The TWILIGHT ZONE, BORIS KARLOFF TALES OF MYSTERY, and RIPLEY'S BELIEVE IT OR NOT titles published by Gold Key Comics were known for their beautifully painted covers...
...Mostly by a talented painter named George Wilson, who also painted covers for VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA, STAR TREK and other Gold Key titles.
Far be it from me to question the technique of such an amazing artist, but there was the matter of TWILIGHT ZONE # 43 (Gold Key Comics, Cover Date: May, 1972)...
I have no idea what my panicked reflexes might do if I were to fall, seemingly to my death, from a tall building and abruptly meet the street below...
...Though it WOULD be sorta "Twilight Zone-ish ironic" if my crumpled body were to be further run over by one of those BUSSES seen in the painting, after all the public hearings I've spoken at to save and restore local bus service...
 |
| That even LOOKS LIKE ME, in 1972 that is! |
...But, knowing me, my final thoughts would probably be... "To PEE, or not to PEE, that is the pants-staining question!"
...And, having asked that question (that was probably on the lips of every comics reader and fan who ever saw this issue), I leave you to provide your own answer!
...Gosh, if only he'd worn BLACK instead of red!
Special Bonus Gag ('cause I just can't help myself): "Hey, Bellboy... Urine trouble now, ain'tcha!"
...Sorry! We'll resume our normally tasteful posting next time!
17 comments:
Speaking of painted covers, Dell Giants have them (the 40s, 50s, and early 60s Little Golden Books and Whitman children’s books (Tell-a-Tales, Whitman Story Hour, Cozy Corner, Top Top Tales) featuring cartoon characters were painted in a similar style.
Anon:
While those covers were very nice indeed, they didn’t have the long-lasting endurance of the Gold Key adventure and mystery covers, being trotted-out basically for specials and eventually fading away altogether.
I don’t know if there was a reason for this beyond routine editorial decision but, strictly in my view – and as nice as they were as a change of pace or specialty image – I don’t think that painted covers showed animated characters to their best advantage. Pencil and ink linework often showed additional detail that would (presumably) be painted-over in the process. As finely skilled a painter as Carl Barks was, I would prefer his pencil and ink linework to showcase his characters - at least for what we know as "comic book art". …Again, just my opinion.
But the adventure and mystery covers truly benefited from the painted presentation. And it was something that Gold Key specialized in specifically for those titles… and did it ever make them stand out from the competition on the overcrowded newsstands of the day.
Joe, as for the Dell Giants featuring cartoon characters (at least from the late 40s-early 60s’, I was referring to the covers. As for the Little Golden and Whitman books featuring cartoon characters (at least from the mid 40s-early 60s), I was referring to both the cover art and interior illustrations.
Rest assured that was the impression I got from your first comment. My view remains the same. A nice change of pace for a special occasion, but glad it was not the norm.
Attention-getting. That is one way to describe the Twilight Zone cover. The more I look, the more intrigued I am by such a moment frozen and captured in a single painting. Makes me want to read the book just to find out how this scenario plays out. I do wonder, however, not knowing the story that is referenced, who that person is climbing up the side of the wall like Batman as though he were scaling the Matterhorn instead of a big city skyscraper. I hope he will have something to do with a positive resolution for the hapless hero who appears to be plunging to his death.
I do share our friend's appreciation of the painted Dell Giant covers. They give dimensionality to figures that otherwise would be drawn flat on the page. And while I, too, overall prefer the "drawn" look to the "painted" look as the norm for the cartoon characters, it is always a refreshing change of pace to see old favorites presented in that format. Two of my favorite Flintstones covers are "Bigger and Boulder" and "The Flintstones at the NYWC". Would not do without those covers for anything! The latter has the bonus of rendering the same characters in the same position as "drawn" figures on the back cover. One painted cover that really impressed me was when painted covers were definitely not the norm, and I was at that time largely unfamiliar with the Dell Giants (which predated me by a few years--can we say many, many years just to humor me?). This was an issue of Yogi Bear featuring Yogi at Mt. Rushmore having apparently added a modification to Borglum's original design. To say this cover blew me away would be an understatement. I was amazed that so much artistry was put into the cover and was equally amazed that there was no corresponding story inside (not that it was needed--the cover image definitely speaks for itself).
