World's Finest - Where's the love? 2 2

[Gambold Vintage]

I've always had a soft spot for the World's Finest series, and I've collected a few in decent grades from several eras. The Golden Age WF had cheerful, relaxed covers with Superman, Batman and the Boy Wonder on just about every one. I know these were quarterlies and marketed as a light-hearted book, and that the stories inside didn't have those three heroes together. 

BUT - these are 1940s DC superhero comics with Superman and Batman on the cover!  Why are they not up there with the rest of the 1940s Superman-Batman group, value-wise?  They are miles away from the Top 100 - the first Supes/Bats issue #2 guides at a mere $8000 - and they even have a Hitler cover on issue #9.

Would Joker have helped? Where's the love for World's Finest?

--Gambold

[circumstances]

World's Finest 9 (and Human Torch 12) were my first two golden age purchases.

[lou_fine]

1 hour ago, Gambold said:

BUT - these are 1940s DC superhero comics with Superman and Batman on the cover!  Why are they not up there with the rest of the 1940s Superman-Batman group, value-wise?  They are miles away from the Top 100 - the first Supes/Bats issue #2 guides at a mere $8000 - and they even have a Hitler cover on issue #9.

Would Joker have helped? Where's the love for World's Finest?

I am in 110% agreement with you here as I absolutely love the early squarebound 100-pagers with the cardboard covers which you don't find on most books.  

I believe there's not much love for this run along with other DC books due mostly to the shall we say "silly" covers which are seen as the complete opposite of a classic cover which seems to be so critical nowadays in this cover centric marketplace that we now have.  Iam sure a Joker cover would have helped, much in the same way that the first appearance of the Scarecrow in WF 3 has turned that probably into the one aand only single hottest book in the entire WF run.  

[Courageous Cat]

9 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

 

I believe there's not much love for this run along with other DC books due mostly to the shall we say "silly" covers 

Fawcetts problem in another thread as well. 

[OtherEric]

2 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 

I believe there's not much love for this run along with other DC books due mostly to the shall we say "silly" covers which are seen as the complete opposite of a classic cover which seems to be so critical nowadays in this cover centric marketplace that we now have

Pretty much my take on it as well, I think 65-67 are the only covers that could be called serious. I also don't think, with the possible exception of issue #9, there's a single cover on the giants with any sort of villain.  And by and large, there's not a lot of major stories, or artists, or character appearances in the title.

I still think the book is underrated; everything else aside you get both Superman and Batman in one book!  But I'll still take a Comic Cavalcade over a World's Finest if I ever had to choose.

[MusterMark]

The problem (if we can call it that) is deeper than that.

Here, we are looking at “silliness” within the superhero genre (for both WF and Fawcett) as the cause of lesser value/demand/etc.

But what about outside the superhero genre? The issue is even more pronounced there, as Funny Animals, cartoon characters, Disney, etc. don’t hold a candle to just about anything in the superhero genre (generally speaking, with just a few exceptions here and there).

There are so many people who forget (or don’t care about) the original concept of a comic book.  A funny book.  A comical book.  A humorous book.  One that is supposed to bring a smile to one’s face. Bring forth a chuckle to be vocalized.

Imo, collectors who disdain or neglect the comical origins of comic books and its continued legacy are not truly appreciative of the medium.  If you ask me (I know you’re not), that is a travesty.

[OtherEric]

2 minutes ago, MusterMark said:

The problem (if we can call it that) is deeper than that.

Here, we are looking at “silliness” within the superhero genre (for both WF and Fawcett) as the cause of lesser value/demand/etc.

But what about outside the superhero genre? The issue is even more pronounced there, as Funny Animals, cartoon characters, Disney, etc. don’t hold a candle to just about anything in the superhero genre (generally speaking, with just a few exceptions here and there).

There are so many people who forget (or don’t care about) the original concept of a comic book.  A funny book.  A comical book.  A humorous book.  One that is supposed to bring a smile to one’s face. Bring forth a chuckle to be vocalized.

Imo, collectors who disdain or neglect the comical origins of comic books and its continued legacy are not truly appreciative of the medium.  If you ask me (I know you’re not), that is a travesty.

Don't look at me; I've got vastly more GA funny animal and humor books than superheroes.  I think the oldest DC title I've got the complete run of is Scribbly. and I'm 15 issues short of a complete run of the Looney Tunes from Dell..  But even as somebody who dearly loves and collects funny comics, I have to admit the World's Finest covers are underwhelming.  I think you may be confusing "silly" with "funny", while the two can overlap they're not the same... and the World's Finest are frequently silly without actually having the benefit of being amusing.

