• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

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

19 posts in this topic

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites