaggerate the
comic-book evil out of all proportion, to the point of presenting it as
the one great cause of delinquency," </i>writes Deutsch.<br />
<i>
"This is, of course, arrant nonsense. To say that delinquency may result
from multiple factors by no means implies frustration or inaction; it
means that the problem must be tackled on many fronts...".</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">9</span></i></sup></b><br />
The enactment of the Comics Code also rendered unnecessary the need for
National's Editorial Advisory Board. Frank still spoke before
parent-teacher groups and the topic of comics was usually discussed, but
the controversy was waning. The editorial oversight of the Comics Code
Authority had had its desired effect.<br />
<i> "So successful has the </i>[Comic Code]<i>
Authority's work been that the Fall 1960 edition of the NODL
newsletter, official publication of the National Organization for Decent
Literature, declared it could find no comics which were "objectionable
for youth"."</i><br />
By the end of the Fifties, with the furor largely subsided, the Comic Book Committee of the CSAA quietly went away.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> Both Dr. Wertham and Josette Frank were appalled by the worst in comic books. Wertham could see nothing else, Frank saw that they could be much more. In the end, Wertham squandered all his credibility on an unswerving vendetta he tried to validate with skewed and faked research. He is remembered for his excesses and ultimately, damned by them. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> Josette Frank left the comics behind, and turned her attention to a newer medium accused of many of the same sins--television. And she always had her children's books. That was her interest and where her legacy lay. She passed away on September 9, 1989 at the age of 96.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> In 1997, Bankstreet College of Education re-named its Children's Book Award as the Josette Frank Award, given annually to the </span><span style="font-size: small;">outstanding achievement in literature in which children are shown to grow emotionally and morally as they deal with difficulties in a
positive and realistic way.</span><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">All quotations to this point: U. S. Senate, <i>Hearings Before the Subcommitte to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency</i>, pp. 119-145, (1954).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"Study Body Tells of Help to Comics"</i>, NEW YORK TIMES, May 19, 1954.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">U. S. Senate, op. cit., pg. 136.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">American Business Consultants, <i>"Comic Adviser has a Not so Comical Background"</i>, COUNTERATTACK, (1954).</span></sup><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5</span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"Lurid Drawings Ruled Out in Crackdown on Comics", </i>SCHENECTADY GAZETTE, Dec. 29, 1954.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Wertham, Fredric,<i> "It's Still Murder"</i>, THE SATURDAY REVIEW, pg. 11, (April 9, 1955).</span></sup><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid.</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">9 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Deutsch, Albert, <i>"What Makes a Boy Bad?"</i>, THE SATURDAY REVIEW, pg. 25, (Oct. 20,1956).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">10 </span></i></sup></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Tebbel, John,<i> "Who Says the Comics are Dead?"</i>, <b>THE SATURDAY REVIEW</b>, pg. 44, (</span><span style="font-size: x-small;">Dec. 10, 1960).</span>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-73956467675267255792014-02-10T00:32:00.000-08:002014-02-15T09:11:26.983-08:00Josette Frank: Alone Against the Storm, Part 4 Once again he was testifying as an psychiatric expert, this time in an obscenity trial. He had appeared as a defense witness for a murderous cannibal, an Oedipally-wrought, matricidal teenager and now on the side of a nudist magazine publisher.<br />
Ilsley Boone, a Baptist minister from Mays Landing, New Jersey, was founder of the American Sunbathing Association and editor of its monthly magazine, <b>SUNSHINE AND HEALTH</b>. The magazine had long been a target of the U.S. Post Office which sought to restrict its distribution through the mails. In 1944, Boone was arrested and eventually indicted in 1945. This led to a protracted trial, during which Dr. Fredric Wertham was called on behalf of the defense.<br />
Wertham was of the opinion that the magazine was not pornographic, that instead, true obscenity was being published in comic books, several of which he reportedly produced as visual aides while testifying.<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span></i></sup></b> With this dramatic flourish, the psychiatrist took his personal vendetta against comics public. And the media was happy to indulge his crusade.<br />
Josette Frank was apparently listening to WNBC and the John K. M. McCaffery radio program, <b><i>Author Meets the Critics</i></b>, when she was inspired to write a letter. <br />
<br />
<i>January 23, 1948</i><br />
<br />
<i>Dear Dr. Wertham,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>I was greatly interested in your presentation this morning on the McCaffrey </i>[sic]<i> program concerning comic books and particularly in your statement that "99 % of the comics" contain obscene material.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I am wondering whether you would be good enough to let me know where I can locate the data on which this is based. It is certainly a very frightening figure to give parents and ought to be substantiated by sound data.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>As you possibly know, I have been interested and concerned with comic books for a number of years as part of my work in the field of children's reading. I have done considerable work with them and I thought I knew them pretty well, but it seems evident that you have made some studies or have access to data which I do not have and would like to study.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>For the past year or so I have been concerned, as you are, about the growing number of new comic books with a sex interest. These are certainly an aberration of the earlier content of both comic books and comic strips. I should have guessed, roughly, without any careful tabulation that they comprise a fairly small percentage (though still too many) of the total number of some 250 titles on the news stands. I am amazed at the figure you find.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Will you be good enough to let me know the basis on which this conclusion was arrived at?</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<br />
And the January 28th reply.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Miss Frank:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Thank you for your letter. Dr. Wertham and his associates have been interested for some time in the question of comic books and related subjects. He wishes me to let you know that none of his data have </i><i>been published as yet.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I might add that in examining the transcript of Dr. Wertham's remarks on the McCaffery program I do not notice at any point the word "obscene".</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours,</i><br />
<i>T. B. Foster</i><br />
<i>secretary</i><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
If Frank was upset by Wertham's attack (and dismissive reply), then she was clearly frustrated by the <i><b>Town Hall Meeting of the Air</b></i> broadcast of March 2nd.<br />
<br />
<i>March 10, 1948</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Ed:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Thank you for your very helpful contribution to my knowledge via the letter to Miss Mannes. I am sure it did me more good than it did her.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I hope you at least enjoyed your research because I greatly fear that your enjoyment was the only fruits you will have from it! From my brief observation of Miss Mannes I doubt that she is open to learning.</i><br />
<br />
Frank's brief note to Edwin Lukas, Executive Director of the Society for Crime Prevention, conveyed her exasperation with what they had both witnessed. <br />
They were in the audience when a panel comprised of drama critic John Mason Brown, writer Marya Mannes, cartoonist Al Capp and publisher George Hecht debated <i>"What's Wrong with the Comics?". </i><br />
<i> </i> As is often the case in such forums, the debate consisted mostly of unswerving points of view with little to no consideration of the other side.<br />
Befitting his profession, Brown led off with a dramatically haughty attack on comics that contained the infamously invective, <i>"Most comics, as I see them, are the marijuana of the nursery! They are the bane of the bassinet! They are the horror of the home, the curse of the kids and a threat to the future!".</i><br />
Hecht lauded the virtues of "good" comics and quoted Frank by name to support his view. He went on to extol the potential of comic books as a learning tool and was followed by Mannes, who conversely denounced comics for stunting intellectual growth, <i>"...comics kill the imagination"</i>, reiterating a claim she had written about the year before in a <b>THE NEW REPUBLIC</b> article attacking comics.<br />
<i> "Though there is no palpable evidence to support the following statement,"</i> observed Mannes in her article,<i> "it is at least reasonable to assume that just as the childhood use of tobacco can stunt the growth of the body, so can the excessive reading of comics stunt the stature of the mind." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2</span></i></sup></b> Like many of comics' critics, Mannes didn't let lack of scientific evidence stand in the way of her opinion.<br />
Capp skewered Brown and like-minded critics with a satirical scenario wherein a father seeking to ban his son from reading comics is flustered as he realizes that each of his preferred reading choices for the boy--newspapers, <i>Oliver Twist</i> and Shakespeare--are rife with violence and sex.<br />
After a bit more barbed repartee and posturing by the panelists, a microphone was passed among the audience for questions. It's quickly evident that the audience had among its number several well-known cartoonists, well-spoken children and a strong showing of comic book defenders.<br />
The first questioner was a woman from the CSAA who posed a query to Brown as did Charles Biro, editor of Lev Gleason Publications' much reviled, <b>CRIME DOES NOT PAY</b>. Frank's correspondent, Ed Lukas, asked Mannes if she thought comics
contributed to juvenile delinquency; a correlation she denied making.<br />
Frank's turn came and she directed her question to Brown. She confronted him with a quote from a piece he wrote for his column, <i>Seeing Things</i>, in a recent issue of the <b>SATURDAY REVIEW OF LITERATURE</b>.<br />
<i></i>
<i> "Mr. Brown, in the February 14th issue of the SATURDAY REVIEW OF LITERATURE you wrote a charming article on a little trip you took with your children, a cultural trip I believe, to a museum to show them a tapestry and found surprisingly, to you, that they were only interested in the murderous ones. And what you said, may I quote your words: </i><br />
<i> "To the young, suffering is almost unimaginable, death is inconceivable. Pain is not real to them. Violence is. And this, quite naturally, they see as an expression of vigor, a manifestation of health and adventure."</i><br />
<i> Now I would like to ask you, in view of the fact that in the hands of responsible comic publishers, this is what is done in the comics, how does it happen, in so short a time, you have changed your mind?"</i><br />
Brown artfully sidesteps her question, denying that he had changed his mind, averring that he was always against the wholesale bloodlust of the comics.<br />
Even though it was couched in pomposity, it was evident that the level of opposition to comic books had entered a new phase. The earlier, relatively genteel arguments centering around the readability of comics had given way to a more serious, more urgent charge that they contributed to delinquent behavior. Bolstered by the supposed clinical evidence cited by Wertham, comics' opponents sharpened their attacks.<br />
Suspicious of such "evidence", Lukas looked to his own research. At first blush, he seemed to be an odd ally for Frank. As a criminologist and the head of an
organization devoted to crime prevention, it figured Lukas would side with
those who found an easy demon in comic books. However, he eschewed this convenient answer by assigning blame to a source that many didn't want to hear. <i>"The way to prevent crime is to prevent the criminal,"</i> he said. <i>"I have talked to hundreds of adult criminals and I don't know of one who felt that when he was a child he was loved and wanted by his parents."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3</span></i></sup></b><br />
In a March 3rd letter to Mannes following the <i><b>Town Hall</b></i> <i><b>Meeting</b></i> broadcast (and the letter referenced by Frank in her note), he painstakingly laid out his case in favor of comics by discussing the relevance of psychological "sublimation" (the change of a socially unacceptable behavior into a socially acceptable form) cited by Mannes in her 1947 article and his resulting conclusion.<br />
<i> "All of which brings me to the point of suggesting that in comics, children find outlets for their naturally aggressive tendencies," </i>Lukas wrote, <i>"If you prefer to call that sublimation (it might also be called a form of expression) then I can't imagine why you should consider it harmful; the sense in which you use the word might also be interpreted to mean that it is good for the child (as healthy sublimation always is). On the other hand, if your use of the word was intended to imply that it is harmful to sublimate in this way, then--as my question last night implied--I merely ask for proof which you may have (which all of us seem to lack) that reading comics has in itself produced any harmful emotional disturbances in children."</i><br />
<i> </i>But the battle wouldn't end with a well-reasoned letter. In fact, the battle was about to get far nastier.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>April 27, 1948</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Bob: </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Herewith I am sending my expense account for the Atlantic City conference.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I found the conference very worthwhile from several points of view. The whole field of social work is, of course, enlarging its viewpoint to take in family problem relating to such subjects as comics, radio, etc. The high spot of the conference for me was, of course, the final discussion on these subjects. You and your confrere</i><i>s will, I am sure, be interested to know that of the whole panel content of this meeting, see Page 25 of the program herewith, the only questions, which were asked at the end of the panel presentations, were on the subjects of comics. Since my presentation in this panel had to do with children's books and since Dr. Sones was representing comics there, I waited to see how the discussion was going. It was interesting to find that three people le</i>[a]<i>pt to the defence </i>[sic]<i> of comics--Dr. Sones (of course), Dr. Zorburgh and Dr. Luther Woodward of the National Committee for Mental Hygiene. This was pretty imposing array of volunteers! However, the chairman then specifically asked me to make a statement so I entered into it, but there was really no opposition. I found this astounding and I knew you would be interested.</i><br />
<br />
Frank's letter to Bob Maxwell was surprisingly optimistic given the growing furor over comics, but it was also indicative of the fact that there was still a true debate. At this point, comic book defenders could counter Dr. Wertham with their own licensed professionals.<br />
In the Spring 1948 issue of <b>CHILD STUDY</b>, Frank interviewed several psychiatrists and psychologists for their opinions on the effects of comics and other media upon children. Perhaps not surprisingly, among the interviewees were Frank's fellow DC Advisory Board members, Dr. Lauretta Bender and Dr. S. Harcourt Peppard, and Dr. Katherine M. Wolf, a noted psychologist who had previously conducted her own comics study and written a well-regarded article generally absolving comic books of harmful effects. <br />
<i> "Does blood and thunder in children's entertainment create or increase their fears?,"</i> asked Frank in the opening paragraph<i>.</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></sup></b><i><br /></i><br />
Dr. Bender's perspective was that it depended upon the media and the imagery the children were presented with.<br />
<i> "Children are fascinated by the Frankenstein monster because it personifies their own fantasies of growing into power. It therefore becomes frightening to them,"</i> suggested Bender, <i>"perhaps they could do these terrible things, or their parents could! Frankenstein personifies their own capacity to let go of impulses to destroy and its therefore threatening. The Superman figure is the reverse of this, an opportunity to identify with good deeds. He is benevolent and loving and upholds a moral code. Children are frightened by the absence of controls. Clearly they want restraint--they want a moral ceiling on what they might conceivably do."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 5</span></i></sup></b><br />
Further on, Bender states that much of what children find in comics, <i>"deals with their own unconscious fantasies," </i>a positive effect, in her point of view.<i><br /></i><br />
<i> "Comics constitute experience with activity, motility, movement. Their heroes overcome time and space. This gives children a sense of release rather than fear."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 6</span></i></sup></b><br />
Wertham, Bender's colleague at Bellvue Hospital, clearly disagreed.<br />
On April 8, he had appeared as a defense witness once again, this time on the side of the publisher of the scandalous novel, <b>THE GILDED HEARSE</b>. The book was facing obscenity charges brought against it by the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice and Wertham was called to counter the charge.<br />
As he had in the <b>SUNSHINE AND HEALTH</b> case, Wertham produced a copy of a comic book, <b>TRUE CRIME COMICS</b> #2 (May 1947) and referenced a page from the Jack Cole illustrated story, <i>"Murder, Morphine and Me". </i><br />
<i> "These comic books, very many of them, like the one I have here, depict
sadism. That is to say, violence in relation to sex. This particular
book," </i>said Wertham, singling out a panel, <i>"shows a man jabbing a hypodermic
needle into the right eye of a young blonde girl. I think that can only
have two effects on young people: either it would cause anxiety -- even
to adults who look at it; or it makes them completely obtuse to sympathy
and to any kind of human feeling about inflicting pain or suffering on
other people, especially a girl. And I think that this kind of picture
would have a very deleterious effect on adolescents and children."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7</span></i></sup></b> As he had in the earlier case, Wertham saw censorship of adult literature as unnecessary, but for children he suggested it be mandatory.<br />
Just a month earlier, on March 19, Wertham had put together a psychotherapy symposium dryly entitled, <i>The Psychopathology of Comic Books</i>.While the symposium itself may have been largely intended for a specifically professional assemblage, its content reached a wider audience.<br />
Wertham, as the symposium organizer, had invited <span class="byline">like-minded speakers, Gershon</span><span class="byline"><span class="byline"> Legman, Paula </span>Elkisch, Marvin Blumberg, and his colleague from the </span><span class="byline"><span class="st">Lafargue Clinic</span>, Dr. Hilde Mosse.</span> An abstract of the presentations by each were published in the July issue of the <b>AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY</b>, while Wertham's own words were presented in an extended form in the March 29th <b>SATURDAY REVIEW OF LITERATURE</b>. The resulting article, entitled, <i>"The Comics--Very Funny!"</i>, laid out Wertham's arguments bolstered by his claimed clinical research. Even though this article was widely read and cited, Frank was not the only skeptical observer.<br />
Norbert Muhlen, writing in the January 1949 issue of <b>COMMENTARY</b> magazine, questioned Wertham's methodology in linking comic books to juvenile delinquency. Wertham took umbrage at this and responded to Muhlen in a letter to the editor in a subsequent <b>COMMENTARY</b>.<br />
<i>"Dr. Muhlen misquotes me," </i>asserted Wertham, <i>"He attributes to me the statement that "the increase in juvenile delinquency has gone hand in hand with the distribution of comic books. That is not what I wrote. What I did write (in the same article in the Saturday Review) is that: "The increase of <b>violence</b> in juvenile delinquency has gone hand in hand with the increase in the distribution of comic books. That is something very different."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 8</span></i></sup></b><br />
Immediately following was Muhlen's reply.<br />
<i>"Whether the subject of violence is or is not one of the most important problems of our time, it certainly is the basic problem of comic books," </i>Muhlen wrote, in partial agreement with Wertham.<br />
<i>"As a matter of fact, the very conclusion of my article was that mass entertainment by violence tends to become the child's education to violence."</i><br />
<i> "I disagreed, however, with Dr. Wertham's often-repeated opinion that "comic-book reading was a distinct influencing factor in the case of every single delinquent or disturbed child we studied." </i><br />
Not to mention that Muhlen had problems with Wertham's clinical "proof".<br />
<i>"While preparing my article, I asked Dr. Wertham to give me an opportunity to let me see the case material on which his opinions are based. Dr. Wertham replied that "it is physically impossible for us to comply with [such a request].""</i><br />
<i>"Without access to his materials,"</i> Muhlen wrote,<i> "I based my conclusion on my own socio-statistical deduction that his charges against comic books are not verifiable and not corresponding to the facts."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 9</span></i></sup></b><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Despite their lack of substantiation, Wertham's claims were repeated by an increasing array of acolytes. Among the first was writer Judith Crist, who in the March 27, 1948, <b>COLLIER'S</b> magazine provided an agreeable forum for Wertham's attack on comics and those he perceived as the main culprits dissuading the publishers from "cleaning house".<br />
Crist wrote that Wertham blamed not the publishers, artists or writers, whom he offered the backhanded exoneration, <i>"it's their way of earning a living--one that incidentally earns them a fat margin of profit."</i><br />
<i> "The major responsibility, Dr. Wertham believes, lies with the mental-hyigene associations, child-study committees, child-care councils and community child welfare groups,"</i> wrote Crist, <i>"So far most of these organizations have been silent on the subject or they have frankly or apologetically endorsed comic books."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 10</span></i></sup></b><br />
Wertham, via Crist, had made it very clear that he considered the Child Study Association as a main apologist for the comic industry. This fact, along with the onslaught of public condemnation of comics in the wake of his attacks, necessitated a response. A response that was referenced by CSAA director Sidonie Gruenberg in a June 28th letter to Fawcett Publications editorial director, Ralph Daigh.<br />
<i> "The whole question of the comics is, as you say, very much before the public and the Child Study Association is planning another survey of the present status of the comics."</i><br />
The formal announcement of the survey in the Fall 1948 issue of <b>CHILD STUDY</b> laid out its purpose and the challenges it faced.<br />
<i> "The enormous growth in the publication of comics books in recent years--an increase both in number and in variety--poses some difficult problems for parents,"</i> wrote co-authors Katie Hart and Flora Straus, <i>"The current hysteria, ranging from sensational journalism to police censorship, has certainly offered them no help in the solution of these problems. On the contrary, it has served to add to their confusion and to intensify their anxiety. Nothing could be less conductive to constructive thinking or more disturbing to sound parent-child relationships than anxiety and confusion."</i><br />
<i> "With a view to offering some practical basis for parental guidance in this almost universal problem, the Children's Book Committee of the Child Study Association is gathering and classifying about two hundred of the comics books currently displayed on the newsstands." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11</span></i></sup></b><br />
As head of that committee, Josette Frank would oversee its conduct and ultimately write its conclusions. One problem that Frank faced with the uncomfortable fact that this survey would undoubtedly include comics which she would find indefensible. <br />
The announcement of the survey was met with a flood of requests from concerned individuals, educators, PTAs and librarians asking for copies of it upon its completion. Others offered their own surveys as a help.<br />
<i> "I am making a study of comic book reading in my 6B class at Oxford School, Cleveland Heights, Ohio," </i>wrote one teacher, <i>"I have found the children on the whole are interested most in the Mickey Mouse style, but I am eager to know what conclusions your committee have arrived at relative to this type of comic books as well as the deadly crime comics that occupy part of the group."</i><br />
Not surprisingly, there were parties with a more vested interest in the CSAA study.<br />
<i> "We are intensely interested in knowing when the Child Study Association's newest study of comic magazines will be available,"</i> wrote Robert D. Wheeler of the Premium Group of Comics in a November 18th letter to Frank.<br />
<i> "Also I wanted to tell you about the much discussed "McGuire Report" prepared in New Orleans. Perhaps you already know about it, but if not, you would find it extremely interesting. Mr. David McGuire is Assistant to the Mayor of New Orleans. He prepared a 49-page study of comics, in relation to New Orleans problems. Without agreeing in all respects with Mr. McGuire's report, I must say that it is a remarkable piece of work., distinguished both by the effort which went into obtaining facts and by well-balanced judgment."</i><br />
<i> </i>Frank's reply<i> </i>five days later thanked Wheeler for his recommendation of the McGuire report and finished with an inquiry.<br />
<i> "Am I correct in understanding that you still have not joined the Association? I am very much interested in this whole situation, for it presents many problems," </i>she wrote.<br />
Frank was referencing the recently formed comic book industry group, the Association of Comics Magazine Publishers (ACMP). The group had been announced with much ballyhoo in July, 1948, along with its six-point code of ethics. A January 18, 1949, press release detailed the program.<br />
<i></i>
<i> "Completion of plans for the first organized effort at self-regulation in the comics magazine industry was announced today by the Association of Comics Magazine Publishers.</i><br />
<i> Comics magazines of publishers willing to subscribe to the comics code are now being screened under the new process, under the personal supervision of Henry E. Schultz, Executive Director of the Association.</i><br />
<i> Non-members, as well as members of the Association, are eligible to apply for and receive permission to sue the seal, certifying conformance to the comics code on an equal basis, it was announced.</i><br />
<i> "Non-members have been welcomed to participate in the self-regulatory process," Mr. Phil Keenan, President of the Association, said, "All publishers must submit drawings and manuscripts prior to publication to the Schultz office, if they wish to be considered for use of the seal"</i><br />
<i> Mr. Schultz disclosed that all comics magazine publishers have been notified that they may apply for the use of the seal. Wholesale distributors throughout the United States have also been informed of the Association's action, he added.</i><br />
<i> Fees for the screening service of the Schultz office, are based upon print orders. The fee system for the review is employed in the motion picture industry, where productions are screened under a code, Mr. Schultz explained.</i><br />
<i> "We are going to review free of charge any magazine that has a planned print order of less than 250,000 copies", Mr. Schultz added. "The reason for this is that we want to leave publishers free of all financial burdens, so far as screening is concerned, if they are starting in business or trying a first issue of a publication."</i><br />
<i> Comics magazines of larger circulation bring in adequate revenue to permit nominal charges for review, he added.</i><br />
<i> In connection with the announcement, Mr. Keenan made the following statement:</i><br />
<i> "All publishers who subscribe to the Code are making a conscientious effort to raise standards of their magazines and meet all reasonable requirements. We know that the first magazines that appear with the seal will represent careful and sincere effort by their publishers. On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that this is the first organized effort at self-regulation and our first direct step forward. We, therefore, realized that there may be imperfections in the initial stage of our program.</i><br />
<i> "We look for continued improvement and refinement of our publications as we gather experience in this work. We are in the same position, as an infant organization, that the motion picture industry was in twenty years ago. We are confident that this first test will be met by publishers honestly an that they will cooperate in continual efforts to raise standards."</i><br />
<i></i>
<i></i>
<br />
The ACMP was formed as a response to those who called for a self-policing body to regulate editorial content in comics.The code adopted by the ACMP was reminiscent of the editorial code DC had been utilizing since 1941.<br />
The membership of the group itself was problematic. While it did have several large distributors along with such notable publishers as Lev Gleason and Max Gaines son William among its number, it was lacking not only Premium's membership, but that of other major publishers.<br />
<i> "You are correct in believing that we have not joined the Association of Comics Magazine Publishers," </i>wrote Wheeler in his December 2nd response to Frank, <i>"We have subscribed to the Association's code, and we believe that Mr. Phil Keenan, President, and Mr. Henry Schultz, Executive Director, have been doing some good work. Some of the strongest and best edited comics publications are not affiliated with the Association--notably the Superman D-C group! I should like to see one strong association in the industry, and should be glad to support it when we have evidence that we can enter it and be in the company of those publishers whose editorial policies most closely resemble our own."</i><br />
Wheeler had touched upon one of the issues plaguing the comics industry group. The largest publishers--DC, Fawcett and Dell--didn't belong to the ACMP since they assumed they were relatively immune to most of the criticism directed toward comics. Still, DC was sensitive to the negative publicity surrounding comic books and looked to get in front of any criticism aimed their way by taking out a full page ad in the September 11, 1948, edition of <b>THE SATURDAY REVIEW</b>. Though not credited, it can be surmised that the text of the ad went by Frank at some point before publication.<br />
After detailing at some length the good works associated with <i><b>Superman</b></i> and the moral benefits attributable to comics, the text makes a special effort to separate DC from other comic publishers.<br />
<i>"As publishers of one of the largest groups of comics magazines, we cannot pretend to defend the context of all comics magazines. Whenever proper restrictions in publishing for the young audience are not consistently observed, the magazines warrant criticism." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 12</span></i></sup></b><i><br /></i><br />
<i> </i> This paragraph appeared in italics<i> </i>so that no reader would miss its significance. It also immediately precedes a self-congratulatory section trumpeting its,<i>"obligation to publish nothing harmful to the sensibilities and moral values of children,"</i> and its long-established Editorial Advisory Board.<br />
Without the membership of DC and the other major players, and the lack of any enforcement powers, the ACMP was a toothless organization doomed to failure. Not insignificantly, certain members of the group who hoped to find cover behind its seal, helped it to its inevitable end by routinely ignoring their own code.<br />
It can be supposed the Wheeler's previous enthusiasm for the McGuire report was tempered somewhat when early in 1949, it resulted in the appointment of a supervisory committee to oversee the sale of comic books in New Orleans. McGuire claimed to have found a third of the surveyed comics to be, <i>"offensive, objectionable and undesirable".</i><br />
<i>"The women of the comic books generally stand out in two groups,"</i> McGuire explained, <i>"Lithe, attractive, bosomy creatures who wear form-fitting clothes, and lithe, attractive, bosomy creatures who wear little or nothing."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 13</span></i></sup></b><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Early in 1949, Frank organized yet another debate on the issue of comics. Among the panelists was Dr. Bender and several local educators. Among the audience was Edwin Lukas.<br />
Although Frank hoped for a discussion of differing viewpoints that would be, <i>"lively and controversial"</i>, the reality was anything but.<br />
<i>"I thought last night's meeting,"</i> wrote Lukas to Frank on February 15th, <i>"failed to serve the purpose you may have had in mind. Conflict for its own sake is not very helpful in resolving issues; but conflict, for the purpose of attracting an audience which is not already converted to an enlightened point of view, helps clarify many confusing issues. The comics have been exposed to a good deal of confusion in thinking, and only through the sharply etched contrast of opposed points of view can that confusion be partially dissipated." </i><br />
He found no argument from Frank.<br />
<i> "I quite agree with everything you said," </i>she wrote in her March 10 reply,<i> "For some reason this meeting seemed to be jinxed from the very start in its planning...".</i><br />
<i> "We had counted too, very heavily on Dr. Siepmann to inject some of the controversial issues and to raise more response from the audience. While we did not try to have a knock-down drag out fight, we did expect to have much more controversy than appeared in the discussion."</i><br />
Frank had encountered a developing aspect of the comics debate. Both opponents and proponents of comics found certain material within the books to be objectionable. There was real anxiety over the increase in perceived sexual and violent content and even the staunchest allies of comic books were troubled by some of what they saw. Not every defender of comics was a fan of the medium. The disagreement came in how this material affected children, to what degree and most importantly, in how to address it. Sometimes, it was difficult to find much distance in opposing points of view, which made for tepid debates.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Frank began her public affairs pamphlet, <b>COMICS, RADIO, MOVIES--AND CHILDREN</b>, with a brief history and an acknowledgment of the popularity of comics books. But this wasn't the purpose of this booklet and she soon got to the crux of the controversy.<br />
While she found that most comics fell into the same genres as their predecessors, Frank noted that there were,<i>
"an increasing number of highly unsavory crime and horror stories,
many of them sadistic and full of sex excitement, whose covers scream
with lurid pictures, often promising more murder or more sex interest
than their pages inside offer."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 14</span></i></sup></b><br />
The quality of comics varied widely in Frank's estimation. So, too, did the editorial oversight of art and grammar. Some comics, though, had an advantage.<br />
<i> "A few of the leading publishers of comics magazines maintain advisory boards of educators and psychiatrists who pass upon their material from the point of view of its suitability for children and who have set up standards for guidance in this respect," </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">15</span></i></sup></b>she wrote without a hint of her own involvement in such an arrangement.<br />
<i>"What is the fascination of the comics? Probably the greatest common ingredient,"</i> Frank suggested,<i> "is <b>action</b>"</i>.<br />
<i>"Children
like things to happen, and in comics they do, fast and furiously. The
very first page, even the cover, offers a sort of preview of things to
come. And from the very outset there is never a dull moment. Even the
gentler types of comics never let the reader down, but maintain a swift
pace from beginning to end." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">16</span></i></sup></b><br />
Children, she assessed, loved comics since they provided, <i>"a
reflection of their own fantasies. Identifying themselves with the hero
or villain, they are in there punching. They fancy themselves strong
and invincible, able to overcome the limitations of time and space,
defending the weak and routing evil."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 17</span></i></sup></b><br />
As in classic folk tales, which she had noted and written about many years before, <i>"children may find release for pent-up feelings of hate, anger, fear, and aggression."</i> This was a view condemned by Wertham; a fact Frank directly confronted.<br />
<i>"Nor
is there any basis in fact for the current news headlines which blame
comics for children's delinquent acts, or for reckless claims that they
have caused a rise in juvenile crime. Certainly we cannot accept at its
face value the plea of a frightened child, hoping to please the judge by
his "reasons", that he committed his crime because he "saw it in the
comics" or "in the movies". Yet such confessions have been quoted as
"proof" of the damage wrought by comics."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 18</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank quotes Wertham from his <b>SATURDAY REVIEW OF LITERATURE</b> article wherein he attempted to trace the murder of a policeman by a young man with the observation, <i>"Is
that so astonishing when he can see anywhere a typical comic-book cover
showing a man and a woman shooting it out with the police?".</i><br />
Frank responds.<br />
<i>
"The causes of crime are not so simple! Children have always done
dangerous things, damaging themselves and others. They do not know why
they are driven to behave as they do. We shall not cure the causes of
this juvenile behavior by blaming it on their reading, or on the radio,
or the movies. It lies much deeper, in our society's failure to meet the
basic needs of these children."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 19</span></i></sup></b><br />
She follows with
agreeing quotes from Edwin Lukas and a psychiatrist. Frank observes that
the presence of violence in comics reflected, <i>"the desire of a large
number of people, including children, to read about crime and violence.
This is nothing new. The greatest literature of all time--Shakespeare,
Homer, even the classic fairy tales--abounds in violent deeds."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 20</span></i></sup></b><br />
This observation, though, was followed with the more sensitive effect
that comics may have on childhood fears. Frank cites an earlier piece
she wrote which quoted Dr. Lauretta Bender among others whom all agreed
upon moderation when it came to exposing children to any medium. They
all stressed, <i>"the importance of knowing each child's vulnerability and "tolerance point" for this kind of excitement."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 21</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank found some common ground with comics' critics.<br />
<i>
"All children, even the hardiest, should be protected from the type of
comics magazines whose pages drip with horror and blood."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 22</span></i></sup></b><br />
This statement reflected the tightrope walk Frank was attempting. While
she could rationally argue away Wertham's most outrageous attacks upon
comics, she had her own misgivings. From her earliest days working on
DC's editorial policy, to her complaints about <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i>,
Frank had battled against egregious violence, torture and sexism.
Thanks in no small measure to her input, DC for the most part had been
able to stay above the fray, <b><i>Wonder Woman</i></b> not
withstanding.<br />
Over time, though, Frank had become the face of comic book
advocacy. All comic books. In response to this increasingly difficult position, in her writings, in her many appearances and debates, her
defense of comics became more nuanced and selective.<br />
<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Frank's letter dated February 15, 1949, was in response to a request for a list of approved comics. It also detailed the challenges presented in conducting the comic book survey being conducted by the CSAA.<br />
<i>"In answer to your inquiry I am afraid that we cannot yet give you the specific information about comics books which you want," </i>Frank wrote. <i>"For several months our Comics Book Committee have [sic] been reading and trying to evaluate the various comics magazines which are on the market with a view to evolving criteria which would be helpful to parents. Whether from this study we will be able to prepare a list of specific titles which are harmful or the reverse, is still not decided.</i><br />
<i> "There are many difficulties in the way of preparing such a list--for example, the ephemeral nature of the medium itself--one would have to approve or condemn a particular issue of these monthly magazines which the following month might not conform to the same standard. There is too, the difficulty that we cannot find any unified opinion as to what is and what is not harmful or desirable in these magazines. We are working on this problem now and trying to formulate criteria for such judgments." </i><br />
It would be some months, but in the Fall 1949 issue of <b>CHILD STUDY</b>, Frank made her presentation of the comic book survey. She led off with a statement that nearly everyone could agree upon.<br />
<i> "Anyone who is concerned with children and their reading must, at some point, consider the problem of the comics. No matter what else they read, or whether they read anything else at all, most children in America read comics."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 23</span></i></sup></b><br />
She followed with a summary of the concerns generally expressed over comic reading.<br />
<i> "Many parents have watched with misgivings, and some bewilderment, the growth of this reading among boys and girls of all ages and all levels of intelligence and economic background. They have feared the inroads of this kind of "picture-reading" on their children's ability and desire to read more challenging books, its effects on the development of their tastes and appreciation of literature and art. They have deplored the low level of vulgarity and sensationalism to which some of the so-called "comics" magazines have resorted for their appeal. They are concerned about the possible effects on impressionable youngsters of so much pictured violence." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 24</span></i></sup></b><br />
In one paragraph, Frank outlined virtually every argument being used by the enemies of comic books. Such arguments had elicited a number of requests, <i>"from parents and teachers for a list of "approved" comics". </i>After noting<i> </i>both <i>"some welcome" </i>and <i>"regrettable" </i>changes in comics since the previous survey in 1943, Frank<i> </i>devoted <i>t</i>he rest of her article, entitled <i>"Looking at the Comics--1949"</i>, to determining what constituted a "good" comic book. <br />
She stated that, <i>"the Committee believes there are certain basic essentials to look for in all comics magazines, certain earmarks by which to recognize good comics publications and to guide the children toward discriminating choices." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 25</span></i></sup></b><br />
In their determination, comic covers, <i>"should be clean-cut, uncluttered and not overly sensational"</i> and story content, <i>"should be plausibly motivated and valid, if they deal with reality, imaginative if they deal with fantasy".</i> <i> </i><br />
<i> "Relationships," </i>she wrote,<i> "between people should be sound and human, especially family relationships. Stereotypes should be avoided, especially those of minority groups. The ideology of "good" characters and of the plot should carry a sense of social responsibility--respect for constituted authority, democratic principles of living, ethical and moral concepts of behavior." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 26</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>This statement<i> </i>concisely summarized not only Frank's personal beliefs, the larger beliefs of the Ethical Culture movement, but the beliefs she had been trying to infuse into comics (particularly <i><b>Superman</b></i>) since the beginning of her involvement with them.<i></i><br />
<i> "They </i>[comics]<i> are in process of change," </i>Frank concluded, <i>"some of it good, some in the wrong direction. We believe the community, by its own awareness of values and standards, can influence the direction of this change--not by censorship and imposed "regulation" but by a process of education and selection. There is no need to "reform" out of them those elements which seem to give them such appeal for children."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 27</span></i></sup></b> <br />
<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
In 1949, the New York legislature took up the matter of comic books and convened a committee to study them. Although created as a fact-finding body, the committee essentially became a soapbox for Wertham and other comics detractors. One prominent publisher appearing before it in December, 1951, vented his frustration.<br />
<i>"I have gained the impression that the committee is unfair," </i>stated Lev Gleason, <i>"biased against a great American industry--comic magazine publishing--and perhaps itself the innocent victim of career charlatans."</i><br />
<i>"This committee's report of previous hearings disparaged the reputation, integrity and competence of those who testified in favor of comic magazines and of the comic industry, yet gave highest praise to those who criticized the comics and the industry."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 28</span></i></sup></b><br />
Gleason had been at the forefront of the comics controversy for a while. His company had imposed a list of self-censorship rules in early 1948 and he had served as first president of the Association of Comics Magazine Publishers. While others in the comic book industry hoped to avoid the glare of publicity, Gleason made efforts to present comics in a positive light.<br />
Speaking at the November, 1951, roll-out of his new comic aimed at the three-to-eight age bracket, <b>UNCLE CHARLIE'S FABLES</b>, Gleason cited the influence of psychologists and educators on the publication of the book and quoted Josette Frank personally.<br />
<i>"One must regret that comic magazines have," </i>she said, <i>"in some respects, missed their opportunity for giving children more than they do."</i><br />
<i> "The comic magazine has a high potential value not only because its form is so acceptable to children but because it can be timely and contemporary in a way books cannot. Here, perhaps, more effectively than anywhere else, we can find an opportunity to give children forward looking attitudes, ideas and ideals around the world they live in." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 29</span></i></sup></b> <i><br /></i><br />
For her part, Frank continued to appear on panel discussions, P.T.A. meetings and radio programs discussing her writings on comics and the media. One of her primary connections to comics terminated with the end of the <i><b>Superman</b></i> radio show on March 1, 1951. She remained as part of the DC editorial advisory board, but that, too, would cease as a result of certain events.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Gilbert, James, A CYCLE OF OUTRAGE, pg. 98, (1986).</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Mannes, Marya, <i>"Junior Has a Craving"</i>, THE NEW REPUBLIC, pg. 20-23, (Feb. 27, 1947).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Boyle, Hal, <i>"Society Develops Plan for Prevention of Crime"</i>, KENTUCKY NEW ERA, April 13, 1948.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, <i>"Chills and Thrills in Radio, Movies and Comics"</i>, CHILD STUDY, pg. 42 (Spring 1948).</span></sup><br />
<i></i><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5</span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 44.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Dr. Fredric Wertham testimony in </span></sup><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Harry Kahan vs. Creative Age Press, Jame E. Reibman </span>introduction footnote #17, SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT, (1999 ed.).</span></sup><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> <i></i>Letters to the Editor, </span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"Violence in the Comics"</i>, </span>COMMENTARY, (Feb. 1, 1949).</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">9 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">10 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Crist, Judith, <i>"Horror in the Nursery"</i>, COLLIER'S, pg. 97, (March 27, 1948).</span></sup><br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></sup></b>
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></sup></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="st">Hart, Katie and Straus, Flora, <i>"Children's Books"</i>, CHILD STUDY, pg. 118, (Spring 1948).</span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">12 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> National Comics Publications, <i>"A million young people will be better citizens..."</i>, THE SATURDAY REVIEW, pg. 4, (Sept. 11, 1948).</span><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">13 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"New Orleans Censors Comics"</i>, INDIANA EVENING GAZETTE, (Feb. 2, 1949).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">14 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, COMICS, RADIO, MOVIES--AND CHILDREN, pg. 3, (1949).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">15 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 4.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">16 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">17 </span></i></b></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 5.</span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">18 </span></i></b></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 6.</span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">19 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 7.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">20 </span></i></b></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">21</span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid., pg. 8.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">22 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">23 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, <i>"Looking at the Comics--1949"</i>, CHILD STUDY, pg. 110, (Fall 1949).</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">24 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">25 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 111.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">26 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">27 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 124.</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">28 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Comic Book Publisher Charges Probers Biased"</span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">, BINGHAMTON PRESS, (Dec. 5, 1951).</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i></b></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">29 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Educators Believe Comic Books May Have Future in School Work"</span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">, BROOKFIELD COURIER, (Nov. 15, 1951).</span><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-27659833712414796502014-02-09T00:34:00.000-08:002014-02-09T00:36:59.874-08:00Josette Frank: Alone Against the Storm, Part 3<i>May 23, 1944 </i><br />
<br />
<i>To The Sponsors of SUPERMAN</i><br />
<i>Mutual Broadcasting Company</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Gentlemen:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> This is written in a spirit of friendly criticism, but definitely criticism.</i><br />
<i> Your Superman Program seems to me to defeat the very purpose for which it was intended. I assume you mean to "get across" the idea of Superman as the power of Good which overcomes or frustrates all the evil in the world.</i><br />
<i> At this point let me say that I believe it is wrong to implant in a young child's mind the idea that the control of good and evil may be lodged in a being such as Superman. We should rather try to raise a generation of healthy minded youth with well-balanced emotional lives. For when people grow up mentally and emotionally in a healthy and well-adjusted way the juvenile problem will be so minor as to be practically extinct, and children are not going to achieve healthy emotional adjustments by being fed such food for emotional digestion as your program furnishes.</i><br />
<br />
So began a long and well-reasoned letter from listener Margaret Linnell detailing her concerns and likely reflecting those of other parents.<br />
<i> "To the average child your program is emotionally exciting, the lurid and frightening events (such as gas attacks terrorizing a whole city, ape men, men with queer quirks of personality and physique, gunmen, spies) assuming such prominence as to be the one thing which remains in their minds. They mull it over and feed their imaginations with it until real harm results.</i><br />
<i> Children have unusually vivid imaginations and little sense of discernment.</i><br />
<i> My own son, aged six, perhaps a bit young for Superman, but the same experience has been true of </i>[my]<i> older boy became frightened to go to bed, had nightmares and finally became very upset when left in his room to go to sleep. He never had been a timid child.</i><br />
<i> I finally banned Superman and in a few days everything was back to normal."</i><br />
<br />
Linnell's rational letter resonated. This wasn't a knee-jerk diatribe written by a parent with an unfocused sense of moral outrage. Moreover, the problems she had with the radio version of <i><b>Superman</b></i> could also be applied to the published one.<br />
<i> "Do you not think that instead of holding before children the evil, the undesirable ways of acting, the wrong sort of conduct, and dramatizing it, that a better approach would be to feature the normal, clean everyday goodness and fun which should be at the root of a child's life?"</i><br />
Josette Frank was effectively employed to be the arbiter of <b><i>Superman's</i></b> moral code. Given that she had invested so much of her own belief system into his heroic persona made any such attack personal. The Child Study Association had been founded upon Felix Adler's principles that premised the Ethical Culture Movement. Its most important goal was educating children and along with that, stressing socially responsible morality. That a parent could find a character imbued with those attributes troubling was in itself troublesome. Frank's oversight of <i><b>Superman</b></i> had taken him from his roots as a Jerry Siegel's wisecracking, vigilante strong man, through his evolution into the virtuous Big Blue Boy Scout. A teenage fantasy re-imagined as a symbol of
America itself. Was the letter-writer objecting to this personification in light of the German<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span dir="auto"> <i>Übermensch</i> that the country was fighting at the time or was it a rejection of a preternaturally powered, God-like protector in general?</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span dir="auto"> Furthermore, Linnell's letter seemed to fear the effect of the, <i>"</i></span></span></span></span><i>emotionally exciting, the lurid and frightening events," </i>would have upon children. This stance flew in the face of Frank's assurance that not all childhood reading need be <i>"saturated with sweetness and light" </i>and that a healthy serving of <i>"good red meat"</i> reading was allowable as well. <br />
Linnell wasn't the only one expressing these complaints. Her letter was representative of other parents, of certain other concerned adults, whose voices would become increasingly louder and far less polite.<br />
_______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
While many historians have usually viewed the controversy surrounding comic books in a vacuum, the fact is that effect that such popular mass media as radio and film had upon children was a larger battleground of which comics, initially, were just a skirmish. <span class="st">The brewing conflict over comic books
was already being fought over children's radio programming and Frank was
uniquely positioned to see both battles. </span><br />
<span class="st"> Frank and Bob Maxwell saw the <i><b>Superman</b></i> radio program as an opportunity. Rather than just choosing to not offend, they sought ways to set an example.</span><br />
<span class="st"> <i>"I have given a great deal of thought to the problem we discussed the other day--the possibility that something new and fine and important can be added to the late afternoon children's radio hour," </i>wrote Frank to Maxwell in a September 29th, 1944, letter, <i>"And
the more I think about it the more excited I am about what might be
done. It seems that the time is ripe for just such an event in juvenile
radio."</i></span><br />
<span class="st"> Frank further noted, <i>"In
a country where radio is doing such magnificent things for adults, we
have really neglected our children, both in terms of their commercial
potential as an audience, and--since I am concerned , after all, as an
educator--in terms of offering them really fruitful, in creative,
cultural entertainment."</i></span><br />
<i>"There is a great
stirring in our educational and cultural world, and children are a part
of it. I believe that some of our "best minds" are turned toward
children these days and I believe could be brought to focus right now on
the really rewarding business of shaping a new kind of radio
entertainment for children."</i><br />
At the same time, comic publisher DC was doing all it could to get on the good side of the public. Their public relations arm, Superman, Inc., was actively coordinating very visible activities that would undoubtedly garner a favorable response. In a December 20, 1944, letter to Frank, Harry Childs described some of these efforts.<br />
<i> "At the request of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, we prepared a specialized History of the United States in comics continuity written with a slight emphasis on the contribution made by Spain and Portugal. This continuity was written in English and then translated into both Spanish and Portuguese. Two editions were printed for Latin-American distribution and I am enclosing copies."</i><br />
<i> "At the request of the Navy Department, we are preparing a series of graded readers for use with Navy Personnel. For sometime </i>[sic]<i> the Navy has been taking men who must be classified as illiterates and has undertaken the job of teaching them to read. In setting up the requirements of reading material, the Navy selected comic magazines since they are both extremely popular with service personnel and are well suited to providing reading experience--small blocks of copy supported by illustration."</i><br />
Childs went on to inform Frank,<i> "These two activities, plus many more in the work, underline the increasing recognition of the comics continuity technique. As additional material becomes available I will see that you are kept informed...".</i><br />
One such widely distributed publication was the <b>SUPERMAN WORKBOOK</b>, which reportedly made its way into some 2,500 classrooms across the country. This effort as part of the <b>Superman Good Reading Project</b> contained, <i>"...vocabulary exercises of various kinds in addition to the pictures stories.",</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span></i></sup></b> and sported Fred Ray's classic <b>SUPERMAN</b> #14 cover of the titular character holding a bald eagle and posing before a stars and stripes emblazoned shield on both its front and back. The choice of this cover, which featured <i><b>Superman</b></i> virtually wrapped in the American flag, was certainly not coincidental. <br />
<i> "In the meantime," </i>Childs implored Frank, <i>"I hope you will give some time to the thought of the potential application of "words, pictures and color in continuity." Needless to say, I will be anxious to hear your opinions, criticisms, suggestions, etc."</i><br />
_______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Even with the efforts to set the <i><b>Superman</b></i> program apart from the rest of the offending rabble, Frank found that not everyone saw the difference. An indiscriminating view that crossed international boundaries. <br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Miss Grannan:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>I am very much interested in the new that the question of "horror programs" is to be on the agenda of your CBC national conference. It seems a little strange that such programs as the general run of our afternoon serials should be included in that category, since when I think of horror programs I think of the more or less adult presentations such as The Shadow and The Inner Sanctum etc. </i><br />
<br />
There was a growing backlash in Canada against "horror programs" aimed at children. So much so, that during 1944, the state-owned Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) recommended that local stations not renew the contracts for such shows. The Canadian Association of Broadcasters went a step further, <i>"...endeavoring to find concrete cases of this type of program contributing to juvenile delinquency."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank's January 9th, 1945, letter to Mary Grannan, <span class="st">CBC supervisor of children's broadcasts, was likely a preemptive strike meant to provide some separation between <i><b>Superman</b></i> and legitimate horror programs. Still, Frank didn't totally disagree with Grannan's view.</span><br />
<span class="st"><i> "However I do think that once or twice the Superman program has gone overboard in that direction--notably when I was away on my vacation last summer, and in case you heard last Friday's Superman (which I hope you did not) it had a few touches which were done over my dead body and screams of protest. But this is not the usual thing, and as a rule I would hardly call it a horror program."</i></span><br />
<span class="st"> There was related matter, unaddressed by Frank, that concerned the producers of <i><b>Superman</b></i>. A concern detailed in a February 12th letter from Robert Maxwell to a parent. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="st"><i>Dear Mr. Duboff,</i></span><br />
<br />
<span class="st"><i> The production department of the Mutual Network has informed me that you called to discuss the HOUSE OF MYSTERY program on the basis that a large group of parents in your locality objected to its content. Since HOUSE OF MYSTERY is produced under my personal direction, your inquiry was referred to me. </i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i> As I understood it, you characterized HOUSE OF MYSTERY as "too much like INNER SANCTUM". I am amazed at this since the two programs are diametrically opposed. As a matter of fact, HOUSE OF MYSTERY was created to combat the so-called "unexplained" or psychological horror programs to which so many children are addicted. The main purpose of HOUSE OF MYSTERY is to explain and expose, to assure youngsters that the occult, the supernatural and the spiritualistic do <u>not</u> exist; to allay fears of the darkness and to show them that wherever supernatural manifestations are said to exist, they can be traced to natural phenomenon or man-made effects.</i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i><u> </u></i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i> The HOUSE OF MYSTERY program is under the editorial guidance of Miss Josette Frank of The Child Study Association of America and the psychiatric guidance of Dr. Loretta Bender, Chief of the Children's Psychiatric Division of Bellevue Hospital, both of whom are convinced that in HOUSE OF MYSTERY we have the first children's entertainment vehicle possessed of therapeutic value. </i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i><u><br /></u></i></span>
<span class="st"> Although<i> </i>its spooky organ music and funereal intro delivered by Roger Ellliott, <i>"the Mystery Man"</i>, would seem to belie the difference between <i><b>House of Mystery</b></i> and other horror programs, Maxwell's assurance was backed by his offer to Duboff to have a meeting. </span><span class="st"><span class="st">The meeting, which would be attended by either Frank or Bender, was Maxwell's attempt to find a common ground. </span> </span><br />
<span class="st"><i> "You have a great deal at stake as the parent; we have a great deal at stake as the creators and producers of juvenile entertainment, which, to be successful must meet with your approval."</i></span>
<span class="st"><i> </i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i> </i>Whether such accommodating measures were common in an attempt to placate upset parents is unknown. But it does go to the heart of the matter as it shows the level of concern felt within Superman, Inc. and by extension, throughout DC. Although <i><b>Superman</b></i> had originated within the pages of comics, the radio program had brought the character into virtually every home and decisions made on the show affected how he was presented in the comic book. And other than Bob Maxwell, nobody affected how he was presented on the radio program more than Josette Frank. <i><br /></i></span><br />
<span class="st"><i> </i></span> _______________________________________________________<br />
<i><br /> </i>Novelty Press<i> </i>was the comic book imprint of Curtis Publishing, publishers of the venerable <b>SATURDAY EVENING POST</b>, influential <b>LADIES HOME JOURNAL</b> and <b>JACK & JILL </b>children's magazine. With such a respectable legacy to protect, managing editor Robert D. Wheeler hoped to show that his comics were on the side of the angels and
the quickest way there was to get Frank's approval.<br />
<br />
<i>March 7, 1945</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Miss Frank:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The inclosed </i>[sic]<i> copy of FRISKY FABLES represents our effort to produce a magazine of the highest type in its field, a "comic" appealing to very small children.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>You will notice that some of the humor will go over the heads of our tiny tots,. We don't think the story value is impaired thereby, however; and frankly our intention was to give a bonus of entertainment value to the adult who has to read the comic to the child.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>As arranged in our telephone conversation, Novelty Press would like an appraisal of FRISKY FABLES by your staff, on the usual paid basis. Not a detailed analysis and study of individual strips, but a general summing up of how ell or how poorly we have accomplished our aims, with perhaps comment on anything particularly deserving praise or censure. </i><br />
<i> </i><i>We appreciate greatly the fact that you have found TARGET COMICS, BLUE BOLT, and 4-MOST of a standard high enough to warrant your recommending them. I am inclosing </i>[sic] <i>a recent copy of BLUE BOLT to show how our Q and A feature is liked by readers, as shown by readers' letters. Note how we have sandwiched educational </i>[material]<i> among others.</i><br />
<br />
Frank's response apparently pleased Wheeler, as a few weeks later in a letter dated March 29, she received his appreciative reply along with his acknowledgement of a recommended aid.<br />
<i> "All the members of our editorial staff are pleased to think that you were so favorably impressed by our new comic magazine, FRISKY FABLES.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>We appreciate also your comments about the Q's and A's, and about the way in which the negro child is introduced in "Fearless Fellers". We are familiar with the booklet "How Writers Perpetuate the Stereotypes" and believe our policies generally are in accordance with the ideas expressed therein."</i>
<br />
Wheeler's familiarity with the recently published (January, 1945) booklet is not surprising, nor is the implication that it was mentioned to him by Frank. <br />
<i> </i>Produced by the Writer's War Board (the main propaganda organization for the U.S. during WWII), <i><b>"How Writer's Perpetuate the Stereotypes"</b></i> took a hard look at the prevailing racial stereotyping in America at the time.<br />
The Board, chaired by famed mystery writer Rex Stout, conducted an extensive survey of current media--film, radio, advertising, theater, and the various print forms--and ranked each according to how sympathetically it treated minorities. Theater was at the top of the list, novels and motion pictures followed. More than halfway down were comics.<br />
Frank was certainly aware of this poor showing. It follows that she would attempt to change the portrayal of minorities within comic books as it fit with her, and the CSAA's, similar efforts in children's literature. <br />
In 1943, the CSSA had established its Children's Book Award based upon rewarding a book, <i>"</i><span class="st"><i>for young people that deals realistically with problems in their own world". </i>The<i> </i>CSAA was especially appreciative of books that reflected its own progressive attitudes of brotherhood and social significance. </span><br />
<span class="st"> This sometimes meant that they would attempt to influence authors themselves. Frank was known to have asked writer Doris Gates to change a white character in a story to an African American <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3</span></i></sup></b>. That she would hope to </span><span class="st"><span class="st">similarly </span>influence comic book editors is understandable and it didn't end with her suggestions to Wheeler.</span><br />
<span class="st"><i> </i></span> _______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>March 4, 1946</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Mr. Maxwell,</i><br />
<br />
<i> It is with the greatest of pleasure that I accept your invitation to serve as the consultant for the Superman Radio Program insofar as the subject of intergroup relations is concerned. Those of us associated with me and I are delighted that you are going ahead with this type of program because we think it can make a very important contribution to the promotion of understanding and respect among Americans of all backgrounds.</i><br />
<br />
This letter from Willard Johnson, vice-president of the National Conference of Christians and Jews, was welcome news. Frank had solicited this organization for their help <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></sup></b> and this confirmation of their input was just what she and Maxwell had hoped for.<br />
Frank had long envsioned a greater purpose for <b><i>Superman</i></b> beyond the everyday crime-fighting limitations placed upon him by his writers. She found a sympathetic ally in Maxwell, who was able to convince W. H. Vanderploeg, president of the program's sponsor Kellogg's and its advertising agency, Kenyon & Eckhardt, that having a social conscience was commercially possible.<br />
It didn't take long after the first installment of <i><b>"The Hate Mongers Organization" </b></i>broadcast on April 16th for the first reviews to come in.<br />
<i> "Though he did not make the headlines, Superman was news of a rather high order last week,"</i> wrote radio columnist Jack Gould, <i>"Disregarding his conventional excursions in escapism, he set out on a new series of adventures in which he proposes to combat the more mundane evils of racial and religious intolerance, adolescent gangsterism and other related problems of the juvenile."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 5</span></i></sup></b><br />
The story arc follows the efforts of Superman and his pal Jimmy Olson to thwart the Guardians of America hate group and their acts of terrorism against the multi-cultrural Untiy House. Though the malicious organization is revealed to be <b>[SPOILER ALERT]</b> conveniently led by a former Nazi spy, this was the show's earliest attempt at potentially controversial subject matter and its positive reception encouraged further socially conscious storylines.<br />
The vice-president of the CSAA, Mrs. Hugh Grant Straus, took the occasion of a mention in the liberal <b>PM</b> daily newspaper to explain the rationale and development of the new direction of the radio program in a letter to the editor dated May 20th.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Sir,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> I was delighted to note your salute to the new series on the <u>Superman</u> radio program.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i> I believe your readers would be interested to know that the Radio Committee of the Child Study Association of America through Josette Frank, its staff adviser, has been consulting with the Superman program and working with its producers for a number of years. The idea of using Superman's special popularity for fighting intolerance was a composite of many consultations and was directly encouraged by a meeting called by this Association to discuss ways in which children's programs might be used to further good interracial and intercultural relations. For the present series, our Committee listened to trial recordings and called upon psychologists, psychiatrists, and propaganda specialists to advise the producers who found themselves with a challenging problem on their hands--entertainment with a purpose.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i> We want to join with you in applauding the sponsor (Kellogg's) and the producer (Robert Maxwell Associates) who were willing to put so much blood, sweat and tears into a risky and difficult experiment. We who watched and worked with it since the inception of the idea know what it takes.</i><br />
<br />
While the next story arc concerning the corruption of poor youth from the slums by a crooked politician (<b><i>"Al Vincent's Corrupt Political Machine"</i></b>) continued along the path of social awareness, it was the following episodes that elicited both the most praise and the most condemnation. <br />
Beginning on June 10,<i><b> "The Clan of the Fiery Cross"</b></i> depicted the torments visited upon a young Chinese-American boy named Tommy Lee and his family by a group of "True American" bigots determined to drive them out of Metropolis. Clearly based upon the real Ku Klux Klan, the organization dubbed the Clan of the Fiery Cross is <b>[SPOILER ALERT]</b> eventually stymied and captured as <i><b>Superman</b></i>, once again, saves the day.<br />
Perhaps predictably, there were threats from what Frank characterized as <i>"the lunatic fringe"</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 6</span></i></sup></b> and some southern U.S. radio stations protested this storyline, but the press was generally positive in their appraisal of <i><b>Superman's</b></i> newly formed social agenda. <br />
Typical was Harriett Van Horne, who wrote in her September 10th column,<i>"Kids admire him now more than ever, it would seem</i>, <i>because his exploits concern matters within their ken. He talks back to the governor and outwits the state police and raises funds for the needy. Along with eating bins of corn flakes, the sponsor hopes the youngsters will imbibe some of Superman's sympathy for the underdog."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7</span></i></sup></b><br />
Unmentioned, but an underlying motivation was the bedrock belief of the Ethical Culture movement to which the CSAA was dedicated: the establishment of a morality based upon socially beneficial acts free of religious dogma. It can't be overlooked that as the<i><b> </b></i>other-worldly Kryptonian was inherently devoid of Earthly religious ties, a being who did good deeds for the sake of goodness itself, <i><b>Superman</b></i> was the fictional personification of that belief.<br />
<span class="st"><i> </i></span> _______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Harry Childs was serving as editorial director of promotional comics publisher General Comics when he received a December 11, 1946 letter from Frank regarding her critique of a proposed comic he had sent her.<br />
<i> "My criticism had to do solely with the philosophy that was enunciated by the hero of your strip when the only advice he could offer to two quarreling children was to learn how to fight so that one of them could win. You realize of course that by this precept one of them will also lose. It seems to me that on the positive side we will do well to teach our children that there are things worth fighting for and worth fighting against in this world, and that they can find things more worth fighting about than petty personal advantage. The fight against injustice, against disease, against ignorance--all these offer a most valuable outlet for children's aggressions too.</i>"<br />
Later that same day, Frank wrote yet another letter to Childs concerning a feature at DC.<br />
<i> "I have been thinking quite a lot about <u>Johnny Everyman</u> and the possibilities he offers for selling America to American children. In a way I think it would be a pity to take him off his international mission. All the educators right now are urging us to do something for children on the U.N. theme, and certainly you are doing it in <u>Johnny Everyman</u>. This idea is more wanted now than ever."</i><br />
<i> </i> Ostensibly created in cooperation with the Pearl Buck-led East and West Association, <i><b>Johnny Everyman</b></i> was an attempt,<i>"to further understanding between peoples"</i>, according to the blurb prominently displayed on the splash page of each story. Often scripted by Jack Schiff, DC editor and writer well-known for his liberal views, the feature put the lead character in situations wherein he could teach impressionable youngsters lessons in tolerance. <br />
<i> "It occurs to me that you might do one of two things: (1) Introduce a new character of this type in another book whose mission would be to show our children what goes on in these United States. There is plenty of wonderful material to draw from, and I would like to talk with you about this idea. Or (2) you might use <u>Johnny Everyman</u> in the United States to show the contributions of various nationality groups to the building of America. I have some excellent source material of this kind and this too, is an aspect of American life which is very much wanted by educators and librarians and which plays into the U.N. theme."</i><br />
<i> "Think about these two possibilities a bit, and let's talk about it further. I'd like to see you take the lead in this."</i><br />
<i> </i>Despite Frank's enthusiasm for the feature, <i><b>Johnny Everyman</b></i> disappeared from the pages of DC comics within a few months, doomed, perhaps, by George E. Sokolsky's nationally syndicated column of June 29, 1946.<br />
<i> "Do you know what your children are reading? Do you ever pick up the comics to which they are so devoted?",</i> he asked rhetorically.<br />
<i>"The other day, I picked up "World's Finest Comics" and noted a distinguished editorial advisory board," </i>wrote Sokolsky as he dutifully listed Frank and the others, <i>"So I thought that with such a group of advisers, this must be something extraordinary indeed. On the very next page to this listing of these great names appears a comic entitled "Johnny Everyman".</i><br />
Sokolsky recounts the story of a young boy named Niikitin ("Nicky") brought before a<i> "young people's court"</i> in the Soviet Union on a charge of theft. The boy kept the bolt of cloth he claimed to have found since he <i>"had his head turned" </i>by pictures he saw in an American magazine.<b><i> Johnny Everyman</i></b> appears in the court and is allowed to speak in the boy's defense. <i>"You see, Nicky, in the first place, although America is far ahead of Russia in production, not everybody in America possesses the things you saw advertised in that magazine."</i><br />
This does not sit well with Sokolsky.<br />
<i> "Of course, Nikitin does not read that. No Russian child will read any American comic. All this is for American children."</i><br />
Sokolsky finishes detailing the rest of the story and concludes that this means just one thing.<br />
<i> "In a word, to the child reading that strip, Americans must appear mean and hateful."</i><br />
<i> "And there is not a single thing in the cartoon to show democracy or decency in America. The question is asked, by no one answers about freedom of speech, of movement, of thought, of the press,of secret elections, of trial by jury and the privacy of one's home and possessions. Not one word of this."</i><br />
<i> "Is that what you want your children to learn about their country? Is that how you would teach them to love their country?" </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8</span></i></sup></b><i><br />
<i> </i> Any dreams Frank may have had expanding <i><b>Johnny Everyman's</b> </i>mission were never going anywhere. Having already incurred the wrath of the powerfully connected Sokolsky (he counted J. Edgar Hoover among his close friends), DC wasn't about to draw any more unwanted attention to its comics.Soon there would be attention enough coming from other quarters and Sokolsky wouldn't be among its biggest concerns. <i> </i><br />
<i> </i>_______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1 </span></i></b><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="fn"><span dir="ltr"><i>"Issues Relating to the Comics"</i>, THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL, pg. 642, (May 1942).</span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"CBC Hits Horror Shows"</i>, BROADCASTING, pg. 24, (Dec. 25, 1944).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Mickenberg, Julia L., LEARNING FROM THE LEFT, pg. 329, (2005).</span><span style="color: black;"></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Bowers, Rick, SUPERMAN VERSUS THE KU KLUX KLAN, pg. 119 (2012).</span></sup><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5 </span></i></b><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">Gould, Jack, <i>"On the New Superman"</i>, NEW YORK TIMES, April 28, 1946</span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;">.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ohio State University, EDUCATION ON THE AIR YEARBOOK, vol. 17, pg. 158, (1947).</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Van Horne, Harriet, <i>"Superman's Message is For Grownups, Too"</i>, NEW YORK WORLD-TELEGRAM, Sept. 10, 1946.</span></sup><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Sokolsky, George E., <i>"These Days: The Reading of Children"</i>, June 29, 1946.</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b></i>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-401643174893121442014-02-07T21:41:00.002-08:002014-02-08T06:37:42.734-08:00Josette Frank: Alone Against the Storm, Part 2<i>March 10, 1942<br /> </i><br />
<i>The Most Reverend John F. Noll, D.D., </i><br />
<i>Bishop of Fort Wayne,</i><br />
<i>Fort Wayne, Ind.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Your Excellency:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> It has been called to my attention that our most recent
publication, "Sensation Comics", is included in the N.O.D.L. listing --
Classification for March, 1942.</i><br />
<i> While I am pleased to see that comic magazines as a whole have
been eliminated from this N.O.D.L. list, I am, of course, rather
concerned that "Sensation Comics" was included, particularly in view of
the fact that I was the originator of the entire comic magazine field.</i><br />
Overlooking Max Gaines' bit of self-aggrandizement at the end of that
paragraph, the content of his letter to Bishop Noll revealed a real
problem for All-American Comics. The National Organization for Decent
Literature (NODL), a Catholic Church group led by Noll and founded
in late 1938 to combat "lewd literature", had singled out <b>SENSATION COMICS</b> for condemnation. While the comic's title was likely troubling in itself, it was its star that led to to the ban.<br />
<i>"You
will no doubt recall a visit made to you the latter part of August of
last year by Miss Josette Frank of the Child Study Association and Mr.
Harry E. Childs of our Executive Department, as a result of which three
of the Superman-DC Publications, "Adventure", and "Detective Comics",
and "Superman", were taken off the N.O.D.L. list."</i><br />
Frank was obviously being utilized more and more as<i> </i>the
respectable voice of DC/AA. The line between her various employers had
become blurred to the point that at a February, 1942, conference on
children's radio programming, Frank represented Superman, Inc., while
other speakers appeared on behalf of the CSAA.That she was being paired with public relations man Childs
indicates that the publisher wanted to take no chances that their point
of view was misconstrued.<br />
<i> "I am sending you the
last several issues of "Sensation Comics", and I call your particular
attention to the May issue, in which we publish Alice Marble's
endorsement of "Wonder Woman", and the page entitled, "Have You A
Civilian Defense Club In Your School?"</i><br />
<i> I am also enclosing some other material about comic books and
our Educational and Defense activities which may prove interesting to
you.</i><br />
<i> Would you be good enough to advise me, at your earliest
convenience, which of the five points in your "Code for Clean Reading"
has been violated by anything which appears in "Sensation Comics"?"</i><br />
The NODL code Gaines was referencing directed that literature is banned which: <br />
1) Glorifies crime or the criminal<br />
2) That is predominantly "sexy"<br />
3) That features illicit love<br />
4) That carries illustrations indecent or suggestive<br />
5) That carries disreputable advertising <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span></i></sup></b><br />
Gaines' request as to which of the points was violated by <b>SENSATION</b> came in Bishop Noll's letter of March 13th.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Mr. Gaines,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>I have your letter of March 10 attached to the April, May and June numbers of SENSATION COMICS, for which I thank you.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Practically
the only reason for which SENSATION COMICS was placed on the banned
list of the N.O.D.L. was that it violates Point Four of the Code in the
same degree that many magazines do.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Wonder
Woman is not sufficiently dressed nor are many of the characters with
whom she deals. There is no reason why Wonder Woman should not be better
covered, and there is less reason why women fall under her influence
should be running around in bathing suits.</i><br />
<br />
Gaines had to be concerned, but surely not surprised. The suggestive qualities exhibited by <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i>
and the other Amazons, even though depicted in Harry G. Peter's
somewhat archaic style, were readily evident to any reader. What had to
be concerning for Gaines was the wide acceptance of the Code. Not only
were millions of Catholics pledged to adhering to it, but so too were
many others who responded to its bans. <br />
At the same time <i><b>Wonder Woman </b></i>was raising the ire of the Catholic Church, she was also enjoying growing popularity among readers of <b>SENSATION</b>.
In a letter to Frank dated March 23, 1942, Gaines included a detailed
survey comprised of readers' responses about their favorite features
within <b>SENSATION COMICS</b>. <br />
<i> "The remarkable thing about this tabulation is, first, the
almost unanimous approval of "WONDER WOMAN", and her selection as first
choice, not only among boys and girls, but also in every age group.</i><br />
<i> Another surprising thing about this poll was the unusual number
of coupons sent in by men and women--mostly women--over 18 years of age.
We received over twenty-five such coupons among the first thousand
replies, the same proportion of these twenty-five choosing "WONDER
WOMAN" first, as did the boys and girls."</i><br />
Its hard to
know how seriously Gaines took these results and furthermore, how he
expected Frank to respond to them. The results of any such poll were
inherently unscientific, taken as they were from a sampling of voluntary
responses from readers already buying the comic with <i><b>Wonder Woman </b></i>as
the lead feature. And Frank,who was concurrently conducting her own
study of the effects of comic books, had to view such a survey with a
jaundiced eye. <br />
In any case, Gaines followed this with another letter to Frank on May 4, in which he assured her that,<i>"A
copy of my letter of March 10 was shown to Mr. Liebowitz (both Mr.
Maxwell's and Mr. Childs' superior in Detective Comics, Inc. and
Superman, Inc. and partner in All-American Comics) before it was sent
out to the Bishop."</i><br />
Enclosed was a copy of the letter he received from Bishop Noll.<br />
<i> "We would have omitted SENSATION COMICS from our May objectionable list," </i>wrote the Bishop, <i>"if it were not for the fear of being charged with not applying the same rule to all publishers." </i><br />
<i> </i><i>"However, since we have no other comic magazines on our list, I shall instruct the publisher of the ACOLYTE </i>[the NODL house organ]<i> to remove SENSATION COMICS from the June list."</i><br />
While Gaines was undoubtedly thrilled by Noll's absolution of <b>SENSATION</b>, Frank likely received the news with mixed emotions. She had her own concerns about <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i>; concerns that would surface in the not-too-distant future.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>May 18th, 1942</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Mr. Childs:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>You asked me to write to you about the meeting I attended at White Plains on the subject of the Comics.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>It
was a a small group (perhaps thirty) composed largely of school
librarians from all over Westchester County. On the panel, beside
myself, were Miss Lockie Parker of Story Parade </i>[note: a children's magazine]<i>, Mrs. Edmonds of the Ethical Culture Schools and someone from N.Y.U. The chairman was the M</i>[t]<i>. Vernon librarian with whom you corresponded. </i><br />
Frank's letter to Childs recounted the program. Several readings of
papers about comics, Sterling North's editorial, a couple of positive
pieces including a DC published pamphlet and, <i>"an attack on comics quoted from 'the eminent psychologist and college professor, Dr. William Marsten. </i>[sic]'<i> (I quote this from the reader's presentation)"</i><br />
<i>
After all the presentations had been made, including mine--the gist of
which you are familiar with--the chairman said that she had hoped to
have the D.C. publications represented by a big, husky man at whom they
might hurl their criticisms, and were therefore disappointed that "this
nice lady" (meaning me) came instead!</i><br />
<i> On the whole, I think the discussion accomplished something for those
librarians who came to it with an open mind. The chairman was very
emotional and resentful of the Comics. The others were, however, more
thoughtful.</i><br />
Along with being the face of DC/AA in
such public venues, Frank was also becoming its scapegoat. Although she
good-naturedly recalled the chairperson's gibe in her letter to Childs,
she would increasingly find herself the subject of far less genial
attacks.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Miss Frank:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the first chapter for the
proposed SUPERMAN book which I promised to let you see at the first
opportunity.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>When you have finished reading it, I'd appreciate it if you'd promptly return it to me with your comments.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Hope Stanley </i>[sic]<i>
was pleasantly surprised by the acceptance of his synopsis. The check I
sent to DC to be forwarded to him, has probably already reached him.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Best personal regards. I may be in New York near June 13th and hope to see you at that time.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Cordially, </i><br />
<i>Jerry Siegel</i><br />
<br />
Siegel's mention of "Stanley" and the acceptance of his synopsis was a
actually a reference to Frank's young son, Steve, who had submitted a <i><b>Superman</b></i>
story idea. While this plot line wasn't used in either the comic or the
radio program, it did garner a personal letter from Harry Childs and
apparently, a check from the company. Coincidentally, it recalled a
recently published, similarly themed comic written by Gardner Fox in <b>FLASH COMICS</b> #32 (Aug. 1942).<br />
More significantly, this letter of June 1, 1942, was accompanied by Siegel's 25-page opening chapter to his proposed <i><b>Superman</b></i> book. It was apparent from the first page that his writing exhibited more enthusiasm than skill.<i> </i><br />
<i>
"Hundreds of thousands of light years distant from our planet Earth
there once rotated in space the colossal, proud planet of Krypton. No
ordinary planet, this. Like our own world it supported life. But--unlike
our world--the life on that far distant world had evolved millions of
years beyond our own. Where Earth is peopled by Men, Krypton was
inhabited by SUPERMEN!</i><br />
<i> What is a SUPERMAN?</i><br />
<i>
A SUPERMAN is a human being whose physical structure is developed to
the ultimate peak of physical perfection. He has a body that is at once
astounding and beautiful to behold for sheer amazing physical
development. And he has powers far beyond that possessed by ordinary
men.</i><br />
<i> For instance--the strongest man on Earth would
have to struggle pretty desperately to raise a huge boulder into the air
with his bare hands...if he could do it at all. But on planet Krypton
it was a mere everyday occurrence for SUPERMEN not only to lift mighty
boulders,but to rip tremendous mountain ranges apart!"</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2</span></i></sup></b><br />
Siegel's limitations as a writer were surely evident to Frank, who had
made a career of critiquing books. Whether it was at her suggestion or
not, Siegel was replaced as author by George Lowther, one of the writers
of the radio program. Frank herself provided the book's foreword.<br />
<i>
"America has had many fabulous heroes. As our country grew, there
sprang up tall tales of men whose wondrous deeds and strength were
beyond ordinary men. In the great lumber country men told of Paul
Bunyan, mighty logger, who moved mountains and changed the course of
rivers to suit the lumbermen. The opening of the West created Pecos
Bill, who could lasso a tornado and mount a demon stallion. As the
railroads pushed south and west came black John Henry, steel-driver,
spitting hot rivets and laying rails just ahead of the speeding trains.
And now--Superman--wrestling with the mechanized might of today's world
of airplanes and submarines and super-villainy."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 3</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i> Frank saw something in <i><b>Superman</b></i>
beyond his science fictional origin. To her, he was the latest hero of
American myth; a mythos she was instrumental in crafting. And if she
could help remake <b><i>Superman</i></b>, she could help change the public perception of comic books in general.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Frank's opinion mattered. Not only in editorial matters, but also on a more personal level, as evidenced by a letter concerning a new publication.<br />
<br />
<i> October 13, 1942</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Miss Frank,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> Thanks for your note of October 12th about "All-Flash", and for your interest in "Picture Stories from the Bible".</i><br />
<i>
You will be interested in knowing that a trial run of 100,000 copies of
"Picture Stories from the Bible" was distributed in about 80 cities
throughout the country and the results were sufficiently good to warrant
our going back to press with an additional 235,000 for a national
newsstand and chain store distribution.</i><br />
<i> You will note
that in the December issues of four or five of our magazines, we ran a
full page ad with a coupon telling the youngsters that if they can't
find "Picture Stories from the Bible" on the newsstand, to send in the
coupon, with a dime. Yesterday and today, we received over 200 of these
coupons, which is a very satisfactory response and an indication that
there is a keen interest in this type of book.</i><br />
<i> Plates for the second issue are now in work and it will go on sale in December.</i><br />
<i>
The third issue--the last of the Old Testament editions--(unless we
decide to extend the fourth one to cover the balance of the Old
Testament characters) will go on sale in March.</i><br />
<i> I have
letters from ministers of every Protestant denomination, praising
"Picture Stories from the Bible", and we have sold many thousands
directly to Protestant churches of every denomination, as we are giving
them a special price of 5¢ a copy.</i><br />
<i> A great many Jewish schools and Talmud Torahs have ordered and are ordering them every day.</i><br />
<i>
So you can see that on the whole, there has been a very favorable
reaction, which is extremely gratifying to me personally because I had
been working on this idea for a number of years and it's nice to know I
am on the right track.</i><br />
<i> Again thanking you for your interest, I am</i><br />
<br />
<i>Very sincerely,</i><br />
<i>M. C. Gaines </i><br />
<br />
It appears that Gaines valued Frank's approval of his pet project. Her
approval wasn't always so easily won, though. A fact that Gaines would
soon realize. <br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
To this point, most of the debate about comics had been chiefly
academic. As demonstrated in Frank's letter, it was librarians, teachers
and clergy who truly fretted over the effects of comics. Indeed, Frank
herself shared some of these concerns, reflected in her continual
commentary on the poor lettering and print quality of many comics.<br />
<br />
<i>February 3, 1943</i><br />
<br />
<i>My dear Harry:</i><br />
<br />
<i>
I want to tell you that I find the new "Boy Commandos" very good indeed
and that I particularly like that fact that the lettering is good.</i><br />
<i>
The question of lettering remains, however, a very serious stumbling
block to any wholehearted recommendation of the comics as reading matter
for children. I think I have never gone to any meeting at which some
parent has not said something to the effect that she has no objection to
her children reading the comics except that they are dangerous to the
eye-sight.</i><br />
<i> You knew we have talked of
this, you and I, many times and I feel that some progress has been made.
Not, for example, "Bible Comics" </i>[sic]<i> whose lettering is above reproach. In the current action comics I find most of the lettering much better but not all of it.</i><br />
<i>
I still cannot understand, despite your editorial department's protest,
why, if some comics can be well lettered, others cannot. I really wish
you would give me a chance to talk with your editorial department on
this subject, for as it is I find it impossible to defend you against
attacks on the comics on this score.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Won't you see if you can make some further effort along these lines?</i><br />
<br />
Arguments pro and con filled scholarly journals; credential-heavy
professionals citing their own personal studies and quoting others. And
although it was Frank who most often showed up in public venues and
radio broadcasts, other members of the Editorial Advisory
Board,--Thorndike, Sones, Bender--provided articles promoting the
positive aspects of comics.<br />
In truth, most Americans had
other concerns. The country was immersed in a war that was championed by
nearly everyone, including comic book characters who fought the Axis with
superhuman fervor and touted war bonds. It was hard to hate such good
citizenship.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>February 8, 1943</i><br />
<br />
<i>Dear Harry,</i><br />
<br />
<i>
Several people on my committee have pointed out to me what seems to be
some violations of your own "code" in one of your publications. I refer
to Wonder Woman, which flaunts a partly dressed woman on the cover.</i><br />
<i>
Since you yourself have old me that this voluntary restriction which
you have put upon your magazines has been dace for the purpose of
avoiding any possible criticism of the ground of being "sexy", I do
believe this constitutes a violation of your policy.</i><br />
<i>
A further violation, it seems to me, is the fact that the "ladies" in
this strip always seem to appear in chains or irons--whatever you would
call them--and this might perhaps come under the head of sadism.</i><br />
<i>
I am passing these criticisms along to you because they have seemed
important to our committee and therefore should be important to you. As
for my own personal feeling about these factors you know how I have
always felt about this particular strip, and I may say here that while I
cannot honestly say that I think it would be damaging to children, I do
believe it lays you open to justifiable criticism. </i><br />
<br />
<i> </i>Frank had touched a sore spot, but as the<i> </i>public
face of AA/DC and their most vocal defender, her words were taken
seriously by the publishers. Just to make sure that they were, less than
a week later, in a letter to Gaines dated February 17th, she follows an
evaluation of the lettering in <b>ALL STAR COMICS </b>by further stressing her concerns about Marston's Amazon.<br />
<i>
"May I take this occasion also to tell you that there has been
considerable criticism in our committee concerning your WONDER WOMAN
feature, both in SENSATION COMICS and in the WONDER WOMAN magazine. As
you know, I have never been enthusiastic about this feature. I know also
that your circulation figures prove that a lot of other people <u>are</u>
enthusiastic. Nevertheless, this feature does lay you open to
considerable criticism from any such group as ours, partly on the basis
of the women's costume (or lack of it), and partly on the basis of
sadistic bits showing women chained, tortured, etc.</i><br />
<i>
I wish you would consider these criticisms very seriously because they
have come to me now from several sources. I should like very much to
talk this over if you think that would help."</i><br />
<i> </i>While her initial letter to Childs apparently didn't produce any results, her letter to Gaines did.<br />
A memo from editorial assistant Dorothy Roubicek coming just two days after Frank's letter, contained suggestions that <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i> be kept off Paradise Island and changes to her costume in pursuit of modesty.<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></sup></b> <br />
Marston himself, having obviously been made aware of Frank's letter,
shot off a reply to Gaines on February 20th. In it, he called Frank, <i>"...an
avowed enemy of the Wonder Woman strip, of me and also of you insofar
as she predicted that this strip would flop and you rubbed it into her
that it hadn't."</i> <br />
The apparently infuriated Marston also chose to question Frank's loyalties to Gaines by declaring that she had, <i>"...a
determined drive to ruin this Wonder Woman strip if possible, or injure
it all she can, and you can bet she's doing that everywhere she goes,
despite the fact that you are paying her to work for you."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5</span></i></sup></b> <br />
Mixed opinions coming from other Editorial Advisory Board members,
Bender and Sones, only exacerbated the debate. Fellow psychologist
Bender generally sided with Marston's benign view of the feature, while
education professor Sones agreed mostly with Frank.<br />
Gaines
was on the fence. Here was a successful feature, perhaps his most
successful, being attacked by comics' most ardent defender. Yet, while
he was likely somewhat assuaged by reassurances from Marston and Bender,
something about the strip bothered him as well. This lingering concern
was actualized when Gaines received a letter from a reader professing
the erotic pleasure they got from the thought of women in bondage.<br />
<i>"This is one of the things I've been afraid of, (without quite being able to put my finger on it)," </i>Gaines wrote to Marston in a September14th note,<i>"in my discussions with you regarding Miss Frank's suggestions to eliminate chains."</i><br />
<i> </i>Gaines,
though, offered a solution rooted more in corporate pragmatism than in
addressing any bothersome psychological predilections or offensive
depictions.<br />
<i> "Miss Roubicek dashed off this morning the
enclosed list of methods which can be used to keep women confined or
enclosed without the use of chains. Each one of these can be varied in
many ways--enabling us, as I told you in our conference last week, to
cut down the use of chains by at least 50 to 75% without at all
interfering with the excitement of the story or the sales of the books.</i>" <br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>
"The Children's Book Committee of the Child Study Association has
watched with increasing interest and concern the growth of comic
magazines as a form of children's reading.Approximately twenty million
of these magazines are circulated monthly. They appear to have almost
universal appeal to children of all ages and both sexes, regardless of
I.Q. or cultural background."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 6</span></i></sup></b>
<br />
These lines introduced the eagerly awaited results of
the comic book survey undertaken by Frank and her very formally bylined
colleague at CSAA, Mrs. Hugh Grant Straus. Appearing initially in the
Summer 1943, issue of <b>CHILD STUDY</b>, <i>"Looking At The Comics"</i> became the oft-quoted argument in the defense of comic books.<br />
The survey undertook the task of studying and evaluating <i>"about a hundred current comic magazines"</i> in an attempt to,<i>"offer
suggestions by which parents and others may help children learn to
discriminate among these as among other forms of reading."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7</span></i></sup></b><br />
That is where Frank and like-minded comic defenders had chosen to make
their stand. They conceded that not all comics were "good", understood
to mean visually appealing, literate or thematically moral.<br />
What they had determined to do was establish a criteria for
differentiating the "good" from the "bad". To accomplish this, Frank and
Strauss separated comics into different genres: <b><i>Adventure</i></b>, <b><i>Fantastic Adventure</i></b> (superhero), <b><i>Crime and Detective</i></b>, <b><i>War</i></b>, <i><b><i>Real Stories and Biographies</i></b><i>,</i><b><i> </i>Love Interest</b> </i>(romance), <b><i>Fun and Humor</i></b>, etc.<br />
This categorization was quite possibly the first time comic books had
been considered as subjectively unique. Although not part of their
expressed purpose, this accurately presaged the genre specialization
that would define the era of comics to come after the superhero-heavy
boom years of WWII.<br />
The survey took pains to describe the general themes, to access their appeal and to determine their impact upon children. <br />
The genre they called <b><i>Fantastic Adventure</i></b>, <i>"centering around a superhuman hero such as Superman or one with magic powers, as Mandrake the Magician,"</i> found that, "<i>a
frequent pattern is the changeling personality, assuming special powers
with a change of costume. Sometimes there are pseudo-scientific
devices, usually for grand-scale destruction. The villain is often a
"mad scientist," and many of the stories are weird and grotesque." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 8</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>Following
the authors' disciplined script, each entry would offer perceived
benefits and caveats, and most importantly, their recommendations to
supervising adults.<br />
<i> "These stories seem to satisfy the
same emotional needs as do the traditional fairy tales: escape and
wish-fulfillment. The fact that they combine fantasy with current,
every-day life adds a satisfying element for our modern children. They
undoubtedly serve many children as emotional release for feelings of
aggression or frustration, and may have positive value in this respect.</i><br />
<i>
Some children, particularly those who are emotionally disturbed or
insecure may need to be protected from a too-heavy reading diet of
fantastic stories in this as well as in other literature. Adults object
to a certain sameness about these stories, which may or may not bother
the children. They are often not really imaginative but merely
variations on a stereotype theme."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 9</span></i></sup></b><br />
Each theme in turn was reviewed in similar fashion.<br />
Despite her connection to the comic book industry, Frank was an
unbiased critic. Her evaluations of comics were consistent with opinions
she had expressed years before her employment by AA/DC. And her public
criticisms matched her private communications. One example was her
constant complaint about the lettering that was mentioned frequently in
her correspondence and in the survey.<br />
<i> "The whole question
of legibility is a serious one, for many of the magazines appear to be a
strain on children's eyes. Publishers should be urged to remedy this
fault and children should be urged to select their magazines with this
factor in mind."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 10</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>The survey concludes with an even-handed look at the <i><b>Pros and Cons of Comics Reading</b></i>.<br />
<i>"To
many adults, all comic books alike. This Committee, however,
finds that these magazines cannot be grouped as all of a kind, or as
either "good" or "bad". As in other publications there is a wide variety
among them, not only in their content and drawing, but in their
editorial standards. Some are carefully edited. Others are not. Some
have amusing or interesting ideas, others not. Some have good drawing,
good color work, good lettering, others not. It is important for us to
recognize these differences and to help our children learn to
discriminate among them." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank and Straus's
survey was widely read and generally well received. One such
enthusiastic response came from Catherine Mackenzie, <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> writer of the influential <b><i>Parent and Child</i></b> column.<br />
<i> "Your and Mrs. Straus's study is so full and rich that I've found it difficult to do anything adequate in a resumé,"</i> wrote Mackenzie in a June 30th letter to Frank, <i>"so I've taken the highspot </i>[sic]<i>
we talked about and added your comment. (The editor thinks it is 'very
good indeed' and is pleased with the constructive suggestions)."</i><br />
<i> </i>Her subsequent July 11, 1943. article lauded,<i> "the sheer physical endurance and mental stamina involved," </i>and offered,<i> "a vote of thanks," </i>to both Frank and Straus.<i> </i>Along with a few highlights from the survey, Mackenzie paraphrases an interview with Frank<i>.</i><br />
<i> "One trouble with anti-comics tactics," </i>wrote Mackenzie, <i>"lies in an effort to substitute "good" books. Well, she </i>(Frank)<i>
says, we can't. "We have to be realistic about it," and think no more
of taking children "off" the comics than we do of taking them "off"
candy--instead we offer them other food too." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">12</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i> ________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i> </i> Not everyone, though, was as pleased with Frank and Straus's survey<i> </i>as Mackenzie.<br />
<i> "It seems to me that after reading this article, "</i> wrote George Hecht of Parent's Magazine Press in a June 11th letter to Frank, <i>"parents,
librarians and educators do not know any more as to which are good
comics than they did before they read it. I believe that you should name
the magazines in each classification which are the best of their type.
Certainly, some of the magazines in each classification are better than
others in the same classification. Why not tell your readers which are
those of the better type in each group?"</i><br />
This was not the
comics survey that Hecht had previously encouraged or expected.
Moreover, although he actively sought Frank's approval of his comics in
their previous correspondence, there was only a passing reference to his
<b>TRUE COMICS</b> in the CSAA survey and he was clearly incensed by the perceived short shrift given his books.<br />
<i> "In all the classifications of the comics except "Real Stories and Biographies" you have printed evaluations," </i>Hecht continued, <i>"However,
under the classification which our principal comics come there is no
general evaluation of our publications as they are now. You say they
have potentiality for the future, implying that if they got better they
may render a greater service. You say that some children like this kind,
and some children like this and other kinds, and then you tell parents
not to urge our kind of comics because they may prejudice children
against them, but you do not publish any evaluation of the job our
comics are doing."</i><br />
<i> </i>Hecht<i> </i>read something more into this slight.<i>
"I have an idea the you think our comics have not been very much of a
success and that they are bought largely by parents who force them on
their children. We know this isn't so," </i>he wrote,<i> </i>bolstering
his argument with sales figures showing that his company's five current
titles all had circulations between 250,000 to 350,000 copies each.<br />
Obviously exasperated, Hecht opined, <i>"The
most definite piece of advice that you give parents is to counsel them
not to urge children to read our type of comics. When you stop to think
it over, it has a humorous aspect!" </i><br />
His final
paragraphs, however, revealed what he thought the real reason was behind
the lukewarm endorsement of his type of comic books. <i> </i><br />
<i>"Furthermore, this survey is published as an unbiased study and yet it undoubtedly was largely prepared by you, who are </i>[sic]<i>
a paid adviser and propagandist for a particular group of comics. This
does not seem to be quite forthright particularly as no mention of your
association with this comic group is made in connection with this
survey.</i><br />
<i> "And it seems to me the height of
inconsistency that you should continue to have your name used as
Chairman of the Editorial Advisory Board of comics, some of which have
scantily clad women on the front covers, and that feature stories
dealing with criminals and what appear to be degenerates--in general,
comics that members of the Child Study Association and people who are
influenced by the opinion of the Association, would surely not wish to
have their children read."</i><br />
As angry as he was already, it
can only be imagined what Hecht's reaction would have been if he had
read the memorandum sent to Frank on April 14th by Harry Childs on
Detective Comics, Inc. stationary.<br />
<br />
<i>SUBJECT: "True Comics"</i><br />
<br />
<i>Dear Miss Frank:</i><br />
<br />
<i>
As you suggested, I have asked Dave Marke to glance over a copy of
"True Comics" that I happened to have in my office. This is dated
September, 1942, and has two historical stories in addition to a number
of current history treatments. Because of limited time, Dave confined
himself to these two stories alone and has not even considered the
remainder of the magazine. </i><br />
<i> The story "The Lost Colony" beginning on page 9, has several
inaccuracies as indicated on page 11 of this marked copy. The date of
Sir Richard Grenville's expedition is inaccurate, and the statement
about 108 colonists is misleading in that nobody knows exactly how many
colonists sailed with Grenville.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
What follows are four more paragraphs pointing out the historical
inaccuracies in the two stories considered by Marke. While this
intercompany evaluation alone would have been enough to infuriate Hecht,
the identity of the evaluator would surely have made him explode.<br />
David Marke was the former editor of <b>TRUE COMICS</b>.<br />
Hecht even authored an introduction to Marke on the inside front cover of <b>TRUE COMICS</b> #1, <i>"All
of the art work and captions are supervised by our Editor, David T.
Marke, a young but already eminent authority in the field of history."</i> Marke's tenure at Parent's Press lasted until the fifth issue of<b> TRUE</b>, and in the small world of comic book publishing, he had landed at DC.<br />
<i>"This is," </i>Childs wrote in summary, <i>"of
course, a sketchy criticism of "True Comics" Miss Frank, but it does
show what even a cursory examination will reveal. Fictionalization is
fully justified only when it is quite clear that it is fictionalization,
but should not be presented as Gospel.</i><br />
<i> Hope this is helpful in your analysis."</i><br />
While it's not possible to know how much influence this information had
upon Frank or the survey, knowing that DC had a hand in evaluating
comics for her gave at least some truth to Hecht's insinuations.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>January 29th, 1944</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Mr. Childs,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>I am enclosing herewith </i>[a]<i> copy of a letter to Mr. Gaines. I am sure this will be no news to you, for you have known for allong </i>[sic]<i> time that I have been disturbed about this feature. It seems to me most unsuitable as a member of your family.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I
am sorry if this request I am making causes any embarrassment to you or
to anyone else. I can only assure you that I am making it after
considerable deliberation and with deep regret.</i><br />
<br />
<i> </i>Frank
had had enough. Her short note to Childs surely came as no surprise,
nor did her qualified letter of resignation from the Editorial Advisory
Board sent to Gaines. She could no longer allow her name to front the
comics carrying the <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i> feature.<br />
<i> "Intentionally or otherwise, the strip is full of significant sex antagonisms and perversions," </i>she wrote to Gaines, <i>"Personally, I would prefer an out-and-out strip tease less unwholesome than this kind of symbolism."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 13</span></i></sup></b> <br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Despite receiving a paycheck from and essentially serving as the
conscience of the company, Frank enjoyed a unique independence at DC
(Gaines having recently been bought out and All American merged).<br />
Her position on the Book Committee at the CSAA was always her primary
calling. And in that capacity, other comic book publishers would seek
her guidance and hopefully, her approval. Among those was Robert Wheeler
of Novelty Press. He came to her in regards to what probably was an
early issue of <b>FRISKY FABLES</b>. Her response on September 22, 1944, showed the serious consideration given to even the smallest details.<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Mr. Wheeler,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Several of our staff and Mrs. Straus, Chairman of our Children's Book
Committee, have gone over the drawings you left with me and none of us
feel hat the subject matter of the strip would be frightening. It has
some touches about it which we like very much but there are some we felt
should be eliminated. </i><br />
<i> </i><i>One--we all agree with
you that the animal should be either a rabbit or a kangaroo but not
both. Personally I think a kangaroo would be more unusual and therefore I
should like to see it definitely a kangaroo. </i><br />
<i> </i><i>Two--most
of our staff felt very strongly about the "hotfoot", as being a rather
cruel form of joke and always objectionable wherever it appears. I am
afraid that I think the children would enjoy the hotfoot very
particularly but as a parent and an educator I have always found it a
very obnoxious form of joke. You will probably have to make your own
decision about that.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Three--we all object
violently to the burning and threatened roasting of the hero. This is
the only spot which I feel very strongly should definitely be
eliminated. I think you would be just as well off or perhaps even better
if you pictured your hero running away, pursued by the flames rather
than threatened with cooking. The cries of help and the rescue by the
elephant could still take place and this, by the way, is a touch we all
liked.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Four--some objection was raised to the
use of the devil as a symbol of fire since he is a quasi religious
symbol and his appearance here might be misinterpreted. Wouldn't your
strip be just as effective if you used some other character invented for
the occasion just as the ingenious little figure of the flame has been
invented?</i><br />
<i> </i><i>The drawings in the whole strip is
excellent and the humor is certainly the kind children will love. On the
whole we would see no reason not to use it with the modifications I
have suggested.</i><br />
<i> I hope this criticism will prove helpful to you.</i><br />
_______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The <b>Journal of Educational Sociology </b>was, unsurprisingly, intended for a primarily academic audience. Its pages were usually filled by serious-minded monographs authored by educators and social scientists trying to establish a basis of educational procedure in the relatively new discipline of educational sociology. <br />
Such a publication would seem to be an odd forum for the current sensationalistic debate over the effects of comic books upon children. But so it was that the December, 1944 issue not only was given over to this subject, it became the high-water mark of the comic book industry's offensive against the growing rumble of criticism.<br />
Under the umbrella title of "<b>The Comics as an Educational Medium</b>", the contents page listed <i>"The Comics--There They Stand!"</i> by issue editor, Harvey Zorbaugh, <i>"The Comics as a Social Force"</i> by CSAA directory, Sidonie Matsner Gruenberg, <i>"The Psychology of Children's Reading and the Comics"</i> by Dr. Lauretta Bender, <i>"The Comics and Instructional Method"</i> by W.W.D. Sones,<i> "Some Uses of Visual Aids in the Army"</i> by Major Paul Witty and Josette Frank's <i>"What's in the Comics?"</i>.<br />
Each author took a different approach. Zorbaugh focused on the worldwide popularity of comics, Dr. Bender on the their relatively benign psychological effects based upon her own research, while Sones and Witty lauded the application of comics as learning aids. <br />
Frank's essay relied heavily on the results of the CSAA survey. She began by noting that, <i>"Children of all ages, of high and low I.Q., girls as well as boys, good readers and nonreaders, in good homes and poor ones--the all read the comics, and read them with an avidity and an absorption that passes understanding."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 14</span></i></sup></b> <br />
As in her survey, Frank discussed each comic book category in turn. She took the time, though, to flesh out her survey evaluations and to add some further comments.<br />
When discussing "fantasy adventure" comics, Frank wrote that, <i>"Indeed, man has always made such fantasy stories for himself. The myths and legends of ancient Greece, the folk legends of America's Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill, and the classic fairy tales themselves attest to the human need for escape and wish fulfillment."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 15</span></i></sup></b><br />
While consistent with her often expressed beliefs of the beneficial aspects of comics, echoes of her foreword to George Lowther's <i><b>Superman</b></i> book could be heard.<i> </i><br />
<i> "Stories which push back the boundaries of reality have long served civilized man for the release of feelings of aggression and frustration. Identifying with "Superman", one can overcome all obstacles, do battle for the weak and against the wicked, triumph over one's enemies, and generally transcend the hampering restrictions of a hard world."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 16</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank's previous correspondence with Hecht garnered a more positive, yet still tepid approval of his historical/biographical comics.<br />
<i> "They are sometimes both inspirational and instructive and point he way to new educational materials," </i>she wrote, <i>"As in other reading, there is a place in the comics for informational stories as well as for fiction and fantasy, and many children enjoy both."</i><br />
<i> "There is no reason to believe, however,"</i> Frank continued, adding a qualification that would surely annoy the Parent's Press publisher, <i>"that fact is more suitable than fiction for children's reading, or the assume that only "educational" stories are valid."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 17</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i> Frank was dismissive of jungle adventure comics, as in her view, <i>"...struggles between rapacious monsters and fair maidens are hardly desirable juvenile reading."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 18</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>Noting that at the time that romantic love only entered into a few comics, Frank observed, <i>"For the most part hero and heroine are noble, courageous, chivalrous, and sexless."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">19</span></i></sup></b><br />
Her next comments, though, seemed more pointedly aimed at her battles over <b><i>Wonder Woman</i></b>.<br />
<i> "Magazines that exploit the female form or picture amorous embraces with the obvious purpose of stimulating sex interests are certainly not suitable for children, nor are these found among the children's favorites."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 20</span></i></sup></b><br />
Notably, Frank's most favorable evaluations were given to comic book types published by DC and less enthusiastic reviews went to types not coming from that publisher. This subtle selectivity colored not only her essay, but that of her CSAA colleague Gruenberg, who also wrote a positive piece about comics, bolstered with examples from Fawcett Publications. <br />
It was likely more than coincidental that Zorbaugh and Gruenberg served on Fawcett's
editorial advisory board, while Frank, Sones, and eventually Bender, served on DC's.
Looking at it impartially, it is hard not to imagine that there wasn't some sort of coordination between the two publishers behind this effort. Though bitter and litigious rivals, they had a shared interest in maintaining their lucrative slices of the publication business.<br />
Fact was, that while not published by the comic book industry itself, this issue of
the <b>Journal of Educational Sociology</b> effectively became its greatest public relations coup of the Forties.<br />
Soon though, such scholarly discussion would move into more publicly accessible venues, as the debate over comics was becoming anything but academic.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1 </span></i></b><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="fn"><span dir="ltr">Catholic University of America, STUDIES IN PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY, pg. 22 (1943).</span></span></span></span><span class="subtitle"></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Siegel, Jerry, <i>"The Origin of Superman"</i>, Chapter One, pg. 1 from unpublished SUPERMAN, (1942).</span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, foreword to SUPERMAN by George Lowther, (1942).</span><span style="color: black;"></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Daniels, Les, WONDER WOMAN: THE COMPLETE HISTORY, pg. 62 (2004).</span></sup><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5 </span></i></b><b><span style="color: red;"></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette and Straus, Mrs. Hugh Grant,</span><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> "Looking at the Comics"</span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">, CHILD STUDY, pg. 112, (Summer 1943).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span></sup><span style="color: red;"><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></sup></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Ibid., pg. 113.</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">9 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">10 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 116.</span></sup><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></sup></b>
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></sup></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="st">Ibid</span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;">. </span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">12 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Mackenzie, Catherine, <i>"Children and the Comics"</i>, </span><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">NEW YORK TIMES, July 11, 1943.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">13 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Daniels, op. cit., pg. 72.</span><i> </i><br />
<i> </i><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">14 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, <i>"What's in the Comics?"</i>, THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SOCIOLOGY, pg. 214, (Dec. 1944).</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">15 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 216.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">16 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 216-217.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">17 </span></i></b></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 218.</span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">18 </span></i></b></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 219.</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">19 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 219-220.</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">20 </span></i></b></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid., pg. 220.</span></span></span></span>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-65699051731965585662014-02-07T16:19:00.001-08:002014-02-14T10:13:07.486-08:00Josette Frank: Alone Against the Storm, Part 1<i> The history of modern American comic books is haunted by one person. Much anger has been directed at and much written about Dr. Fredric Wertham and his almost monomaniacal crusade against comics. </i><br />
<i> But what of the other side of the controversy? For there to be a controversy in the first place there had to be two sides. Who spoke up for the comic book medium?</i><br />
<i> In fact, there were many, but one stands out; one who was steadfast; one who didn't relent. </i><br />
<i> It's about time to meet Josette Frank.</i><br />
<br />
<b>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS </b><i> </i><br />
<br />
<i> The following text is the product of many sources, but chief among them were Stephen Jacobs and Judith Rosen, Josette's children, her grandson, Thomas Jacobs, and Lindsey Wyckoff, Archivist and Special Collections Librarian of the Bank Street College Lib<span style="font-size: small;">rary.</span></i><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-size: small;"> But special thanks go out to Linnea Anderson, Archivist of the Social Welfare History Archives of the University of Minnesota. The vast majority of correspondence utilized in this text came from those archives and without Ms. Anderson's kindness and research help, this would not have been possible.</span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-size: small;"> I have made every attempt to make sure that all other sources are properly cited and noted. Unless otherwise noted, all correspondence comes from the aforementioned University of Minnesota Social Welfare History Archives.</span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></i><span style="font-size: small;">-- Ken Quattro</span></span> <br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Robert Maxwell had a lot riding on the success of the upcoming <i><b>Superman</b></i> radio program. Trumping that, publisher Detective Comics, Inc. (DC) had even more riding on it.They employed Maxwell and the newly incorporated Superman, Inc. to market their franchise superhero to America and the radio show was to be the platform.<br />
It hadn't been easy. After getting Hecker's Oats, who had once backed the <i><b>Bobby Benson</b></i> show, to agree to sponsorship, Maxwell and publicist Allen "Duke" Ducovny, were only able to sell the <b><i>Superman </i></b>program to ten regional stations.<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span> </i></sup></b>Complicating matters was the concern among certain portions of the citizenry about the effect that "adventure" radio programs were having upon children. <br />
Such was the level of concern that Dr. John DeBoer of the University of Chicago, conducted experiments on 148 children who listened to radio programs while he recorded their respiratory and galvanic responses.<br />
<i>"In situations of danger, combat, pursuit, flights and threats to the possession of some treasured object,"</i> he was quoted,<i> "both boys and girls in the 6 to 8 group respond by gripping some article of furniture tightly, gasping, chuckling involuntarily, sobbing, laughing and weeping quietly."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2</span></i></sup></b><br />
Keenly aware of the public scrutiny, the National Association of Broadcasters issued a industry-wide code in July, 1939, aimed at quelling their concerns. <br />
Still, the debate continued and as such, it was one of the topics discussed in a public forum held by the Child Study Association of America (CSAA) in November, 1939, to discuss matters affecting the "modern child". When it came to the portion of the meeting to broach the subject of children's radio programming, Josette Frank of the CSAA Radio Committee, noted that "approved" children's radio shows were not popular with children. She then offered the controversial opinion, <i>"...that parents and teachers must realize that children's tastes are not those of adults."</i> <b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3</span></i></sup></b><br />
It's not known whether Maxwell or Ducovny were among the audience at the CSAA forum, but they surely were aware of Frank's point of view.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>January 3, 1940</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Miss Fielding </i><br />
<i>c/o Mr. Bob Maxwell</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Miss Fielding:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> I have looked over the "Superman" script which you left with me and I have an idea it should be very popular radio program with the young.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>So far as the two scripts you left with me are concerned I can see no objection to the whatever. They seem to me harmless enough unless one brands all excitement as harmful, but I do not. Naturally I cannot give you any kind of opinion on the whole program on the basis of two scripts. I have no way of know</i>[ing]<i> that the 9th script may not contain something which I would object to and so of course I must confine my opinion to these which I have read.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>Do let me know if the program goes on as I shall look forward with considerable interest to hearing it. Knowing the hold which the magazine SUPERMAN has upon young readers, I would be curious to know whether the same fascination could be translated into this other medium.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>With best wishes, I am</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours,</i><br />
<i>Josette Frank</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<i> </i>Maxwell and Ducovny must have been overjoyed to get Frank's approval of the two scripts. So overjoyed that they anticipated her thumbs-up in a press release even before Frank had written her response. This didn't go unnoticed by Frank in a letter dated February 3, 1940.<br />
<br />
<i> </i><br />
<i>Dear Miss Fielding:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> I am greatly shocked to find on my desk this morning a clipping from the New York Telegraph of January 30th concerning the SUPERMAN program, in which I find this sentence: "The first set of scripts for the serial have been submitted to the Child Study Association, according to reports and have won that body's approval. Reason for the previous ban was that parent organizations had objected to the excitement as too much for children."</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>I recall very clearly that when you came here to ask for our opinion of the program, you very distinctly told me that this was not to be used in any publicity, and that you merely wanted for the information of the prospective sponsor, to know whether we considered the program <u>harmful</u>. The letter which I subsequently wrote you specifically said that we could not approve a program of which we had seen only two of the scripts but that so far as these two were concerned, we did not consider them <u>harmful</u>. I can imagine no possible warrant in my letter for any such publicity or any such claims as you have made.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>Will you please take every measure to eliminate our name from any future publicity, and to correct, in so far as you can, any public impression that this program is going on the air with the Child Study Association's approval.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>Please let me hear from you as to what you can do in this respect.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
It took a few days, but Fielding's response of February 8th, was geared toward making amends.<i></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Miss Frank,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> I have been attempting since receipt of your letter to contact you by phone, but without success. Mr. Maxwell has gone into the matter of SUPERMAN publicity revolving about the Child Study Association and finds that its point of origin was the advertising agency controlling the Hecker Product's account. He has issued orders that no publicity naming the Child Study Association is to be released in the future.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i> Copies of your original letter to me were submitted both to the Hecker Company and the advertising agency, and since by inference at least, you gave approval to the scripts you read, you can readily see how the sponsors were eager to take advantage of such approval.</i><br />
<br />
<i> </i>It stretches the bounds of believability that Maxwell or Ducovny were unaware of the use of the Child Study Association's good name in the <b>TELEGRAPH</b> piece. Furthermore, Fielding's contention that the submission of Frank's letter had been what triggered the press release rings hollow, given that the <b>TELEGRAPH</b> article pre-dated the writing of the letter by several days. <br />
<i> "I will call you within a day or two and trust that you can see me personally, as we are very anxious to secure, if not your approval, your opinion on our future scripts. Believe me, it was not our intention to trade on the Child Study Association's name, since the SUPERMAN program had already been sold to Hecker's prior to the appearance of the publicity you mentioned."</i><br />
Fielding's postscript dutifully informed Frank that the <i><b>Superman</b></i> program was debuting the following Monday, February 12th, at 5:15 P.M. on local station WOR. In a personal touch, Fielding (who was also Bob Maxwell's wife) added, <i>"I should be interested in knowing how your son reacts to it." </i>It was in the best interest of Bob Maxwell and Superman, Inc. to stay on the good side of Josette Frank. They would have need of her in the near future.<i><br /></i><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Josette Frank,whose father Leo owned a successful New York City furniture company, graduated from a girls finishing school in 1910 with a clear view of her path in life.<br />
<i> "For me the world was full of things needing to be done, and I needed to be doing," </i>she wrote years later, <i>"I seemed to think I owed the world my services. So I did what socially conscious girls did in those days: volunteered for social service." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>For much of the following decade, Frank worked in a variety of positions, mainly with organizations having a socially progressive mission. She taught English to newly arrived immigrants, aided social workers at Bellevue Hospital and served on the publications staff of the National Child Labor Committee helping to edit <b>THE AMERICAN CHILD</b> magazine. A frustrating turn as a vocational counselor in a Lower East Side school preceded her employment in 1923 with the Federation for Child Study as part-time editor of their new monthly magazine. The publication soon had its title changed to <b>CHILD STUDY</b> and the organization that published it eventually changed its name, too, to the Child Study Association of America<i>.</i><br />
<i> </i>The original Federation of Child Study was formed by five women
from the Ethical Culture Society in 1888. This group of Jewish women
were followers of Felix Adler, founder of the ethical culture movement
which believed in a morality based not upon religion, but social
activism. Adler's motto, <i>"Deed, not creed"</i>, led to the
organization of a number of social welfare programs and the establishment of a cooperative kindergarten. From
this simple beginning, the group's scope expanded to not only include the study of children, but to also aid in their
educational, societal and moral development.<br />
Frank's part-time position at the CSAA led to additional responsibilities as staff liaison to the Children's Book Committee and as contributor to various publications.<br />
<i>"We can best guide our children's reading if we let our children's reading guide us,"</i> she wrote in a 1936 issue of <b>PARENTS MAGAZINE</b>, <i>"Instead of trying to mold them into preconceived patterns of 'what the well-read child should read,' let us rather encourage them to find their way to real experiences of their own in the vast world of books."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 5</span></i></sup></b><br />
Frank's growing expertise in the area of children's literature prompted the organization's director, Sidonie Gruenberg, to suggest that Frank author a book recommending children's books. The result was <b>WHAT BOOKS FOR CHILDREN?</b>, first published in 1937, providing the basis for Frank's growing reputation as an authority on the subject. Despite her notoriety, though, her views on independently thinking children flew in the face of many contemporary beliefs and were not always well received. <br />
An appearance at a <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> sponsored book fair promoting her book led to an angry letter to the editor attacking Frank's progressive views. She in turn responded with her own letter.<br />
<i> "It is true that there is much good literature today, and we, as parents, must see to it that our children have ready access to plenty of it, and the best of it,"</i> she wrote, <i>"But this is not to say the we can keep them from reading much that is less than good."</i><br />
Frank goes on to acknowledge that children cannot be protected from reading material that, <i>"is fraught with danger,"</i> since they are surrounded by it. Trying to stop them from reading such things that adults may consider <i>"unwholesome"</i> is pointless since, <i>"...we know that prohibiting has ever had the effect of enhancing the allure of the forbidden."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 6</span></i></sup></b><br />
It was a chapter added to the 1941 edition of <b>WHAT BOOKS FOR CHILDREN?</b> that carried Frank's most controversial views. Views that she stated in no uncertain terms.<br />
<i> "We may have to climb down from pleasant ivory towers and concede the possibility that children's books need not be saturated with sweetness and light, that writing for children may be fine and still deal in good red meat.</i>"<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7</span></i></sup></b><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<br />
Fortunately, for all concerned, the <i><b>Superman</b></i> radio program was a hit.<br />
After achieving reportedly record numbers (for shows broadcast 3-times per week) in the April, 1940, Crossley Ratings, 'Duke' Ducovny parlayed that success into the July 3rd "Superman Day" at the 1940 New York World's Fair. And though a deal with Republic Pictures for a live-action movie serial fell through, another with Paramount for a proposed cartoon series would result in the classic Fleischer Brothers productions a year hence. Along with the myriad number of licensed <b><i>Superman</i></b> products hitting the market, the hoped-for multimedia exposure of <i><b>Superman</b></i> seemed to be complete.<br />
But not all observers were taken with the Man of Steel's growing popularity.<br />
<i> "Virtually every child in America is reading color "comic" magazines--a poisonous mushroom growth of the last two years,"</i> read the first line of Sterling North's May 8, 1940, editorial titled, <b>"A National Disgrace".</b><br />
<i>"Ten million copies of these sex-horror are sold every month,"</i> he wrote, <i>"One million dollars are taken from the pockets of America's children in exchange for graphic insanity."</i><br />
<i> </i> The Wisconsin-born children's book author and literary critic, North would seem to be a likely kindred spirit to Josette Frank. Instead, his beliefs were perhaps more reflective of prevailing deeply-rooted American values; of slowly changing attitudes and fear of the new. He withheld no vitriol as he continued his hyperbolic attack <br />
<i> "Save for a scattering of more or less innocuous 'gag' comics and some reprints of newspaper strips, we found that the bulk of these lurid publications depend for their appeal upon mayhem, murder, torture, and abduction--often with a child as the victim. Superman heroics, voluptuous females in scanty attire, blazing machine guns, hooded 'justice' and cheap political propaganda were to be found on almost every page." </i><br />
North went on to further castigate comic books for being, <i>"Badly drawn, badly written and badly printed--a strain on young eyes and young nervous systems--the effect of those pulp-paper nightmares is that of a violent stimulant. Their crude blacks and reds spoil a child's natural sense of color; their hypodermic injection of sex and murder make the child impatient with better, though quieter, stories."</i><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And then his <i>coup de grâce</i></span>.<br />
<i> "Unless we want a coming generation even more ferocious than the present one, parents and teachers throughout America must band together to break the 'comic' magazine." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8</span></i></sup></b><br />
The gauntlet had been thrown down and though he may not have realized it at the time, North had established the talking points for the comic book debate to come.<br />
<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
North's editorial was widely reprinted (claims were that requests for copies numbered in the millions) and DC knew that had to do something. There had to be outwardly signs that they were a concerned organization.<br />
Someone came up with the idea of an editorial advisory board; a group of
upstanding citizens, impressively credentialed, with notable names. Even before the official formation of the advisory board, Managing
Editor Whitney Ellsworth had been tasked with developing an in-house
code
of editorial conduct that reined in some of the more objectionable
behaviors appearing in comics. <br />
<i>"I sat down with several of the editors and the public
relations people to work out a set of standards for the guidance of all
of the artists and writers who were engaged on these magazines," </i>Frank later told an interviewer,<i>
"A number of these standards were of course on the negative side--things
not to do. They contained such obvious prohibitions as "no kidnapping
of a child" -- "no derogatory attitudes toward parents or toward
constituted law enforcement", etc. </i><br />
<i> "There were, however, some positive suggestions having to do with social attitudes and educational values."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 9</span></i></sup></b><br />
In mid-April of 1941, Ellsworth sent out a memo.<br />
<br />
<i>TO: All Editors, Associate Editors, Writers and Artists preparing material for DC Comic Magazines.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>
It is our desire to publish our magazines in strict adherence to
accepted standards of decency and good taste. The following code must be
followed both as to spirit and to letter; there are no exceptions.</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Writers and artists are advised to confine their contributions to
material that is completely above any possible criticism. Our
requirements are rigid, and much time and effort will be saved if they
are strictly adhered to.</i><br />
<i> In this
rapidly growing field, many recent comic books have fallen far short of
our standards. We have no intention of catering to that fringe of the
public which forms the market for vulgar, obscene or vicious literature.
Our obligation to the youth of America and parents requires us to
publish only wholesome material.</i><br />
<i> We wish to point out that this code of editorial practice has been prepared with the advice and assistance of: </i><br />
<i> Dr. Robert Thorndike, Teachers College, Columbia University.</i><br />
<i> Miss Josette Frank, Staff Advisor to the Children's Book Committee, Child Study Association of America.</i><br />
<i> Dr. Ruth Perl, Associate Member, American Psychological Association.</i><br />
<i> Dr. C. Bowie Millican, Department of English Literature, New York University.</i><br />
<br />
<br />
Ellsworth's memo came with the attached editorial code. It was very specific, quite restrictive and sporadically enforced.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><u><b>Editorial Taboos</b></u></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"> <b> No profanity of suggestion of profanity (such as "Who th'--", What the '--", etc.)</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> No reference to the Deity.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> No sex. Relations between the sexes must be kept casual.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Female characters used as little as story exigencies permit.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> NO FEMALES ON COVERS OF MAGAZINES. Covers must stress clean action.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> No sadism. Use of whip and hypodermic absolutely forbidden. </b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> No torture.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b>
No pictorial horror. The borderline here is difficult to define. A
certain amount of shooting and such may be necessary if stories are to
pack any "punch" whatever. There must also be a definite an strong
menace for the hero to overcome. Yet by careful and judicious editing,
the violent action angle must be played down, and details of death are
not emphasized either in story or picture. Battered or bloody figures
must never be shown. This angle is approached very much as the movies
approach similar problem under the restrictions of the Hays Office.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"><b><u>General Policy</u></b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"><b>
"Heroic" heroes (the type of hero who has superhuman or extra-human
powers) never use firearms or other lethal weapons. If a menace loses
his life in an adventure with such a hero, he loses it through his own
machinations. For example, a menace may fire a shot at SUPERMAN; because
of the fact that SUPERMAN has impenetrable skin, the bullet merely
bounces off him and back to the menace, destroying him. Thus the death
of the villain can in no way be blamed upon the hero, who was merely a
passive agent to the act.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Ordinary "detective" heroes generally "get their man" by ingenious brain--and footwork. However, such a hero, <u>because</u> he is ordinary in the sense that he possesses no extra-human powers, must sometimes use firearms to get him out of trouble.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"><b>
The overall general policy is to point up the phrase "Crime Doesn't
Pay". Every story hammers home this same message. Further, it pictures
regular law-enforcement agencies and agents as capable and
on-the-job--never inept or ridiculous.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Wherever women are essential for plot purposes, they must be properly and decently clothed.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Except where characterization requires it (as in the case of hoodlums), grammar must be correct. Check this carefully.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Captions and dialogue must be large enough for easy reading and must appear on white and light shaded background only.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Patriotism and the manifold merits of democracy shall be emphasized wherever possible.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b>
The good neighbor policy shall be maintained--individual and national
villains shall not be Mexicans, Central or South Americans.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Humor, gauged to childhood levels, is a desirable attribute.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b> Physical fitness, learning and moral integrity are essentials for all heroic characters.</b></span><br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><b>
Weapons, such as revolvers, automatics or machine guns, incidental to
plot, shall not be over-emphasized or their operation described.</b></span><br />
<br />
The four individuals credited with helping write this code, along with the honorary membership of former heavyweight boxing champ Gene Tunney, formed the Editorial Advisory Board that came to be prominently displayed on the inside front cover of DC and the affiliated All-American (AA) comics. It seems, though, that the writing of the editorial guidelines preceded the official formation of the editorial advisory board. <br />
Frank's inclusion was likely the easiest to secure. She was already working with Maxwell on the radio show, reviewing scripts and making suggestions, and had even recently started writing book and movie reviews that were appearing in some of the AA/DC comics.<br />
She was also recently widowed. Her husband, Henry, passed away on September 30, 1940, leaving her with two small children. The opportunity to work for AA/DC came, <i>"...shortly after </i>(Henry's)<i> death and life was at a low point,"</i> daughter Judith recalled years later, <i>"I think
she found this interesting and stimulating, and it, literally, gave her
a new lease." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">10</span></i></sup></b><br />
Curiously, Frank's invitation to serve on the advisory board didn't come from Ellsworth or another member of the editorial staff. It came from Harry Childs of the Juvenile Group Foundation.<br />
The Juvenile Group Foundation was in reality an arm of DC's publicity department, headquartered at a different address to give the impression of independence. The appropriately named Childs was yet another publicist, probably working under Ducovny's direction. <br />
Frank's response to Childs' invitation dated June 17th, 1941, was decidedly friendlier than her earliest correspondence with Maxwell's office. And she was certainly more willing to offer her approval backed by her name.<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Mr. Childs,</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> Thank you for your invitation to serve on the advisory board of your magazines, comprising, as I understand it, Superman, Bat-Man </i>[sic]<i>, Detective Comics, Action Comics, More Fun Comics, All-American Comics, and Flash Comics.</i><br />
<i> I shall be very glad to serve on the advisory board, especially since I am confident, from my conversations with you, that you are as concerned as I am with standards which will safeguard your young readers, and that any criticism or constructive suggestions which I may have to offer toward that end will be welcomed by you.</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> You may, if you wish, use my name along with other members of your advisory board on your editorial page, listing me as "Staff Advisor to the Children's Book Committee of the Child Study Association of America".</i><br />
<br />
In practice, enforcement of the editorial guidelines meant no killing (sorry <i><b>Spectre</b></i>), no overt
sexuality (sorry boys), no use of chains or torture devices (we will get
back to that...). The curiously misogynistic ban on women would soon prove to be a particular problem.<br />
<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i> </i><i> </i>DC and AA weren't the only ones hoping to secure Frank's nod of approval.<br />
In a letter dated June 21, 1941, coming less than a week after Frank's agreement with AA/DC, George J. Hecht, President of Parents' Magazine Press, courted her as well.<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Miss Frank:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The snowball has started to roll.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>For some time past parents and teachers have worried about the trashy, lurid ("comic") magazines which boys and girls insist on buying, literally by the millions. Nagging and scolding were of no avail; prohibition of "comics" only resulted in deceit.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>Now they find the solution in <u>substitution</u> wholesome, educational reading matter <u>that the children like</u>. The campaign has started. Educators, mothers and fathers are actively promoting the new idea in "comic" magazines..."comics" that provide all the thrills and action told in colorful picture-stories, but "comics" that educate, in the right way, even while they entertain.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>This solution of the "comics" problem was created by the publishers of PARENTS' MAGAZINE. Now the Parent's Magazine Press, Inc. is bringing out REAL HEROES, a brand-new 64 page "comic" publication, built around the heroic deeds of famous and little-know <u>real</u> people. Instead of fantastic, impossible "comic" characters, REAL HEROES deals entirely with the men and women who have made or are making history, heroes and heroines who really lived and performed important deeds of bravery or of service to the world. I am enclosing a copy of the first issue together with additional data about the magazine.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>This forward step in popular juvenile reading has the endorsement and support of leading teachers and psychologists, as well as parents. We believe REAL HEROES merits your attention, and we shall appreciate any editorial mention of it that you see fit to make.</i><br />
<br />
Hecht didn't even try to conceal his contempt for the dominate trend in contemporary comics (a term he disdainfully confined between quotation marks). Hecht was founder of the Parents' Institute and, like Frank, had long history of involvement with social welfare.<br />
While he had already put together his own illustrious board of editorial advisers, Hecht apparently hoped for Frank's blessing via her position at <b>CHILD STUDY </b>magazine. And he wasn't the only publisher so inclined. In a letter dated two days later, the publisher of <b>CHILD LIFE</b> also sought to gain Frank's favor in regards to a new comic book-style feature it was running in its magazine.
<i> </i><br />
<i> "CHILD LIFE believes that the "comic" form of story telling need not be objectionable to parents," </i>wrote A. A. Belford to Frank, <i>"In fact, we believe that a method of story telling which appeals so completely to children can be effectively used to increase the interest of a child in a magazine which provides good literature and wholesome entertainment." </i>
<br />
Frank had to be conflicted. While she certainly shared their view that comics could be used as an entry point to "good" literature, Frank also believed that the current superhero genre that they found so objectionable was a positive release for children. And she wasn't the only one who thought this way.<br />
In a research paper published in the July 1941, issue of a psychiatry journal, Dr. Lauretta Bender and Dr. Reginald S. Lourie concluded that their study of the effect of comics upon children had shown that,<i>"The comics may be said to offer the same type of mental catharsis to its readers that Aristotle claimed was an attribute of drama." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11</span></i></sup></b><br />
Even the efforts of DC were being noticed.<br />
Catherine MacKenzie, columnist and parent-child editor of the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b>, wrote in an opinion article on October 12, 1941, <i>"Parents who haven't been keeping up with Superman may not be aware of the high moral tone pervading his exploits, or aware that a serious-minded committee, including educators and psychologists, advise on editorial policy." </i><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">12</span></i></b><br />
Still, Frank's agreement to work for DC/AA posed an ethical dilemma. How could she maintain objectivity when she was being paid by them? This connection was only to get closer when she also agreed to work on Superman, Inc.'s latest venture: the radio dramatization of an <b>ALL-AMERICAN COMICS</b> feature.<br />
<i></i>
<i> "Your invitation of me to serve in an advisory editorial capacity in the preparation of the HOP HARRIGAN radio program is at hand," </i>Frank wrote to Bob Maxwell on June 23rd,<i> "and I more than welcome the opportunity to be of assistance on this program." </i><br />
Frank's closeness to the companies she was advising was evident in the correspondence she had with All-American Comics president, M. C. "Max" Gaines. In an October 15th missive, Gaines included copies of her book reviews that were to appear in upcoming issues of his comics, along with his note that, <i>"I am arranging to get two more tickets for your Association's theatre party, and hope to have Mr. and Mrs. Dvorkin join our party on October 30th, at which time we can arrange for a get-together sometime in November."</i><br />
This letter also contained an interesting paragraph hinting at something more.<br />
<i> "I had a talk with Mr. Childs yesterday, and as he pointed out to you Dr. Marston's name will be eliminated as a member of the Editorial Advisory Board on all issues which will come out during the month of January."</i><br />
Was this removal of Marston's name coming at Frank's request? If so, what objection did she have against his inclusion on the board?<br />
A letter from Gaines dated just one day later accompanied copies the latest issues of <b>FLASH</b> and <b>SENSATION</b> comics and concluded with, <i>"I am also sending you an advanced copy of "All-Star Comics" #8, which contains the introductory episode of "Wonder Woman". </i><br />
Gaines seemed to grow increasingly dependent upon Frank. In early November, he wrote her asking, <i>"Can you arrange to have with me Friday? I would like to tell you about our visit with Dorothy Canfield Fisher, and at the same time take up some other matters with you."</i> Fisher was an early women's rights activist and it can be speculated that Gaines' meeting with her concerned the character, <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i>.<br />
The public reception of <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i> appears to have been a major preoccupation for Gaines. His letter to Frank dated November 22nd touted a report by another advisory board member, Dr. Thorndike, that the <i><b>Wonder Woman</b></i> feature received a "readability" rating of, <i>"...17, which is 3 or 4 points higher than any other comic strip in either "Sensation Comics" or any of the others of our publications."</i><br />
<i> "Incidentally, a preliminary check up just received from our distributing company indicates a very favorable reception to "Sensation Comics" insofar as the sale on the first issue is concerned."</i><br />
His postscript surprisingly referred to an earlier letter he received from George Hecht of Parents' Press.<br />
<i> "I believe you will be interested in knowing that our good friend, Hecht, has not yet replied to my last letter to him of November 14th,"</i> Gaines noted cryptically.<br />
The letter to which Gaines was referring was itself part of a series of letters that were exchanged by him and Hecht over several months. A November 10th letter was representative of their subject matter.<br />
<br />
<i>Dear Mr. Hecht;</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> My attention has been called to an item in the New York Times of Thursday, November 5, reporting the proceedings of the first Children's Book Week luncheon.</i><br />
<i> As the originator of he monthly comic magazine, and publisher of an important group, I was, of course, very much interested in the account of your address at that luncheon.</i><br />
<br />
The <b>TIMES</b> article cited was wholly given over to an account of Hecht's remarks criticizing the amount of time children spent reading comics in lieu children's books.<br />
<i> "There are approximately 125 different comic magazines and they are featured on more than 100,000 newsstands in the country,"</i> Hecht said, contrasting that number with, <i>"I am told that a publisher is pleased if 1,000 book shops sell his children's books and an edition of 5,000 copies is a good sale."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 13</span></i></sup></b> <i><br /></i><br />
It was another quote, though, that caught Gaines' attention.<br />
<i>"The publisher declared," </i>read the article, <i>"that he would be glad if "all comics, including our own, were put out of business."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></sup></b><br />
Gaines reminded Hecht of his earlier letter to <b>TIME</b> magazine that was more specific in its criticism.<br />
<br />
<i> "You will recall that in your letter to TIME, you specifically mentioned "Superman", "All-American Comics", and, I believe, several others of our group as not being in a class with those which you wholeheartedly condemned."</i><br />
<i> "It seems not that you put all comic magazines, including your own and the "DC-Superman" Group, with such a distinguished Editorial Advisory Board as Dr. Thorndike of Columbia University, Dr. Sones, Professor of Education at the University of Pittsburgh, Josette Frank of the Child Study Association, Dr. Millican of New York University and others, in the same category."</i><br />
<i> "I have tried to analyze the reasons for your statement as reported in The New York Times and have come to the conclusion that there is a possibility that you may have been misquoted."</i><br />
<br />
Gaines went on to propose a symposium about comics under the auspices of Hecht's Parents' Institute and funded by Gaines.<br />
Hecht's letter of reply came back quickly. He assured Gaines that he, <i>"...was in part misquoted by THE NEW YORK TIMES,"</i> and he readily agreed to Gaines' proposal.<br />
"<i>I gladly accept your proposition,"</i> wrote Hecht, <i>"and will be glad to publicly debate the problem of the comic magazines with you and with other members of your editorial advisory board." </i><br />
While Gaines' November 22nd letter to Frank refers to his reply to Hecht, it's not clear if the symposium ever occurred. What is clear is that Gaines didn't appreciate Hecht's opinion of comic books, a medium which Gaines frequently took credit for creating and the main source of his income. Less obvious, but no less likely, is that Gaines didn't appreciate Hecht's previous attempt to recruit Frank to extol his comics.<br />
<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A blurb in the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> of Dec. 14, 1941 may have gone overlooked in all the war news so soon after Pearl Harbor, but it was an announcement that would have a significant impact on the comic book industry.<br />
<i> "The Child Study Association of America has embarked on a study of the comics and Miss Josette Frank has this to say about it:</i><br />
<i> "Because our children are reading comic books literally by the millions it seems important for us to find out wherein lies there peculiar fascination and to help children to develop discrimination in their comics as in their other reading.""</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 15</span></i></sup></b><br />
With the probable input of Bob Maxwell, Frank had come up with the perfect public relations tool. A "scientific" study of comic books, conducted by a respected institution, with a likely positive result. Given Frank's favorable predisposition toward the comic book medium, and not to mention her connection to DC/AA, there was little chance for it to turn out otherwise.<br />
Despite the sincerity of Frank's research, this delicate dance between unbiased advisor and paid consultant complicated the perception of her impartiality.<br />
By the time of the <b>TIMES</b> mention, Frank had already gone about contacting the various comic book publishers for copies of their products for the study.<br />
<i> "I am sending you two copies of each of our comic magazines under separate cover. The titles are: Walt Disney's Comics, Looney Tunes & Merrie Melodies Comics, Super Comics, Popular Comic, and The Funnies, which are published on a monthly basis,"</i> wrote Helen Mayer of Dell Publishing in her response of Nov. 25th.<br />
<i> "At the request of Robert Maxwell," </i>scribbled Leo Greenwald in his short handwritten reply, <i>"I will send you the latest issue of "Champ Comics"." </i><br />
<i> "Mr. Max Grossman suggested that we send up copies of each of our comic magazines to used in your study of current comic books," </i>was the answer of Timely Comics' Abraham Goodman.<i> </i><br />
<i> </i>Not surprisingly, her former correspondent, George Hecht of Parent's Magazine Press, was enthusiastic about the study.<br />
<i> "We are, naturally, tremendously interested in the findings of your Children's Book Committee and should like very much to see any report they publish on their study of the effect of comics on children's reading," </i>was his reply along with current issues of <b>TRUE</b>, <b>CALLING ALL GIRLS</b> and <b>REAL HEROES</b>. Notably missing was his condescending inclusion of the word "comics" within quotation marks.<br />
Frank seemed a bit confused about the difference between comic publishers and the comic shops that created many of them. In a January 6, 1942, letter to Lloyd Jacquet of Funnies, Inc., Frank thanked him for his offer of the use of his files of comics, but, <i>"I am not quite clear, from your letter, whether you are publishers of certain comic magazines--you mention True Comic</i>[s]<i>, which we already have--or whether you are a production agency, creating strips for many publishers." </i><br />
In point of fact, this wasn't the first comic book study undertaken. In the months leading up to the CSAA announcement, Frank asked for and received help from librarians, educators and social workers, from the Smith Memorial Library in Chautauqua, New York to the State Board for Vocational Education in Boise, Idaho. Each had also conducted their own research into the effects of comics. Frank's study was going to be as thorough as possible, even though the outcome was in little doubt. <br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>December 4, 1941 </i><br />
<br />
<i>Dear Mr. Childs:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> I have been going over very carefully all of your magazines that are now coming to me regularly and I am impelled in my capacity of "advisor" to make one or two suggestions.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>The first has to do with the type faces in several of the magazines both in the captions and in the balloons. For example, in the current issue of FLASH the type is in places almost unreadable. I realize that in each of the magazines there are spots where it is good and others where it is not, but I do wish that something could be done in <u>all</u> your magazines to bring them up to a good standard in this respect. I think the best of them right now from this point of view is the STAR SPANGLED COMICS which I received this morning.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>The reason I stress this matter of print so strenuously is because this is always the very first point which parents make when they complain about the comics. Invariably the statement runs something like this: "I wouldn't care if my children read the comics if the only had different print so that they would not ruin their eyes." I always assure them that in our group of comics we are working on this problem seriously and sincerely but I must confess when I look at some of your books after I have given them this assurance I have some misgivings.</i><br />
<i></i>
<i>I want also to ask again whether I may be assured that I will see proof of all copy which appears in my name. Recent issues have carried perfectly appalling errors which seem to me most unnecessary especially considering the fact that our original agreement provided that I should see all proof. I am sure that I could forestall most of these errors.</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I should like to ask also by what process you check the grammatical correctness of your own copy. One of the "standards" which you have thrown up and of which you are pardonably proud is a demand for correct grammar. I have found grammatical errors from time to time that I have always hoped they were isolated slips of editing. Can you find some satisfactory way for handling this?</i><br />
<i> </i><i>I am sorry if I seem to be taking my responsibility of "advisor" too seriously, but I assume that this is one of the things you want me for. Incidentally, while I am on this subject, I note that the Advisory Board as it appears in the February issue of STAR SPANGLED COMICS remains unchanged. As long ago as August, 1941 I was promised that there would be changes in this Editorial Board and only a few weeks ago I was told that the changes would take place after the January issue. This is something about which I am seriously concerned and I would appreciate some immediate word from you about it.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours, </i><br />
<i>Josette Frank </i><br />
<br />
There was no doubt that Josette Frank took her position with DC/AA seriously. As well as her detailed advice to Harry Childs, Frank was compiling lists of children's books to run in the comics. She came up with a contest that paid five dollars for the best review submitted by a child based on her published lists. <i>"That <u>ought</u> to get 'em!"</i>, she wrote hopefully to a correspondent.<br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">De Haven, Tom, OUR HERO: SUPERMAN ON EARTH, pg. 95 (2010).</span></i><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">2 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Radio's Effect on Youth"</span></i><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">, NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 13, 1938.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">3 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Parents Criticize 'Newer Education'"</span></i><span style="color: black;">, NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 19, 1939.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">4 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, THE YEARS AFTER SCHOOL.</span></sup><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></sup></b><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">5 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">"Book Expert Makes Plea for Child Deciding What to Read", </span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">MIAMI DAILY NEWS, Oct. 21, 1936.</span></span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span></i></b><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">6 </span></i></b><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Letters to the Editor</span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;">, NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 28, 1937.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">7 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Frank, Josette, WHAT BOOKS FOR CHILDREN?, </span></sup><b style="color: red;"><sup><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></span></sup></b><span style="color: red;"><sup><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">pg. 82 (1941)</span></span></sup></span><span style="color: red;"><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">.</span></span></sup></span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">8 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> North, Sterling, <i>"A National Discrace"</i>, </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">May 8, 1940.</span><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">9 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Josette Frank interview with Mrs. Charles Liebman, Jan. 28, 1947.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">10 </span></i></sup></b><sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">Judith Rosen email, April 4, 2013.</span></sup><b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></sup></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></sup></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">11 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="st">Bender, L. and Lourie, </span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="st"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="st">R. S., </span></span></span><i>The Effect of Comic Books on the Ideology of Children</i>, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPSYCHIATRY, 11: 540–550 (July, 1941). </span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">12 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Mackenzie, Catherine, <i>"Movies--and Superman"</i>, </span><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: black;">NEW YORK TIMES, Oct. 12, 1941.</span></span></span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">13 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"> <i>"Comics' Effects on Youth Scored"</i>, NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 6, 1941.</span> <br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"></span></i></b><br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">1</span><span style="font-size: x-small;">4</span></i></b>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Ibid.</span><br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;">15 </span></i></b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>"Notes"</i>, NEW YORK TIMES, Dec. 14, 1941.</span><b style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></i></b><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span>
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-28796842794466071922013-06-14T10:20:00.000-07:002014-05-28T12:09:55.775-07:00Harry 'A' and the Flying Cadet Mystery<i> It was the itch I couldn't scratch.
A decade of research resulting in my biographical study of Archer St. John and his publishing company, </i><a href="http://comicartville.com/archerstjohn.htm">Archer St. John & The Little Company That Could</a><i>,</i> <i>left a lingering question floating in its wake. What was St. John's relationship to Harry 'A' Chesler and how did he figure in St. John's entry into comic book publishing? I had resigned myself to never solving this so-called "Flying Cadet Mystery" until recent discoveries answered at least some of my questions.</i> -- Ken Quattro<br />
<br />
Special thanks go to the Roxbury (New Jersey) Public Library and Sara W. Duke, Curator of Popular and Applied Graphic Art at the Library of Congress, for her invaluable help with my research.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>BIRTH OF A SALEMAN</b><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerphoto.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslerphoto.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Harry 'A' Chesler, circa age 78</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>from the SUNDAY JOURNAL (Dec. 19, 1976) </b></span></center>
<br />
Harry 'A' Chesler had a long career in sales by the time he
entered the comic book game. Early on, this grocer's son wrote sales orders for a wholesale grocery house, purchased space in the Bergen Evening Record and resold it to advertisers, and by the early Twenties, had his own company selling outdoor advertising. He bounced from Philadelphia (where his name acquired the superfluous 'A' while he was employed at the PUBLIC LEDGER) to Chicago and back again to his native New Jersey. Always looking for a new opportunity; always on the make. <br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/chesler411923ad.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/chesler411923adsm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b></b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">NEW YORK TIMES classified ad (April 1. 1923) </b></center>
<br />
Well into this peripatetic career, Chesler stumbled into comics. On August 15, 1935, he copyrighted, but either never published or limitedly distributed, a tabloid-sized text and comics hybrid
publication entitled <b>CHERRIO</b>. Some of the features such as <b><i>King Kole's Kourt</i></b>, <i><b>Lucky Coyne</b></i> and the <i><b>Cheerio Minstrels</b></i> appeared in future Chesler comics. By the next year, Chesler had assembled a staff of artists and writers
that was supplying original material to not only the two comics published under his own imprint, <b>STAR</b> and <b>STAR RANGER</b>, but also to competing publishers. He also formed Syndicate Features in an attempt to shop such strips as <i><b>"Dan Hastings"</b></i> and revived versions of <i><b>"Little Nemo"</b></i> and <i><b>"Foxy Grandpa"</b></i>
to newspapers.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerkingletter1937.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/chesler1937kinglettersm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b></b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">King Features letter asking to license </b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;"><i>Foxy Grandpa</i> from Chesler</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">(March 11, 1937) </b></center>
<br />
While his newspaper strip venture was apparently
stillborn and the comic books not sufficiently profitable (resulting in
their sale to Frank Temerson and I. W. Ullman's, Ultem Publications),
his comic shop survived in various incarnations into the 1950s.<br />
Early on, Chesler saw the potential of comics as an advertising source. He used his comics to cross-merchandise the probably-never-produced King Kola soft drink (a name he appropriated from a beer brand he once marketed), the powdery milk-additive, Cocomalt and the George Nagle/Charles Biro <b><i>"Goobyland"</i></b> feature with a series of trading cards for Yum Yum Desserts.<br />
<br />
<center style="color: red;">
<b></b></center>
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslergoobystar5pg1.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslergoobystar5pg1sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<i><span style="color: red;"><b>Goobyland </b></span></i></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>STAR COMICS #5 (July-Aug. 1937)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[image retrieved from <a href="http://digitalcomicmuseum.com/index.php" target="_blank">The Digital Comics Museum</a>, </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Marble River scan] </b></span></center>
<center>
</center>
<center>
</center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b></b></center>
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslergoobycardduo.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslergoobycardfandbsm.jpg" /></a> <span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Goobyland</i> card that came in packages </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>of Yum Yum Desserts products (1938) </b></span></center>
<center>
</center>
<br />
Apparently hoping to cash in on the boom created by the success of <i><b>Superman</b></i> and other costumed heroes, Chesler re-entered the publishing business with the formation of Dynamic Publications in 1941.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerdynamicbackcover.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslerdynamicbacksm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>DYNAMIC COMICS #1 (Oct. 1941) </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>back cover house ad featuring the first issues </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>of each of the 1941 Chesler comics </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span>This brief foray was similarly short-lived and unsuccessful as his earlier effort. Only a handful of issues of <b>SCOOP</b>, <b>PUNCH</b>, <b>DYNAMIC</b> and <b>YANKEE</b> comics were produced before Chesler once again threw in the towel.<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></div>
<center style="color: red;">
<b></b></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/chesler1942suit.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/chesler1942suitsm.jpg" /></a> <span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>One of the lawsuits generated </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>by Chesler's 1941 publishing venture </b></span></center>
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>THE PAPER WAR </b><br />
<br />
As fate would have it, Chesler's latest publishing disaster ended just about the time the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Although staggered, the U.S. regained its balance and quickly assumed a wartime footing. Just over five weeks after the attack, President Franklin Roosevelt issued <span class="paperstitle">Executive Order 9024, establishing the War Production Board (WPB)</span><span class="paperstitle"><span class="displaytext">. The WPB was created to oversee the war procurement and production program, which included the restriction of certain materials crucial to the war effort</span>. Among these was paper.</span><br />
<span class="paperstitle"> <i>"</i></span><i>The reason for the increased demand," </i>wrote WPB Chairman J.A. Krug in a report to President Truman in 1945, <i>"...is directly
traceable to increased military needs: Increases of ordnance pulp, used
as a substitute for cotton linters in explosives, of waterproof papers
for the Army, of photographic papers, of containers, of V-boxes for
over-seas shipment. Practically every piece of equipment produced in the
United States today is packaged in some manner in a paper or paper
product." </i>[pg. 48-49, War Production in 1944, Report of the Chairman of the War Production Board]<br />
<i> </i>To confront this pressing need, the<i> </i>Printing and Publishing Division of the WPB proposed voluntary restrictions for the various publishing industries (newspaper, magazines and books) applying a formula based upon a percentage of the paper tonnage they individually used in 1941. It soon became apparent that such an honor system was rife with violators and in response, the WPB issued a series of "Limitation Orders" that set quotas for various paper users that went into effect on January 1, 1943.They also established an appeals process for companies that claimed they had need for an increased quota based upon their particular situation.<br />
Ready to take another shot at comic book publishing and unhappy with his paper allotment, Harry 'A' Chesler appealed.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>THE DOLLAR-A-YEAR MAN</b><br />
<br />
<i>"Dynamic Publications, Inc.. published one issue each of two comic magazines in 1942 and then suspended publication because of financial difficulties caused primarily by the fact that its magazines did not sell," </i>so noted Allen E. Norman, Chief of the Magazine and Periodical Section of the WPB in a summary of appeal cases he presented to a Senate committee investigating the<i> </i>state of the national defense program in June, 1944. <b style="color: red;"><sup><i>1 </i></sup></b><br />
<i> " According to Mr. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Chesler</span>," </i>Norman continued,<i> "the newsstand returns on Dynamic Publications were about the worst in the business, only one copy being sold out of every three produced. With two out of every three copies being returned unsold it is not surprising that Dynamic Publications was not a financial success."<br />
"Mr. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Chesler</span> appealed for extra paper to reenter the magazine-publishing business on a scale larger than that which he enjoyed in the days when he was unable to compete successfully in a free market. He admitted that financial difficulties, arising from the unsalability of his magazines, was a prime factor in his discontinuing operation, and listed several other factors as contributing to this<br />
situation, namely, his state of health, disagreements with his distributor, and the drafting of his personnel. Investigation revealed the unsubstantial nature of these claims, since his state of health was sufficient to permit him to earn a fee of $1,500 per month in doing art work for others, and most of the personnel which he mentioned had been drafted several months before the company started<br />
publishing. His discussion of his troubles with his distributor consisted mostly of derogatory statements about the Fawcett Distributing Corporation and its personnel." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2 </i></sup></b><br />
In fairness to Chesler, he had some reason to distrust Fawcett and it involved Allen E. Norman himself.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslernorman131944.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslernorman131944small.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Appointment of Allen E. Norman to WPB post</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>from THE HERALD STATESMAN (Jan. 3, 1944) </b></span></center>
<br />
Prior to his appointment as head of the Magazine and Periodical Section, Norman was secretary of Fawcett Publications and its subsidiary corporations.<span style="color: red;"><sup><i><b>3</b></i></sup></span><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> </i></sup></b>Though he was on leave from this position and serving voluntarily with the WPB as a "dollar-a-year man", he was still receiving a comfortable salary of $1,333.33 per month from Fawcett. <b style="color: red;"><sup><i>4 </i></sup></b>This cozy situation didn't go unnoticed and complaints about it led to Norman being questioned by the same Senate committee investigating the defense program. Questions asked by Senator Homer Ferguson specifically concerning an in-house Fawcett publication. <b style="color: red;"><sup><i>5 </i></sup></b><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> <i>I want to show you an exhibit here </i>[Exhibit No. 1189]<i>. Do you know what that exhibit is?</i><br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b>:</b> <i>I certainly do.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> <i>What is it?</i><br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN:</b> <i>It is page 9 from the February issue of a house organ known as Fawcett Distributor, published by the Fawcett Distributing Corporation.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> What year was it published ?<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b>:</b> <i>1944.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> <i>And at that time you were the enforcing officer of the order for magazines?</i><br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b>:</b> <i>I was, sir; yes. I was the Chief of the Section.</i><br />
<br />
After a line of questioning that established Fawcett's place among <i>"seven or eight large national magazine distributors"</i>, Chief Counsel for the committee, Hugh A. Fulton, zeroed in on a portion of the aforementioned Fawcett house organ. <br />
<br />
<b>FULTON:</b> <i>I think, if you look at the front page of that exhibit,
there is a statement of how many, or at least a statement of the number of magazines</i> [distributed by Fawcett]<i>; is there not ?</i><br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b>:</b> <i>Very frankly, I haven't even read the rest of this article. I read those two paragraphs and practically fell off my chair.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FULTON:</b> <i>When did you first read those two paragraphs?</i><br />
<br />
<b>NORMAN:</b> <i>The night of March 21,1944.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FULTON:</b> <i>How large a distribution would that house organ
have ? It is fair to call it a house organ ?</i><br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b>:</b> <i>I think so, sir. Well, I am sure under the interpretations that we have. It would go, Senator Ferguson, I presume, to the
whole list of independent distributors through which Fawcett distributes magazines—there are some 700 of those—and it would go to publishers whose magazines Fawcett distributes, and it would probably go to some prospective publishers whose magazines they may hope
to distribute.</i><br />
<br />
Then, Senator Ferguson jumped back in and asked Norman to read the two paragraphs that were cause for concern.<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b> [reading Exhibit No. 1189]<b>:</b> <span style="color: yellow;"><b><i>"These franchises </i></b>[the independent distributors]<b><i> will pay off even greater profits in 1944."</i></b></span><br />
<i> The value of a franchise in wholesale distribution means a great deal, and the position that magazines have on the newsstands, and that sort of thing. </i>[reading Exhibit No. 1189] <span style="color: yellow;"><b><i>"This is a case in which Fawcett foresight and careful planning aided us in getting the most possible from our paper allotments."</i></b></span><br />
<i>Do you want me to read the whole thing, and then let's comment piecemeal ?</i><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> Afterwards.<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b> [reading Exhibit No. 1189] <b>:</b> <span style="color: yellow;"><b><i>"We were fortunate enough to have <span class="solr_highlight_4">Allen </span><span class="solr_highlight_1">E</span>. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Norman</span>, secretary of the Fawcett corporations..."</i></b></span><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON</b> [interposing]<b>: </b>That is you, by the way?<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b>: Yes, sir. [Reading Exhibit No. 1189]<b>:</b> <span style="color: yellow;"><i><b>"...acting as a consultant to the Printing and Publishing Division of the War Production Board; and W. H. Fawcett, Jr., president of the Fawcett Corporations, as a member of the magazine task force..."</b></i></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON</b> [interposing]<b>:</b> What is the task force? An advisory committee?<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b><span class="solr_highlight_2">:</span> </b><i>It is a group which acts as an operating committee for the Magazine Advisory Committee </i>[of the WPB].<i> It is a little more flexible than the Magazine Advisory Committee. Some of the members only live </i>[sic]<i> from San Francisco to Boston to Birmingham.</i><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON:</b> All right.<br />
<br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b> [reading Exhibit No. 1189]<b>: </b><span style="color: yellow;"><i><b>"...which cooperates with the Printing and Publishing Division of the War Production Board. This enabled us to really know the paper situation at all times. Roger Fawcett, in the New York office, carried out the War Production Board orders and suggestions so far as Fawcett-published magazines were concerned. It has been largely through the excellent work of this trio..."</b></i></span><br />
<br />
<b>FERGUSON</b> (interposing)<b>:</b> <i>Who is this trio?</i><br />
<i> </i><b class="solr_highlight_2"> </b><br />
<b class="solr_highlight_2">NORMAN</b><b><span class="solr_highlight_2">:</span></b> <i>That would presumably be W. H. Fawcett, Roger Fawcett, and myself. </i>[reading]<i><span style="color: yellow;"><b>"...that F. D. C.,"</b> </span>—that is Fawcett Distributing Corporation—<b><span style="color: yellow;">"...has been able to make its plans for 1944 long in advance, thereby providing our independent wholesalers with a goodly supply of magazines to assure high profits for this year."</span> </b></i> <span style="color: red;"><b><sup><i>6</i></sup></b></span><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerfawcettbrosphoto.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslerfawcettbrosphotosm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Roger, W.H., Gordon and Roscoe Fawcett</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[image courtesy of P.C. Hamerlinck's FAWCETT COMPANION] </b></span></center>
<br />
This apparently damning paragraph insinuating collusion between Norman and Roger Fawcett to benefit the Fawcett distribution corporation was dismissed by Norman as,<i> "...a very ill-chosen selection of words ...written by a minor employee of Fawcett Publications in the Greenwich, Conn., office."</i> <span style="color: red;"><b><sup><i>7</i></sup></b></span><br />
(Even though the article in question carried the byline of "Roscoe Fawcett", company circulation manager and a Fawcett sibling, the anonymous Fawcett employee Norman was so willingly threw under the bus was revealed to be Gene Fornshell. Fornshell was conveniently in the Army at the time and unable to respond to Norman's claim of his responsibility for the offending paragraphs.)<i> </i> <br />
<i> </i>The whole matter had come up when a publisher seeking a larger quota of paper, appealed to the Magazine Section headed by Norman and presented the house organ article as evidence of his partiality toward Fawcett, a competing publisher. Norman's superior, Dr. Arthur Holcombe, Chairman of the Appeals Board for the whole WPB, ruled the evidence as irrelevant and the publisher's appeal was denied.<br />
The publisher questioning Norman's impartiality was the National Police Gazette Corporation. The <b>NATIONAL POLICE GAZETTE</b> had been bought in 1933 by Merwil Publishing. Merwil was the publisher of a men's soft-core pornographic magazines and was owned jointly by Merle Williams Hersey and the brothers, Irwin and Harry Donenfeld. Significantly, among the Donenfelds other publishing ventures was National Comics (D.C.), Fawcett Publishing's direct and very litigious competitor. Merwil lost the tabloid to bankruptcy in 1935. By the time of their appeal before Norman, the publisher of the <b>NATIONAL GAZETTE</b> was Harold H. Roswell.<br />
While the "house organ matter" wasn't brought up by Chesler in his own appeal before Norman, he asserted that Fawcett, at once his distributor and a competing comic book publisher, purposely drove him out of business.<i></i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>PAPER CUT</b> <br />
<i><br />
"The Printing and Publishing Division contended, and the Appeals Board concurred," </i>continued Norman's report to the Senate committee,<i> "that it would he illogical to allot a sizable quantity of a critical war commodity to a publisher who could not operate in normal times, so that he might operate in the highly artificial market caused by the paper shortage. The last year that Mr. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Chesler</span> published for 12 consecutive months was 1938, 4 years before the paper-limitation orders were put into effect."<br />
"Mr. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Chesler</span> is now being investigated by the Compliance Division in New York. In the first quarter of 1943 he overused his quarterly allotment by about 250 percent, and in addition he participated in the publication of four and one-half million copies of comic magazines without a paper quota." </i><span style="color: red;"><b><sup><i>8</i></sup></b></span><br />
<i> </i>Unmentioned in the report were the titles of the comics in whose publication he "<i>participated</i>". Since none bore either his own name nor that of his Dynamic Publications, it is likely that these were surrogate publishers fronting for Chesler, who likely got a piece of the action.<br />
<i>
"Another matter of investigation is whether or not Mr. <span class="solr_highlight_2">Chesler</span> falsely represented his paper usage in 1942 in order to obtain the paper quota that was recognized for him."<br />
"Mr. Chesler's case has been reviewed on two separate occasions by the Printing and Publishing Division, and he has been given two oral hearings before the Appeals Board in order that he might present any material that would support his claim of excessive and undue hardship. Following both hearings the Appeals Board issued letters of denial." </i> <span style="color: red;"><b><sup><i>9</i></sup></b></span><br />
This denial of his quota appeal would seem to end Chesler's wish to get back into publishing. But Chesler wasn't so easily discouraged. If he couldn't get the paper he wanted to publish in his own name, perhaps he could buy it from someone else.<br />
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>FLYING CADET TAKES FLIGHT</b><br />
<br />
On an undated sheet of typing paper, Chesler (or someone in his employ) wrote out a list of comic titles: <b>THE ARROW</b>, <b>DETECTIVE EYE</b>, <b>FANTOMAN</b>, <b>FUNNY PAGES</b>...nineteen titles in all. Obscure comics, mostly short-lived and some that hadn't been published for several years. Linking all of them, though, was a lineage that began with Chesler himself.<br />
He had sold two of the titles on this list--<b>STAR</b> and <b>STAR RANGER</b>--to Ultem Publications back in 1937. Similarly, William Cook and John Mahon sold two of their Comics Magazine Company's titles, <b>FUNNY PAGES</b> and <b>FUNNY PICTURE STORIES</b>, to Ultem in the same period. Eventually, Ultem sold all of these to Centaur Publications, the comic book venture owned by pulp publishers Joe Hardie and Raymond Kelly. The rest of the titles on Chesler's list were filled by comics published by Comic Corporation of America, the imprint used by Hardie and Kelly as the successor of Centaur.<br />
On March 15, 1944, Chesler wrote a letter to Ray Kelly asking about acquiring the rights to <b>FUNNY PAGES</b> and <b>AMAZING MAN</b>. <br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslercomiccorpletter.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslercomiccorplettersm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Letter from Chesler inquiring about the availability </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>of two defunct Comic Corp. of America comics. </b></span></center>
<b></b><br />
Within a week, Chesler received his reply.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslercomiccorpreply.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslercomiccorpreplysm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>The reply of co-owner, Raymond Kelly </b></span></center>
<b></b><br />
Undeterred, Chesler looked elsewhere. He didn't have to look any further than to a publisher who had been the beneficiary of fortuitous ruling in another quota appeal.<br />
Like Chesler, the publisher of <b>AIR NEWS</b> magazine had appealed for an increase in its paper quota. Phillip Andrews, owner of his namesake Phillip Andrews Publishing, claimed that the increase was based upon, <i>"...the essentiality of the publication in the war effort and on his competitive standing with other aviation magazine publishers." </i><br />
Andrews request was initially rejected, but the appeals board eventually agreed to increase, <i>"...Phillip Andrews' quota along with that of <b>SKYWAYS</b>, <b>FLYING CADET </b>and various other publishers,"</i><b> </b>of aviation magazines. <span style="color: red;"><b><sup><i>10</i></sup></b></span><br />
<b> FLYING CADET</b> was a curious hybrid publication. Although in most ways it was a straightforward aviation magazine, packed with text and photos of airplanes and pilots, it also featured a comic book style section in some of its early issues. Its editor, Archer St. John, obviously had an eye on the growing comic book market and was integrating some of its format into his magazine. <br />
(It should be noted that Phillip Andrews bought <b>AIR NEWS</b> from St. John, who was its original publisher. St. John then used that money to start up <b>FLYING CADET</b>.)<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslercadetv1num1.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslercadetv1num1sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>FLYING CADET vol. 1 #1 (Jan. 1943) </b></span></center>
<br />
How Chesler became aware of <b>FLYING CADET</b> and its bonus paper quota isn't clear. Had he heard about it during his own appeal hearing? Or did he know St. John through his previous employment as advertising manager of Lionel Trains Corporation? In any case, in September 1944, they struck a deal.<br />
The deal was spelled out in a letter to Chesler from his attorney, David Alterbaum, dated September 12, 1944. In it, Alterbaum notes that on September 1st, St. John organized the Flying Cadet Publishing Company, Inc., paying $500 for its 100 shares of capital stock. In turn, St. John sold those shares to Betty Chesler for the sum of $500. Subsequently, St. John then sold, <i>"...all his right, title and interest in and to," </i><b>FLYING CADET</b> magazine to the corporation.<br />
And he was well compensated for the sale.<br />
Chesler agreed to pay St. John $38, 000, with $20,000 of it up front and the rest in 12 monthly installments of $1,500 beginning October 1, 1944.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerstjohncontract.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslerstjohncontractsm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Details of the agreement between </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Archer St. John and Harry 'A' Chesler</b><b> (Sept. 12, 1944)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[note writer/editor Kenneth Fitch named as Secretary] </b></span></center>
<br />
It's a fair assumption that this influx of cash helped finance the start up of St. John's <span class="quote"><span class="qword">eponymous</span></span> publishing company a few years later.<br />
Although the owner's statement in <b>FLYING CADET</b> vol. 2, #7 (17) names St. John as editor, business manager and owner, by the time it was published on October 1, 1944, he had already assigned the copyright to Chesler (aka Flying Cadet Publishing Co., Inc.) on September 8th. The comic (and by now, its contents were mostly in comic book format) ended with this issue. Chesler didn't care about the title; he had other plans.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslercadet17.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslercadet17sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>FLYING CADET #17 [vol. 2 #7] (Oct. 1944) </b></span></center>
<br />
On paper, Flying Cadet Publishing Co., Inc. and Dynamic Publishing, Inc. were separate companies. In reality, they had the same owner operating (for a time) from the same address at 163 W. 23rd Street. This led to the somewhat absurd, but probably legally sensible situation which found Chesler corresponding with himself.<br />
Chesler was working one more angle.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i>"Gentlemen:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> The following offer is hereby submitted to you:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> 1. You are to have the exclusive right to publish and distribute the magazine, DYNAMIC COMICS and PUNCH COMICS, beginning with the January, 1945 issues thereof...". </i><br />
<br />
<i> S</i>o began the two-page agreement draped in legalese that granted the Flying Cadet Publishing Co., Inc. the license to publish several comics for a set royalty fee.<br />
The agreement goes on to specify that no less than 200,000 copies of each issue must be published. It also states unequivocally that, <i>"It is understood and agreed that this license does not include any rights of the licensee in and to any paper quotas which may or may not be assigned to us, as licensors."</i><br />
Since Chesler had been denied a paper quota increase as Dynamic Publishing, this sentence didn't mean much, if anything. This is followed by the carefully crafted, <i>"It is understood and agreed that this license shall not be construed to be that of a joint venture or partnership, and that you undertake the ultimate risk of publishing venture in connection with these magazines." </i><br />
Seemingly, a perfectly normal agreement designating the terms between two different companies. In actuality, Chesler was to profit both from the sales of a comic on the newsstand and from a royalty he would pay himself for the right to publish it.<br />
A perfectly executed double-dip.<br />
The agreement was accepted, naturally, and signed by Flying Cadet Publishing Co. Inc.'s secretary, Kenneth Fitch. Fitch, longtime writer and editor, was doing double-duty himself.<br />
How much this royalty meant is spelled out in a statement sent out on April 23, 1945. In it, the sales of <b>DYNAMIC COMICS</b> #13 and 14, and <b>PUNCH COMICS</b> #12 and 13, totaled and divided by the 1/4 cent royalty, netted Dynamic Publishing $3,787.50.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerflyingcadetpunch12.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslercadetpunch12sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>PUNCH COMICS #12 (Jan. 1945) </b></span></center>
<center>
</center>
On May 5, 1945, the license was renewed and expanded upon. Dynamic Publishing now graciously allowed Flying Cadet Publishing to not only publish more issues of <b>DYNAMIC</b> and <b>PUNCH</b>, but also the new title, <b>RED SEAL</b>. All other terms remained the same except that now it was specified that at least 250,000 copies of each comic had to be published per issue.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/chesleramerairforce.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/chesleramafsm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>AMERICAN AIR FORCES #1 (1944)</b></span></center>
<center>
</center>
The debut issue of <b>AMERICAN AIR FORCES</b> was also published under the Flying Cadet Publishing imprint. What kind of deal Chesler had with Vincent Sullivan's emerging Magazine Enterprises is unknown. But it is perhaps noteworthy that the comic was similar to the final issue of <b>FLYING CADET</b>, with a mix of comic and magazine material. Ironically, the format lived on if the title itself did not.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>POSTSCRIPT</b><br />
<br />
Harry 'A' Chesler was always looking for a
new opportunity. By the mid-Forties he had made enough money off his various comic sorties to veer off into other ventures. He purchased 200 acres of land off Eyland Avenue in Succasunna, New Jersey, containing a pond. With the help of bulldozers, the pond was reshaped to resemble a horseshoe. And it was soon revealed to be part of a much larger plan.<br />
In March, 1947, Chesler announced that he had invested $200,000 in Horseshoe Lake Park, a venue that was to include, <i>"...</i>[a] <i>restaurant, a tap room and a ballroom, the latter having a floor space of 60 by 120 feet." </i><sup><i><span style="color: red;"><b>11</b></span> </i></sup>The complex, still under construction and set to open on June 1st, was also to feature, <i>"...a Merry-Go-Round, Ferris Wheel and Caterpillar for a starter." </i><sup><i><span style="color: red;"><b>12</b></span> <b></b></i></sup>Two years later, it seems the project was still under construction, but none the less ambitious.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/cheslerpark.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/cheslerparksm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>From BILLBOARD (Feb. 26, 1949) </b></span></center>
<br />
Perhaps Chesler's amusement park was never fully realized. Given Chesler's penchant for reusing old names, perhaps the citizens of Succasunna were spared an amusement park named<i> Goobyland</i>.<br />
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>ENDNOTES</b><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> </i></sup></b><br />
<br />
<div class="title">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></b><sup><i><b> </b></i></sup>Investigation of the National Defense Program. Hearings before a Special Committee Investigating the National Defense Program, Pt. 22-24, (1944), pg. 10861.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2 </i></sup></b><span style="color: red;"><sup><i> </i></sup></span>Ibid.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>3 </i></sup></b><span style="color: red;"><sup><i> </i></sup></span>Ibid., pg. 10457.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>4</i></sup></b><b> </b>Ibid. <br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>5</i></sup></b><b> </b>Ibid., pg. 10453.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>6 </i></sup></b><span style="color: red;"><sup><i> </i></sup></span>Ibid., pg. 10454.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>7</i></sup></b><b> </b>Ibid., pg. 10455.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>8</i></sup></b><b> </b>Ibid., pg. 10861.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>9</i></sup></b><b> </b>Ibid.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>10</i></sup></b><b> </b> Ibid., pg. 10860.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>11</i></sup></b><b> </b><i>"Horse Shoe Lake, Still In Building Stage, Bows June 1"</i>, BILLBOARD, March 29, 1947, pg. 102.<br />
<br />
<sup><i><b><span style="color: red;">12 </span> </b></i></sup>Ibid.<br />
<br />
Additional general information sources include:<br />
<br />
Ewing, Emma Mai, <i>"The Funnies Can Be Serious"</i>, THE NEW YORK TIMES, Sept. 12, 1976, pg.347.<br />
<br />
Babbage, Joan, <i>"Comics' "Father" Helping Fairleigh Make A Home For His Children"</i>, THE STAR LEDGER, Jan. 20, 1976, pg. 27.<br />
<br />
Mueller, John,<i> "Harry 'A' & The Golden Age Of Comics"</i>, SUNDAY RECORD, Dec. 19, 1976. <br />
<br /></div>
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-90955869550523660532013-04-12T11:27:00.000-07:002013-04-15T15:59:06.295-07:00That's The Spirit<i> Return with me now to those thrilling days of last year, when I first posted the</i> <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/07/mystery-of-radio-spirit.html" target="_blank">Mystery of the Radio Spirit</a>. <i>My plaintive plea for help in finding details about the elusive radio program based upon Will Eisner's classic strip was heard and answered by Karl Schadow. </i><br />
<i> Schadow, appropriately, is a brilliant old-time radio history sleuth whose researching instincts mirror my own. His subsequent response to my request was seen in the </i><a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/07/mystery-of-radio-spirit-solved.html" target="_blank">Mystery of the Radio Spirit -- Solved!</a> <i>post that contained his initial discoveries. </i><br />
<i> Since then, Karl has soldiered on, digging and uncovering even more about the program. His findings were first published in </i><i>the official magazine of the Metro Washington Old Time Radio Club, <b>RADIO RECALL</b>,<b> </b>late in 2012. At my request, Karl is graciously allowing me to republish his research here. Readers should note that this article was originally intended for old-time radio aficionados and as such, it contains information geared toward that audience. </i><br />
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> I'd like to thank both editor Jack French of <b>RADIO RECALL</b> and Denis Kitchen for providing me with all the permissions and clearances that make this r<span style="font-family: inherit;">eprintin</span>g poss<span style="font-size: small;">ible. And Denis would also like me to remind everyone that:</span></span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><span style="font-size: 12.0px;"><b><br />
</b></span><span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="color: red;">THE SPIRIT trademark is owned by Will Eisner Studios, Inc. and is registered in the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. </span> </b></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 12.0px;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i> So take it away, Karl! </i> -- Ken Quattro </span></span></span></span> __________________________________________________________
<br />
<br />
<b>THAT'S THE SPIRIT</b><br />
<b>© 2013 Karl Schadow</b><br />
<br />
For years it has been rumored that <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>,
one of the classics of the comics, had its own radio
program. Interest in this seemingly obscure venture
was rejuvenated when R.R. King recently posted
on the <a href="http://www.oldradio.net/" target="_blank">Old Time Radio Digest</a>, a
link to Ken <i>"The Comic Detective"</i> Quattro's blog
with
Ken's request for any information on this unique
incarnation of <b><i>The Spirit's</i></b> exploits.<br />
<br />
Unique and obscure it is. A radio program of<i> <b>The Spirit</b></i> is not to be found in any OTR reference
including: <b>RADIO CRIME FIGHTERS</b> by Jim Cox
(McFarland, 2002) nor Ron Lackmann's <b>COMIC STRIPS & COMIC BOOKS OF RADIO'S GOLDEN AGE</b> (Bear
Manor Media, 2004). Most compelling however, is
that <b>THE STERANKO HISTORY OF THE COMICS 2</b> (Supergraphics, 1972) is most often cited as the
initial source which is reiterated in Ken's blog, for
any existence of such a program.<br />
<br />
For those of you new to <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, he
premiered in the publishing field with no advance
publicity in the newspaper trade, on June 2, 1940
as part of a special free Comic Book Section (commonly
known as <b>The Spirit Section</b>) insert of Sunday
newspapers across North America. This project was
the joint effort of Quality Comic Group (QCG)
publisher Everett M. " Busy" Amold, the Register
Tribune Syndicate (Des Moines, Iowa) and most
importantly comic creator-extraordinaire, Will Eisner,
brilliant innovator of the three crime-fighting characters
of the Section: <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, <b><i>Lady Luck</i></b> and <b><i>Mr.
Mystic</i></b>.<br />
<br />
<b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, former Detective Denny Colt thought to be dead, had been revived from a state
of suspended animation to fight crime in Central
City. Accompanied by his faithful African-American
sidekick Ebony White, <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, whose real identity was known only to Central City's Police
Commissioner Dolan, operated from a hide-out
located beneath Wildwood Cemetery, the
supposed final resting place of Denny Colt.<br />
<br />
His escapades in the Sunday Comic Book
Section continued into the Fall, 1952. A much
anticipated daily strip was added in October 1941,
having a prosperous two and one-half year run
closing in March, 1944. Over the past few decades,
those original stories have been reprinted,
predominantly by DC Comics and Kitchen Sink
Press In addition to new series of adventures
being published. IDW Publishing is soon to release
a new compendium of Will Eisner art. <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was produced for TV in a brief 1948 series, with a
made-for-TV movie in 1987. A feature film of the
character was seen in movie theaters in 2008. More
on<i> <b>The Spirit</b></i> and Will Eisner may be found
elsewhere in this issue of <a href="http://www.mwotrc.com/index.html" target="_blank">Radio Recall</a>, at
<a href="http://www.willeisner.com/" target="_new">www.willeisner.com</a> and <a href="http://www.deniskitchen.com/" target="_new">www.deniskitchen.com</a>.<br />
<br />
The Steranko History had purported a short-lived
program of <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> in three Mid-Atlantic
cities: Baltimore, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.,
with scripts penned by Enid Hager On his blog,
Ken informs us that Miss Hager had been
associated with <b>THE PHILADELPHIA RECORD</b> (morning
and Sunday newspaper). Thus, my current
research commenced with the perusal of the
broadcasting, newspaper, advertising and
amusement trade periodicals. In addition to the vast
pages of <b>THE RECORD</b> and its competitors. Although
<b>THE RECORD</b><i> </i>had been promoting frequently the
new Comic Book Section in its daily pages, there
was no indication that a sister radio program was
soon to hit the airwaves.<br />
<br />
The November 1, 1940 issue of<i> </i><b>BROADCASTING</b> reported a swap between <b>THE RECORD</b> and
Philadelphia's station WFIL of the three crimefighters
comprising the Comic Book Section in <b>THE SUNDAY RECORD</b>. Each was to be featured on a
rotating basis in a weekly 15-minute drama adapted
from this Section. Readers of <b>THE RECORD</b> on
Saturday, October 26, 1940 were pleasantly
surprised that <b><i>Mr. Mystic</i></b> (a magician with
supernatural powers) was going to be aired at 7:00
that evening on WFIL, with <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> slated for next
week. On the radio page of <b>THE RECORD</b> the next
day (October 27th), <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was affirmed for the
upcoming broadcast.<br />
<br />
Whether or not the story of <b><i>Mr. Mystic</i></b> and his
entanglement with Shanghai dope peddlers
garnered the initial stanza awaits further study as
there was no follow up to confirm which story was
actually presented. A preview in <b>THE RECORD</b> the
following Saturday (November 2nd) indicated that
<b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was to be featured that evening but the
publicity tacked a plot summary.<br />
<br />
With this night's episode, <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> had
joined his fellow characters, from the well·known <b><i>Blondie</i></b> and <b><i>Dick Tracy</i></b>, to the even more obscure <b><i>Lew Loyal</i> </b>as comics who had their
founding in the newspaper strips, and who had
made the transition to the medium of radio. To date,
episodes featuring<i> <b>Lady Luck</b></i>, that dashing
debutante sleuth of the Section have not been
identified.<br />
<br />
With each succeeding week, a brief story
synopsis was published in <b>THE RECORD</b>, usually
printed on a page other than that carrying the radio
logs. Moreover, in Friday's issues of <b>THE RECORD</b>,
the Comic Book Section and its radio companion
were promoted with bold, one-line statements at
the top of individual comics which probably did not
appease the syndicates distributing<i> <b>Alley Oop</b>, <b>L'il
Abner</b> </i>or <b><i>The Phantom</i></b>. Subsequently in early
1941 these one-liners were reduced to a single
comic which varied from week·to-week and
featured just <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> on WFIL. Though <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was listed in the radio logs of <b>THE PHILADELPHIA EVENING PUBLIC LEDGER</b><i>,</i>other sheets merely
indicated the program as 'Dramatization' or refused
to print any WFIL programs at the designated time.<br />
<br />
This conundrum illustrates a classic point for all
OTR researchers in that all available newspapers in
a given market should be consulted when seeking
information on programs, especially those locally produced.
Amusingly, issues of <b>MOVIE-RADIO GUIDE</b> which included WFIL programs (Edition 2, MidAtlantic
versions) listed the program as
'Dramatization' for several months before finally
giving the program its official title.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center>
<i><b>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/radiospiritmaskad.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/radiospiritmaskad.jpg" /></a> </b></i></center>
<i><b>
</b></i><b></b>
<br />
<center style="color: red;">
<b>
<b>from THE PHILADELPHIA RECORD (</b></b><b><b>Nov. 30, 1940)</b></b></center>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: 12.0px;"><b> </b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> <span style="font-family: inherit;">With the episode of November 30th, readers
of <b>THE RECORD</b> were encouraged to listen so that
they could learn how to receive a mask similar to
what <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> wore in the comics ... and get it
FREE! The offer
was also plugged on a different page than that
of the weekly plot summary thus culminating in
publicity for <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> on three individual pages of
the issue. A <b><i>Spirit</i></b> mask is mentioned in <b>THE STERANKO HISTORY</b> and also in Hake's and Tomart's
toy/premium guides. However, no direct tie-in with
a radio program is stated.
It is unknown if other premiums were offered
during<i> <b>The Spirit</b><b>'s</b></i> stint on WFIL.<br />
<br />
Ironically, the
radio program was not promoted anywhere in the 16-page, Comic Book Section, an interesting
absence of cross-promotion as the basic premise
of the radio program was to entice listener's to
purchase<i> </i><b>THE SUNDAY RECORD</b>.<br />
<br />
During the first season which ended in May,
1941, <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> encountered a potpourri of
criminals from gangsters to dictators and even a few
femme fatales, all while having to rescue on
occasion the romantic interest of the strip, Ellen
Dolan, daughter of the police commissioner.<br />
<br />
There
is no current explanation as to the reason behind
the hiatus as the Comic Book Section continued
throughout the summer in <b>THE SUNDAY RECORD</b>.<i> <b>The Spirit</b></i> returned for a second season
Saturday, September 6, 1941 at 7 pm on WFIL. <b>THE RECORD</b> continued to promote the program
both on the radio page and elsewhere with a short
synopsis. The scripts were again adapted by Enid Hager from stories of the Sunday comics. In
September, 1941, <b>THE BILLBOARD</b><i> </i>reported that each
episode could now be heard twice each Saturday
on a regular basis, now that a rebroadcast was
slated for Philadelphia station WHAT.<br />
<br />
<b> THE RECORD</b><i> </i>indicated on September 27th that
a transcription of <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was to be aired that
evening at 9 pm on WHAT. According to this
source, this is the only occasion in which a repeat
performance was scheduled either in the radio logs
or other publicity. Had <b>THE RECORD</b><i> </i>encountered
technical, contractual or copyright difficulties in
procuring and airing a transcription each week?
Nevertheless, this situation presents a fascinating
scenario that a recording of <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> was made
and that one may still exist.<br />
<br />
As of February 14, 1942, <i>The Spirit</i> was
being promoted at a new time of 6:30 pm as the
result of a new program,<i> <b>This is War</b></i>, directed by
Norman Corwin to be broadcast on all network
stations across the country at 7 pm.<br />
<br />
Continuing the promotion in March, <b>THE RECORD</b> was still alerting new readers of <b><i>The
Spirit's</i></b> 6:30 pm airtime.<br />
<br />
</span></span><br />
<center>
<i><b>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/radiospiritad.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/radiospiritad.jpg" /></a> </b></i></center>
<i><b>
</b></i><b></b>
<br />
<center style="color: red;">
<b>
<b>from THE PHILADELPHIA RECORD (March 7, 1942)</b></b></center>
<b>
</b><i><b>
<br />
</b> </i>Also in
March, accompanying the short plot summaries
were such episode titles as: <i>"Mr. Hush Runs an
Election"</i> (March 7th), <i>"The Men Who Time
Forgot"</i> (March 21st) in which <i><b><b>The Spirit</b> </b></i>clashed
with Seventeenth Century Spanish explorers, to
<i>"Dr Jekyll & Mr. Ebony"</i> or <i>"Dr. Ebony & Mr.
White" </i>(March 28th), where Ebony exhibits some
bizarre behavior after ingesting a noxious, blue
liquid found in<b> <b><i>The Spirit's</i> </b></b>lab. In one of his last
radio adventures (May 9th),<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>foiled Nazi
spies in their attempt to sabotage a coastal
artillery base.<i><b><br />
<br />
</b></i><br />
<center>
<i><b>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/radiospirit5101942.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/radiospirit5101942sm.jpg" /></a> </b></i></center>
<i><b>
</b></i>
<center>
<i><b>
<span style="color: red;"><b> <i>"Army Operas No. 2: Pvt. O'Toole" </i></b></span></b></i></center>
<i><b>
</b></i>
<center>
<i><b>
</b></i><b><span style="color: red;"><b>THE SPIRIT (May 10, 1942)</b></span></b></center>
<b>
</b>
<center>
<b>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[as reprinted in THE SPIRIT ARCHIVES #4]</b></span></b></center>
<center>
<b><span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></b></center>
<i><b>
</b></i><i><b>
</b><b>
</b></i>[<i>Quattro here: A likely reason why <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> radio program ended circa May, 1942 is that Eisner was inducted into the Army early that month. The contract he had with the show's producers may have been contingent upon his scripting of the strip, which he relinquished while in the service.</i>] <i><b><br />
<br />
</b> </i>During <b><i><b>The Spirit's</b></i> </b>tenure on radio, the
program received favorable reviews from
Philadelphia critics, as both Maurie Orodenker <b>[<b>THE BILLBOARD</b></b>, December 14, 1940] and Si Shaltz
[<b>(<b>VARIETY</b></b>, February 4, 1942] praised the program's
writing, acting and overall production. Orodenker
commented that each episode was complete. Does this imply that that the entire story of the
Sunday comics was told in contrast to the cliff-hanger style Shaltz reported the following
season? Or, did both series' stories leave
listeners pondering <b><i>The <b>Spirit's</b></i> f</b>ate and that
Orodenker was informing his audience that <b><b>The
Spirit</b> </b>was not a serial with a continuing plot from
week·to·week?<b><br />
<br />
</b> The advantage of the cliff-hanger of course,
was to entice listeners to purchase<b> <b>THE SUNDAY RECORD</b> </b>with accompanying Comic Book Section
so that one could obtain the solution to the
mystery. As no scripts or audio have been located
of<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i></b>, this and many other questions
regarding the program remain unsolved. In his
review, Orodenker mentions the names of the two
prominent cast members, Sam Serata as<b> <i><b>The
Spirit</b></i> </b>(likely a misspelling of long-time Philadelphia
entertainment personality and executive, Sam
Serota) with Salvatore Benigno as Ebony.<b><br />
</b><i><br />
</i>It is unknown if these individuals were
credited at the end of the broadcast, or if their
voices were recognized by Orodenker who gave
them the proper acknowledgement. Serota would
have been a choice candidate for the lead, as he
had previously amassed a great following
impersonating the comics as 'Brother Bill' on WIP, a rival of WFIL in Philadelphia. It is unknown
if Serota continued as<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>in the second
season and who assumed the role of Ebony when
Benigno was inducted into the Army in March, 1941.<b><br />
<br />
<b>THE RECORD</b> </b>noted that Private Salvatore
Benigno was to make an appearance in the
episode of December 21, 1941 portraying Private
Chuck Magoo, a former gangster encouraged by
The Spirit to join the Army. This was one of the
rare instances in which individual cast members
of the program were identified in<b> <b>THE RECORD</b></b>. The
other two names cited in <b><b>THE BILLBOARD</b> </b>review,
were author/producer Enid Hager and WFIL
organist Mil Spooner who provided the music.
One name not mentioned in the review, but who
was included in those of other WFIL programs
was sound effects expert Jeff Witt. If not directly
involved in each episode, he supervised those
performing <b><i><b>The Spirit's</b></i> </b>physical battles, especially
the ferocious punches.<b><br />
<br />
</b> Noteworthy is that <b><i>The Spirit</i> </b>program also
received high praise from Will Eisner, though he
only had scripts sent to him by Enid Hager which
to critique. In a November 29, 1941 letter
<a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/07/mystery-of-radio-spirit.html" target="_blank">(transcribed copy available on Ken's blog) </a>to Miss
Hager thanking her for the scripts, Eisner states
that, <i>" ... the dialog is great and the continuity
positively absorbing ... ".<b><br />
<br />
</b> </i>Was this the first time that Eisner had
intimate knowledge of the program (he was
unable to receive the program on his set in New
York City)? Had <b><i>The Spirit's</i> </b>creator not been
consulted over a year earlier when a radio
program had been initially proposed?<b><br />
<br />
</b> Other interesting admonishments are
illuminated in the letter. There was no mention of
Eisner in the scripts as he had informed the
program's author of this situation. He firmly
suggested as a favor to himself that she include
the by-line "Will Eisner" following <b><i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>in the
show's opening. Moreover, was Eisner alluding to any
possible copyright infringement?<br />
<b><br />
</b> On the front page of each of the weekly
Sunday Comic Book Sections was found in tiny
print, copyright credited to Everett M. Arnold. It
would be years later before Eisner actually
acquired the full rights from the Quality Comics publisher.
Furthermore, to what extent Arnold was involved
in the radio program awaits additional
documentation.<b><br />
<br />
</b>In his letter, Eisner was optimistic that, <i>" ... we
can spread this idea far and wide ..."</i>. Perhaps this
is when the program was developed in other
markets yet to be discovered. Finally, it is
unknown if Eisner was provided with any
recordings. And, what of the fate of those scripts
he received? There are none in his collection at
The Ohio State University <a href="http://cartoons.osu.edu/" target="_blank">Billy Ireland Cartoon Library & Museum</a>.<b><br />
</b><i><b><br />
</b></i>Why<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>did not return for a third season
in Philadelphia remains a mystery. In March,
1943, Enid Hager departed <b><b>THE RECORD</b> </b>for a
position with Philadelphia's WPEN. Later that year
she deservedly achieved the position of manager
of the newly-formed radio department of Qualiy Comics. According to Mike Kooiman, who with
Jim Amash, completed a comprehensive
history of QCG entitled<b> <b>QUALITY COMPANION</b> [</b>TwoMorrows, 2011], virtually nothing is known
regarding the endeavors of this ancillary Quality
component.<b><br />
<br />
</b>Although <i><b><b>The Spirit</b></b> </i>was technically not a QCG product, there may have been attempts by
Enid Hager and colleagues to promote the
radio program in the mid 1940s. In the Program
Producer section of the 1944 <b>RADIO ANNUAL</b>,
Quality elevates their entity to the Radio & Motion
Picture Department, still headed by Enid Hager.
Unfortunately, the seemingly lofty aspirations of
QCG may have not come to fruition as no further
projects have been identified. However, the
popular<b> <i><b>Blackhawk</b></i></b>, a major QCG title did make a
brief run on radio in the early 195Os. This author
encourages his fellow researchers in both fields to
continue to investigate the obscure radio tenures
of such pertinent comics.<br />
<b><br />
</b>So how did<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>find its way to<b> <b>THE RECORD</b> </b>and subsequently WFIL? One thought is
that<b> <b>THE RECORD </b></b>was not limited to comics
from a single syndicate, as titles from seven such
firms graced the pages of the daily and Sunday
issues. The Register & Tribune Syndicate was a
newcomer to those already supplying comics to
the newspaper and the Sunday Comic Book
Section was evidently an admirable addition.<b><br />
<br />
<b>THE RECORD</b></b> had much experience in promoting itself
on the airwaves. Prior to <i><b><b>The Spirit</b></b></i>, the newspaper had
solidified relations with WIP for its Nine o'Clock
Scholars program and also WFIL for the musical
quiz, Sound Your A. These programs expanded
the usual time-for-space agreement in that live
productions were utilized instead of the banter
going for spot announcements.<i><b><br />
<br />
</b> </i>WFIL had a top-notch promotional campaign
and was on its way to winning the 1940 annual
exploitation award from <b>T<b>HE BILLBOARD</b> </b>in the
Regional Station Division when<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>was
launched in October 1940. The station had been
at the forefront in producing local dramatics since
its founding in 1935; the result of the merger of
stations WFI and WLIT More on the history of
WFIL and Philadelphia radio may be found at the
Philadelphia Broadcast Pioneers website
<a href="http://www.broadcastpioneers.com/" target="_new">www.broadcastpioneers.com</a>.<b><br />
<br />
</b>George Lilley, radio editor of<b> <b>THE RECORD</b><b> </b></b>in
his December 22, 1940 column, echoed the praise for WFIL and its program director James
Allan for their efforts in developing the current
array of programs not only <i><b><b>The Spirit</b></b></i>, but also
<b> <i><b>Drama Laboratory</b></i></b>,<b> <i><b>Mystery History</b></i> </b>and the daily
serial,<b> <i><b>The Ghost of Thunder Island</b></i></b>. The
extensive exploitation of WFIL included: ads,
merchandising, billboards, school bulletins. and
cards in cars, subways, busses, trains and even
windows.<b><br />
<br />
</b>There is no doubt that <b><i><b>The Spirit</b> </i></b>was
afforded his share of such publicity in addition to
the newspaper copy illustrated above. Moreover
the discovery of such items is crucial to further
chronicling <b><i><b>The Spirit</b></i> </b>on WFIL and other stations.
Furthermore, this exploitation may have been a
major factor WFIL was selected rather
than WHAT, a station which had been purchased
by <b>THE RECORD</b> just months prior to <b><i>The Spirit</i> </b>making its radio debut. WFIL was a full-time
station rated for 1000 Watts, but was soon to be
upgrading its signal strength to 5000 Watts. This is compared to the 100 Watt, part-time status of
WHAT On his blog, Ken also suggests that
general program format of WHAT precluded <b><i><b>The
Spirit</b></i> </b>from airing on the station.<i><b><br />
<br />
</b> </i>Enid Hager who had previously been a
member of the WFIL production staff before
engaging in her current position as radio
promotion chief of<b> <b>THE RECORD</b></b>, took on the
added task of script author in addition to her
duties as producer of<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b></i>.</b>
During the course of researching OTR, one
may find a major source of pertinent material
to be located in various advertising and ad
agency archives. In the case of <i>The Spirit</i> however, this potential resource is not available.<b> <b>THE RECORD</b> </b>had negotiated directly with WFIL,
thus no agency was employed, ultimately saving<b> <b>THE RECORD </b></b>a tidy sum. This author does not
imply, however, that correspondence, publicity, a
script or even a transcription of the program
would not have eventually made its way to any
such archive.<b><br />
<br />
</b> Additional leads on<b> <i><b>The Spirit</b> </i></b>are being
pursued at <a href="http://www.temple.edu/" target="_blank">Temple University</a>,
and other academic institutions along with
collections of <a href="http://www,freelibrary.org/" target="_blank">The Free Library of Philadelphia</a>
and <a href="http://www.hsp.org/" target="_blank">The Historical Society of Pennsylvania</a>.<b> <b><i>The Spirit</i> </b></b>is still being
elusive in Washington, Baltimore and in other
markets but attempts are ongoing to remedy this
situation. Thus, as of this writing, <i><b>The Spirit </b></i>can be
classified as a local and not syndicated program.<br />
<br />
Readers may contact Karl Schadow at <a href="mailto:bluecar91@hotmail.com" target="_blank">bluecar91@hotmail.com</a>.<b><bluecar91 hotmail.com=""></bluecar91></b>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-56880664422467392832013-02-15T23:37:00.000-08:002013-02-15T23:37:38.866-08:00Men of StealAn Editorial by Ken Quattro:<br />
<br />
To say I'm indebted to the Internet would be a huge understatement. It has opened doors into research that were never available before it existed.
It allows me to communicate with people all over the world in seconds.
And it has introduced me to friends that I never would have met without it.<br />
Yet one cancerous side effect of this magnificent communicative tool is that it encourages laziness. Sloth. One of the Seven Deadly Sins if you believe sins still exist. <br />
Highlight.<br />
Right click.<br />
Copy.<br />
Paste.<br />
It's so easy, isn't it?<br />
Recently I came across a website with a page devoted to the artist <a href="http://www.pulpartists.com/Stoner.html">Elmer C. Stoner</a>. As I have written <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2010/04/e-c-stoner-forgotten-trailblazer.html">my own piece about Stoner</a>, I began reading it. I was only a few sentences in before I noticed a remarkable similarity between it and my article. While the "author" had padded the first part of his bio with info obtained (but not credited) from Ancestry.com, and a few speculations based on nothing in particular, he followed the structure of my article exactly. The references to Stoner's patron Fred Morgan Kirby, his involvement in the Harlem Renaissance, his failed early marriage. There was a mention of the 1939 World's Fair children's book I also wrote about and the comic books he chose to list were all from my piece. He even included information that artist Samuel Joyner related to me in a personal letter. There was more, but you get the gist.<br />
I wouldn't have minded at all if the "author" had made the simple gesture of acknowledging my article as his source. But he didn't. Instead he employed the quasi-plagiarism preferred by middle schoolers who change a few words of a Wikipedia entry and turn it in as a term paper.<br />
To add further insult, nearly all of the images he used to accompany his article were lifted completely from mine. And to put his intentions in an even worse light, he ran a copyright notice at the bottom of the page with the year 2009; one year earlier than my posted article that he swiped.<br />
I wish I could say that this was the only time I'd experienced such blatant theft, but it's not.<br />
Some years back I wrote an article about <a href="http://comicartville.com/archerstjohn.htm">Archer St. John and his publishing ventures</a>. This was the first comprehensive history ever written about St. John and an effort that took a decade of research on my part.<br />
Within two weeks of my putting the article online on my Comicartville website, a St. John Publications entry appeared on Wikipedia that was basically a Cliffs Notes version of my piece. The Wikipedia editor, who hides behind the username "Tenebrae" (which tellingly means "darkness" in Latin), that contributed this entry has gained the enmity of a host of legitimate comic historians for his unabashed thievery. When confronted about his theft of my St. John article, he shrugged it off by claiming mine was only one of his sources. A provable lie since mine was the ONLY source available at the time.<br />
Several years later, I published the testimony from the historic <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2010_07_01_archive.html">Detective Comics v. Bruns Publications trial</a> on this blog. Again, this was the first time this information had been presented to the general public since the trial in 1939. Soon after, a publisher who I had previously allowed to reprint one of my articles, decided to download the trial transcript and publish it without any acknowledgement of where he had gotten it.<br />
These are but a few of my experiences. And I'm not alone.<br />
Jim Amash, artist, writer and the man behind some of the most historically important interviews ever conducted with comic creators, has been similarly victimized. He has many had quotes and anecdotes taken directly from his interviews and dropped into others writings without any credit to him. This practice occured so frequently and had become so prevalent that Jim decided in the past year to stop doing interviews altogether. His decision is a great loss to all of comic fandom, but one I can fully appreciate and have contemplated myself.<br />
Virtually every serious comic historian has a similar story. Dr. Michael Vassallo, Bob Beerbohm and Roy Thomas have all related tales of plagiarism and intellectual property theft. And yet it continues. If anything, it is getting worse.<br />
On the chance that some of the research-phobic freeloaders are reading this, I have to ask: <br />
What happened to common courtesy?<br />
What is gained by stealing someone else's work?<br />
What is lost by giving someone else credit?<br />
I understand that research isn't easy. It can be a painstaking, boring, and often, expensive undertaking. But if you don't want to make that effort, at least acknowledge the people who do.
