Where are the classic silver age covers

[Ferran Delgado]

The OA of AF #15 was published in Amazing Spider-Man Masterworks TPB #1 with notes by Blake Bell. Printing was quite bad, nothing similar to the Artist's Editions. I wish I had the chance to see it in person, it must be impressive.

 

Let's cross fingers so IDW release some day a Ditko SPM Artist's Edition and the AF #15 gets included.

[chromium]

 

I absolutely have to make the "request" and pilgrimage to the National Museum and see those pages to AF 15, if anything just to marvel at their pristine condition. Wow. Better than Cooperstown in my opinion.

 

Mark (well over 50 years into this hobby, and loving it more every day!)

 

If I lived in the US it would be top of my " to do " list.

 

I live on another continent and went to see it

 

 

I asked the curator if it was Marie Severin as I also though it was here because of her ties to Ditko and the fact there are only a few comic pages in the Library and a few of them were drawn by Marie...I figured Marie donated them together with the Ditko pages... But the lady told me she couldn't deny or confirm if it was Marie and to the best of her knowledge Marie had never donated any art to the museum...

But my fellow collectors with me thought she was blowing smoke up our arses.

 

She had also heard the story of Gil Kane and the stacks of disappearing art from the Marvel offices

[clemso]

I know that back in the day, some art was held and trashed by the studios and some was returned to the creators.

But I have never really seen any top covers for sale.

AF #15, AMS #1, FF#1 etc. are they locked in collections or are they out there.

The Library of Congress has the AF15 OA It can be seen through appointment.

 

Thank you for your interest in the collections of the Library of Congress. Yes, we permit individuals and groups to see Steve Ditko's original art for Amazing Fantasy #15. Please let me know if you are only interested in the Spider-man story.

 

The Prints & Photographs Division is closed on Saturdays and Sundays. I work from 6:30-3:00 and offer appointment times that start between 8:30 and 1:30 (to allow researchers a proper amount of time to view art). I tend to take my holidays in August, and intend to be away from the Library of Congress from Friday August 13, through Friday, August 20, 2010. In addition, I may not work every day the week of August 23 through August 27, but can make myself available.

 

The Prints and Photographs Division is located in room 339 of the Madison Building of the Library of Congress, 101 Independence Ave., SE, between 1st and 2nd streets. The nearest Metro station is Capitol South. We are a quick walk across Capitol Hill from Union Station.

 

You may bring a hand-held camera that can be operated without flash using available light for reference purposes. The drawings are housed under mylar and will not be removed during your appointment.

 

If you do not already possess a Library of Congress researcher card (available with one form of picture ID that contains your current address, you will need to stop in room 140 and get one before you arrive in the Prints & Photographs Division): < http://www.loc.gov/rr/security/readerreg.html >. Everyone in the group will need one.

 

I cannot show the comic book to anyone younger than 16. There is no exception to this rule (even my own son is counting the days until he is old enough to see it). There is a Young Reader's Center in the Library, and I suggest it as an alternative arrangement for children.

 

I look forward to meeting you. Please let me know when in August you intend to visit, and how many people will be in the group.

 

Sincerely,

 

Sara W. Duke

Curator, Popular and Applied Graphic Art

Prints and Photographs Division

Library of Congress, Washington, DC 20540-4730

 

 

 

 

Hi Sara

 

I would love to see AF 15 original art in my life time, but unfortunately I live in the UK. Any chance you could ship it over? I promise I'll send it right back. Only kidding! But seriously, would the art ever be part of a global touring exhibition?

[glenbru]

Let's address the issue of ownership...

 

The art is NOT stolen. At least not from a legal prospective. At the time that the art went missing it was the property of Marvel--not the artists. In some cases art was gifted back to artists and returned, but it was always a gift not a return of their property. Marvel never filed a police report that any art was missing or stolen so they have given up their rights to the stolen property. The statute of limitation has certainly run out long ago for Marvel to recover that art.

 

I don't think legal ownership is the issue if there are indeed covers In hiding as has been suggested. I'd think it's more of a public relations problem for any ex staffer sitting on the art.

 

I really think if this stuff all exists that the recent high prices realized would have driven more of these things into the open. Why not sell pre 1965 covers that are not key issues? Those are for the most part the covers missing. There are plenty that could be sold for lesser amounts that wouldn't raise eyebrows. What about all those nice Rawhide Kid covers that Kirby did or the Strange Tales covers? Those could be sold and no one would concern themselves with where they came from. Why aren't they being sold? Why haven't they popped up into the open. My theory, they no longer exist.

