|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Dec 18, 2015 20:40:08 GMT -5
Ok, the BEST part about old DC Comics Letter Pages is that the editors (or whoever answers) are flat-out jerks like 80% of the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 18, 2015 20:47:10 GMT -5
Ok, the BEST part about old DC Comics Letter Pages is that the editors (or whoever answers) are flat-out jerks like 80% of the time. If I come across anything egregious, I'll post about it somewhere. But I just got a lot of Detective Comics, which aren't usually anywhere near as bad as the Weisinger-edited Superman family comics. Maybe Coldwater will come across something REALLY MEAN in all those issues of Adventure and Action she got recently? |
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on Dec 19, 2015 15:18:51 GMT -5
]If I come across anything egregious, I'll post about it somewhere. But I just got a lot of Detective Comics, which aren't usually anywhere near as bad as the Weisinger-edited Superman family comics. There's a section in Brian Cronin's entertaining book Why Does Batman Carry Shark Repellent? And Other Amazing comic Book Trivia about Weisinger's famously acerbic responses to readers' letters. A Cronin example: in a letter that appeared in World's Finest #173 (1968) in which the letter writer claimed he was "an expert on Batman. In fact I probably know more about him than anyone short of Bob Kane. And I don't like some of your recent issues, which have had Robin popping corny puns. Until that 'camp' stuff started on TV, Robin never made with the puns when he was fighting crooks. I especially dislike those 'Holy this' and 'Holy that' expressions. What's so 'holy' about these stories anyway?" Weisinger's reply:"If you were a real Batman expert, you'd know punning was part of Robin's personality from the day he first donned that red vest of his. And we sometimes think the 'holiest' things about our mags are the heads of certain self-styled 'experts.' " Another one that appeared in Adventure Comics #264 (1959): A fan asks why Atlanteans in Aquaman look different (i.e., no fishtail) from the Atlantean mermaid/mermen (such as Lori Lemaris) in the Superman books. Weisinger's reply: "Are you serious? We're publishing fiction not documented history." (He does go on to explain DC's philosophy at the time "Different stories present different conditions on different worlds. If not, all stories would be monotonously alike.If writers didn't use their imaginations to vary conditions, all comic books and science fiction movies would become so repetitious you'd soon lose interest.") Interesting, isn't it, that even back then fans were thinking about the notion of a "shared universe." |
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on Dec 19, 2015 15:50:24 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing! Clearly, the 1st writer gets it (at least, is on my wavelength).... though I can't deny that it felt a bit Adam West-y. As Hoosier X noted, the "1st writer" is Irene Vartanoff, who--along with Tony Isabella and Guy H. Lillian III--was one of the big 3 letter writers/letterhacks of the 1960s/early '70s. You couldn't open a DC comic back then without seeing a letter by her, Isabella or Lillian (later on in Marvel too, esp. Isabella). Martin Pasko was up there too. All of them eventually worked in comics. Vartanoff has written of the sexism/resistance she encountered despite the years she'd corresponded with DC editors and meeting them at the early Comic Con gatherings in NY or taking DC office tours, etc. When she graduated college in 1970 she asked Julius Schwartz for a job, but he didn't want to hire her and advised her to "go get married instead." She sold some stories here and there (Lois Lane, romance comics) but found it rough going, and she later took a job with Marvel as an editorial assistant to Roy Thomas. She had various responsibilities and when Marvel decided to return original art to the artists in 1974, her job was to catalogue the inventory. She met her future hubby Scott Edelman while working at Marvel. Later on she went to DC and worked for Paul Levitz, but left comics around 1980 to work in the romance novel industry. There are some great interviews with her online, and as Hoosier X said she has her own site. Talented, interesting individual, whose inquiring mind and sharp intelligence is quite evident in those early letters. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 19, 2015 19:27:41 GMT -5
I've seen some of Weisinger's replies on continuity in books I have... he clearly didn't think it was important. Did anyone ever ask him about it after Marvel showed how cool it was? I wonder if he ever changed his tune.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Dec 19, 2015 19:51:57 GMT -5
