When did the "Golden Age" end?

[Drusilla lives!]

There was an interesting discussion regarding this question (in addition to the broader question of trying to define the beginning and end of the comic eras in general) in a forum on another website (which shall remain nameless). One of the members pointed out that from his experience (and I quote)...

"... in 1966 there wasn't one person that I knew or knew of that thought that the Golden Age extended into the 50s. That's a dealer-originated "redefinition" that occurred in the 1970s simply because you could charge more for "Golden Age Comics". Read the old RBCCs or any of the 1960s fanzines and you'll see that EVERYONE placed the end of the GA, at the very latest, in 1948." -- JVJ (JVJ Publishing and VW inc.)

Just wondering where everyone here stands on the issue.

[dan bailey]

Without thinking about it too much, I don't have a heck of a lot of problem with dating the end of the Golden Age to the advent of the crime comics (& then extendng that era -- whatever one wants to call it ... I've heard Atomic Age more than anything else, seems like -- until Showcase #4).

[Drusilla lives!]

I agree... as I happened to mention there, I think the GA began it's decline with what I like to describe as the beginning of the "reign of crime" in comics (about 1948) and was (for me) certainly over when EC's new trend took hold. Whenever I heard the term GA, the first thought that came to mind was of super heroes... Superman, Batman. Certainly not the Vault-Keeper, not what came after, in the period from 1950-55. I think a better label for that period would be the "new-trend" era... although there was more going on then just the new genres embraced by EC. There was still the crime comics... and other trends like romance. But now I've come to accept the standard divisions (with my own personal subdivisions of these).

BTW, (again as I mentioned on that other site) for me the SA begins with FF #1 (I really don't know what to call the period from 1955 to about 1960) and begins to transition to the BA with Kirby leaving Marvel... with the transition completed with the publication of Conan #1. The halfway point being Ditko's departure from the ASM title (with Romita replacing him)... the high point, Kirby-Sinnott on FF.

[md62]

I would say the beginning of the end was 1948 & the final nail in the coffin was the last issue of All Star Comics (#57) in 1951.

I agree with the previous poster that the "Ages" of comics vary. Obviously the GA started with Action Comics #1 but really started in earnest in 1940 when the flood of other heroes arrived.

The SA started with Barry Allen as The Flash in Showcase #4 but really didn't get going until FF #1 in 1961. When it ended is with the Death of Gwen Stacy in 1973.

The Bronze Age started in 1970 (overlapping the SA) when Kirby left Marvel for DC. It had it's definite end (IMO) in 1985 with DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths

[The Confessor]

Well, I'm no expert but I've always felt that the Golden Age ended with the launch of EC's "New Trend" comics.

With regards to this statement though...

"... in 1966 there wasn't one person that I knew or knew of that thought that the Golden Age extended into the 50s. That's a dealer-originated "redefinition" that occurred in the 1970s simply because you could charge more for "Golden Age Comics". Read the old RBCCs or any of the 1960s fanzines and you'll see that EVERYONE placed the end of the GA, at the very latest, in 1948." -- JVJ (JVJ Publishing and VW inc.)

...haven't the various "ages" of comics always been kinda fluid? I mean, the longer that comics exist, the more years certain "ages" will have to encompass.

I mean, take the Bronze age for example...myself, I've always thought that the Bronze Age began somewhere around the 1973 mark and extended up to the mid-80's but more and more you see late 80's comics referred to as Bronze Age. Surely as time goes on and we get further and further away from the 1990s, comics from that era will also begin to fall into the Bronze Age?

Likewise, what was considered the Golden Age from the view point of the late-70s should probably be different to what is regarded as the Golden Age nowadays because we’re that much further away from the era. I could see people being able to legitimately refer to anything before the 1960s as Golden Age from the view-point of the 21st century.

As I say, I'm not an expert on these matters and so I might be talking out of my hat here but I wonder, is there an "age" after Bronze that should apply to comics from the 90s and early 00s? Also, what “age” are we in now?

[dan bailey]

As I say, I'm not an expert on these matters and so I might be talking out of my hat here but I wonder, is there an "age" after Bronze that should apply to comics from the 90s and early 00s? Also, what “age” are we in now?

Whatever name one wants to call it, by the ... mid-'80s? slightly earlier? slightly later? ... comics had surely entered the Direct Market Age. Where I would say, off the top of my head, they remain today.

Otherwise, I've long leaned toward Drusilla's & md62's marks on the beginning of the Bronze Age as being circa Conan #1, Kirby's departure for DC, etc. A lot of things were going on around that time -- you can also cite the return of horror comics, for instance. (My own line of demarcation -- I've seen it mentioned by others, too -- has always been the cover price increase to 15 cents, but that's rather personal & doesn't seem particularly significant historically. Then again, the transition from 10 to 12 cents happened not too long after FF#1, so perhaps a certain basis for comparison does exist.)

[Avenger08]

GA ended with the end of the civil war and the decline of comic book sales.

[Drusilla lives!]

For me the BA ended with the demise of Warren... just about the time I left comics. The "modern age" (or "direct market age" as dan bailey mentions) started about mid to late 80s... I don't know if it ever really ended because I was out of comics until about 2005 (and I don't have many examples to point to and say "that was it, that was the end of the modern age for me"). But it certainly feels like we're in a different era (or about to enter one). Maybe they should call it the "post-modern era" (or maybe the "big fade-out," since comics as we know them might not exist in a few years). :)

[md62]

I've heard the current era called the Platinum Age or the Modern Age. Again I agree with drusilla. The Modern Age is coming to an end.