<br />
<br />
Note: Please feel free to copy this post and reprint it anywhere you like. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-12283653697457291522013-01-24T15:18:00.000-08:002013-04-12T10:18:07.841-07:00Sincerely Yours, Busy <i> Before email, before texting, when only birds tweeted, people wrote letters. Letter writing was a craft, an art form in deft hands, wherein thoughts could be expressed with nuance not limited to 140 character bursts. For some, though, letters were a cudgel to prod the recipient down a certain path. Business letters were often of this type and when it came to writing them, Busy Arnold was all business.</i> -- Ken Quattro<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Bill,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>As I told you over the telephone today, Lou has been changing his costumes form month to month especially on The Ray. In the first installment of this feature, he had The Ray wearing a peaked headpiece but in the second installment he left off the peak on this, later it was restored. In some installments The Ray wore slippers and in others he did not have any. Also the stars around the neck of The Ray were omitted in some instances, although Ed Cronin usually added these.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>I am enclosing a memorandum with some tear sheets and would appreciate having you tell Lou to make the costumes of both The Ray and The Black Condor the same each month.</i></div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/busyeisnerphoto.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busyeisnerphotosm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>Everett M. "Busy" Arnold (smiling)</b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>Will Eisner (at drawing board)</b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>circa 1941</b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>[as reprinted in THE ART OF WILL EISNER by cat yronwode]</b></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
Arnold was both Will Eisner's business partner (in <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> comic section) and client of his comic shop. It was in that role as owner of Comic Favorites, Inc. that Arnold wrote (more accurately, dictated) this October 1, 1940 missive. They would always come typed and on company letterhead. This was a business, after all, and Arnold's concern was for the product he was selling. The elegance of the artwork and the future status of Lou Fine as a Comic Book Legend wasn't even a consideration.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busyraysmash15.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busyraysmash15sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>The Ray </i>by Lou Fine</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">SMASH COMICS #15 (Oct. 1940), pg. 4 </b></center>
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Try and build up the characters in both of these features so that they are more human and likeable. The Ray is in reality Happy Terrill, a reporter who works on The Morning Telegraph. His boss, the city editor, should have a definite name and other characters might be introduced from time to time.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>While Happy Terrill leads a normal life at most times, he has the power to change to The Ray when he goes in a beam of light an then can perform his wonderful deeds. As The Ray he can also bring people to him by means of the ray forces which he has in his hands.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>The same sort of build up should be given to The Black Condor and he should be a definite personality who operates as The Black Condor only in times of necessity. Originally you had The Black Condor brought up by birds when his parents (British) were killed by outlaws. I don't believe that he should be British and in any "build up", you should naturally assume that he is an American.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I assume that you will finish the next HIT and NATIONAL covers within the next few days so that Lou can start working on The Ray for the February issue of SMASH COMICS</i>.</div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Sincerely yours, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<br />
Eisner once told interviewer Jim Amash,<i> "Busy Arnold and I had a very interesting relationship. I regarded him as a partner and he thought of me as an employee."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 1 </i></sup></b>When it came to the content of the comic books, it appears there was little doubt as to who was the calling the shots. By the next issue of <b>SMASH</b>, Happy Terrill was in more panels than <b><i>The Ray</i></b> and not long after, his boss finally had a first name.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/busyraysmash17big.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/busyraysmash17sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>The Ray </i>by Lou Fine</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">SMASH COMICS #17 (Dec. 1940), pg. 2</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;"><br /></b></center>
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/busyraysmash19detail.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busyraysmash19detail.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<center>
<b>Panel from page 9 of <i>The Ray</i></b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">SMASH COMICS #19 (Feb. 1941)</b></center>
<b style="color: red;"><br /></b></center>
For his part, <b><i>The Black Condor</i></b> had soon forgotten his rarely mentioned British origins and apparently his name (Dick Grey), becoming instead an American named Tom Wright. A U.S. senator no less. <br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busycondorcrack13big.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busycondorcrack13small.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>The Black Condor </i>by Lou Fine</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">CRACK COMICS #13 (Dec. 1940) splash page</b></center>
<br />
Within in a few months, the business arrangement of Arnold and Eisner had evolved even further. On January 20, 1941, the pair agreed to a joint publishing venture. On that day they signed contracts specifying their co-ownership of two new properties: <b>UNCLE SAM QUARTERLY</b> and <b>ARMY AND NAVY COMICS</b>, soon to be retitled <b>MILITARY COMICS</b>. While Arnold agreed to pay the artists for their work, Eisner was to receive no money for his editing. Both shared any profits equally.<br />
Despite the parity suggested by this new arrangement, however, the hierarchy seemingly didn't change.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i> Dear Bill,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>The issue of MILITARY COMICS which Julian delivered here yesterday was handled in a very sloppy manner. So for the fifteenth time will you please ask your gang to go over things more closely so that we don't have so much work on this end of the line.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>The ears which your boys put on page one and page 33 are very sloppy and you should have new ears made for these pages. Also, you should have whoever puts them on do a better job than they have done in the past. Not only are they ears always dirty and partly torn, but whoever drew the originals looks like they had the palsy. They have to be retouched here by Tony and this work could be eliminated if your office didn't do such a careless job.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<br />
But he wasn't done yet. As he would many times, Arnold added a postscript in his own handwriting.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>P.S.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Please don't supply any more art work for Military by the artists who did Miss America and The Sniper. They are awful so put Jerry Robinson on these two features--he </i>[is]<i> to do everything except the lettering. Sniper is a good idea but this artist is impossible--also</i> [the]<i> Miss America artist.</i></div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busysnipermilitary7.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busysnipermilitary7sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>The Sniper </i>by Jerry Robinson</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">MILITARY COMICS #7 (Feb. 1942) splash page</b></center>
<br />
The "ears" referenced by Arnold that needed retouching by in-house artist Tony DiPreta were likely paste-over corrections to the artwork. It's just as likely that poor Julian, Eisner's younger brother, received an earful from Arnold. Arnold got his wish as Robinson briefly filled in on <i><b>The Sniper</b></i>. Eisner must have agreed with the assessment of Maurice Kashuba's artwork on <i><b>Miss America</b></i>, as she disappeared from the pages of <b>MILITARY</b> soon after Arnold's September 17, 1941 letter.<br />
Arnold's comments weren't restricted to just the comic books. Just a couple of weeks later, on October 3rd, he had something to say about <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, too.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Bill,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I was able to correct the text on page three of The Spirit in the October 19 issue. It certainly was a good thing this happened on a number 1 issue of the weekly comic book since if it had happened on a number 2 issue, it would have been too late to change it.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I think that the October 19 issue of The Spirit was absolutely the worst you have done to date and I don't think you should run any stories in this groove. This particular episode was altogether too heavy and profound. It is on the philosophical side and will not interest most readers. I think you should make The Spirit more along the usual lines with a good interesting story and plenty of sustained rapid fire action. And the art work could certainly be much better than the October 19 issue which was pretty sad.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I think that you might try and get more close-ups of The Spirit, Ebony, Ellen Commissioner Dolan, etc. and eliminate some of these far shots you have been running.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busyspirit1019.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/busyspirit1019sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<b><span style="color: red;">"The Oldest Man in the World" </span></b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>The Spirit </i>by Will Eisner</b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>(Oct. 19, 1941)</b></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><br /></b></center>
This one probably hurt. It can be supposed that Eisner was used to Arnold's criticisms by now, but they usually were directed at the work of the artists he employed. This hit closer to home. Eisner was the principal artist on <i><b>The Spirit </b></i>at this point and probably plotted this story (<i>"The Oldest Man in the World"</i>) as well. <br />
No detail was too small to escape Arnold's notice. On October 31st, he sent a letter to Eisner critiquing the work of a letterer.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Bill,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Will you please get after Sam, your lettering man, and instruct him to make his commas properly in both the weekly comic book and the daily Spirit strips? He uses a straight line with no loop for a comma and this is very bad. Have him use regular commas in the future.</i></div>
<br />
Not content with this admonition, Arnold demonstrated in his own hand this punctuation that was causing him so much grief. <br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/busycommaps.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/busycommapssm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>Busy's punctuation lesson for Sam Rosen</b></center>
<br />
Usually, though, Arnold's concerns were not so trivial. Money was the main subject of his November 6 letter. Along with a few suggestions, of course.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Bill,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I am enclosing [a] check for $730.45 covering the material for issue No. 7 of MILITARY COMICS as per your statement dated October 17. However, there was no Diary of A Draftee in this issue so I deducted the $15 charge for this.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>You had four pages of Inferior Man listed whereas this was cut to three pages. However, I imagine the cost of $40 was still the same. You also listed Death Patrol as being six pages whereas it was only five pages but the price of $75 was correct. The Sniper which was done by Jerry Robinson was only five pages in length and I believe you were a bit off on the figure of $104 for this feature. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I hope you have the material pretty well in hand for the next issue of MILITARY COMICS. If Jerry Robinson isn't going to handle X Of The Underground, you had better get Borth or some other artist started on this right away so we can get out a complete book in another week or 10 days. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Please have Chuck Cuidera do the next MILITARY cover and also make up a full page of promotion for MILITARY COMICS. In other words, you can make up the page of promotion on everything except the reproduction of the cover and I will have this stripped in by the engraver. I expect to have some covers available next month and will run a promotion on MILITARY COMICS in everything except FEATURE COMICS. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<br />
And he couldn't help adding a postscript.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>P.S.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Is Cuidera getting ahead on Blackhawk? If he only takes about 12 days for each 11 pages of Blackhawk in Military Comics, he should be able to turn out some work for the Quarterly now.</i></div>
<br />
The first inkling that events in the outside world were affecting their product were mentioned in Arnold's letter of December 12, 1941. After reprimanding Eisner for a continuity mistake in <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> daily, Arnold has some thoughts about the direction of the comic books.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>In view of present war conditions, don't you think it wold be best to have the Blackhawks get a new base and operate from the Pacific? Also, have the Hero Stamps about Americans rather than Britishers. A good subject for the first American Hero Stamp is Captain Kelly who was killed sinking the Japanese battleship yesterday. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I think this same applies to the material for UNCLE SAM QUARTERLY No. 3. I don't believer you should let Ed Cronin go through with the original plans on this magazine but should have new up to the minute stories written for the third issue. In UNCLE SAM QUARTERLY No. 3, I think that you should eliminate the four pages of illustrated poetry since this doesn't "ring the bell" with kids.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<br />
Arnold once again got what he wanted. <b>UNCLE SAM</b> #3 quickly took on a more sobering tone. No longer was the titular character circumspect in his choice of foes. The George Tuska drawn cover depicted a resolute <b><i>Uncle Sam</i></b> swatting down readily identifiable Japanese Zeroes. Over in <b>MILITARY</b>, soon gone was the Anglocentric Hero Stamp, replaced by a new United States Hero Stamp, with the first being the Arnold nominated Captain Kelly.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busywarheromilitary9.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busywarheromilitary9sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>United States Hero Stamp #1</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">MILITARY COMICS #9 (April 1942) </b></center>
<br />
It took the <b><i>Blackhawks</i></b> a bit longer to follow his orders, as they had to finish up an ongoing continuity in Europe. But eventually they too relocated to the Pacific Theater per Arnold's request.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://comicartville.com/busyblackhawkmilitary11.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/busyblackhawkmilitary11sm.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><i>Blackhawk </i>by Chuck Cuidera</b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">MILITARY COMICS #11 (Aug. 1942), pg. 10</b></center>
<br />
Not all of Arnold's correspondence was directed at Eisner. One particularly blunt and detailed letter was sent to Eisner's former partner, Jerry Iger on December 26, 1941. And Arnold had plenty to say to him.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Jerry,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>The total combined loss on HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS for the June 1941 to the November 1941 issues (six issues of each magazine) was $10,704.87. During this period we were operating under our agreement dated January 13, 1941.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Starting with the December issues of HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS, we worked under the terms of a second agreement dated July 21, 1941, The loss on the December issue of HIT COMICS was $1,261.99 and the loss on the December issue of NATIONAL COMICS was $1,506.51 -- a total of $2,768.50. While I haven't as yet any exact figures on the January and February issues of HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS, they will be even worse than the results on the December issues. So for the period from June 1941 to February 1942 we will lose a total of nearly $20,000.00 on HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS. You must realize that we cannot operate any longer under the terms of our agreement dated July 21, 1941 and this letter is to officially cancel all past deals on HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS effective with the April issues of each magazine. By then we will probably be in the red for a total of almost $25,000.00 and, if we are going to buy any material from you in the future for these magazines, it must be on an entirely new setup. Incidentally, HIT COMICS is now on a permanent bi-monthly basis and I plan to drop the May and July issues of NATIONAL COMICS so that temporarily this book will also be on a bi-monthly basis.</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">In the first place, the 20 per cent profit arrangement up to a total of $5,000.00 covered in our agreement of January 13. 1941 and the 30 per cent profit arrangement on HIT COMICS covered in our agreement dated July 21, 1941 are both cancelled by this letter. If we ever recover our losses on these two magazines we will be very lucky. The present features obviously will not sell HIT COMICS or NATIONAL COMICS well enough to enable us to make a profit on either magazine, so in order to try to get "out of the red" in the near future on HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS, I must add the best available material which I can buy independently to each book and kill several of your features which apparently do no sell comic magazines.</i><br />
<br />
Busy Arnold's methodically precise recounting of his profit and loss statements are a painful reminder that the content of comic books were driven by more than editorial whim. It's likely Iger read the above dense paragraphs with growing anger over the cancellation of his ongoing contracts with Arnold and trepidation at what was to come.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Strictly on a month by month basis, I will buy the following material from you for these two magazines in the future:</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i><u>NATIONAL COMICS</u></i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>6 pages Sally O'Neil (by Bryant) -------------------------- $90.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Prop Powers (By Williams) ---------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Wonder Boy (by Bryant) ------------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Kid Patrol (by artist who did April job) ------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Kid Dixon (by Nordling) ------------------------- 60.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i><u>HIT COMICS</u></i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>6 pages Betty Bates (by Bryant) -------------------------- $90.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>6 " The Red Bee (by Williams) ----------------------- 90.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " The Strange Twins (by Blum) -------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>7 " Don Glory (by Peddy) ---------------------------- 105.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Bob and Swab (by Nordling) -------------------- 60.00</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">All of the above features (except those done by Nordling) are at the arte of $15 per page which is a fair price with conditions in the comic magazine field as they are at the present time. You are only paying Nordling $10 per page for his work and since he completes everything and writes his own stories, $12 per page is a fair price for Kid Dixon, and Bob and Swab. If you prefer, I will buy these two features direct from Nordling and pay him per page.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> </i> This last line was surely included to tweak Iger. In no way did he want to lose his $3 per page cut by letting Arnold deal directly with an artist.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>I may have Lou Fine or Chuck Cuidera handle Stormy Foster starting with the June issue of HIT COMICS. However, this feature is very second rate and it hasn't any character. So unless Lou or another top notch artist can do a first class job on it right away, I will get another lead feature for HIT COMICS. </i></div>
<br />
Once again,<i> </i>Arnold casually tossed in a possibility meant to get Iger's goat. Iger knew very well that both Fine and Cuidera were in the employ of his former partner Eisner and losing work to his shop would be particularly galling.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>So much for the material for HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS. I am also losing money at present on SMASH COMICS and POLICE COMICS and I can only afford to pay you the following rates for your material in these two magazines in the future:</i></div>
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><u>SMASH COMICS</u></i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i><i>6 pages Rookie Rankin (by Peddy) ---------------------- $90.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " The Purple Trio (by Blum) ----------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><u>POLICE COMICS </u></i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>6 pages Phantom Lady (by Peddy) ---------------------- $90.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Eagle Evans (by Williams) --------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Steele Kerrigan (by Bryant) ------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">Although FEATURE COMICS is still operating at a profit, it has dropped considerably in recent months and we can only afford to pay the following prices for your material in this book in the future:</i><br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>5 pages Zoro, Ghost Detective (by Bryant) ------------- $75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Samar (by artist who did April Kid Patrol) --- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>5 " Spin Shaw (by Williams) -------------------------- 75.00</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>I will continue to pay you $20 per page for Crandall's features on a month by month basis. However, I am not sure whether I will keep The Firebrand in POLICE COMICS much longer as a six page feature after I jump Plastic Man into the lead position in this magazine. Like Stormy Foster, The Firebrand is very second rate even with Reed handling the art work in it.</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">It is understood that you will supply better and more timely stories for all of the above features in the future and will give first class art work on all of this material.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i> </i> Arnold's reconsideration of <i><b>The Firebrand </b></i>become a reality as it soon dwindled to a 5-page feature before exiting <b>POLICE</b> within the next year. With the bulk of the financial business completed, Arnold's letter takes a different tone and gets personal.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>In closing may I take a crack at the statement in your letter of December 4th where you say "Maybe I'm a fool, but I've turned down considerable business so that I may better serve you in your books. What do I get in return?" Are you trying to be funny or do you think I am a bit simple? You never turned down any business because of me and grabbed off all of the accounts you could get from such magazines as Pocket Comics, Champ Comics an Speed Comics. And aren't you the same Jerry Iger who started Great Comics and Choice Comics with Fred Fiore even though you were supposed to be concentrating on producing extra good work for E. M. Arnold and Thurman Scott? Don't make me laugh, Jerry.</i></div>
<br />
<i> </i> Arnold was just getting warmed up. As much as this paragraph probably irked Iger, it was the next one that was pointedly crafted to infuriate.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>And please don't tell me again that you personally developed every top-notcher in this business including Bill Eisner. He was largely responsible for the success of Eisner & Iger as you well know. Bill always was a swell artist with a flair for writing interesting plots and nobody helped develop him except Wm. E. Eisner, a lot of natural ability and plenty of good hard work.</i></div>
<br />
Arnold knew this was the sorest of Iger's sore spots. The split between Iger and Eisner left the older partner with a lingering grudge toward his departing junior. A grudge that lasted his lifetime. Even in his later years, Iger would downplay Eisner's role in the creation of characters and contend that he was no more than a freelancer in his shop who worked on an "as-needed" basis. That Arnold took special glee in writing this paragraph is evident in his handwritten notation at the top of the copy he forwarded to Eisner.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Bill/ Maybe you better send Jerry some smelling salts and flowers. Is paragraph #5 on page 3 okay or did Jerry really develop W. Eisner?</i></div>
<br />
But he didn't stop there. He made sure to get in a few more jabs as long as he had Iger on the ropes.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>As regards the $10,000 you paid Bill for his share of the business, may I remind you that I had nothing to do with this and it was a matter entirely between Wm. E. Eisner and S. M. Iger. We paid you several thousand dollars as a split on the first ten issues of HIT COMICS and NATIONAL COMICS after Bill sold out to you and you got plenty more from Scottie about the same time. So I guess the deal you made with Bill was pretty fair to you both.</i></div>
<br />
<i> </i>And then back to business. <i></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">Don't think there is anything personal in anything I had done, Jerry. It is strictly a matter of good business and you can readily see why I cannot afford to pay $18 and $20 per page for material any longer. And please don't get me together with Sid Klinghofer as I don't care to waste a lot of time talking about something that will have to stand as outlined above.</i><br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Incidentally, in addition to dropping the May and July issues of NATIONAL COMICS, I am also dropping the April and June issues of SMASH COMICS and POLICE COMICS. So during the weak selling spring months (March, April, May and June issues), FEATURE COMICS will be our only magazine published on a monthly basis. If business improves by next summer, I will put NATIONAL COMICS, SMASH COMICS and POLICE COMICS back on a monthly basis, otherwise I will leave them all bi-monthly magazines. </i></div>
<i><br /></i>
Business must have improved, as all three titles were back to a monthly schedule by the following summer.<i></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i style="color: yellow;">I hate to take so much work away from Nordling and, if you wish me to do so, I will drop a five-page feature from CRACK COMICS and put Pen Miller in this magazine (five pages instead of four pages). But I can't afford to give you an agent's fee of more than $2 per page for Nordling's features so the price for five pages of Pen Miller will be Sixty Dollars ($60).</i><br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>In closing may I ask you to deliver the balance of the material for issue No. 2 of THE DOLL MAN QUARTERLY just as soon as possible. You are nearly three months late in delivering this book with the result that we have to call issue No. 2 Spring instead of Winter. Follow up with 11 pages of Doll Man for April FEATURE COMICS (we need this just as soon as possible), then have Crandall do six pages of The Firebrand.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i> </i>His business (and evisceration) of Iger completed, Arnold recommenced his correspondence with Eisner on January 5, 1942.<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Dear Bill, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Will you please send me the script for the next eight pages of Secret War News and one page of The Atlantic Patrol. Alden McWilliams is about ready to start working on these pages and I would like to turn over the script to him just as soon as possible.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>Sincerely yours, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>P.S.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>For very apparent reasons I would like to get Alden ahead on his comic magazine pages.</i></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i> </i>Arnold's handwritten postscript reveals a concern then facing all publishers. The United States entry into<i> </i>the ongoing World War<i> </i>posed the real possibility of losing many of their artists and writers to the mandatory conscription. It made good business sense to stockpile some inventory as a buffer against the lack of artists to provide material for their comics.<br />
While that eventuality loomed, Arnold still had more to say about the work coming out of Eisner's shop, as in this short letter from January 13, 1942.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Bill, </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Will you please have Nick spend more time on his backgrounds and eliminate the free-hand sloppy type of stuff. On the last set of Lady Luck which we sent to the engraver today, many of the backgrounds had doorways, windows, etc. done in free-hand which were pretty awful.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Sincerely yours,</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Busy</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>P. S. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>Lady Luck for the past couple of months has been awful -- not even comic book quality. </i></div>
<br />
A similar letter dated January 26th critiqued Eisner's handling of a story-line before launching into yet another scolding about the work of Alex Kotzky.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>The six pages of Espionage for SMASH COMICS which I picked up last week weren't completed. We have to do the lettering, heading and general clean up here. This was an awful set of Espionage so try to have Kotzky do a better job next month. </i></div>
<br />
By February, there was a sense of urgency to Arnold's correspondence. His letter dated February 10th covered a lot of ground. After reminding Eisner to keep Tuska working on UNCLE SAM and to get a script to McWilliams as soon as possible, Arnold once again confronts the inevitable loss of talent.<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: yellow;">You now have Cuidera about two episodes ahead on Blackhawk as well as an extra cover for MILITARY COMICS. Better have Cuidera do a couple more covers right away, then start him on another 11 pages of Blackhawk. Try to get him as far ahead on everything as possible.</span> </i><br />
<br />
Again on February 27, Arnold requests that Nordling get ahead on all of his features. Then, in a paragraph midway through his letter, Arnold indirectly refers to a coming editorial change.<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: yellow;">What do you plan to do for issue No. 4 of UNCLE SAM QUARTERLY? Will you figure out the make-up of this book and have Nitkin and Bob Powell write the stories? Or should I plan to handle this? At any rate, you might have George work on the cover for the No. 4 issue (Autumn) now so it is done under your capable supervision.</span> </i><br />
<br />
In those few lines, Arnold seems to be contemplating taking over the editorial reins from Eisner on UNCLE SAM. But why? His closing comments make the picture a bit clearer.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i>See you on Thursday. Hope Lou is working them so we can get quite a distance ahead on everything before you leave.</i></div>
<br />
What both Arnold and Eisner knew, why Lou Fine was apparently overseeing Eisner's comic shop, was that Eisner wasn't going to be around to run it himself. <br />
Eisner and Arnold had fought vigorously in the summer of
1941 to keep Eisner from being conscripted. Eisner wrote a lengthy
affidavit detailing how he was solely responsible for the employment of <i>"sixteen artists, some of whom are married".</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2 </i></sup></b> But even the inclusion of supporting affidavits from several of these artists as well as Arnold and the top executive of <i><b>The Spirit's</b></i> newspaper syndicate failed to convince his local draft board. He entered the Army in May, 1942.<br />
The relationship of Busy Arnold and Will Eisner wasn't easy to explain. They were business partners, though never quite equals. The publisher was the artist's biggest fan, though not really his friend. Arnold was a demanding client who would critically scrutinize the minutest details and a generous patron who funded their joint publishing ventures and shared ownership of various properties. The complexity of their relationship seemingly mystified even Eisner, who simply told Jim Amash, <i>"We had a different view of each other." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>3 </i></sup></b><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>1 </i></sup></b>Amash, Jim, "I Always Felt Storytelling Was As Important As The Artwork", ALTER EGO, (May 2005), pg. 9.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2<span style="color: black;"> </span></i></sup></b>Affidavit of William E. Eisner to Local Board No. 121, Bronx, New York.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>3<span style="color: black;"> </span></i></sup></b>Amash, op. cit., pg. 9.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-4236205642295358542012-12-15T07:27:00.000-08:002012-12-15T12:46:05.892-08:00Roy Thomas: More Corrections & Suggestions<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt;"><i> I<span style="font-size: small;">n the immediately preceding post, legendary comic creator Roy Thomas offered his perspective on details and events discussed in Sean Howe's recent book, MARVEL COMICS: THE UNTOLD STORY. In this second post, Roy continues his commentary on the second half of the book.</span></i><span style="font-size: small;"> -- Ken Quattro</span></span></div>
<span id="btAsinTitle" style="font-size: small;"><i> </i></span><span style="font-size: small;">__________________________________________________________</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Re Marvel Comics: The Untold Story by Sean Howe</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Notes by Roy Thomas</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">[Alas, due to my heightened
schedule, after p. 150 I’ve pretty much limited myself to correcting errors
related to my own career.]</span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 152:</u> I was the
“second-longest-tenured Marvel employee”?
Maybe… but that would have to discount both Stan Lee and Marie Severin.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">Also, while Stan and I may
have agreed that the future editorship be split up after I left the
editor-in-chief job in 1974, it was entirely Stan’s idea and decision... I
believe I only acquiesced, and like, what did I care? But it’s true that, while I don’t generally
correct anyone when Len Wein is referred to as the next editor-in-chief after
me, I doubt if he really held that title… or at least held that authority…
because I don’t think he was considered technically over Marv, the b&w
editor, as I had been. Marv was probably
actually the next ed-in-chief after me, not that it matters much.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">By the way, I “stayed on for
a few weeks” (about two, I think) mainly because Len and Marv had left for the
World SF Con, which was somewhere on the East Coast around that time, and they
showed no inclination to cut that trip—and, I believe, vacations scheduled for
after that—to come back and take over.
My idea was to leave two minutes after Stan and I agreed it was time I went. I hate long goodbyes.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 153: </u>May
as well mention that I have no knowledge about Shooter’s statement that Len and
Marv influenced Stan not to hire Gerry as editor-in-chief, or precisely
whatever that footnote says. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">The account re the creation
of THE X-MEN is in serious error on one important detail. No way did Al Landau “charge” me to “devise a
super-team of non-Americans.” He merely
stated, in a meeting of Stan, him, and me and perhaps Verpoorten or someone
else that if Marvel had a team of heroes composed of characters from various
countries in which Marvel sold large numbers of comics, it might help sales
there. The suggestion was tossed out to
all of it. I immediately suggested the
X-Men revival idea and, I suppose, was “charged” (encouraged?) to go ahead with
it. It was Stan who decided I should go
ahead with my notion, not Landau. I’m
not trying to deny that Landau was the impetus, but his suggestion was vaguer
than the book suggests.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 154:</u> Not a big
deal, but it really does irk me when all the credit for creating Wolverine is
given to Len and John Romita, important as they were. I mean, I didn’t just mention that I’d like a
Canadian character. I told Len I wanted
him to make up a character specifically named Wolverine, who is Canadian and
small/short of stature and has a fierce temper (like a real wolverine); if that
doesn’t establish my bona fides as co-creator of Wolverine, I don’t know what
does. </span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br clear="all" style="page-break-before: always;" />
</span></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 156:</u> I don’t recall
keeping a box of index cards about where characters had last appeared,
etc. That sounds almost too organized
for me. Maybe I once started something
like that, but I doubt I did much with it.
Where did I say that?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 165:</u> I don’t recall
knowing that Stan once told Gerry he could have my job if I left, but if Gerry
says so, I suppose he did. I do know I
told Stan, when I was getting set to leave the ed-in-chief job, that, as noted
on p. 166, I told Stan that if he didn’t make some sort of provision for Gerry
besides just being a writer under Len and Marv, Marvel would lose him… which is
precisely what happened.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 166:</u> Ditto, I don’t
recall promising Gerry he could edit a PUNISHER title, but I may have. Sounds like me.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 174:</u> Error of fact
here, pure and simple. Jim Shooter was
already writings long-distance scripts for Mort Weisinger when Mort hired me,
nt months later.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 182:</u> I rather
suspect Jim Shooter is, er, overstating the case when he says I showed him a
list of people I intended to fire.
Carrying around a list, let alone showing it to a prospective assistant,
was hardly my style… let alone a “nice chunky list” of people I was going to
fire. Nonsense, really… to put it
politely. How could I have had a
“chunky” list of people I was going to fire, when I had hired most of them (Don
McGregor included) and respected their talents. This is just Shooter making up drama, or
perhaps merely misremembering it. Nor do
I recall precisely whether I intended to remove McGregor from some of his
assignments, but I may well have, and why not.
They weren’t selling, and, as noted, he showed no willingness to make
even small concessions to change that situation. By my lights, and Marvel’s, he deserved being
replaced, no matter how passion (some of it perhaps misplaced) he showed for
his series. Still, I’m sure I’d have
tried to find something else for Don if I did remove him. I don’t believe I ever planned to fire him,
and I’m suspect of Shooter’s motives for saying the things he does. But even pilloring poor ol’ Don wouldn’t have
amounted to the “chunky” list Shooter talks about. Where does he go to dream these things up?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 193:</u> Was it Algeria
George Lucas filmed part of STAR WARS in?
I was thinking it was Morocco, but that’s just a question, not a
correction.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 208:</u> You’d have to
show me some documentation to convince me that “Kirby refused to allow Thomas
to script” the WHAT IF issue in which he and Stan, et al., became the Fantastic
Four. In fact, I’m quite certain it
didn’t happen that way. Jack was drawing
away, and at some point I simply let him write it, but he never “refused”
anything. Jack wasn’t that
confrontational. I wish I were certain
if it was before or after I learned that he was drawing Sol Brodsky as the
Human Torch rather than me, as was his assignment, that I withdrew as writer,
but I don’t. In any event, Jack’s
instincts were sound in that instance.
It made more sense for Sol to be in the comic because he was around for
#1 if not on staff yet; he told me he even designed the FF logo. It annoyed me that Jack didn’t do what he was
supposed to do, since I was the editor… but I recognized his idea as an
improvement, so I let it stand. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">I don’t recall if or why
supposedly “everybody’s” grammar was changed for the better in that story except
Jack’s… but the writing in UNTOLD STORY makes it sound as if it was a vengeance
thing... getting even with Jack for real or imagined sins. It wasn’t.
The Thing was the crudest-speaking of the FF, so that was the reason for
any changes, and it fit with Jack’s vernacular.
It is true, though, that Stan insisted that all uses of the word
“Stanley” be changed to “Stan.” He
didn’t like Jack calling him Stanley, for some reason.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 226:</u> Please check
sources… book may be right, but my
result is that, after I received a contract which had been changed with regard
to the writer/editor thing, in contradiction of what I’d been told, I talked to
Paul Levitz at DC BEFORE I talked to Shooter.
But I wouldn’t swear to it. The
basic facts here are right, anyway.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 233:</u> Actually,
Gruenwald and Macchio were brought in to finish (in #300) the THOR saga that
Shooter wouldn’t LET me finish… just as he wouldn’t let me continue the CONAN
newspaper strip even though DC Comics and Sol Brodsky (who was in charge of it)
said that was fine by them. That and the
refusal to run a mild and non-threatening letter of goodbye in CONAN were par
for the course for Shooter, and part of the reason why I continue to despise
him to this day, and feel that he well earned that feeling. (Which is a shame, because I have real
respect for Shooter as a writer and in some other areas.) </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 254:</u> Ah, I recall
John Byrne’s quote. It wasn’t
specifically that quote over which I threatened to sue Byrne… there were a
couple of others… but it will do. A
shame that such a talented artist is such a poor judge of others’
skill…sometimes, even of his own. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><u>P. 428:</u> Maybe I do
spend more time on ALTER EGO than anything else, but of course I’ve continued
to write comics, including a one-year run on a CONAN comic for Dark Horse in
2010-11… and I have, after all, been acknowledged by Stan as working with him
on the SPIDER-MAN newspaper strip, which I’ve done since the turn of 2000… some
12-13 years now. I’ve also written
several books on comics. This isn’t a
request to add more… but the paragraph seems to indicate I’ve gone back to
being a fan, pure and simple, and that isn’t really the case, even if I’ve had
to put development of a new creator-owned comics feature or two on hold until I
finish a humongous book on Stan Lee for the German publisher Taschen.</span></div>
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-76840086615257314842012-12-07T15:41:00.001-08:002012-12-10T21:20:01.388-08:00Roy Thomas: Corrections & Suggestions<i> </i><i>There is probably nobody in the comic book industry that I like
and respect more than Roy Thomas. The man is truly a Legend and if I
have to list his accomplishments for you...well, you are obviously reading the
wrong blog. It only adds to my appreciation of him that he has
occasionally published some of my articles in his essential <b>ALTER EGO </b>magazine. If it isn't on your must read list, it should be. Buy it. Now.<br />
</i>
<i> I also like and respect Sean Howe. Sean is a terrific
writer and editor who also happens to be a comic fan. His book of
collected essays, <b>GIVE OUR REGARDS TO THE ATOMSMASHERS!</b>, is one of the finest tomes ever written about comics. Buy it. Now.</i><br />
<i> Recently, Sean's latest book,<span id="btAsinTitle"> <b>MARVEL COMICS: THE UNTOLD STORY</b>,
was released and not without controversy. Howe reportedly interviewed
more than 100 people in preparing his book. Not everyone agreed with all
of the details that came from these interviewees, including Roy Thomas.</span></i><br />
<i><span id="btAsinTitle">
Roy privately contacted Sean and gave him a detailed response to
what he perceives as misconceptions and errors. After an exchange of
emails among Roy, Sean and myself, it has been agreed to allow me to
publish Roy's thoughts here, on my blog. Sean has also said that Roy's comments will be considered for inclusion in an updated edition of his book.</span></i><br />
<span id="btAsinTitle"><i>
As Roy notes, he didn't have time to type out the text from Sean's book
that he is referencing. That means you have to buy the book to get a
full appreciation of Roy's response. So buy it. Now. </i></span><br />
<span id="btAsinTitle"><i>-- </i>Ken Quattro<i><br />
</i></span><br />
<span id="btAsinTitle"><i> </i></span>__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Re Marvel Comics: The Untold Story by Sean Howe<br />
Notes by Roy Thomas<br />
<br />
[SEAN: I haven’t always taken the time and space to type down the
precise text in the book to which the correction applies, assuming that
will be clear from context. If clarification is needed, please advise.]<br />
<br />
P. 1: Not a big error, but by the time of Blushing Blurbs and Golfers
Anonymous, Stan’s name was long since legally Stan Lee, contrary to the
impression given in the first paragraph.<br />
<br />
P. 11: To the best of my knowledge, there was never a Goodman magazine
called Timely. What Michael Feldman researched of late, and which is
covered in detail with illustrations in Alter Ego #114 (Dec. 2012), was
the 1939 Popular Digest magazine, whose subtitle was “Timely Topics
Condensed,” and for which he started Timely Publications. Chances are,
as Feldman surmises, he wanted to call the mag Timely, but figured Time
would sue.<br />
<br />
P. 25: “Jap Buster Johnson” was just a feature, not a magazine, so shouldn’t be italicized.<br />
<br />
P. 47: No big deal, but surprised you didn’t mention Mario Puzo’s
expressing, around 1966 or so, an interest in writing for Marvel while
finishing “his new book”—which would be The Godfather, of course. He
returned the comics Stan had me give him after a short time, saying
there was just too much to learn about all the characters… he was better
off continuing to write for Magazine Management. ’Course, in the early
’70s for the first big open-to-the-public meeting of ACBA, he did send
group a telegram Stan read there, thanking “Marvel Comic for teaching my
children to read when the public schools failed.” Of course, that’s
just my memory…Stan’s long since lost the telegram.<br />
<br />
P. 59: Big error! When Stan looked out the window of his office and
asked (to correct the wording, which is not right for something in
quotation marks), “So—what do we have to do to hire you away from
National?” [not “DC,” in those days], he was standing, not swiveling in
his chair. We’ve got to get these important historical details
straight. If Stan stayed sitting, he couldn’t see the pretty girls
walking down Madison Avenue (like in that Sinatra song “It’s Nice to Go
Travelin’” from the “Come Fly with Me” album), and he liked to do that,
in a harmless, non-lecherous way. <br />
<br />
Next paragraph: There was no comic, of course, called Millie and the
Model. The character was Mille the Model… and the actual title of the
comic I wrote that weekend was Modeling with Millie. I didn’t even get
to start off on the main Millie book!<br />
<br />
No problem with your litany of the office interruptions that kept me
from being effective as a “staff writer,” but one of the main problems,
actually, was Stan himself, who was constantly asking me for bits of
information (“Where did Sandman first appear?” “When did Sandman last
appear?”—that kind of thing), and in addition I was almost immediately
given pages on which to do backup proofreading, seeing that Stan’s
corrections were done.<br />
<br />
P. 79: Just for the record, I believe Jim Steranko’s always claimed he
did have an appointment in 1966 when he come up to the offices at the
time of the convention… but that’s simply not how I remember it. Or
maybe he had indeed wangled an appointment somehow, through Flo or
whoever or even Stan somehow… and it’s just that when the time came,
Stan wanted out of it because he was busy. But everything in this
section is as I recall it. I’ve said from time to time that I thought
he also came up to the Marvel offices with no success in 1965, but I
don’t really recall that now… and Jim denies it, and he may be right.
My memory’s much firmer on ’66.<br />
<br />
P. 80: Not sure that I wore goatee, Russian hat, alligator shoes, and
Nehru jacket all at the same time… but I may have. The jacket and suit
were orange trimmed in white; I looked like an orange sherbert. When a
truck driver whistled at me as I walked up Second or Third Avenue one
day on my lunch hour (where I often browsed book stores), I gave up the
Nehru… and Jeanie married me in July 1968 on condition that I shave the
beard. Sol and I bought Russian hats together when it was a fad in New
York… and they did keep the head warm. And of course the gator shoes
were before they became part of the uniform of pimps. None of this
esp. belongs in the book, of course… just sayin’.<br />
<br />
P. 93: No correction needed, but it wasn’t technically a “vacation” I
was on when Jeanie and I eloped. Rather, I’d gone to St. Louis for the
weekend to a Gateway comics convention. But the lecture you mention was
purely from Stan, not Sol… and actually wasn’t a lecture at all, just
one stern remark in the middle of a conference when I made a
light-hearted remark. This isn’t a complaint, though. Also in that
paragraph the impression is given perhaps that Archie had been “hired”
to replace me on Doctor Strange (italics needed; it was a full book
then)… actually, all they’d done was give him the original art for that
one issue to dialogue. As I was coming in from being away, I ran into
Archie by the elevator and, with no resistance from him, marched him
right back in to Sol and demanded that I dialogue the book I’d plotted.
Archie didn’t mind that, I don’t think, though he’d wasted a trip into
the office from the Upper West Side. More than you need to know, I
realize… but I need to make it clear so you can decide if you feel you
can change anything beyond removing the “and Brodsky” in the lecture
thing.<br />
<br />
P. 94: Re that “All the Way with LBJ” button in Brand Echh #1 (“Not”
wasn’t part of the comic’s actual title then, though it did appear on
the cover): I didn’t tell Stan that button had been in the b&w
proofs, as you write… Stan didn’t regularly look at those, I don’t
think, leaving them to Sol… but the button had been in the original art,
which Stan had proofread, and he’d just overlooked it. Nor did I
really quit… I merely told him that if he was accusing me of lying, I
would quit, and with that I stormed back to my desk in the other
office. Stan came out to call me back into his office a few minutes
later to explain himself. A generally accurate portray, but I think I
covered the facts pretty clearly in AE #95. A painful experience, but
there were, I think, no residual hard feelings on either side.<br />
<br />
P. 112: Surprised there’s no mention of the fact that I talked Stan out
of a comic called The Mark of Satan by suggesting we make it The Son of
Satan, instead. ‘Course, Satan was still a major character in it… but
at least he wasn’t the hero! And the first Marvel vampire, of course,
was Morbius in Amazing Spider-Man #101 by Gil and me, though he wasn’t a
real vampire, more of a science-fictional one. Not a request for
changes, though.<br />
<br />
P. 116: Put me down as voting for “new levels of intertextual ectacy,”
not “fumes from an empty tank.” If the Marvel Universe was to be and
remain a believable universe, it needed that continuity and integrity,
and both Stan and I saw part of my job as being to oversee that.<br />
<br />
P. 118: Maybe Vinnie brought Kirby Fourth World pages to Stan, but if
so, I don’t ever recall seeing them… and I sure don’t recall their being
hung up in the office, or else I would have seen them and looked
carefully at them and remember them, I’d think. Do you really have a
source for this, or is it mere scuttlebutt? I have real doubts about
that statement… and not because Vinnie wasn’t entirely capable of
exactly what’s claimed.<br />
<br />
P. 120: With all that went wrong with the Carnegie Hall show in January
of ’72, our two rock numbers went over fairly well, esp. with the
dancing girls (Jeanie and two others—one may have been Mary McPherran)
in Marvel costumes left over from the same Macy’s parade as “my” Spidey
outfit… and despite the fact that the band’s mikes didn’t work so our
banter had to be cut out, since I was on the stage and they were up on a
pedestal 30 feet or so aawy. But there were no “Elvis songs”—there was
this one John Lennon song I hated (much as I love the Beatles and
Lennon) that Barry talked me into against my good judgment, and
“Be-Bop-a-Lula,” a song originally sung by Gene Vincent in, admittedly,
very much an Elvis vein. I think too much has been made of Gerry
Conway’s assessment as to the backstage mood… I didn’t see that kind of
thing, and I was around the whole evening. But there were a lot of
foul-ups and dissatisfactions. I’m proud of some parts of the evening…
but the slow parts and the non-comics-related parts really dragged us
down. High point for me personally, after the songs, was having Tom
Wolfe, one of my favorite writers, read my long paragraph on Captain
America. Compared to what I got out of that evening, the slings and
arrows of a few outrageous fans were nothing. I’ve forgotten their
names, but I still remember singing on the stage at Carnegie Hall… and
Tom Wolfe standing there in his white suit, reading something I’d
written.<br />
<br />
P. 121: Apparently, Stan’s actual quote referring to me as the new
editor-in-chief, made (as you perhaps know) to Don Rico, was, according
to Don, “Oh, some guy out there.” Just one word difference, beause Stan
wouldn’t have said “back there” when referring to the other offices.<br />
<br />
P. 123: Along with my sincere feeling that Conan the Barbarian deserved
rather more attention than it’s given in the book, for several good
reasons I won’t bother going into, I find the mention of “Goodman’s
cancellation of Savage Tales” potentially confusing to readers. The mag
is never previously referred to in the book, so there’s no context.
What was it? Why was it cancelled? When? (Savage Sword of Conan, also,
which isn’t even mentioned in the book, deserved a little attention as a
consistent moneymaker; it sold very well and had no color for its $1
price tag, as well as lasting more than 200 issues, Marvel’s only real
b&w comic success. The downplaying of Conan is, in terms of
history, a fault of the book, I very much feel.<br />
<br />
P. 124: I wince at seeing a reference to “Roy Thomas, Gary Friedrich,
and artist Mike Ploog” in that order as originating Ghost Rider. Just a
minor point… you cover it better later. I feel I was far more of a
player than Gary was likely to have acknowledged in his lawsuit against
Marvel, but it was his idea, not mine. <br />
<br />
P. 127: The paragraph about Don McGregor doesn’t make it clear he was
working for Marvel around that time. He was working as a security
guard, I believe, when I called to offer him a writing and
assistant-editing position at Marvel; but because of some obscure grudge
which he refuses to spell out, Don refuses to admit in print that I
hired him… nor do I care overmuch. I’ve always just felt it makes him
look small. Hey, do I deny the role that Mort Weisinger played in
getting me to New York? Don was and is a disappointment to me, because I
gave him real gainful employment for the first time and defended him
against his critics. But I have eight dogs, so I don’t need his
gratitude at this late stage.<br />
<br />
P. 128: I never had any idea that Marvel president Al Landau, my
pre-Shooter nemesis, was a godson of Albert Einstein. It wouldn’t have
made me despise him any less… but it’s interesting.<br />
<br />
P. 129: A bit awkward… discussing how I divvied up the writing of three
“women’s titles” between three women… before mentioning that all three
titles were Stan’s idea and names. Puts the cart before the horse.
Stan came up with the titles and concepts… and it was then my idea to
have women write them. That can be called a cynical ploy… but on the
other hand, I was well and instantly aware that if there were to be any
real other-media coverage of those titles, the fact that they were being
written by men would have been pointed out and held against them. It
was less cynicism than self-defense. Besides, we didn’t have a lot of
writers to spare. Jeanie had worked with me on a few plots and I knew
she could write in general… and Linda had written a bit before… and I
knew Carole was intelligent and a comics fan. They all three made
sense. When Linda asked me why it had to be a “Cat,” I should’ve just
told her, “Because Stan says so,” and let it go at that. Hey, you don’t
quite what I said to her… so maybe I did.<br />
<br />
P. 130: “Lee dangled the idea of a secretarial job [before RT’s wife
Jeanie upon her graduation from Hunter College in NYC] and then quickly
withdrew the offer.” Not really. Actually, Stan had made the offer at
least a year or so earlier (probably around 1969, actually), when Jeanie
left the same job, which she’d held for some months not long after Flo
Steinberg left. He said the job would be hers when she graduated. It
was a year or two later that it was withdrawn when Jeanie came to him to
take up the offer. As to who or how many folks in the office
“objected,” I never really tried to find out, as it would have severely
impacted my relations with them had I known. Stan told me that day that
I should acquiesce because “You have to get along with these people.” I
replied, “I think they should have to get along with me.” I should’ve
stuck by my guns… I’m pretty sure Stan would have back me, and Jeanie
would have done a good job in that position again. But you’re right
that it did color my view of Marvel. I remember that the Carnegie Hall
show was a few days later, and I seriously considered withdrawing from
it in protest. Glad I didn’t. But I still despise the attitudes of the
cowards in the office, who I’m sure were all smiles and friendliness to
Jeanie’s (and my) face while aiming their knifes for our backs.<br />
<br />
P. 145: “Thomas, who’d secured the rights to Sax Rohmer’s pulp-novel Fu
Manchu character, suggested they incorporate martial arts into a Fu
Manchu comics.” Sideways, more inaccurate than accurate in this case.
I’m fairly certain that, when Starlin and Englehart came to me with the
Shang-Chi idea, I “suggested” (okay, insisted) that Fu Manchu be
incorporated into the comic… and it was only then that I went after and
acquired the rights to the character. I may have been toying with the
idea of a Fu Manchu comics before, but I mainly wanted to get the rights
because of DC editorial director Carmine Infantino’s alleged statement
to Denny O’Neil and others, when they told him that if DC didn’t publish
a comic about the Warner-owned TV series Kung Fu, Marvel might license
the rights. Carmine was alleged to have retorted, “If they do Kung Fu,
we’ll do Fu Manchu!” Whatever that may have meant, it thus struck me as
ironically amusing for Marvel to have a comic book called Master of
Kung Fu—with Fu Manchu, as well, in that very comic. It’s quite
possible that Steve and Jim already planned to have an evil father, and
that spurred me to “suggest” Fu Manchu to fill the roll. Even if Marvel
could never print that comic in France… and now can’t reprint it at
all. Pity.<br />
<br />
P. 149: About how I “talked things over” with Seaboard/Atlas publisher
Chip Goodman to feel him out about a job, I don’t care if the info is
added in the book or not, but that dinner meeting was at Chip’s request,
not mine. I was not looking to leave Marvel, but I felt I might as
well talk to him, as long as he was paying for dinner. I was offered
the job of co-editor with Larry at equal status… same if any other
editor was in place at that time. That paragraph also makes it sound as
of my “beginning all-night writing sessions at ten or eleven at night”
was a result of problems in my marriage. Rather, it was probably more
of the cause… I’d been doing those all-night sessions since before
Jeanie and I were married in mid-1968, and I mostly kept at it. A
combination of deadlines and poor work habits.<br />
<br />
I’ve no quarrel with John Romita’s quote re some people not “cottoning”
to me being in charge, but I can honestly say that any “disrespect” they
felt was generally hidden by them if so. Artists of the older
generation almost never challenged me or talked back or whatever form
“disrespect” should take, at least to my face… perhaps Sean means it was
all behind my back? I do recall that Frank Giacoia blamed me in late
1972 or so for his ceasing to be part of the triumvirate that Stan
briefly put in charge when he became president and publisher, though
again that got back to me through others; Frank merely complained to me
about Stan, claiming he (Frank) had “busted my ass” for the company and
the Stan had removed his as “associate art director” or whatever exactly
he was. Funny that older artists should think of me as a “kid”—since
in 1972, when I became editor-in-chief, I was 31… more than a decade
older than Stan had been when he’d become editor. But then, didn’t Al
Gabrielle get fired for complaining about Stan’s youth to Goodman, as
the story goes?<br />
<br />
Also: Not exactly inaccurate, but I don’t feel it should be said that
Vinnie Colletta actually quite threatened to “throw [me] out a window.”
Of course, that’s my own fault, since I used that phrase, but
half-jokingly, in Alter Ego #70. What Vinnie said when he found out
(from Verpoorten) that he was being taken off Thor was, “I feel like you
got your hand in my pocket and I’m thinkin’ about throwin’ you out the
window.” A small but real distinction, perhaps… but the actual quote
would work better than treating it as a 100% bona fide threat… although I
won’t quarrel overly with the sentence as written. Of course, once I
explained to Vinnie that the work would be replaced, page for
page—something John V. knew but had neglected to tell him for some
reason—all was forgiven and we became buddies from then on.<br />
<br />
No, I never “wanted to fly to the Philippines to recruit artists” for
cheaper rates or just because they were good artists. For the most
part, we already had the artists through the DeZunigas; I was just to
pep-talk to them, etc., and get the lay of the land. It was Stan’s idea
that I go (probably so that he wouldn’t have to)… I never wanted to go,
period, but was willing to be a good soldier about it. I was annoyed
at Landau for nixing the trip, because of what Stan told me he’d said
his reason was (which Sean quotes accurately), but otherwise I was quite
content to stay in the USA.<br />
<br />
P. 150: Is there any reason why it isn’t mentioned that the
“freelancer” who became the final straw that led me to leave the
editor-in-chief job was Frank Robbins, who fibbed about his DC rates?
Not that it matters that much. By the way, for the record, it might be
mentioned that, as per an angry letter he wrote to Alter Ego, Carmine
Infantino vehemently denied ever agreeing to share rate info with
Marvel. He claimed he flatly refused to do so. Me, I only knew what
Stan told me… I wasn’t at the lunch, but Stan talked to me right after
it. Maybe Carmine heard what he wanted to hear and Stan heard what he
wanted to hear. <br />
<br />
No quarrel with the basic bare-bones account of my half-resigning,
half-being-fired from the position of editor-in-chief, so I’ll pick up
with comments on chapter 6 at some near-future point… even if only
you’re interested.<br />
Best wishes,<br />
Roy Thomas Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-73805399525962705472012-09-18T23:20:00.001-07:002012-09-30T08:23:27.883-07:00OWENS v. AMERICAN STEREOGRAPHIC<i> This is the third and final installment of my investigation into the litigious back story of 3-D comic books. To get a full understanding of what follows, it is best to have read both of my previous posts, "<a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/08/two-views-of-3-d-comics.html" target="_blank">Two Views of 3-D Comics" </a>and<a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/09/tale-of-tape.html" target="_blank"> "Tale of the Tape".</a> Unheard in the courtroom, but very much in the minds of the participants, chosen portions of the tape are interspersed throughout this article.</i>-- Ken Quattro<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> FELDSTEIN: <i>When we made all these conjectures, I lifted myself from
being Lenny’s friend, and looked at it from a purely business point of
view.</i></b></div>
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<u><b>THE PLAINTIFFS</b></u><br />
<br />
<i><b> </b></i>The whole situation had gotten out of hand. It started with an
uncomfortable business meeting between old friends, schoolmates, suspiciously eyeing one another over a contract. Clandestine dealings and a month of contentious communications followed, capped by a surreptitiously tape-recorded interrogation/brainwashing. Smooth legalese soon tempered blunt accusations and elevated a Brooklyn street fight to a Foley Square courtroom.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dstenonotes.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dstenonotessmall.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Stenographer's minutes from </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>OWENS v. AMERICAN STEREOGRAPHIC</b></span></center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[filed Oct. 7, 1953]</b></span> </div>
<br />
On Sept. 1, 1953, the attorneys for the opposing parties appeared before Judge Irving R. Kaufman at 10:30 a.m. to argue the case. Emanuel Posnack, who represented American Stereographic, the corporation formed by brothers Norman and Leonard Maurer, their friend Joe Kubert and publisher Archer St. John, requested more time to prepare his case. Martin Scheiman, representing inventor Freeman H. Owens as well as Gaines, fought that request. Judge Kaufman heard both attorneys and granted a one week delay. The case was rescheduled for the following Tuesday, after the Labor Day holiday.<br />
The attorneys next appeared before Judge Edward A. Conger on September 9, 1953, which was a Wednesday. In a quick hearing, Scheiman requests to be heard as soon as possible. It is indicated that Posnack cannot make it the next day (Thursday). Court is adjourned and convenes once more at 10:30 a.m., Friday, September 11th.<br />
Scheiman immediately asks the judge for permission to serve Posnack with additional papers. When the court asks why, Scheiman launches into a long story explaining how Posnack served him with papers late in the afternoon the previous Wednesday. Since it was so late in the day, and the following Thursday was a Jewish holiday, he wasn’t able to serve Posnack in turn. The judge cuts Scheiman short and allows him to serve Posnack with additional papers. The court briefly adjourns.<br />
When court finally resumes at 12:15, Scheiman begins.<br />
<i> "If your Honor please, this is a motion for a preliminary injunction in connection with a suit for the infringement of a patent issued to one Freeman H. Owens, on October 13, 1936. The patent will expire on October 13 of this year."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 1 </i></sup></b><br />
<i> "Then it will be moot on October 13th,"</i> reasoned Judge Conger. Scheiman agrees, and after noting all the parties involved, he points out the uniqueness of Owens patent,<i>“…to provide a set of complementary stereographic pictures from a flat drawing.”</i> He goes on to say, <i>“Lest your Honor be in any way misled by what I say, I want to impress upon you that no claim is made by the Owens patent or by the plaintiffs that Mr. Owens invented anything new in the sense of stereoscopy as a science, which has been long and well known for perhaps a hundred years or so; what he did do in his invention was to make it possible to make an ordinary drawing and by a unique process convert that drawing into something which could be adapted to several forms of entertainment, advertising, and other purposes.” </i><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dpatentpgs.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dpatentpgssmall.jpg" /></a></center>
<center>
<span color:="color:" red="red"><b><i>
<span style="color: red;">"Method of Drawing and Photographing </span></i></b></span></center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b><span color:="color:" red="red"><i>Stereoscopic Pictures in Relief"</i></span></b></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b style="color: red;">(patent # 2057051)
</b><i><b style="color: red;"> </b> </i></div>
<br />
<i> “If you will examine the letters patent you will note that Mr. Owens illustrated his process in part by the use of certain panels cartoon-like in character depicting what might be termed a Tarzan-like scene.”</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> "The defendants," </i>Scheiman continued,<i> "have produced in the recent past a number of so-called comic books. Several of them are before your Honor. The first one which was produced by the defendant St. John pursuant to the process which I have referred to as the Illustereo process professedly invented by certain of the individual defendants, was on the New York newsstands approximately on July 3rd or July 5th."</i><br />
<i> "It has been followed in rapid succession by a number of similar comic books employing the same process."</i><br />
<i> "It is the plaintiffs' contention, and I don't think there can be very much doubt of that in view of the affidavits that are now before this Court, that the defendants have, in fact, made use of the Owens process in the preparation and production of their comic books. </i><br />
<i>“The defendants have attempted to explain their position by introducing the proverbial red herring in this matter in large quantity. I submit, your Honor, that most of those red herrings are so decomposed that they putrefy the atmosphere,”</i> Scheiman suggested. You should imagine that he took a pause to let his colorful imagery sink in.<br />
<i> “The defendants </i><i>have attempted by the use of distortions and other media to create the impression that the Owens patent is not a patent relating to the conversion of an ordinary drawing into a 3-dimensional effect. That, your Honor, I submit is equally transparent and sham.”</i><br />
Scheiman then presents an affidavit from a retired chief examiner for the United States Patent Office named George Hanlin. Hanlin was the examiner who approved Owens original 1936 application and Scheiman claims that his affidavit , <i>“…clearly and convincingly demonstrates that the Owens patent is beyond reproach, beyond criticism, as valid as any patent.”</i><br />
Scheiman notes the case being made by American Stereographic is, <i>“…that the Owens patent constitutes in part prior art.”</i> This claim, he says, undermines their own Illustereo patent application, which was made in May, 1953.<br />
Legally, prior art constitutes everything ever known publicly about an invention before a given date. In other words, if knowledge relevant to an invention is accessible by the public, it could disqualify a patent application. A trade secret, which is confidential information not readily available to the public, is usually not considered prior art.<br />
__________________________________________________________ <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> GAINES: </b><i><b>Now, at that time, I was very definitely given to understand that he had...that you had...patents pending.</b></i></div>
__________________________________________________________ <br />
<br />
Scheiman further contends that the defendants' application, <i>"...to my knowledge has not been prosecuted beyond its initial stages, except that the defendants have alleged that they have made application for special treatment of that particular application."</i><br />
<i> </i>The special treatment he referred to was the requested accelerated consideration and approval of the Illustereo application by American Stereographic. Clearly, they wanted to get their comics on the stands and start licensing their process as soon as possible. The 3-D fad was currently hot, and there were no guarantees on how long that would last.<br />
<i> </i>After stating his opinion that this request would be denied, Scheiman says,<i> "If the defendants knew about the Owens patent at the time they "jumped the gun" then they have committed a serious wrong, created an immoral situation, in my humble judgment."</i><br />
<i> "If they did not know about the Owens patent existed at the time they filed their application, then they were guilty of inexcusable ignorance because they professed in their papers to have made a laborious search through experts."</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> FELDSTEIN: </b><i><b>Who made St. John’s patent search?</b></i><b></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> KUBERT: <i>The one guy was this Asher Blum." </i></b></div>
__________________________________________________________ <br />
<br />
Asher Blum was an old-time patent attorney and while it's curious that St. John used him instead of Posnack to do the patent search, it's even more interesting (as far as comics history is concerned) that Blum was the lawyer for Victor Fox in the landmark copyright infringement lawsuit brought against him by D.C. comics, <i>Detective Comics, Inc. v. Bruns Publications</i>. [covered in my article in <b>ALTER EGO</b> #101 and online beginning here: <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2010/07/dc-vs-victor-fox-testimony-of-will.html" target="_blank"><b>DC vs VICTOR FOX</b></a>]<br />
Scheiman went on. <i>"It would be impossible, your Honor, for a patent of this nature to be overlooked in the ordinary course of such a search. But I shall no dwell upon the facts in that connection, because it is unnecessary to the attainment of the relief sought herein to prove knowledge on the part of the defendants or lack of it." </i><br />
Once again asserting that the defendants had "usurped" Owens process, Scheiman points out, <i>"...that the papers that have been interposed by the defense illustrate and clearly depict a steady retrenchment, a steady backward motion of the position originally asserted by the defendants as to their rights."</i><br />
<i> "For example, in the original comic book published, the first one of this nature using the plaintiffs' process and referred to in the trade and publicly as "Mighty Mouse", there are clear indications that the defendants have published this book pursuant to a licensed process for which a patent application is pending. Gradually and steadily the defendants have obliterated, removed, and concealed any such assertions."</i><br />
At this point, he picks up a comic book. <i>"Yesterday, the book I hold in my hand, "Little Eva", went on the New York newsstands for sale, and it significantly omits any references to there even being a patent pending application for their alleged Illustereo process."</i><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dlittleevacomp.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dlittleevacompsmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">Comparison of "Mighty Mouse" comic with <i>"Patent Pending"</i> note </span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">and "Little Eva" comic without.</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Scheiman then makes another accusation. As soon as American Stereographic had applied for their patent in May,<i> "They immediately licensed the St. John Publishing Company under that so-called Illustereo process."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> "I submit, your Honor, that the evidence before this Court suggests strongly that the defendants never intended in any way or manner to license anybody else. But they were pretty sly. They knew what they might be confronted with should they confer upon St. John an absolutely exclusive right, and they profess to offer such license to competitors of St. John."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> "They did this, mind you, sometime after they had given Mr. St. John the opportunity to be the first "infringer". </i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> </i>Hyperbole aside, there was some truth to Scheiman's accusation. Years after the fact, Leonard Maurer told interviewer Ray Zone,<i>"We gave St. John a 25 percent partnership in our licensing company,
along with a 6 month's head start for his publishing company in exchange
for financial guarantees for Norman and Joe as Editors, and myself, as
supervising producer</i><i>..."</i><i>. <b><span style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></span></b></i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Scheiman went on.<br />
<i> "But in the course of the next succeeding months or weeks they preferred self-styled standard licensing agreements to the plaintiffs in this action, and presumably to other comic book publishers in the City of New York and perhaps throughout the country."</i><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dlicense.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dlicensesmall.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center style="color: red;">
<b>Copy of licensing agreement offered to E.C. </b></center>
<center>
<b style="color: red;">and likely other publishing companies. </b></center>
<center>
</center>
<i> "These contracts, those self-styled license agreements, are so unfair, your Honor, that if time permitted I believe I could convince you from the bench to agree wholeheartedly with me that it was never the intention of the defendants to license anybody other than St. John."</i><br />
__________________________________________________________ <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> GAINES: <i>How do we know that we don’t have the same process as you have? Or
maybe we have a different process. Why should we pay you $2,500 a book?</i></b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
__________________________________________________________</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
Scheiman claimed that,<i> “…in the course of the negotiations
had by the defendants with the plaintiff corporations it became quite
obvious to the plaintiffs and their counsel that the defendants had
nothing to license, nothing to sell, and they were asking quite a price."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> “In the course of those negotiations because of the suspicious inclusion and/or exclusion of necessary clauses in the license agreement, the plaintiffs became suspicious.”</i><br />
<i>“They undertook to make a search of their own. They discovered the Owens patent. They negotiated with Mr. Owens and secured a license agreement under the Owens patent and have been endeavoring since obtaining that license in July to publish 3-dimensional comic books for sale to the public.”</i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> </i> Scheiman continued. <i>“Now, your Honor should bear in mind that the comic book market today is highly competitive, that the introduction of 3-dimensional comic books was considered a great scoop. Mr. St. John has admittedly done a wonderful job filling his coffers with profits and in enhancing his prestige in the industry.”</i><br />
<i> “The inventors admit in certain releases,” </i>he states, <i>“…that the market for 3-dimensional comic books is necessarily a limited one in respect of time, that in the course of a few months succeeding the introduction of the epic “Mighty Mouse”, it would be highly probable that millions of this one comic book would be flooded throughout the United States and elsewhere, perhaps, so that comic book publishers who undertook to sell their own comic books at a later date would find it virtually impossible to gain a ready and successful market.”</i><br />
<i> “The evidence before the Court is replete by admissions by the defendants that it was their intention to glut and flood the market…”.</i><br />
The gushing publicity that was so welcomed by St.. John and the others just weeks before was being used against them. <i>"It was a publisher's dream come true," </i>wrote Aron Mathieu in the August issue of<b> WRITER'S DIGEST</b>,<i> "enough sales of one issue of one magazine to call it quits and retire...or bat out a dozen imitations for three months before the onrush of 50 hurried and harried competitors swamp the field."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 3 </i></sup></b><br />
Schieman opined that however the defendants learned of Owens' patent,<i> "...they knew the Owens patent would expire, and whether they learned it when Mr. Owens sent letters to them, is immaterial. Those letters were sent in July. It has not stopped the defendants from releasing for publication three or four more of the same kind of books, employing the very same infringing process."</i><br />
<i>“What cared they? They made their investment and they were going to protect it,” he dramatically stated, “But in an effort to conceal, to confuse, to obscure the rights of Mr. Owens and the plaintiffs in this dispute, they have resorted to skullduggery and roughism such that I have never confronted in my life.”</i><br />
When Judge Conger asks for an example of distortions claimed by Scheiman, he directs the jurist to Leonard Maurer’s affidavit. When Scheiman goes on at length to point out an observed discrepancy between Maurer’s affidavit and Owen’s, the judge finally cuts him off. <br />
<i> “I don’t see anything so frightful about that. I don’t see that there is any great or deliberate or terrible distortion.”</i><br />
Scheiman makes one more attempt. He points to Norman Maurer's affidavit which attempts to show the differences between the Illustereo process and Owens' patent.<br />
<i> "By the Owens process, several months are required to produce a 3-dimensional comic book," </i>Maurer claimed,<i>"whereas by the Illustereo process, the production can be completed in 14 days." </i><br />
Schieman sees this as a purposeful distortion on behalf of the defendants.<br />
<i> "The matters pertaining to the placing of a book on the market are far beyond the process used. There are many things that follow the use of this process, the making of photographic plates, the printing on the plates, the assembling of the book, the putting of the covers on the books, the stapling of the books, the placing of the finished product in the hands of the distributors, and the like."</i><br />
<i> "It is now obvious, transparent and clear that the defendants were attempting to delude the plaintiffs and they were attempting to delude this Court when they uttered those remarks."</i><br />
This draws no comments from the judge this time, so he launches right into another claim.<br />
<i>“I realize full well that the Owens patent hs not been adjudicated before. The defendants are relying strongly on the fact that because the Owens patent has not been adjudicated, they can go on freely and merrily selling their books, preventing the plaintiffs from having the possibility of enjoying a fruitful market, and in that respect they estimate that whatever penalties they may have to pay in the future for their infringement will only be a fraction of the prestige they have gained by being self-professed pioneers in an industry that at the present time is one of great proportion.”</i><br />
<i>“Your Honor knows that the 3-dimensional craze has seized this country in its grip,” </i>Scheiman observed.<i> "Your Honor knows that while there is a tendency on the part of all of us to enjoy a fad or a fashion, these books will sell.”</i><br />
Then, obviously referring to Joe Kubert’s statements in the <b>WRITER’S DIGEST</b> article, <i>“But Mr. Kubert, one of the inventors, said in a press release,” </i>said Scheiman, <i>“that by November there will be nothing left in the market. They are going to be sure that theirs are sold, and not their competitors, that their competitors will not have a free and equal chance to make a reasonable and proper profit.”</i><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dwritersdigest.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dwritersdigestsmall.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>portion of WRITER'S DIGEST article (Aug. 1953) </b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
After acknowledging the fact that while he is not a patent attorney, Scheiman concludes that the defendants argument is, "...so much balderdash and nonsense...". Once again, he refers to Hanlin’s affidavit. <br />
<i> "...a man whose integrity is clearly beyond reproach," </i>Scheiman attests,<i> "and I point to the contents of that affidavit as completely and significantly demonstrative of the fact that the Owens patent is entirely valid."</i><br />
He was much less impressed, though, by an affidavit supplied to the defendants by animator Paul Terry. In addition to being owner of Terrytoons Studios, Terry also licensed St. John to publish comic books based upon his cartoon characters. Including Mighty Mouse.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dterryphoto.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dterryphotosmall.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Paul Terry (July 13, 1951)</b></span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>[Associated Press wire photo]</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
This affidavit was what Posnack’s office presented to Scheiman late the preceding Wednesday. Scheiman asserts, <i>“…that the only thing that impresses me in this affidavit is Mr. Terry’s residence, which is the Westchester Country Club, Rye, New York, and I envy him that.”</i><br />
Despite Schieman's flippant dismissal of Paul Terry's affidavit, there was no denying his animation credentials. Starting out in the studio of J.R. Bray and Earl Hurd, Terry had been witness to many of the earliest innovations in the industry. Bray had patented the method of making cartoons on translucent paper, a method cited by Terry as a predecessor of Owens' process.<i> </i><br />
<i>“The affidavit is offered in a suggested attempt to demonstrate that the process described in the Owens patent was well known as far back as 1915. The affidavit,”</i> claimed Scheiman, <i>“was drawn in an inartistic attempt to convey the impression that one reading its contents would be impressed that such a process was indeed known to the animated cartoon industry in 1915.” </i><br />
Scheiman disputes this by noting that,<i> “ Mr. Owens’ patent states in its disclosure and in its specifications that its process involves the tracing of drawings on cells, which, in Mr. Owens’ language,is a well known process employed for many years in the animated cartoon industry.”</i><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenspatentdetail.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenspatentdetailsmall.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Detail from page 1 of the Owens patent</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Scheiman states that, <i>“….the defendants either through ignorance, or, again, in an attempt to delude someone or some persons, suggested that that old process of tracing used in the animated cartoon industry is the Owens’ process. Nothing is further from the truth, and a close reading of Mr. Terry’s affidavit indicates that he said no such thing.”</i><br />
Scheiman then quotes Terry's affidavit at length.<br />
<i> "As a result of my long experience, I am thoroughly familiar with the methods, processes and devices employed in the production of composite pictures having a stereoscopic, 3-dimensional effect."</i><br />
After granting that Terry is indeed familiar with such processes, Scheiman reads on, <i>"Since 1915, I have actually used in my various businesses and am still using a process relating to the creation of 3-dimensional effects from a drawing, whereby the final product, whether viewed through a stereoscope of some similar device, produce a final picture with a 3-dimensional or multi-planar effect."</i><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dbraypatent.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dbraypatentsmall.jpg" /></a></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>John R. Bray's first patent, </b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i style="color: red;"><b>"Process of and Articles for Producing Moving Pictures"</b></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b style="color: red;">(patent # 1107193)
</b><i><b style="color: red;"> </b> </i></div>
<br />
Scheiman then makes a lengthy argument disputing Terry’s affidavit. He claims that Bray-Hurd patents referred to by Terry have been examined and contain no similarity to Owens’ except for, <i>“…the simple expedient of tracing characters on transparent sheets.” </i>He again notes Owens’ acknowledgement of that particular technique in his patent and to refute the defendants’ argument that it constituted “prior art”, a claim which, if proven, would devalue Owens’ patent. His counter argument once again, was Hanlin’s affidavit, which, Scheiman asserted,<i> “…states that if there had been any such prior art he never would have granted the Owens (application) letter.”</i><br />
Scheiman finishes with, "<i>There is nothing 3-dimensional about the Bray-Hurd process referred to by Mr. Terry. As I say, the affidavit is utterly insignificant, and if read in conjunction with the answering affidavits, the transparency of the argument is quite obvious.” </i><br />
This closes Scheiman’s presentation and the judge recesses the court until 2:15.<br />
__________________________________________________________
<br />
<br />
<b>GAINES:<i> He said Posnack has a civil suit all prepared to hit us with no matter what our process is.</i></b><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<u><b>THE DEFENDANTS</b></u><br />
<br />
William Gaines had good reason to be concerned about Emanuel Posnack.<br />
The man knew his stuff.<br />
Not only did American Stereographic have a top notch patent attorney representing them, he was an inventor himself. Putting the engineering degree he acquired to good use, Posnack had patented everything from desk accessories, to a stapling machine. He even invented an exhaust system for industrial furnaces.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dposnackphoto2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dposnackphoto2small.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Emanuel R. Posnack (circa 1951) </b></span>
</center>
<br />
When court resumes in the afternoon session, the defendants’ attorney, Posnack, presents his case.<br />
<i>“Your Honor, this motion is based upon a simple cause of action for patent infringement,”</i> he began. "<i>In such a case there are only two issues: The issues of infringement and validity. In the trial of a patent infringement suit the burden of proof as to infringement is, of course, upon the plaintiff.”</i><br />
As Posnack starts into a description of what is necessary to proof a plaintiff’s case in such matters, Judge Conger cuts him short. After a discussion of several similar cases, Conger then asks Posnack a question.<br />
<i>“Any injunction that I might issue here, would that go beyond October 13th?”<br /> “It becomes a moot case,”</i> replies Posnack.<br />
<i>“I can only grant an injunction for a short time,”</i> states the judge.<br />
<i>“Up to October 13th. The question of damages is something else,” </i>Posnack points out.<br />
As the judge pondered the usefulness of such a short-termed remedy, Posnack begins his attack on Scheiman's arguments by noting that there has been not, <i>“…one word describing or comparing the process of the defendants with the claims of the patent, and I know of no other way in which infringement can be proven except by that comparison.”</i><br />
<i> "We have a defense of non-infringement, we have a defense of invalidity," </i>he stated flatly.<br />
Referring to the Bray patents, Posnack continued<i>, "Our defense of invalidity is based upon prior art which we have discovered, whi</i><i>ch the Examiner </i>(Hanlin) <i>has never seen."</i><br />
<i> "And we have even better," </i>he offered,<i> "We have an affidavit from one of the world's most famous cartoonists who swears he uses the very same process which is described and has used it since 1915. Now, assuming that the affidavit of Paul Terry raises a doubt with respect to validity, I think that doubt is completely dispositive of this motion for a preliminary injunction.”</i><br />
But dismissing the validity of Owens' claim was not Posnack's whole case.<br />
<i> “Up until the spring of this year the printing industry had never been able to produce a 3-dimensional effect from a drawing. Stereoptican pictures are old. Your Honor may remember the old stereoscopic arrangement that was known and practiced at the turn of the century.”</i><br />
<i>“That was 3-dimensional,” </i>notes Conger.<br />
<i> “Yes, but that was taken from a photograph,” </i>Posnack answers. <i>“There were two pictures and when you looked through the stereoscope you saw a single picture giving the effect of real depth.”<br /> “Yes, my grandmother had one,”</i> interjects the judge.<br />
<i>“It dates back as long as my grandmother’s time,”</i> agrees Posnack. <i>“Now, never has anyone been able as a practical matter to take a drawing on a flat sheet and give a multi-planar effect, as we call it. They tried it. And while they produced some effect, it was impossible to produce it on a mass production basis so that it could be printed.”<br /> “The defendant St. John Publishing is one of the oldest and most reputable publishing companies in this country,”</i> Posnack states emphatically, but with more than slight exaggeration. Although he had once been a crusading newspaper publisher thirty years earlier, Archer St. John's comic book company had only been in existence about six years. <br />
The judge inquires, <i>“Are they responsible and reliable?” <br /> “Most reliable,”</i> assures Posnack,<i> “and I don’t think it is questioned by the plaintiffs. Two of the employees, two of the artists who had been doing work for St. John, had together with another party developed and perfected a new technique for making 3-dimensional pictures for printing purposes. The presented this to the employer of two of them, St. John, and when he saw the process he was impressed, impressed to the point of putting in in, in the last few months, close to a million dollars in the production of publications showing this 3-dimensional effect.”</i><br />
<i> “Success was instantaneous and dramatic. I was the attorney for the inventors, as well as for the St. John Publishing Company. I was instructed to file patent applications and to file a petition to make the case a special one so to expedite the consideration. That was done. Patents are now pending. Your Honor knows it takes time for a patent to issue.”</i><br />
Posnack continued.<br />
<i> “In the meantime, since St. John had decided to expedite this, a company was formed, the American Stereographic Corporation, whose main objective was to do this, to help in the perfection of the process, to surevise licensees in their use of the process, and to license others. Licenses were offered to all.“</i><br />
Then Posnack makes one of his main points.<br />
<i>“Included among those who were interested was this very plaintiff Gaines and all his corporations that are producing various publications. At the time they negotiated with the St. John Publishing Company or with American Stereographic Company, they did not know and did not have the Owens patent, which is the patent in suit.”</i><br />
The judge seems surprised. <i>“I did not hear that,”</i> he states. Posnack goes on. <br />
<i>“At the time the plaintiff Gaines was negotiating with the defendants for a license under the defendants’ Illustereo process, Gaines did not have the patent in suit; it was only after the negotiations fell through that he sought and found this patent.”</i><br />
<i>“Was he an assignee of the patent?”</i>, Judge Conger asks.<br />
<i> "He became an assignee either of the whole patent or certain rights," </i>Posnack replied uncertainly, <i>"I did not get that clear." </i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> FELDSTEIN: <i>...So we had to buy the patent. We didn’t exactly buy the patent. </i></b><b><i>We bought the exclusive assignment.</i></b><b> </b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b> KUBERT:</b>
<b><i> So he let it go for three bills, huh?</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b>
FELDSTEIN: <i>That’s right. We would have paid a thousand.</i></b></div>
__________________________________________________________ </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
<i> “Since that date," </i>Posnack went on,<i> "the St. John Publishing Company has published many more of the 3-dimensional comics, and intends to publish more, under this new special technique. The plaintiffs have not as yet published a single 3-dimensional book.”</i></div>
<i>“What was Gaines offered in his negotiations with the defendants? He was offered, just as every other publisher in the country was offered, a license to practice a secret process under a confidential disclosure. Gaines refused to accept certain of the obligations of a licensee with respect to confidential disclosure and, as I said, the negotiations fell through.”</i><br />
<i> "In the motion papers Gaines is now challenging the defendants to disclose the process which they refuse to do. That is the general background picture."</i><br />
Posnack was well aware of the disclosure language in the licensing agreement. He wrote it. By signing the agreement, a licensee was legally required to keep the Illustereo process a secret.<i> </i>At the time of this trial, Gaines still didn't know for sure what that process entailed, making the claim that it infringed upon the Owens patent difficult to prove.