I've seen some of Weisinger's replies on continuity in books I have... he clearly didn't think it was important. Did anyone ever ask him about it after Marvel showed how cool it was? I wonder if he ever changed his tune. Weisinger never changed. Probably the most egotistical and controlling of all the various DC editors of the 50s and 60s. The Superman family of books' sales success only fed his self-importance It was he who jealously guarded Superman's appearance in books outside his domain and demanded that Supes would hardly appear in the early JLA stories It was he who abused Roy Thomas during the 2 weeks Roy worked for DC, driving Roy to look for work at Marvel in the 60s It was he who made fan-turned-pro E. Nelson Bridwell's life in the office a living hell It was he who turned down plot ideas from some writers and then offer those same ideas for other writers to use and then claimed credit Weisinger's shenanigans was overlooked by DC's top brass due to the sales of his books and his close friendship with Donnenfeld. But they have been documented by many in books and interviews including Julius Schwartz, Roy Thomas and others. Weisinger's retirement (1970?) came with him thinking he was still at the top and going on to a big career writing his own books like "How To Be A Perfect Liar"- ironic , is it not? He had no use or communication with fanzines or that community |
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Dec 19, 2015 19:53:30 GMT -5
I have no doubt that Weisinger is the reason that Jim Shooter became the way he did.
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Dec 21, 2015 9:21:19 GMT -5
I've seen some of Weisinger's replies on continuity in books I have... he clearly didn't think it was important. Did anyone ever ask him about it after Marvel showed how cool it was? I wonder if he ever changed his tune. Weisinger was also of a generation who believed--rightly--that the bulk of their readership turned over every five years or so. The lucrative licensing revenue was also dependent on these readers, and licensing was for toys, coloring books, board games, etc. They also believed that the books had to have the widest possible appeal to sell through on the stands, which meant casulat readers being able to pick uop and enjoy an issue. Continuity may have been "cool," but by the mid-70s, a lot of people at DC (and Marvel) expected the industry to go under any minute. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Dec 21, 2015 12:37:54 GMT -5
Ok, the BEST part about old DC Comics Letter Pages is that the editors (or whoever answers) are flat-out jerks like 80% of the time.
I think Ish Kabbible summed up Weisinger as well as anyone could - this is a man who told Jerry Siegel that his Superman scripts were good only for toilet paper.
But while Reptisaurus!'s comment above is true, I can't help but understand why the letter page responses read the way they did.
So many of the questions received were so nitpicky and inane that I'm somewhat surprised that the letter column wasn't done away with as a failed experiment. "Superman says on page three that he's so hungry he could eat a horse, but in last month's World's Finest he says he would never eat a horse. Admit you goofed!" "You had Superman say that his other name is 'Clark Kent', but shouldn't it be 'Kal-El' since blah, blah, blah? Admit it! You Goofed!"
It clearly got to the point where in anticipation of the letters they would receive, the Superman titles began feeling a need to head complaints off at the pass by addressing potentially troublesome spots within the stories themselves as they were written. So, we'd get dialogue like:
"I'm so hungry I could eat a horse! (thought balloon) Of course, as a survivor of the planet Krypton my body doesn't actually need to eat under the yellow sun of Earth, though I could eat if I chose! I'm just paying this chef a compliment so he won't have his feelings hurt!"
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Of course, I am Clark, but it would give away my secret identity to say that I have!"
Then some kid would write in saying "But isn't Superman lying? If he is Clark, surely he would have seen himself in his mirror that morning when he shaved?"
So next time we'd get:
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Even though I am Clark, I can't reveal my secret identity! Technically I'm not lying because as a Kryptonian, my hair doesn't grow on Earth so I wouldn't have seen my reflection in a mirror since I don't need to shave!"
Then another kid would write in "You told so and so that Superman doesn't have to shave, but wouldn't he have to look into a mirror to put on Clark's tie?"
So in a future issue, we'd get
"Sorry Lois, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) While it's true I am Clark, I can't tell Lois that! Nor am I lying, since I haven't looked into a mirror today! My hair doesn't grow on Earth so I don't need to shave and while I normally straighten my tie in the mirror, a freak explosion of one of my Superman robots resulted in a high does of X-Rays melting all the mirrors in my apartment! Yes, I could have fixed the robot or borrowed a mirror, but I had to handle an emergency in a distant galaxy and couldn't wait! And no, Supergirl couldn't handle it for me as she's away in the future! Krypto's also on an adventure and couldn't be reached either!"
So yeah, if you ever want to know why people spoke the way they did in the Superman titles for the majority of the 1960's, that's why. Yet, it remains my favorite era for the guy - Go figure!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 21, 2015 12:57:01 GMT -5
Ok, the BEST part about old DC Comics Letter Pages is that the editors (or whoever answers) are flat-out jerks like 80% of the time.
I think Ish Kabbible summed up Weisinger as well as anyone could - this is a man who told Jerry Siegel that his Superman scripts were good only for toilet paper.
But while Reptisaurus!'s comment above is true, I can't help but understand why the letter page responses read the way they did.
So many of the questions received were so nitpicky and inane that I'm somewhat surprised that the letter column wasn't done away with as a failed experiment. "Superman says on page three that he's so hungry he could eat a horse, but in last month's World's Finest he says he would never eat a horse. Admit you goofed!" "You had Superman say that his other name is 'Clark Kent', but shouldn't it be 'Kal-El' since blah, blah, blah? Admit it! You Goofed!"
It clearly got to the point where in anticipation of the letters they would receive, the Superman titles began feeling a need to head complaints off at the pass by addressing potentially troublesome spots within the stories themselves as they were written. So, we'd get dialogue like:
"I'm so hungry I could eat a horse! (thought balloon) Of course, as a survivor of the planet Krypton my body doesn't actually need to eat under the yellow sun of Earth, though I could eat if I chose! I'm just paying this chef a compliment so he won't have his feelings hurt!"
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Of course, I am Clark, but it would give away my secret identity to say that I have!"
Then some kid would write in saying "But isn't Superman lying? If he is Clark, surely he would have seen himself in his mirror that morning when he shaved?"
So next time we'd get:
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Even though I am Clark, I can't reveal my secret identity! Technically I'm not lying because as a Kryptonian, my hair doesn't grow on Earth so I wouldn't have seen my reflection in a mirror since I don't need to shave!"
Then another kid would write in "You told so and so that Superman doesn't have to shave, but wouldn't he have to look into a mirror to put on Clark's tie?"
So in a future issue, we'd get
"Sorry Lois, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) While it's true I am Clark, I can't tell Lois that! Nor am I lying, since I haven't looked into a mirror today! My hair doesn't grow on Earth so I don't need to shave and while I normally straighten my tie in the mirror, a freak explosion of one of my Superman robots resulted in a high does of X-Rays melting all the mirrors in my apartment! Yes, I could have fixed the robot or borrowed a mirror, but I had to handle an emergency in a distant galaxy and couldn't wait! And no, Supergirl couldn't handle it for me as she's away in the future! Krypto's also on an adventure and couldn't be reached either!"
So yeah, if you ever want to know why people spoke the way they did in the Superman titles for the majority of the 1960's, that's why. Yet, it remains my favorite era for the guy - Go figure!
I laughed out loud three or four times at this comment. It's funny because it's true! (Excuse me now while I read "The Madwoman of Metropolis" in the 80-Page Giant issue of Lois Lane I got in the mail a few days ago.) |
|
|
|
Post by realjla on Dec 21, 2015 13:30:39 GMT -5
I think Ish Kabbible summed up Weisinger as well as anyone could - this is a man who told Jerry Siegel that his Superman scripts were good only for toilet paper.
But while Reptisaurus!'s comment above is true, I can't help but understand why the letter page responses read the way they did.
