Amazing Spider-Man #1....Peter Palmer and not Peter Parker?
0

19 posts in this topic

1,782 posts

I am reading Marvel masterworks The Amazing Spider-Man volume #1 right now.

 

Did anyone else ever notice this in the The Amazing Spider-Man #1 under the story titled ''Spider-Man vs. The Chameleon''?

 

During the whole story they call Peter Parker.....Peter Palmer. After that story his name is corrected (and before that story his name was correct as well).

Edited by Hulk1962

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,782 posts

Same as the reprint in my book (the 1st one I mean) I am not far enough into the book to say for the 2nd image.

Edited by Hulk1962

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,213 posts

AF15 Spiderman was a filler for a dying coming. When it came around to writing Spiderman the series, Stan Lee forgot the name he used during AF15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,230 posts

This thread comes up from time to time. Here is a link to the last discussion.

 

Peter Palmer Rocks

 

Here is my post in that thread and the previous on the topic.

 

There is a theory that goes like this:

 

Suppose that the two stories in Amazing Spider-Man #1 were written several months apart. If you look at the art differences, it is possible that a slightly different style was used, especially the inking, between the lead story and the second one. Let's say for sake of argument, that the lead story in ASM #1 had been meant for Amazing Fantasy #16 (remember Stan did promise more Spider-Man stories in that AF#15 letter). AF #16 would have been cover dated Sept. 1962 while ASM #1 didn't make it out until March, 1963.

 

As the theory goes, in the lead story Stan got Peter Parker's name right because AF#15 was just a month old when he wrote it, but after a several month layoff, he had forgotten Peter Parker's name and called him "Peter Palmer." Note that this wasn't just a one-time error, as a few panels later on the same page posted above, he used Peter Palmer again.

 

It's a compelling theory and adds a little more glamor (IMHO, of course) to the Peter Palmer issue.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
503 posts
AF15 Spiderman was a filler for a dying coming. When it came around to writing Spiderman the series, Stan Lee forgot the name he used during AF15.

 

What?.... I always thought it was Peter Palmer... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,493 posts

There is a boarding called Peter Palmer on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15,744 posts

You are on to a new modern comics storyline here! Peter Palmer could have been from alternate earth #76, and he was banished to the past to try and alter the events surrounding uncle Ben because uncle Ben was actually the one who really possessed the knowledge of the radio active spider serum and was Ohh just forget it......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,551 posts
AF15 Spiderman was a filler for a dying coming. When it came around to writing Spiderman the series, Stan Lee forgot the name he used during AF15.

 

I am going to quote myself from an earlier thread as I can't see any words I'd want to change.

 

"I believe that most now accept that the two 14 page stories in ASM 1 and 2 were commissioned for AF 16 and 17, belying the story that Spider-Man was a throw-away or test inclusion in an already cancelled magazine.

 

Will Murray has researched the order of job numbers in early Marvels. For example, in 1997, he "speculated that the contents of Amazing Fantasy #16 were to have been the Spider-Man story ("Freak! Public Menace!"), "Prophet of Doom" and "My Fatal Mistake", which was published in Tales to Astonish # 43. "My Fatal Mistake" doesn't carry a job number, but is signed by Lee and Ditko rather than having the credit box which was standard in most Marvel comics in 1963, and is lettered by Art Simek in the style used in Amazing Adult Fantasy but not the other titles."(marvelmasterworksfansite/1962-1963 Job Numbers/Shinning Knight)

 

Goodman was noted for cancelling a magazine on a dime (pun included). He cancelled AF, before sales figures came in, to revive Two-Gun Kid with issue #60. He cancelled Linda Carter Student Nurse with issue #9 to immediately reinstate Spider-Man when he found out how well AF #15 had sold."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,072 posts

Same thing happened in an early Hulk, "Bob" Banner, not Bruce Banner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,486 posts
Same thing happened in an early Hulk, "Bob" Banner, not Bruce Banner.

 

That happened in Fantastic Four #25 and #26, "The Hulk vs The Thing" and "The Avengers Take Over".

I don't recall if it was one or both issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,296 posts

Here's a very early Oz reprint of ASM #1 circa 1963. The error wasn't caught here either:

 

100_0686508x381.jpg

 

 

100_0687508x381.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,846 posts

In my Thor Omnibus at the end of the story JIM 83 they refer to Thor as

 

THORR

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,551 posts
you mention how well AF 15 sold-- has anyone figured out the total production numbers for the major keys like this one and FF1 Hulk 1 etc ? And how many were sold on the stands? I am supposing the rest were remaindered (not sure of this process exactly). The reason I pose this question to understand what the overall possible population of these comics have ever existed to begin with.

 

Let's play historian and detective ---

 

Not all Marvel books published a Statement of Ownership but in 1960 the best selling Atlas/Marvel comic that did so was Tales to Astonish with a paid circulation of 163,156 copies. This circulation data and that which follows is from comichron.ca.

 

It ranked 43rd in a list of comics topped by Uncle Scrooge (1,040,543 copies).

 

In 1961, Tales to Astonish was again the #1 Atlas/Marvel listed at 184,895 copies. Right below it at 41st position was Tales of Suspense at 184,635 -- a virtual tie. Rawhide Kid also made the top 50 with 150,162 copies.

 

In 1962, numbers 44 through 48 were Modeling with Millie (143,476); Patsy & Hedy (139,167); Tales to Astonish (139,167); Strange Tales (136,637); and Journey into Mystery (132,113). To be in the top 50, one needed to sell 112,441 copies to match Charlton's Teen Confessions.

 

Even given that there could be better selling books that did not include a Statement of Ownership, it seems clear that Amazing Adult Fantasy was not doing as well as the lowest selling Marvel listed -- Gunsmoke Western at 126,475 copies.

 

Gunsmoke Western was canceled in May of 1963. Amazing Fantasy #15 was canceled in June 1962.

 

One can assume that Amazing Adult Fantasy was underselling Gunsmoke Western by a fair bit as the western outlasted the title by nearly a year.

 

As Marvel printed about double the number of copies that were actually sold we could roughly say that Amazing Adult Fantasy was printing about 200,000 copies and perhaps only selling 100,000.

 

Amazing Fantasy #15 was a good seller compared to the title in general -- so could it have sold 120,000 copies?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19,148 posts
In my Thor Omnibus at the end of the story JIM 83 they refer to Thor as

 

THORR

 

 

No doubt the letterer forgot he wasn't doing another double consonant monster story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19,148 posts
Same thing happened in an early Hulk, "Bob" Banner, not Bruce Banner.

 

Then there's that episode of The Price Is Right where the announcer referred to Bob Barker as Bruce Parker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,249 posts
Here's a very early Oz reprint of ASM #1 circa 1963. The error wasn't caught here either:

 

100_0686508x381.jpg

 

 

100_0687508x381.jpg

 

 

That's a cool book!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,551 posts
that is considerably more than I had thought it would be -- for some reason I was thinking they sold somewhere in the 40-50K issue range.

 

Well, if 1% still exist, that's only 1200 copies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0