<i> </i><br />
<i> “This patent has never been adjudicated," </i>Posnack continued,<i> "For almost 17 years of its entire life it has never been commercially exploited or used. It is known in patent parlance as a paper patent, unknown, unused, unadjudicated. The plaintiffs now wave this piece of paper at the Court and over the heads of these defendants and their proposed licensees and seek to destroy the terrific investment made by the defendants.”</i><br />
<i> "We say, in the first place, that because the patent has not been adjudicated, there is no basis whatsoever for a preliminary injunction..." .</i><br />
<i>“It seems to me that Mr. Scheiman, plaintiff’s counsel, was a bit naïve when he referred to the very Examiner</i> (Hanlin)<i> who passed upon the patent as proof of the validity of the patent," Posnack suggested, "I think if an examiner’s word was sacred not a single patent would ever be adjudicated by the courts.”</i><br />
Posnack goes on to make the point that Hanlin was unaware of other prior art that would have never allowed issuance of Owen’s patent. Although he doesn’t go into all of the aspects he claims are similar between Owens’ patent and the method used by Paul Terry, he does point to one similarity.<br />
<i>“All of the affidavits of the plaintiff indicate that the Owens patent relies upon a shifting of the cellophane sheets. First a stack of sheets are placed one upon the other, being transparent, and a picture is taken. Then there is a shifting of these sheets relative with each other. The picture looks different. Another photograph is taken. From that a combined effect is obtained which is 3-dimensional. Mr. Terry swears that that same series of steps which he sets forth in detail has been used by him. I rely upon that.”</i><br />
Posnack then confronts the claim of infringement; a claim he dismisses out of hand.<br />
<i>“There is not a single statement made by the plaintiffs in the affidavits which indicates that anyone has seen the defendants’ process, which is held secret.”</i><br />
<i> "Never seen what?", </i>Conger asks.<br />
<i> "The defendants' process,"</i> Posnack replied. <i>"In other words, the plaintiffs charge that the Illustereo process infringes the patent. In order to prove infringement they must know the process. Not one of the affiants has stated that he saw the process in actual use. What did they say? The first group of affiants looked at the final product, which is not the patented process, and deduced it was made by this process, which is utterly inadequate for any suit."</i><br />
__________________________________________________________</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
GAINES: <i>...It took me about an hour to figure out
what I thought I could produce...a way I thought I could produce a book
to look exactly like the book you had produced.</i></div>
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i> “Two days ago a new witness was obtained by the plaintiffs," </i>said Posnack, in reference to an affidavit sworn to by artist Bill Elder, <i> "He set forth in detail conversations he had with one of the defendants. Some steps he states he saw. Others he states he heard about. I submit, your Honor, it is utterly unfair and unjust and inequitable to decide a patent infringement suit in favor of the plaintiffs based upon such hearsay testimony without a single bit of evidence to show what the process consisted of.”</i><br />
<i>“There is no actual proof of infringement. There is, on the other hand, positive evidence of non-infringement. The patent has never been adjudicated. The patent is invalid by the evidence which we have in our affidavits. For almost 17 years of the patent’s existence it has never been commercially exploited or used. The affidavits on behalf of the defendant American Stereoscopic</i> (sic) <i>Corporation indicate that a patent application for its process has been filed, and in order to expedite the issuance of the patent an application therefore has been made special.”</i><br />
<i> “The defendants have been the first to exploit, popularize, and make successful 3-dimensional comics. The plaintiffs are utter newcomers in the field of 3-dimensional publications and are seeking unfairly to profit from defendants’ successful pioneering efforts.”</i><br />
<i>“I submit for these reasons that this suit for preliminary injunction be denied.”</i><br />
With that, the plaintiff’s attorney Scheiman requested a rebuttal.<br />
<i>“There is an affidavit before the Court given by Mr. Elder, who states that at the defendants’ offices on a particular day the defendants instructed him in the very process employed by them, step by step, making use of demonstrable exhibits that were employed by the defendants in the production of their first 3-dimensional book, “Mighty Mouse”. There is absolutely no question of hearsay evidence. There is no question of incomplete knowledge. There is direct proof by the defendants to this affiant stating what the process is. There can be no question with respect to identity of the process.”</i><br />
Scheiman refuted Posnack's test of validity by first agreeing with its necessity.<br />
<i> "I agree with Mr. Posnack that it is necessary to prove a valid patent. I think that the proof of that validity is encompassed in the affidavits before this Court. There is no proper attack upon the validity of the patent in any of the answering patents." </i><br />
Continuing on, Scheiman pointed out that, <i>"...the prior art referred to in the Terry affidavit is,"</i> as he stated earlier, <i>"related to animated cartoons in the two dimensions."</i><br />
<i> "Mr. Terry never produced prior to 1936, when the Owens application was filed, any 3-dimensional animated cartoons. I am prepared with exhibits and demonstrable apparatus in this courtroom to show this Court exactly what Mr. Terry has done. I realize time does not permit of any such demonstration at this moment. But I would gladly and happily proffer it."</i><br />
Having avoided subjecting the courtroom to a showing of <b><i>Farmer Alfalfa</i></b> cartoons, Scheiman goes on. <br />
<i> "The Terry affidavit is self-serving, confusing in its contents, and by reference to motion picture patents goes clearly beyond the field of art that is in purview here, at least with respect to the process here, which was never employed by Mr. Terry at any time in the production of any of his motion pictures.”</i><br />
Scheiman avers the originality of Owens’ patent as,<i> "...a unique process whereby a drawing just like the drawings that were used in the defendants' publications could be traced onto separate cells, photographed so as to create the image as would be seen by one eye; the cells would then be shifted laterally with reference to each other and for a background view so that a photograph could then be taken with the other eye."</i><br />
<i> "By use of Mr. Owens' process the two complimentary pictures were obtained. These complimentary stereoscopic pictures are then available for reproduction and were available for reproduction when Owens invented the process.</i><br />
To counter Posnack's contention that Owens' invention was merely a <i>"paper patent"</i>, Scheiman offered, <i>"There is no doubt that Mr. Owens did not publish a 3-dimensional comic book in the form of "Mighty Mouse. The papers, his own affidavit, indicate that when he in 1936 attempted to exploit his invention, the people whom he approached were no longer interested in printing 3-dimensional material because there was no market for it at the time."</i><br />
While making a point comparing Owens’ patent to the pending Illustereo process, Scheiman parenthetically mentions,<i>“…that the defendants have never shown us that application,” </i>in an effort to cast doubt that it had even been subjected for patent consideration.<br />
<br />
<center style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3delderseverin.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3delderseverinsmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Will Elder (seated) and John Severin</b></span></center>
<center style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>from FRONTLINE COMBAT #5 (March-April 1952) </b></span></center>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Scheiman once again asserts that nothing Posnack presented, in any way cast doubt upon the patent’s validity. And secondly, “<i>…the proof of the infringement lies in the affidavits on file, particularly the affidavit of William Elder, served upon the defendants a couple of days ago, in which he states under oath that on June 18, 1953, at the office of American Stereographic Corporation, with an address given in that affidavit, that the defendants, two of the inventors of the so-called process, there having been three in the first instance, instructed this Mr. Elder in the exact technique employed by them to create the “Mighty Mouse” publication.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> “The affidavit states that they showed him the artwork that was involved in the creation of that “Mighty Mouse”, showed him the several cells, explained to him how they were assembled after they were created, explained to him the unique shifting technique that is the heart of the Owens patent, showed him that the “Mighty Mouse” itself was merely the product of the use of that process and the wonderful invention of printing that has existed for hundreds of years.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> </i>After once again pointing out that the defendants, <i>“…do not have any patent application that can be granted at any time with respect to the process used by them to create “Mighty Mouse”, </i>Scheiman asserts that, <i>"it will be established beyond any doubt that the defendants have unlawfully, or at least, improperly usurped to themselves profits and rewards of the Owens invention that have no business being in their pockets. While, as I stated before, your Honor, they will be held responsible for pecuniary damage at the proper time, it is extremely unfortunate that while the defendants are reaping their rewards, the plaintiff is put in the position of having to meet this competition of the defendants."</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> "The plaintiff hopes to have its publication reach the newsstands during this month, probably about September 20th, and that is being issued in the wake of a flood of Illustereo products, comic books, five or six in number, the last of which hit the New York newsstands yesterday."</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> </i> In actuality, E.C. didn't come close to that September date. Their first 3-D comic, <b>THREE DIMENSION E.C. CLASSICS</b> #1, was released with a Spring 1954, cover date late in 1953<i>.</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> "So great is the marketing of the defendants' products that the plaintiff corporations will have a very, very difficult time obtaining any financial return from their substantial investment."</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> "I think that on an application for a preliminary injunction the equity should be regarded from both points of view, not from the defendants' point of view alone. If they made a mistake or if they were corrupt, whichever it may be, and made improper use of an invention, they should not be permitted to go along for the ride, they should not be permitted to continue on indefinitely, capitalizing on an improper and immoral act."</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> "Bear in mind, your Honor, that these are competing companies. The plaintiff companies were in existence long before the defendant St. John; the plaintiff companies were the pioneer of comic books. These companies were founded by the plaintiff Gaines’ father, and the prestige which the St. John Company is now attempting to achieve through this immoral, improper and illegal act is being denied the plaintiffs. What good will come to the plaintiffs at a trial later on? The damage will have been done by illegal, improper and unlawful distribution of 3-dimensional comic books to a point where it will be virtually impossible, according to the defendants' own statements attached to the motion papers, to sell these books."</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> </i>Once again Scheiman cites Kubert's comments in the <b>WRITER'S DIGEST</b> article.<i></i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> “The defendants said that by October or November it will be practically impossible to do any business in that field. This is a passing fad, a passing fancy. The plaintiffs are being denied it merely because they proceeded in an honorable, in a proper, in a lawful manner to operate under the patent of an inventor who licensed them for that purpose.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> “These defendants have on color of right; they have no title; they have no authority; they are usurpers; they are newcomers; they are the ones who have achieved and are achieving the fruits and labors and rewards that belong to Owens and his licensees.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>“Mr. Posnack suggests that every one of the comic book publishers in the City of New York or elsewhere was given the opportunity to have a license. The fact remains, Judge, that St. John is the only one who has a license under this so-called Illustereo process.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>“Nobody else took a license because of the terms. I suggest to your Honor, as the moving papers show, that the defendants never intended any such license agreement to be accepted by anybody.”</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i> </i> With that, the court adjourns to await Judge Conger's decision. <i><br /></i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<u><b>THE DECISION </b></u><br />
<br />
On September 30, 1953, Judge Conger handed down his decision. What follows is an abridged version.<br />
<br />
<i>This is a motion for a preliminary injunction
restraining the defendants from making and distributing
three-dimensional comic books or magazines produced by a certain "3-D
Illustereo" process upon the ground that said process infringes United
States Letters Patent No. 2,057,051 issued to plaintiff Owens on October
13, 1936.</i><br />
<i><br />
The plaintiffs have filed various exhibits as well as a number of affidavits in support of their motion.</i><br />
<i><br />
According to the affidavit of the plaintiff
Gaines, the corporate plaintiffs are well known publishers of comic
books and he is well acquainted with the efforts involved in the
production and knowledge of stereoscopy and the aspects of its
production through the medium of photography; he is the assignee of the
Owens patent and has made a study of it. He sets forth his analysis of
the patent which is entitled "Methods of Drawing and Photographing
Stereoscopic Pictures in Relief"...<br /> </i><br />
<i>The Owens patent technique embraces according to Gaines the following production steps:<br /> </i><br />
<i>"(a) analyzing the drawing and breaking it down into the desired number of planes;<br /> </i><br />
<i>"(b) copying each plane, either by hand or
photographically, on to a separate sheet or transparent cell (acetate,
celluloid or the like) or a combination thereof, and, in the case of
transparent cells, opaquing the areas covered with white where and if
desired;<br /> </i><br />
<i>"(c) superimposing the sheets and/or cells in register to simulate the original drawing and then copying photographically;<br /> </i><br />
<i>"(d) shifting the sheets and/or cells laterally
with reference to the background so that each sheet or cell is shifted
slightly more in reference to the preceding one, which shift distances
may be varied in amounts and in proportion to each other, and then
copying the composite result photographically;<br /> </i><br />
<i>"(e) the photographic copies produced or
obtained through steps (c) and (d) above described are then reproduced
for visual observation.<br /> </i><br />
<i>"Reproduction for visual observation is
achieved in the following manner: plates are made from each of the two
photographic copies referred to in the process outlined above; one being
usually inked in red and the other in green, and a printing is then
made with the impression of each plate superimposed. When viewed through
color filters of the same two colors that the said plates were
respectively inked in, a three dimensional effect is obtained through
the application of well-known and, concededly</i> (sic)<i>, not now patentable
principles of `stereo-anaglyph' viewing."<br /> </i><br />
<i>He reminds the Court of the "3-D" craze and the
profits to be reaped, and he describes the efforts of the defendants in
marketing the "World's First Three Dimension Comics" under a so-called
secret "illustereo" process for which patent application is pending; he
further describes his negotiations with defendant for a license to
employ the process in his own publications and his refusal to accept the
same because of the conditions imposed therein; he charges that the
defendants actually never had intention of licensing anyone other than
St. John Publishing Company and that defendants are out to corner the
market in 3-D comic books; he cites an announcement in a trade magazine by one of the
defendants and inventors, Kubert, to the effect that there will be an
immediate but short-lived market for 3-D comics and "then it will be all
over"; the announcement also refers to the problem of acquiring glasses
for the comic books because of the limited supply of acetate in New
York; this points up the difficulty because it takes Gaines' companies
several months to produce a 3-D comic book.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Mr. Gaines' affidavit further goes on to relate
his discovery, during the course of the license negotiations, of Owens'
patent; that he became absolutely convinced the defendants were
employing the Owens process; and he is equally convinced the defendants
infringe the Owens patent since the "naked eye tells the story"; he
studied defendants' work and can't think of any method other than Owens'
that might have accomplished the result.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Mr. Gaines' affidavit winds up by "challenging"
defendants to admit or deny the use of certain practices in their
production and pleads the necessity of the relief sought, because of the
defendants continuing publication despite full notice of plaintiffs'
rights, the limited (in time) market, the limited source of supplies
created by defendants' activities and the fact that the Owens patent
expires October 13, 1953.<br /> </i><br />
<i>The affidavit of plaintiff Owens recites, among
other things, his invention, his belief that defendants infringe, his
failure ever successfully to promote the patent, or to receive one penny
from it, his experience as an inventor, his introduction to the
defendants' claimed infringing production, the receipt of a visit from
plaintiff Gaines and subsequent conversations with the latter after
which he assigned his patent to Gaines, his notification to defendants
of infringement and various replies. He has no doubt that defendants use
his technique in their productions, for the same reasons Gaines gives.<br /> </i><br />
<i>One Feldstein, a commercial artist and employee
of the plaintiff corporations, also expresses the opinion that "only
one of the methods invented, taught and detailed in the Owens patent
could have been used in the production of that (`Mighty Mouse') comic
book ****<br /> </i><br />
<i>Further, one George Hanlin files an affidavit
in support of the application. Hanlin is no less than the Government
patent examiner, now retired, who examined and allowed the Owens patent
in 1936. It is his opinion that the Owens patent was and is valid in
every way. This opinion results from a refreshed recollection and
further study by Mr. Hanlin. He is further of the opinion that if
defendants use certain processes in producing their comic books, they
infringe the Owens patent.<br /> </i><br />
<i>One Elder, a commercial artist, formerly a
free-lancer, but now employed by the plaintiff corporation, relates that
he visited the offices of American Stereographic Corporation in June of
this year and that defendants Kubert and Norman Maurer explained to him
the process by which defendants' comic book "Mighty Mouse" had been
produced. He is of the opinion that it "is undoubtedly the process
invented and taught by Mr. Owens."<br /> </i><br />
<i>One exhibit is a transcript of a tape recorded
interview between defendant Kubert and plaintiff Gaines and plaintiff
corporations' employee Feldstein at Gaines' office in August of this
year. It appears that Kubert was invited to Gaines' office by Gaines
and/or Feldstein for a little chat and, unknown to Kubert, the
conversation was tape recorded — 70 pages in all.<br /> </i><br />
<i>I read the entire transcript. Without giving
consideration to its propriety or admissibility — plaintiffs have filed a
memorandum in support of the submission — I can only conclude that it
completely establishes that Kubert was innocent of any wrongdoing in
connection with Owens' patent and the publication of defendants' 3-D
comic books. Further, I regard it as worthless in establishing any
impropriety on the other defendants' part. The conversation consisted mainly of Gaines' and Feldstein's
relation to Kubert of what they had learned, suspected, speculated and
otherwise. Kubert was astonished by some of the revelations but he was
unaware of wrongdoing on his own part or anybody else's, except
possibly, if what he was told was true, a certain lawyer's part.<br /> </i><br />
<i>The defendants have filed affidavits in opposition to the application.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Leon (Leonard) H. Maurer, general manager of
the defendant American Stereographic Corporation, states that he, in
conjunction with Norman A. Maurer and Joseph Kubert, invented the
process whereby defendants produce 3-D comic books; that a patent has
been applied for along with a petition for "special" attention in order
to expedite the application; that defendants sought to license Gaines
and his companies but the latter would not agree to the conditions in
connection with secrecy of the process; he states that Owens' patent has
no relation to defendants' process; he is of the opinion, after study,
that the Owens patent is and always was invalid in view of the prior art
which he purports to cite; that the St. John Publishing Company has
invested three-quarters of a million dollars in the project and the
plaintiffs have yet to produce a comic book.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Archer St. John relates his part in the
production, his substantial investment, the great success of the
venture, his belief after investigation that his process infringed no
patent, among other things.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Norman H. Maurer states that he is a coinventor
of the Illustereo process; that it is different than the disclosures of
the Owens patent; and that such Owens process is not capable of
producing a product of the quality of defendants' comic book.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Paul Terry, a producer of well-known animated
motion picture cartoons, states that he has used, since 1915, a process
relating to the creation of 3-D effects from a drawing which process is
described in many old patents, which he cites.<br /> </i><br />
<i>I believe I have given the highlights of the various affidavits and I have considered the exhibits.<br /> </i><br />
<i>I am convinced that the plaintiffs have not made a case for the relief sought.<br /> </i><br />
<i>I shall assume for the purposes of this application that the Owens patent is valid.<br /> </i><br />
<i>It is plain from all the circumstances,
however, that defendants' infringement of the Owens patent is not
reasonably clear, if at all.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Only Elder among the affiants in support of the
application has any knowledge of defendants' process. Gaines and others
cannot think of any method other than disclosed in the Owens patent to
do the job. Hanlin says in effect that if the defendants use the Owens
method they infringe the Owens patent.<br /> </i><br />
<i>Elder's affidavit remains practically
unanswered. Of course, in general the defendants deny using the Owens
patent, aver that the Owens method has no relation to their own and have
their own invention for which they seek a patent. But they do not deny
that their method was explained to Elder nor do they counteract Elder's
opinion that it is the Owens method. This circumstance along with others
raises a suspicion that the defendants may have appropriated Owens'
work. I do not, however, regard it as clear proof of infringement in
view of defendants' denials and averments, and particularly since
defendants have seen fit to file their own "invention" in the patent
office.<br /> </i><br />
<i>This doubt coupled with the fact that the
plaintiffs will not be irreparably damaged by defendants' continued
production compels me to deny this application. There appears to be no
question that the defendants are financially secure and well able to
compensate plaintiffs if and when they are successful in this suit. It
may well be three years before it reaches trial, yet the patent will be
in the public domain within a month. Even assuming that the defendants
saturate the market within a short time, it may not be said that they
are sole contributors to this circumstance since it appears that at
least one other company is in the field.<br /> </i><br />
<i>The application is denied.</i><br />
_________________________________________________________
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<b><u>THE AFTERMATH </u></b><br />
<br />
With the Sturm und Drang past, when the dust settled, in the end, nobody really won. <br />
Despite their loss, Gaines and Feldstein eventually published their two 3-D comics. Despite their win, American Stereographic eventually folded; from lack of customers for their process and the predictable fading of the 3-D fad.<br />
Although Archer St. John probably lost as much as he had made on this debacle, he didn't go out of business. While his comic book company withered, along with the rest of the industry at that time, his other publishing ventures did well. Right up to his death by drug overdose on August 13, 1955.<br />
<i> </i>In addition to his continued success as a patent lawyer, Emanuel Posnack wrote several books on economics. His 1956 book, <b>WORLD WITHOUT BARRIERS</b>, proposed a theory of a global economy that presaged events decades later. <br />
William Gaines would go on to other battles, including an ill-advised one with the Senate subcommittee investigating juvenile delinquency. A lesser skirmish with a lesser foe was fought by his attorney in December of 1953.<br />
Massachusetts Attorney General George Fingold, citing the depiction of Christmas in a "pagan" manner and Santa Claus as being divorced, had copies of E.C.'s <b>PANIC</b> #1 pulled off the stands. Gaines' lawyer, Martin Scheiman, decried the<i> "wanton damage"</i> suffered by his client, inflicted by people who had <i>"come to the rescue of a wholly imaginary, mythological creature rarely believed to exist by children more than a few years old.</i>"<b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 4 </i></sup></b><br />
He would go on to represent Gaines in far more serious cases including a copyright infringement suit over the image of Alfred E. Neuman and Irving Berlin's attempt to prevent <b>MAD</b> from using his songs in their parodies.
<br />
Scheiman, who counted Gaines cohort Lyle Stuart and radical publisher Paul Krasner among his clients, would be found dead in the Time-Life Building in 1966, an apparent suicide.<br />
And Freeman H. Owens, the inventor who Gaines had told Kubert in 1953, <i>"...is so near to death. He’s had seven strokes. He’s an old man…a little old man,"</i> continued inventing until he died at age 89 in 1979.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<u><b>BONUS MATERIAL DEPT.</b></u><br />
<br />
Proving that a little thing like an expensive lawsuit couldn't stop their respective creative juices from flowing, both St. John and E.C. published humorous takes on the 3-D comics saga. Presented here, for not-for-profit historical purposes only, are <i>"The 3-D-T's"</i> from <b>WHACK</b> #2 and the first page of <i>"3-Dimensions!"</i> from<b> MAD</b> #12. All copyrights are retained by the estate of William M. Gaines and all other respective copyright holders.<b> </b><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg1small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><i><span style="color: red;"><b>"The 3-D-T's" </b></span></i></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>WHACK #2 (Dec. 1953) pg. 1 </b></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg2small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>pg. 2 </b></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg3.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg3small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>pg. 3 </b></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg4.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg4small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>pg. 4 </b></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg5.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg5small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>pg. 5 </b></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg6.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d3dtspg6small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span><span style="color: red;"><b>pg. 6 </b></span></center>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">[the following image courtesy of Ger Apeldoorn]</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmad12pg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmad12pg1small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<i><span style="color: red;"><b>"3-Dimensions!"</b></span></i></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>MAD #12 (June 1954) pg. 1</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></span> </b>All quotes of Martin Scheiman and Emanuel Posnack come from the court stenographer's notes for OWENS v. AMERICAN STEREOGRAPHIC CORP., et. al.,United States District Court S. D. New York, Sept. 1-11, 1953.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></span></b><i> </i>Zone, Ray, <i>"Leonard Maurer: 3-D Comics Pioneer"</i>, <a href="http://www.ray3dzone.com/LM.html">http://www.ray3dzone.com/LM.html</a>
<br />
<b> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>3</i></sup></span></b> Mathieu, Aron M., "<i>3-D Comics Knock 'Em Dead"</i>, WRITER'S DIGEST, Aug. 1953.<br />
<br />
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>4 </i></sup></b> <i>"Santa Claus Cartoon Damages Are Charged"</i>, PALM BEACH POST, Dec. 28, 1953.<br />
<br />
Additional general information obtained from the NEW YORK TIMES archives, HOLLYWOOD ON THE HUDSON by Richard Koszarski,<b> ARKANSAS BIOGRAPHY: A COLLECTION OF NOTABLE LIVES</b> by Nancy A. Williams and Jeannie M. Whayne and the online Google patent search engine.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-53399121991692222312012-09-06T20:41:00.001-07:002012-09-19T08:35:35.418-07:00Tale of the Tape<i> How would it really feel to be that fly on the wall; to hear history in the making? </i><br />
<i> As recounted in <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2012/08/two-views-of-3-d-comics.html" target="_blank">my previous post</a>, there was a basic disagreement over who was the creator of the process that made 3-D comic books possible. Leonard Maurer claimed it came to him<i> "fully formed"</i>, while inventor, Freeman H. Owens swore it was based upon his 1936 patent. As any time when money is at stake, a lawsuit was inevitable.
But it wasn't just Owens and Maurer who were involved. There were others; others with a financial interest, with a lot to lose and a lot to gain. </i><br />
<i> What follows is a transcript of a taped conversation I obtained from the National Archives. The men speaking are legends in the comic book industry, icons of popular culture, and key players in the drama surrounding the creation of 3-D comics. </i><br />
<i> This is a very long transcript, but to maintain the flow of the conversation, I've chosen to present it in one post. The only edits I have made are to correct obvious misspellings and typos. Since this blog is accessible to all ages, I also partially censored some of the stronger vulgarities . </i><br />
<i> Due to this post's length, I have refrained from making any comments. Those will appear in my next post, which will also explain references made by the speakers and details on the names they mentioned.</i> -- Ken Quattro<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Transcript of a tape-recorded interview between Mr. Joe Kubert of American Stereographic Corporation and William M. Gaines and Albert B. Feldstein of Entertaining Comics Group, held in room 803, at 225 Lafayette Street, New York City, on August 3, 1953, at approximately 12:05 p.m., through 1:15 p.m.
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Hello, Joe!<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Hi ya, hi, ya!<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Joe Kubert, as I...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Is this your sanctum sanctorum?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yah. Sit down Joe. Is it “Cuebert” or Koobert”?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Any way you want to say it, as long as it isn't dirty; it's alright...Very, very nice.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Al was having a lot of trouble...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In fact, Lenny was up here, you know. Lenny came up to see us.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: When was this?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When we were...You tell him Bill.<br />
<br />
GAINES: About three weeks ago, was it?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He was kind of cool. Quite frankly, his attitude was very belligerent.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Tell you why we wanted to talk to you alone, Joe. There are a lot of interesting...developments and in trying to figure out what was going on...for some queer reason, I assumed all along, that you're an honest man...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I'm flattered.<br />
<br />
GAINES: So figuring that you/re an honest man, we came to the conclusion that maybe you didn't know some of the things we found out. So frankly I was curious to know whether you knew them, and if you don’t know them, I want to tell you.<br />
<br />
KUIBERT: I’m all ears.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Do you want to first tell him what Lenny said to us?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I would like to know because I've heard...because Leonard has pretty well kept us up on things happening. He repeated the things...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, Lenny said to us if we go ahead with 3-D, with our process, American Stereograph (sic) will sue us for unfair competition...fair trade or something like that.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, he didn't say so in so many words.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, he said a civil suit, that’s what he said.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He said Posnack has a civil suit all prepared to hit us with no matter what our process is.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: See...and...and...I was trying...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Them's pretty hard words.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Huh?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Them’s pretty hard words.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yeah...Well, I think you're .going to be pretty surprised at what we have to tell you. If you're not, ah, maybe...maybe you know.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, look, this is the way we felt about it, Joe.
When you sent out your circulars and everything, we immediately figured
out the process...and when we went up to see you...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We told it to you, right? And Lenny said...<br />
<br />
GAINES: That's the...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When we explained the process that we had...we said we had a process...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He said it was actually your process, right?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, no, actually what happened up there was we were not in a position where we could say that your process was like ours because had we admitted something like that...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, you'd be telling us that it is your process...but Lenny did say it infringed...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: The point I am trying...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But it is your process.<br />
<br />
GAINES: The point I’m trying to establish...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: As to myself, I happened to be only one of the four fellows up there in the Stereographic office. I’m not as of now...as of probably about a month and a half ago in the Stereographic office at all. Neither Norman or myself. That’s why I asked if it would be O.K. if Norman came up here. Because neither Norm or myself have been doing any business with Stereographic.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Who are the other two?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What two?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You said there are four fellows in Stereographic.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: There are four. St. John, there is Leonard, myself, and Norman.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What about Posnack?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Posnack is not any part of it -- as yet. He had offered Lenny. He had offered...he wanted to come in. As a matter of fact, it’s in the stage of being negotiated right now.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Are you sure he isn’t in already?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’m positive he isn’t in already.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: At this stage of the game...<br />
<br />
GAINES: No, look, wait -- you phrase it in such a way that Joe doesn’t want to answer. What I’m trying...what I’m trying to say was...we came up there knowing a process.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Knowing a process...It took me about an hour to figure out what I thought I could produce...a way I thought I could produce a book to look exactly like the book you had produced.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: The same.<br />
<br />
GAINES : We came up that first day, the first Friday; we got the brochure on a Thursday. I don’t know what date it was offhand, and we came the next day, because Al and Harvey were all excited. We came in and we told you at that time that we knew a process. And we said, <i>“How do we know that we don’t have the same process as you have? Or maybe we have a different process. Why should we pay you $2,500 a book?”</i> Lenny said, <i>“You tell me the process, and I’ll tell you if it infringes.”</i> So I told him the process; I said, <i>“You make a drawing on cells, plane by plane; you take a picture, you shift the cells varying amounts, you take another picture.” </i>And he said, <i>“That infringes.”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now, at that time, I was very definitely given to understand that he had...that you had...patents pending.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right.<br />
<br />
GAINES: On the process.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Excuse me. And we felt, you know the attitude we had. Remember Lenny...Lenny said to me, <i>“I...you know.”</i> I mean, I said to Lenny, <i>“You guys got it.”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: I remember it distinctly.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You went ahead and put your patent in.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right. So...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Although we know the process, we’re up the creek. Unless we want to try and beat you out before you get your patent. See, that’s why we went through this routine to tell you why we knew the process.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I was very happy about the fact that you guys did play it...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When we went in, we really were serious about going into production. So that’s why we sent Bill Elder up. Because we...you remember the whole routine with the contract. Everything would be worked out amiably.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And we wanted to be all signed up, sealed and ready to go. We wanted to catch an August crowd if we could or at least get out soon so that’s why we sent Bill up. But Bill, when Bill went up, I had already produced a page on some cells and showed it to him.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What’s this again?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I had already produced a page with cells.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What was this? When did you do this?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Before Bill went up went up to get a disclosure from you.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When he was up there, didn’t he tell you that I showed it to him?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Not that I remember. Perhaps he told it to the other boys.I don’t remember...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, he did. It was funny, he was surprised to find out that we never did get a disclosure.<br />
<br />
GAINES: It was a week and a half later, before Bill realized that we didn’t get a disclosure from you...because...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, that can’t be because I remember telling Bill myself specifically that no one up in the office knows what the process is as yet and since he has signed these papers, he’s not to talk about it to anybody up in the office.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He went along. He went along. Well, I’ll tell you, as far as that disclosure is concerned, that’s one thing I want to discuss, not the biggest thing. I sent Bill up to sign a disclosure that he had seen the process. I didn’t know that in the disclosure was also going to be (1) <i>“I admit I never heard of this or had any prior knowledge of it.”</i> (2) <i>“I agree not to so forth and so on for five years.”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I didn’t know that was in there...because we had already been negotiating with Posnack to have that thing out of our contract. You see? But that’s neither here nor there...the thing is, that we had a method, ...I still don’t to this day know if it’s exactly the same as yours.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Bill has never told us your process.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We’ve been for legal reasons very goddamn careful…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Very frankly, I’ll tell you, both Norman and myself have talked about that particular point, and we realize it’s like hanging, like holding on to a guy by the nuts by having him sign a paper like that. And it could conceivably bring it to a point where a guy might have to sacrifice a certain amount of his money-making potential for having signed that paper.<br />
<br />
GAINES: But, Joe, do you know why?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: We couldn’t do anything else.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Do you honestly and truly know what all those clauses were in the contract that I objected to? And do you know...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Do I know why? Frankly, I did not.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Joe...<br />
<br />
GAINES: I know why those clauses were in the contract, and I know why that disclosure...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, here comes the thing...<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here’s...you’re going to get yourself shocked...I hope...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We feel that you’re going to get shocked. We don’t know. You may be aware of this. Do you know you’re not going to get a patent?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Did you ever hear of a man by the name of Freeman Owens?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Freeman Owens?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yeah...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Did you ever see Owens’ patent?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Show him Owens’ patent...<br />
<br />
GAINES: Did you know that American Stereographic a week and a half ago or so got a letter from Owens? Did you know that?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Son-of-a-bitch.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now, raise your right hand, did you know it, Joe? Huh?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, I’ll tell you. Leonard did tell me that we had received some information that put our patent in a very shaky position, but he did not tell me what it was. He said that the less people that spoke about it, the better off, we’d all be.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Joe, how much does Lenny know? I mean Normy know? Is he very friendly with Lenny?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Pretty much. But he’s pretty busy lately.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Let me ask you this: Did you examine the patent search?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: St. John did. St. John got the patent search. As a matter of fact, as we told you up in the office...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Who made St. John’s patent search?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: The one guy was this Asher Blum.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Did he go to Washington?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He did a patent search here?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He has people, or he had people, I understand...well, one other guy that did a patent search was what’s his name? Posnack.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We know about Posnack. Posnack is Supreme Knitting Mill’s patent attorney, right?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s...ah...yeah...that’s how we got involved with him.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s how Lenny got involved?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right...that’s right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Did Lenny ever do any patent work for Supreme Knitting Mills? Did he ever go down to the library and examine books?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Do you know that there is a knitting mill patent...there is a knitting patent...two away from Mr. Owens’ patent?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here, Joe, brace yourself. Seventeen years ago. Read it.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Look at the pictures. We did a search on what we felt was your process, which you told us infringes.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We did a search on that process, and we came across this patent. Didn’t your boys come across this patent?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Where did you do this search? Did you go up to Washington to do it?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Why did you ask that question?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Because I know there was a cursory search made. And I know that several different patents dating back to the late 1800’s were submitted to Mr. St. John. And he looked over those patents and none of them came anywhere near...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Was that patent ever given to St. John?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No. No, sir.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Post engraving made a search and didn’t turn up that patent in Washington.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Didn’t?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They couldn’t find it. In other words, when he asked out Class 88, you see the front of that patent--it says Class 88--when he asked out Class 88, he got a sheaf of patents to read, and it comes out of a hopper or shelf or somewhere in the patent office in Washington, and that’s how every patent attorney makes a search. He reads all the patents.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And that patent was not in that file.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: You’re kiddin’.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I ask...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We ask whether it was possible for someone to have pulled that patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Where did...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That comes later, Joe. He did pull out a patent given to Disney...not to Disney, to two animators in 1950 involving some kind of a shift of cells on the Garrity Camera. But in the back of that patent was a citation. Do you know what a citation is on the back of a patent? There isn’t any on that one.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I know very little about patents.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: All right. Show him the patent, Bill.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here’s the first patent we got ahold of...somebody got it for us.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That patent showed up. The Owens’ patent did not.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Look it up, Al.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: See, it says, “<i>References cited: Owens.” </i>Now, we looked up...this is the Garrity reference...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The Garrity is a camera...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Burkhardt was...what...do you remember...you looked at them all?<br />
<br />
GAINES: What’s the difference?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: None of these were applicable. Owens was this patent. So we went to see Owens’ patent in the New York Public Library.<br />
<br />
(At this point there were three people speaking at the same time and the voices were indistinguishable.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We immediately started to wonder what is going on. Is it a swindle or something? Four patent searches don’t turn up your process?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Christ!<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What about Asher Blum?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now, the following is pure speculation, pure speculation.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: (Whistles)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Bill and I are twisted mentally...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: This is quite a shock.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I thought it would be, Joe. I am glad it is too, because I didn’t want to think you were in it. Maybe Norman isn’t either, but I didn’t want to take a chance.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We may be all wrong, Joe.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here’s my thought, Al’s and my thought. This is not an accusation, it’s a thought. Lenny is thumbing through idly through old patent books looking for something on mill equipment. Two or three patents away from something on mill equipment. Two or three patents away from something on textile equipment... incidentally, there was one five behind it and one to three in front of it. He might have been going from one to the next. And if you will notice that Owens’ patent... if you’re thumbing through a volume with 200 of these, and you went through and you see a thing like that, it hits you in the eye. If you have a brother in the comic business...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Tarzan...<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now this, Joe, now, later, I’ll give you time to read it, but you can see the shift. If you read this word for word, Joe, down to coloring in different pencils...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Whose idea was that, Joe? Coloring in different pencils?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That was just in kicks. Norm and I were doing it in pencils...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Lenny didn’t suggest it, did he?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, sir. As a matter of fact, I know it couldn’t have worked this way because if anything, it’s strictly coincidental.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No, no, no. The layout...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Strictly coincidental.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: O.K., O.K., all right.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’ll explain to you why. The idea came from myself. It originated from me.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You mean the penciling?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, sir. The idea of 3-D in comic books came from me. Leonard did not suggest it. It did not come from Leonard. We were seated, I might have told you...I’m not sure...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But Lenny has seen 3-D in comics four years ago.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He said that he had seen something that you had shown him.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Four years ago?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: But why does Lenny go around now palming this off as his idea, his process?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Actually, all three of us, you know, have filed our names on the patent application. All three of us are down there as inventors.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Who actually had the thought of shifting planes with cells?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Leonard was the guy.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Leonard.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Do you think Leonard got that...<br />
<br />
GAINES: Joe, is it possible that when you suggested 3-D in comics...what was your original thought on how to do it?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I had an idea. I had suggested this to several people. I had talked it around a bit. The thing that gave me the idea originally was that I had seen several books, several magazines in Europe while I was overseas in three-dimensions, but they were photographs and I immediately thought this applied to comic books, if it could be done in art work. I knew nothing of what the problems it involved or anything else.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Did you ever see our old stuff, by the way? The thing I showed Lenny four years ago?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You want to show it to Joe?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, it has no bearing on this.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, it was a one-panel drawing.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In three dimensions. You looked at it through red and blue glasses.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Was that a drawing or was it a set-up? Or was it done in set-ups?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I didn’t tell Lenny how it was done...I don’t think! And what is the difference?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Leonard said that was in the set-ups...he did mention it. He did say that it was in set-ups.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He did say it wasn’t set-ups?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It was in set-ups.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Was in set-ups?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, actually, it was in set-ups. This was a stage. Naturally, you see the plane running away from me on the sidewalk?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The fence running away from me? You can’t get that in planal (sic) shift. But that’s not the point. This is something he knew about while he was working for Supreme Knitting Mills. So if he came across this system, and say that it was...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Did he see this?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Four years ago? He saw this four years ago?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes, My wife, my mother-in-law, my mother were there at the time. Lennie came up from Georgia Tech. I think he just graduated or was still going and I...<br />
<br />
GAINES: All this is quite besides the point.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: ...came up in a red Oldsmobile convertible.<br />
<br />
GAINES: All this is quite beside the point... <br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We were very...you know the old friend routine. I don’t say he stole this idea...but 3-D in comics was imbedded in his mind from this. Now, perhaps he ran across this patent while he was working for Supreme...<br />
<br />
GAINES: Or something else.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He never mentioned it.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Or perhaps when 3-D in comics was thought of, Lenny having something to do with patents and knowing about it, which you or I or Al probably would never in our wildest dreams think to go look in a book of patents...I never did in my life until recently. He might have run across it then. I don’t know when he ran across it. As I say, I don’t even know for sure if he did run across it. Although I had a case all built up in my mind. It looked awful fishy.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, this is the patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What’s his first name?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Freeman H. Owens.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He sent two letters of cease and desist to St. John’s...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He sent a letter to American...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I know that there has been a furor up there. I know that there has been a lot of trouble up there.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Did the find that patent yet?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: This patent?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’m not sure. I just came in the first of the week.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, well, he sent them another letter telling them that the number of the patent was. If you look at the date of that patent, Joe, you see that it expires this October...which means that it becomes public property.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I notice it was submitted in 1934.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, it was submitted, but it was given patent in ‘36. On October 13th. The point being that with clauses like you had...you tie us up with a process that was public property.<br />
<br />
GAINES: When I first went to my lawyer and he started raising objections, he said, <i>“They’re up to something.”</i> I says,<i> “No, I know Joe Kubert. They’re not up to anything.”</i> He kept raising objection after objection to the contract, and I kept trying to talk him out of it. So, I learned a lesson, don’t argue with a lawyer. Now listen to some of these. In the light of what you now know, you can see what was bothering me. Now, let me find the ones. Now this, <i>“…licensee admits that prior to the date of this agreement, it has had no knowledge of or interest in any invention, process or technique for the creation of three dimension multiple plane effects from a picture produced from an original drawing or print on a single plane and admits licensor’s right to a valid patent therefore, and further agrees to admit the validity of any letters patent that may issue for said invention and never to contest the validity of any such patent.” </i><br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In other words, we had to…after telling you that we knew your process...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Or a process that would be...it was your process. We had to then say we didn’t know it.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, do you see a reason for that?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Now let me give you an explanation, this is the reason that was given to me; now I didn’t go into this blindly. There was certain information that I was given when I went into this and it seemed to me pretty logical stuff at the time, and perhaps it still does. One reason that we were asked, we were told, that it would be wise to put clauses like that in, was in case that a patent was not granted to us, on certain of those patents, in other words, if there had been...not figuring that the thing has been patented at first, but if it couldn’t be patented at all…In other words, if it was just unpatentable...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Or if it had been patented and was running out...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That, that side of it I wasn’t given.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You see, that’s...<br />
<br />
GAINES: <i>“The licensor agrees that it will disclose to the licensee the invention forming the subject matter of this agreement, said disclosure to be made in a written statement to be submitted to the licensee simultaneously with the execution of this agreement. Said agreement being part of a disclosure agreed by the licensee.”
“The licensee agrees that it will sign said disclosure agreement simultaneously with the execution of this agreement.”</i> And so on and so forth...<i>“the licensee agrees to keep confidential the subject matter of the disclosure and any technique and processes disclosed,”</i> and so on and so forth.<i> “The licensee further agrees not to engage either directly or indirectly in the production of plates according to said invention or in the practice of said invention without the written consent of the licensor.”
</i>Here is what they were going to do. At least this is the way that ...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I...there were some other very weird paragraphs in it. Especially these ones about suits and infringements, where you have the right to decide whether you would sue or not. Well, cripes, if D.C. comes out with this system after October or November, when they can and I say to you, <i>“Joe, sue them, this is your process,” </i>you haven’t got a leg to stand on. This is public property.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: There is another problem there, too. Had we had a patent on it, and if you wanted to cause trouble for us, being that we had the patent, if you...I was going to be speaking broadly, if you want to cause trouble for us, you could set somebody up for us to sue and force us to sue these people. Therefore, expending a heck of a lot of our dough, making some sort of a deal with these...<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s a very nice reason, but do you see mine? Isn’t it a little logical?<br />
<br />
GAINES: That’s the reason.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You had no right to sue D.C. after October.<br />
<br />
GAINES: And here’s the clincher, Joe.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Let me finish, please, Bill. With the existence of the Owens’ patent...<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: ...making...I mean the ending of the Owens’ patent, the fact that it expires, and the process becomes public property, you have no right to sue D.C. But I am mad as hell because I am tied up with you. D.C. isn’t tied with you, and therefore got 15-cent magazines, and I want you to stop them and you can’t. And you won’t.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That was your objection in the first place.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: All right. There was another clause in that agreement that we would be responsible for infringement suits on us.<br />
<br />
GAINES: That was the one that I couldn’t figure until it occurred to me. So what the hell could they be trying to do up there? Here they are selling us something that they don’t own.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: What can they possibly be trying to achieve? Nobody could that stupid. Because they’d get sued, and then it occurred to me one time, they don’t get sued, I get sued. Because when my lawyer pointed that out and asked Posnack, or somebody up there, to put in a clause that if anybody sues for patent infringement: (1) they would defend the suit and, (2) they would pay the damages, they being American Stereo…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He says, <i>“No. Take it or leave it,”</i> he says.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, isn’t that rather weird?<br />
<br />
GAINES: That’s where I pulled out. Then we started looking and this is what we found.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Let’s hear Joe’s thoughts on this.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, from the ay you speak, I mean, apparently you both feel that somebody knew all the time that this patent existed, and…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We suspected it…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: And possibly might have even pulled it out of the Washington files.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That is pure speculation.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We got fantasy minds, Joe.<br />
<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Joe, Bill and I make plots all the time. And they’re very weird.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Frankly, I knew that something like this existed. During last week, I knew that something like this existed. As I told you, Lenny…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: During last week was a heck of a lot too late.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Last week was the first time that I heard about it.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Lenny knew when the letters came.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: …Dreams about this. We started this whole business on the premise that we might get a patent. We went up to Posnack…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Had Lenny had any dealings with Posnack previous to you three going up…any private talks?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: You mean about the patent?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yah. Posnack would have to be aware of this whole thing. In drawing up these contracts…if this, as I say, if our suspect (sic) is correct or even partially correct…if what we think…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …happened, Posnack would have to be in on this. In other words…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Tell me this. I want to know this. In a cursory search…now you know there are two different types of searches…<br />
<br />
GAINES: This was very cursory.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In a cursory search, that patent did not turn up in Washington.<br />
<br />
GAINES: No, in Washington it didn’t. Well, on fellow it didn’t turn up for. We sent a patent lawyer down, and he specifically requested that…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He goes to a different department.<br />
<br />
GAINES: It’s one thing to request a patent, and it’s another thing to…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What I want to know is this: Should Posnack have turned up…<br />
<br />
GAINES: My God, yes. Four patent searches? <br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: A cursory search should have turned up that patent in Class 88...if it was there.<br />
<br />
GAINES: That’s what I couldn’t figure…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, you know what’s going to happen, don’t you?<br />
<br />
GAINES: I know what’s going to happen.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What’s going to happen?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: St. John…the first thing St. John will do is sue Posnack because he put down on that patent application that to his knowledge he…he was submitting that patent on the basis that the patent…when a patent attorney submits a patent, he has to sign down…sign on the patent application…that as far as he knows, he sees no reason why this patent shouldn’t go through, and there is no patent…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: As far as he knows, Joe. What is he doing, tying up his life?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah. What the heck would they call it? Actually he didn’t do the type of job that he was supposed to do.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: So what?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Do you know who has made more money out of this thing that anybody else so far?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: St. John.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, sir. Posnack. That’s right. Posnack has made more money than anybody in this whole deal so far.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: How much does Lenny make?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Lenny gets paid a salary from Stereographic.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Is he getting a better salary than he got at Supreme?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah. I doubt very much if he’s go in on that frankly. That’s why, even if he was making a thousand dollars a week, which he isn’t, and far from it, he certainly wouldn’t take a think like this knowing it would go kaput sometime, and that would be the end of it.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: It wouldn’t have gone kaput after November. October 13th to be exact. If Freeman H. Owens was out in Oshkosh, Ohio, and he never bothered about this or he was dead or sick in the hospital, and this thing ran off into October, unless he came out and sued, because he published previous to…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Do you know where Freeman H. Owens was?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Where was he?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In the hospital.<br />
<br />
GAINES: The man is so near to death. He’s had seven strokes. He’s an old man…a little old man.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Joe, Joe…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Did you see this guy?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Sure.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Wait a minute, Joe, let me say something before we go on. I would say a month ago and before, up to about 1950, no one could even have located Freeman H. Owens.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Why?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He was in a hospital.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Since that time?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And it’s very difficult to locate a man from a patent. From 1950 to about tow months ago, he was in and out of hospitals. He had closed down his business, whatever it was, I don’t know. When we located him…when we located him…he had been out of the hospital three days, and we located him by a stroke of…I don’t know what kind of luck. I became a Mickey Spillane detective and I went up to the library; we were in the library when we found the patent. I found his name, it said 1936; we went up to the…we took out old telephone books…we took out old ledgers on everything…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: You were the fellows that contacted him, told him about this thing, and caused him to write these letters?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No.<br />
<br />
GAINES: No.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He knew about it. When we went up to see him, he had the “Mighty Mouse" book in his hand.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, what are his ideas on the subject?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He’s sore as hell. He hasn’t made a dime out of this patent since 1936.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He’s a pathetic old character. He…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In fact…well, it’s up to you, Bill.<br />
<br />
GAINES: At this point I guess it’s all right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I don’t know; it’s up to you.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yes, it’s all right. We bought the patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I see.<br />
<br />
GAINES: But he wouldn’t sell the rights to sue.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Show him the contract. It’s a very simple contract. He knows it has got three more months to run. See?<br />
<br />
(Mr. Kubert whistled at this point and laughed.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What are you laughing at? I’ll tell you why we had to buy the contract, Joe. If we didn’t deal with you, and we went in on our own, you couldn’t do anything to us, but he’s sue us, you understand? You couldn’t stop us if you had no patent.<br />
<br />
(Mr. Kubert’s statement was indistinguishable at this point.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Now, perhaps you can tell me, what can he do to us now? Can he still sue us?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Can he still sue you?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Can we still have him produce these books, the first books?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He can sue you for everything you’ve taken. In the first place, he can sue you for everything that you put out… for everything you have done. You know it’s very funny, Joe, we went up to him and he asked us what our names were, who we were, and after we got through with the preliminary discussion, he says, <i>“If you come out before October 13th, I’ll sue you, too.”</i><br />
<br />
GAINES: Scared the s**t out of us.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Because you see, as soon s he has his finger on a guy who has been fooling around with the patent, the guy’s out of luck. Think of the proof he has of guys fooling around. I understand D.C. is coming out with a book. Do you know anything about it?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes, I do.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What process are they using?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Very similar to ours. I understand Timely is coming out with a book, too, and Avon is coming out with a book.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They’re all using the shift system?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Owens is going to sue every one of them.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: So is Disney.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Disney is using the shift system?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But it’s based on that patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Exactly.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now there comes a little thing. That patent is for obtaining film strip. That patent is for obtaining a film strip…and Owens ay question the validity of that patent on the ground that they used the shift.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yes. I don’t know how the patent was ever granted. There are seven claims. Every one starts with …<br />
<br />
(Mr. Kubert then whistled.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: <i>“A method for producing stereoscopic motion picture strip film.”</i><br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: All right. When Mr. Dellacourt…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Listen to this one.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now wait a minute…<br />
<br />
GAINES: No, let me just read Claim 8.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s the claim in Owens’ patent that covers everything.<br />
<br />
GAINES: <i>“The process of producing pictures with stereoscopic effect which comprises separating a flat picture into a plurality of sections representing portions of the picture of seemingly like distance from the point of view, making copies of the foreground sections, each upon a separate sheet, superimposing said sheets and background in register for simulating the appearance of the original view as seen by one eye and copying the same, making a second copy of the same after shifting said superimposed…superimposed sheets laterally with reference to the background to simulate the appearance of the original view as seen by the other eye and reproducing said copies for visual observation…”</i><br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That covers it.<br />
<br />
(At this point there were three people talking at one time making the voices indistinguishable.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, when Mr. Dellacourt takes a picture from a film strip and puts it into a book, he goes right back into Owens’ patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Tell me this, though: What was the sense of you buying this patent?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: So we can go ahead for the next three months clean. Do you realize everybody that has put their finger on his patent is now sueable?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Everybody that’s thought about it.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: D.C. is going to be sued if they come out. In fact, they could be sued anyway whether they come out or not, just for what they’ve done.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We went up to Owens and we offered him $100 for the patent. He said, <i>“Bububububaa!,” </i>and I said, <i>“Well, look. We go ahead and produce the book and the day after your patent expires, we hit the stands.”</i> And he says, <i>“Oh, no, you can’t.”</i> He’s a funny little fellow. He says,<i> “Anybody who almost thinks about this patent before it expires, no matter when he comes out, he violated…he infringed.”</i> So I checked with my patent attorney, and he’s right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The man has…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: S**t.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The man has 200 patents.<br />
<br />
(Mr. Kubert then started whistling.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Watch your language, Joe. That man has 200 patents. He has fooled around for a long, long time with patents. He’s been in and out of patent searches and patent infringement suits.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He spent everything he ever had getting patents.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, 200 patents would mean about $60,000. You multiply 200 by 300, that’s cheap. $300 a patent is cheap. That’s $60,000 he sunk into patents. Any man who has sunk that kind of money into patents, he’s going to get every dime he can out of one of them or all of them. So we had to buy the patent. We didn’t exactly buy the patent. We bought the exclusive assignment.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: So he let it go for three bills, huh?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s right. We would have paid a thousand.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Do you know how much St. John would have paid for it?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He’s going to now. Why wasn’t it found so St. John could buy it? Because then, there would be no such thing as American Stereograph (sic) Corporation. <br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s true.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What do you think, Joe?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I don’t know.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: So when Lenny comes up to us--and believe me when I say this...when Lenny came up to us last time, it was on a Monday, two weeks ago, we had this patent in our possession.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: You had this?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes. And when he threatened to sue us on a civil suit because we stole his idea, when all we did was take our process and make a search, and find this patent, and buy it…<br />
<br />
(At this point Mr. Kubert whistled.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now I feel very sorry for the innocent parties involved, and I think there is a lot of them. I think poor St. John is going to have a stroke.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, wait a while, wait a while. There are several different ramifications of this. We assume there are innocent parties involved.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’ll tell you frankly: I go on the assumption that Leonard is innocent…Norman definitely.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: So who’s guilty?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Not St. John. If anybody knew about it, there is only one man who could have known about it, and that’s Posnack himself. As I said before, up to date, this guy has made over $6,500 from us.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But you say Asher Blum did not find this patent. Wait a while. Let me ask you another question.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He might not have made a search. I think that all he did was use the opinion that…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: An opinion on what?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: On that patent. On the worthiness of the patent.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Based on Posnack’s search?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: On Posnack’s…not search…or maybe it was based on his search, too…but it was based on his patent application…on Posnack’s application.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: O.K., you only go an opinion of a patent application.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That may have been it. I was under the impression that it was a search, too.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Oh, from Blum? I don’t think Blum made a search. It would be pointless.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: All right. Now, let’s go on…the only other possibility is that there was something screwed up in Washington, which we ran across…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …which is possibly that all patent searchers run across. And that was that this patent did not turn up in Class 88.<br />
<br />
GAINES: In other words, one…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But it’s in the New York Public Library.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Now, Lenny knows things are in the New York Public Library.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That may be where he turned up this information anyhow. As I said, he did mention during the week that he had some information. Maybe that’s where he got it.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You mean…well, of course when you got the letter…When American Stereo (sic) got Owens’ letter, he probably ran right to the library to read the patent. .I’m just interested to know whether this is the first time he’s ever seen this patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: The first time I’ve ever seen this patent?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No…Lenny. This is the first time you’ve seen it. I can tell. But Lenny…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I don’t know. I don’t know.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I hope he’s also innocent, but of course, this isn’t going to save anybody as far as Mr. Owens is concerned.<br />
<br />
(There were a number of pauses at this point and indistinguishable conversation.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Of course, what’s been done on the other three books? They’re not being engraved yet, are they?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes, I think they are.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They’re being engraved? Do you think if St. John knew about this, he’d run other books? Well, he couldn’t anyway, unless he’d want to take a chance of a court suit. But his is what it’s going to get. It’s going to get awfully messy. I mean, we’re not involved in this at all. Mr. Owens is the one who is involved. He’d probably use Scheiman, huh?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yes, Owens would use him<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He’ll probably use Scheiman, because Scheiman drew up our contracts, and he met Scheiman, and he has his own patent attorney, and between a patent attorney and a court suit, he’ll probably use Scheiman. You see, he was very shrewd about it. He knew about Lenny…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Please don’t ask me to keep this stuff to myself, because I’ll have to tell Norman.<br />
<br />
GAINES: No.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No. We didn’t ask you up here to tell you any secrets. We felt that we wanted to tell you first.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I appreciate that very much.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I wanted also to tell you our speculations. I mean theoretically you should have known all along about these letters. Now, heck, the letters went out two weeks ago. St. John got a letter, American Stereo (sic) got a letter.<br />
<br />
FELDTEIN: Well, Joe said he knew something about…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I had heard…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You should have read this patent last week.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I haven’t seen…look, that’s the first time I’ve seen…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, the number was in your office last week.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What number?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The number of that patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Was in?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Was in your office last week because Mr. Owens sent you a letter, saying you are infringing upon Patent 2053057...whatever it happens to be.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I happen to have a copy of the letter here that Scheiman sent…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, tell me this: Did that letter start suit, or did it just say to stop and desist?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes. Yes, the first letter said cease and desist, you are infringing on my patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And Lenny wrote back…I don’t know whether he wrote back with Posnack’s approval…I’m sure he did…<i>”What patents?” </i>So he sent back a letter, <i>“This patent.” </i>Owens sent back a letter, <i>“This patent.” </i>So Lenny sent back a letter, <i>“We’ve got to find out what it looks like. We’ll send to Washington.” </i>But let’s face it, Joe. In a half an hour he could have read that patent. In a half an hour you should have read the patent…and Norman and St. John and everybody.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here was Lenny’s answer of July 17th. Today for the record is the 3rd of August. Here is the carbon of Owens’ letter of reply.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: On July 24th , this was sent…you probably got it on the 25th.<br />
<br />
GAINES: What we’re getting at is that if you don’t know these, Joe, that means somebody is keeping something from you which is what I suspected right along.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: You know, Norman and I have been working like…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yes, you guys have been uptown in the office. You don’t know what’s going on.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Why did you move? Did you move of your own free accord?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes, because I couldn’t get the stuff done there.<br />
<br />
(At this point Mr. Kubert whistled.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: I know it’s quite a shock, Joe, and I…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I mean, for example, we’re in production now, and we go to order glasses, and we find out we gotta wait for fifteen million glasses to be made for St. John before we can get ours.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Then you know how much Mr. St. John…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes. We know all about it. The point is this: Is he doing this on the face of this, or has the wave not rolled downtown yet to Freedman?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I don’t know. Perhaps, the wave hasn’t. I don’t know, I don’t know.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, here’s what…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: But I’m sure as hell going to find out.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here’s what Lenny told us when he was up about, I think, two or three weeks ago Monday. I think it was three weeks ago. He said something to this effect. He says, <i>“A lot of money has been sunk into this thing and we’re going to send out a letter in a few days putting ourselves very clearly"…</i>a tough letter, <i>"so forth and so on.”</i> We got the tough letter…it was one sentence! And he says, <i>“We’re going to prosecute any infringers,” </i>…and so on and so on. He said, <i>“I’ll tell you this,”</i> he said, <i>“I don’t know, I don’t care what process anybody comes out with. To protect ourselves, we’re going to sue.”</i><br />
He says, <i>“Posnack has a process! …papers all drawn up against every single publisher…”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: He did have papers drawn up. He had one paper, I know. I don’t know whether it had any name…no, it didn’t have any name on it at all…but a paper of infringement. Drawn up in case…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Infringement against what, Joe?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Against the first fellow who comes out with a patent that’s similar to ours.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: A process?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: A process.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: What is he going to sue on? What grounds?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Based on the fact that we were going to get a patent. I have seen that paper.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Oh, you mean…but he couldn’t do anything now?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Oh, not until the patent is passed upon. As a matter of fact, it was about a month ago, and I asked…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, that’s strange.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: And he was going to go ahead and do that. He showed us letters and everything else.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Of course, the funniest thing about this is you might get a patent. Who knows what goes on in Washington?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s the craziest f*****g thing I’ve ever heard.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: But Owens will contest it. He probably will contest…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, the first thing that St. John will…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, wait a while. You said something about Disney used the shift. He used this patent?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes, yes. He had a whole write-up…was it, some sort of a camera magazine where the whole process was explained.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Did it say it was patented?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I don’t know. I didn’t read the article.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You don’t know what kind of a magazine it was?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, I don’t remember. I think it was “American Camera”.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Mr. Owens will probably be very interested in it. I don’t know where he’s going to get all the money to sue all these guys, but he’ll go after them.<br />
<br />
GAINES: The Disney thing, look…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What St. John will probably do, the first thing, is try to get a hold of this guy Owens and try to settle with him. He can’t…he couldn’t afford to take a suit at this point. He’s too far over his head.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s a very strange thing. But we don’t know whether Mr. Owens can settle. Can he, Bill? Bill has an exclusive ownership assignment. Mr. Owens would have to settle for what’s been out on sale prior…<br />
<br />
GAINES: He can settle or sue on “Mighty Mouse”. As far as St. John is concerned…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Wait a while. Everything else, too.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Here, the only way that St. John could come out with the other three books, as I see it…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Is for him to first settle with Owens, and then get a license from Bill.<br />
<br />
GAINES: …is to get a license from me…which I ain’t going to give probably…because I want to get out first at least with my two books…and also he’d have to get Owens’ permission not to sue him, even if I did license him, because although I licensed him, I am only able to license as of…what was it, July 17th?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: As you say, this lasts only about ten weeks, twelve weeks, doesn’t it?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes, but…Joe, you better not use any of that artwork you have been working on. You’d have to start all over, clean, because it would be touchy. Of course you could try and slip something in. As of October 14th, you’d have to start clean, and I don’t know whether you could, because you guys fooled around. You’re infringers already. I don’t know if you will ever be able to play around with this patent, and that’s why we didn’t want to fool around with you, because we didn’t want to get ourselves involved; when you asked us not to…admit that we never knew the process…He doesn’t look shocked. I don’t know what’s the matter with him.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Maybe he’s numb.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It’s quite a thing. This, I never figured on…never.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We didn’t either, Joe. But you see, there was no reason…for example, we understand that in the Second District Court, the Federal Court, when an application for a patent is made, you cease to retain a fair…a trade secret.<br />
<br />
GAINES: That’s besides the point.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That is the point, William, as far as I see, so why all the shenanigans? You guys were protected. Nobody is going to get if for application before you, whether you made it in February or March or April. Here, we are dealing with you in the beginning of July. Why all the shenanigans? What is this business with disclosures and everything? The only reason that we could feel was that there was no actual thought about a patent, that this was possibly a trade secret…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, they had to have put in for a patent because, although that wasn’t in the contract either, that’s the first thing my lawyer spotted. He says, <i>“They expect you to put in your book, “Patent Applied For”, and they don’t even have it in the contract that there is a patent applied for.” </i>He says, <i>“Supposing there is no patent applied for, you’ll get shafted.”</i><br />
<br />
*GAINES: It’s illegal.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right. I remember he made mention of that.<br />
<br />
GAINES: So they agreed to put in an thing saying, “Patent Applied For”. So I assumed there was a patent applied for. Well, in any event, whether there was fraud involved or whether there wasn’t fraud involved, I don’t know. It really doesn’t make too much difference to me.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Not now, anyhow.<br />
<br />
GAINES: It may to you. I mean…you know…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I hope Lenny wasn’t in on this thing, too. <br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’m pretty sure. It may have been just a matter of circumstance…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When we made all these conjectures, I lifted myself from being Lenny’s friend, and looked at it from a purely business point of view.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And when I went down to read this patent in the library and I thumbed this way and found a patent…I’ve got it here somewhere…a patent on some kind of a bobbin or some kind of control on a knitting machine which was expiring at the same time s this Owens’ patent, so Lenny might have said…might have been looking for things that expire, so they can improve their machinery. Isn’t it possible?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It’s possible.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, what started this whole thing was, when we were down there on that first Friday, and told you we knew a process, and told you our process, and Lenny says, <i>“Well, you got to sign a paper anyway that you didn’t know the process.”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, let’s look at it…<br />
<br />
GAINES: That’s when I first got suspicious.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: We had an attorney. The guy told us what to do. Comes from patents and contracts and stuff like that.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, if you were in…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: We know very, very little…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: If you were in my place…<br />
<br />
GAINES: I know what the trouble was.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: If you were in our position, would you have signed that kind of thing? Here you know a process. I have patents pending on a process. You look at my sample. You say, <i>“I can do it”</i>. And I say, <i>“Well, you got to sign that you can’t.”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, I guess then it would be all according to how badly you wanted to come out with the damn thing.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, we wanted to come out badly.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: If you wanted to sacrifice the fact that you had come out with it first…you had the thing first…and you wanted to admit that you didn’t know it at all…from coming out with that book…as soon as you wanted to…at that particular time. It’s purely up to the individual. I don’t know. Frankly, I don’t know what I would have done under those circumstances.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Joe, there was no reason for us to say that. Unless there was a fear of some kind of trying to invalidate patents or something. Do you understand? If it was a straight patent deal, and we would come in and say, <i>“Although we know how you do your patent, you’ve got your application in”…</i>there is no reason for you to make me say I don’t.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I can’t believe Posnack would know any of this, too, because that guy ahs been so excited himself about starting a whole new field of comic books and commercial advertising, etc., etc., and I don’t think he would have gotten so enthused about something that apparently has already been done, that apparently has already been patented. I don’t think he’d take the chance with his whole career that way…<br />
<br />
*KUBERT: Quite a business.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: How is the family?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Fine. You know I had a boy this summer.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I know. You know, I expecting my third any day now.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Really?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yes.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: This is old hat to you.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: When was yours born?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: The 27th of last month…<br />
<br />
(At this point the conversation was inaudible.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, if anyone is going to get hit with this thing, it’s actually St. John. He’s going to get hit harder than anybody else…<br />
<br />
(At this point the tape ended abruptly. This transcript was continued after the tape had been reversed and its play continued.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …made his own personal patent search?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah. So far as I know, that’s what he told me.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He had his own patent search?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Perhaps they investigated in Washington and didn’t find hide nor hair, just as you didn’t, on that patent up there.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s very weird. Why should a patent disappear like that?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I have no idea.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: This patent of all patents.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right. I have no idea.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Of course, I don’t know how many patents are missing, but…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It’s a very strange thing.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: It really is.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It really is.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: How about some lunch, Joe?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, no, thanks. I lost my appetite.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Come on, grab a sandwich, Joe. <br />
<br />
KUBERT: No, I couldn’t. I had a late breakfast.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You know, I felt all along that you weren’t aware of this. You know, it was very funny. I don’t know. Posnack probably never even thought anything about it. But I called up Posnack, when we were in the middle of this phoney contract and these things were bouncing on our heads. You know, fact after fact coming through. I called him up and I said, <i>“Mr. Posnack, are you patent attorney for the Supreme Knitting Mills?” </i>And he said, <i>“Yes.”</i> And I said, <i>“Thank you.” </i>And I hung up. It was just another thing that made me suspicious…if you have a suspicious nature, and I’m probably a suspicious type guy. So I asked him and he said, <i>“yes”</i>, he was a patent attorney for Supreme Knitting Mills, and all of a sudden things started to fit in; Lenny was dealing with Posnack.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, that’s how he came to Posnack in the first place.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, he had been dealing with Posnack before. He had been dealing with Posnack at Supreme.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: We had had no patent attorney or any experience with a patent attorney and Len was the only guy that did. It was perfectly natural and normal that we should go to him.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I assume you’re going to talk to Posnack now?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Definitely.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Jesus, I’d love to hear you…hear it.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: We’re going to get the whole set together. Well, I’m pretty sure that St. John will institute some sort of suit of negligence against Posnack for all this.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That’s never going to cover the cost of what St. John is probably going to be sued for. What did he print now, a million?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He’s got a million…he’s already put on the stands a million “Mighty Mouse”?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: So far as I know.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And he’s planning more?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Oh, yes. He had planned…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They’d be coming off the press…I know he printed 500,000.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes, he had contracted for a million…that’s five hundred…he contracted for an amount of paper to print a million books…he had contracted with the printing company to have…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Who engraved your plates, by the way?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, you know, we told you Haynes.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Haynes did the plates, too?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: They did the whole package.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The did the whole package. They’re awfully expensive you know.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We priced…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, it was an expensive job.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: It was an expensive job, expensive job…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: It was a beautiful job. You know Post is going crazy trying to match those inks. So go ahead…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Ah…what was I saying now? Gee, my thoughts are going in fifty different directions at the same time.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yeah…but we were talking about the print order of St. John.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Oh, yes. The first run was to be 500,000 and after that, if it showed some sort of a sale return, he was going to run a second 500,000. I believe he had already called for it…if it hasn’t been printed already.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, in which case, it’s only 500,000 print order.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I don’t know. I’m not sure.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, you see, it was Mr. Owens’ moral and legal duty to let you know as soon as he knew…I mean…so he couldn’t suck you in…or anything like that.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: But actually that guys that made him known of the fact that all these things were gong on, were you.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No, let me explain that to you. He was the craftiest son-of-a-bitch.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He thought we were from you.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He thought, he had a feeling we might be from “Mighty Mouse”. You see, and that’s all right. We thought he had already sold the process to you.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I tell you, it was only…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: The reason why we’re telling you know is this reason.<br />
<br />
GAINES: It was only a few days ago, Thursday or Friday, which is why I called you Friday, that we had the papers registered in Washington of the transfer. <br />
<br />
KUBERT: I see.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Up until that time, we were sitting on pins and needles wondering whether it would come back, and it turns out that maybe Mr. Owens sold these, this patent, to several different people. I don’t know.<br />
<br />
(At this point Mr. Gaines laughed.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: But he knew about “Mighty Mouse”.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You see, when we went over to see him…<br />
<br />
GAINES: And he wasn’t sure who we were…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …he had the “Mighty Mouse” book…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What was his contention? He says he’s definitely going ahead and bringing suit?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Oh, yes.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Oh, yes.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Listen. When we had the…when we went to see him, he had a “Mighty Mouse” book, and we told him we were comic publishers and we were interested in putting out comics in three dimensions, and he said, <i>“You mean like this one?”</i>, and we said, <i>“Well, we’re interested in putting out our process, and we’ve made a search, and we found your process, so we’d like to buy it from you.”</i> So the upshot was, he said, <i>“All right, I’ll sell you my process, but I want to retain the rights to sue these infringers and anybody else who infringes up to…</i>”<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Up to the time this process lapses.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Up to two or three months after this process lapses.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: He’ll sue up to December 15th. If anybody hits December 15th…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Why?<br />
<br />
GAINES: Because no one can possibly hit the stands…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Unless, unless he’s been prepared.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Without starting to prepare in advance of…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Now, I understand Toby is in something…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Avon…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …And all the rest of those guys. If you want to keep that a secret, you ought to tell St. John not to tell anybody. Let them all suffer, I mean why should he suffer alone? But he can’t…Mr. Owens can’t let them know until he finds proof, and the proof would be the book. You can’t send a letter that you’re going to infringe on a rumor. That’s why we didn’t want to have Lenny and Norm come up. Just in case, we just wanted to see your reaction. If you want to bring Normy in now, it’s perfectly all right. But, if fact, I’d like to see Normy’s reaction, too.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, all through this thing, I sort of felt that Joe and Normy were in the clear, but Normy being…you know…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: One thing, I don’t understand…if there were anything going on, it would be so easy, so much easier for you, for American Stereographic, to have gone to Owens, unless…<br />
<br />
(At this point three people were talking at the same time.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: If anybody had even come up with an idea similar to it afterwards, that could add to it, we would try to work some sort of a deal where he could become part of us or we part of him.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: So…we’re going ahead with it in any event.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, naturally…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: In fact, we pulled our first proof yesterday; Post, we pulled our proof at Post. They died.<br />
<br />
(At this point Mr. Kubert laughed.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Why? Because they were infringing on the system.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They were afraid they were infringing on you system. Now, they find they’re actually infringing on a patented system. You could do nothing to them until you got your patent.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And you could do nothing retroactively. They’d have to stop immediately and then get permission from you. Now, they’re infringing.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Very ironic, very, very ironic.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, I don’t see any irony in it.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, I’m sitting now in the position where you fellows were several months ago when you came up to see us.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Yah, now you know our process.<br />
<br />
(At this point there was general laughter and there was a long pause.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, I better get back and tell the boys the good news.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well, look, if you want to come over later on with the rest of them, I mean, and talk about it any more…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Something, something should be done about it. I don’t know. Actually, I don’t think…I don’t think it right that St. John suffer by this. The poor f****r went into the whole thing in good faith.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: By the way, what is your agreement with him? Are you responsible, or is he responsible? Do you remember these things? In other words, did he sign a contract like you wanted us to sign?<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yes…oh, yes, he signed that contract.<br />
<br />
GAINES: He signed the contract…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Posnack is pretty clean.<br />
<br />
GAINES: You won’t get sued. St. John will.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, I know. That’s…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: They will, too.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Even if we did get sued, actually, there isn’t enough money in the jackpot to even hurt. The whole corporation…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Well, that was the first thing I said. Remember when I said,<i> “Suppose so and so and such and such…”</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Oh, we would have, I know. St. John said it himself.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Gees, I just feel very badly in case it goes to personal people.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: What do you mean?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I mean, I don’t know. I don’t know what this character is going to do…Owens. So he sues American Stereo (sic) and American Stereographic has no money, so he sues Lenny Maurer and Joe Kubert and Norman Maurer and Posnack.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, if it does work out that way, that’s the way it will be. I mean, there is…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We’ll try and talk him out of it.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Ah, s**t.<br />
<br />
(At this point there is general laughter.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: no, he’s very friendly to us. You see, we came to him above-board, and explained things…and although he was very crafty and nasty in the beginning, you know, when we said we were coming out with something, he said, <i>“All right, so don’t try it now, buddy.” </i>You know, until…<br />
<br />
(At this point there was general laughter.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: We had made some little experiments…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We had made some experiments. I drew the cells up, the same cells I showed Bill before he went up to sign the disclosure. We took pictures of it, we shifted, we took more pictures. We did it with a Polaroid camera, and we viewed it…you don’t have to show him, Bill. It’s all right…and we showed him the pictures…stupid asses that we were.<br />
<br />
GAINES: As soon as we showed him the pictures, he had us.<br />
<br />
(At this point there was more general laughter.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You want to show him what Owens did 36 years ago? Well, you see, the drawings he made. He used…and you know that’s the strangest thing. He used comic strip. He definitely had this in mind. It’s very funny how…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Couldn’t sell it then.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You see, this business with the contract is what pushed us into this thing.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Do you remember…I’ll tell you something funny now. Do you remember the day I called up and said,<i> “Send Bill Elder back and stop all work”?</i><br />
<br />
KUBERT: Yah.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We didn’t know from nothing that day. That was a last ditch attack.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We were trying to get a cheaper price from you.<br />
<br />
GAINES: To bluff you into better terms.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We were going ahead with you. <br />
<br />
GAINES: And we had decided…that was on a Thursday.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: It was a Thursday.<br />
<br />
GAINES: And we decided that by Monday, because Scheiman was going to be out of town…Otherwise we would have had it done Friday…Monday we were going down and sign the contract.<br />
<br />
(At this point there was general laughter.)<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Scheiman says to us, <i>“All right”…</i><br />
<br />
GAINES: The next day we found the Owens’ patent.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: <i> “…see if you can get it a little cheaper.”</i><br />
<br />
GAINES: We found the Owens’ patent on a Friday, and we dug him up on the following Wednesday.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No, we dug him up on the following Monday.<br />
<br />
GAINES: We dug him up Monday, but we signed the papers…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We signed them on Wednesday…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, boys…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: We were actually saving our neck, too.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Oh, sure…boys, thank you very much for the information. And, well…<br />
<br />
(At this point there were three people talking at the same time.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: No matter what happens, I won’t run.<br />
<br />
GAINES: You don’t have to run. But I mean…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: In case any suit is instituted or anything like that, I certainly won’t put on my coat and walk away.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Yah, if there was anything dirty going on, just make goddamn sure that it gets on the record somehow, that you were not involved in this. That’s all. If there was, and if there wasn’t, there wasn’t…We’ve kept this a big secret as we say until those things were registered and we were sure we had them. I wasn’t sure that we weren’t being conned or something. Now, I suppose I’ll…it’s no secret now, I’m willing to let the cat out of the bag with anybody because…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Well, you can certainly blow it from the rooftops now, Bill.<br />
<br />
GAINES: I don’t want to blow it. I just want to keep everybody off the stands.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You see, Bill is in a funny position. Mr. Owens would like to see lots of people come out.<br />
<br />
GAINES: You see, if somebody comes out with a book…<br />
<br />
(At this point the voices were inaudible.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: He can, but I can’t. So it’s to my advantage to call up everybody and say, <i>“Don’t do it, fellows”. “Don’t do it, so I can get out”.</i><br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: And then, on the other hand, Mr. Owens doesn’t give a damn. He would rather them come out. What did he get? A measly 300 bucks out of Bill.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He may very well…ah…St. John may very well go ahead and continue along the same plans that he has, and decide to fight it in court. Because I think he sunk too much into this at this point to stop. He may…he may go ahead and continue as he is…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I would assume that he would do that just…just…I mean from a safest point of view.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: That’s right…I’m pretty sure…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I wouldn’t be surprised if Owens would settle on “Mighty Mouse”, and…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I am almost positive that he will not stop production dead as it is right now and leave every…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: I just hope he stops…for a while, as we can get our glasses.<br />
<br />
(At this point there was general laughter.)<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He is on production on approximately eight books…all 3-D.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: There is no question about it, it’s a very hot item. Why would we come running up to you? I mean Bill and I are no schnooks.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: As I say, the thing is settled down now. The dust is pretty much cleared away…well, thanks a lot for calling me over.<br />
<br />
GAINES: O.K., Joe.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I should thank you for your confidence and everything. Believe me, thanks a lot.<br />
<br />
GAINES: Give us a call if you find out anything new that you care to tell us.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: I’ll do that, and if there is anything that you can aid me with…by for instance, contacting this guy Owens…Incidentally, do you have his address, so we can contact him?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: You got three letters. American Stereographic sent you the letters…<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He’s at that address?<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: …His home.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He is home.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Well…<br />
<br />
GAINES: His home…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: That 116th Street address is his home.<br />
<br />
GAINES: If you want to contact him today, he’d be there by the time you’d want to contact him, probably. He comes into his office about an hour a day.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: He doesn’t have a phone on his…<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: No, he doesn’t. It’s a…<br />
<br />
GAINES: Boarding house.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Boarding house.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: O.K. Thanks a lot, fellows.<br />
<br />
GAINES: O.K., Joe. See you.<br />
<br />
FELDSTEIN: Take it easy.<br />
<br />
KUBERT: Right.<br />
<br />
(At this point the door slammed.)<br />
<br />
GAINES: Nance, you want to hear it? Well, wait five minutes and come up.<br />
<br />
(At this point there were general whispers.)<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
* Probably not this speaker. The transcript made several such erroneous credits and the asterisk is used to indicate these. <br />
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-57450181118979967712012-08-29T11:12:00.002-07:002012-09-18T23:05:15.283-07:00Two Views of 3-D Comics<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<i> There are problems inherent to writing this blog that I
cannot overcome. My type of detailed research takes a long time.
