• 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.

Seduction of the Innocent: New stuff discovered
0

50 posts in this topic

6 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

You make a really good point!  CGC should note when EC Annuals are SOTI books.  I guess Overstreet cannot because the contents change.

I gotta say, though, you need a new GA collecting focus to occupy your time.  Meeting a collecting goal is great and horrible at the same time.  You do it, and you have to find a new goal.  Given how much intellectual energy you put into your collecting, I'd suggest you go after comics that are off the beaten path, yet culturally significant like some of the red scare giveaways or other themes of that nature.

As of 2019, CGC will list the contents of an EC annual on the label (page 7 of this thread).

Based on the contents, it's easy to tell what's in the book:  stories, art, character appearances, whether it's SOTI, and lots of other stuff.  I don't get why CGC wouldn't make it standard procedure to list the complete contents, whenever possible, on all books that are made up of remainders.  Fox Giants, EC Annuals, etc. 

And as for needing another collecting focus?  I don't see that happening..  Although I hit an easily quantifiable milestone, there are still lots of things for me to collect:  articles and books related to the anti-comics era, the NY State Legislature reports, the dangerous comics used in POP and Love & Death and the Senate report and Wertham's articles, and the list goes on.  Plus I still collect books that strike my fancy because of their offensiveness:  racism, violence, sex, red scare, and so on.  All the while, I'm looking to slowly add decent slabbed books to my mostly-raw SOTI collection.  So while I did hit a big milestone, the net I'm casting is still far larger than my time or budget will allow so I won't be trying to expand my collecting focus any time soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another fun SOTI-related item I just added to the collection.  Poison Peddling on America's Boulevards. It's a religious tract from the 1950's that rails against immoral comic books.

I prefer mainstream anti-comics publications to religious tracts, but this one was cheap so I couldn't resist.  This 32-page booklet attacks publications that it deems to be immoral, and pretty much conflates comic books with more adult-targeted material of the day like detective magazines.  It lumps them into one big nasty sleazy immoral they'll-rot-your-brain-and-send-you-to-hell bucket. 

I found it interesting that the author chose to obscure the titles of the real comic books displayed on the cover, replacing the titles with nonsense characters. So of course, I was dying to know what the books were.  I found one pretty easily because I recognized a character, and then I read the tract and found out what the rest of the books are because the author named the titles.

Since we have such awesome sleuths on the boards, here's a fun challenge:  how many of these books can you identify?  I'll drop hints as necessary.

92A1AD87-FD35-4B8B-A91D-64632AC9F2C6.thumb.jpeg.4df1936d1d063ca2d38231c133d0632e.jpeg
166AFDEE-60AC-4D64-B209-C6D08FCE32CA.thumb.jpeg.7358d1bfae7a075d43a3f4930c3351db.jpeg

 

Edited by SOTIcollector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SOTIcollector said:

Here's another fun SOTI-related item I just added to the collection.  Poison Peddling on America's Boulevards. It's a religious tract from the 1950's that rails against immoral comic books.

I prefer mainstream anti-comics publications to religious tracts, but this one was cheap so I couldn't resist.  This 32-page booklet attacks publications that it deems to be immoral, and pretty much conflates comic books with more adult-targeted material of the day like detective magazines.  It lumps them into one big nasty sleazy immoral they'll-rot-your-brain-and-send-you-to-hell bucket. 

I found it interesting that the author chose to obscure the titles of the real comic books displayed on the cover, replacing the titles with nonsense characters. So of course, I was dying to know what the books were.  I found one pretty easily because I recognized a character, and then I read the tract and found out what the rest of the books are because the author named the titles.

Since we have such awesome sleuths on the boards, here's a fun challenge:  how many of these books can you identify?  I'll drop hints as necessary.

92A1AD87-FD35-4B8B-A91D-64632AC9F2C6.thumb.jpeg.4df1936d1d063ca2d38231c133d0632e.jpeg
166AFDEE-60AC-4D64-B209-C6D08FCE32CA.thumb.jpeg.7358d1bfae7a075d43a3f4930c3351db.jpeg

 

That’s an awesome find!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, SOTIcollector said:

Here's another fun SOTI-related item I just added to the collection.  Poison Peddling on America's Boulevards. It's a religious tract from the 1950's that rails against immoral comic books.