[dan bailey]

For me the BA ended with the demise of Warren... just about the time I left comics. The "modern age" (or "direct market age" as dan bailey mentions) started about mid to late 80s... I don't know if it ever really ended because I was out of comics until about 2005 (and I don't have many examples to point to and say "that was it, that was the end of the modern age for me"). But it certainly feels like we're in a different era (or about to enter one). Maybe they should call it the "post-modern era" (or maybe the "big fade-out," since comics as we know them might not exist in a few years). :)

I'm in the same boat. Stopped buying comics in 12/78 & stayed away till 2004ish, which is why I can't cite a certain period as marking the absolute end of spinner-rack distribution.

[Avenger08]

I've heard the current era called the Platinum Age or the Modern Age. Again I agree with drusilla. The Modern Age is coming to an end.

Wasnt it also called the Dark Age of Comic books.

But yea, its ending. Being slowly replaced with the One event after another Age of comic books.

Wait, what will the next age be called? Modern-Modern Age. Modern Age Pt. II, Ultramodern Age?

[Drusilla lives!]

...haven't the various "ages" of comics always been kinda fluid? I mean, the longer that comics exist, the more years certain "ages" will have to encompass.

I mean, take the Bronze age for example...myself, I've always thought that the Bronze Age began somewhere around the 1973 mark and extended up to the mid-80's but more and more you see late 80's comics referred to as Bronze Age. Surely as time goes on and we get further and further away from the 1990s, comics from that era will also begin to fall into the Bronze Age? ...


Yes, the boundaries which separate the periods or ages are fluid, but I don't think they should change much over time. This "growth" of the BA is sort of what happened with the GA... GA books were being sought out and collected by comic fans in the 60s, so enlarging the pool of GA comics to encompass what was really "new-trend" allowed profiteers to soak collectors to a certain extent. You see this now with BA books because once again interest is growing among collectors for them.


... As I say, I'm not an expert on these matters and so I might be talking out of my hat here but I wonder, is there an "age" after Bronze that should apply to comics from the 90s and early 00s? Also, what “age” are we in now?

The "ages" according to various "experts" (in the Overstreet Price Guide... and they're all rather vague) is something like as follows:

Golden Age: 1929 to 1946. This begins with "The Funnies" #1 by Dell Publishing and Eastern Color (early 1929) and all the "protocomics." It also encompasses all of what we think of as far as early super hero comics and ends around the time of the rise in crime and romance comics.

Atomic/Romance Age: 1946 to about ???. The end of this period is up for grabs, with comic scholars considering Showcase # 4 as the end (and beginning of the SA)... others consider Kurtzman's MAD #1 in 1952 as the end (???), others Bark's Uncle Scrooge Four Color #386 as SA (???).

Silver Age: ??? to Kirby leaving Marvel (or alternatively, the 12 to 15 cent price increase).

Bronze Age: Kirby leaving Marvel (or alternatively, the 12 to 15 cent price increase) to 1979 (when DC and Marvel joined the direct market).

Modern Age: Everything since.

[Dan Felty]

1948--I associate "Golden Age," etc. with superhero comics. That's usually the context in which I see it being discussed, and it keeps it more discrete. I wouldn't call early newspaper strips part of the Golden Age, or undergrounds part of the Silver Age. Similarly, the golden age of romance comics, for example, doesn't exactly correspond to the golden age of superheroes.

Didn't these terms generally arise in fan press devoted almost exclusively to superhero comics?

[Drusilla lives!]

I've heard the current era called the Platinum Age or the Modern Age. Again I agree with drusilla. The Modern Age is coming to an end.

The "Platinum Age" is used by many to describe the period prior to 1929 (by others for the period from 1883 to 1938)... and yes, there were comic strips and the like in the late nineteenth to early twentieth century which are of interest to collectors. :)

But it gets even muddier, some like to consider what I think of as a transition period between the BA and the MA as the "Copper Age." :)

Well for me it's like this...

Golden Age: 1929 to about 1946.
"New Trends" Age: 1946 to about 1955 or 1956 (imposition of comics code, end of EC's comics line, Kurtzman leaves Mad).
"Post New Trends" Age: 1955/56 to about 1961.
Silver Age: FF #1 to Conan the Barbarian #1.
Bronze Age: Conan the Barbarian #1 to Warren implosion (about 1982 or 83, don't remember exactly).
Modern Age: Everything after 1983.

I know, I know... a rather EC and Marvel centric view of things.

[benday-dot]

It is all incredibly fluid. It has always been the spirit of the age that would define the parameters. What is the prevailing aesthetic or mood that marks comics of the day?

Depending on who you ask is the simple truism.

It seems agreed that what marked the end of comics' first period (excluding the those pre-Cambrian Platinum, Victorian eras etc.) was the decline of the original and successful superhero era, an age thought of as "Golden" because it holds the irrevocable privilege of having stood at the beginning of the whole thing. The GA will ever exude an extra gilded sense of nostalgia and innocence. The Golden Age will always have the rights beholden to firsts and beginnings.

