Ding Dong, the wicked code is dead!

[dan bailey]

If Miller said it, I'm going to assume it's wrong. If he told me the sun was shining, I'd conclude otherwise.

(And I just looked through the blinds -- it's overcast!)

[The Darknight Detective]

Frankly, I have no idea what anybody's sales figures were, compared to anybody else's, in that era. Neither in terms of how well any individual title was doing, nor in terms of how much loot any given publishing company was raking in as its grand total, month after month. So I certainly don't know if EC was making enough to make Archie and DC, for instance, feel terribly threatened.

Wasn't Dell the Big Kahuna of the Fifties anyway (at least for the first half of that decade)?

[Rob Allen]

...
He then goes on to argue that the primary purpose of the Comics Code was to drive EC out of business.
...

EC was the secondary target. The primary target was Lev Gleason, publisher of Crime Does Not Pay, Crime and Punishment, Daredevil, and Boy Comics, all of which were enormously successful from the mid-40s to the mid-50s.

[Julian Fine]

I'd always heard that EC's horror comics along with Crime SuspenStories were the big sellers of the 50s (along with Crime Doesn't Pay) when both superheros and animal comics had gone into decline in postwar America. The story of Archie and DC feeling threatened by Gaines didn't originate with Miller, I know that much; and Martin Goodman ripped off their publishing model damn near wholesale so they were clearly recognized as successful.

[MDG]

I'd always heard that EC's horror comics along with Crime SuspenStories were the big sellers of the 50s (along with Crime Doesn't Pay) when both superheros and animal comics had gone into decline in postwar America.

EC popularized horror comics, and crime comics had been on the rise since the mid-40s, but I think Archie and DC didn't like going against these genres more than EC itself. EC didn't flood the market, so it wasn't going to dig into their sales the way Atlas, Standard and other publishers probably did. (I'm pretty sure that EC was also pretty weak in actual distribution and # of copies sold.)

And i think funny animal comics were still going pretty strong through the mid-50s.

[CaptChucky]

EC was the secondary target. The primary target was Lev Gleason, publisher of Crime Does Not Pay, Crime and Punishment, Daredevil, and Boy Comics, all of which were enormously successful from the mid-40s to the mid-50s.

I suspect you're right. Crime Does Not Pay could not be sold in Chicago! I guess this was on account of crime paying fairly well there. They just couldn't bring themselves to lie to the kids.

[tyciol]

Not completely sure what year this is. I think possibly it was honestly assumed that the Betty and Veronica reader was generally a girl, so there was more leeway for things like this. Anyway, just posting to prove I'm not crazy and confusing my adolescent Betty and Veronica fantasies for reality.

This strip is fascinating, I don't suppose anyone know what year it's from? Or decade at least?

[The Darknight Detective]

This strip is fascinating, I don't suppose anyone know what year it's from? Or decade at least?

Betty's outfit looks very Seventiesish to me.

[CaptChucky]

In the 70's, female nudity was becoming a little more common. This changed in the 80's when things got more conservative. It looks like they were pushing the envelope here to see what the reaction might be.

[The Darknight Detective]

In the 70's, female nudity was becoming a little more common. This changed in the 80's when things got more conservative.

Are you talking about in comic books? If so, there were more examples of implied nudity/lingerie shots in the '80s than in the '70s.

[tony ingram]

In the 70's, female nudity was becoming a little more common. This changed in the 80's when things got more conservative. It looks like they were pushing the envelope here to see what the reaction might be.

Are you talking about in comic books? If so, there were more examples of implied nudity/lingerie shots in the '80s than in the '70s.

I certainly recall seeing more implied or actual nudity in 70s titles, to be honest. Just check out a few random issues of Marvel's Dracula or Savage Sword of Conan.

[The Darknight Detective]

I certainly recall seeing more implied or actual nudity in 70s titles, to be honest. Just check out a few random issues of Marvel's Dracula or Savage Sword of Conan.

I'm more of a DC fan, so you might be right that there was more of at Marvel. Having said that, I was referring to Comic Code books only.

[MDG]

I'm more of a DC fan, so you might be right that there was more of at Marvel. Having said that, I was referring to Comic Code books only.

When I saw Mike Grell at a show in 1980, he mentioned that he would draw two little lines to indicate dimples above the butts of his female characters, and every time the art came back from the Code, those dimples were whited out.

[The Darknight Detective]

When I saw Mike Grell at a show in 1980, he mentioned that he would draw two little lines to indicate dimples above the butts of his female characters, and every time the art came back from the Code, those dimples were whited out.

That used to happen pre-1971 regarding cleavage lines, IIRC.

[The Confessor]

I'm more of a DC fan, so you might be right that there was more of at Marvel. Having said that, I was referring to Comic Code books only.

Yeah, in terms of comic code approved books, Marvel in the '80s had much more implied nudity/scantily clad females in their pages than in the '70s. Without doubt.