New book on black & white horror for horror fans!

[Rob Allen]

If the book has something that can't be easily found on the internet, then yes, there's still a market. You can see in this thread that some people are eager to see this book.

[rarndt]

If the book has something that can't be easily found on the internet, then yes, there's still a market. You can see in this thread that some people are eager to see this book.

Hmmm, I guess I'll find out the market prospects in December.

However, I should note that the book is both a catalog and a critical/historical look at those magazines, NOT simply a catalog, although that is certainly a major factor. In addition, I note that Jess Nevins' cataloging of interesting background notes on Alan Moore's 49ers and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen books appeared first on the internet and only later in book form. There have been several volumes of the books produced and I suspect that series of books would have stopped at book one if there was no interest in books based on the original internet postings.

I'd also like to note that the inquiry seems to indicate (and this may not be intentional on the writer's part) that information previously posted on the internet negates any tangible need for print or ebooks on the subject. I don't think that's true. College, public and school libraries, for example, which the publisher considers a major part of their target audience, may not have a great deal of prior sources on this subject. Much of the online information on these titles is scattered on many different websites, is incomplete and, frankly, often inaccurate. Much of the information I put into the issue commentaries was gleaned from personal interviews and emails with the creators, some of which are on the internet and some of which are not. Plus, the book, I think, draws a great number of publishers and magazines together for the first time in an easily accessed single volume.

Most of the people I either contacted in regards to the book or have told about the book are excited about it. I hope that excitement continues and expands to future potential readers.

And finally, I can't write a book based on the potential market for such a book. I can only write one based on the notion that this would be a book that (if I weren't writing it) I would like to buy for myself. That was the reason I started working on it originally and the reason I submitted it to a publisher (who spent literally five minutes looking over the initial proposal and then said yes!). They seem to have confidence they can sell it. They also seemed to quite like the manuscript I turned in to them. Enough so that we're discussing a second comics-related book (although not a catalog type volume this time). To me, somebody who publishes books being willing to take a chance on me is gold. A market for it? I hope there is. It would be fun to keep doing this.

RA

[BDiogenes]

Check the Grand Comicbook Database (www.comics.org) and search for the publishers Stanley or Eerie. Both were operating in the late 1960s and both covers and contents are explored at the site.

Sorry, but I was unable to find anything. Advanced Search produced nothing when I put your names in the Publisher field. Putting Stanley in the regular nonassigned field gives only titles from DC with Stanley in them. Could you explain how to search? About the "mildness" I was really comparing with stuff in "Fangoria", which I've never read, but I have consideried sending photos like it has, UNSPECIFIED by e-mail, to certain ladies in my life who give me a hard time! That gore is akin to what one might find in medical textbooks!
_____Were the covers of the mags you think I bought unrelated to any of the stories inside? I believe that's another thing which I didn't like about them. As in Creepy or Eerie, it creates a lose-lose situation: if you like the cover, a related story won't be in the mag; if you don't, the cover has been totally wasted when it could've featured something from one of the stories you did enjoy. Never read Vampirella so don't know its cover scheme, but this scheme was very uncommon and I'm glad FM didn't follow.
_____ Regardless of the level of my enthusiasm for your subject matter, I support your book. All we fans should need to know about your book to support it is that it's fannish, you yourself are a fan, and you respect your material, which you quite obviously do. In addition, I am pleased you are able to promote your book here whereas some sites might insist you pay for an ad, which is garbage. This proves CBR is a fan-oriented site, which we should also support wholeheartedly, including its sponsors when we can it.

[benday-dot]

Sorry, but I was unable to find anything. Advanced Search produced nothing when I put your names in the Publisher field. Putting Stanley in the regular nonassigned field gives only titles from DC with Stanley in them. Could you explain how to search?

Hmm... the search works fine, as Richard suggests.

Don't even bother with Advanced searched. Just select Publisher from the drop down menu on the regular search page and type in Eerie or Stanley.

Eerie: http://www.comics.org/publisher/name/eerie/sort/alpha/

Stanley: http://www.comics.org/publisher/name...ey/sort/alpha/

If you want a taste of what to expect from Richard's upcoming book I encourage you to visit his wonderful indexes here..

He covers creative, critical and chronological aspects (and more) of most of the comic magazines from the past few decades. That's a lot of ground. About the only major comic mag not covered is Heavy metal, and its not necessarily a black and white.

[rarndt]

Hmm... the search works fine, as Richard suggests.

Don't even bother with Advanced searched. Just select Publisher from the drop down menu on the regular search page and type in Eerie or Stanley.

Eerie: http://www.comics.org/publisher/name/eerie/sort/alpha/

Stanley: http://www.comics.org/publisher/name...ey/sort/alpha/

If you want a taste of what to expect from Richard's upcoming book I encourage you to visit his wonderful indexes here..

He covers creative, critical and chronological aspects (and more) of most of the comic magazines from the past few decades. That's a lot of ground. About the only major comic mag not covered is Heavy metal, and its not necessarily a black and white.