I prefer mainstream anti-comics publications to religious tracts, but this one was cheap so I couldn't resist.  This 32-page booklet attacks publications that it deems to be immoral, and pretty much conflates comic books with more adult-targeted material of the day like detective magazines.  It lumps them into one big nasty sleazy immoral they'll-rot-your-brain-and-send-you-to-hell bucket. 

I found it interesting that the author chose to obscure the titles of the real comic books displayed on the cover, replacing the titles with nonsense characters. So of course, I was dying to know what the books were.  I found one pretty easily because I recognized a character, and then I read the tract and found out what the rest of the books are because the author named the titles.

Since we have such awesome sleuths on the boards, here's a fun challenge:  how many of these books can you identify?  I'll drop hints as necessary.

92A1AD87-FD35-4B8B-A91D-64632AC9F2C6.thumb.jpeg.4df1936d1d063ca2d38231c133d0632e.jpeg
166AFDEE-60AC-4D64-B209-C6D08FCE32CA.thumb.jpeg.7358d1bfae7a075d43a3f4930c3351db.jpeg

 

The one on the left is this one.

comspirit4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can imagine a bank ordering lots of those Magic Dollar comics only to run into the buzzsaw of negative publicity  SOTI generated. Being bankers and being naturally frugal, they stuck the undistributed copies deep in some vault where they may well sit today. 

 

I'd think a real challenge would be assembling the complete set of bank name variations. There couldn't be more than a couple thousand banks involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Robot Man said:

The one in the middle is this one I think. 

No idea on the “love book”...

ED8E77A1-15A2-49A2-A871-4FF71434A6CB.jpeg

Well done!  That’s two out of the five.  Here’s a hint.  The author bought them all in a single purchase, so the cover dates are all within a two month span in 1953.  (Well, except for the Spirit, which has no cover month.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, EdMann2 said:

Here's one, and possibly the two others (with just the tops of the covers it's hard to tell, but these were released roughly the same time):


^^

Well done!  That's all of them.

Lovers #52 (Aug, 1953)
Detective #197 (July, 1953)
Spirit #4 (1953)
Uncanny Tales #11 (Aug, 1953)
My Own Romance #33 (Aug, 1953)

Here’s what the author had to say about them.  

D42E8AC2-5427-45EE-8EC1-D67ABB6FBA29.thumb.jpeg.1e97aa7eb20b3a29c4d9aa5865c1e127.jpeg

I find it interesting that he got the title of Detective Comics wrong, even though it's only a two-word title.

And what should be done about these pernicious comics?  For that, the author consulted somebody whose qualification seems to be that she's a "housewife."

Edited by SOTIcollector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SOTIcollector said:


^^

Well done!  That's all of them.

Lovers #52 (Aug, 1953)
Detective #197 (July, 1953)
Spirit #4 (1953)
Uncanny Tales #11 (Aug, 1953)
My Own Romance #33 (Aug, 1953)

Here’s what the author had to say about them.  

D42E8AC2-5427-45EE-8EC1-D67ABB6FBA29.thumb.jpeg.1e97aa7eb20b3a29c4d9aa5865c1e127.jpeg

I find it interesting that he got the title of Detective Comics wrong, even though it's only a two-word title.

And what should be done about these pernicious comics?  For that, the author consulted somebody whose qualification seems to be that she's a "housewife."

Trying to look at this from a purely objective viewpoint, there are several red flags about the interviewer’s bias in interviewing an anonymous source noted only as a housewife.  Since that term was a common 50’s description of married women of child bearing age, I’ll set aside the contemporary misogynistic interpretation and look at the query solely from the standpoint of a discussion.  A number of things stand out raising more questions than are answered.

What were the circumstances under which Mr. Brunsting would question someone about specific ideas set forth in comics?  Did the anonymous housewife come to him about this topic or did he seek her views on this? What are the author’s credentials? Is it possible that the housewife was manufactured for the purposes of this book? We’re these comics the specific books he locked in on or just a random sampling’s of newsstand comics of the period working under the assumption that all comics are evil?  Why go to so much trouble to make up nonsense titles that look like a foreign language?  Is that nonsense language subliminally meant to represent a foreign influence?

These are just some of the questions that crossed my mind.  What seems obvious though, is that this was designed to fuel the fear and cash in on the success of Wertham’s book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poison Peddling -- great discovery. Never heard of it before. 

Millions of citizens considered these comics lewd and therefore immoral, or, at the very least, inappropriate for children. If anyone wants to feel morally superior to them in 2020, that's their prerogative. I do not. You might have felt differently if you were a parent in the 1950s. History is about trying to understand people, first and foremost, in the context of their time. When/if we can do that, then perhaps we can begin to understand them in our time. We can judge them as long as we understand that we may be similarly judged, and found wanting, in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

Trying to look at this from a purely objective viewpoint, there are several red flags about the interviewer’s bias in interviewing an anonymous source noted only as a housewife.  Since that term was a common 50’s description of married women of child bearing age, I’ll set aside the contemporary misogynistic interpretation and look at the query solely from the standpoint of a discussion.  A number of things stand out raising more questions than are answered.

What were the circumstances under which Mr. Brunsting would question someone about specific ideas set forth in comics?  Did the anonymous housewife come to him about this topic or did he seek her views on this? What are the author’s credentials? Is it possible that the housewife was manufactured for the purposes of this book? We’re these comics the specific books he locked in on or just a random sampling’s of newsstand comics of the period working under the assumption that all comics are evil?  Why go to so much trouble to make up nonsense titles that look like a foreign language?  Is that nonsense language subliminally meant to represent a foreign influence?

These are just some of the questions that crossed my mind.  What seems obvious though, is that this was designed to fuel the fear and cash in on the success of Wertham’s book. 

Good questions.  Thanks for your perspective.

Your question about the credentials of the author, Mr. Brunsting, goes to the heart of my disdain for this type of item.  It's a religious tract, so the author needs no more credentials than the ability to write a sermon.  Similarly, the author need not cite reputable sources; they need only a religious tome and an opinion as to its interpretation.  I have no idea how many of these booklets were produced or how widespread their circulation was, but I suspect its impact on the general public was pretty close to zero.  

To clarify the timeline, this book cites comics with cover dates of July and August, 1953, and  has a publication date of 1953.  I doubt it was designed to "cash in on the success" of Seduction of the Innocent, because SOTI wasn't published until April of 1954 (although there was an excerpt in Ladies' Home Journal in November of '53). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sarg said:

Poison Peddling -- great discovery. Never heard of it before. 

Millions of citizens considered these comics lewd and therefore immoral, or, at the very least, inappropriate for children. If anyone wants to feel morally superior to them in 2020, that's their prerogative. I do not. You might have felt differently if you were a parent in the 1950s. History is about trying to understand people, first and foremost, in the context of their time. When/if we can do that, then perhaps we can begin to understand them in our time. We can judge them as long as we understand that we may be similarly judged, and found wanting, in the future. 

In the 1950's, millions of citizens were convinced that there were communists hiding under every bed (figuratively speaking).  Many innocent folks were persecuted out of fear simply for supporting civil rights causes.  Comic publisher persecution should be viewed under the umbrella of McCarthyism, all of which was opportunistic manipulation generated by paranoid overreaction to cultural change in the '50s.

Fear causes people to behave irrationally in every era.  Hitler was surprisingly popular even in the U.S., as evidenced by a German-American Bund rally held in Madison Square Garden (February, 1939).  After Birth Of A Nation, D. W. Griffith's successful epic film paying homage to the antebellum south, there was a resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan that culminated in a massive parade on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC (September, 1926).  And at the height of the Cold War, there was a fallout shelter building craze that extended into the 1960s, inspired by above ground nuclear testing and "duck & cover" films.   As a nation we're constantly being challenged by bizarre stuff we can't even discuss here.  So, you're right, we'll probably be similarly judged and found wanting in the future, sooner rather than later, I suspect.  

Philosopher Georges Santayana probably said it best:   "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Edited by Cat-Man_America
Good ale and better wordsmith-ery. ;0)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sarg said:

Poison Peddling -- great discovery. Never heard of it before. 

Millions of citizens considered these comics lewd and therefore immoral, or, at the very least, inappropriate for children. If anyone wants to feel morally superior to them in 2020, that's their prerogative. I do not. You might have felt differently if you were a parent in the 1950s. History is about trying to understand people, first and foremost, in the context of their time. When/if we can do that, then perhaps we can begin to understand them in our time. We can judge them as long as we understand that we may be similarly judged, and found wanting, in the future. 

Spot on.  They had been down on comic books since 1948, and it really took off in the early '50's, along with the Red Scare and UFO sightings. 

You would have had to have been there to understand the mindset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SOTIcollector said:

Good questions.  Thanks for your perspective.