You could select the advent of Crime comics as major nail in the GA's coffin. But the first issue of Crime Does Not Pay, acknowledged as having provided the genre's first breath, came in the Fall of 1942. This is far too early to end the Golden Age, which was fueled by robust sales of superhero titles until at least a few years after the War.

And Crime comics may not be so significant an end marker to others. Why not consider the appearance of Romance comics with Young Romance #1, in the Fall of 1947, to spell the GA's end.

Or why not the resurrection of Funny Animal and Humour comics as points to begin the end.

Still others will seize on Jungle, which also took off in popularity in the mid to late 40's.

The thing is there is so much overlapping of the sort of tastes and moods for genres that characterize each of these ages.

Myself, I voted for the New Trend choice in this poll (1950-51). My reason is simply that by this time period the muddiness of the waters seemed sufficiently clarified that it became all too clear that the genre which more than anything else characterized the Golden Age, namely the Superhero genre, had absolutely been eclipsed not only in terms of sales (which was steadily happening earlier) but in terms of the prevailing spirit of the times.

It was the themes of horror, weird science and atomic paranoia and a dollop of crime thrown in that finally came to completely eclipse, by the early 50's, the old zeitgeist, and characterize the new.

[InfoBroker]

1948--I associate "Golden Age," etc. with superhero comics. That's usually the context in which I see it being discussed, and it keeps it more discrete. I wouldn't call early newspaper strips part of the Golden Age, or undergrounds part of the Silver Age. Similarly, the golden age of romance comics, for example, doesn't exactly correspond to the golden age of superheroes.

Didn't these terms generally arise in fan press devoted almost exclusively to superhero comics?

You are in the same chorus as the poppa of comic book fandom Jerry Bails, who in the early 60s, when he and Roy Thomas and Maggie and Don Thompson to name but a few; gathered for a comical book party/get-together that coined and named the term "Silver-age" and pretty much determined that it started with Showcase #4. He and others wanted to call it "The Second Heroic Age of Comics" a term and its definition, which had it taken, would have done much to improve the fairness of other comic genres and their particular hey-days, and make it far easier to label their eras. Sadly, other (suer-duper-based) voices won out.

I could easily present debate points, that since super-duper-action-heroes have maintained their status as the major comic selling force since the 60s, that we have yet to leave the Second Heroic Age, dwindling though it may be.

Course I won't... since "we" settled all this age start and ends stuff on the Compuserve Comics and Animation Forum waaaaaay back in 1995, which in some peoples books was a couple of ages ago all by itself.

As DL and a few others have stated. during the initial periods of comical book historical data collecting and fandom activity (early 60s), the Golden Age start marker was firming attached to the appearance of Superman and all the long underwear that he spawned, and concluded when both the super-heroes and comics sales collapsed following WWII, and 1948 is pretty much were they placed the end marker.

Interestingly enough, the first usage of the term "Golden Age of Comics" doesn't have such a definitive origin point. It was in general use before comics fandom got organized, and as Dr. Bails noted in his telling of it, it referred to all comics produced in the early to mid forties, not just super-dupers.

Side-note: the above "Second Heroic Age Shindig" and its Silver Age labeling event, predates the first published use of the term "Marvel Age of Comics." See Fantastical Four #17 and all other Marvel comics on sale that month for that event.

-jb the "tried to stay out of this discussion, but danged if I didn't give in to evil temptations" ib -

[spoon_jenkins]

I feel like ages used to be given longer spans. I'd hear about the Golden Age running all the way to the advent of the Silver, and the Silver running all the way to the beginning of the Bronze. I don't remember hearing about the Atomic Age until I'd been collecting for many years.

The end of geologic time periods often coincides with mass extinctions. My impression was that the Golden Age of Comics coincided with the mass extinction of superhero comics. So maybe around 1950 because of all the superheroes (Flash, Green Lantern, Captain America, Sub-Mariner) who got cancelled in the 1949-1951 window.

But it's hard to put definitive endpoints on ages. With the exception of "mass extinctions", changes in comics are fluid, as noted upthread. It varies with the perceptions of individual readers.

I was born in 1979 and started collecting comics in 1985. And for me the "sweet spot" of my collection is something like 1977 to 1990, give or take a couple years. It's the period of comics I feel most at home in. So to me, when I hear 1980 or 1983 or 1985 or 1986 defined as breaks between ages, it sounds weird. Comics before and after those points mostly have the same feel, aesthetic, and appeal to me.

Now, of course, there are reasons why people pick those years. Big events like Secret Wars and CoIE marked a change in the way and extent titles were connected at DC and Marvel. Certain independents rose up in those early and mid-80s years. But different fans experience the magnitude of change differently.

[InfoBroker]

I'll pose two related follow up questions if DL doesn't object.

#1 - Has anyone ever heard the term "Bronze Age" in print would be best, as it relates to comics prior to early 1980s and the direct market's inroads? I'm not talking about the use of it to define a start (or end) point. I mean anybody actually hear anybody using the term to describe a comical book period before 1980.

#2 - Did we ever document the first time the term "super-hero" was coined? I know we had a thread a few years back striving to do so. Did we ever come to a definitive?

- jb the "stirring the ages" ib -

[spoon_jenkins]

#1 - Has anyone ever heard the term "Bronze Age" in print would be best, as it relates to comics prior to early 1980s and the direct market's inroads? I'm not talking about the use of it to define a start (or end) point. I mean anybody actually hear anybody using the term to describe a comical book period before 1980.
I broke out my copy of the 27th Edition Overstreet Price Guide from 1997. It doesn't even use the term Bronze Age. It refers to the "Post Silver Age" as 1970-1979 and the "Modern Age" as 1980-present.

The other eras in that edition are Platinum Age (1897-1932), Pre-Golden Age (1933-May 1938), Golden Age (June 1938-1945), Post Golden Age (1946-1949), Pre-Silver Age (1950-Aug. 1956), and Silver Age (Sept. 1956-1969).

[InfoBroker]

I broke out my copy of the 27th Edition Overstreet Price Guide from 1997. It doesn't even use the term Bronze Age. It refers to the "Post Silver Age" as 1970-1979 and the "Modern Age" as 1980-present.

Platinum Age is a late comer in terms of being used to define a period, and the mid to 90s was the first time I heard it in use.

I do remember Bronze Age as a term being used in the early 80s, both in fan pubs, Westfield Newsletters, comical books, and in general fan discussions. Most of it related to what to call the current comic resurgence in new titles, and whole new companies. Bronze was in competition with Diamond, and it took awhile before bronze "won" out, and in the process back-dating to Conan #1 as the start point.

Start points, even then were topics of long and endless discourse...

But I can''t recall any earlier use of the term "Bronze Age" in Comic Reader or Nostalgia/Comics Journal (the only "fan"zines I was getting in the mid to late 70s).

-jb the "thinks the Third Heroic Age of Comics started with Giant-Size X-men #1 and then it got blurred into the De-constructed Heroic Age" ib -

[Ed Love]

I did a post talking about this (http://hero-goggles.blogspot.com/2007/12/end-of-golden-age.html) and the beginnings of the Silver Age on my blog some time ago.

My own take is that all new characters and titles introduced after 1951 (All-Star Comics ceases with the JSA and becomes a western, the introduction of Captain Comet) are no longer GA although many titles still continuing from the 40s would qualify as still being the GA. 1952/53 Fawcett cedes defeat and closes shop. At this point it's official. 1953, Timely re-introduces their big three of the golden-age: Captain America, Sub-Mariner and the Human Torch but a different gestalt is at work.

I don't accept the convention that the introduction of the Barry Allen Flash is the beginning of the Silver-Age though. Looking at the publishing history of comics through the 1950s with an unbiased eye from 1951 up through the Hal Jordan Green Lantern or the Atom and you'll see new superheroes being introduced and re-introduced at a fairly steady rate though a trickle it may be. In its proper context, there is nothing significant about that issue of Showcase that couldn't be made for Captain Comet, the Martian Manhunter, Captain Flash, etc. The Flash follows more closely on the heels of the Martian Manhunter than Green Lantern does on the Flash's. It took 3 years before DC introduced another superhero after the Flash. Hardly a watershed moment or a modern superhero explosion.

[Cei-U!]

As a JSA historian, I tend to think of All-Star #51 as the end of the Golden Age but really the whole "Ages" paradigm is too vague and arbitrary to be of any real value. These days I look to changes in publishers or EICs as the demarcation points. For example, instead of breaking DC's 1950s-80s output down into Silver and Bronze, I divide it into three periods: Donenfeld, Infantino and Kahn. Marvel in the same era I divide into Lee, the revolving door (Thomas, Wein, Wolfman, Conway, Goodwin) and Shooter. I find this much more useful.

Cei-U!
I summon the different drummer!

[MDG]

For end of the GA, I put '48--not just the rise of crime comics, but of a lot of genres besides superheroes: western, funny animal, teen, jungle, romance and (a little later on) horror/mystery.

None of these are age demarcations are firm lines--what would happen if we rephrased the questions as "By what year are we definitely out of the golden age?" "When are we firmly into the Bronze age?" etc.

To contradict myself, one thing that did strike me when we were discussing this a little while back is how House of Mystery went clearly from Silver to Bronze (or at least "post-silver") in consecutive issues: #173 (Jan 68) and 174 (Mar 68).

http://www.dcindexes.com/gallery/browse.php?select=!dc/housemystery

'68 is probably early for some people. And, for example, the Superman titles only leave the Silver Age when Weisinger leaves. But it also seems to be the year when things start seeming different. (It's also the year when some longtime DC writers--my take is going to be DC-centric 'cause i know squat about Marvel history--are locked out after asking for health insurance).

I always love the "age" discussion and the different arguments.

[dan bailey]

And it could certainly be argued that Batman didn't really enter the Silver Age till the "new look" was implemented in '64 ...

[Slam_Bradley]

And it could certainly be argued that Batman didn't really enter the Silver Age till the "new look" was implemented in '64 ...


Batman has always been sticky. His books (Batman & Detective) certainly maintained an "older" feel for longer. But then he also appeared in JLA with the new Flash, G.L. & Hawkman.

[dan bailey]

Definitely. My bolding the name was my way of indicating that I was talking about the comic, not the character per se, though of course that wouldn't be obvious to anyone but me. I should've added Detective as well, of course.

(Makes me wonder how World's Finest was faring back during those days ... My Showcase Presents World's Finest vol 2 isn't here at work for me to consult, not surprisingly.)

[Cei-U!]

I consider the June 1955 issues of Batman and Detective as the start of the Earth-One (Silver Age) Caped Crusader for two reasons:

1. According to the Huntress' origin in DC Super-Stars #17, the Earth-Two Batman and Catwoman married in the summer of '55.