Following a lead may take weeks, months, sometimes even years. One
discovery prompts another and that leads to yet another. Documents found
must be analyzed, interviews must be conducted and transcribed,
supporting material found. But the fact is that this kind of plodding
research carries with it a curse. The people I write about, many of them
my heroes, are human. Fantastically talented, but ultimately mortal. </i><br />
<i> During the several years (yes, years) I have spent putting this post
together, two of men involved have passed away, Leonard Maurer and most recently, the great
Joe Kubert. Tragically, he died before I was able to send a final list of
questions in order to tie up some loose ends before making
my post. That will now never happen. </i>-- Ken Quattro<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
In the physical world, seeing in 3-D is easy. Our brain combines the images
projected onto the eye's retina with various visual cues (such as
perspective, shading and relative size) allowing us to understand the
world in its three-dimensional glory.<br />
But to perceive a
flat image three-dimensionally first requires two eyes. The binocular disparity between our two ocular orbs perceive everything
from a slightly different vantage point. Optimally, the brain takes
these two differing views, combines them, and comes away with the
perception of three dimensions.<br />
In much the same way, there are two differing views of the creative story behind 3-D comic books and it takes both views to get a complete picture. <br />
As the tale of 3-D comics was inexorably tied to St. John Publications, I covered aspects of it when writing <a href="http://comicartville.com/archerstjohn.htm" target="_blank"><i style="font-family: inherit;">"Archer St. John and the Little Company that Could"</i></a>. Since my history was obviously St. John-centric, I began my research by contacting Joe Kubert and Leonard Maurer.<br />
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Leonard (aka Leon or Lenny) was an eclectic, colorful, and somewhat eccentric, individual. His lengthy bio listed accomplishments from musician to engineer, from philosopher to inventor. It was in that last role, and as the brother of comic book creator Norman Maurer, that Leon is vital to the story of 3-D comic books. It is, in fact, his telling of that story upon which everything else herein hinges. <br />
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
__________________________________________________________ </div>
<br />
<b>THROUGH MAURER'S EYES </b><br />
<br />
It began for Leon Maurer when he and his brother Norman, along with their pal Joe Kubert, happened to be driving by the Paramount Theater on Times Square. Joe, according to Leon, looked up at the marquee touting its latest attraction, Arch Obler's 3-D exploitation epic, <b><i>Bwana Devil</i></b>, and said, <i>"Gee, wouldn't it be great if we could make a 3-D comic book?" </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></b><br />
It sounded simple enough.<br />
Kubert had stated on several occasions that the idea first came to him when he was in the army, <i>"...in Germany (1950/51) and saw a 3-D (photo) mag. I suggested a 3-D comic book. Norm Maurer and I worked it out." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></b>
<br />
Norman Maurer elaborated<i>. "We had worked all night and I'll never forget how we waited on the street for Woolworth's store in mid-town Manhattan to open because we figured we could get red and green cellophane from lollipop wrappers. We bought two packages and made a funny pair of glasses which, believe it or not, worked perfectly."</i><sup><i> <b style="color: red;">3</b></i></sup></div>
But between the inspiration and the execution there was the critical technical process. That's where Leon Maurer came in.<br />
Following Kubert's speculative musing in front of the Paramount, Leon had a revelation.<i> "Later, while driving home to Queens over the Midtown bridge, the whole process [of] depth shifts suddenly popped into my head,"</i> he told interviewer Ray Zone.<br />
"<i>With the idea fully formed in my head, I immediately turned around,
picked up some acetates, went back to Norm's hotel room, and explained
the process to him. We then collaborated on a short, short story, and he
went immediately to work with pencil, brush, ink and paint, following
my technical instructions while I did the opaqueing. Around 2:00 AM we
finished the real World's First 3-D comic book page entitled, 'The Three Stooges in the Third Dimension' starring Moe, Shemp and Larry."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 4</i></sup></b><br />
Certainly the concept wasn't new. British physicist Charles Wheatstone put forth the idea in the 1830s and soon began producing reflecting mirror stereoscopic devices that allowed the viewer to see his slightly offset drawings (and soon after, photographs) in apparent three dimensions. Not long after, in 1853, Wilhelm Rollmann of Germany described a technique using complementary colored images viewed through glasses fitted with red and blue filters to achieve the three-dimensional effect. Frenchman Louis Arthur Ducos du Hauron refined this anaglyphic technique for photographs; a technique that eventually provided the basis for the 3-D comic books.<br />
Was Leon Maurer aware of any of the previous efforts using anaglyphs? Or did the idea come to him <i>"fully formed"</i> as his recollection suggested?<br />
In any case, the three men took their sample page to publisher Archer St. John, for whom they were already producing several titles. Norm Maurer recalled that St. John, <i>"...almost fell out the window when he saw the drawings which literally popped from the paper."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 5 </i></sup></b><br />
St. John was on board, with a 25% stake in the new company named American Stereographic which brought with it a guarantee of a six month exclusive license to their 3-D process. The comics were produced in secrecy as to prevent anyone from stealing the process and beating them to the newsstand.<i> </i>When ready, the date was set. It would hit the stands on Friday, July 3rd<i>, </i>as the country was going into the holiday weekend.<i><br /></i><br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmightymouse.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmightymousesmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>THREE DIMENSION COMICS #1 (1st edition, Sept.1953)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dtarzancard.jpg"></a></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"></span></center>
In the August, 1953, <b>WRITER'S DIGEST</b>, writer Aron M. Mathieu recounted the frenzy that accompanied the release of <b>THREE DIMENSION COMICS</b> #1, featuring Mighty Mouse.<br />
<i> The telephone swithboard of the Roxbury News Company flashed two red lights, and before the PBX operator inserted her first plug, two more lights beamed red at her. "Holy Cripes," she sang out to the bookkeeper who was passing her board. "I bet you billed <b>GLAMOR</b> to all the newsdealers again and forgot to send the magazine. Now I listen to them raise hell." </i><br />
<i> "This is Stop 56," said the first voice, Schultz's by Main Street. "We're outta 3-D. I can use 16 more."</i><br />
<i> "I'm Bellfontaine, your Stop 187," said the next voice. "Finally you got something we can sell so you give me 4. I need 18 more 3-D right away."</i><br />
<i> But Stop 56 and Stop 187 didn't get any more, for the nation's craziest, zaniest fad, <b>THREE-DIMENSION COMICS</b>, had both kids and newsdealers by their ears as they fought to buy 40,000,000 copies in one month, with only a fraction of the desired supply available.</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 6</i></sup></b><br />
While Mathieu's number may be an exaggeration, the excitement stirred up by the comic's release was not. Others began to take notice. <br />
<i> "The competition, Ace, Dell, Goodman, National Comics, Pines and all the others who missed the boat," </i>continued Mathieu, <i>"were burrowing into printing techniques trying to issue their own 3-D comics before the kids ran out of quarters or their parents raised hell because of eye strain." </i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i>7</i></sup></b><br />
<i> "After terrific take off of <b>MIGHTY MOUSE</b>, 1st 3-D comic,"</i> stated the July 31, 1953, edition of American News Company's newsletter, <b>THE LOOK OUT</b>, <i>"St. John is readying six companion pieces for August bow." <b style="color: red;"><sup><i>8</i></sup></b></i><br />
The August 28th of the same publication breathlessly noted the,<i> "Flood of 3-D titles to hit the stands in Sept. St. John's <b>MIGHTY MOUSE</b> leading the pack with a first issue sellout of 2,500,000 and starting 2nd issue with 2,300,000; additional 3-D comics on the way are St. John's <b>3 STOOGES</b>, and <b>WHACK!</b>; Toby's <b>FELIX THE CAT</b>; Archie's <b>KATY KEEN</b> </i>(sic)<i>; Fiction House's <b>3-D CIRCUS</b>, and <b>SHEENA</b>...Independent coming out with <b>SUPERMAN</b>, a 3-D book, not a comic."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 9</i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>Throughout it all, Kubert maintained a pragmatic view.<br />
<i> "We estimate that the first 40,000,000 comics we print will sell and then it will be all over," </i>he was quoted in the <b>WRITER'S DIGEST</b> article,<i> "Whoever gets his books out first wins. Publishers who come along next November will flop because of the 2</i>5¢<i> price and because many parents may say 3-D comics are hard on the kids' eyes."</i><b style="color: red;"><sup><i> 10</i></sup></b><br />
<i> </i>More money was to be made, they assumed, from licensing their technique.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dasad.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dasadsmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Trade publication ad for American Stereographic Corp. (1953)</b></span></center>
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dtarzancard.jpg"></a></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dadvage.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dadvagesmall.jpg" /></a> </center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>from ADVERTISING AGE (Aug. 3,1953) </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dtarzancard.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dtarzancardsmall.jpg" /></a></div>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Topps TARZAN card and wrapper (1953)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[attributed Norman Maurer art on wrapper]</b></span></center>
<br />
Then, amidst all of this good news arrived a letter, dated July 10, 1953, and addressed to American Stereographic Corporation.<br />
<br />
<i>Gentlemen:
</i><br />
<i> I have just learned that you are engaged in the business of producing, selling and distributing certain three-dimensional comic books employing a process invented and patented by me some years ago.</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Your said acts constitute an infringement upon my rights and I demand that you cease and desist from all such activity forthwith.</i>
<i> This notice is without prejudice to the assertion of any and all claims for infringement that may lie against you.</i><br />
<br />
<i>Very truly yours, </i><br />
<i>Freeman H. Owens</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>THROUGH FELDSTEIN'S EYES</b><br />
<b> </b>
<br />
Several years after first communicating with Kubert and Maurer, I met Al Feldstein at a comic book art exhibition. We arranged a phone interview, which I conducted in January, 2008. Except for a few bracketed prompts from me, and some minor edits to extraneous conversation, this is the transcript of his story. I have also included some informational material, within brackets, to provide context.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i> Let’s see. The inspiration was that Bill and I, for some reason, got very fascinated with 3-Ds. <br /> He bought this Stereo Realist, with a projector and a silvered screen, a special screen and had the polarized glasses. He’d go to Cuba. He liked to go to Havana. He photographed, with his Stereo Realist, the shows…know what I mean? </i>(laugh) <i>and then he would show it to us, to me, the shows. We got fascinated with it, and we wondered how…3-D movies were out…you know, this was the Fifties. Early Fifties. We got fascinated with how we could put this into the comics. </i><br />
<i> </i>
<br />
<center>
<i><span style="color: black;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3d1949stereoad.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3d1949stereoadsmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b></b></span></span></i></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Stereo Realist camera ad (1949) </b></span></center>
<br />
<i>
He had a bonus party once, in which he gave out a one of those exotic 35 mm Konica cameras, which I loved, it was like $300-$400. I’d been using it prevalently. We had discovered some of these French </i>(unintelligible)<i> process…red and green process…I don’t know if it has a name or not…one of the two images is printed in red, the other is printed in green and with these glasses that of the two superfluous prints to test your eye, and the other eye…and you could see 3-D. it was planar imaging. <br /> I figured well, gee whiz, what we need to do is have two views of the same art. That will do it. So I spent one day, all morning, producing a kind of stage show. Not a stage show, but a stage setting. I had a tree, I had a gal sitting on an ashcan and a fence, a sidewalk, distant trees, etc., etc., and I set up my camera, and I turned one picture of it. It had depth, you know, like a stage setting. I set up my Konica and I took one picture and I moved it four inches, or so and I took another. </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Then I had it developed. I had black-and-white film, which was high-contrast. I had the prints made and I got back a print of each of the two views that I took, and I said to Bill, "Let’s see what we can do with this," and so sent it down to the engraver, I guess at our own expense, and had a proof pulled. They printed a photograph of one of the views on a red plate, and one of the views for a green plate, and they produced a 3-D picture! It worked! I mean, you could see these planar differences, you know. <br /> The tree was way up at the front, the girl was toward the back, the fence went away from the foreground to the background, the sidewalk went away from the foreground to the background, the house across the street was behind the bushes, etc., etc.<br /> So, we look at this and I say, "Well, we achieved 3-D in a printed form, a comic book panel, but how could we ever have this for a book? What the hell! Are we gonna make stage settings for every panel? This is ridiculous!"<br /> So we abandoned it. I took it home and stuck it in with my memorabilia. Whatever. I had it framed. </i><br />
<i> Anyway, there was this guy from the School of Music and art that I went to when I was a kid named Lenny Maurer. Lenny was…well, I don’t know why he went to the school as he really wasn’t into his art, he was an art student...he used to get on the subway at Franklin and I used to get on...I’d take the 88th at Flatbush…and we would play the harmonica together, play hooky and go to the Paramount, see Benny Goodman, blah, blah, blah. He lived over on Carroll Street somewhere in Brooklyn and I lived in Flatbush, on Eastern and 1st Street, and after graduation he went on to Brooklyn College and I went on and got out of touch with him. </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Anyway, I went into the service. Then I came back, then one day in my apartment, when I was working for EC, Lenny got in touch and wanted to visit. I thought, “That’ll be great!” You know, my old best friend from high school. So, he came over to the house. Among other things we talked about, I was married, I’d been married since the service living with my first wife in Brooklyn in an apartment, and I showed him this proof. “Look at this. 3-D comics!” He looked at it, and he goes, “Gosh, it looks great!” And I told him how we did it and the problem we had. <br /> OK. Skip ahead a couple of years.<br /> St. John Publishing comes out with a 3-D comic book---I forget what it was…I think it was about a flying mouse </i>[it was <b>Mighty Mouse</b>]<i>. God, there it was 3-D! How the Hell did they do it? We couldn’t figure it out. </i><i>So I was desperate to put it out, a 3-D comic, because 3-D was hot. Movies were out, people, kids were fascinated with the glasses, in the theaters. And now with the red and green pictures on the publications. </i><i>We saw this was being patent pending by American Stereographic. So, we got in touch with them and we had to come back with a legal disclosure. But Lenny Maurer and…uh, oh, God, I forgot the name of the artist...and Joe Kubert. So, they walk in and I’m shocked! It’s Lenny! What the hell’s Lenny got to do with comic books? I remembered that he told me he was with a textile business. Which was his father’s business, but I’m not sure exactly what he did, he was not a clothing outfitter</i>(?)<i>… I assumed he was doing nothing to do with </i>(unintelligible)<i>, but he listened…so we listened to their spiel and they go through it, and the financial arrangements that American Stereographic demanded so that they’d release to us their method, blah, blah, blah, and they left. </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> And I said to Bill, “This stinks! Something‘s wrong!” Lenny Maurer…off my impression of this may be…has only a year or two years ago, whatever it was, I don’t remember…had just </i>(unintelligible)<i>. “Something is fishy. Let’s go down to the library and look at patents.” </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> I don’t know what pushed us to do this. Bill…he and I were good friends, we were adventurous, we would to games together, we would go to documentaries together. I pushed him into horror, blah, blah, blah. So we went into a nearby library and started to dig through patents. I got this feeling that I should look through patents that were expiring. That were close to their 15-16 year limit. </i>[Patents used to expire at 17 years]<i><br /> Anyway, I’m looking and looking and looking and there it is! My God! A patent for green images or cels and moving the cels. It was designed for photographing animation films so that they had a 3-D effect. </i>[Feldstein makes a side reference to Disney applications of the process] <i>And then I see that there’s an addition which Freeman H. Owens basically had added for 3-D applications in other forms. Or something like that. I don‘t remember.</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> I said to Bill, “There it is!” I turned the page back a full </i>(unintelligible)<i> and there was a</i>(n)<i> expiring patent, in a textile process. </i>(unintelligible)<i> or something like that. I said, “Son-of-a-gun!" Lenny Maurer was looking for something for whomever he was working for in the textile company ran across this and a bell rang. And so he, figuring it was expiring, I guess formed American Stereographic with Kubert. </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Now, this is all my conjecture. I'm not sure if that's exactly what happened. </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> So, we got to get to this Freeman H. Owens and we can make 3-D comics without American Stereographic. It was very clearly laid out how it was done. </i>(unintelligible)<i> …horizon was stationary, blah, blah, blah. We got to find this guy. Bill says, “How?” I said, “Well, now that I’m thinking of it, let’s go up into the library’s telephone book collection and start looking to see if he’s in the area or see how we can do it.</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> And so we look in the New York telephone book and like God was with us (laugh), here was Freeman H. Owens! </i>(laugh)<i> Down on 29th Street or so. </i>(unintelligible) <i>Freeman H. Owens lived in a brownstone, a little, you know, an odd little…and we go in and he greets us and we tell him this whole story. And he laughs he seems interested, and I said, “You know, it’s like your patent.” And Bill says, “We want to buy it.” He said, “It’s expiring, in like 6 months or so; 8 months.” And Bill says, “OK. We’ll just buy it for the balance, we want to have it, we want to own it so we can put out 3-D comics.” And Freeman said, “OK.” </i>
<i> </i><br />
<i> Freeman later on became real friendly with us. Used to come to our Christmas parties and incidentally, he was quite a brilliant man. </i>[Feldstein recounts a conversation in which Owens described a new plastic camera lens] <i>That’s what he was. He was a great inventor, and made patents and that’s what he did until he died. </i><br />
<i> </i>
<br />
<center>
<i>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens1924.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens1924small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></i></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Freeman H. Owens posing with his 16 mm </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><b>home movie projector (1924)</b></span></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><b>[image acquired from the Freeman H. Owens Photo Page website]</b></span></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></span></center>
[Freeman Harrison Owens had a long and storied history in the film industry. He was a cameraman in the Silent Era and has been credited with developing the synchronization of sound to film. He held around 2,000 patents in his lifetime. He was also the plaintiff in several copyright infringement lawsuits.]<i><br /> <i>But anyway, he sold us what was left of his 3-D patent. Of course, we didn’t have any claim on any prior commitments he had on any planar camera or anything like that. We got it just for the use in this 2-dimensional printing process. Anyway, we went ahead and started to do the 3-D comics. We told American Stereographic to go screw themselves. I don’t know how many other people they convinced with their patent pending, but </i></i>(unintelligible)<i>when we found the copyright. And we did our 3-D comics. By then, the fad was dying. It’s now coming back. I don’t know how successful our 3-D comics were.</i><br />
<i> To kind of explain. I went home, I lived out in Hudson </i>(unintelligible)<i> and I made drawing boards. You know, lap type drawing boards with rings. We had a punch that made 3-hole loose leaf punches for paper, that were adjustable. I would make a set of…at that time I had sheets of vinyl or whatever it was to draw on, it was treated for ink drawings. It was the same as the cels the animation studios were using. I got these cels. I made sets of these cels, I made six or seven of these boards, whatever, for the artists. I fixed it so the punch would change position of the sheet for the foreground was, I think we moved it, I think I was experimenting with almost a half-an-inch and then like, three eighths, then like a quarter, then like an eighth. We did, I don't know how many sheets, I think it was four levels--I don’t remember exactly. </i>
<br />
[I think EC used six levels. That’s what I’ve read. You got down to six levels.]<i><br /> Six levels? I had five adjustable levels? </i>[Yeah, that’s what I’ve read.]<i> I don’t remember; I really don’t. Check around on our 3-D comics, I think they still work.<br /> I made these things, and of course, we pay these artists extra because they had to draw these panels, then turn the sheets over and opaque the art, just like animators do. In black and white. And we put out, I think it was three, 3-D comics…or two and we didn‘t print the third, I don‘t remember. You have to clarify that for me, too.</i>
<br />
[You put out two and there was a third one made, but it was never published.]<i><br /> Then, we had to go to Buffalo, after we had the artwork back, we drove the engraver nuts ‘til he understood what the heck we were doing when we said, “Now, you photograph this set,“…it was a page…five times, that’s what you say we did…and I bound up the sets and they photograph that as one picture, through the set. Then by shooting it through the cels and…I’m not sure whether the artist </i>(unintelligible)<i> turned in a distance one panel and I didn’t shoot it. Then they shot that again. And they had two black-and-white photographs. Just like when you pulled my proof, you pull a proof, and that’s how we got the whole book together.<br /> We were doing this, it was clumsy, it was time consuming, it was really tough. But, it was better than making stage settings.</i><br />
<i> </i>
<br />
<center>
<i>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3decclassics.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3decclassics1small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></i></center>
<center>
<i><i>
</i></i><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>THREE DIMENSIONAL E.C. CLASSICS #1 (Spring 1954)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<i>
Now wait a second…I sent boards with seven punch holes, and they did this one page, they did it with three different planes, I said, “Just figure out the planes,” and then I did the shoot. That’s what I remember. Anyway, with the engraving costs and the printing costs…I don’t know whether Bill made money or not. But I know we didn’t do the third one.<br style="color: black;" /> Anyway, the next problem was after we had the proofs and it was all working, we had to have glasses made, you know, to bind into the covers, the issues. We had to go up to Buffalo, New York, where the Greater Buffalo Press was located, where EC was printing its comic books, to talk to them about how to print this and how to mix the paints…to print the inks, rather…to effectively work with our glasses, which we had, these green glasses, which they were making. </i><br />
<i> It was all pretty wild. That’s my story of 3-D.</i>
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>DUELING LETTERS</b><br />
<br />
Freeman Owens July 10th letter to American Stereographic set off a chain reaction. At the same time Kubert and the Maurers were trying to peddle their "3-D Illustereo" process, they became engrossed in an escalating war of dueling letters with Owens.<br />
Apparently unaware of Freeman's relationship to Bill Gaines, Leon Maurer sent the publisher a letter introducing him to their Illustereo process and offering him a chance to license it for his own comics.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurerletter714.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurerletter714small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Leonard Maurer to Bill Gaines</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Meanwhile, Owens (through his attorneys) upped the ante by next sending a letter to St. John Publishing informing them of his claim of patent infringement. </div>
<b> </b>
</center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstostjohn.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstostjohnsmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Owens to Archer St. John</b></span><br />
<div style="color: black;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Maurer reacts to Owens first letter by denying knowledge of any patent they may have infringed upon. He further requests that Owens send him the number and date of the patent he was referring to.</div>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"></span></center>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer717.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer717small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Maurer's response to Owens</b></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Archer St. John gets into the action by parroting Maurer's letter. He too asks for Owens' patent number and its date.</div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dstjohn720.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dstjohn720small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>St. John's response to Owens</b></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Owens responds to Maurer with his patent number and its date.<b> </b></div>
</div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens724.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens724small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Owens third letter to American Stereographic</b></span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><br /></b></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Maurer acknowledges receipt of the patent information and informs Owens that he has ordered a copy. In the meantime, Maurer requests that Owens meet with him to discuss the matter.</div>
</div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer727.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer727small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Maurer's response to Owens</b></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Owens sends St. John the same patent information he sent to Maurer previously.<b> </b></div>
</div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens729.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowens729small.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Owens third letter to American Stereographic</b></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Owens (and presumably his attorneys) decide to swing for the fences. Their next letter goes out to the powerful distributor, American News Corporation. This cease and desist letter was likely designed to interfere with the newsstand distribution of the St. John 3-D comics.<b> </b></div>
</div>
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstoamnews.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstoamnewssmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Owens letter to American News Company</b></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Taking it even further, Owens contacts St. John's largest advertiser--Lionel Trains Corporation--and informs them of his patent claim. Probably unknown to Owens, Lionel and Archer St. John had a longtime connection going back to his days as their advertising manager. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: red;"><b><span style="color: black;"><br /></span></b></span></div>
</div>
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstolionel.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dowenstolionelsmall.jpg" /></a>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Owen's letter to Lionel Corporation</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
Even after a month of ever-increasing threats from Owens, it appeared that Maurer was still unaware of the inventor's connection to Gaines. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer730.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/3dmaurer730small.jpg" /></a></div>
</div>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b><br /></b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>Maurer's second letter to Gaines</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: left;">
A lawsuit seemed inevitable. But even if the Maurers, Kubert and St. John were bracing for that likelihood, surely they never could have suspected what would occur on August 3rd.</div>
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b>ENDNOTES</b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></b> Zone, Ray, <i>"Leonard Maurer: 3-D Comics Pioneer"</i>, <a href="http://www.ray3dzone.com/LM.html" target="_blank">http://www.ray3dzone.com/LM.html</a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></b> Kubert, Joe, letter to author, March 31, 2004.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>3</i></sup></b> Lenburg, Jeff et. al., <u>THE THREE STOOGES SCRAPBOOK,</u> pg. 119 (1982).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i><br /></i></sup></b>
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>4</i></sup></b> Ray Zone, op. cit.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>5</i></sup></b> Jeff Lenburg, et. al., op. cit., pg. 125.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>6</i></sup></b> Mathieu, Aron M., "<i>3-D Comics Knock 'Em Dead"</i>, WRITER'S DIGEST, Aug. 1953.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>7</i></sup></b> Ibid.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>8</i></sup></b> The Lookout staff, THE LOOKOUT, (July 31, 1953).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>9</i></sup></b> The Lookout staff, THE LOOKOUT, (Aug. 28, 1953).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="color: red;"><sup><i>10</i></sup></b> Aron M. Mathieu, op. cit.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Additional general information obtained from the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> archives, <b>ARKANSAS BIOGRAPHY: A COLLECTION OF NOTABLE LIVES</b> by Nancy A. Williams and Jeannie M. Whayne, <i>Selected Attempts at Stereoscopic Moving Pictures and Their Relationship to the Development of Motion Picture Technology, 1852-1903</i> by H. Mark Gosser, "Seeing in Three Dimensions" by Jonathan Strickland, "Anaglyphs Perfected" from <b>PHOTOGRAPHIC TIMES</b>, July, 1896, issue.</div>
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-42485749502730956452012-07-29T08:09:00.002-07:002012-08-21T16:00:35.998-07:00Mystery of the Radio Spirit -- Solved!
<div class="keyCont">
<div>
<div>
[Announcer] <i>In the previous episode, our intrepid detective was last
seen staring at his computer screen, intently pondering the puzzle
before him. His decades long search for information about the fabled <b>Spirit</b>
radio program had produced little other than a single crumbling letter
found among the late Will Eisner's correspondence. The futility of his
quest left him no choice. Setting pride aside, the humbled gumshoe made a
plaintive cry for help into the vastness of the Internet. A cry that
was heard and answered in this exciting conclusion of...The Mystery of
the Radio Spirit!</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
I have always been thankful for the help I've received from other
comic fans. Kindred souls who share the same interests and passions as
I. But for once, the help didn't come from them, it came in the form of a
Schadow. Specifically, Karl Schadow. <br />
Karl, a brilliant radio historian and writer, happened to read of
my request for information regarding the legendary Spirit radio show on
an old-time radio chat list. Not long after, he emailed me.<br />
<i>"There definitely was a program on WFIL in Philadelphia from 1940- ca. 1942,"</i> he wrote as he briefly recounted a few details he had retrieved from various trade magazines. <i>"I'll be more than happy to send you copies of the reviews and anything else I find on this program, "</i> Karl promised. And true to his word, he did.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: yellow;"> "THE PHILADELPHIA RECORD, in a swap
deal with WFIL, Philadelphia, inaugurated on Oct. 26 a weekly 15-minute
dramatization based on the
three crime-fighting comics carried in a Sunday special comic section.
Each Saturday, the program will alternate between "The Spirit", " "Lady
Luck", and "Mr. Mystic," comprising the Sunday comic special. Although
every newspaper in the city has special swap deals with every station,
the Record is the first to tie in a regular newspaper feature with a
with a regular air show, all others using the time for institutional and
spot campaigns."</span></i>[<b>BROADCASTING</b>, Nov. 1, 1940]</div>
<div>
<br />
Amazing. My years of searching for clues about this program had
returned naught. Yet Karl had found this revealing mention that answered
most the questions I had about the show.<br />
It premiered much sooner than I had speculated; actually not long after the strip debuted in June, 1940. To be sure, the <b>PHILADELPHIA RECORD</b> was one of the earliest proponents of Eisner's creation, as demonstrated by this ad.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/eisnerad090140.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/eisnerad090140small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>THE PHILADELPHIA RECORD (Sept. 1, 1940)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[image courtesy of Charlie Roberts] </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span> </center>
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the clipping Karl sent, was the revelation that not only did <i><b>The Spirit </b></i>strip get a radio drama-tization, but so did his Sunday section partners, <i><b>Lady Luck</b></i> and <i><b>Mr. Mystic</b></i>! </div>
<div>
Given the date, it follows that the first <i><b>Spirit</b></i> episode was based upon the October 27th strip, which found him contemplating joining the military.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/radiospirit102740.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/radiospirit102740small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>THE SPIRIT section (Oct. 27, 1940)</b> </span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;">[as reprinted in the 1973 "Spirit Bag"]</span></center>
</div>
</div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
<br />
Karl's research didn't end with that one clipping. Included as well was a full-blown review of <i><b>The Spirit </b></i>from <b>THE BILLBOARD</b>, by legendary music critic, Maurie Orodenker. Orodenker (who would soon coin the term, <i>"rock and roll"</i> ) was effusive in his praise of the show.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i> Considering the The Spirit, crime adventure comic in the paper's
Sunday editions, is fast chasing Dick Tracy into a rumble-seat position
in popular favor, this stanza has practically a ready-made audience for
itself. And the the dramatic efforts of the actors are worthy of the
advantage.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i> Each dramatization is complete, based on the following morning's
story. When caught, a frantic telephone call tells of a corpse in a
college dormitory. The Spirit (Sam Serata) with his down-South Ebony
(Salvatore Benigno) comes thru with his usual flair, battles the
criminals and winds up with lipstick all over his face.</i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i> Interest is sustained thruout. Mill Spooner at the organ tying
together the scenic changes. Enid Hager, of the Record staff, scripts
and produces. Gal was formerly with the station's production department,
and does an excellent job. </i></div>
<div style="color: yellow;">
<i> Commercial palaver limited to bally on the paper's Sunday comic section.</i></div>
<br />
While Orondenker's<i> </i>estimation of <b><i>The Spirit's</i></b> popularity may be a bit off (it never truly challenged <i><b>Dick Tracy</b></i>),
his evaluation of the program is enlightening. Now we know the actors
who played the lead--Sam Serata--and Ebony--Salvatore Benigno. The
characterization of Ebony as <i>"down-South"</i> is a reflection of Eisner's own portrayal; at once unfortunate, but consistent with contemporary media (e.g., <b><i>Amos 'n' Andy</i></b>). Since the lead to the review lists just <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>, it appears that somewhere along the way, both <i><b>Lady Luck</b></i> and <i><b>Mr. Mystic</b></i> lost their turns in the Saturday at 7:00 PM line-up. <br />
Not stopping with just this one review, Karl found yet another, from the February 4, 1942 issue of <b>VARIETY</b>.<br />
<br />
<i> <span style="color: yellow;">The Philly Record has evolved a
novel method for plugging one of its prize Sunday comics by dramatizing
part of the sequence the night before over the air and leaving the
Spirit, hero of the strip, in dire danger at the end of the
dramatization. If the listener wants to know how Mr. Spirit gets out of
this jam he has to buy the Sunday Record. Simple.</span></i><br />
<br />
The use of a cliffhanger not only took a popular device from the
movie serials of the day, but provided a clever newspaper selling
technique, which after all, was the purpose of the program in the first
place. The date of the <b>VARIETY</b> piece reveals that the show ran well over a year; not as short-lived as its obscurity would indicate.<br />
But the search goes on. Karl is continuing to follow-up on several leads, and I can assure you, my quest will not stop.<br />
Do any recordings of <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> program exist? And what happened to the scripts Hager sent to Eisner as mentioned in his letter? <br />
Who knows what revelations are yet to come? <br />
If I had to bet, I'd bet Karl Schadow knows.<br />
__________________________________________________________<i><br /></i><br />
<b>ADDENDUM</b></div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
<br />
It has been suggested to me, by Denis Kitchen and others, that the 1987 <b>Spirit Picture Disc</b>
record may contain excerpts from the radio program.<br />
Alas, this is not
so.<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/spiritrecord1987.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/spiritrecord1987small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>The Spirit Picture Disc (1987)</b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span> </center>
The clips heard on the record come from a short-lived 1948 <i><b>Spirit</b></i> television show. This show, produced by
Alan R. Cartoun Associates, apparently used panels from the strip
accompanied by voice-overs by actors. Once again, the incredible Karl Schadow comes through with the info.</div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
</div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody" style="color: yellow;">
<i> A series of five, five-minute television productions, for an
across the board weekly schedule, has been completed by Alan R. Cartoun,
radio and television producer, Scarsdale, New York. An animated version
of the syndicated comic strip, "The Spirit", the open-end package is
available to local advertisers and TV stations throughout the country. </i></div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
<i><span style="color: yellow;"> The episodes are delivered as a unit on specially prepared film strip with voice and sound track effects.</span></i><br />
[<b>BROADCASTIN</b>G, Nov. 8, 1948]</div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
</div>
<div class="searchResultItemBody">
<br />
While there is undoubtedly a story
yet to be told behind THAT venture (as well as the proposed 1966 Irwin
Allen <i><b>Spirit</b></i> show), it is a story for another day. One mystery at a time, please.</div>
</div>
Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-63645737437239725502012-07-06T10:27:00.001-07:002012-08-08T07:47:06.742-07:00Mystery of the Radio Spirit Sometimes its just the incidentals that intrigue me. The flotsam and jetsam of comic book history that float along outside the mainstream issues. It doesn't take much; sometimes it's just a letter.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i> November 29, 1941</i></div>
<i><span style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
</span></i>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Miss Enid Hager</i></div>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>The Philadelphia Record</i></div>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Broad & Wood Sts.</i></div>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Philadelphia, Penn.</i></div>
<i><span style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
</span></i>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Dear Miss Hager, </i></div>
<i><span style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
</span></i>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Thank you for the copies of
the radio scripts of the Spirit show, they were fine. I'm really sorry
that I can't get the show on my set here in New York. Your handling of
the dialogue is great and the continuity positively absorbing. I am
hoping that we can spread this idea around far and wide. Incidentally, I
notice that the authorship, 'Will Eisner', is not mentioned after the
opening. I'd deem it a great favor if you would include the 'by'-line
after the Spirit, since the plots are identical with those in the
section. Thanks, and my best regards.</i></div>
<i><span style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
</span></i>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Cordially,</i></div>
<div style="background-color: black; color: yellow;">
<i>Will Eisner</i></div>
_________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
This was not the first I'd heard of <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> radio program, but the crumbling letter in my hands verified its existence. <i>"At one point,"</i> wrote Jim Steranko in his <b>HISTORY OF COMICS 2</b>, <i>"The Spirit became so popular, a radio show recounting his adventures played in cities like Washington, Philadelphia and Baltimore."</i><br />
Not much to go on, but it seemed to be a simple enough quest. The <b>PHILADELPHIA RECORD</b> was one of the original papers running <i><b>The Spirit</b></i> Sunday supplement and had reportedly profited nicely from its publication. Hoping to capitalize even more, the <b>RECORD</b> pushed for a daily version of the strip. And on October 13, 1941, it got its wish.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center>
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/spiritdaily1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/spiritdaily1small.jpg" /></a></center>
<center>
<br />
<b><span style="color: red;">THE SPIRIT daily strip (Oct. 13, 1941)</span></b><center>
<span style="color: red;"><b>[as published in THE ART OF WILL EISNER] </b></span></center>
<center>
<span style="color: red;"><b> </b></span></center>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
</center>
An article by Norman Abbott published the same day, trumpeted Eisner's strip and his personal accomplishments. It's obvious the <b>RECORD</b> was pushing this strip hard and evidently it decided to create a radio program to accompany the daily's beginning. <br />
The <b>RECORD</b> already owned a radio station, <b>WHAT</b>, but its
usual content leaned toward ethnic Italian and Polish programming
and sober music shows. None of the gee-whiz kids adventure shows like <b><i>Jack Armstrong</i></b> or <i><b>Captain Midnight</b></i> that would seem to be fit companions to <b><i>The Spirit</i></b>. Enid Hager, the paper's promotions chief, was apparently given the task of the writing the show. <br />
Hager's forte was promotion, but she must have had ambitions beyond her job title. Within a few years she had jumped to a similar role at rival <b>WPEN</b>, owned by the competing <b>PHILADELPHIA BULLETIN</b>. By 1943, she moved on to New York, <i>"...to join a publishing house"</i>. Things must not have worked out there, though, as by 1945, she was back in Philly heading up the city's Seventh War Loan and Salvation Army campaign. Under her married name of Enid Hager Clarke, she appears once more as co-author of a 1946 radio script.<br />
But what of <b><i>The Spirit</i></b> program itself? What time slot did it have? Was it on every day? How long did it run and who were its stars?<br />
I began my searches where I usually do. Newspaper archives and databases. Frustratingly, the <b>PHILADELPHIA RECORD</b> is an elusive beast. Few microfilm rolls of it exist and the one source I did find with a fairly comprehensive collection of it was missing the needed years of 1941-42. I purchased a yellowing copy of the December 11, 1941, issue, but its radio listings gave no indication of the show.<br />
I reached out to Philadelphia old-time radio expert, Alan Boris, but even he had never heard of the program.<br />
And that, dear reader, is where it stands.<br />
So I turn to you. Does anyone know more about this nearly mythical radio show? Was there an article or ad touting the show?<br />
If anyone has anything to add, please let me know so I can put this case to rest.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-20715961443608788292012-04-19T14:02:00.002-07:002012-04-19T14:05:52.414-07:00Weisinger on Woolfolk My most recent posting of William Woolfolk's scathing "obituary" of Mort Weisinger has stirred some emotions. While most of the responses I've received echo Woolfolk's dim view of Weisinger, one was far different. It came from Mort's son, Dr. Hendrie "Hank' Weisinger. <br />
<br />
Dr. Weisinger, who happens to be a noted psychologist specializing in emotional intelligence, asked that I post his reply to Woolfolk's essay. While this already appears in the comments section to the Woolfolk post, I feel it's only fair that I give Dr. Weisinger an equal platform for his rebuttal.<br />
_____________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<font color="yellow">Maybe you can post this. I'd appreciate it,<br />
hank weisinger<br />
<br />
It is amazing that with so many negative perceptions said about Mort Weisinger, he maintained his position for thirty years. Other writers and editors came and went. they all had brilliant ideas, created concepts for Superman, but Weisinger took credit for all of them and somehow, convinced others that they were his ideas and gave these talented folks nothing but a kick in the pants. Wow, the guys who ran DC must of been blind.<br />
<br />
I don't know who it was, but surely, it was not Weisinger who got Superman on I Love Lucy, or thought of making Superman the spokesman for JFK's physical fitness program, or innovated comics with the annual. It must of been people like Woolfolk. Amzazing that Woolfolk's books never became bestsellers, like his friend Irving Wallace's and Ray Bradbury, who said, <i>"It was Weisinger who discovered me; he took my story out of a slush pile,"</i> or the great Rod Serling: <i>"Weisinger was a very talented man."</i> How could the Society of Magazine Writers-now The American Society of Journalist and Authors, create the Mort Weisinger Award. What is wrong with Root's author, Alex Hailey, proclaiming, <i>"Mort loaned me money so I could pay my dues and never asked to be repaid."</i> These people should be shamed and humiliated for not recognizing the true Mort Weisinger who would yell at a writer for misspelling a word. Shame on all the science fiction experts who thought of him as a science fiction founder and for all the free lance writers, like award winning Sally Olds who proclaim he <i>"inspired me."</i> What is wrong with the editors of Saturday Evening Post, Readers' Digest, Life, and dozens of other magazines for publishing his articles that were so poorly written--they all should of been fired.<br />
<br />
There is something wrong with the comic industry to let a man who passes ideas of others off as his own, berates and humiliates others, who is a terrible writer stay in such a top position longer than all the other talented editors. It is amazing what you get by with when you are a creative genius.<br />
<br />
It is interesting that Woolfolk forgot to mention all the hospitality he and his wife received from the Weisinger on hot, humid summer days, when they would spend the weekend, swim in his pool, and eat his food. That Woolfolk sure knows how to tell a story.</font>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-87187751005508404542012-04-16T14:42:00.006-07:002012-04-25T06:57:04.909-07:00Woolfolk on Weisinger Tradition requests that you don't speak ill of the dead.<br />
It's a concept nearly as old as civilization; a courtesy extended to a defenseless soul lest the violator incur bad karma or at least a disapproving look. Some of the departed, though, get a special dispensation from such polite consideration. It's hard to find anyone willing to say nice things about Adolph Hitler or Bin Laden. And while he's not nearly as despicable, few kind words have ever been said on the behalf of DC comics editor Mort Weisinger.<br />
<br />
Recently, I was gifted with an undated and apparently unpublished "obituary" of Weisinger, written by William Woolfolk, that the late Dr. Jerry Bails had shared with a few correspondents. Was this intended as a fanzine piece? Or a private letter? Who knows? Why Woolfolk wrote it is a mystery to this comics detective.<br />
<br />
<font color="red">[Mystery solved! Roy Thomas, comic book legend and current ALTER EGO magazine editor, has informed me that this William Woolfolk piece was originally written for submission to that publication. However, Woolfolk's critical commentary of Weisinger gave Thomas second thoughts and he sent his old friend Jerry Bails a copy for his opinion. They concluded it was too harsh for AE and the "obituary" never saw publication. Roy has graciously forgiven my unintentional appropriation of the piece and given his full approval of its online appearance here. Thanks, Roy!]</font><br />
<br />
William Woolfolk had a long career, beginning as a comic book writer at MLJ, spending more than a decade working for Fawcett, Orbit, EC and a brief venture into publishing as co-owner of O.W. Comics, before making his way to DC. Though his tenure at that company was relatively short (his talent and ambitions far exceeded the confines of the comic industry) his relationship with Weisinger stayed with him--and not in a good way.<br />
_______________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<font color="yellow"> When Will Rogers said that he'd never met a man he didn’t like, he had never met Mort Weisinger.<br />
<br />
In my dealing with the various people I met during the Golden Age, I always try to follow the Golden Rule of treating them as I would like to be treated. In most cases I think I succeeded, but I make an exception for the editor of the Superman comics. In Latin the saying is, <i>"De Mortuis nil nisi bonum"</i>--speak no evil of the deal. De Mort is a different matter, and it is long past time to let the full truth about him be known.<br />
<br />
I first met Mort through my wife Dorothy (nee Rubichek), who had worked with him on Superman at DC Comics. Dorothy said he was anxious to meet me, knowing that I wrote for Captain Marvel, Superman's chief rival in the marketplace. We invited him for a weekend at a summer home we had on Shelter Island. Mort came with his wife Thelma, a tall, willowy, very pretty woman who had been his nurse during a stay in the hospital.<br />
<br />
Within an hour, Mort was pressing me for a contest in which we'd plot new stories for our respective super-heroes. I saw this as a transparent attempt to formulate plots he could then offer to his writers, so I didn't go along with his "contest." As is now well documented, Mort made a habit of enticing writers to give him plot ideas which he would turn around and give to other writers as his own. He was addicted to the thievery of ideas.<br />
<br />
If Mort had lived in ancient Rome, he'd have been feeding writers to the lions in the arena. His chief victim was the very talented but very undisciplined and financially irresponsible Bill Finger. Mort was also editing <b>BATMAN</b> at the time, and Bill Finger was the writer who, with artist Bob Kane, had made <b>BATMAN</b> the most exciting and imaginative comic book feature of the time.<br />
<br />
I admired Bill Finger's work and knew he was having a rough time paying his bills, largely because he took so much time over his stories that he earned comparatively little money. He borrowed money from everyone he met, including from my wife Dorothy during the funeral of a well-beloved DC editor whose name I think was Bernie Breslau <font color="red">[note: actually, Breslauer]</font>.<br />
<br />
Mort reveled in telling tales about Bill Finger’s financial difficulties. And he took every opportunity to humiliate him. He made Bill wait in the anteroom for an hour while he discussed plots with other writers who had arrived later. On one occasion Bill arrived in his shirtsleeves because he’d told his wife he was just going for a pack of cigarettes and that time Mort kept him waiting for more than two hours. I was present when Mort laughingly joked about Bill’s predicament. I went out and lent Bill the ten dollars he needed so badly, and Mort reproached me, saying I was a "bleeding heart" and shouldn't have done that because Bill needed to be taught a lesson. <i>"After all, he can sit down and write a page and get the money, but he’s too damn lazy."</i> I said that not all writers could turn out pages like links of sausage.<br />
<br />
Most writers who worked for Mort Weisinger would probably have paid to buy a ticket to his hanging, but they could not afford the price that scalpers would have charged. His fellow editors in the same large office -- Jack Schiff and Murray Boltinoff -- always looked forward to my arrival because I mocked Mort as a modern Dracula who liked to suck the lifeblood from writers.<br />
<br />
Boltinoff was a particularly appreciative audience of Mort's skewering. Why did Mort put up with me? I think it was because he made the mistake of trumpeting what a catch he'd made by persuading me to work for Superman/DC.<br />
<br />
At the time I was working simultaneously for three other publishing houses--Fawcett, Timely, and Orbit Publications--and even selling some stories and articles to mainstream publications. As a result, I was under continual deadline pressures, but I thought that was a good trade-off for the increased security.<br />
<br />
However, I did get a personal glimpse of what it would be like if Mort got the upper hand. At one point I was down to three other markets because Robert Erisman had left editing Captain America and returned to editing the strip of pulp magazines for Martin Goodman. I made the mistake of telling Mort that, if he could guarantee me a certain number of stories, I would stay with only three publishing contracts.<br />
<br />
Mort mistakenly took this as a confession of need and told me that he considered every writer to be like a lemon that he squeezed until it was dry before throwing it away...and I was no exception. That was enough for me.<br />
<br />
On my next visit to DC I bypassed his office and went down the corridor to where Bob Kanigher was editing the other DC magazines. I'd known Bob from our days as writers at MLJ, and Bob had often suggested that I come to work for him.<br />
<br />
We were discussing a story idea when Mort came storming down the corridor. He demanded to know what I was doing there, and I replied that I had every right to work for whoever wanted to employ me. He then told Kanigher he could have me, because I wasn't up to his standards. I suggested he should try to be more modest about his standards, considering how modest they were.<br />
<br />
I believe that when people try to treat you like a dog, you should not only bark, you should bite. Considering the fact that Mort and I were like two pit bulls, it is hard for me to explain why we had any further contacts. Although we did,they occurred outside of comic books.<br />
<br />
The first was when I left comic books to become a magazine publisher. I employed several comic book people such as Murray Boltinoff and Jack Miller in getting out four pocket-sized magazines, and Otto Binder as editor of <b>SPACE WORLD</b> magazine, the first consumer magazine devoted to the unfolding Space Age.<br />
<br />
And then the distributor, Kable News, wanted an imitation of the phenomenally successful magazine <b>CONFIDENTIAL</b>. I was unwilling to deal in the kind of celebrity scandals that <b>CONFIDENTIAL</b> specialized in, but thought there would be a market for other "inside stories" which I would have to cull from various sources.<br />
<br />
I decided that Mort would be a good choice to help in packaging it.<br />
<br />
Commercially, that was a good decision. Mort came up with variations of previously published magazine interviews and stories, and I acted as editor and reviser of what he wrote and purchased from other writers. <b>INSIDE STORY</b> became the second-best-selling magazine of its kind, next to <b>CONFIDENTIAL</b>. <br />
<br />
By then Mort had become a slavish admirer of mine, claiming I was the best editor he had ever known -- an opinion that might have been based on the fact that I was paying him a share of the profits in addition to his packaging fee. In fact, I overpaid him, and when the time came for him to return some of the money, he accused me of <i>"stealing bread out of his family's mouth."</i><br />
<br />
At one point while he was packaging articles for <b>INSIDE STORY</b>, Mort submitted an idea about heavyweight boxing champion Rocky Marciano having been involved in a fixed fight. I told him that sounded libelous to me, and I couldn't accept it. He responded that he'd excerpted it from an article that had appeared in <b>THE SATURDAY EVENING POST</b>. I still thought it risky to publish, so Mort said if there was any trouble about it he would pay any legal fees involved.<br />
<br />
Reluctantly, I went ahead and published it. Sure enough, the <b>POST</b> was sued for having made that statement, and we were sued for having republished it.<br />
<br />
When I reminded Mort of his promise to pay for any legal problems that resulted, he said I ought to sue the <b>POST</b> for the money.<br />
<br />
He was always trying to take advantage of people he knew. When Adlai Stevenson was running against Eisenhower for the Presidency in 1952, Mort, who admired Stevenson, as we all did, decided he was a loser and that he could profit from that. Instead of betting on Eisenhower, which would have been the straightforward thing to do, he called his friends who were also Stevenson rooters and said he could help them to place bets on Stevenson to show their support for him. Then he booked the bets himself. He told me this, chuckling at how he'd hoodwinked his friends.<br />
<br />
Once at a party in his home he boasted that DC Comics had never had to cancel a comic book title, and he put down money on a table to challenge anyone who said they had. I immediately rattled off a list of titles I knew DC had discontinued.<br />
<br />
Mort immediately picked up the money and said, <i>"Well, you know."</i><br />
<br />
Our relationship came to an end when I sold my publishing business in order to become the story editor and head writer of <i><b>The Defenders</b></i> television show, which was then the most highly-regarded, award-winning show on the air.<br />
<br />
Mort wanted to write for the show, but Reginald Rose, the creator and owner of the show, wanted no part of him. Reggie had met him and shared the universal disregard in which most people held Mort.<br />
<br />
The last contact I had with Mort was after <i><b>The Defenders</b></i>, when I'd returned to my first love of writing novels. I had a million-copy bestseller with <b>THE BEAUTIFUL COUPLE</b>, and Mort wrote a pandering letter hailing me as the "Prince of Paperbacks." That resulted in an unexpected benefit for him, since the publisher wanted me to write another novel, based on the Miss America contest.<br />
<br />
But I had already committed to write for Doubleday a novel about a Supreme Court justice. When the head editor Ed Kuhn asked if I knew anyone else who might be able to handle the subject, I recommended Mort, knowing that he would do the research necessary, even though I knew that his prose style moved as turgidly as a river under ice.<br />
<br />
On my recommendation Mort got a contract for <b>THE CONTEST</b> and a handsome advance. Naturally, Ed Kuhn found him impossible to work with, and the novel had disappointing sales. Mort was never able to publish another, although I saw a recent mention of him as having written <b>THE CONTEST</b> and "other novels." A gross exaggeration for a gross man.<br />
<br />
The last time I saw Mort he told me, <i>"Bill, you're the only one who's going to cry at my funeral."</i><br />
<br />
He was wrong about that.<br />
<br />
I didn't rejoice at his passing because I believe with John Donne who said, <i>"Never send to learn for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."</i> But I reserve my tears, and I have shed them, for the lovely men and women I knew in the Golden Age of Comics.<br />
<br />
Enough said about Mort. Let him rest in peace.</font><br />
________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
He didn't pull any punches, did he?<br />
<br />
I generally shy away from publishing any unsubstantiated gossip, but much of what Woolfolk writes about has been said by others. Maybe not as pointedly or in such detail, but frequently enough that I doubt little of what he wrote. <br />
<br />
A couple of years back, in <b>ALTER EGO</b> #98 (Dec. 2010), my friend, the great interviewer Jim Amash, responded to several complaints he had received about negative comments made by some of his interviewees.<br />
<br />
<i>"The truth is, we can’t pick and choose the history we want to learn."</i><br />
<br />
Well said, Jim. I couldn't agree more.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-74146947978164004492012-04-01T08:35:00.004-07:002012-04-24T09:01:07.279-07:00William Ekgren -- Movie Star! Uddevalla is an ancient town, once Norwegian, presently Swedish. The world has changed, the borders may change, but Uddevalla endures. So, too, does current resident William Ekgren.<br />
<br />
My curiosity about the mysterious artist of three bizarre comic book covers published in the waning months of 1952, evolved into an obsessive search for his identity. My quest resulted in two articles (which can be read <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html">here</a> and <a href="http://thecomicsdetective.blogspot.com/2010_05_01_archive.html">here</a>) and the satisfaction that a long-overlooked artist was finally receiving his due.<br />
<br />
Proof that the world is indeed flat, the wondrous reach of the Internet allowed relatives, friends and admirers of Ekgren to contact me, filling in details, sharing photos of world-traveler William. It became obvious that there was far more to the man than the coincidental meeting at a Greenwich Village sidewalk art show that led to his minor, accidental "career" as a comic book cover artist.<br />
<br />
Not long after the publication of my second Ekgren post, I received the first of many emails from Erika Olsson. Erika is William's great-niece, and more importantly, a film-maker. <br />
<br />
<i>"I am doing some research about my family</i>, Erika wrote in her first email, <i>"Ever since I was a kid I heard a lots of stories about William, his painting and his sometimes crazy life."</i><br />
<br />
As my articles had provided details about a part of William's life that she had never known, Erika had a request.<br />
<br />
<i>"The reason why I write to you, is that I have been filming William for almost a year now. It looks like it will be a documentary about him..."</i> <br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this project was a 6-minute short entitled, <b>KORTET (The Card)</B>. The focus of this particular work was the ongoing bickering of William and his nonagenarian sister, Greta. <br />
<br />
<i>"This probably sounds a little bit strange"</i>, Erika continued, <i>"but I would love to have people from all around the world that know/knew him, love him, hate him or just knows about his former work. Like small interviews. My question to you is, if you want to be part of this?"</i> <br />
<br />
Despite my natural shyness, I have agreed to Ekika's request. At this point, she is trying to arrange financing for a trip to the U.S. that would include a visit and interview with me. In the meantime, she has established a Facebook page carrying the name <a href="http://sv-se.facebook.com/pages/Larrys-World/142880799158344?sk=wall&filter=12">"Larry's World"</a>, which is the name of her production company. If you click on that link, you will find among her postings, information about her film and recent photos of the incomparable William.<br />
<br />
Erika has kindly shared a very recent photo with me, one that makes me smile. In it, Ekgren is seen reading a copy of Craig Yoe's <b>ARF FORUM</b>, and presumably, the first print appearance of the article I wrote about him.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/ekgren2012photo.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/ekgren2012photosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<font color="red"><center><b>William Ekgren (2012)</b></center></font><br />
When you drop a pebble into the ocean, it's amazing how far the ripples can spread.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-29458866609740836602011-09-28T04:46:00.000-07:002011-09-28T05:00:15.013-07:00Michael T. Unleashes Rich E.! Not only am I getting older; I'm getting luckier.<br />
<br />
Once again Michael T. Gilbert has dug into his personal files, reached across the ether and made me an offer I can't refuse:<br />
<br />
<font color="yellow"><i><b>Hi Ken!<br />
<br />
I just remembered another unpublished DC short story. It was originally supposed to be a three-page section of Keith Giffen's 1992's very funny AMBUSH BUG: NOTHING SPECIAL. However it turned out to be too hot to print!<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/richeambush.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/richeambushsm.jpg"></a></center><br />
At the time I wrote this, the 1989 ARKHAM ASYLUM graphic novel was still making waves. Old-school Luddite that I am, I pretty much hated the whole package. When Keith Giffen invited me to contribute to his comic, (which included a roast of editor Julie Schwartz), I jumped on it and decided to do a send-off of Vertigo. In the decades since, I've found a number of their titles that I really admire, but my initial reaction was that the line was depressing, negative and pretentious. I also felt that fully-painted comics like Dave McKean's ARKHAM ASYLUM and Frank Miller and Bill Sienkiewicz's ELEKTRA:: ASSASSIN, beautiful as they were, were just hard to read.<br />
<br />
Interestingly, ARKHAM ASYLUM illustrator Dave McKean later came to a similar conclusion, saying "overpainted, lavish illustrations in every panel just didn’t work. It hampers the storytelling." <br />
<br />
Anyway, my idea was to do a Vertigo version of Harvey's classic kiddie comic, Richie Rich. Unfortunately after I handed it in, despite protests by my editor and Keith, some higher-ups at DC nixed my three-pager. They claimed there were worried about a possible Harvey lawsuit. Personally, I've long suspected that my Vertigo parody hit a little too close to home, but I'll let you decide.<br />
<br />
On a technical level, I drew hand-separated color for the Rich E. Rich section, followed by full color art for the Ambush Bug part. It would have been very striking, and I always felt bad that the strip never saw print.<br />
<br />
I guess the joke was on me!</font></b></i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<center><font color="red">Text and art scans by Michael T. Gilbert<br />
© 2011 by DC Comics<br />
[all text and artwork is presented for not-for-profit historical purposes only and no further use is allowed or implied]</font></center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg1sm.jpg"></a><br />
<font color="red"><b>page 1</b><br />
<br />
><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg2sm.jpg"></a><br />
<b>page 2</b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg3.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/richepg3sm.jpg"></a><br />
<b>page 3</b></font></center>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-50125229608737308062011-09-08T08:49:00.000-07:002011-09-28T04:09:06.452-07:00The Unexpected Michael T. Gilbert It's not always a matter of hard-nosed sleuthing. Sometimes a gumshoe just gets lucky. This is one of those times. <br />
<br />
Michael T. Gilbert--famous comic artist, writer, historian, creator of <i><b>Mr. Monster</b></i>, and all-around swell guy--has gifted me with an unseen story pulled from his own personal files. Being the good buddy that he is, Michael T. is allowing me to share that story with you!<br />
<br />
<i><font color="yellow">"Ken: I was recently going through my files and found color roughs for an unpublished Superman story I wrote and drew. The full story behind the story is below, along with scans. I think you'll find it amusing!"</i></font><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<center><font color="red">Text and art scans by Michael T. Gilbert<br />
© 2011 by DC Comics<br />
[all text and artwork is presented for not-for-profit historical purposes only and no further use is allowed or implied]</font></center><br />
<br />
<font color="yellow"><b><i>Subject: Tales of Kryptonite!<br />
<br />
In 1997 DC wanted to revive Tales of the Unexpected. Their idea was to do EC style stories featuring the DC superheroes. Naturally it was right up my alley, and I got the OK to write and draw (and color) <i>"Second Story Man!"</i><br />
<br />
I used a hunk of Kryptonite named Mort to tell my story. I figured it would work as a play on the French word for Death, as well as a tip of the hat to good ol' Mort Weisinger---the editor who popularized so many forms of Kryptonite.<br />
<br />
There were some kind of convoluted legal problems with the book (don't ask!), and the whole project was scrapped. My story never appeared, and probably never will. But here's scans of my color roughs so you can enjoy it. <br />
<br />
I tried to imitate the old EC Leroy lettering here, and I made the story the standard 7 page length of an EC story too.<br />
<br />
I did this just before my "Mann & Superman!" Superman graphic novel which came out in 2000, so it's my first Superman story.<br />
<br />
Hope you enjoy it!</b></i></font><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg1sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 1</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg2sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 2</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg3.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg3sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 3</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg4.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg4sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 4</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg5.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg5sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 5</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg6.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg6sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 6</b></span></center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg7.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/secondstorypg7sm.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>page 7</b></span></center>Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-21611423741962979182011-07-09T22:27:00.000-07:002012-05-28T08:30:31.501-07:00Mr. Gleason, are you now or have you ever been...? (<i> Was he or wasn't he?<br />
Like many of his peers in comic book publishing, Lev Gleason was a staunch supporter of liberal, even leftist, causes. Unlike most of them, though, he was suspected of having been a full-fledged Communist Party member. Those same peers mostly came from hard-scrabble, immigrant Jewish beginnings. Gleason’s upbringing was the polar opposite. <br />
Unless otherwise footnoted, all italicized quotations used come from the Federal Bureau of Investigation files on Leverett Stone Gleason I obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.<br />
Information taken from the documents provided by the FBI is presented exactly as it is appears in the originals, misspellings and typos included. The only exceptions occur whenever illegible wording is completed by my best guess at the intended word. In those cases, my wording appears in parentheses.</i> -- Ken Quattro )<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Though he downplayed it later on, Edgar made his mark by rounding up the Bolsheviks. He wasn’t long out of law school, working for the Justice Department, when he was tapped to head the new General Intelligence Division. Starting in November, 1919, his agents began their raids on the bomb-throwers, the anarchists who made a jittery post-War America fearful it would go the way of Russia. They started with the Communists, a loosely defined target that included anyone unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity of a meeting hall. Thousands were arrested, a couple hundred were eventually deported. <br />
Edgar moved on, moved up. Prohibition created a new class of organized criminal activity. The media created Robin Hoods out of common criminals. He had to get that under control, re-instill order and respect for the law. Then came the damned Nazis and another war. <br />
But he still had his eye on those Communists.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhoover1924.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhoover1924small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>John Edgar Hoover at his desk. (Dec. 22, 1924)<br />
[image obtained from the Library of Congress]</b></span></center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>The teachings of Communism are directed toward one final result—world revolution and the triumph of international Communism. The achievement of this aim would mean the violent and complete destruction of the American Government.</i> -- J. Edgar Hoover <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></span> <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>“Date: December 16, 1943<br />
<br />
To: SAC, NEW YORK <br />
<br />
From: J. Edgar Hoover -- Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation <br />
<br />
Subject: LEVERETT S. GLEASON<br />
INTERNAL SECURITY -- C”</i><br />
<br />
The Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the New York office knew that any correspondence from the Director was serious. That Hoover himself took a personal interest gave the subject the highest priority.<br />
<i>“The Bureau has noted that the above-captioned individual and his wife have recently attended the Convention of the Federation of Organizations for the Aid of Spanish Republicans held in Mexico City from August 21 to 23, 1943. Gleason was designated as a delegate from New York representing the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee.”</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonfirstpg.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonfirstpgsmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>First page of Leverett S. Gleason's FBI file</b></span></center><br />
There was a familiar name. That organization had been on the Bureau’s radar for a while. Particularly after that messy business when Helen Keller quit as honorary national chairman of their American Rescue Ship Mission back in early ‘41. As it said in the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> article, <i>“Miss Keller has been investigating the evidence that she had been used as a front for controlling figures more interested in communism than in the avowed purpose of the ship mission to rescue Spanish republican refugees from France.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></span> They should have suspected something was up when Mrs. Roosevelt quietly resigned from the mission back in December 1940, stating, <i>“there are other groups serving the same purpose with which I would be happier to be affiliated.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>3</i></sup></span> <br />
Gleason was named in that same article. No surprise that he eventually came to the Director’s attention. <br />
<i>“Other information in the possession of the Bureau indicates that Gleason formerly served as the Circulation Manager of “Friday“ in 1940 and that he was listed as the Editor and Publisher of “Inside of Russia,“ the sale of which latter publication was sponsored by the Worker’s Book Store in New York City.”</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonfriday31940.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonfriday31940small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>FRIDAY vol. 1, #1 (March 15, 1940)<br />
[image courtesy of Michael Feldman]</b></span></center><br />
Of course, the SAC knew about <b>FRIDAY</b> as well. Dan Gillmor’s left-wing version of <b>LIFE MAGAZINE</b>. The Bureau had Gillmor broomed from the Office of the Coordinator of Information for being a suspected Red. If guilt by association counted for anything, Gleason was immediately suspicious.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasongillmor2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasongillmor2.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Dan Gillmor</b></span></center><br />
<i>“For your further information there is attached a photostatic copy of a report dated November 9, 1942, which the Bureau received from the War Department. In view of this subject’s presence in Mexico it would appear that he has since been discharged from the Army.<br />