Neither was Epic Illustrated, which I personally consider a superior magazine, at least in terms of story (artwise, HM may have had the edge). Unfortunately the translations of much of the Heavy Metal material, at least in the years I was a regular reader (1977-1986), were often pretty poor. Still, I'd urge anybody who liked the straight B&W mags that both HM and EI are worth tracking down and reading. There is some extremely good material there.

[rarndt]

Many of the Warren covers (particularly on Vampirella) weren't tied to a particular interior story but probably just as many were. Certainly as often as any other B&W publisher's title linked to an interior story. In fact, with Warren, several entire issues were built around the covers.

[benday-dot]

Neither was Epic Illustrated, which I personally consider a superior magazine, at least in terms of story (artwise, HM may have had the edge). Unfortunately the translations of much of the Heavy Metal material, at least in the years I was a regular reader (1977-1986), were often pretty poor. Still, I'd urge anybody who liked the straight B&W mags that both HM and EI are worth tracking down and reading. There is some extremely good material there.

Ah yes, I forgot about Epic Illustrated. I'll have to differ a little with your contention that it was superior to Heavy Metal in terms of story. Your point on clumsy translation is hard to argue with in many instances, but EI, especially in its longer serials, always left me rather indifferent. I enjoyed Metamorphoses Odyssey and Marada, but most of the other extended pieces did little for me. I actually thought the art to be found in EI held the advantage over its scripts. There was nice stuff by John Bolton, P. Craig Russel, MW Kaluta, Windsor-Smith, Kent Williams, Al Williamson, John Jay Muth, Charles Vess and others.

Still, the more Euro-centric Heavy Metal, countered with Druillet, Moebius, Bilal, Pichard, Crepax, Corben, Gal, Chaykin, Wrightson, Giminez and many others. Many of these stories were cryptic and mind-bending, but often thoughtful as well. I just feel that the horizons of HM were more expanded than what was to be found in EI. Much of the same ground was covered by both publications, but overall I feel Heavy Metal did it all a little better.

[BDiogenes]

benday-dot, yes, it was Eerie, but I might've also bought the oldest Stanley shown (perhaps a cut better; recall light-green logo) and not been particular about the difference. Many of the oldest Eerie ones aren't shown, but I recall the logos for Weird and Tales of Voodoo. The insides were no better. How could I ever have bought this tripe, even back issues? Perhaps I didn't think there was any better. So glad I unloaded them. Some stuff just might not merit persisting. randt, are any pros admitting to having worked these rags?

[dan bailey]

are any pros admitting to having worked these rags?

Dick Ayers & Chic Stone are the most obvious names.

[MDG]

Dick Ayers & Chic Stone are the most obvious names.

Also Carl Burgos.

[dan bailey]

Also Carl Burgos.

Who did, IIRC, quite a few of the covers.

[berk]

_____Were the covers of the mags you think I bought unrelated to any of the stories inside? I believe that's another thing which I didn't like about them. As in Creepy or Eerie, it creates a lose-lose situation: if you like the cover, a related story won't be in the mag; if you don't, the cover has been totally wasted when it could've featured something from one of the stories you did enjoy. Never read Vampirella so don't know its cover scheme, but this scheme was very uncommon and I'm glad FM didn't follow.

Generally I agree with you that the cover should reflect the story inside - I don't even like it when the cover artist isn't the same as the artist who drew the story - but for some reason it doesn't bother me with anthology magazines. Not only the Warren mags, but Heavy Metal, Epic, and just about all of them seemed to follow the same practice at least some of the time, so maybe I just got used to it and accepted it as normal.

But in colour, non-anthology comics, I still find it disappointing when, say, a beautiful Steranko cover isn't accompanied by Steranko artwork inside.

[berk]

And finally, I can't write a book based on the potential market for such a book. I can only write one based on the notion that this would be a book that (if I weren't writing it) I would like to buy for myself.

If only more comics were made with the same motivation.

[MDG]

Generally I agree with you that the cover should reflect the story inside - I don't even like it when the cover artist isn't the same as the artist who drew the story - but for some reason it doesn't bother me with anthology magazines. Not only the Warren mags, but Heavy Metal, Epic, and just about all of them seemed to follow the same practice at least some of the time, so maybe I just got used to it and accepted it as normal.

Eerie pubs would frequently retouch and reuse covers with no thought to inside content. They also purchased a bunch of cover paintings from european SF magazines and slapped them on the books.

Warren usually seemed to design covers around some story in the book. One time, they got a cover from Vaughn Bode and Larry Todd and had all the stories in the book written around it.

[rarndt]

Eerie pubs would frequently retouch and reuse covers with no thought to inside content. They also purchased a bunch of cover paintings from european SF magazines and slapped them on the books.

Warren usually seemed to design covers around some story in the book. One time, they got a cover from Vaughn Bode and Larry Todd and had all the stories in the book written around it.

For those interested, the book is now out in kindle form and the print version is only days away from shipment. Let me know what you think.