Interestingly for a comic book based on a live-action source, Gold Key's Lassie comics always used a photograph for the cover. During the Dell years, following a photo image for issue #1, the comics used painted covers from #2 until #37 or so, then resumed the use of photos until the end of the run under the Gold Key banner. I like photo covers, too, but the types of covers depicted in this post have a special dynamic that can only be captured in the "painted" format. Thanks once again for expanding my horizons!
You’re welcome, Scarecrow!
Scarecrow:
Now, you know I’d never spoil a story… even one from (that personally glorious time of) spring, 1972! But, isn’t that cover perfectly evocative of what we’ve come to think as “Twilight Zone”?!
However, I will go as far as to say that the wall-scaler was nothing more than a window-washer and, like the busses, did not appear in the story but made for a better overall composition for the painting.
I will also say that the story was pure “Twilight Zone” in its execution! Rod Serling ends his opening monologue with “…So let’s join him in his Twilight Zone … if you have the courage! But be prepared for the unexpected!”
And “the unexpected!” does indeed come, when you turn from page 3 to page 4 of this 6-page story! …An’ that’s all I’m gonna say about that!
I completely agree with you on the animated character covers. Again, a nice and special change-of-pace but I’d still not prefer it to have been the norm. And those Flintstones covers are everything you say – and more, especially the World’s Fair cover!
The cover to YOGI BEAR #39 (January, 1970) was a true anomaly! A NEW painted cover, at a time when Gold Key’s classic-character Hanna-Barbera comics were in their final year – and were mostly reprint! A cover that had nothing to do with any of the interior stories. And one that I once wrongly assumed at the time, and with no way to really check, would have been reprinted from an earlier Dell Giant – but it was NOT! You can see it HERE!
The Gold Key TV-based titles largely (but not exclusively) tended to go with photo covers over painted ones. LAND OF THE GIANTS, THE WILD WILD WEST, etc. But most of these titles did not extend beyond the life of the show itself. STAR TREK used photo covers for its first nine issues (most of which were composed of familiar stills from episodes of the show – I can name many of them), and then shifted to some amazing painted covers by George Wilson for most of the rest of the run. VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA used painted covers for almost all of its 16-issue run - #14 was a line drawing, and #15-16 were reprints of earlier painted-cover issues – but sometimes used photos of stars Richard Basehart and David Hedison for the back cover pin-ups, alternating with the usual reproductions of the front covers.
…So, there was really no hard-and fast rule.
However, when it came to titles like TWILIGHT ZONE (based on the Rod Serling TV series) and BORIS KARLOFF TALES OF MYSTERY (based on the TV series “Boris Karloff Presents Thriller”), covers largely presenting photo stills of Mr. Serling and Mr. Karloff would not necessarily evoke the mysteries that await between the covers.
So, a perfect comprise was enacted. Run George Wilson painted covers but each with a black and white photo-inset of Mr. Serling or Mr. Karloff, usually placed somewhere around the title logo. I’d say that served the titles best! Eye-catching, dramatic cover images, but with inset reminders of the “host” delivering them!
As for “expanding your horizons”, I am STILL expanding mine! The glorious thing about comic books is that there is an unending wealth of material to explore, sample, and embrace!
I take it George Wilson worked on these covers on days when he wasn't being annoyed by the pesky little blond kid who lived next door.
HA! I shudder to think how many magnificent painted covers little well-meaning-but-pesty Dennis may have inadvertently ruined!
I had a feeling Norm McGary, Neil Boyle, Don McLaughlin, Sam Armstrong, etc. painted the Dell Giant covers.