Your office should immediately open a case on Gleason and conduct a thorough investigation to develop fully all information concerning his Communist activities and connections and any possible connections he might have with the international organization of the Party.”</i><br />
Despite the urgency stressed in this line, it took a while to get the requested information about Gleason; a little too long for Hoover’s satisfaction. One reminder letter was sent in February, 1944, followed by another, more direct missive from the Director on May 6th.<br />
<i>“The Bureau’s files fail to disclose the submission by your office of a report on the above-captioned subject as requested by Bureau letters dated December 16, 1943 and February 21, 1944. This matter should be given prompt attention and a report submitted in the near future.”</i><br />
This time it took the SAC only four days to comply.<br />
The report contained Gleason’s basic biographical data. Born in Winchendon, Massachusetts on February 25, 1898 (though the file incorrectly had it as 1897) attended Harvard 1916-17, served in the U.S. Army 1917-1919. <br />
Nothing radical in any of that. Nothing to explain how he may have come to be a Communist.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
To an outsider, Leverett Stone Gleason was confounding. <br />
He was the son of wealthy physician, Dr. Mardis E. Gleason, whose deep New England roots can be traced back to the early 1600s. Eldest son Leverett graduated from Newton (Mass.) High School in 1915, before moving on to the exclusive Phillips Academy boarding school in Andover--hardly the breeding ground for potential revolutionaries. Briefly, from 1916 until early 1917, Gleason attended Harvard University. Then, on April 26, 1917, he enlisted in the U.S. Army.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1916army.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1916armysmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>THE PHILLIPS BULLETIN (Oct. 1916)</b></span></center> <br />
From February of 1918 until the war’s end on November 11th of that year, Gleason saw action numerous times at the front as a driver with the 110th Field Artillery. While still in the military, and although he was only a Private First Class, he was detailed to Paris for a four-month course “in letters” at the Sorbonne, before being discharged on September 4, 1919.<br />
Lev (as he was familiarly known) eventually found employment as a salesman for the Charles P. Dow & Company investment bank in Boston. But, like the song of the period asked: <i>"How 'ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen Paree?".</i> Gleason returned to France for a vacation in August, 1921 and didn’t return until April of 1922. <br />
Emerging from the ruinous War to End All Wars, Paris of the 1920s was the epicenter of radical thought. Home to the Lost Generation and the Dadaists; artists and writers crowding the smoky Left Bank cafes, rubbing elbows with like-minded émigrés from the world over. Lenin himself spent four years in the French capital a decade earlier. <br />
Did this environment help shape young Gleason’s life philosophy? <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>“From 1922 until 1942, GLEASON was employed as magazine editor and publisher at Comic House, Incorporated, 114 East 32nd Street, New York City, at a weekly salary of $150.”</i><br />
The FBI’s case file on Gleason may have had the beginning date wrong, but they were right about his connection to Comic House. Of course, it wasn’t as simple as that; nothing in comic book publishing was ever that clear cut. No mention of Arthur Bernhard, his partner in publishing, or the several name changes the company had undergone. And consider Lev’s reported salary--about the same amount that could be earned by an industrious artist working for him. Being true to his egalitarian beliefs, Gleason believed in profit sharing with his employees, likely keeping his own income low.<br />
As their unnamed informant detailed, Gleason had been knocking around the publishing industry for a while. <br />
<i>“Subject further admitted to </i>[name redacted]<i> that he had spent most of his adult life in Eastern United States, or in the vicinity of New York City, and had been engaged in the publishing business. He stated that he had served on the staff of the “National Sportsman”, a sporting magazine, and for nine years had been employed by the “Open Road for Boys”.</i> <br />
Lev had been advertising manager there. By the mid-Thirties, as his file noted, <i>“…</i>(Gleason)<i> had been employed by the Eastern Color Printing Company and the United Features Syndicate…”</i>. It was while working at Eastern under sales manager Harry Wildenberg that Gleason became exposed to the comic book industry. In fact, Wildenberg and Lev’s fellow salesman, Max Gaines, jousted in print for years over claims to having invented the modern comic book. <br />
It’s likely that the Bureau didn‘t have many comic book fans, as the file duly noted such Gleason publications as, <i>“…“Boy Comics”, “Silver Streak Comics”, “Dare Devil”,</i> [sic]<i> “Crime Doesn’t Pay,”</i> [sic]<i> and “Scoop Detective Cases”</i>. (The last title was a crime magazine and not a comic.) It’s apparent, though, that the agent putting the file together had made a very recent trip to the newsstand. The very first issue of <b>CRIME DOES NOT PAY</b> (#22, replacing the canceled <b>SILVER STREAK</b>) had just come out, but still made it into his report. <br />
Their informant wasn‘t much of a comic fan either. <br />
<i>“According to</i> [name redacted]<i>, the publishing of the cheap pulp paper type comic booklets is a common practice and is considered a racket in the publishing fraternity in New York as little capital is needed to engage in this type of business, which is not highly regarded by reputable publishers.”</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonwoodbirophoto.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonwoodbirophotosmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bob Wood, Lev Gleason and Charles Biro publicity photo</b></span></center> <br />
A brief listing of Gleason’s publishing efforts follows.<br />
<i>“…he has produced a cheap publication, known as “Picture Digest” and has also published a magazine known as “Burlesque” </i> [sic]<i> emphasizing “leg art”. GLEASON is also known to have published a magazine “Friday” and to have published a booklet entitled “The Truth About the Red Army” which dealt with the Soviet Military Machine.”</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonburlesk.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonburlesksmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>BURLESK #1 (Aug. 1942)<br />
[courtesy of Frank Motler]<br />
</b></span></center> <br />
Nothing new there. The Director had noted some of these in his initial letter. The file then gets more personal.<br />
<i>“Regarding subject’s habits and activities, </i>[name redacted]<i> was unable to furnish any derogatory information but stated that in his conversations he appeared to be above average in intelligence, liberal in his views an sincere in his feeling against Totalitarian forms of Government. GLEASON, by his conversation, indicated to</i> [name redacted]<i> that he is pro-Labor and is impartial to capitalism and that he advocates the (advance)ment of the under-privileged.</i> [name redacted]<i> further states (that) the subject speaks, reads and writes French fairly well.”</i><br />
Then it starts in on Gleason’s involvement with the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee (JAFRC).<br />
<i>“</i>[name redacted]<i> indicated that a chapter letter, addressed to the Communist Party, Baltimore, Maryland, on May 5, 1943, signed by FELIX KUSMAN, of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, indicated that after the above-mentioned letter had referred to the work done by the Committee to bring about release of prisoners in Spain and France, it stated that LEVERETT S. GLEASON, a member of the Board of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, together with Miss Bryan, Executive Secretary, visited the State Department, “last week”.</i><br />
A heavily redacted paragraph follows and contains these damning lines.<br />
<i>“</i> [name redacted]<i> further advised that the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee is almost entirely Communist controlled, Communist managed and Communist backed. It‘s purpose is to bring about the release of Spanish political prisoners in Europe and to provide transportation to this country to carefully selected and capable organizers for use in the United States by the Communist Party.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee had been controversial since its inception. It had grown out of the original Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign (SRRC), a broad-based, liberal-leaning organization founded in 1936 to aid the beleaguered Loyalists in their struggle against the Fascist-backed insurgents of general Francisco Franco. <br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1939spanishrefposter.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1939spanishrefpostersmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign poster (1939)</b></span></center><br />
While the original organization enjoyed popular, high-level support (President Roosevelt’s Secretary of the Interior, Harold Ickes, was its honorary chairman) and numbered many well-known artists and intellectuals among its members, it eventually came under the scrutiny of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, chaired by Martin Dies.<br />
Internal squabbling and pressure from governmental inquiries into suspected Communist infiltration of the SRRC led to a split in March, 1940, and the formation of the United American Spanish Aid Committee, which evolved into the JAFRC.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
In September, 1941, Gleason and his new wife Margaret, moved from their apartment at 15 W. 106th Street in Harlem, to the bucolic lifestyle offered by Chappaqua. This Westchester County hamlet within the larger town of New Castle, had at one time been the home of another publisher, Horace <i>“Go West, young man!”</i> Greeley. <br />
Chappaqua was a curious choice of residence for Lev. Not only was the upscale enclave far removed from the common men he championed, it was also the home base of <b>READER’S DIGEST</b> and a bastion of the Republican party. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Despite being what yet another unnamed source called, <i>“…a person who is very important in Communist circles,”</i> Gleason kept a low profile. Usually.<br />
On July 21, 1943, Gleason addressed a letter to the editor of the local Chappaqua, New York newspaper, the <b>NEW CASTLE TRIBUNE</b>. In it, Lev responded to a statement made by Justice Hamilton Hicks, chairman of the town’s American Legion Post’s Committee on Americanism. Justice Hicks had commented on the ignorance of American children exhibited in a Legion sponsored essay contest, noting that some, <i>“…had so slight a conception of the meaning of free government that they thought Russia is a republic.” <br />
“Regardless of how one may feel toward our Russian ally,”</i> wrote Gleason, <i>“I think that the truth will stand on its own feet and that little is to be gained by distortion. I dread to think of the future of education if the children are to be told that the Soviet Union is not a republic.”</i><br />
Gleason goes on to cite specific articles of the Soviet Constitution that reaffirm his contention. Further, he avers that, <i>“The Constitution also guarantees by law freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of street processions and demonstrations, as well, of course, as freedom of religious worship.”</i><br />
<i>“If the Soviet Union,”</i> he writes in closing, <i>“regardless of what virtues or faults one wishes to credit it with, is not a republic, what in heaven’s name is it?”</i><br />
Lev’s impassioned defense of what he saw as an attack on the Soviet Union, drew public attention; likely more than he had bargained for.<br />
Hicks responded with his own letter to the editor. After first castigating Gleason for being either, <i>“…a victim of such ignorance or one of its promoters,”</i> Hicks writes, <i>“The report criticized by Mr. Gleason states that none of the students who entered the essay contest knew that the United States is a republic and that none understood that our freedom depends largely on our republican form of government, Mr. Gleason makes no comment on this shocking condition. It does not interest him. He is only interested in defending Russia from the implication that Russia is not a republic…”.</i><br />
Gleason responds with one more volley in the August 20th <b>TRIBUNE</b>.<br />
<i>“…frankly I do not believe that, by and large, American school children are unaware that the U.S.A. is a republic. I think they know our country is a republic, love it deeply and fully appreciate its significance when they repeat: ‘I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands.’ Ours is an excellent school system, the teachers are of a high character, very capable instructors, and I believe personally the present crop of youngsters is about the best informed n all our history. Sorry, Mr. Hicks, I am interested, but I am not disturbed about the students.”</i><br />
<i>“I am, however, disturbed about you, for you apparently wish to instruct the children that our Russian ally is not a republic. You answer me with quotations intended to prove that Russia is not democratic. This, of course is a different point altogether. Great Britain, for example, is a democracy--yet it is not a republic. The terms are not synonymous. For the sake of the young students, let us not confuse terms. Though, be assured, I am perfectly willing to uphold the argument that the Soviet Union is not republic--but democratic as well.”</i><br />
Lev goes on for a bit before finally asking that, <i>“We might well refrain from criticisms of our allies at this time, if only for selfish reasons, and I for one believe that closer understanding of, and friendship for, our allies, together with ever stronger unity at home, are the first patriotic requirements of the hour.”</i><br />
In spite of his closing appeal to patriotism, Gleason’s public debate mainly drew suspicion to him. The FBI interviewed several residents of Chappaqua, beginning with Lev’s aforementioned sparring partner, Justice Hicks. <br />
Hicks, however, could provide little. While he didn’t know Gleason personally, Hicks mentioned that, <i>“he believes that GLEASON is enrolled as a member of the American Labor Party,”</i> and nothing more.<br />
The New Castle Chief of Police concurred. Chief Lester Romaine, <i>“…stated that GLEASON had never been reported to him as a Communist nor had he received any indications that GLEASON was a member of any subversive organization.”</i> Obligingly, he also checked to see if Lev had any local criminal record. He had none. <br />
An anonymous source at the Westchester Lighting Company provided that Gleason moved into his home on Park Drive on September 26, 1941. The name redacted source at the New York Telephone Company agreed with that date. Mundane stuff. <br />
A detailed accounting of his personal banking information was supplied by yet another unnamed person at Chappaqua National Bank. No suspicious transactions, but there were several checks from Comic House and Magazine House. <br />
Even his mail was checked, as the Bureau recorded the names and addresses of all mail he received for several months in early 1944. <br />
The paucity of incriminating information regarding Gleason is reflected the “Undeveloped Leads” assigned to both the Washington, DC and New York FBI field offices. While Washington confined their searches to State Department files, New York laid out an ambitious plan.<br />
<i>“Will contact the officials of the “National Sportsman” and discreetly obtain information regarding the past activities of subject.”<br />
“Will similarly contact officials of the “Open Road for Boys”.<br />
“Will similarly contact the officials of “Eastern Color Printing Company”.</i> <br />
And so on.<br />
The Bureau apparently intended to interview virtually everyone Gleason had ever worked for, associated with or passed on the street.<br />
<i>“Will, if feasible, discreetly contact reliable individuals in the vicinity of 114 East 32nd Street, New York City, subject’s place of business, and obtain from them information relative to his activities and associates.”</i><br />
They also planned to photograph Lev, check his phone records, and go through his garbage.<br />
<i>“Will, if feasible, obtain trash coverage of subject’s place of employment at 114 East 32nd Street.”</i><br />
Gleason’s home life would be scrutinized as well. A <i>“confidential informant”</i> would keep an eye on his activities, his mail would still be monitored and they would, <i>“…through suitable pretext or other discreet methods, attempt to obtain a photograph of subject.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The drought of information was broken in September, 1944, when Gleason formed a political action committee to reelect President Roosevelt and mass-mailed a letter to his fellow Chappaquans. <br />
<i>“We plan an active campaign to roll up the largest possible Roosevelt vote in this Republican stronghold,“</i> he wrote, <i>“We can, by hard work, pile up several hundred additional Roosevelt votes in our district.”</i><br />
The Bureau sent an informant to cover the first meeting.<br />
In the report of the meeting followed, the informant detailed every speaker’s words and noted that Gleason was elected President of the PAC. <br />
While noting that <i>“about 35 persons were present at the meeting,”</i> and that, <i>“most of them there were well educated and well dressed. Many were dark and of swarthy appearance,”</i> nothing subversive was discussed. Still, the informant provided a list of automobile license plates near the meeting hall. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Months of following undeveloped leads went by. Finally, on March 14, 1945, Director Hoover received a teletype headed, “URGENT”, from the New York field office. <br />
Gleason had mentioned to Helen Bryan (a possible informant?), executive secretary of JAFRC, that he had an appointment with Walter Winchell, the powerful newspaper columnist and radio commentator. <br />
Although Winchell was a close friend of Hoover’s and a avowed anti-Communist, he was also a fan of Gleason’s muckraking digest, <b>READER’S SCOPE</b>. <br />
The potentially explosive combination apparently set off alarms at the Bureau.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhooverwinchell.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhooverwinchell.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Walter Winchell, J. Edgar Hoover & Al Jolson </b></span></center> <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
On May 5, 1945, a report was filed at the Bureau that collected a number of leads related to Gleason. <br />
While not directly attributing any Communist activity to Lev, the report does present information that appears to link him to the Party.<br />
The fact that Gleason was editor of <b>READER’S SCOPE</b> and that the magazine published articles by <i>“known Communists”</i>, was apparently of note. <br />
So, too, was the <b>DAILY WORKER</b> article of March 23, 1943, that told of Gleason and publishing partner Arthur Bernhard’s presentation of the Reader’s Scope Award, <i>“to the American who had made the year’s most outstanding contribution to the fight against native Fascists and the threat of Fascism in America.”</i><br />
A clipping from the <b>NEW CASTLE TRIBUNE</b> dated April 6, 1945, covered the first meeting of Gleason’s newly formed Chappaqua Community Council, held in his home. Gleason moderated a panel discussion which concerned the sensitive topic, “The Obstacles to Permanent Peace”. This was a subject frequently featured in leftist magazines of the period, as it propounded the need for America and the USSR to continue as allies after the coming defeat of Hitler.<br />
Among the panelists invited to talk was Lement U. Harris, an unabashed Communist. If Gleason was hoping to avoid the FBI’s attention, he was picking the wrong friends.<br />
However, with leads leading nowhere and nothing substantially incriminating, the SAC of the New York field office sent this memo to Director Hoover on July 2, 1945.<br />
<i>“A review of the file fails to disclose that the subject is of sufficient importance in the Communist Movement to warrant the continued designation of a key figure. Therefore, he is being deleted from the New York Key Figure List. A Security Index Card on the subject is being maintained.<br />
“The undeveloped leads in this case are not being covered and the case is being marked closed, subject to being reopened if any information is received in the future to warrant such action.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
And within six months, the Bureau reopened Lev’s file.<br />
Lev’s Chappaqua Community Council was drawing bad publicity in the community. A number of speakers invited by him carried leftist credentials and unfavorable coverage of the council’s meetings in the <b>NEW CASTLE TRIBUNE</b> led Gleason to create his own competing paper, the <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b>. <br />
The newspaper, which premiered on November 1, 1945, reflected Gleason’s personal leanings. One of his columnists, Johannes Steele, was singled out for mention in the Bureau report for supporting among other things, <i>“that the atomic bomb secret should be given to Russia.”</i><br />
The tension between Gleason’s paper and the community manifested in a Halloween night act of vandalism. Someone smeared the words, “Jews” and “Communist” on the window of the <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b> office. While police chief Romaine assured the Bureau that it was the action of “several young boys”, Gleason printed a photo of the offensive graffiti along with a photo from pre-War Germany with a similar window scrawled with the word, “Jude”. <br />
According to the report, Gleason, <i>“made a comparison of the smearing of his newspaper office windows to the action of the Fascists in Germany smearing the store windows of Jews prior to the war. He also wrote an editorial on this matter, stating that the individuals who smeared his newspaper windows were undoubtedly Fascists.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
As the war ended, the Bureau’s attention became more overtly directed at the perceived threat of homegrown Communists. <br />
<i>“An article appeared in the “New York Telegram” on December 11, 1945 by FREDERICK WOLTMAN, World Telegram Staff Writer, stating that LEVERETT S. GLEASON intends to act as promoter and publisher of a new monthly magazine entitled “Salute”, due to be published in February 1946.”</i><br />
Gleason’s involvement with SALUTE had been public knowledge, reported in numerous articles leading up to its publication. A <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> article of March 3, 1946, was typical, citing the <b>YANK</b> and <b>STARS AND STRIPES</b> credits of its editors and writers. <br />
<i>“Most of the contributors to the fifteen-cent monthly will be veterans whose names are familiar to soldier readers of the two Army publications.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>4</i></sup></span> <br />
Woltman, however, had a totally different take on Gleason and the staff.<br />
<i>“WOLTMAN, in his article, sets out background information of GLEASON alleging that he has been known as a pro-Communist fellow traveller</i> [sic]<i> in the past.”</i><br />
Woltman notes Gleason’s connection to <b>FRIDAY</b> and <b>READER’S SCOPE</b>, <i>“…a magazine which closely follows the Communist Party Line.”</i><br />
<i>“It is pointed out here,”</i> the report goes on, <i>“that the foreign editor of “Reader’s Scope” is JOHANNES STEELE previously reported as a pro-Soviet radio commentator.”<br />
“Woltman’s article also sets out the fact that GLEASON became one of the five directors of the “Peoples Radio Foundation”…”.</i><br />
People’s Radio was a proposed network of FM radio stations with a leftist lean and an illustrious group of supporters. <br />
Along with Lev, charter members included Charlie Chaplin, Rockwell Kent, Langston Hughes and Howard Fast. In April, 1946, the FCC denied the People’s Radio application for a license to broadcast in New York City.<br />
<i>“Information received from</i> [name redacted]<i> indicates that GLEASON is closely associated with ALEXANDER L. TRACHTENBERG, head of “International Publishers”, official Communist book publisher. GLEASON and TRACHTENBERG have on a number of occasions discussed publication projects of the Communist Party. Also information received from</i> [names redacted]<i> indicates that GLEASON and</i> [name redacted]<i> are rather closely associated and on occasion confer regarding political matters pertaining to Communist Party policies.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The latest Bureau report coincided (but probably not coincidentally) with the most public scrutiny yet of Gleason. On April 4, 1946, the House of Representatives Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA) began its investigation into “Un-American Propaganda Activities in the United States”. One of its targets was JAFRC and as a consequence of his membership on its executive board, Lev Gleason.<br />
Gleason and 17 other members of the JAFRC had been subpoenaed to testify before the HCUA concerning their refusal to produce records and papers previously requested by the investigating body. JAFRC’s chairman, Dr. Edward Barsky, have already appeared before the HCUA empty-handed, stating that the executive board had agreed unanimously to deny the House committee’s request. <br />
Ernie Adamson, HCUA’s counsel, questioned Gleason about his part in the meeting wherein the executive board members reported denied to produce the records.<br />
<i>“MR. ADAMSON: I want to ask you if you participated in that meeting either by personal attendance or proxy or by telephone?<br />
MR. GLEASON: I was not present at the meeting. By telephone I voted with the majority.<br />
MR. ADAMSON: And you voted to withhold the record from the committee?<br />
MR. GLEASON: No, I did not. That was not the question that was asked.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>5</i></sup></span> <br />
Gleason contended that the only question asked was whether custodianship of JAFRC’s records should be changed from Helen Bryan, the executive secretary, to Dr. Barsky. Lev resolutely adhered to this position, denying that he ever voted to refuse the records to HCUA or that he personally had the capacity to produce those records. Representative Karl Mundt was suspicious.<br />
<i>“MR. MUNDT: What are you trying to conceal?<br />
MR. GLEASON: We are not trying to conceal anything.<br />
MR. MUNDT: It seems to me that there is a strange, stubborn conflict between your testimony and that which Dr. Barsky gave, his sworn testimony before this committee when he was here.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>6</i></sup></span> <br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonbarsky1937.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonbarsky1937small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Dr. Edward Barsky (1937)<br />
[image obtained from the Library of Congress</b></span></center><br />
Barsky had previously testified that, <i>“…the board of directors, the executive board had the ultimate authority to produce the records,”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>7</i></sup></span> apparently contradicting Gleason’s own words.<br />
Mundt had inadvertently touched upon an internal dispute within the JAFRC that would soon manifest itself publicly.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The very next day, the JAFRC ran a full page ad in the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1946jafrcad.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleason1946jafrcadsmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>NEW YORK TIMES (April 5, 1946)</b></span></center><br />
The public appeal failed to garner sufficient support within Congress. On April 17th, by a split of 292 to 56, the House voted to cite Gleason and 16<span style="color: red;">*</span> other members of the JAFRC for contempt. The accused fought in court to get the charges dismissed, to no avail. On March 31, 1947, they were finally indicted by a District grand jury and on July 16, 1947, they received their punishments.<br />
Dr. Barsky received the stiffest sentence: six months in prison and a $500 fine. Ten others, including writer Howard Fast, Gleason’s collaborator on the Tito booklet, received three months in jail and the same fine. Lev got off a bit easier.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasontito.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasontitosmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>THE INCREDIBLE TITO, MAN OF THE HOUR (1944)<br />
by Howard Fast and published by Gleason<br />
[despite the hyperbolic title, it's not a comic book]</b></span></center><br />
<i>“Five of the original sixteen defendants were fined $500 each, and received also three-month suspended sentences. They had told the court that they had resigned from the committee and desired to purge themselves of the contempt.”<br />
“Among them were Herman Shumlin, Hollywood and Broadway theatrical producer, and Leverett Gleason, publisher of the magazine, “Reader’s Scope”.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>8</i></sup></span> <br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">*</span> While 17 seem to have been originally indicted for contempt, it appears only 16 made it to conviction.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The Bureau report of July 3, 1946 contained their latest revelation.<br />
<i>“The title of this report is being changed to reflect the addition of the subject’s nickname LEV GLEASON.”</i><br />
Details of Gleason’s past were gradually being revealed, in large part due to a biographical piece that ran in the New York City “negro weekly” , <b>PEOPLE’S VOICE</b>, on August 5, 1944. <br />
<i>“Gleason is a tall, New Englander,”</i> wrote journalist, Ted Zitel, <i>“a veteran of both World Wars, a fast thinker, who has been a stock broker, a Broadway restaurateur, a comic book publisher, as well as a publisher of other fast selling paper covered books…”.</i><br />
The agent compiling the Bureau’s report summarized, <i>“The article stated that many years ago GLEASON worked in a stock exchange firm editing its monthly paper to the clients but that he was very unhappy in this job; that a fellow employee of his shared his dislike and together they planned to leave, this fellow employee being WALTER PIDGEON, the screen actor.”</i><br />
The agent also gleaned a possible reason for Gleason’s social consciousness from the same article.<br />
<i>“According to the article, GLEASON was a Bostonian whose maternal grandfather and the person for whom he was named, LEVERETT G. E. STONE, devoted much of his fortitude and energies to the abolitionist movement in the border states of Kentucky and Ohio. The article stated that his </i>(grand)<i>father Dr. AARON GLEASON, a sergeant in the United States Army during the Civil War, retired to New Hampshire where for many years after the war he devoted much of his practice to the free treatment of negro veterans.”</i><br />
Another article was cited, from the <b>DAILY WORKER</b> of December 17, 1944, that named Lev as one of the five directors of the People’s Radio Foundation, <i>“…a community type FM station in which trade unions, peoples organizations and progressive leaders in religious, civic, fraternal and community life could participate and guide the policies of programs and services.”</i><br />
This surprisingly even-handed tone was suddenly reversed with the cold conclusion, <i>“PEOPLE’S RADIO FOUNDATION INC. is known to the New York Field Office to be a Communist front project.”</i><br />
According to one of the Bureau’s unnamed informants, Gleason apparently showed some reluctance when it came to funding the JAFRC.<br />
Gleason, he stated, <i>“…has been long a financial angel for numerous Communist front organizations and projects in New York City.”<br />
“…GLEASON gave him a song and dance about how many thousands of dollars he had raised for the Spanish Appeal Committee during the previous period. According to </i>[name redacted]<i> GLEASON claimed he had for the time being exhausted his contacts.”</i><br />
The Bureau report went on to summarize the Frederick Woltman article that had referred to Gleason as, <i>“a pro-Communist fellow traveller</i> [sic]<i>”</i>. One of their informants had more to add.<br />
<i>“</i> [name redacted]<i> advised that on December 16, 1945 that GLEASON told ALBERT E. KAHN…that he was suing FREDERICK WOLTMAN of the NEW YORK WORLD-TELEGRAM for the article previously mentioned.”</i><br />
Gleason brought a libel suit against Woltman and the <b>NEW YORK WORLD-TELEGRAM</b> for $500,000.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Frederick Woltman had been at the WORLD-TELEGRAM since 1929, when he was fired from his career as a philosophy instructor at the University of Pittsburgh. He was accused of being a Communist for an article he had written condemning police brutality during a coal strike. <br />
Over time, Woltman’s world view swung rightwards and he began to specialize in reporting upon Communist infiltration of labor and political organizations. <br />
At about the same time Gleason was suing him, the <b>WORLD-TELEGRAM</b> was publishing a series of articles Woltman wrote under the umbrella title of, “Exposing Communist Infiltration”. In May, 1947, he won the Pulitzer Prize for reporting based upon that series.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The attacks on Gleason were coming from all sides. Congressman George Dondero derided Lev and his latest publication in the March 15, 1946, <b>WORLD-TELEGRAM</b>. <br />
Dondero, noted the FBI report,<i>“…officially accused “SALUTE” magazine of being an insidious hoax and a means by the Communist Party of infiltrating into “veterans organizations and to incite veterans against our government.”. Representative DONDERO said the magazine in its first issue “followed the Communist line to the letter”.</i> <br />
Apparently, Gleason refused to back down and hide. To make his case, he chose the editorial page of his <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b> to use as his bully pulpit. The March 28, 1946, edition of the paper contained his words under the title, “Playing With Our Children’s Lives”, and according the compiling agent, he condemned the, <i>“…evil men in our country and other lands”</i> who were conspiring to risk another world war in order that <i>“they and their interests might become enriched”</i>. <br />
An article in <b>PRINTER’S INK</b> dated May 2, 1946, castigated Congress for what they deemed the Un-American acts of the HCUA, an article which Gleason quoted in an editorial a week later. <br />
His editorial of May 16th, though, confronted the whispers head on.<br />
<i>“GLEASON was the writer of another editorial which appeared in the NEW CASTLE NEWS for May 16, 1946 entitled “DON’T BELIEVE RUMORS”. In this editorial he talked about the “Communist threat in New Castle Township. He said that his community was the least likely in the whole country where Communism could take root. He said he seriously doubted whether the Communist Party had ever heard of Chappaqua and that he was certain it had no concern for the affairs of this township.”</i><br />
The Bureau report further noted, <i>“He pointed out that under American laws any citizen may be a Communist if he chose but he doubted that in all New Castle Communists would number one tenth of one percent of the population. GLEASON declared that it was an easy though cowardly device to shout “Communist” at anyone and everyone with whom one disagreed…”</i>.<br />
The report ended with the “Undeveloped Leads” to-do list in Chappaqua for the New York Field Office .<br />
<i>“Will follow and report subject’s activities in Communist Party affairs.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A redacted copy of Lev’s local draft board application from April, 1942, was contained in the next Bureau report of January 17, 1947. The additional personal data to be gleaned from it indicates that Gleason stated a yearly income of $7,500 from his various publishing ventures. Furthermore, in 1939, he was the proprietor of a “tavern“.<br />
The tavern in question was named Kent’s, an eatery lauded by columnist L. L. Stevenson in his May 16, 1939 column, “Lights of New York“.<br />
<i>“A newspaper man going into the restaurant business being something of a bit out of the ordinary, stopped for dinner at Kent’s where Leverett Gleason, who used to edit comic pages, is one of the two impresarios. Found the food of such excellence and the company so congenial that we lingered late, the fact that prices are modest despite the Broadway location, also possessing appeal.”</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>9</i></sup></span> <br />
For a period of less than a year, Lev’s restaurant at 1677 Broadway hosted such typically <i>bourgeois</i> gatherings as theater afterglow parties and art showings before he apparently called it quits.<br />
He was also paying alimony to his ex-wife, Marie, totaling $1,550 per year.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The Bureau report dated February 19, 1947, divulged that Lev had married Margaret, reportedly his second wife, on September 20, 1941, before a Justice of the Peace in Stamford, Connecticut. <br />
Leaving no stone unturned, this information led to the next “Undeveloped Leads” request for the New York Field Division to <i>“secure appropriate data concerning her parents”</i>.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A March 18, 1947, report dug even deeper into Gleason’s affairs. And into his personal mail.<br />
<i>“</i> [name redacted]<i> advised on December 12, 1946, that a letter addressed to LEVERETT GLEASON, c/o the NEW CASTLE NEWS, Chappaqua, New York, was postmarked Islington, Mass., on December 9, 1946, bearing the return address of</i> [name redacted]<i> Islington, Mass.<br />
The letter stated:<br />
<br />
“Dear Lev,<br />
I’ve got the dope on Wally and will leave the stuff with Welen’s. Will see you in the store 9 A.M. Saturday, December 14; Be there.<br />
/s/ Rog.”<br />
<br />
The informant advised that WELEN’S is a drug store and stationary store located in Chappaqua and the Informant offered the opinion that the subject probably was meeting someone there each Saturday morning. Regarding the individual termed as “Wally” in the letter, the Informant also offered the opinion that this might refer either HENRY WALLACE former Vice-President and Secretary of Commerce, or</i> [name redacted]<i>.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Unknown to Gleason and most other Americans, the FBI had been performing “mail covers” for a number of years. Post office employees were led to believe that this just entailed the copying of names, addresses and postmarks off envelopes, but in actuality, there was more to it.<br />
A select group of FBI agents were schooled in undetectable mail-opening techniques. This program, designated “Z-Coverage”, was initially begun in 1940 and targeted the Axis powers. It lived on, though, lasting until 1966.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The Bureau report continued.<br />
<i>“The Informant pointed out that GLEASON in his local newspaper has been carrying on a crusade against the READER’S DIGEST, alleging that the DIGEST is anti-labor and pro-capitalist.”</i><br />
A revelation that surely startled nobody.<br />
<i>“The Informant also advised that information had been received to the effect that the New York World Telegram in defending its suit by GLEASON against the World Telegram and FREDERICK WOLTMAN, in the Supreme Court, New York County, had filed a defense brief.”</i><br />
And their brief contained a bombshell.<br />
<i>“They stated that under the name of ALEXANDER LEV, GLEASON became a member of the Communist Party in or about the year 1939."</i><br />
The brief goes on to note Gleason’s signing of a nominating petition for a Communist candidate under his own name.<br />
<i>“The files of the New York Field Division were checked for information under the name ALEXANDER LEV. It was determined that an individual by the name ALEXANDER LEV was Business Manager for a publication known as SOVIET RUSSIA TODAY. He was employed by the SOVIET RUSSIA TODAY PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC., located at 114 East 32nd Street, New York City. It is pointed out that this is the same address where GLEASON presently maintains his publishing business.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
To this point, Gleason’s comic publishing business had been apparently unaffected by the unfavorable publicity and scrutiny. The mere mention in the <b>WORLD-TELEGRAM</b>’s brief that his funny book company shared an address with a Communist publishing firm was a game changer. If the case made it to court, then everyone would know. <br />
What red-blooded American parent would let their kid buy a comic published by Commies?<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhoovercdnp52.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonhoovercdnp52small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"Trigger-Happy Durkin"</i> page <br />
from CRIME DOES NOT PAY #52 (June 1947)<br />
[on newsstands around the time Gleason <br />
was indicted for contempt]</b></span></center> <br />
Gleason had been instrumental in presenting a positive face for the comic industry. (Among his efforts was the proposed dropping of comic books to children in the Soviet Union.) As of late, it had been under increasing criticism from concerned parents, politicians and professionals over the supposed adverse societal effects the comics had upon children. The offending comics most often cited were the brutal crime books, of which, Gleason’s <b>CRIME DOES NOT PAY</b> was the poster child.<br />
In an attempt to head off the witch hunters, Gleason ran a <i>“self-imposed censorship”</i> letter on the inside front cover of both <b>CRIME DOES NOT PAY</b> #63 and <b>CRIME AND PUNISHMENT</b> #2 (May 1948 issues).<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoncode.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoncodesmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>inside cover of CRIME DOES NOT PAY #63 (May 1948)<br />
[recognize the photo?]</b></span></center> <br />
Though ostensibly penned by editor Charles Biro, the list of “don'ts” obviously had Gleason’s blessing. And while it was primarily geared toward assuaging concerns about inappropriate sexuality and violence, note that “don’t” number 12 mandated, <i>“Any political propaganda is out--in other words--no between-the-lines political soap-boxing.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>“Special Agent</i> [name redacted]<i> ascertained from</i> [name redacted]<i> staff writer for the New York World Telegram, that LEVERETT GLEASON, when he was known as ALEXANDER LEV was manager of SOVIET RUSSIA TODAY from 1933 to 1939.”</i><br />
A time period roughly coinciding with his employment at Eastern Color and United Features Syndicate.<br />
In addition to signing a petition for a Communist political candidate, the informant claimed Lev also, <i>“at one time was Campaign Manager for the Communist Party.”</i><br />
The hoped-for chilling effect of the defense brief was expressed in the informant’s, <i>“…belief that no further action would be taken by GLEASON in furtherance of the suit.”</i><br />
He was right. Gleason dropped the lawsuit. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A heavily redacted portion of the Bureau report mentions the formation of Leverett Gleason Publications, Inc. on April 17, 1946. According to the file, this corporation was created from the merger of Comic House, Boy Comic, Inc., Reader’s Scope and Magazine House. For some unexplained reason, Gleason and his unnamed partner (Arthur Bernhard perhaps?) both withdrew their names as principals in the corporation. A likely guess would be that they wanted to distance themselves and their politics from the company.<br />
One intriguing tidbit that also emerges is the existence of yet another corporation owned by Gleason and friends. It appears that Teledrama, Inc. was formed on July 16, 1945, <i>“to produce silent films with musical backgrounds of various comic characters appearing in LEV GLEASON publications.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Lev was apparently busy during the fall months of 1946.<br />
In August, he co-sponsored a JAFRC event at Lake Mahopac, New York; an event that was noted to have, <i>“caused considerable adverse publicity,”</i> in the region. <br />
Then, in September, he met with an official from the National Council of American Soviet Friendship to discuss holding a rally for former Secretary of Commerce, Henry Wallace at Yankee Stadium. The two, <i>“…indicated that they intended to build WALLACE into a new ROOSEVELT.”</i><br />
In October, Gleason joined the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). <i>“The informant advised that GLEASON was attempting to use the VFW against the AMERICAN LEGION POST at Chappaqua.”</i> As the American Legion was in the forefront of anti-Communist sentiment in general, and the local post anti-Gleason in particular, this droplet of information rings true. <br />
Finally, in November, Lev was involved in a conference with yet another official of an American-Soviet friendship organization. During this discussion, Gleason made reference to several individuals who fell under the purview of the “Foreign Agents Registration Act”. This act requires that anyone representing the interests of a foreign power register with the Department of Justice. At least one person mentioned by Gleason had failed to register in violation of the act.<br />
While this section of the Bureau report has been redacted to near-incomprehensibility, the implication is that Gleason was wading into dangerous waters.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A letter from M.A. Jones of the FBI addressed to a name redacted staff member of READER’S SCOPE MAGAZINE.<br />
<i>“Reference is made to the telegram dated April 29, 1947, from the captioned individual requesting permission to have exclusive rights to reprint the Director’s article entitled, “How Good A Parent Are You?” which appeared in This Week Magazine on April 20, 1947.”</i><br />
The letter writer details Gleason’s involvements with JAFRC, the People’s Radio Foundation and his HCUA contempt conviction. After sternly noting that Gleason had been, <i>“in contact with known Communist Party leaders and having aided in raising funds for various front groups,”</i> he further describes <b>READER'S SCOPE</b> as, <i>“Anti-Fascist and pro-Russian”</i>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonreaderscover.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonreaderscoversmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>READER'S SCOPE (Dec. 1946)</b></span></center><br />
The fact that the magazine had also run a recent article suggesting that the FBI was being made into a <i>“political police organization”</i>, didn’t help either. <br />
<i>“RECOMMENDATION: That the request be denied.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A brief report was filed on April 15, 1948, noting the concern of an unnamed citizen of Chappaqua to Gleason’s election as the local VFW Post Commander.<br />
Despite the approval of 90% of the post’s members, the election was the subject of a White Plains newspaper article that stated that a county VFW official had been dispatched to question them individually. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
An office memorandum dated February 8, 1949, from “Mr. Nichols” of the New York field office to “Mr. Tolson” in Washington, D.C.<br />
<br />
<i>“SUBJECT: LEV GLEASON PUBLICATIONS, INC.</i><br />
<br />
[name redacted, but possibly Charles Biro?] <i>for the above publications, called at the Bureau this morning for the purpose of obtaining information as a basis for a feature article on scientific methods of crime detection. He asked to go on a tour of the Bureau and was conducted by Supervisor [name redacted]. On his return he was informed that in view of the man commitments at the present time, it would not be possible to develop any material for him along the lines that he wished. This action is taken in view of the character of Gleason and the type of publications he has handled in the past of which “Reader’s Scope” magazine is typical.”</i><br />
The letter goes on, <i>“</i> [name redacted]<i> during his visit stated that the Gleason Publications are putting out a new magazine in June or July which will be called “Tops”.</i> <br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasontops.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasontopssmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>TOPS #1 (July 1949)</b></span></center> <br />
<i>“When</i> [name redacted]<i> left the office he stated that he would forward a copy of the first issue of the magazine “Tops” to our attention as soon as it was released and he hoped that at some future time arrangements could be made for an article. He was given no commitment or encouragement along this line.”</i><br />
Clyde Tolson’s handwritten response was scrawled across the bottom of the copy:<br />
<i>“We will have nothing to do with this crowd.”</i> <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
An Inspection Report dated October 17, 1949, notes that there have been no updates to Gleason’s information file since May 5,1947. <br />
<i>“Bureau instructions that reports be submitted every six months in key figure cases have obviously not been complied with in this case. Immediate arrangements should be made so that a current report shall be submitted to the Bureau without further delay.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
An updated report was filed on January 30, 1950. Apparently, the New York SAC took the Inspection Report to heart. Along with the previously recorded information, new details and a close reading of Gleason‘s writings were included. <br />
<i>“On February 4, 1948 [name redacted] of known reliability advised that according to</i> [name redacted] <i>of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, the subject had severed all relations with Dr. EDWARD BARSKY, National Chairman of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee and had not spoken to him since the contempt sentences had been received.”</i><br />
A current battle being fought by Gleason was the allegation that he employed a man named Gerhardt Eisler as a writer at <b>READER’S SCOPE</b>. Eisler was a prominent member of the German Communist Party who came to the U.S. in the Thirties. He was indicted by HCUA in 1947 for contempt and for misrepresenting his Communist affiliation to the government. <b>NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE</b> described Eisler as the <i>“number one Red agent”</i>,<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>10</i></sup></span> and his supposed connection to Lev was proving to be yet another problem. <br />
To combat this and other allegations, Gleason once again took to the pages of his <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b> on March 13, 1947, to respond. <br />
This time, though, instead of writing an editorial, he submits to an interview, with carefully crafted questions that would allow him to make his points. As inclusion in the Bureau report occurs some 2 ½ years after publication of this interview, some of Gleason’s thoughts are painfully dated and at odds with what eventually transpired.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg1small.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>NEW CASTLE NEWS Gleason interview (March 13, 1947)<br />
as it appeared in FBI report.<br />
Page 1</b></span></center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg2.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg2small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 2</b></span><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg3.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg3small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 3</b></span><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg4.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg4small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 4</b></span><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg5.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasoninterviewpg5small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 5</b></span><br />
</center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
After the presentation of Gleason’s interview, the Bureau report notes his attendance at a dinner sponsored by the Civil Rights Congress which was essentially an inauguration of a campaign to oust Senator Theodore Bilbo of Mississippi. <br />
Bilbo was a notorious, unabashed racist, who once proclaimed his membership in the Ku Klux Klan and by stating, <i>“"No man can leave the Klan. He takes an oath not to do that. Once a Ku Klux, always a Ku Klux."</i> <span style="color: red;"><sup><i>11</i></sup></span> <br />
Gleason contributed $500 to the cause.<br />
He, too, was an attendee at a meeting of the Congress of American Women on March 28, 1947. At this meeting, Gleason commented on a speech made by President Truman that, <i>“When Truman spoke he shot the works and he shot the American people.”</i><br />
The compiling agent follows this item with, <i>“It is to be noted that the Congress of American Women is as organization that has been designated as a Communist front organization by the Attorney General…”</i>.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Gleason editorialized once again within the pages of his <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b> on March 27, 1947, regarding the inquiries being made by officials into the loyalty of government workers.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonloyalty1.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasonloyalty1small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>NEW CASTLE NEWS Gleason editorial (March 27, 1947)<br />
quoted in FBI report.<br />
Page 1</b></span><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonloyalty2.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasonloyalty2small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 2</b></span><br />
</center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Lev had thoughts, too, about the current American foreign policy in the March 20, 1947, edition of the <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonforeign1.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasonforeign1small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>NEW CASTLE NEWS Gleason editorial (March 20, 1947)<br />
quoted in FBI report.<br />
Page 1</b></span><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonforeign2.jpg"><img src="http://comicartville.com/gleasonforeign2small.jpg" /></a><span style="color: red;"><b>Page 2</b></span><br />
</center><br />
_________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
From the Bureau report of July 27, 1950.<br />
<br />
<i>“RE: LEVERETT STONE GLEASON<br />
<br />
LOUIS F. BUDENZ, formerly managing editor of the “Daily Worker” and a Communist Party functionary until he broke with the Party in October, 1945 has been interviewed during the past few months concerning the concealed Communists whom he knew. The person named above as the subject of this case, was one of those individuals whom BUDENZ described as a concealed Communist. BUDENZ describes a concealed Communist as one who does not hold himself out as a Communist and who would deny membership in the Party.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
From a letter to the Director.<br />
<i>“Attached is a blind memorandum dictated by LOUIS F. BUDENZ and containing all the pertinent information concerning the subject which BUDENZ could presently recollect.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
From Louis Budenz’s memo regarding Leverett Gleason.<br />
<i>“I have met him on several occasions as a Communist, notably, twice at the home of FREDERICK VANDERBILT FIELD on 12th Street. Mr. GLEASON was a very active Communist in 1944 and 1945, to my knowledge., advising the Daily Worker on its tabloid appearance and also participating in other advice to the Party on publication matters.”<br />
“While I received official information of this at the Daily Worker through members of the Politburo, specifically my chief source of information, [name redacted] at the same time I met GLEASON and discussed these matters with him personally. Also, he advised me, as I knew from other sources, that he employed members of the Daily Worker staff as writers on the Reader’s Scope.”<br />
“In the Politburo discussions, and confirmed by Mr. GLEASON to me, Reader’s Scope was also established in order to fight the Reader’s Digest and to be a Communist Party means of invading that field.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The revelations of the Budenz memo apparently failed to impress the New York SAC. Soon after, on August 25, 1950, he filed this report.<br />
<br />
<i>“SUBJECT: LEVERETT STONE GLEASON<br />
<br />
Review of the subject’s file indicates that he has been carried as a key figure in the New York Office because of his importance in the Communist movement. This activity appears to have been his associations with the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, “Reader’s Scope”, and individuals who are known Communists or are believed to be pro-Communists. The file review also reflects that he is no longer associated with the tow above mentioned organizations although he is still reported to maintain pro-Communist sympathies. There is nothing to indicate that he is important in the Communist movement at the present time.<br />
In view of the above, this individual no longer will be carried as a key figure in the New York Office.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The SAC’s report was filed along with an updated report that offered little new information other than a quotes from the competing <b>NEW CASTLE TRIBUNE</b> of June 16, 1950, which detailed Gleason’s JAFRC conviction and noted, <i>“Mr. GLEASON was enrolled to vote on the Communist ticket in 1933 and 1935, according to the registry of voters of the Board of Elections of New York City…”</i>.<br />
Currently, though, Gleason had gone mainstream and registered in 1949 as a Democrat.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
After three years without any mention, the FBI had an interest once again in Lev Gleason. The Bureau was looking into suspected espionage activity by Walter Bernstein, a former writer for Gleason’s SALUTE magazine. On August 13, 1953, a new report--stamped ’SECRET’--was filed. And a new view of Gleason was being seen.<br />
<i>“Gleason was reported to have been a CP member and pro-Communist; he was a director of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee (JAFRC), and was convicted of contempt of Congress. He resigned and recanted. As a result, he received a three months suspended sentence and $500 fine instead of a jail sentence. He was reported to have severed relations with Dr. Edward K. Barsky, National Chairman of the JAFRC. During 1944-1945, he was consulted by the CP for advice on the operation of its publications. He is self-employed at the present time, publishing a weekly newspaper at Chappaqua, New York, and comic and pulp magazines in NYC. He is reported to be anti-Communist and approachable at this time. Gleason is presently on the security index. Letter prepared for New York Office authorizing interview with Gleason.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A report detailing Gleason’s history was once again attached. This time, though, there was an assurance that he was now, <i>“definitely anti-Communist and could be approached.” <br />
“The New York Office is being authorized by the attached letter to interview Leverett Gleason. If cooperative, Gleason can furnish information about Bernstein’s activity around the pertinent period. If he is completely cooperative, Gleason can furnish information about his own Communist Party and front activities. [name redacted] can adequately be protected during the interview as our interest in Bernstein can stem from his mention in “Red Channels” or other public records and our real interest does not have to be disclosed. Gleason’s cooperativeness should be readily apparent early in the interview and if he is not cooperative, the interview can be terminated.”</i><br />
Hoover authorized Gleason’s interview in an attached letter.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
A letter from the New York SAC to J. Edgar Hoover dated September 25, 1953.<br />
<i>“GLEASON was interviewed on 9/23/1953 by SAS</i> [name redacted]<i> and </i>[name redacted]<i> which interview was conducted in accordance with existing instructions relating to interviews of Security subjects.<br />
GLEASON was cooperative during the interview and stated that he recalled WALTER BERNSTEIN as a writer for “New Yorker” magazine from whose conversation he appeared pro-Communist but GLEASON had no information regarding BERNSTEIN’S CP membership.<br />
GLEASON could not recall any specific incidents to bear out GLEASON’S belief that BERNSTEIN was pro-Communist.<br />
He stated that several years ago, at a time that he cannot recall, BERNSTEIN and two or three other men, names not recalled, approached him and suggested he publish a magazine entitled, “Salute”, which would be written along the style of “Yank”, a US Army publication for GIs. GLEASON stated that BERNSTEIN appeared to be a spokesman for the group. He stated that, after the magazine was described to him, he thought it would be a good idea and might make some money so GLEASON consented to publish “Salute”. He put in $5,000.00. He stated that, when he saw the first issue, he was immediately of the opinion that the magazine was too “arty” and would not sell. He voiced his objections to BERNSTEIN but his objections were talked down. After about two of three issues, GLEASON saw that the magazine was a losing proposition and he stated that he wanted to get out of the venture. GLEASON stated that he was bought out by </i>[name redacted] <i>and that within a year “Salute” went out of business. GLEASON stated that he has not seen or heard from WALTER BERNSTEIN since that time.”</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonsalute.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonsalutesmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>SALUTE MAGAZINE (Jan. 1947)<br />
[after Gleason left <b>SALUTE</b>, it evolved into a "men's interest" magazine]</b></span></center> <br />
<i>“In view of GLEASON’S cooperativeness, he was questioned further about his own Communist activities. <br />
GLEASON stated that, in the early 1930s, he believed that the Soviet Union was the answer to the world’s problems and he was sympathetic to the Soviet Union. He stated that he joined the CP in 1936 or 1937 and remained a member for approximately two years. He stated that he became disillusioned with the Party with the Soviet-Nazi Pact in 1939 and thereafter had nothing to do with the Party.<br />
In connection with the magazine, “Salute”, he stated that FREDERICK WOLTMAN wrote an article stating that GLEASON had thought up a new magazine to be called “Salute” which he was going to use as a sounding board for Party doctrine among GIs. GLEASON stated that he was particularly incensed because the original idea for “Salute” was brought to him by WALTER BERNSTEIN and the two or three other men with BERNSTEIN and that the only reason GLEASON went into the venture was to make some money.<br />
GLEASON stated that, when he was in the CP, he as known as LEV.<br />
He stated that he is sympathetic to the work that the FBI is trying to perform but that he has no use for Senator JOSEPH MCCARTHY.<br />
He stated that, in his opinion, MCCARTHY is a “head-line hunter” and he contrasted this type of “sensationalism” with the attitude of Director J. EDGAR HOOVER toward his work. He stated that, in his opinion, the Director avoids “making headlines” and is performing much more constructive work along security lines than any other organization he has ever heard of.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The SAC took time at this point to mention the contradicting statements made by Gleason and Louis Budenz concerning Lev’s status as a <i>“very active Communist in 1944 and 1945.” <br />
“It may well be that GLEASON’S comment concerning BUDENZ could be classified as a self-serving declaration.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The rest of Gleason’s interview concerned his connection to Gerhardt Eisler. Lev apparently sought to distance himself from him as well. According to Gleason, Eisler approached him with an offer to write articles for <b>READER’S SCOPE</b> on <i>“the international scene.”</i> Gleason (not quite matching his answer in his earlier interview published in the <b>NEW CASTLE NEWS</b>) agreed to publish two of them for a payment of $50 a piece.<br />
When Eisler apparently claimed in a newspaper article to have been an editor for <b>READER’S SCOPE</b>, Gleason contacted the paper for a retraction, which they refused to give. Gleason’s disavowal of Eisler contradicted the latter’s employment history claim and helped lead to his deportation. <br />
<i>“GLEASON stated that to top it all off, when the hearing was over, as MRS. EISLER passed GLEASON she looked at him and spit in his face.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The FBI figured that Lev had more to give and was given permission for yet another interview with him in a letter from Hoover dated October 16, 1953. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
From FBI memorandum of January 5, 1954.<br />
<i>“GLEASON was interviewed on 12/22/53 by SAS </i>[name redacted]<i> and</i> [name redacted]<i> concerning </i>[name redacted]<i> Communist activities.<br />
As previously reported in relet 9/25/53, GLEASON stated that he joined the CP in 1936 or 1937 and left in approximately 1939, after the Soviet-Nazi Pact came into existence. He stated that during his membership he went to meetings for a short while somewhere on the Lower East Side of NYC. Thereafter, he moved over to a study group which spent its time on theoretical discussions. GLEASON stated that he never held any office during this time but that he has no recollection of any details concerning these groups, such as identities of members, officers, meetings, etc.<br />
GLEASON stated that his break with Communism was not a thing which occurred overnight but was a gradual process being completed with the Soviet-Nazi Pact, mentioned above.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
The next portion of Lev’s interview was regarding his involvement with the DAILY WORKER as charged by Louis Budenz. Gleason’s version was that he was simply invited by someone at the paper to a meeting to discuss details about the tabloid size of the publication. Most of the comments offered were, <i>“complimentary”</i>, including his own that size didn’t matter as much in improving circulation as, <i>“improvement of the quality of news coverage”.</i><br />
<i>“Concerning the CP itself, GLEASON stated that he believed the party consisted of reformists who were motivated by a desire to improve social conditions of the common man. He characterized his description of the party as a group of “super new dealers”.<br />
He stated that he does not believe this today and refused to give his present opinion, stating that he has no opinion of the party’s purposes, since his complete divorcement with party philosophy from about 1940 to date, would prevent him from having an opinion. He stated that at no time as a member did he ever believe that the organization had revolutionary aims and purposes.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>“Concerning “Reader’s Scope” formerly edited by GLEASON, he stated that sometime in the early 1940’s another publisher then in the same building where GLEASON maintained his office (114 East 32nd St., NYC) whose name was </i> [name redacted, but probably Arthur Bernhard]<i> approached GLEASON with the idea of “Reader’s Scope”.</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonreaderseditorial.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonreaderseditorialsmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Inside back cover READER'S SCOPE (Dec. 1946)<br />
Gleason editorial </b></span></center> <br />
<i>According to GLEASON,</i> [name redacted, but likely Bernhard]<i> had made a lot of money publishing “trashy” and “leg art” magazines and wanted to get on to a higher plane in the publishing field.<br />
GLEASON agreed to go in on the venture because he thought he could make some money out of it, and HOWARD FAST was engaged by </i>[name redacted] <i>(for) “Reader’s Scope”. FAST was chosen, according to GLEASON, because he name was becoming well known as the author of “Citizen Thomas Paine” and other works. <br />
GLEASON stated that trouble between him and FAST started since GLEASON saw the proofs of the first issue. The issue was almost completely filled with articles dealing with phases of the Jewish question such as persecution, advancement, history, destiny, etc.<br />
GLEASON told FAST that the articles should be more diversified for greater reader appeal, thereupon FAST accused GLEASON of being anti-Semitic and as a result of the ensuing argument, FAST quit and GLEASON became Editor. The magazine lasted about five years and “folded” about 1948. GLEASON denied any knowledge of Communist influence in the “Reader’s Scope” or that any of the writers employed on the staff were party members. <br />
GLEASON further stated that he really did not know if anyone was a party member to his knowledge, that he may have “guessed” a person’s political philosophy through things that person stated or his reaction to a set of circumstances, but that he did have no actual knowledge of anyone’s membership or other Communist activity.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>“Regarding the JAFRC, GLEASON stated that one time (GLEASON states he is very poor on remembering dates) his friend and personal physician, Dr. EDWARD BARSKY, told him about the JAFRC and said that it was set up to collect funds for the relief of Spanish refugees, which funds were to be administered by the Unitarians and Quakers. Dr. BARSKY asked GLEASON to become a member of the Executive Board. GLESON agreed, both out of his friendship for BARSKY and also out of sympathy for the plight of Spanish refugees. <br />
This state of mind existed, as far as GLEASON was concerned, until the trial of the JAFRC for contempt, which it will be recalled ended for GLEASON with his resignation from JAFRC on 7/16/47.<br />
GLEASON stated that this trial brought several things to his attention. First, it appeared to him that Dr. BARSKY and the majority of the committee welcomed the trial as a chance to become martyrs. Secondly, the desire to lost the case was shown by the introduction of minutes of the committee meetings by the defense of which GLEASON had no recollection, which minutes actually strengthened the government’s case rather than the defendant’s case, to the consternation of Mr. O. JOHN ROGGE, defense attorney.<br />
Next, people were listed as members of the Executive Board, whom GLEASON had never known to be members, such as HOWARD FAST, who according to GLEASON, had never attended a Board meeting.<br />
Finally, after the verdict GLEASON suggested that the committee’s books be turned over to the HCUA. This suggestion was met with vehement opposition by Dr. BARSKY, et al and since that time GLEASON and BARSKY have not been friends.<br />
GLEASON stated that he did not believe at first that the HCUA was entitled to know the names of contributors to the JAFRC, but with the verdict he reversed his position in proper compliance therewith, and it was this which prompted his suggestion to turn over JAFRC books to the HCUA.” <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
“GLEASON was asked if he knew any Communists and he replied that he did not know any of his own knowledge. He “guessed” that</i> [names redacted]<i>.<br />
He also “guessed” that</i> [name redacted]<i> because of his actions in the JAFRC trial and afterwards, but he stated that he knew nothing “for certain”.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
“In conclusion it may be stated that GLEASON is careful “to walk a tight rope” when he talks. He studiously avoids anything which would cast doubt on his premise that he was in the party originally for the uplift and betterment of mankind, and that since 1939 or 1940 he has been completely separated from any party activity.<br />
GLEASON’S fear of involvement is based, in part at least, on a possibly adverse effect which might result to his earning power.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Following soon after, this FBI memo was placed in Lev’s file.<br />
<br />
<i>“SUBJECT: LEVERETT STONE GLEASON<br />
<br />
Enclosed herewith are five copies of the report of SA [name redacted] dated 2/11/54, at New York, New York, in the above captioned matter, which places this investigation in a closed status.<br />
New York letter to the Bureau, 1/5/54 suggested that GLEASON’S name be deleted from the Security Index Program [redacted information] and stated break with the Communist Party. The Bureau notified New York that the Security Index card on GLEASON was cancelled, 2/1/54. Accordingly, GLEASON’S name has also been removed from the Security Index Program at New York.”</i><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Except for a detailed reiteration of all information gathered about and from Gleason, that ended the FBI’s interest in him.<br />
By 1956, Gleason had moved on; out of the comic book business, out of publishing. Lev became a real estate broker, selling ranch homes, split-levels and suburban estates. Selling the American Dream. In his ads, he referred to himself as, <i>"The Friendly Broker"</i>. <br />
<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonad3161958.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/gleasonad3161958.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>NEW YORK TIMES (March 16, 1958) </b></span></center> <br />
Away from the scrutiny of comic book censors, away from the scrutiny of the FBI. Forgotten.<br />
...until the Bureau began looking into the activities of Morris and Lona Cohen. American born, the two had left the States and re-emerged in England under assumed names. No one knew that the antiquarian book dealers were actually Soviet spies. Some time before their eventual arrest in 1961, they came to the attention of the FBI.<br />
On December 26, 1957, Director Hoover received a message from the New York SAC:<br />
<i>“UACB </i>[Unless Advised to the Contrary by the Bureau]<i> by 1/2,58, NYO will interview GLEASON for information concerning </i>[name redacted]<i> and MORRIS and LONA COHEN.”</i><br />
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Postscript.<br />
Long after the close of Leverett S. Gleason’s extensive FBI file, long after his death in September, 1971, the Soviet Union collapsed. Along with the fragmentation of the old USSR, the rise of capitalism and the Russian mob, came unprecedented access to the forbidden files of the KGB.<br />
Former KGB agent and journalist, Alexander Vassiliev, was granted limited access to those files, specifically from the Thirties to the early Fifties. He made detailed notes which were in turn translated into English when he came to the U.S. to co-author a book. <br />
Among the notes was this entry by Soviet agent “P. M. Fitin” from September, 1945.<br />
<i>“Regarding the entreaty debate, Browder</i> (Earl Browder, former American Communist Party leader and Soviet agent)<i> made derogatory comments about Foster</i> (William Z. Foster, current U.S.Communist Party leader)<i>, calling him a “feeble-minded schemer”.<br />
Browder discussed the same issue with the publisher of Reader’s Scope, the Communist Gleason.<br />
He told Gleason that if he were given an opportunity to go to the Soviet Union for talks, those talks would result in his position in the party being restored.” </i><span style="color: red;"><sup><i>12</i></sup></span> <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<br />
<center><b>ENDNOTES</b></center><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>1</i></sup></span> U.S. News Staff, “How Communists Operate: An Interview with J. Edgar Hoover”, U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT, (August 11, 1950).<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>2</i></sup></span> “Miss Keller Quits Rescue Ship Drive”, NEW YORK TIMES, 8 Feb., 1941.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>3</i></sup></span> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>4</i></sup></span> “Magazine for Ex-GIs”, NEW YORK TIMES, 3 March, 1946.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>5</i></sup></span> INVESTIGATION OF UN-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA ACTIVITIES IN THE UNITED STATES, Hearings Before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, (April 4, 1946).<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>6</i></sup></span> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>7</i></sup></span> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>8</i></sup></span> “Barsky, 10 Aides Sent to Prison, Fined for Contempt of Congress”, NEW YORK TIMES, 17 July, 1947.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>9</i></sup></span> L.L. Stevenson, “Lights of New York”, SAN JOSE EVENING NEWS, 16 May, 1939.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>10</i></sup></span> NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE, (Feb. 23, 1948).<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>11</i></sup></span> Fleegler, Robert L., “Theodore G. Bilbo and the Decline of Public Racism”, THE JOURNAL OF MISSISSIPPI HISTORY, (Spring 2006).<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><sup><i>12</i></sup></span> Vassiliev, Alexander, "Translation of Original Notes from KGB Archive Files", White Notebook #2, (1993-1996).<br />
<br />
Additional general information obtained from <b>J. EDGAR HOOVER: THE MAN AND THE SECRETS</b> by Curt Gentry, the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> archives and Ancestry.com.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-33400368735776460102011-06-25T18:31:00.000-07:002011-06-25T19:05:51.929-07:00The Spectre and The Almost Man, Part 2 <i><font color="yellow">For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,<br />
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:<br />
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,<br />
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!</i> <br />
   -- Lord Byron, from <b>The Destruction of Sennacherib</b></font><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>"...Siegel came up with the feature, The Spectre,"</i> Bernie Baily told interviewer Ron Goulart, <i>"The look of the character I created, the script he wrote." <font color="red"><sup><i>1</i></SUP></i></font> <br />
Apparently nobody involved gave much thought to the incongruity of publishing <i>The Spectre<b></b></i>, Spirit of Vengeance, in a comic entitled <b>MORE FUN COMICS</b>. <br />
<br />
<font color="red"><i><b>The Spectre, a supernatural being whose mission on Earth is to stamp out crime and to enforce justice with the aid of such weird powers as becoming invisible, walking through walls and delivering death with a glance.</b></i></font> -- Introduction from the splash page of <b>MORE FUN COMICS</b> #52<br />
<br />
Although this oft-told tale of the reincarnated murdered police detective, Jim Corrigan, was likely rooted in Siegel's grief over his father's death, his words in the splash panel of <i><b>The Spectre's</b></i> debut appearance read as a simplistic reimagining of a far older Judaic entity, the Angel of Death. This entity was so important that on the first day of Creation, God granted, <i>"Over all people have I surrendered thee the power,"</i> <font color="red"><sup><i>2</i></SUP></font> to take life.<br />
Like the Talmudic version of this angel, who was said to be <i>"full of eyes"</i>,<font color="red"><sup><i>3</i></SUP></font> doomed evil-doers can't escape <i><b>The Spectre's</b></i> stare. <br />