2. Batman #92 introduces Bat-Hound, the first of the "Batman Family" characters (the others: Batwoman, Bat-Girl and Bat-Mite) that I consider the dominant element of pre-New Look continuity.

But, y'know, that's just me.

Cei-U!
I summon the esoteric reasoning!

[dan bailey]

2. Batman #92 introduces Bat-Hound, the first of the "Batman Family" characters (the others: Batwoman, Bat-Girl and Bat-Mite) that I consider the dominant element of pre-New Look continuity.



Whereas for me, "pre-New Look"="pre-Silver Age."

[Slam_Bradley]

Whereas for me, "pre-New Look"="pre-Silver Age."


That's always been kind of my cut-off as well. Though I see Kurt's point.

[spoon_jenkins]

I don't accept the convention that the introduction of the Barry Allen Flash is the beginning of the Silver-Age though. Looking at the publishing history of comics through the 1950s with an unbiased eye from 1951 up through the Hal Jordan Green Lantern or the Atom and you'll see new superheroes being introduced and re-introduced at a fairly steady rate though a trickle it may be. In its proper context, there is nothing significant about that issue of Showcase that couldn't be made for Captain Comet, the Martian Manhunter, Captain Flash, etc.
I can't agree that last point. The introduction of the Barry Allen Flash does do things that the introduction of Captain Comet, the Martian Manhunter, etc. don't. Barry Allen re-used a name, a superpower, and some costume elements from a Golden Age character. So that marks a certain break with the past.

Furthermore, the seeds of the Earth-1/Earth-2 division are planted in Barry Allen's first appearance. By making Barry Allen a fan of the the Jay Garrick Flash, who is a fictional character in Allen's world, the story implies that these stories take place in a different/world reality from numerous Golden Age tales.

The only 1950s Martian Manhunter story I've read is the first appearance, but I've haven't heard of any similar break there. I don't think John Jones was considered part of an alternate universe until the Flash came around. If hypothetically before the intro of Barry Allen, DC decided to revive Jay Garrick for a guest appearance with Martian Manhunter, no one would assume an alternate universe from that.

The Flash follows more closely on the heels of the Martian Manhunter than Green Lantern does on the Flash's. It took 3 years before DC introduced another superhero after the Flash. Hardly a watershed moment or a modern superhero explosion.
It is a good point that revival of other characters was a delayed reaction.

[dan bailey]

That's always been kind of my cut-off as well. Though I see Kurt's point.

If I were steeped at all in Golden Age Batman (just about all that I've read comes from 80-Page Giants & 100-Page Super Spectaculars, & several of those stories no doubt originated after June '55 demarcation that Kurt cites), I would probably see things entirely differently, as he does.

Maybe the few characters who continued to appear without interruption through the '50s -- Batman, Superman ... anyone else? -- should be regarded as having their own transitional period between the Golden & Silver Ages. If so, that's where I'd put the Batman of the Bat-Hound/Batmite/Batwoman/etc era.

[MDG]

Maybe the few characters who continued to appear without interruption through the '50s -- Batman, Superman ... anyone else? -- should be regarded as having their own transitional period between the Golden & Silver Ages. If so, that's where I'd put the Batman of the Bat-Hound/Batmite/Batwoman/etc era.
Wonder Woman's book continued from the GA without a break. Aquaman might have also been published continually, though I'm not sure in what book.

Congo Bill might also have staggered past whatever starting point we want to assign to the Silver Age. Ditto Tommy Tomorrow, but I don't think he appeared until after the Golden Age was definitely over. Tomahawk, though, started in the late GA and made it through to the early Bronze in his own book.

What do we do with charatecers whose books started after the GA but didn't make it into the SA? (Granted Rex the Wonder Dog is the only one I can think of. And phantom Stranger)

How about Jimmy Olsen #1 as a starting point? Too early?

I could do this all day....

[spoon_jenkins]

Wonder Woman's book continued from the GA without a break. Aquaman might have also been published continually, though I'm not sure in what book.
Aquaman was in Adventure Comics. His adventures continued without interruption (as confirmed by a GCD search).

[dan bailey]

Duh -- yes, of course: Wonder Woman & Aquaman.

From the non-superpowered division, the Blackhawks belong with the others MDG listed.

Green Arrow goes back to the Golden Age as well (which I don't think I realized till I hit Wikipedia just now).

[Rob Allen]

Two only semi-related thoughts:

- I read somewhere that the only superheroes whose adventures were published without interruption from the 1940s to the 1960s were Superman/Superboy, Batman & Robin, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow and Aquaman. Non-superhero characters who spanned the same era include Blackhawk, Tomahawk, and Archie.

- I was away from comics fandom from the late 70s to the turn of the century. I never heard the term "Bronze Age" back in the 70s; if anything, we thought we were still in the Silver Age.

[Cei-U!]

If I were steeped at all in Golden Age Batman (just about all that I've read comes from 80-Page Giants & 100-Page Super Spectaculars, & several of those stories no doubt originated after June '55 demarcation that Kurt cites), I would probably see things entirely differently, as he does.

It helps to remember that, though they overlap in places, "Silver Age" and "Earth-One" are not synonymous. (Nor, for that matter, are "Golden Age" and "Earth-Two." In fact, a strong argument can be (and has been) made that they are two different universes but I digress.)