Your question about the credentials of the author, Mr. Brunsting, goes to the heart of my disdain for this type of item.  It's a religious tract, so the author needs no more credentials than the ability to write a sermon.  Similarly, the author need not cite reputable sources; they need only a religious tome and an opinion as to its interpretation.  I have no idea how many of these booklets were produced or how widespread their circulation was, but I suspect its impact on the general public was pretty close to zero.  

To clarify the timeline, this book cites comics with cover dates of July and August, 1953, and  has a publication date of 1953.  I doubt it was designed to "cash in on the success" of Seduction of the Innocent, because SOTI wasn't published until April of 1954 (although there was an excerpt in Ladies' Home Journal in November of '53). 

Point taken.  What I intended to say about Mr. Brunsting cashing in on the success of SOTI was that he appears to have been influenced by Wertham’s writings on comics ...which started much earlier than SOTI... and latched onto the popular trend of attacking comics as contributing to juvenile delinquency.  Whether he profited from it is open to debate.

I own a ‘54 copy of SOTI and have researched earlier writings on the subject.  Bernard Brunsting seems to be more of an outlier in this field as he doesn’t appear to have the scientific background to make any claims based on clinical research of comic books cultural influence.  Also, the books chosen seem rather benign compared to most examples of horror and crime comics of the era.

For those seeking more research information on this era here’s a link with a number of cross-referenced articles that can be accessed via additional links.  

http://www.lostsoti.org/TheAntiComicsCrusade.htm

This is an excellent timeline & overview.  It also appears to be a work in progress.  I suspect there are more books, articles and editorials critical of pre-code era comics yet to be attributed.

Note: My biggest criticism of Fredric Wertham is that in his zeal to be the leading advocate for comic book regulation he apparently used shoddy research data not borne out by facts.  As a voice for compassionate treatment of those suffering from mental illness and as an advocate against violence Dr. Wertham’s crusading efforts appear much more laudable.

Edited by Cat-Man_America
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

For those seeking more research information on this era here’s a link with a number of cross-referenced articles that can be accessed via additional links.  

http://www.lostsoti.org/TheAntiComicsCrusade.htm

This is an excellent timeline & overview.  It also appears to be a work in progress.  I suspect there are more books, articles and editorials critical of pre-code era comics yet to be attributed.

 

Cat, I agree with your even handed take on Wertham.  I also agree that anti-comics was a "bandwagon" that a lot of people jumped on, although I personally think Wertham was one of them and not the first.

I think you probably know this, but for others it is worth noting that the site you link is SOTIcollector's baby.  I think Steve has probably done more in the past decade or so to find "lost SOTI" books that anyone (no slight to Robotman and others who pioneered a lot of the SOTI spotting back in the 70s or so).  I know that SOTIcollector is always on the lookout for new info, but I also suspect that a LOT of it has already been found.  Still, I'm always happy when I can pick up a cool item, like a CCA pamphlet I just on got on eBay (but I am sure SOTIcollector's already got one).  I'm gonna store it on my CCA rack (pics taken down due to site issue).

 

 

 

 

Edited by sfcityduck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2020 at 4:40 PM, Sarg said:

How many more untraced/unknown references in SOTI still exist? 

I'm still amazed that so many were known by 1980. 

Steve's website www.lostsoti.org has a list of what's left.

 

Edited by sfcityduck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2020 at 7:52 PM, SOTIcollector said:

Good questions.  Thanks for your perspective.

Your question about the credentials of the author, Mr. Brunsting, goes to the heart of my disdain for this type of item.  It's a religious tract, so the author needs no more credentials than the ability to write a sermon.  Similarly, the author need not cite reputable sources; they need only a religious tome and an opinion as to its interpretation.  I have no idea how many of these booklets were produced or how widespread their circulation was, but I suspect its impact on the general public was pretty close to zero.  

To clarify the timeline, this book cites comics with cover dates of July and August, 1953, and  has a publication date of 1953.  I doubt it was designed to "cash in on the success" of Seduction of the Innocent, because SOTI wasn't published until April of 1954 (although there was an excerpt in Ladies' Home Journal in November of '53). 

Also, in 1951, Senator Capehart accused Sad Sack Goes Home as being Socialist propaganda. If people will be ready to point out Seduction of the Innocent, then they should be ready to point this out too:

RZUTI8p.png

XeX2jgS.png

Edited by Electricmastro
Link to comment
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