wpbooks

I've picked up all the issues so far but I'm unsure for how much longer I'll be doing so. I like the design of the magazine, but the contents are at best mediocre. Creepy and Eerie started out Gangbusters in their day and maintained a level of quality for awhile. This endeavor has some good bits but nothing that's really making me look forward to the next issue like Warren used to. Could be my age and that too much 'edgy' material has appeared between then and now that has turned me into a jaded old fart when it comes to this kind of thing, but it's not really a magazine I feel I need to complete, so to speak. Like you I was pretty disappointed with the single page of Corben.....

Haven't really been looking. What have you gleaned and/or obtained?

Nice! Never seen this before, what date is it from? My guess would be the 80's since it has a bar code on the cover, and they not so cleverly reused the Creepy #1 cover..... What, you don't think "FUN BOOK" is clever? ....as opposed to "Funnybook", which is why we are here???

Nice! Never seen this before, what date is it from? My guess would be the 80's since it has a bar code on the cover, and they not so cleverly reused the Creepy #1 cover.....

Here's what the other 2 look like:

Is this made to look old? Yes. And worn!

There are 2 other Brubaker magazine variants.... another Criminal, Savage Sword Of Criminal, and one for The Fade Out!

Cool book, but why assume it was anything other than a printing error, which is fairly common with underground comics. It was pretty much printed one sheet at a time with room for experimentation or just a cool thing to play around with when stoned. I doubt it was unintentional.

(Qualifier- I know this wasn't directed at me) I see your point WP, though for the record I have only ever bought two copies of FFFB 2 and have never bought a copy of BA 1 ... indeed I have stayed away from these books because of all this mess. So, I can honestly tell you... I am not living in denial. I simply understand the difference between hypothesis, evidence, theory and fact. And I can see the embedded assumptions in all of this (and am only hoping others do as well). It was directed nowhere in particular, so I'm glad you weren't offended. As you say in a previous post: While some of these were established via data sources some 50 years ago (and by an author that had far more 1st hand information) I'm just pointing out that the guy who has ACTUAL 1st hand info by actually being the guy who ran the press the book was printed on, says otherwise. Also, it would seem, based on some other misinformation that appears sporadically in Kennedy, that the printer has less of an agenda to spread said mis-info. He wasn't trying to complete a collection or protect his published text from plagerists, so I would easily defer to the printer!

Anybody ever come across this sort of mutant Plymell Zap #1? This was printed without the yellow! As you can see by the vividness of the blue ink, this is an intended or experimental variant. Perhaps the only one in existence and is in vg/f condition. Any idea of a value to put on it?

Maybe it's one of those entries that was a plant, so to speak, of a non-existant book, so if anybody tried to copy and redistribute JK's info, he could point to that one and say A-HA!! Busted!!! I recall some chat about that sort of thing in one of the old, lost threads from another time and place....

And yet the idea or reality of Hydrogen Bomb And Biochemical Warfare Funnies having a $1.00 price on it's 1st and 3rd printings, while the second is 50c seems logical? Hey man, it's UG..... why should anything make sense? What other comix had a price reduction on a subsequent printing? I know Marvel Comics did in 1971 or so, but you also got less pages! I think either Moriaty or 50 Cent explained the rationale in the original revelation that white box Big A*ss was the second....but I forget what it was.......too much LDS is the Seventies, perhaps.....

Normally I might agree with you, but the listing in Kennedy for Big A*ss #1 has always bugged me because the mistake in the pages at the rear was so obvious and so ignored that it made me dubious about the whole way the book is described in his guide. I did have 1 or 2 later printings of BA where the mistake had been fixed so it was doubly obvious that something funny was going on. Now that we have information from a source who was actually there at the moment of conception, if you will, I'm happy to discount Kennedy when it comes to that book. It's possible he was keeping the point a secret for personal reasons, or never really noticed it, but if either of those reasons is correct, then it calls into question the whole purpose of creating a guide like his, doesn't it? What other entries in Kennedy need to be considered suspicious or ignorant of the facts? You got me, as I don't collect everything...just the books by artists and writers that interest me, so I defer to someone as obsessive as 50, and so far he's got my confidence!!! Hell, he should do a guide...probably the true successor to JK, if you ask me!

I'm willing to bet they won't! Thanks for the detailed explanation. I bought my copy around 1972-73 but I've never really thought about it being a first, especially after I read all the confusion about identifying it as such. I know one of my #1's is for sure, and I have pink paper editions of either or both (it's been awhile since I've dug them out), but now I might have to give my #2 a serious examination and figure out what exactly it might be. Must have been somebody else, though, who matched on your belief. it's always been a source of confusion for me thus causing me to make no claim one way or another. I just know when and where I bought it (kind of.....).