Maybe the few characters who continued to appear without interruption through the '50s -- Batman, Superman ... anyone else? -- should be regarded as having their own transitional period between the Golden & Silver Ages. If so, that's where I'd put the Batman of the Bat-Hound/Batmite/Batwoman/etc era.

Some continuity scholar/geeks, myself included, postulate such a transitional world, where these characters share elements of both the Golden and Silver Age versions. I call it Earth-1.5; others call it Earth-E (for E. Nelson Bridwell) and I've seen other names as well. However, the question of Robin's 25-year-long adolescence notwithstanding, there's no internal reason to assign any '50s Batman stories to 1.5.

And don't forget that Batwoman and Bat-Girl both show up in Earth-One continuity in the mid-'70s.

Wonder Woman's book continued from the GA without a break.

Wondy's continuity is particularly complex but generally Wonder Woman #98 is considered the start of her Silver Age incarnation. I personally lump all post-William Moulton Marston WW stories up to that point to Earth-1.5.

Congo Bill might also have staggered past whatever starting point we want to assign to the Silver Age.

Congo Bill lasted into the '60s, albeit as Congorilla.

What do we do with charatecers whose books started after the GA but didn't make it into the SA? (Granted Rex the Wonder Dog is the only one I can think of. And Phantom Stranger)

Beats me. DC considered those characters part of Earth-One continuity but that doesn't answer the Golden/Silver question.

How about Jimmy Olsen #1 as a starting point? Too early?

Not for me. I actually go back a couple of months earlier, to World's Finest #71, the launch of the Superman/Batman series.

Aquaman was in Adventure Comics. His adventures continued without interruption (as confirmed by a GCD search).

Judging from the Showcase volumes, DC considers Adventure #260 the start of the Silver Age series, but I and some others push it back to #229, the introduction of Topo.

From the non-superpowered division, the Blackhawks belong with the others MDG listed.

The switch from Quality to DC as of Blackhawk #108 makes a convenient marker, especially as the origin that pops up a few issues later differs from the Quality version.

Green Arrow goes back to the Golden Age as well (which I don't think I realized till I hit Wikipedia just now).

DC considers Adventure #246 and World's Finest #95 the starting point of Silver Age stories. I tend to agree.

Whereas for me, "pre-New Look"="pre-Silver Age."

That's always been kind of my cut-off as well. Though I see Kurt's point.

Well, honestly, my cut-off point is every bit as as arbitrary as the others. There will never be a right answer because the creators of that era simply weren't thinking in terms of Golden/Atomic/Silver or Earth-One/-1.5/-Two. They were focused on cranking out those pages, confident that the entire readership turned over every seven years.

I could do this all day....

I do!

Cei-U!
I summon the scholarly mind-rot!

[Drusilla lives!]

...Well, honestly, my cut-off point is every bit as as arbitrary as the others. There will never be a right answer because the creators of that era simply weren't thinking in terms of Golden/Atomic/Silver or Earth-One/-1.5/-Two. They were focused on cranking out those pages, confident that the entire readership turned over every seven years. ...


I think that's why a "-centric-neutral" approach to understanding this "problem of the ages" is called for as suggested by JVJ (that guy in that forum on the other website I mentioned at the start of the thread). That is, trying to define the ages from the actions of one or two companies would ultimately lead to a "fan-centric" and incorrect definition.

In his words (he said them so well I'll just quote them here)...

... Any -centric "defining point" is missing the whole concept of an "age". The "Golden Age" isn't about super-heroes, IMHO, but about a general approach to comic books that brought forth such diverse books as Keen Detective Funnies, Action Comics, Four-Color Comics, Prize Comics, New Funnies, Heroic Comics, Jungle Comics, Captain America, etc. It was not about a particular genre but about newness, freshness, experimentation and creative diversity coupled with a touch of naivete. The same can be said of "golden ages" of pulps, TV, radio, film, etc. The term in generally applied to the defining period of a new medium.

The "Silver Age", IMHO, revolves around a restriction in the "formula" of comics that saw the number of companies and genre radically condensed. It also featured the rise of fandom and an awareness of the creators that had been gradually eroding away over time. Consider that in early Fiction House and Centaur nearly EVERY artist was identified and acknowledged. Though the practice continued sporadically over the decades, it wasn't until the SA that Marvel and then DC made it a practice to give credits as a matter of course.

Up until the SA, artists were coming into comics at a fairly regular clip. By the time the SA arrives, the Atlas Implosion has created a surplus of artists and a dramatically lowered demand for their services. I can't think of more than two or three artists (Neal Adams, Jim Steranko, and ?) who entered the comics field in the SA. Given that we're talking about a period of at least ten years, that's significant in and of itself.

"Ages," again IMHO, are "-centric-neutral" and should help define the INDUSTRY, not the contents of the product. ...


With regard to the "Golden Age" he had this to say...
...I think that there was VAST difference between what was going on in early 40s and what happened after 1947. I think in MY Golden Age, experimentation was rife and often way over the top, but more focused on product than genre. With the end of the war we see a retrenching of the medium and a search for THE (as opposed to A) new thing. Crime, Romance and Horror are a LOT different from the superheroes, funny animal and westerns of the GA. They're more "grown up" (as the medium had become) and the "thrills" more focused. The books were losing page count (and physical dimensions - albeit at a much slower rate than pages) and the stories were being condensed too. Tighter, more-focused, more "true to life" (their term, not mine) than before. Where "True" used to mean biographies of famous people in the GA, in the post-GA period it meant depictions of a "real" crime, a "real" romance, or "real" fear - or at least the comic books equivalent of same. This is a MAJOR change. ...