So many of the questions received were so nitpicky and inane that I'm somewhat surprised that the letter column wasn't done away with as a failed experiment. "Superman says on page three that he's so hungry he could eat a horse, but in last month's World's Finest he says he would never eat a horse. Admit you goofed!" "You had Superman say that his other name is 'Clark Kent', but shouldn't it be 'Kal-El' since blah, blah, blah? Admit it! You Goofed!"
It clearly got to the point where in anticipation of the letters they would receive, the Superman titles began feeling a need to head complaints off at the pass by addressing potentially troublesome spots within the stories themselves as they were written. So, we'd get dialogue like:
"I'm so hungry I could eat a horse! (thought balloon) Of course, as a survivor of the planet Krypton my body doesn't actually need to eat under the yellow sun of Earth, though I could eat if I chose! I'm just paying this chef a compliment so he won't have his feelings hurt!"
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Of course, I am Clark, but it would give away my secret identity to say that I have!"
Then some kid would write in saying "But isn't Superman lying? If he is Clark, surely he would have seen himself in his mirror that morning when he shaved?"
So next time we'd get:
"Sorry Jimmy, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) Even though I am Clark, I can't reveal my secret identity! Technically I'm not lying because as a Kryptonian, my hair doesn't grow on Earth so I wouldn't have seen my reflection in a mirror since I don't need to shave!"
Then another kid would write in "You told so and so that Superman doesn't have to shave, but wouldn't he have to look into a mirror to put on Clark's tie?"
So in a future issue, we'd get
"Sorry Lois, I haven't seen Clark today! (thought balloon) While it's true I am Clark, I can't tell Lois that! Nor am I lying, since I haven't looked into a mirror today! My hair doesn't grow on Earth so I don't need to shave and while I normally straighten my tie in the mirror, a freak explosion of one of my Superman robots resulted in a high does of X-Rays melting all the mirrors in my apartment! Yes, I could have fixed the robot or borrowed a mirror, but I had to handle an emergency in a distant galaxy and couldn't wait! And no, Supergirl couldn't handle it for me as she's away in the future! Krypto's also on an adventure and couldn't be reached either!"
So yeah, if you ever want to know why people spoke the way they did in the Superman titles for the majority of the 1960's, that's why. Yet, it remains my favorite era for the guy - Go figure!
I laughed out loud three or four times at this comment. It's funny because it's true! (Excuse me now while I read "The Madwoman of Metropolis" in the 80-Page Giant issue of Lois Lane I got in the mail a few days ago.) "Once, when I was Superbaby, I accidentally saw into the future, and caught a glimpse of my grown-up self, looking into a mirror, and putting on THIS VERY TIE! Thanks to my Super-photographic memory, I recall every detail perfectly, and haven't used a mirror ever since!" |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 21, 2015 13:48:33 GMT -5
LOL! The nitpicks, I suspect, came from Marvel embracing them (with the No-Prize).. I'm sure people were writing into DC trying to get them to do something similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Dec 21, 2015 17:02:03 GMT -5
Keep in mind that many of the letters in Weisinger's early columns were faked to allow him to plug an upcoming story so you can't always be sure whether he's responding to real readers or not.
Cei-U!
I summon a word to the wise!
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Dec 21, 2015 18:32:27 GMT -5
Keep in mind that many of the letters in Weisinger's early columns were faked to allow him to plug an upcoming story so you can't always be sure whether he's responding to real readers or not. Cei-U! I summon a word to the wise! "Hey Jim, write me some fake letters so I can abuse you in print as well as in person!" It wasn't just Weissinger, though - I can't think of any actual examples but I know I've noticed snarky responses in other letter pages as well. |
|
|
|
Post by realjla on Dec 21, 2015 20:44:33 GMT -5
Keep in mind that many of the letters in Weisinger's early columns were faked to allow him to plug an upcoming story so you can't always be sure whether he's responding to real readers or not. Cei-U! I summon a word to the wise! I've read that Parade Magazine likewise, and for the same reason, fakes the questions in the "Walter Scott's Personality Parade" column. |
|