 

Glen

[Messier3499]

 

 

Keep in mind there are still a lot of private collections out there that are relatively loaded with pre 77 art.

 

The folks I know with collections like this have no interest in sharing on CAF or elsewhere -- NOT because of any perceived legal issues, but simply because they do not want to be pestered about items for sale/not for sale/trade etc.

 

I agree with Glen that many of these older covers are gone, BUT I also think that there are a heck of a lot more out there hidden away than people believe.

 

Now that this is settled, will you guys out there with the secret stash please contact me off list with any older Avengers covers you want to 'liquify'

 

 

Len

[Kevin.J]

I would settle for someone to post a couple of great covers, just so I could drool over them.

[Ferran Delgado]

Let's address the issue of ownership...

 

The art is NOT stolen. At least not from a legal prospective. At the time that the art went missing it was the property of Marvel--not the artists. In some cases art was gifted back to artists and returned, but it was always a gift not a return of their property. Marvel never filed a police report that any art was missing or stolen so they have given up their rights to the stolen property. The statute of limitation has certainly run out long ago for Marvel to recover that art.

 

I don't think legal ownership is the issue if there are indeed covers In hiding as has been suggested. I'd think it's more of a public relations problem for any ex staffer sitting on the art.

 

Glen,

It was not my intention to reopen the discussion about the stolen art which has been discussed here and in Comicart-L ad nauseam.

 

But don't you think that it's slightly incoherent that you state that it was not stolen from a legal prospective and at the same time to state that it could be a public relation problem for whoever has it now if he belonged to Marvel's staff? If it was not stolen, why this would harm the reputation of whoever took away the art from the Marvel warehouse or offices? It was legal since Marvel didn't move a finger to prosecute it...

 

Why then all the hassle for the art dealers to hide the art inside their booths in Cons when Kirby approached? According to you it was still property of Marvel, and they didn't filed a police report in spite that Kirby's rep at that age demanded for it to Jim Shooter. So they had not the need to hide it.

 

There's a theory that Marvel was interested to let it go in order to remove proofs that could be used by the artists to claim property on characters. Hence that Kirby got NO X-Men art when it was officially returned. ZERO pages from the first 12 complete issues listed in Vartanoff's inventory in 1986. But hey, he can't complain, it was Marvel's property!

http://ohdannyboy.blogspot.com.es/2011/04/marvel-worldwide-inc-et-al-v-kirby-et_04.html

 

I really think if this stuff all exists that the recent high prices realized would have driven more of these things into the open. Why not sell pre 1965 covers that are not key issues? Those are for the most part the covers missing. There are plenty that could be sold for lesser amounts that wouldn't raise eyebrows. What about all those nice Rawhide Kid covers that Kirby did or the Strange Tales covers? Those could be sold and no one would concern themselves with where they came from. Why aren't they being sold? Why haven't they popped up into the open. My theory, they no longer exist.

 

Well, as Len pointed out, many people got many of those covers bought in the 70s when they costed $50-100, as seen in old ads of Comics Buyer's Guide. Since then, their value skyrocketed to several thousands, as you know perfectly. Why to sell it now when the market still has not reached the top and prices still grow? (although maybe artificially...). Unless I was desperate, I wouldn't sell it...

[Guest Grails]

I would settle for someone to post a couple of great covers, just so I could drool over them.

 

From CAF. Unfortunately not my CAF.

 

 

 

 

[Kevin.J]

I would settle for someone to post a couple of great covers, just so I could drool over them.

 

From CAF. Unfortunately not my CAF.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now that's what I'm talking about.

[artdealer]

I found the Iron Man #1 cover up at Marvel probably 17-18 years ago. It was in a large envelope under the leg of a desk in the art returns office.

I made sure Colan received the art back. A friend and I went to see Gene and my friend bought the #1 cover, which, a few years later, I sold for him.

 

MI

[glenbru]

Let's address the issue of ownership...

 

The art is NOT stolen. At least not from a legal prospective. At the time that the art went missing it was the property of Marvel--not the artists. In some cases art was gifted back to artists and returned, but it was always a gift not a return of their property. Marvel never filed a police report that any art was missing or stolen so they have given up their rights to the stolen property. The statute of limitation has certainly run out long ago for Marvel to recover that art.

 

I don't think legal ownership is the issue if there are indeed covers In hiding as has been suggested. I'd think it's more of a public relations problem for any ex staffer sitting on the art.