While this antecedent may have provided inspiration, and while Siegel's words gave <b><i>The Spectre</i></b> purpose, it was Baily's drawings that gave him form.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun52.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun52small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #52 (Feb. 1940) </b></span></center><br />
Proving himself up to the challenge, Baily accomplished the remarkable task of modernizing the traditional depiction of Death. His was a brawny Grim Reaper, sans scythe. <br />
Along with the hooded cloak, life-stealing eyes and blanched complexion expected of his ghastly position, <i><b>The Spectre</b></i> also unnecessarily sported boots, gloves and tighty-whiteies (albeit, green*) in keeping with the already <i>de rigueur</i> superhero fashion of the era.<br />
*(<i>In reality, <b>The Spectre</b> was initially depicted as being gray. My assumption--supported by two panels near the end of his origin story in <b>MORE FUN</b> #53--is that he was wearing a costume, which was later reinterpreted as his bloodless pallor. Furthermore, <b>MORE FUN</b> #52 had his cloak, gloves, boots and shorts colored blue. This coloring suggests that DC wanted potential comic book buyers to confuse this ghostly newcomer with their current star, <b>The Batman</b></i>.) <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf53seq.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf53seqsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #53 (March 1940)</b></span></center><br />
(<i>Addendum: to further complicate matters, the VERY first appearance of <b>The Spectre</b>, in the last panel of Baily's final <b>Buccaneer</b> story, bizarrely depicts him as having a purple cape, blue shirt and a green face!</i>)<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun51page.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun51pagesmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #51 (Jan. 1940)</b><br />
Last page of Baily's final Buccaneer story</span></center><br />
Baily's drawing was equal to <i><b>The Spectre's</b></i> grim task. Terrified villains would visibly cower at his appearance, mouths agape, while his pupil-less eyes would send chills through the reader. As the Earthbound ghost was unapologetically remorseless, Bernie responded with appropriately graphic bluntness. In one memorable sequence from <b>MORE FUN</b> #56, <i><b>The Spectre</b></i> first crushes, then heaves, a car full of pleading criminals. Mercy be damned!<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf56seq.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf56seqsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #56 (June 1940) <br />
[as reprinted in THE GOLDEN AGE SPECTRE ARCHIVES]</b></span></center><br />
Baily also proved to be a masterful cover artist. His striking rendition of a towering <b><i>Spectre</i></b> striding through a battlefield, wreaking destruction, ranks as one of the most iconic images of the Golden Age.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf54.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymf54small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #54 (April 1940)</b></span></center><br />
One might think that the portrayer of such Old Testament-minded retribution to be a misanthropic recluse, but nothing was further from the truth. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
When Bernie married the former Regina Rachinsky on June 24, 1939, he had already taken to using the truncated version of his last name, Bailynson. <i>"He always said,"</i> Stephen Baily told me,<i>"the reason he did it was that there was a Mickey Mouse wristwatch he coveted when he was young in which you could substitute the letters of your name for the numbers--and Bernard Bailynson was four letters too long."</i> Then, too, the Anglicization to Baily wouldn't hurt when looking for a job. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyreginaphoto.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyreginaphotosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bernie and Regina Baily<br />
[photo courtesy of Eugene Baily]</b></span></center><br />
Regina, born Riva, emigrated to the U.S. from Russia with her family in 1923. While details of her grandparents courtship are lost, granddaughter Miriam Risko recalled, <i>"...I heard they met in the Catskills."</i> <br />
The young couple moved into a four room apartment in a 13-story high-rise at 22 Metropolitan Oval in The Bronx. The kitchen table in apartment 5H became Bernie's de facto art studio. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/baily22metovalsmall.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/baily22metovalsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>22 Metropolitan Oval<br />
The Bronx, New York</b></span></center><br />
At about the same time the Bailys were beginning their life's journey, Bernie's comic career was beginning to take off. <br />
While <i><b>The Spectre</i></b> replaced his <i><b>Buccaneer</i></b> feature in <b>MORE FUN</b>, Baily continued work on <i><b>Tex Thomson</i></b>.<br />
<i>"At the time,"</i> Baily told Ron Goulart, <i>"I feel everything was being geared to <b>Superman</b>, who'd become their big property. At the height of his popularity, in the beginning, I had my <b>Tex Thomson</b> feature in <b>ACTION</b>. I created a cyclops character called <b>The Gorrah</b>."</i><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyaction27texsplash.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyaction27texsplashsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"The Return of the Gorrah!!"</i><br />
ACTION COMICS #27 (August 1940)<br />
[image courtesy of Bruce Mason]</b></span></center><br />
<i>"Now, they had a contest at that time. The kids sent in the names of the characters they liked the best and that character ran so close to <b>Superman</b> in popularity that they made me cut it out. Really."</i> <font color="red"><sup><i>4</i></SUP></font> <br />
In the same issue as the above mentioned <b><i>Gorrah</b></i> story, Bernie got the rare opportunity to display his humorous side, with the filler page, <b><i>Mr. Pots</b></i>. Just the month before, in <b>ADVENTURE COMICS</b> #52 (July 1940) and then again in <b>MORE FUN COMICS</b> #58 (Aug. 1940), Baily contributed a <b><i>Farmer Doode</b></i> page to each issue. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailydoodeadv52.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailydoodeadv52small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Farmer Doode</i> page<br />
ADVENTURE COMICS #52 (July 1940)</b></span></center><br />
Meanwhile, Editor Vin Sullivan apparently had enough confidence in the <i><b>Tex Thomson</i></b> creative team to assign them another feature, a new super-powered hero to headline <b>ADVENTURE COMICS</b>.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
While Jim Corrigan paid the ultimate price to transform into <i><b>The Spectre</i></b>, writer Ken Fitch <font color="red"><sup><i>5</i></SUP></font>didn't expect Rex Tyler to make a similarly gruesome sacrifice to become the <i><b>Hour-Man</i></b>. He simply took a pill. <br />
<br />
<font color="red"><i><b>"Rex Tyler, a young chemist, discovers MIRALCO, a powerful chemical that transforms him from a meek, mild scientist to the underworld's most formidable foe...with MIRALCO, he has for one hour the power of chained-lightning--speed almost as swift as thought. But unless he performs his deeds of strength and daring within one hour the effects of MIRALCO wear off and the Hour Man becomes his former meek self..."</b></i></font> -- Introduction from the splash page of <b>ADVENTURE COMICS</b> #48<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv48hourman.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv48hourmansmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"Presenting 'Tick Tock Tyler' The Hour-Man"</i><br />
ADVENTURE COMICS #48 (March 1940)</b></span></center><br />
Ken Fitch was 13 years older than Baily and his upbringing couldn't have been more different. Born and raised in Norwalk, Connecticut, Fitch had deep familial roots in the Nutmeg State going back hundreds of years and an ancestry that boasted colonial governor Thomas Fitch. <font color="red"><sup><i>6</i></SUP></font><br />
Before heading off to Pace College in New York and obtaining a degree in accounting, Fitch was a member of the Young Men's Community Club; an organization whose presidency he fiercely pursued. The battle between Fitch and his main opponent was dutifully chronicled in the Norwalk newspaper's local news column.<br />
Now, that in itself may not matter much. What is interesting, though, is the name <b>THE NORWALK HOUR</b> gave to the anonymous reporter who wrote of Fitch's campaign. This writer was known as <i>"Hour Man"</i>. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfitchhourman.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfitchhourman.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Hour Man</i> column<br />
THE NORWALK HOUR (July 9, 1920)</b></span></center><br />
As a life-long Norwalk resident, Fitch was undoubtedly aware of this long-running column, but whether his appropriation of its writer's <i>nom de plume</i> was intentional or based upon latent memory will never be known. <br />
Baily's depiction of <b><i>Hour-Man</i></b> was straight forward. Clothed head-to-toe in a traditional circus strongman's outfit, the <i>Man of the Hour's</i> added accouterments were his cape, half-mask and a dangling hourglass to remind him of his time constraint. And if he forgot, small boxes counting down the waning minutes appeared at the bottom of every few panels. <br />
Although lacking <b><i>The Spectre's</b></i> moodiness and opportunity for expanding his artistic horizons, it was Baily's <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> that received the editorial popularity boost. In <b>ADVENTURE</b> #54, at the end of a tale involving his new young partners, <b><i>The Minute Men of America</b></i> (a bit of jingoist provincialism from Fitch--the Connecticut Yankee in Rex Tyler's court), an announcement in the last panel informed readers of a contest that included a cash prize and an original piece of artwork from Baily.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv54contestannouncement.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv54contestannouncementsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>ADVENTURE COMICS #54 (Sept. 1940)<br />
[image courtesy of James Ludwig]</b></span></center><br />
The entries were read, the winners determined and finally, in <b>ADVENTURE</b> #57, their names were announced. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv57contestwinner.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyadv57contestwinnersmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>ADVENTURE COMICS #57 (Dec. 1940)<br />
[image courtesy of James Ludwig]</b></span></center><br />
Along with the $1.00 cash prize, the ten winners each received their personalized artwork, including "William Carroll", the first person listed.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyhourmanorig.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyhourmanorigsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Hour-Man</i> contest winner original art<br />
inscribed to "William Carroll"<br />
[image courtesy of Jon Berk]</b></span></center><br />
Soon after their debuts, both <b><i>The Spectre</b></i> and <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> would find themselves appearing in other venues. <br />
When the New York World's Fair opened for its second season on May 11, 1940, the kids in the crowd who were able to coax their parents into spending the exorbitant sum of 15 cents for a comic book (!), were greeted by a cover featuring DC's big guns--<b><i>Superman</b></i>, <b><i>Batman</b></i> and his young sidekick, <b><i>Robin</b></i>--waving cheerily back at them. Not to be outdone, the newcomer, <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i>, had secured a place on the inside for his own fair-oriented adventure.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyhourmanworldsfair.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyhourmanworldsfairsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>NEW YORK WORLD'S FAIR COMICS #2 (1940)</b></span></center><br />
Virtually simultaneously (on May 24th, actually), <b>ALL-STAR COMICS</b> #1 (Summer 1940) appeared on newsstands, featuring both <b><i>The Spectre</b></i> and <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i>, both illustrated by Baily.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas1cover.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas1coversmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>ALL-STAR COMICS #1 (Summer 1940)</b></span></center><br />
The concept of <b>ALL-STAR</b> was likely an outgrowth of the <b>NEW YORK WORLD'S FAIR</b> comics' success. Instead of featuring its heavy hitters, though, DC and related publisher All-American,<font color="red"><sup><i>7</i></SUP></font> chose to showcase their second-tier heroes in this new title. <br />
Along with DC's <b><i>Sandman</b></i> and All-American's <b><i>Ultra-Man</b></i> and <b><i>The Flash</b></i>, Baily's <b><i>Spectre</b></i> captured one of the coveted quarters of the cover. Meanwhile, <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> was relegated to <i>"Also Featuring"</i> status in a blurb along the bottom. The disparity continued on the interior as <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> was given just six pages for his adventure, while <b><i>The Spectre</b></i> topped everyone with his ten-page tale.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas1splash.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas1splashsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Spectre</i> splash page from ALL-STAR #1<br />
Debut of classic <i>Spectre</i> logo, which was essentially<br />
a reworking of Baily's MORE FUN #54 cover.<br />
[as reprinted in THE GREAT COMIC BOOK HEROES]</b></span></center><br />
<b><i>The Spectre's</b></i> cover presence percentage increased with the second issue as <b><i>Ultra-Man</b></i> was gone and he now appeared alongside only <b><i>The Flash</b></i> and <b><i>Green Lantern</b></i>.<br />
While the first two issues of <b>ALL-STAR</b> were anthology comics made up of unrelated individual adventures, a radical new format was introduced in <b>ALL-STAR</b> #3.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<i>"I worked from the beginning with the Justice Society stories,"</i> wrote famed writer, Gardner Fox, in a letter dated March 26, 1979, <i>"though the idea of creating the Justice Society was Gaines' (I believe)."</i><font color="red"><sup><i>8</i></SUP></font> Additionally, Roy Thomas has speculated it was the aforementioned 1940 <b>WORLD'S FAIR</b> comic cover that inspired the concept of a super-team.<font color="red"><sup><i>9</i></SUP></font><br />
Whatever the inspiration, the format premiered in <b>ALL-STAR</b> #3 allowed the reader to see their favorite super-heroes (and DC/All-American had more than anyone else at the time) meeting to swap stories of their exploits. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyallstar3cover.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyallstar3coversmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>ALL-STAR COMICS #3 (Winter 1940)</b></span></center><br />
Each hero related their individual adventure in turn. <b><i>The Spectre</b></i> told of his battle with an interplanetary beast named <i><b>Oom</b></i>. Baily's unique style was well-suited to depicting their cosmic rumble.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3spectrepg.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3spectrepgsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;">Baily <b><i>Spectre</i> page<br />
from ALL-STAR COMICS #3<br />
</b></span></center> <br />
Unlike the other JSA members, who ended their tale in one panel before the next hero appeared in the following one, <b><i>The Spectre</b></i> and <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> (spelled <b><i>Hourman</b></i> here) occupied one panel in a seamless segue. Curiously, even though it appeared in the middle of a Baily drawn page, this panel was drawn by E.E. Hibbard, who also provided the bracketing JSA sequences and the linking interludes between the individual adventures.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3panel.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3panelsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Spectre</i> and <i>Hour-Man</i> panel <br />
from ALL-STAR COMICS #3<br />
drawn by E.E. Hibbard</b></span></center><br />
For his part, <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> battled a gang of thieves dressed to look like him. In this case, Baily's artistic versatility prevailed over a fairly pedestrian story. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3hourmanpg.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyas3hourmanpgsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;">Baily <b><i>Hour-Man</i> page<br />
from ALL-STAR COMICS #3<br />
</b></span></center> <br />
By 1941, with two lead features, their additional <b>ALL-STAR</b> stories and his long-running <b><i>Tex Thomson</b></i>, Baily had established himself as DC's most reliable artist. He was also apparently given a greater say in the plotting of <b><i>The Spectre</b></i>.<br />
<i>"The thing I created in <b>The Spectre</b> was his sidekick, <b>Percival Popp, the Super Cop</b>. An interesting thing is that in many cases the side characters became more popular than the main characters. For the obvious reason that you could do more with them."</i><font color="red"><sup><i>10</i></SUP></font><br />
While it's difficult to see how anyone could do more with a bumbling, self-deluding, wanna-be detective than the limitless wraith, <b><i>Percival Popp</b></i> not only became a part of <b><i>The Spectre's</b></i> supporting cast, he eventually took over his feature. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun81splash.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun81splashsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>MORE FUN COMICS #81 (July 1942)<br />
[image courtesy of Bruce Mason]</b></span></center><br />
But introduction of <b><i>Popp</b></i> in <b>MORE FUN</b> #74 (Dec. 1941) wasn't totally driven by creative possibilities. There were larger concerns.<br />
In an article dated May 8, 1940, author Sterling North decried the fact that, <i>"Virtually every child in America is reading color "comic" magazines--a poisonous mushroom growth of the last two years."</i><br />
North seized the moral high ground, royally noting that, <i>"...we found that the bulk of these lurid publications depend for their appeal upon mayhem, murder, torture and abduction..."</i>.<br />
What likely resonated particularly at DC, was North's scorn for, <i>"Superman heroics, voluptuous females in scanty attire, blazing machine guns, "hooded" justice...".</i><font color="red"><sup><i>11</i></SUP></font> The pointed mention of their franchise star made it apparent that they were a target.<br />
In reaction to North's essay and the growing murmur of condemnation heard expressed by other concerned citizens, DC developed an in-house editorial code that mandated squeaky clean behavior from its heroes, including the edict that none of them would ever knowingly kill. What was a minor inconvenience for <b><i>Superman</b></i>, was a game-changer for <b><i>The Spectre</b></i>. <br />
By the summer of 1941, the company had also created an Editorial Advisory Board, populated with child-rearing specialists and other upstanding citizens. Goodbye death-staring <i>Spirit of Vengeance</i>, hello clownish <i>Super Cop</i>. <br />
<b><i>The Spectre</b></i>, I can't avoid noting, became a ghost of himself . <br />
Meanwhile, even though the team concept in <b>ALL-STAR</b> was proving to be a success, <b><i>Hour-Man's</b></i> role in it was apparently not. He became the first original member of the <b><i>JSA</b></i> to leave, making his last appearance in issue #7 (Oct.-Nov. 1941). What prompted <b><i>Hour-Man's</b></i> departure is speculative (He was granted a leave of absence after the last <b><i>JSA</i></b> story in this issue.), but it resulted in Baily having one less story to draw each month. And the loss of income couldn't have come at a worse time. Bernie's son Stephen had just been born.<br />
As with most who worked in comics at the time, Baily's steady production hadn't been enough to warrant special compensation. <i>"When I was working for DC, I wasn't on salary."</i> said Bernie, <i>"It was always page rates."</i><font color="red"><sup><i>12</i></SUP></font><br />
Baily's prospects at DC were limited. Added to that fact, a growing family and a diminished workload were realities that couldn't be ignored. Reasons enough for Baily to look elsewhere to pad his income.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Bertram D.(“Bert”) Whitman's transient career as a cartoonist had taken him from Chicago to Los Angeles, from Detroit to Cincinnati. But like many of the young (he was born in 1908) artists eking out a living, he ended up back in his native New York City and the boomtown environment of the late-1930s comic book industry. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailywhitmanpic.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailywhitmanpic.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bert Whitman (1961 photo)<br />
[photo courtesy of Allan Holtz]</b></span></center><br />
While he may have established himself a bit with individual efforts in several early Fox titles<font color="red"><sup><i>13</i></SUP></font>, Whitman quickly followed the entrepreneurial lead of Harry "A" Chesler and Eisner & Iger by forming his own comic shop, circa 1939. And Whitman's primary, if not only, client was Frank Z. Temerson.<br />
Temerson was the former city attorney of Birmingham, Alabama, who had partnered with Irving W. Ullman in various business ventures going back to 1935, at least. One such was the early comic publisher, Ultem Publications. <br />
Ultem folded in 1938, selling their titles to Centaur Publications. However, Temerson soon re-emerged with a new company, Tem (AKA Nita) Publishing, at the same 381 4th Avenue address.<font color="red"><sup><i>14</i></SUP></font><br />
While Bert Whitman Associates packaged such comics as <b>CRASH</b> and <b>WHIRLWIND</b> for Tem and Nita respectively, they also supplied the contents of the licensed <b>GREEN HORNET COMICS</b> for yet another Temerson company, Helnit Publishing.<br />
Both <b>CRASH</b> and <b>WHIRLWIND</b> failed quickly, off the newsstands by the fall of 1940. With his shop pretty much reduced to packaging the <b>GREEN HORNET</b>, Whitman began considering other options. Although a proposed <b><i>Green Hornet</b></i> newspaper strip didn't sell, Whitman continued to produce the comic book a bit longer, until issue #6 (Aug. 1941). He ultimately sold the publishing rights to the character to the new Harvey company (Ron Goulart wrote, <i>"He later maintained that he made more money by selling the rights to the Green Hornet than anyone ever made off publishing comic books about him."</i><font color="red"><sup><i>15</i></SUP></font>) and closed up his comic studio. <br />
In the meantime, though, Whitman had already moved on to another strip that did sell.<br />
In March, 1940, the Chicago Tribune debuted their new Sunday supplement, the <b>CHICAGO TRIBUNE COMIC BOOK</b>, a format similar to the better known <b>SPIRIT</b> supplement which was to come along in June of that year. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailywhitmanmrexsunday.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailywhitmanmrexsundaysmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bert Whitman <i>Mr. Ex</i> page (circa 1941)<br />
[image courtesy of George Hagenauer]</b></span></center><br />
Whitman sold the syndicate a strip about a secret agent, a master of disguise. And on January 19, 1941, <b><i>Mr. Ex</b></i> premiered in their supplement.<br />
Enter Bernie Baily.<br />
<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
It's hard not to note the irony in Bernard Baily, artist of <b><i>The Spectre</b></i>, being a "ghost".<br />
How he came to be an uncredited assistant on Bert Whitman's <b><i>Mr. Ex</b></i> isn't known, and neither is the exact time frame. But the loss of the <b><i>Hour-Man</b></i> solo story work in <b>ALL-STAR</b> closely corresponds to the ending of Whitman's comic shop, circa the summer of 1941. <br />
It is difficult to ascertain exactly what strips Baily had a hand in. As with many "ghosts", Baily's own style virtually disappears in an effort to maintain visual continuity with Whitman's. But Baily's moody, seriousness appears at times in contrast to Whitman's own lighter, cartoony style, as in the undated <b><i>Mr. Ex</b></i> strips that were reprinted in <b>A-1 COMICS</b> #2 (1944).<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymrexa1comics2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymrexa1comics2small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Mr. Ex</i> page <br />
from A-1 COMICS #2 (circa 1944)</b></span></center><br />
Even though <b><i>Mr. Ex</b></i> ran until late June of 1943, Whitman was still drawing comic books. As was Bernie. <br />
In Fawcett's <b>MASTER COMICS</b> #32 (Nov. 4, 1942), Whitman took up the art chores on the ongoing <b><i>El Carim</b></i> feature, introducing <b><i>Balbo, Boy Magician</b></i> in the process. By the next issue, <b><i>Balbo</b></i> had taken El Carim's spot in <b>MASTER's</b> line-up. <br />
Coincidentally (or not?), an inter-office memo dated <i>"Sept. 21"</i>--without a year designated, but likely 1942--notes that Baily was also working for Fawcett. Historian Roger Hill, who revealed the contents of this memo to me, reports that Baily is credited with having completed a <b><i>Captain Marvel Jr.</b></i> story entitled, <i>"Once Upon a Time"</i>.<br />
Armed with this information, I conducted a search of <b><i>CM Jr.</b></i> stories and though that line didn't show up as a title, it did appear as an opening line in a <b><i>CM Jr.</b></i> backup tale in <b>CAPTAIN MARVEL JR.</b> #2 (Dec. 18, 1942).<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailycaptmarveljr2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailycaptmarveljr2pg1small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"The Pied Piper of Himmler"</i> splash page <br />
CAPTAIN MARVEL JR. #2 (Dec. 18, 1942)</b></span></center><br />
Once again, it is hard to see Baily's style in this work (perhaps it is only his pencils under another artist's inking). The intent was to give the illusion that primary <b><i>CM Jr.</b></i> artist, Mac Raboy, was drawing this back-up as well. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailypanelscompare.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailypanelscompare.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Comparison of panel details <br />
from MORE FUN #68 and CAPTAIN MARVEL JR. #2 <br />
</b></span></center><br />
As with other <b><i>CM Jr.</i></b> artists, Baily employed liberal use of pasted-up stock Raboy poses and <b><i>CM Jr.</i></b> faces. Unlike his DC art, this story is unsigned--not only in deference to his role as a "ghost", but likely a job-saving consideration in light of DC's discouragement of their artists' freelancing, particularly with their main competitor.<br />
Bernie's moonlighting at Fawcett continued at least until early 1943. A March 29, 1943 artists rate list retrieved from the files of editorial director Ralph Daigh (and published in P.C. Hamerlinck's <b>FAWCETT COMPANION</B>), indicates that Baily was still producing work for the company at that time. Note, too, that his credits also included artwork for the <b><i>Spy Smasher</b></i> feature. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfawcettartistsrates.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfawcettartistsratessmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Fawcett artist rate list (March 29, 1943)<br />
crediting "Bernard Bailey" (sic)<br />
[image courtesy of P.C. Hamerlinck] </b></span></center><br />
Curiously, at about the same time, Bernie was getting a helping hand on <b><i>The Spectre</b></i>. The helping hand of Pierce Rice.<br />
<b><i>The Spectre</b></i> chapter in <b>ALL-STAR COMICS</b> #14 (Dec. 1942-Jan. 1943) has been identified as having been penciled by Rice, with Baily providing the inks. Furthermore, Rice also handled the art chores on the <i>Ghostly Guardian's</i> story in <b>MORE FUN COMICS</b> #90 (April 1943). <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyricemf90.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyricemf90small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Pierce Rice <i>Spectre</i> splash page<br />
MORE FUN COMICS #90 (April 1943)</b></span></center><br />
At first look, it doesn't add up. Why would an artist jeopardize his bread-and-butter job (and split his page rate) in order to pick up a few assignments elsewhere? It's not like Baily was overwhelmed with work at DC. During this same time period--fall of 1942--<b><i>Hourman</b></i> (who had lost his hyphen along the way), ended with <b>ADVENTURE COMICS</b> #83 (Feb. 1943). <br />
So what was going on?<br />
A clue can be found in a statement made by Bernie's son, Stephen.<br />
<i>"From the time he was a kid he preferred working for himself."</i><br />
Fate had positioned Baily perfectly. The burgeoning comic book industry was full of guys just like him: would-be entrepreneurs with little money, but a lot of moxie. <br />
The marketplace demanded material; it was ravenous...and undiscriminating. At best, quality was an afterthought; publishers just needed something to fill their pages. This shallow need spawned the comic shops--low paying, no frills, grind-it-out art sweatshops. <br />
Bernie Baily had seen Jerry Iger, Will Eisner and Bert Whitman profit from this business model.<br />
Why not him?<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfaustdetail.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfaustdetail.jpg"></a></center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>1</i></SUP></font> Baily, Bernard. interview by Ron Goulart, "Golden Age Memories", <b>THE HISTORY OF DC COMICS</b> (1987), pgs. 50-51.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>2</i></SUP></font> Tan. to Ex. xxxi. 18; ed. Stettin, p. 315.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>3</i></SUP></font> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>4</i></SUP></font> Baily, op. cit.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>5</i></SUP></font> There has been some debate as to the writer of the first <i><b>Hour-Man</i></b> story. Even the influential <b>Grand Comic Book Database [GCD]</b> site credited Gardner Fox for some time. My inquiries into the subject led historians Craig Delich and Martin O'Hearn to re-evaluate the writing style of the origin story. In an April 15, 2009 email, Delich informed me, <i>"Ken Fitch wrote the <b>Hour-Man</b> story in NY WORLD'S FAIR 1940, and also wrote the stories for the character in ALL-STAR #2, and ADVENTURE #48 well into issues in the 50's.The credits came from Jerry Bails, who got it from Fitch himself, who also said that he created the character."</i> Delich, with verification from O'Hearn, made subsequent corrections to the GCD credits.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>6</i></SUP></font> Another Fitch ancestor, the Governor's son, Colonel Thomas Fitch, Jr., was THE "Yankee Doodle". According to the story, during the French and Indian War, Fitch commanded a rag-tag troop of colonists attached to the British army. Elisabeth Fitch, the colonel's sister, thought to dress-up the uniform-less Norwalkers by giving them chicken feathers to wear as plumes in their hats. Upon seeing this, the British regulars ridiculed them unmercifully, prompting one of them to mockingly change the words to the then popular tune, <i>Lucy Locket</i>, to what we now know as <i>Yankee Doodle</i>.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>7</i></SUP></font> All-American (AA) Publications was owned by Max C. Gaines and, ostensibly, Jack Liebowitz, DC's <i>"secretary and treasurer"</i>. In reality, Liebowitz, while certainly a partner, was gifted that position by Harry Donenfeld, Detective Comics undeniably shady owner and the real money behind AA. The two companies enjoyed a special relationship, outwardly evidenced by reciprocal advertising and the publication of <b>ALL-STAR COMICS</b>.<br />
Eventually, Gaines would sell his share of AA to DC, as it became one part of the amalgamation of distribution and comic book companies under the umbrella corporation, National Periodical Publications.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>8</i></SUP></font> Fox, Gardner. letter printed in <b>ROBIN SNYDER'S HISTORY OF COMICS</b>, vol. 2, #2, (Feb. 1991).<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>9</i></SUP></font> Thomas, Roy, <i>"Seven Years Before the Masthead"</i>, <b>THE ALL-STAR COMPANION</b>, (2004), pgs. 13-14.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>10</i></SUP></font> Baily, op. cit.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>11</i></SUP></font> North, Sterling, <i>"A National Disgrace"</i>, <b>THE CHICAGO DAILY NEWS</b>, May 8, 1940.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>12</i></SUP></font> Baily, op. cit.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>13</i></SUP></font> Although several sources give Whitman credits as early as <b>NEW FUN</b> #1 (Feb. 1935), this is unlikely. Not only was Whitman living and working halfway across the country at the time, the feature credited to him--<i><b>Judge Perkins</b></i>--was probably drawn by Bert Salg, a veteran illustrator who died in 1938. <br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>14</i></SUP></font> The Temerson saga is an involved one that necessarily dovetails into a discussion of the quagmire surrounding such publishers as Holyoke and a plethora of small publishers with a possible, but indeterminate, relationship. As Bernie Baily was himself related to this discussion, I will return to it in a later installment of his story. <br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>15</i></SUP></font> Goulart, Ron. <b>COMIC BOOK CULTURE: AN ILLUSTRATED HISTORY</b>, (2000), pg. 113.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-56707212858068534012011-03-29T07:34:00.001-07:002012-03-26T16:13:11.499-07:00The Spectre and the Almost Man, Part 1<b>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</b><br />
<br />
(<i>This project has been long in development. I would like to thank the following kind individuals for their contributions, patience and help. I couldn't have done this without them:<br />
<br />
Jim Amash, Ger Apeldoorn, Amy Baily, Eugene Baily, Stephen Baily, Shaun Clancy, Beau Collier, Craig Delich, Michael Feldman, Bob Fujitani, Ron Goulart, George Hagenauer, Dave Hartwell, Roger Hill, Allan Holtz, Carmine Infantino, Bruce Mason, Harry Mendryk, Frank Motler, Will Murray, Marc Tyler Nobleman, Martin O'Hearn, Howard Post, Lynn Potter, Miriam Baily Risko, Jim Vadeboncoeur Jr., Dr. Michael Vassallo, and Hames Ware.</i> -- Ken Quattro)<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>INTRODUCTION</b><br />
His work appeared in some of the most important comic books in the history of the medium.<br />
His comic studio was the breeding ground of legends. <br />
He drew some of the most memorable covers of the 1950s.<br />
He was an artist, a writer, an editor and a publisher.<br />
And chances are you know little or nothing about Bernard Baily.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Dr. Harold G. Campbell stood at the podium surveying the audience. Before him sat 228 graduating seniors of New York City high schools who had been chosen as the June, 1933 recipients of the Cooperation-in-Government award. The award was given semi-annually to those that had performed an outstanding piece of public service and was considered to be the highest honor bestowed upon a student.<br />
<i>“Of the nearly 4,000 who have received the awards,”</i> Dr. Campbell proclaimed, <i>“not one has failed to make good.” </i><font color="red"><sup><i>1</i></SUP></font><br />
Not one has failed to make good. Practically a guarantee of success.<br />
<i> “I congratulate you as super-graduates on the fact that each of you in your school has stood out as a person upon whom that school can put its stamp of approval.” </i><font color="red"><sup><i>2</i></SUP></font><br />
As the noble words of the Ephebic Oath were administered and recited by the eager young students seated about him, Bernard Bailynson had to be feeling good about his prospects. He was, after all, one of the <i>“super-graduates”</i>, one of only a handful representing James Monroe High School in The Bronx. Not bad for a child of immigrant parents. Not bad at all.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
As family legend has it, Gershon Beilinsohn used to cut the hair of “Crazy Moyshe the Painter” back in their native Vitebsk, Russia. Moyshe eventually left Russia and changed his name to Marc Chagall when he reached Paris, while Gershon became Harry Bailynson when his name was Anglecized as he passed through Ellis Island in 1910. Rumors were that Gershon was a deserter on the run from the czar's army, but that tale, too, remains unsubstantiated. <br />
Harry had sailed to the U. S. aboard the <i>T.S.S. Rotterdam</i>--pride of the Holland America Line. Unlike the well-heeled First and Second cabin passengers that enjoyed their luxurious accommodations and the ocean breezes as they strolled the promenade deck, it's likely Harry spent his voyage crammed into steerage with some 2,000 other immigrants.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyrotterdampostcard.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyrotterdampostcardsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>T.S.S. Rotterdam</i> </b></span></center><br />
Harry settled in the teeming ethnic melting pot of The Bronx. In time, he resumed his vocation as a barber. If the story is true, Harry once again had a brush with history when he cut the hair of Leon Trotsky during the revolutionary leader's brief stay in The Bronx. Harry also met a girl from his hometown of Vitesbsk (a common occurrence in the tightly-knit Eastern European Jewish enclaves in New York City) and married her. While her given name was Zelda, she went by the more American sounding, Jenny.<br />
Back in Russia, Jenny was a dressmaker, a gifted one who had her own business while still a young woman. But now in America, the Old World paternalism of her husband wouldn't allow her to work outside the home, even when times were tough. She had four children to raise; Bernard was the oldest. <br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Bernard was born April 5,1916, and accounts of his early years have mostly faded from memory. What is known is that by the time he reached James Monroe High School, Bernie began making his mark.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymonroesmall.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymonroesmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>James Monroe High School, The Bronx</b></span></center><br />
<i>“I think he began drawing cartoons in high school, "</i> wrote Bernard’s eldest son, Stephen Baily, <i>"possibly for the student newspaper. I also have a vague memory of him telling me that he sold his first cartoon while he was still in high school. I don't know if he had any formal training”.</i><br />
Stephen's father never gave the full, biographical interview that comic fans and historians glean for details. Perhaps he considered that part of his life private, perhaps it recalled bad memories. In any case, it was his sons Stephen and Eugene that I turned to in hopes of filling in the blanks.<br />
Legendary comic creator Sheldon Moldoff, in an interview with Roy Thomas, remembered that Bernie, <i>"...lived in the same apartment house I did in the Bronx. He was a few years older than me; he went to James Monroe High School, and he was also his school's newspaper cartoonist. He was a very good-looking guy, and I think he was class president." </i><font color="red"><sup><i>3</i></SUP></font> <br />
President of the school's General Organization (G.O.), Baily called for a student walk-out over the questionable use of student dues paid to the group’s fund. His actions led to a brief expulsion in his senior year, but he apparently stayed in the good graces of the school’s administration as they nominated him for the prestigious citizenship award.<br />
Moldoff continued, recounting his first meeting Bernie. <br />
<i>"I was drawing in chalk on the sidewalk-Popeye and Betty Boop and other popular cartoons of the day-and he came by and looked at it and said, "Hey, do you want to learn how to draw cartoons?" I said, "Yes!" He said, "Come on, I'll show you how to draw." So we went across the street and sat on a bench in the park, and he showed me how to start with a circle, and how to make the body, and how to make a smile, and the proportions for cartoons. He said, "Keep practicing. I live on the fourth floor, and if you want to show me some of your work, I'll be glad to look at it." So we became friendly, and I'd periodically go up and show him my stuff, and he would help me and criticize me. </i><font color="red"><sup><i>4</i></SUP></font> <br />
Moldoff lost touch with Baily when the latter moved away. Bernie's son Stephen picks up here:<i> “</i>(my father)<i> told me that he was offered a scholarship to the Philadelphia Art Institute (or possibly it was a Boston art school) after high school but that he turned it down because he was already selling his artwork.” </i><br />
Eugene remembers a bit more, <i>“I think my father went to City College, but my memory also suggests it might have been Columbia; it never went beyond the first year.”</i><br />
City College of New York was a natural choice for Depression era high school grads. Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, coincidentally speaking before the January, 1934 graduating class at James Monroe, urged the students to enroll at City College instead of entering the strained job market. More importantly, tuition was relatively cheap: $2.50 per credit hour.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
While some questions remain about his education, there is little conjecture about the publication hosting Bernie’s first comic book work.<br />
For reasons unknown, John Henle Jr. wanted to be a publisher. He had inherited his family’s well-established shirt factory--a seemingly more secure venture than taking a flyer on the fledgling comic book industry. In any case, he set up shop in the front offices of his factory and hired a journeyman cartoonist, Samuel “Jerry” Iger, as his editor. <br />
Iger’s task was simple, but daunting. He had to put together a staff. <br />
In a perverse way, the economic realities of the time worked in his favor. This was the nadir of the Great Depression and virtually everyone was looking for a job, any job. Located firmly at the lowermost end of publishing, the emerging comic book industry became the train platform of career opportunity. Aging illustrators and cartoonists would pass through on their way down, as well as eager, young neophytes would on their way up. <br />
Moonlighting painter Louis Goodman Ferstadt and illustrator Serena (aka "Serene") Summerfield were a few of the veterans on staff other than Iger himself. Among the rest were Bob (actually, Kahn) Kane and Bill Eisner--two kids from DeWitt Clinton High--Dick Briefer, who had the honor of drawing the cover to the first issue, and Bernie Baily. Each of them was young, talented and ambitious; some with more ambition than talent.<br />
The first issue of the immodestly titled <b>WOW, WHAT A MAGAZINE!</b> was dated July, 1936. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailysmoothiewow1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailysmoothiewow1.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>Smoothie</i> page by "Bernard"<br />
WOW, WHAT A MAGAZINE! #1 (July, 1936) </b></span></center><br />
Baily’s contributions to this diverse mix of strips and text features were a <i><b>Smoothie</b></i> humor page (signed simply, “Bernard”) and the factoid-bearing <i><b>Stars On Parade</b></i>. This strip was drawn in the photo-realistic style of Bob Ripley or Stookie Allen, and featured movie-star trivia along with illustrations of Shirley Temple and Fred Astaire. It was also the prototype for other Baily features that would follow.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailystarswow1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailystarswow1small.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>Stars on Parade</i> page <br />
WOW, WHAT A MAGAZINE! #1 (July, 1936) </b></span></center><br />
Henle’s publishing venture was short-lived as <b>WOW</b> ended with its fourth issue. Whatever personal gratification Bernie gained from being published, it is reasonable to assume that financially his experience was much like Eisner’s, who once told an interviewer: <i>“I ended up being owed money I never collected.” </i><font color="red"><sup><i>5</i></SUP></font><br />
Even Iger found himself on the street. <i>“Iger was let go, of course. There's no need for an editor at a shirt-manufacturing business.” </i><font color="red"><sup><i>6</i></SUP></font> Faced with a similar dilemma, Eisner approached Iger and proposed a business arrangement. Using Eisner’s modest investment (a <i>very</i> modest $15) to rent office space, they opened their own comic studio. Their intent was to supply original content for the growing comic market. And they didn’t have to go far to find artists to fill their shop. From out of the ashes of <b>WOW!</b> came much of the first incarnation of the Eisner & Iger Studio.<br />
At Eisner and Iger, Baily specialized in the <b><i>Stars on Parade</i></b> format he'd begun in <b>WOW!</b>. now titled <b><i>Screen Snapshots</i></b>, it debuted in "Busy" Arnold's <b>FEATURE FUNNIES</b> #2 (Nov. 1937).<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyscreenfeature16.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyscreenfeature16small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Screen Snapshots</i> page<br />
FEATURE FUNNIES #16 (Jan. 1939) </b></span></center><br />
Under the shop-name of "Glenda Carol", Baily continued it as <b><i>Movie Memos</i></b> in Fox's <b>WONDER COMICS</b> #1 and #2 (May and June 1939, respectively) and early issues of its successor, <b>WONDERWORLD COMICS</b>. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymoviememoswc1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymoviememoswc1small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Movie Memos</i> page <br />
WONDER COMICS #1 (May 1939) <br />
signed "Glenda Carol"</b></span></center><br />
Breaking out of that mold, Bernie drew the <b><i>Gilda Gay</i></b> strip for Eisner and Iger's Phoenix Features Syndicate, circa 1938. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailygilda7211943.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailygilda7211943small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Gilda Gay</i> strip<br />
(circa 1938, as published July 21, 1943)</b></span></center><br />
Originally intended (and regionally distributed) as a newspaper daily strip, <b><i>Gilda</i></b> found it's way into <b>JUMBO COMICS</b> #1 (Sept. 1938). Following the life of a stylish career gal, <b><i>Gilda Gay</i></b> (based in name upon dancer Gilda Gray), the strip found new life in the mid-1940s when it was acquired along with other Phoenix Features material such as Eisner's <b><i>Harry Karry</i></b> and <b><i>Stars on Parade</b></i>, by strip re-marketer International Cartoon Company. It's unlikely none of the artists involved in these strips, including Bernie, saw any remuneration for this secondary publishing of their work. <br />
Another daily strip, <b><i>Phyllis</b></i>, was reportedly drawn by Baily for the same Keystone/Lincoln Features syndicate, circa 1938-39, that published some of Jack Kirby's early work. To this point, however, no example has been found. <br />
In any case, sometime in 1938 Bernie Baily left Eisner and Iger. <br />
It's tempting to draw comparisons between Eisner and Baily. To be begin with, they shared similar back-stories: a couple of Jewish kids from The Bronx using their artistic talent to better their circumstances. Moreover, neither was inclined to simply make ends meet. <br />
With a business savvy that at least equaled his drawing ability, Eisner was among the first of his generation to capitalize on the opportunities afforded by the burgeoning comic book industry. Years later, he would tell interviewer Marilyn Mercer that, <i>"I got very rich before I was 22." </i><font color="red"><sup><i>7</i></SUP></font> <br />
Bernie witnessed that success and perhaps he looked at Eisner's path as a template for his own career. He also had the drive, the intelligence and the talent--how could he fail?<br />
But he wouldn't go far working within the confines of a comic shop. With that likely in mind, Bernie found work at Detective Comics (DC).<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Baily arrived at DC in early 1938, shortly after founder Malcolm Wheeler-Nicholson went bankrupt and Nicholson Publishing Company's assets were bought by Harry Donenfeld. Under the editorship of Vin Sullivan, Bernie was assigned two regular features. <br />
Debuting in <b>MORE FUN COMICS</b> #32 (June 1938), <b><i>The Buccaneer</b></i> strip owed its existence to the popularity of such Errol Flynn film swashbucklers as <b>"Captain Blood"</b> and perhaps more directly, Eisner's <b><i>Hawks of the Seas</b></i>. Baily had the opportunity to see that strip in its earliest incarnation in <b>WOW, WHAT A MAGAZINE!</b> and then as it became the lead feature of the Eisner and Iger shop.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneermorefun37.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneermorefun37small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Buccaneer</i> page<br />
<b>MORE FUN COMICS</b> #37 (Nov. 1938) </b></span></center><br />
In early issues, not surprisingly, lingering vestiges of the Eisner and Iger shop style show through in Baily's drawing. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneerpanelmf38.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneerpanelmf38small.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Buccaneer</i> panel <br />
MORE FUN COMICS #38 (Dec. 1938) </b></span></center><br />
But gradually, he sheds the shop look and his own style emerges; a simplistic, edgy form of Mannerism.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneermf48.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailybuccaneermorefun48small.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>The Buccaneer</i> page<br />
MORE FUN COMICS #48 (Oct. 1939) </b></span></center><br />
The comic book industry of the time was a small world unto itself. There were still only a handful of publishers and invariably, career paths would intersect time and again.<br />
<i>"I was at National bringing in some filler pages for Vin Sullivan,"</i> Shelly Moldoff recalled, <i>"and in walks Bernard Baily! He looked at me, and he said, "Sheldon?" I said, "Yeah, Bernie, how are ya?" He said, "Well, you made it, huh?" I said, "Yeah, yeah, thanks to help from you and other people, I'm a cartoonist!" </i><font color="red"><sup><i>8</i></SUP></font> <br />
Bernie's other strip was <b><i>Tex Thomson</b></i>, which appeared in another comic cover-dated June, 1938: <b>ACTION COMICS</b> #1. The feature, which followed the exploits of a wealthy globetrotting Texan, was the creation of veteran comic writer, Ken Fitch. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailythomsonaction1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailythomsonaction1small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Tex Thomson</i> splash page <br />
ACTION COMICS #1 (June 1938) </b></span></center><br />
The first adventure, full of thick, black shadows and close-ups, exhibited the probable influence of film (and perhaps Milton Caniff) upon Baily; the contemporary setting seemingly a more comfortable fit for the artist than a period adventure.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfitchillo1937small.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailyfitchillo1937small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Ken Fitch portrait <br />
from SYNDICATE FEATURES #3 (Nov. 15,1937),<br />
promotional flyer for the Harry "A" Chesler Syndicate </b></span></center><br />
Fitch had a wide-ranging résumé--wandering from longshoreman, to insurance salesman, to printing press operator--but what mattered in this case, he had credits at DC (née National Allied Publications) going back to the company's first comic book, <b>NEW FUN COMICS</b> #1 (Feb. 1935). He was also a stalwart of the Harry "A" Chesler shop, authoring such features as <b><i>Dan Hastings</b></i> as well as editing four of Chesler's comics. <font color="red"><sup><i>9</i></SUP></font> <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailythompsonaction17.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailythompsonaction17small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Tex Thomson</i> splash page<br />
<b>ACTION COMICS</b> #17 (Oct. 1939) <br />
[image retrieved from the <a href="http://dccomicsartists.com/goldage/artistfile.htm">Who's Whose in the DC Universe</a> site</b></span></center><br />
Bernie had one more contribution to the premiere issue of <b>ACTION</b>--a filler page titled, <b><i>Stardust</b></i>, that was yet another version of his <b><i>Stars on Parade</b></i> format. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailystardust.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailystardustsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Stardust</i> page, signed by "The Star-Gazer" <br />
<b>ACTION COMICS</b> #1 (June 1938) </b></span></center><br />
As apparent evidence that he was quickly learning the tricks of the comic book trade, Baily re-used the image of Fred Astaire from <b>WOW, WHAT A MAGAZINE!</b> #1. Why re-draw what you can cut-and-paste? Perhaps Baily felt some remorse at the double-dip, since he signed the page anonymously as "The Star-Gazer".<br />
Ironically, though, it wasn't Baily's work on <b><i>Tex Thomson</b></i> (or his other strips) that would have the most lasting effect on his career. It was the success of another feature from that first issue of <b>ACTION</b>. <br />
As the sales figures came in, it was apparent that the cover feature was a winner--a character and concept that had been knocking around for years. Although its creators were already fixtures in DC’s comics, it was only when a young assistant editor at the McClure Syndicate, Sheldon Mayer, suggested that his boss Max Gaines take another look at this frequently rejected strip that it finally saw publication. Unable to use the strip himself, Gaines took it to his clients at DC.<br />
Gaines had a discussion, <i>"...with Mr. Liebowitz and Mr. Sullivan, the editor of the comic magazines for the Detective Comics group, and impressed upon him the fact that this would be a good idea and by all means to use it in Action Comics." </i><font color="red"><sup><i>10</i></SUP></font> <br />
However, even they had to be surprised at the immediate success of <i><b>Superman.</b></i><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailysupermanpanelsmall.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailysupermanpanelsmall.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>Superman</i> panel <br />
ACTION COMICS #1 (June 1938), pg. 1<br />
by Joe Shuster </b></span></center><br />
Jerry Siegel had distilled most of the attributes people wanted in their heroes and poured them into the alter ego of Clark Kent. He was strong as could be, kind-hearted and just. Aware of his awesome power, <i><b>Superman</b></i> always pulled his punches. The same couldn't be said of <i><b>The Batman</b></i>.<br />
Following less than a year on the red-booted heels of <i><b>Superman</b></i>, <i><b>The Batman</b></i> was the inspired creation of writer Bill Finger and artist Bob Kane.<br />
(Kane was someone Bernie knew well from their days at Eisner and Iger. A marginal talent, his ego and hubris alienated many, including Baily.<i> “…I know he didn’t like Bob Kane,” </i>wrote Stephen Baily, <i>“because he said so, often.”</i>)<br />
Unlike the Kryptonian who came by his powers by landing on the right planet, <i><b>The Batman</b></i> had to earn his cape. Driven to avenge the death of his parents during a hold-up, Bruce Wayne resolutely forged himself into a crime-fighting machine. Whereas <i><b>Superman</b></i> adhered to the boundary of law, <i><b>The Batman</b></i> was a shadowy vigilante who meted out his own brutal interpretation of justice. <br />
Finger had created a hero who, like many of the pulp heroes before him, viscerally satisfied the popular desire for unforgiving punishment of evil. Siegel's immaculate creation was above common vindictiveness. A curious decision on the writer's part, as Jerry knew from personal experience that life doesn't always allow such nobility. <br />
On June 2, 1932, Michael Siegel, Jerry's father and the owner of a Cleveland clothing store, was robbed by three men. While it’s not clear if any of the men possessed a weapon, during the robbery, the elder Siegel collapsed and died. Although the coroner's report stated his death was due to heart failure, Jerry felt that the thieves had killed him. <font color="red"><sup><i>11</i></SUP></font><br />
Perhaps he was thinking of his father, or perhaps he just had <i><b>The Batman</b></i> on his mind, but in any case, when it came time for Jerry to create another hero, this one would be above all Earthly laws. <br />
And Bernie Baily would be the artist.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun54detailsmall.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/bailymorefun54detailsmall.jpg"></center></a><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
<b>ENDNOTES</b><br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>1</i></SUP></font> "228 City Students Are Honored By Civic Cooperation League" New York Times 25 June, 1933.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>2</i></SUP></font> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>3</i></SUP></font> Roy Thomas, <i>"A Moon...A Bat...A Hawk"</i>, <b>ALTER EGO</b> vol. 3 #4 Spring 2000). <br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>4</i></SUP></font> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>5</i></SUP></font> Tom Heintjes, <b>THE SPIRIT: THE ORIGIN YEARS</b> #1-4 (Kitchen Sink Press, 1992).<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>6</i></SUP></font> Ibid.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>7</i></SUP></font> Marilyn Mercer, "The Only Real Middle-Class Crimefighter", <b>NEW YORK</b>, (Sunday supplement, New York Herald Tribune) pg. 8, (Jan. 9, 1966).<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>8</i></SUP></font> Thomas, op. cit.<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>9</i></SUP></font> <b>SYNDICATE FEATURES</b> #3, pg. 1, (Nov. 15,1937).<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>10</i></SUP></font> <b>DETECTIVE COMICS, INC. v BRUNS PUBLICATIONS</b> transcripts, pg. 133 (April 6, 1939)<br />
<br />
<font color="red"><sup><i>11</i></SUP></font> <a href="http://noblemania.blogspot.com/2008/09/death-of-jerry-siegels-father-part-1.html">Noblemania</a> website [The causes of Michael Siegel's death are listed on the coroner's report as <i>"acute dilatation of heart"</i> and <i>"chronic myocarditis"</i>. In short, he had heart disease.]<br />
<br />
Additional sources for general information included the archives of the <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> and Ancestry.com.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2431199187287315689.post-64707934031242607582011-02-13T12:17:00.000-08:002011-02-17T08:03:45.858-08:00The 1905 Comic Fan(<i>Sometimes a mystery begins with a small clue. This is one.<br />
<br />
I'd like to thank Rod Beck, Allan Holtz, Frank Motler, Dave Reeder and Jeff Howard-Lindsey for their kind contributions.</i>--Ken Quattro)<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
San Francisco, California <br />
July 1, 1905<br />
<br />
The letter likely arrived with the rest of the mail.<br />
<br />
As Harry picked up the envelope, he probably smiled at the hand-drawn caricature of him that the sender had inked on the upper left corner. Tearing it open, he read past his pen-name to the salutation.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanenvelopedetail.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanenvelopedetailsmall.jpg"></a></center><br />
<i>My dear sir: I've been trying to collect a few originals & have written to you in the hope that you can spare me one of you many drawings to add to my little store. I've drawings from ZIM, Harrison Fisher, Gordon Grant, Albert Levering, Culver, Tad, Swinnerton, Frank Opper, Bronstrup, H. King, Everett Shinn, E.J. Cross, Maynard Dixon, R.L. Goldberg, J.H. Smith, Will Grefe, Ransom and letters and etc. from a few others--as I'm very much interested in art and I think you do very good newspaper work. I have a very nice drawing from Haig Patigian which he gave me at his old studio."</i><br />
<br />
At this point of the letter, perhaps Harry paused. The breathless recitation of names was impressive, as was the list itself. The letter continued.<br />
<br />
<i>I admire also the stand you and The Bulletin have taken against the "grafters". My father has done all he could to purify politics in his district and sent Wyman and Steffens to jail."</i><br />
<br />
This last line may have caused Harry to glance at the name at the bottom of letter. You can picture him as he nodded at the familiar last name. Fremont Older, editor of the <b>BULLETIN</b>, had made cleaning up city hall his personal crusade and the letter writer's father was a prominent ally. <br />
<br />
<i>"Please if you can spare me anything I shall be deeply grateful to you and I assure you it will be a most welcome addition to my collection.<br />
Hoping to hear from you soon and wishing you all success--<br />
Believe me<br />
Very Respectfully yours,<br />
Edgar S. Wheelan"</i><br />
<br />
Immediately below the closing was an inked drawing of a small boy accompanied by a curiously apologetic note.<br />
<br />
<i>"P.S. Enclosed is a very poor proof of a drawing I did for our school book Down South--the original is pretty good for me.<br />
This is absolutely "ROTTEN" if you'll excuse my language--I was in a great hurry but I shouldn't have done anything."</i><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterillo.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterillosmall.jpg"></a></center><br />
It was obvious that the artist of the sketch was young and quite insecure about his work. It's not known exactly how or if Harry responded to this missive, but it's hard to imagine he didn't respond with a drawing of his own. After all, courtesy demanded it, and furthermore, it wouldn't hurt to show kindness to the son of a prestigious family.<br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
Fairfax Henry Wheelan cast a long shadow. A native San Franciscan, he was Harvard educated, vice-president of Southern Pacific Milling Company, head of several charitable organizations and as his son alluded, a leader against the political corruption that was prevalent in the city. In the wake of the devastating earthquake of April 18, 1906, Fairfax was one of the Committee of Fifty that led the city's relief efforts. And oh, yes,--he was a former classmate and close friend of President Theodore Roosevelt. <br />
<br />
The distaff side of the Wheelan family was no less impressive. Albertine Randall Wheelan, in fact, was even better known than her husband. Her fame as an illustrator of children's books, calendars and magazines had made her name recognizable far beyond the Bay area and put her son Edgar in an advantageous position to pursue his art collecting. In a display of evidential marital bliss, she even illustrated her husband's few literary efforts for <b>ST. NICHOLAS MAGAZINE</b>.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfatherpoembig.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfatherpoemsmall.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Pansies for Thoughts</i></b><br />
by Fairfax and Albertine Wheelan<br />
ST. NICHOLAS MAGAZINE, pg 353 (March 1888)</span></center><br />
In this case, the apple didn't fall far from the maternal tree. In 1905, Edgar was 17-years old and an aspiring artist as well as art lover. Still a few years away from beginning his own career as a cartoonist. <br />
<br />
Harry--actually his given name was Henry--was eight years older than Edgar and had a more common upbringing. He was the son of French immigrants, Louis and Louise, who settled in San Rafael, a picturesque Marin County community north of the Golden Gate narrows from San Francisco.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/peter1884sanrafael.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peter1884sanrafaelsmall.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b>an 1884 drawing depicting San Rafael</b></span></center><br />
Louis was a tailor and a respected town leader, but he didn't have the Wheelan's wealth or connections. Youngest son Harry attended the Mark Hopkins Art Institute while making a living as an illustrator for the <b>SAN FRANCISCO BULLETIN</b>. <br />
<br />
The Bay area was a spawning ground of artistic talent that included Jimmy Swinnerton, "Tad" Dorgan, Rube Goldberg and Herb Roth, the latter two being friends of Harry's future wife, Donna.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://comicartville.com/peterwiferothnote.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peterwiferothnotesmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Undated note from Herb Roth to Adonias "Donna" Fulton<br />
<i>Roth's note mentions "R.L.G."--his high school pal "Rube" Goldberg, one of their art teachers at Polytechnic High School, Rose Murdock, and noted sculptor, Haig Patigian.</i></b><br />
</span></center><br />
Within a year of Edgar's letter to him, Harry had moved over to the competing <b>SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE</b> where, he would later claim, he worked with a young sports cartoonist named Bud Fisher, who had just begun work on his new daily strip featuring a <i>"Mr. A. Mutt"</i> (<i>"Jeff"</i> would come a bit later). <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://comicartville.com/peter1906chronicleillo.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peter1906chronicleillosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE (Oct. 7, 1906)</b><br />
[image retrieved from <a href="http://www.ha.com/c/index.zx">Heritage Auction Galleries</a> site]</span></center><br />
The strip made its <b>CHRONICLE</b> debut on November 15, 1907, but by December, Fisher took a better offer from William Randolph Hearst's <b>SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER</b>.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/petermutt1907.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/petermutt1907small.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>"A. Mutt Starts in to Play the Races"</i> (1907)</b></span></center><br />
While there is no proof that Harry assisted Fisher (though he most certainly had assistants), nor followed him to the <b>EXAMINER</b>, it is apparent that when Fisher made the move to New York and Hearst's <b>NEW YORK AMERICAN</b> in 1909, so did Harry. <br />
<br />
Edgar, too, had moved on. After graduating in 1911 from Cornell University, he too took a job at the <b>SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER</b> as a sports cartoonist. While they may not have crossed paths while still in San Francisco, when Wheelan relocated to New York to work at Hearst's <b>NEW YORK AMERICAN</b> in 1915, he found Harry working there as well. <br />
<br />
During his tenure at the <b>AMERICAN</b>, Harry also freelanced for various publications such as <b>THE OUTING MAGAZINE</b> and <b>JUDGE</b>. While he never quite broke into the ranks of the upper echelon illustrators, Harry had established a solid career and reputation.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/peteroutingdetail.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peteroutingdetailsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>THE OUTING MAGAZINE, pg. 674 (Sept. 1910)<br />
illustration detail</b></span></center><br />
In 1920, the commercial art firm of Louis C. Pedlar, Inc. announced Harry's hiring in <b>PRINTER'S INK</b> magazine. Touting <i>"...his wide experience as a black and white artist, and a colorist of infinite imagination,"</i> their ad went on to proclaim that he was, <i>"also a specialist in animal and Western subjects which gives his prowess an added value and wider scope."</i>*<br />
<br />
Still, Harry didn't equal the success of his younger admirer. In 1917, Edgar had come upon the novel idea of comic strip continuity. His <i>"Midget Movies"</i> strip was premised on the concept that it followed the episodic film offerings of an acting troupe. Wheelan even drew sprocket holes and used movie techniques such as scene fades to strengthen the film format.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelan1917midgetmovies.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelan1917midgetmoviessmall.jpg"></a><span style="color: red;"><b><i>"Midget Movies"</i> (1917)<br />
[image courtesy of Allan Holtz's <a href="http://strippersguide.blogspot.com">Stripper's Guide</a> blog]</b></span></center><br />
The strip (eventually dubbed <i>"Minute Movies"</i> when he left Hearst's employ) was a hit. This success subsequently spurred a number of imitations (including its successor for Hearst, Elzie Segar's <i>"Thimble Theater"</i>) and, not to mention, established a fundamental comic strip device.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelan1931photosmall.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelan1931photosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Ed Wheelan newspaper photo (Nov. 21, 1931)</b></span></center><br />
By late 1936, <i>"Minute Movies"</i> successful run had ended. Early in 1937, Wheelan collaborated with Bill Walsh on a new circus themed strip entitled <i>"Big Top"</i>. Not long after, Wheelan found another venue for the strip. There was now a burgeoning market for strip reprints to fill the pages of newsstand comic books. <br />
<br />
The first issue of Everett "Busy" Arnold's <b>FEATURE FUNNIES</b> (cover dated October, 1937) contained <i>"Big Top"</i> reprints among its other offerings. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfeature16bigtop.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfeature16bigtopsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"Big Top"</i> page<br />
FEATURE FUNNIES #16 (Jan. 1939)</b></span></center><br />
While the strip suffered when five dailies were reduced to fit on one comic book page, the experience still led Wheelan (and the George Matthew Adams Service syndicate) to offer <i>"Minute Movies"</i> in the comic book format. Unlike most other reprints, however, <i>"Minute Movies"</i> was published in a sideways oblong booklet entitled <b>LITTLE GIANT MOVIE FUNNIES</b> (Aug. 1938) from Centaur Publications. When the strip was revived in the All-American Publications', <b>MOVIE COMICS</b> #1 (April 1939), it was the beginning of a decade-long publishing relationship. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanlittlegiant1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanlittlegiant1small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>LITTLE GIANT MOVIE FUNNIES (Aug. 1938)</b></span></center><br />
Unlike other name cartoonists, Wheelan embraced the comic book medium. As a particular favorite of All-American's young editor Sheldon Mayer, he created several new backup features, including <i>Fat and Slat</i>. This <i>Mutt and Jeff</i>-like duo proved popular enough that they were featured in <b>ED WHEELAN'S JOKE BOOK</b> (Dec. 1944).<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanjokebookphoto.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanjokebookphotosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Ed Wheelan photo from inside front cover<br />
ED WHEELAN'S JOKE BOOK (Dec. 1944)<br />
[image courtesy of Jeff Howard-Lindsey]</b></span></center><br />
When Max Gaines sold All-American to DC in 1944, the <i>Flat and Slat</i> strip was one of the few properties that carried over when he formed Educational Comics (EC) Publications. The duo became a reliable staple of Gaines new comic line, appearing in such titles as <b>HAPPY HOULIHANS</b> and <b>MOON GIRL</b> as well as their own short-lived, four issue series beginning in 1947.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfatandslatmoongirl4.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanfatandslatmoongirl4small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>"Fat and Slat" original art<br />
from MOON GIRL #4 (Summer 1948)<br />
[image retrieved from <a href="http://www.ha.com/c/index.zx">Heritage Auction Galleries</a> site]</b></span></center><br />
Meanwhile, by the late 1930s, Harry likely saw his prospects dwindling. The jobs available for an aging illustrator were limited, particularly during the throes of the Great Depression. So like others in his predicament, he looked to the lowest end of the publishing industry for employment. Comic books would at least provide a paycheck.<br />
<br />
He first found work through Funnies, Inc., Lloyd Jacquet's comic shop, illustrating such pedestrian fare as the biography of General George Marshall in <b>TRUE COMICS</b> #4 (Sept. 1941). <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/petertruecomics4.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/petertruecomics4small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>"U.S. Army Chief General George C. Marshall"</i> splash page from TRUE COMICS #4 (Sept. 1941)</b></span></center><br />
It probably took some effort for him to adapt his illustrative style to this new medium. But he did, and as odd as his work appeared at times, it apparently had its fans. At least, one fan.<br />
<br />
Over at All-American, Gaines was trying to get a new character in print. As the story goes, his editor Mayer and the writer were involved in a debate over who was to draw the feature. Harry, for some unknown reason, was the writer's choice.<br />
<br />
<i>"I found an artist,"</i> the writer would claim in a 1943 <b>AMERICAN SCHOLAR</b> article, <i>"...an old-time cartoonist who worked with Bud Fisher on the San Francisco Chronicle and who knows what life is all about..."**</i>. Mayer protested that his style was too archaic. <i>"The selection,"</i> Mayer said,<i>"...was not my idea. It was one of the compromises I made."***</i>. In this instance, the writer prevailed over the editor. <br />
<br />
Now, it would be presumptuous to claim it as a fact, but was Wheelan's presence at All-American and Mayer's affection for him, a factor in Harry getting the job? <br />
<br />
<i>"Dear Dr. Marston,"</i> wrote Harry, <i>"I slapped these two out in a hurry. The eagle is tough to handle - when in perspective or in profile, he doesn't show up clearly -- the shoes look like a stenographer's. I think the idea might be incorporated as a sort of Roman contraption.</i><br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/peterwwmodel.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peterwwmodelsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Wonder Woman</i> model sheet (1941)</b></span></center><br />
Harry simply signed this sketch to his future collaborator as "Peter", eschewing his full name, Harry George Peter. The rest, as it's said, was history. <i>Wonder Woman</i> not only became a hit, she became an icon.<br />
<br />
At 61-years old, H.G. Peter had become a success. In April, 1942, he opened his own studio at 130 W. 42nd Street (although Marston's widow claimed years later that Peter was just an employee of Marston Art Studios****), employed several other artists and continued drawing <i>Wonder Woman</i> up until his death in 1958.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/peterphoto.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/peterphotosmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>[left to right] William Moulton Marston, Harry G. Peter, <br />
Sheldon Mayer and Max Gaines (1942)<br />
[photo attributed to Alice Marble, as printed in <br />
75 YEARS OF DC COMICS]</b></span></center><br />
For his part, Ed Wheelan continued producing a number of features, including the <i>"Foney Fairy Tales"</i> back-up strip that ran in <b>WONDER WOMAN</b> and her sister publications, <b>COMICS CAVALCADE</b> and <b>SENSATION COMICS</b>. With his marriage in June, 1947 and Max Gaines tragic death soon after, Wheelan left comics and spent the final years of his life painting pictures of clowns.<br />
<br />
But there was one more comic creation of his worth mentioning, perhaps the most telling Wheelan creation of all. It was <i>"Comics McCormick"</i>, which premiered in <b>TERRIFIC COMICS</b> #2 (March 1944), and carried the subtitle, <i>"The World's #1 Comic Book Fan"</i>. <br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanmccormickterrific2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanmccormickterrific2small.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Comics McCormick</i><br />
TERRIFIC COMICS #2 (March 1944)</b></span></center><br />
Despite a sporadic publishing history as the feature bounced from Et-Es-Go, to All-American, to EC, "Comics McCormick" charmingly depicted a young boy's love of comics; an affection Wheelan understood well. <br />
<br />
One of the character's last appearances was also one that contained a a nod and a wink to his youthful idol, Harry G. Peter. In <b>FLAT AND SLAT</b> #2 (1947), "McCormick" encountered <i>Marvel Maid</i>, who bore a resemblance to a certain Amazonian princess.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanmarvelmaid.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanmarvelmaidsmall.jpg"></a><br />
<span style="color: red;"><b><i>Comics McCormick</i><br />
FAT AND SLAT #2 (Fall 1947)</b></span></center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
I was admittedly a bit coy in not showing up front the letter that sparked this post. The original resides in my personal collection and it's my pleasure to share it with you.<br />
<br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanenvelope.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanenvelopesmall.jpg"></a><br />
</center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg1.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg1small.jpg"></a><br />
</center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg2.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg2small.jpg"></a><br />
</center><br />
<center><a href="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg3.jpg"><img src="http://www.comicartville.com/wheelanletterpg3small.jpg"></a><br />
</center><br />
__________________________________________________________<br />
<b>ENDNOTES</b><br />
<br />
* <b>PRINTER'S INK</b>, Feb. 26, 1920, pg. 161.<br />
** <b>THE AMERICAN SCHOLAR</b>, vol. 13, pg. 43 (1943).<br />
*** Les Daniels, <b>WONDER WOMAN: THE COMPLETE HISTORY</b>, pg. 24 (2004).<br />
**** According to Roy Thomas in the article <b>"Two Touches of Venus"</b>, <i>When Jerry Bails mentioned Peter to Dr. Marston's widow in 1970,"</i> her response, wrote Thomas, was,<i>"Re Harry Peter--think you must be referring to the Marston Art Studios located in the building on the southeast corner of Madison and 43rd in N.Y.C. Bill personally handled every aspect of production up to the point of sending to the printer. Harry Peter worked there, plus several young commercial artists who drifted in and out."</i> [<b>THE ALTER EGO COLLECTION</b>, vol. 1, pg. 62]<br />
<br />
However, an April 15, 1942, <b>NEW YORK TIMES</b> article notes an office rental at 130 W. 42nd by "Harry G. Peter, cartoonist," and no mention of Marston Art Studios. Furthermore, Peter's WWII draft registration card gives the same address with his notation that he was self-employed. <br />
<br />
There is far more to the lives and careers of both H. G. Peter and Ed Wheelan than can be covered in this post. I highly recommend that readers scurry on over to the always informative, always excellent blog of Allan Holtz, the <a href="http://strippersguide.blogspot.com">Stripper's Guide</a>, for his recent post about Ed Wheelan and all things comic strip.Ken Qhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09117873553674453756noreply@blogger.com4