[MusterMark]

2 minutes ago, OtherEric said:

Don't look at me; I've got vastly more GA funny animal and humor books than superheroes.  I think the oldest DC title I've got the complete run of is Scribbly. and I'm 15 issues short of a complete run of the Looney Tunes from Dell..  But even as somebody who dearly loves and collects funny comics, I have to admit the World's Finest covers are underwhelming.  I think you may be confusing "silly" with "funny", while the two can overlap they're not the same... and the World's Finest are frequently silly without actually having the benefit of being amusing.

Haha, that is funny, because I find them amusing.  (The WF covers, that is.)

I think if you're going to try to stick with the idea of making a distinction between silly and funny, there'll be endless trouble.  What is silly to one is funny to another.  What is funny to one is silly to another.  And so on.

[Ghastly542454]

Some of my love!

[William-James88]

Yes, it's because of the sillier covers. And it's not a title that had a lasting run, like Batman, Superman, Action or Detective, so there isn't even that extra incentive to buy them to complete a run. It does feel like fluff, something extra not overly integral to the characters' publication history, and thus not overly integral to a collection of said characters. 

The first appearance of the Scarecrow doesn't have as much as a demand as his second appearance in Detective because in this world of CGC, all you see is the cover and this ain't the cover you have in mind for a key Scarecrow book:

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by William-James88

[Brian48]

[Gambold Vintage]

Great replies, thanks.  I think you all hit it on the nail - it's the lack of "serious" covers that are keeping the prices and interest down (although many of the stories inside are just as serious as those in other Superman/Batman books of the time.)

I guess we have to remember that these comics were originally marketed to children, but now the only people buying and reading them are adults - and we want to feel "serious" about our comics!

 

 

[Sauce Dog]

48 minutes ago, William-James88 said:

Yes, it's because of the sillier covers. And it's not a title that had a lasting run, like Batman, Superman, Action or Detective, so there isn't even that extra incentive to buy them to complete a run. It does feel like fluff, something extra not overly integral to the characters' publication history, and thus not overly integral to a collection of said characters. 

The first appearance of the Scarecrow doesn't sell for as much as his second appearance in Detective because in this world of CGC, all you see is the cover and this ain't the cover you have in mind for a key Scarecrow book:

 

Ahem, excuse me sir:



 

 

[pemart1966]

17 hours ago, OtherEric said:

Pretty much my take on it as well, I think 65-67 are the only covers that could be called serious. I also don't think, with the possible exception of issue #9, there's a single cover on the giants with any sort of villain.  And by and large, there's not a lot of major stories, or artists, or character appearances in the title.

I still think the book is underrated; everything else aside you get both Superman and Batman in one book!  But I'll still take a Comic Cavalcade over a World's Finest if I ever had to choose.

When you think of the structure of the book, it makes absolute sense that none of the early issues had a major villain on the cover.  

Batman/Robin and Superman were in separate stories until issue #71, so to have a cover such as the mock up to issue #3 as an actual cover would have only served to confuse and or disappoint the buyer who not doubt would have been expecting all three superheroes to be fighting the Scarecrow.

Edited September 22, 2020 by pemart1966

[bpc3qh]

I really like the actual cover to #3, but maybe that's because I'm a baseball guy. In general, I think the WF covers are fun and entertaining.

[Gambold Vintage]

One argument *against* the silly cover theory - what about these examples from early Superman and Batman - they are hardly more serious than the early World's Finest covers.

 

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by Gambold

[Marty Mann]

Not too many in my collection, (8 copies), due to the fact that they cost 15 cents...the copies I do have were bought for me by my Grandmother.

WORLD'S FINEST #34 contains one of my favorite splash pages,

 

[Robot Man]

Yeah, Superman AND Batman in the same book. You would really think they would get more love. I am not a huge GA DC fan with some notable exceptions. I have accumulated a lot of seldom gone after specific issues. As many for contents as covers. These three ones I went after for the covers.

I do, however, like the thick stiff cover issues of WF as well as Comic Cavalcade but no longer go out of my way for them.

[Larryw7]

The WF 3 used to be considered a classic. I still like it. The covers to WF are like a time capsule from the forties and fifties. They're underrated. And there are some great Joker and Penguin stories hiding behind those covers.

[Kevin.J]