And finally with regard to the SA and BA...

...The Silver Age, as I see it, was defined by DC limiting Timely/Marvel/Atlas to eight monthly comics. This caused dozens of artists to be freed up from their adequately paid jobs and to go looking for work. The explosion of Classics Illustrated/World Around Us/Special Issues, the experimentation at Charlton, Dell movie and TV adaptations, MAD imitation magazines, etc. are ALL part of the SA. The super-heroes at DC, Archie and Charlton are also part of it, but remember that 25% of the comics on the newsstand had just mysteriously vanished. That leaves a huge vacuum in the supply chain. Superheroes eventually filled that vacuum, but it didn't happen overnight. ...

...The BA came about because Marvel was sold and the new owners examined the ten year old restraint of trade contract that Goodman had signed with DC's distributor and said it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. Up until then, Marvel was "restricted" to 16 titles. What was originally meant to be only eight monthly titles had doubled as the sales and profits of an expanding Marvel overrode the restraint agreement. When the restraint was removed, the double-mags (Strange Tales, Tales of Suspense, Journey into Mystery, etc.) were split and as many new titles as possible were added. Conan was one of them.

Yes, there was creative risk taking, but it came from a small group of fans-turned-pro. The main thrust of the BA was, as always, PROFITS. It also marked the beginning of new blood in the ranks of comic book artists. As fandom grew and fans like Roy Thomas moved into the industry, change was inevitable, but not until the artificial restraints were lifted. The DEMAND for artists opened up and the SUPPLY was there in fandom just waiting for the call. It was these new fan-centric artists who eventually brought about the changes.

Like I indicated earlier, you have to stand back at examine the industry, not the individuals, when you're trying to "define" an "age."

Some really great ideas with regard to this problem that I think were worthy of repeating here. They've changed my perspective on the problem... thanks JVJ where ever you are.

I think benday-dot was also putting forth a similar line of reasoning with regard to the GA.

[Cei-U!]

I think that's why a "-centric-neutral" approach to understanding this "problem of the ages" is called for as suggested by JVJ (that guy in that forum on the other website I mentioned at the start of the thread). That is, trying to define the ages from the actions of one or two companies would ultimately lead to a "fan-centric" and incorrect definition.

Which is why, as I mentioned in my first post, I don't care for the whole "Ages" paradigm.

thanks JVJ where ever you are.

You know, I started to write a long response pointing out the many factual errors JVJ made in the excerpted quotes (for example, Goodman still owned Marvel at the time of the line's first big expansion in '68) but it just got too lengthy and, frankly, dull. Suffice it to say that, despite his shaky grasp of the medium's history, I agree with his basic point and leave it at that.

Cei-U!
I summon the afternoon torpor!

[benday-dot]

Two only semi-related thoughts:

- I read somewhere that the only superheroes whose adventures were published without interruption from the 1940s to the 1960s were Superman/Superboy, Batman & Robin, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow and Aquaman. Non-superhero characters who spanned the same era include Blackhawk, Tomahawk, and Archie.


From the latter category should we also throw in (from the Marvel camp) Kid Colt (Outlaw) and Millie the Model, both of which enjoyed enormous runs from the 40's to the 70's.

[Drusilla lives!]

...Suffice it to say that, despite his shaky grasp of the medium's history, I agree with his basic point and leave it at that. ...

I agree, I've come to agree with his basic point... but I do think some of the specifics of his argument are a little off. I'm not inclined to agree (or sure of what he's talking about) with regard to that "Atlas implosion" and "surplus of artists" statement... but then my knowledge of comics history isn't that good either. I was always under the impression that the imposition of the code crushed the comics industry across the board... with DC fairing better then some. Off the top of my head I think companies like EC were done in by the code, yes... but even more so by the loss of distribution. I guess he's referring to a similar situation at Atlas... I think that forced them to use DC's distribution channel. But I digress... the problem is artists were leaving the field anyway, working in comics at the time (before and certainly after the code) was considered the bottom rung as far as illustration work. With the stigma attached to the field due to the popular sentiment at the time, I doubt artists were flocking to the medium (regardless of whether or not Atlas was imploding or not). So while I agree that the existing pool of artists (the ones that didn't want to leave the comic medium for whatever reason) had less work (and many did leave for this reason), I'm not completely convinced that this was the only one, nor am I convinced that this was a driving force behind new artists not entering the medium in the SA, if this also was indeed the case... again, I'm not that familiar with comics history to say definitively (I mean, were there less artists entering the field?... I'm not really sure).

But in his defense, he does acknowledge that some of the historical facts might be off a bit, they were after all extemporaneous... nevertheless I think he makes his point rather well (with regard to the "Ages" problem).

[Ed Love]

I can't agree that last point. The introduction of the Barry Allen Flash does do things that the introduction of Captain Comet, the Martian Manhunter, etc. don't. Barry Allen re-used a name, a superpower, and some costume elements from a Golden Age character. So that marks a certain break with the past.

Furthermore, the seeds of the Earth-1/Earth-2 division are planted in Barry Allen's first appearance. By making Barry Allen a fan of the the Jay Garrick Flash, who is a fictional character in Allen's world, the story implies that these stories take place in a different/world reality from numerous Golden Age tales.

