Here is PAGE 27 of SCOOBY-DOO WHERE ARE YOU # 7 (Charlton Comics, Cover Date: April, 1976).
Here is PANEL TWO of that page.
Anything look unusual about this panel of the typically scheming "phony-ghost guys" confessing after being exposed by those meddling kids and their dog?
Oh, wait... THERE IS...
WELL, LOOKY HERE!
It looks like some of Charlton's PRODUCTION NOTES accidentally found their way to the published page! ...ZOINKS!
And, with a little insight into the layout of the issue, you can even INTERPRET it!
Reading the notes from RIGHT TO LEFT (that is in "reverse order") we see that:
1: THIS PAGE is Page 27.
2: Page 28 is reserved for an AD.
3: Pages 29-30 present a TWO PAGE TEXT STORY.
4: Pages 31-32 are reserved for ADs.
And darned if that isn't the way the issue is actually laid out! ...JINKIES!
So, for once, what you and Scooby are seeing is really true!
2 comments:
I never collected the Charlton Scoobys. In the early days of Scooby Doo, I was pretty lukewarm. It seemed trite and cliched from the start. I did not understand why a character was named after Barney Rubble's catchphrase and spoke with Astro's voice. I would have preferred Messick to use his canine-speak for further Jetsons episodes, rather than for this character. I watched occasionally, but didn't really get interested until "The New Scooby Doo Movies" with the many guest stars. That got me watching. But still more as a fan of some of the guest stars than of the main characters. When the Gold Key comic book came out, I dutifully purchased the first few issues, but never developed much enthusiasm for the franchise. Unlike with his H-B brethren, I did not follow Scooby when he translated over to the other side.
But wait a minute! some long-term readers are protesting. I've read your comments on Scooby Doo in which you have waxed eloquent on the characters and the many episodes. When did the change occur? I'm glad you asked. Quite recently (from my dinosaurish perspective) in the mid-2000s (can anybody remember that far back?) I discovered on-line a treasure trove of Hanna-Barbera recordings some of which I had been seeking for thirty years or more. This re-awakened my fascination with all things H-B, and now that some time had elapsed, I even developed some interest in the stuff that I had not truly warmed up to before. When someone posted an old Scooby Doo record, and around the same time when I bought a music CD that featured Scooby Doo music, I had somehow become a solid Scooby fan. So then retroactively I appreciated the large body of material I had hitherto been ignoring.
I am sure if I scoured my H-B Charltons I could find some similar errors of material left in that should have been left out. They were not stellar in their quality on the best of days, if any such existed during the Charlton years. I have a few issues where pages were not properly cut, and either some retailer or I myself had to cut the pages so that they would open. Occasionally some excess paper would fold out below the bottom of the page. Or one of the staples would be missing from the center. So it's not surprising that someone wasn't watching the quality control on this Scooby Doo issue. To be truthful, I find such lapses quite interesting, and it's also informative to get a behind-the-scenes look, though unintentional, at comic book production as handled by our favorite bargain-basement operation.
Very interesting perspective as always, Scarecrow!
In contrast, I was an original “Scooby-Dooer” (if I may coin that phrase). Not only did I watch the premiere Saturday morning episode (September 13, 1969 – CBS), which some folks are now designating as the “50th Anniversary of Scooby-Doo”, but also the FRIDAY NIGHT PREVIEW, which preceded it!
How many of you remember when new cartoons were SOOO concentrated into a scant few hours on Saturday mornings that the networks would run “preview specials” the night before (or some day late in the week) to ensure that we choose the correct network, of the then-existing three (!), as our SatAM home base?
…And, in consideration of that, would the “50th Anniversary of Scooby-Doo” actually be September 12, 1969?
I somehow missed the first Gold Key issue of SCOOBY-DOO, but got the second and as many of the others as I could find. Later getting # 1, and a scant few other missing issues of that run, in the 1980s, before they started going for high prices – especially SCOOBY-DOO # 1. Those first few issues adapted TV episodes, later shifting to original stories.
Oddly, I lasted, as an original fan, through "The New Scooby-Doo Movies" (1972), by which time girls had already become my primary life’s focus! Again, in the 1980s, when my interest in comics and animation resumed (somehow managing to find a way to co-exist with that for the opposite gender – and that WASN’T as easy or common in the ‘70s and ‘80s as it is today), and I began mail-corresponding with Mark Evanier, I gathered up the remaining back issues of SCOOBY-DOO, as he and Dan Spiegle created so many of them.
Originally appalled by the remarkably low quality of the early Charlton H-B comics in 1970-1971, I left them behind with no regrets, even before my general interest waned. You can find references to that throughout this Blog.
More recently, as my back-issue collecting has become more narrowly focused, I have revisited and reassessed Charlton. Their LATER H-B comics were worlds better than the earlier ones, though still not up to Gold Key and Dell standards. Even artist Ray Dirgo who has been occasionally maligned here improved vastly upon his work, after I departed.
Sure, they were quite gaffe-prone (to repurpose a phrase I hear on TV news-opinion shows all too often), and my posts will both note and celebrate that, as seen in this very instance. But in my estimation, Charlton has, oddly, become all the more “beloved” for it – now that I can see the bigger picture!
Post a Comment