 

Glen,

It was not my intention to reopen the discussion about the stolen art which has been discussed here and in Comicart-L ad nauseam.

 

But don't you think that it's slightly incoherent that you state that it was not stolen from a legal prospective and at the same time to state that it could be a public relation problem for whoever has it now if he belonged to Marvel's staff? If it was not stolen, why this would harm the reputation of whoever took away the art from the Marvel warehouse or offices? It was legal since Marvel didn't move a finger to prosecute it...

 

AT THE TIME IT WAS CLEARLY STEALING. IT'S NO LONGER A PROBLEM LEGALLY BECAUSE MARVEL LET THEIR RIGHTS LAPSE BY NEVER PERSUEING IT LEGALLY. EX MARVEL STAFFERS MAY STILL ENJOY WORKING WITH OR FOR MARVEL FROM TIME TO TIME. I THINK MARVEL MIGHT FROWN UPON HIRING THEM IF IT CAME TO LIGHT THEY STOLE IN THE PAST. HENCE THE PR PROBLEM.

 

Why then all the hassle for the art dealers to hide the art inside their booths in Cons when Kirby approached? According to you it was still property of Marvel, and they didn't filed a police report in spite that Kirby's rep at that age demanded for it to Jim Shooter. So they had not the need to hide it.

 

I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS. MAYBE AT THE TIME THE LEGALITIES WERE STILL IN QUESTION? I DONT SEE ANY DEALERS HIDING KIRBY ART NOW. THE KIRBY'S MAY STILL HAVE A CASE AGAINST MARVEL FOR NOT CARING FOR HIS ART THAT WAS IN DISPUTE BY THEM. PERSONALLY I THINK KIRBY WAS SCREWED BY THEM, BUT REGARDING THE ART THERE'S NOT A LOT THE ESTATE CAN DO TO RECOVER IT LEGALLY ANYMORE?

 

There's a theory that Marvel was interested to let it go in order to remove proofs that could be used by the artists to claim property on characters. Hence that Kirby got NO X-Men art when it was officially returned. ZERO pages from the first 12 complete issues listed in Vartanoff's inventory in 1986. But hey, he can't complain, it was Marvel's property!

http://ohdannyboy.blogspot.com.es/2011/04/marvel-worldwide-inc-et-al-v-kirby-et_04.html

 

I really think if this stuff all exists that the recent high prices realized would have driven more of these things into the open. Why not sell pre 1965 covers that are not key issues? Those are for the most part the covers missing. There are plenty that could be sold for lesser amounts that wouldn't raise eyebrows. What about all those nice Rawhide Kid covers that Kirby did or the Strange Tales covers? Those could be sold and no one would concern themselves with where they came from. Why aren't they being sold? Why haven't they popped up into the open. My theory, they no longer exist.

 

Well, as Len pointed out, many people got many of those covers bought in the 70s when they costed $50-100, as seen in old ads of Comics Buyer's Guide. Since then, their value skyrocketed to several thousands, as you know perfectly. Why to sell it now when the market still has not reached the top and prices still grow? (although maybe artificially...). Unless I was desperate, I wouldn't sell it...

 

IF YOU BOUGHT A KIRBY RAWHIDE KID FOR 50 BUCKS IN 1970 AND COULD SELL IT NOW FOR 30k I THINK SOME ORIGINAL OWNERS WOULD DO SO. NOT ONE HAS EVER TURNED UP FOR SALE. A LOT OF THINGS REALLY WERE DESTROYED. THEY'RE NOT FORGOTTEN IN SOMEONE'S BROOM CLOSET.

 

GLEN

[glenbru]

Another thought on the whole Marvel staffer PR thing is that Marvel most likely pays some of them pensions that could be rescinded for cause if it came to light that they stole art from the company.

[PrechterFool-migration]

What book is that to the right of the subby in this pic?

 

http://photos.mlive.com/kalamazoogazette/2012/03/_mg_0264jpg.html

[delekkerste]

What book is that to the right of the subby in this pic?

 

http://photos.mlive.com/kalamazoogazette/2012/03/_mg_0264jpg.html

 

ASM #109

[PrechterFool-migration]

What book is that to the right of the subby in this pic?

 

http://photos.mlive.com/kalamazoogazette/2012/03/_mg_0264jpg.html

 

ASM #109

 

Thats what i was thinking. thx

[clemso]

My favorite, but never verified urban myth was that pages were given as gifts to visitors to the Marvel offices during the early 60's. However, not one single documented case of that ever happening. Would love to hear a testimonial and see the page given to any individual.

 

The whole Spider-Man #93 (including cover) was discovered recently in the vaults of the Western Michigan University, donated by Stan Lee himself.

http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2012/03/original_john_romita_sr_spider.html

 

Irene Vartanoff, who had the task to make an inventory of the Marvel storage of Original art, commented in an interview to The Comics Journal that he had to fight to prevent some Marvel staffers to give them as a gift as it was a common practice till then.

 

About Shooter, I read somewhere (probably in his blog) that both covers of the Spectacular Spider-Man magazine by Romita were found in his personal vault by an assistant, but I can't find the source right now. Later they were auctioned in Heritage. Maybe they were a gift by Romita himself... or not.

http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=751&lotNo=3797

http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=803&lotNo=5886

 

Urban Myth? I don't think so...

 

Thanks for the link. i had never heard about this ASM 93 story. Its interesting to note that the story and cover were sent out together. I think I read somewhere that cover and story were stored separately at Marvel. I wonder what what John Romita thought of Stan gifting his work away.

[Ferran Delgado]

IF YOU BOUGHT A KIRBY RAWHIDE KID FOR 50 BUCKS IN 1970 AND COULD SELL IT NOW FOR 30k I THINK SOME ORIGINAL OWNERS WOULD DO SO. NOT ONE HAS EVER TURNED UP FOR SALE. A LOT OF THINGS REALLY WERE DESTROYED. THEY'RE NOT FORGOTTEN IN SOMEONE'S BROOM CLOSET.

 

Let me focus on X-Men by Byrne. Maybe this could prove my point.

 

-There are 639 interior pages in the run (yes, I counted them with the help of the unofficial X-Men Index!)

 

-I think that Austin keeps his share, and maybe sometimes he lets go a piece. But since I don't know for sure, I won't include it. This means 426 pages in the market excluding covers.

 

-Pages in CAF (more or less, I tried not to count pieces that traded hands): 68.

-Pages offered by dealers (excluding Donnelly's pages which were already included in CAF pages): 7

 

-Total pages that surfaced: 75.

 

This means that 82% of the pages are still not shown publicly. Let's say 75% more or less, if we add a few pages that showed in Heritage/ComicLink/ComicConnect and weren't posted in CAF.

 

In few words, 75% of the art sold by Byrne has not surfaced yet.

 

In the last year, in spite that we're suffering the worst crisis since 1929, only 11 pages were posted in CAF, although mostly of them were already public. Hardly 3-4 of fresh pages.

 

As you perfectly know, it's stuff originally sold for few hundreds which easily could reach the 10k mark right now, as shown in Heritage.

 

Why people don't sell? My bet is that with prices increasing this way, it's perceived as an x-traordinary investment, and people keep it unless it's absolutely necessary.

 

Maybe this is the same reason those silver age covers don't show. I wouldn't lose faith that they'd show someday before you assume that they don't exist.

[Ferran Delgado]

Another thought on the whole Marvel staffer PR thing is that Marvel most likely pays some of them pensions that could be rescinded for cause if it came to light that they stole art from the company.

 

Or maybe Marvel would increase the amount of the pensions as a reward for good services provided to the company.

[dem1138]

One of the best questions raised here is where is all of the phenomenal art that was in the back of the CBG and sold by Sotheby's and Christies? We know for a fact all of that art is out there. Fact is that despite all of the publicity we see and this echo chamber aka the boards, a lot of this art is stored away or literally in the closet of a collector who bought something 20 years ago and doesnt really know its value.

 

2 Ditko ASM pages walked into a con last year and the guy had no idea what the were worth. A few years ago a friend of a friend sold me a Kirby page and an Avengers splash that he still had in the envelope sent to him by Tony DiSpoto decades earlier. It was the only OA he ever bought.

 

There is still a lot of OA out there to come. However I don't think much of that will be the Marvel covers we would love to see surface unfortunately.

[Ferran Delgado]

where is all of the phenomenal art that was in the back of the CBG and sold by Sotheby's and Christies?

 

Maybe those high profile pieces don't surface in CAF because...

 

Option A: Big fortunes don't want to mess with plain mortals.

 

Option B: Drug dealers that use high valued collectibles to whitewash their dirty money don't wish to be bothered.

 

Option C: They are stored in a vault of a Japanese Bank along fine paintings.

 

Just joking...