Is this art really Wally Wood Inside Crime? 0

[SOTIcollector]

This caught my eye on eBay.  A well-known seller is offering individual pages from this 1950's story, which is advertised as being Wally Wood art from Inside Crime #2, a Fox book.  That jumped out at me because Inside Crime #2 was used in SOTI, and I collect all things SOTI.  Alas, this story is not from Fox's Inside Crime #2, and the story was not referenced in SOTI.  

From what I've been able to tell, this story is actually from the unumbered issue of Inside Crime put out by "M.S. Dist", that sketchy company that reprinted lots of Fox books in the mid-50's.  The front cover of the M.S. Dist Inside Crime is a reprint of the Wally Wood cover to Fox's Inside Crime #2, but the interior of the MS book, including this story, appears to be previously unpublished.  

To be clear, I have no reason to believe that the seller was trying to be misleading in their listing.  I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they simply listed the art as being from Inside Crime #2 because that's what's printed on the art. 

But in any event, the art is unsigned, GCD doesn't attribute this art to Wood, and there's at least one other error in the listing.  Which got me wondering if the art is really Wood's.  I know his EC work quite well, but I don't have the eye or the experience to identify the work he did for other publishers.  So I'm wondering if there's anybody here who could offer an opinion as to whether this is truly Woody art.  I'd greatly appreciate any help you could offer.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by SOTIcollector

[The Lions Den]

Based on what I'm seeing, this doesn't look like Wood art. But maybe someone else here has more insight than I do...  

[artdealer]

Not even close to being Wood.

it makes me sad when people don’t do their due diligence when listing art. And these guys sell comics. A little research would have shown Wood never touched these pages. 
it also made me sad that some poor buyer is going to buy these thinking it’s Wood. 

[Unca Ben]

Yep, not Wood.

[SOTIcollector]

19 minutes ago, artdealer said:

Not even close to being Wood.

it makes me sad when people don’t do their due diligence when listing art. And these guys sell comics. A little research would have shown Wood never touched these pages. 
it also made me sad that some poor buyer is going to buy these thinking it’s Wood. 

Kind of what I figured.  Some of those figures look like they were drawn by somebody whose grasp of anatomy was not quite as good as Wood's.  

I went back to one of the auctions, so I could contact the seller, and I noticed something that was added to the auctions since I first saw them.

"Wally Wood is the only artist associated with this book that we can find, he may or may not be the artist for this page." 

So the seller is apparently already aware that the art may be mis-attributed to Wood.

The title of one of the auctions reads "Inside Crime #2 pg 1 (2) Original Comic Art Interior Page Wally Wood SOTI Used"  

I've contacted the seller, saying that perhaps they should cancel and re-list the auctions given that there are three significant things in the titles that are incorrect.

1) It's not from Inside Crime #2.

2) It's not by Wally Wood.

3) It's not used in SOTI.

I guess the auction title is correct in stating that it's an interior page.  But that's about all that's correct in the auction title.  

We'll see how they respond to my suggestion of cancelling the auction.  There's one page I'd like, and I could probably win it in a fair auction.  There's not a huge demand these days for mediocre art from 50's crime books, at least not compared to the demand for Wood art.  If I'm bidding against any number of people who erroneously believe this is Wood art or a SOTI book, then I'll surely be outbid.

 

[ESeffinga]

With all of the knocks against it being the case, I just wanted to add the art on these pages is cool, all by itself.

Of course one wouldn’t want to pay the premiums for all those namedropping reasons above. But simply as a form of this period of art, I think the drawing is super rad in that kitschy sort of way. And the spotted blacks are great. 

Edited November 17, 2019 by ESeffinga

[The Voord]

Not Wood.  Not even remotely close.

[vodou]

2 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

With all of the knocks against it being the case, I just wanted to add the art on these pages is cool, all by itself.

Of course one wouldn’t want to pay the premiums for all those namedropping reasons above. But simply as a form of this period of art, I think the drawing is super rad in that kitschy sort of way. And the spotted blacks are great. 

Likewise on all points...I'm a bidder to win but only with all the hype/bs puffery removed.

[PopKulture]

I don't see any hint of Wood either.  

[cpannell]

I agree it's not Wally Wood.

This stuff is rather similar to artwork from either Sheldon Moldoff or Bob Kane (or both) done for the early "new look" Batman stories (circa. 1964-65). But whoever has inked these pages is not likely the one who inked those Batmans.