More than that, I wonder how many of those Dell painted covers were painted over the original pencils of another artist, like Harvey Eisenberg, Pete Alvarado, John Carey, etc. Some of them do look as if that might be the case. In contrast, George Wilson, it would seem by the overall consistency of his work, did his own complete paintings, probably from an editor’s suggestion of what the story would be about.
“We have a bellboy falling to his death from a very tall building! He is young, medium build, in a classically red bellboy outfit, and has dark hair! …Take it away, George!”
From that, Wilson probably added the window-washer and elements of traffic below that were not in the story proper – which was drawn by artist Jack Sparling.
Not coincidentally, Monday is what would’ve been Alvarado’s 101st birthday! Talk about coincidences!
And yes, in the case of the Dell Giant covers and the Little Golden Books and Whitman children’s books featuring cartoon characters, Harvey Eisenberg, Tom McKimson, Tony Strobl, John Carey, Carl Barks, Ralph Heimdahl, Paul Murry, et al did draw the pencils and someone
else, like Norm McGary, Neil Boyle, Don McLaughlin, Sam Armstrong, etc. painted them. Why was it that the Dell/Gold Key artists never got credited in their comic book work compared to their Golden/Whitman book work?
Unfortunately for them, and a great loss for those of us who make a study of such things, comic book creators of all types were not generally and regularly credited as an industry norm until the 1960s – with certain publishers remaining WAY behind that curve. Western Publishing was one of those “behind-the-curvers”, but they were far from alone.
As for the reasons, there are probably many, but keeping a popular creator from asking/demanding/negotiating for more money is likely one of the top ones. Without name recognition, there is less chance of fame… and higher page rates.
Of course, today, that’s all out the window! Lots of people know who I am, and my page rates are still awful! :-)
Walt Disney is famously quoted as having said that any artist who wanted to promote his own name would not be welcome at his studio. Of course, during the course of the years a few exceptions did arise, and today some of the "Nine Old Men" are nearly as well-remembered and well-known as Uncle Walt himself. As well as Mary Blair, Bill Peet, Shamus Culhane, and many others who eventually developed their own followings. In the comics world, of course, only Walt Disney's name was attached to the various properties and it wasn't until the post-Walt era when fans ferreted out the identities of "the good Duck artist", "the good Mouse artist," and so forth. In a way, too bad for those fans who would have liked to know early on who these people were, but from a branding perspective it makes sense to keep their names quiet.
I would guess that a similar principle prevailed in other venues besides the Walt Disney Studio, with one name such as Max Fleischer, Walter Lantz, Paul Terry, Warner Brothers, etc. being associated with certain characters, even though multiple artists were involved and the name brand person not necessarily doing any of the actual artwork. (I can't picture any of the brothers Warner sitting down at a drawing board to draw Bugs Bunny.) Probably for similar reasons to this, the comics industry kept its artists under a low profile. And when recognition finally did emerge, probably the reason that companies like DC and Marvel released the names of their artists before Western ever did could have to do with the fact that most of the characters and titles presented by DC and Marvel were owned in-house, whereas Western's properties were mainly licensed from other owners. Only guesswork on my part, and I will certainly defer to your greater wisdom, Joe. Also I believe that in our times people are perhaps more aware of the nature of commercial art and would be more ready to accept more than one name associated with a certain character or set of characters. Certainly Walt Disney's name has not been diluted through greater public awareness of the contributions of Floyd Gottfredson, Carl Barks, Paul Murry, Tony Strobl, Al Hubbard, and others. Today people understand that one individual does not "do it all." In Walt's time there seems to have been a sort of mythos that Walt himself drew and animated every piece of artwork associated with his characters. Fostered, of course, by the restrictions imposed upon the artists not to promote themselves.
Scarecrow:
I’d tend to agree with most of your comments (as usual), though the name of Carl Barks was “ferreted out” by Malcolm Willets and Bill Spicer (the later a future letterer for Gold Key) in the early 1960s, still well into Unca Walt’s lifetime. I, personally, did not learn Barks’ name until 1971 and THIS WONDERFUL BOOK, which I still have – and still occasionally refer to – today!
I would venture to guess that, in animation’s earlier days, SCREEN TIME (and the limitations thereupon) would have also figured into the scarcity of on-screen credits. With a five-to-seven-minute running time, it may have been more important to get the producer's or studio’s name out there, then to identify the starring character along with the cartoon’s title, and get on with the show!
But, as time passed, other credits (limited though they were) began to creep in. Watch any modern Looney Tunes short (some of which find their way into DVD collections of the classic-era material) and you’ll see more credits than you can shake a stick at, without your arm falling off! As with so much else today, even this one-time injustice has been waaaay over-compensated for!
With comics, it was even simpler than you suggest. Two words… STAN LEE!
Where there were sporadic and limited instances of comic book credits over the “pre-Lee years of 1960s Marvel Comics”, it was Stan Lee who personally ushered-in what we now regard as some sort of “modern age of comics creator credits”.
And he did it for the simplest of reasons…
…He wanted the credit for himself!
As the primary driving force behind those comics, I suppose he felt that he might as well get whatever celebrity there was to be had from branding the comics with his name – and the names of his co-creators. And, as those early Marvel Comics grew in popularity, Stan Lee’s celebrity status grew with them! Comic book fans, Marvel fans, and outright civilians, why does everyone know of Stan Lee? That’s why!
DC and its editors and creators actually brought about the Silver Age of Comics with an explosive burst of creativity in the late 1950s but, if you are not a DC fan or otherwise plugged into comic book history – and, sadly, even if you ARE a “modern DC fan” – how many folks could name the primary DC editors of the time? I’ll bet even a number of my cherished regular readers cannot.
Julius Schwartz, the true driving force behind the Silver Age, may have run some credits before Stan Lee did, but it was Lee who cajoled the industry as a whole toward editorial and creative credits. Even at DC the change was uneven, as it came down to individual editor’s choice to do it or not. Mort Weisinger, for instance, pretty much resisted for nearly the entire decade, as did Jack Schiff (to a lesser extent) who kinda followed Weisinger in a sort of editorial lockstep. In contrast, Schwartz was quick to embrace the change… that he more-or-less started anyway. That may be why Julius Schwartz might be the best known of DC’s Silver Age editors – also because his stories and concepts were so good, not to mention groundbreaking!
Other publishers, less concerned with fandoms (their mistake), like Western, Archie, and Harvey eschewed credits for as long as possible – to fandom’s (and perhaps their own) great misfortune!
…WHEW! This must be what it feels like to run a marathon! …Not that most writers would know much about that! :-)
Oh Joe, you're so naughty!? I'm sure that the "stain" on the bellboy's uniform is caused by his foot casting a shadow along his body.
Anyway,this stunning cover reminds me of a piece by my favorite art studio: Hipgnosis, a trio of British photographers best remembered for doing memorable album covers for prog and metal bands like Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin. Hipgnosis' cover for Heartburn, an LP by eccentric singer/songwriter Kevin Coyne, has the artist standing in front of a building -- while a woman falls or jumps off the roof in the background. Interesting enough, but the poster promoting the album is even better. It depicts Coyne himself plunging toward the pavement, although unlike the unfortunate bellboy, he is shown from the back. Check it out at http://hipgnosiscovers.com/kevincoyne.html and tell me if the poster reminds you of this thrilling cover.
Mark:
“…his foot casting a shadow…” …Yes, I suppose that’s *one* possible explanation!
…A deep, wet, expanding “shadow” coming to the surface from within! Yeah, that’s it, all right! …What else could it possibly be?
Holeee Cow! That promo poster sure does evoke the TWILIGHT ZONE cover! HERE is Mark’s link, so you can see it for yourself. Scroll down a bit to get there… but you will KNOW it when you see it!
Of course, with Kevin Coyne being photographed from the back – and wearing black pants to boot – we will never know if there’s a TRUE parallel! …That’s “Parallel” with a capital “P”(ee)! …Yes, I’m “so naughty”... but abundantly loveable!
Post a Comment