I'm over there fairly regularly and while I've never taken photos on my own, they seem like reasonable people and my guess is they won't have a problem with you taking pictures of the various aisles, shelves, departments, etc. but I would ask first if you are going to take photos of Kristine, Jon, Ron, etc. or Ron's cool man-cave with all his carny accoutrements, pinball machines and other fascinating fu!

I'm curious, since the power of fine image reproduction is here and now, which of your 50 cent (no pun intended) editions would you say, or show, is the likeliest first printing? Now that you've had so many specimens to compare, and I know of no other with such an extensive inventory, it would be logical to defer to your expertise! What's your opinion, Doctor?

I'd love to hear your other story on the main article but since it's the Big A*ss issue that seems to have folks in a tizzy, it's kind of funny that when the white box cover variant makes it's way onto Ebay and other places, it's still touted as the true first. Definitely a case where people want belief to trump first hand information in a way that would seem to call into question many other claims about UG one sees for sale in all the pertinent arenas, eh? Collectors love to live in denial when it suits them, it would appear! Maybe Mr. Moriaty will do them all a favor and just die so the delusion can become the state of things.....too much fun!!! And for you 50..... ad infinitum!!!!

wink, wink, nudge, nudge My two major contributions to that guide. It's why you're one of my heroes!!!!

I found a fascinating piece of UG memorabilia today while rooting around a few used books stores. I have an uncut partial sheet of the Greg Irons button for Berkeley Con 1973 as seen here: So I've been familiar with it for over 25 years or so. However, until today I had never seen, nor come across, the button for the 2nd Berkeley Con held in 1974. I had seen the t-shirt with the design in full color for sale on Ebay a few times, but this button, featuring a jam between Dave Sheridan, Rick Griffin and Robert Williams, was totally unknown to me until I found it in a box that also contained a Fillmore East badge that was worn by staff who worked there, a Jefferson Airplane button that was a promo from their Grunt Records era and a button featuring Elvin Bishop advertising a concert at Winterland in the 70's. I bought them all, but this is the gem of the bunch, in my eyes: Is that button common and I've somehow been ignorant of it all these years or is it the scarce item I believe it to be having never even been aware of it until today?

And I didn't know of the existence of these books before I read your post! There is one book missing from that collection. The Ridiculously Expensive Mad Yep, and it's very tough to find with the slipcover and all the interior goodies intact (it was loaded with stickers, bumper stickers and other stuff similar to what was found in the Trash/Worst/Follies issues). I consider it a somewhat thematically separate collectible from the three books posted because it was printed during a different era of Mad. The three books above are from the late 1950s and the reprint stuff from the earliest magazine issues. The Ridiculously Expensive Mad is from 1969, a decade later. Still a highly desirable Mad collectible of course! I'd argue that it's more desirable that the first 3, actually. It's certainly more well known. Really the key difference is the publisher, World vs. Crown. REM reprints a few comics from the Kurtzman era as well as magazine material from the early 60's to it's then present. If anything it continues from where Golden Trashery left off with the added addition of multiple bonuses/inserts and cover reproductions, fold-in's and ad parodies. I would never, at this point, part with any of my complete copies (6 of the 10), sorry to say. I did that once and it pained me. As far as the Humbug book you mention goes, it's not really in the same category as it was basically Kurtzman, et.al. taking leftover copies of the comic book and having them bound in hardcover to sell through the office to make some money to keep the enterprise going. They more than likely contacted a local bindery and had a batch made up, but there was no editorial process involved. Just bound the run and had a die stamp made for the spine, etc. It's an interesting item, to be sure, but it's a totally different thing than the Mad compilations...like having a batch of file copies bound to sell as well as keep in the office for reference. I've seen bound file copies of all sorts of old comics come up for sale, Kurtzman just figured it was probably an alternative way of recycling old stock to keep some cash flowing on a sinking ship. There was a Humbug Digest put out in pb, that had been compiled by an editor, though.

And I didn't know of the existence of these books before I read your post! There is one book missing from that collection. The Ridiculously Expensive Mad I've got 10 copies of it but only 1 each of the books pictured. Golden Trashery was the toughest one for me to track down in a condition I could embrace. Mad for Keeps went through at least 6 printings and is the easiest to find. Mad Forever falls somewhere in between. All 4 are books that were way ahead of their time in the sense that very few compilations of comic book material of any kind existed!

You can already buy the regular edition from the publisher. I have a copy sitting in front of me and it's a terrific book!

containing: