question about Marvel's Giant-Size comics

[Shellhead]

The question below was raised over in the X-Men forum here at CBR, but I don't think that they're as likely to get an accurate answer there because X-posters there seem to be younger than average for these forums.

I looked in my own collection at a Giant-size to confirm my memory that they didn't use staples on those editions, because the type of glued binding on the Giant-Size issues didn't require staples. Am I correct, or did Marvel indeed use staples on some of the Giant-Sizes, in addition to the glued binding?

"Giant Size X-men #1

"I need some help here. I purchesed a copy of Giant Size X-men #1 about 10 years ago. I recently decided to sell it I took it to a local comic shop and let him look at it to see what he would offer me. He told me the book was restored that the original editions were not stapled. Is this true?

"Thanks for you help. I recently saw one on ebay that had staples but I am wondering if that one has been restored also. Please help."

Sandy

[howyadoin]

Seems to me they were squarebound, but I don't have anything handy that's giant-sized.





At least, nothing with glue on it.

[Paul Newell]

I just looked at my Giant Size Invaders #1, June 1975, and it does indeed have staples.

And I was disappointed Howy, when I saw that you had replied I was expecting to see you talking about your Giant Size Man Thing. :(

[scratchie]

They were stapled before the cover was glued on. The staples went from the front page to the back, rather than being through the spine.

[InfoBroker]

I wonder where the local comic book dealer got that crazy idea?

From Marvel Classic Comics, to King Conans, to 1970s Giant-Sizes, to 60s reprints, Annuals and King Size Specials, all my squarebond Mavel comics have staples to secure the inside signatures, and the cover is glued to the spine.

-jb the (a bit suspicous of the motives of the local comic dealer in telling that "myth") ib -

[Lone Ranger]

I agree with all of the smart guys above.

Interior contents stapled - cover glued at the spine.

Sometimes you can even see staples 'pressing through' the back cover.

My advice is to not sell it to that guy.

[MWGallaher]

The poster at the X-forums may well have misunderstood the proprietor at the shop. If the staples on his copy are showing on the outside of the cover, that could indeed be evidence of (sloppy) restoration. If that were the case, he probably pointed at the visible staples and said something like "See, the Giant-Size comics don't have staples here", which the poster misinterpreted to mean that they didn't have staples at all.

[shaxper]

Honestly, the first time I saw one of my giant-size books, I thought it had been sloppily restored with staples too. Marvel just did a very crude job of it, and the staples sort of bleed through on the back cover in many cases, looking like it's not supposed to be there.

[im399unot]

See, I was right in the other thread. :D The cover was glued to the int. pages that were stapled together. Its pretty hard to find a copy that does not have dents in the cover from the staples used on the inside of the book.

This was a really stupid way of putting together the books. I am just glad its not done any longer.

[Captain Jim]

They were stapled before the cover was glued on. The staples went from the front page to the back, rather than being through the spine.

This used to be pretty standard for all "giant size" books: annuals, etc.

[T GUy]

The cover was glued to the int. pages that were stapled together. Its pretty hard to find a copy that does not have dents in the cover from the staples used on the inside of the book.

Yeah, I first noticed how severe this could get on my Giant-Size Chillers No. 1-and-only. I have inserted a piece of paper between the staple and the cover in an attempt to limit any damage (about 0.5 inch by 0.25 inch of high quality paper... well, higher than the comic is made from).