It is a good point that revival of other characters was a delayed reaction.

Part of that is not all that unique though. The golden-age is rife with examples of characters' names and such being re-used as different characters (by the same company sometimes). An interesting one, Captain Future started off as a pulp Buck Rogers type hero. His name got used by the same company as a standard superhero (pun intended), while his actual character and storylines got recycled as Major Mars in the same company's comics. DC did it too. In All-Star Comics #39, 1948, Johnny Thunder has his last golden-age appearance in a comic as a member of the JSA. Later that very same year, the western hero Johnny Thunder appears with nary a mention of any connection. A couple of months later, we also got a new Tommy Tomorrow, the one most people are familiar with. The previous one was also a hero of the future, but was more realistic hard science-fiction looking at how we might explore space as opposed to juvenile science-fiction space cop. Timely/Atlas in 1950 introduced Marvel Boy, having already had two heroes by that name in the 40s. Not only that, the 1950 Marvel Boy shows many of the same elements of post 1940s characters that would continue into the 60s: emphasis on science, space travel, flying saucers, not all that different from Hal Jordan.

It is interesting to note that the Flash comic does make a point of breaking with the past in-story which is mostly unique. Marvel's 1950s attempts to bring back Captain America is a mirror example of the same thing, opening with school teacher Steve Rogers showing a film of Cap and Bucky in action during the war. It's an in story way referencing the past, while also modernizing the character for the readers. Sure, one is presented as being the same character and the other as an all new one with the same name and themes (but not bothering to explain how Bucky is still just a kid, but I digress) , but I think the purpose of actually referencing the past is really for the same goal: "Remember how great Captain America/the Flash was in the 40's, well here's the character for this generation." Otherwise, there is no reason to make the reference at all. As shown, the companies re-used the names all the time without bothering to reference they were doing so or that it was a new character.

Otherwise, I don't ascribe as much meaning to it because what we think of as continuity and comics universes was not how it was treated back then. Superman fights martians with Orson Welles which pretty much invalidates the Martian Manhunter character. Overall, continuity meant that characters' status quos and info were the same from one issue to the next, though not always. Otherwise, continuity was often whatever the current story said it was.

There were often situations of characters breaking the 4th wall, recognizing that their adventures were appearing in comics, that the characters knew the reason why Jay Garrick and Alan Scott had to leave the JSA was they graduated to their own titles instead of just appearing in an anthology title. In one old Superman story we have him constantly having to distract Lois Lane from watching a Superman cartoon so that she doesn't see him change from Clark Kent on film and have her learn his secret identity, that the rest of the world then apparently knows! Barry Allen reading a Jay Garrick comic is a bit of meta-fiction continuity held over from the 40s. In the sense that Jay knew he appeared in comics to begin with, it's not even an invalidation of the character. I can't say that it's a recognition of a division in the continuity of the past and the current because that kind of concept of continuity universe hadn't really been defined yet.

That's why I hold that the "Flash of Two Worlds" is a much bigger and important comic to the Silver-age as that comic ushers in the more modern sensibilities of continuity. "Flash of Two Worlds" establishes a real continuity between what went before and accepting both as real and valid instead of sweeping it under the rug. While the origin story says that it's all a bit of fiction, this takes that concept of saying just because it was in a comic doesn't mean it didn't really happen, that they aren't all interconnected. Continuity is now more than just what happened last month and the current status quo, it's what happened 10, 15, 20 years ago, that the published adventures on some level really happened.

[Slam_Bradley]

DC considers Adventure #246 and World's Finest #95 the starting point of Silver Age stories. I tend to agree.



Green Arrow has always been one of the easiest "pass-through" characters to deliniate because of Kirby's run on the character. Makes a nice easy break point.

[stelok]

The Golden Age ended when the WWII ended and the super hero comic books stopped selling anymore. But that was more like the beginning of the end.

The true and final end of Golden Age was Frederic Wertham's crusade against comic books and the creation of Comics Code Authority

[mgs]

Man! I don't know anything about these, 'in-between' eras! :confused:

I only know the the Golden, Silver, Bronze and Modern.
And maybe with the advent of so many comics going online, the newest era will be the Digital Era?

[destro]

I view it like this:

Golden Age - obvious
Silver Age - obvious
Age of Deconstruction (the Shooter/Kahn age) - the period where things like Watchmen and Dark Knight started to appear
Dark age - The rise of the image artists and cover variants
Last age - Where we are now. The end of comics as we know them is in sight.

[Scott Shaw!]

I like refer to comics from the late 1940s through the mid-1950s as "Atomic Age" funnybooks, not just because of the obvious reference, but it represents a time in which genres mutated to an previously-unheard-of level.

It's always surprised me that the period in which comics went from 10¢ to 12¢ has never been some sort of line-of-demarkation. Although it didn't affect the material itself, the change in price was a HUGE deal at the time, and was the first step toward comics becoming a niche industry as it now exists.

Aloha,

Scott!

[MDG]

I was thinking that another tipping point in the mid-60s is the Batman TV show. When it started and became a huge fad, it boosted superheroes and sales for not just DC, but other publishers. After it went off the air, superhero comics by publishers other than the big 2 seemed to evaporate and, at least DC seemed to be looking at other genres.