Print

[jfglade]

 It's well known that Blue Beetle has a very checkered publication history, having been published by Fox, then Holyoke, then Fox again, and then by Charlton. I keep running into "information" in various books that purport to have reliable knowledge about the golden age of comics, but simply repeat "information" from prior texts which may or may not be accurate. In particular, I'm thinking of reports and references I've read that claim that while Holyoke was publishing the Blue Beetle he developed new abilities, such as flight and/or a growth power that could tum him into a giant. What I'm not finding is any confirmation of those claims in any of the Holyoke books I've read. Not one of the Blue Beetle stories available at the download site show Dan Garrett with any unexplained or unexpected "new" abilities.

Simply put, I'd like to know if the Blue Beetle was ever featured in any stories that had him flying, becoming a giant, and/or anything else of that nature before the Blue Beetle stories from Charlton in the mid-sixties which showed him using a mystic scarab to use a wide variety of abilities.

Can anyone cite any examples, including an issue number, of the golden age Blue Beetle using "super-powers" beyond the boost in strength caused by Vitamin X-2?

[OtherEric]

Check out the last story in Blue Beetle 33, from Fox.  Thanks to JVJ we have it on site.  I suspect the story was inventory from Holyoke, and it includes flight, growing giant size, body blocking a tidal wave, and punching a dormant volcano active.  It's something to see.

[John C]

I keep running into "information" in various books that purport to have reliable knowledge about the golden age of comics, but simply repeat "information" from prior texts which may or may not be accurate.

It's not limited to the Golden Age Beetle, either, just so you know.

Of all the supposedly-authoritative sources I've seen, it's clear that not a one of them has ever read the Charlton "Dr. Dan Garrett" books, because there's only one issue in the run that's actually as over-the-top as everybody suggests.  The rest are typical superhero fun.  (Son of Vulcan, by contrast, is a complete mess, but nobody ever talks about it.  He's at times Thor, Captain Marvel, or He-Man, with almost no consistency whatsoever.)

The information out there is bad enough that I very nearly convinced myself to spend eight thousand bucks (I think it was) on a full Blue Beetle run someone had on eBay, because I wanted to see for myself.

[rez]

I very nearly convinced myself to spend eight thousand bucks (I think it was) on a full Blue Beetle run someone had on eBay, because I wanted to see for myself.

Congratulations!
JohnC receives the GAC Serious Hero Award.
Saaalute!!!

[JVJ]

I keep running into "information" in various books that purport to have reliable knowledge about the golden age of comics, but simply repeat "information" from prior texts which may or may not be accurate.

It's not limited to the Golden Age Beetle, either, just so you know.

That tendency is prevalent in all of art "history." I hate it when I keep reading paraphrased "facts". There's a story about Howard Chandler Christy that has been going around for 80+ years and I've challenged it in my HCC biography (http://www.bpib.com/illustra2/christy.htm) that's been posted for nine years (and comes up #1 in Google for Howard Chandler Christy, so it's been seen by many a HCC fan). NO ONE has yet to find the source material that the story describes, yet it persists.

History sure ain't what people are writing these days.  Comics are just the latest in a long line of lazy historical writers.

ps. John - if you want to read all of my Blue Beetles, I'll be happy to loan them to you. It's not a complete run, but it's not $8 grand, either.

Peace, Jim (|:{>

[jfglade]

 I thought I had thanked (other) Eric for the tip, but there's no sign of my last message. That's odd, but not as odd as some of the things the Yahoo system does from time to time. I have downloaded and read 'Blue Beetle' #33 now, and the third Blue Beetle story in that issue is rather incredible. Thanks, Eric.

I do have to agree that academia and quasi-academia are in sad shape when the emphasis is on reading the literature about the literature, rather than the primary texts themselves (which, in this case, would be the actually comics about which so much has been written). To often I have met English majors who read only what they personally like, and journal articles and texts about whatever novel or whatever they are assigned rather than the assigned work. For example, rather than read, for example, 'Rapucine' Daughter' they will find a few article about the short story and then them for nifty quotes, in essence rehashing what is easily accessible that deals with the short story, rather than actually reading the story itself and then writing a paper that might actually contain some honest, original ideas. I suspect Enlish is not the only field in which that sort of thing goes on.

[narfstar]

jf the topic was split from where it was getting political. Your message was probably after the split and got moved with it.

[John C]

For example, rather than read, for example, 'Rapucine' Daughter' they will find a few article about the short story and then them for nifty quotes, in essence rehashing what is easily accessible that deals with the short story, rather than actually reading the story itself and then writing a paper that might actually contain some honest, original ideas. I suspect Enlish is not the only field in which that sort of thing goes on.

Edging away from the main topic again, I've seen that identical example, by the way.  And I find it hilarious, because outside of "The Scarlet Letter" and a few early short stories, Hawthorne is wonderfully readable and easy to analyze.  I went on a Hawthorne binge not too long ago, and only found two or three stories I wouldn't highly recommend.  (His earlier work is clunkier and not particularly dramatic, basically.  It's kinda like reading the output of a Junior High School creative writing class.)

[jfglade]

John,

I like most of the Hawthorne work I've read, and I also like some of the golden age Blue Beetle stories I've read, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like any Blue Beetle story written by Hawthorne. However, if such a critter existed, I probably would read it out of sheer curiousity.

[narfstar]

John,

I like most of the Hawthorne work I've read, and I also like some of the golden age Blue Beetle stories I've read, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like any Blue Beetle story written by Hawthorne. However, if such a critter existed, I probably would read it out of sheer curiousity.

Now there is a challenge for some fan fic. What if famous authors wrote certain comics?

Charles Dickens and the orphaned Kryptonians Kal-el and Kara taken in by The Artful Dodger comes to mind as well as Steven Crane writes Enemy Ace or some other war character.

[John C]

He's got a different name and motif, but the Gray Champion actually does remind me some of the early Beetle stories.  They both have some notoriety (everybody stands back to gape when they reveal themselves), for example, and aren't particularly action-oriented.

It's obviously not a perfect match, but it's definitely a good start in answering the question of what a character may have looked like in the hands of Hawthorne.

And yeah, the classical author spin on characters is something I find amusing when it's done well.  DC occasionally tried it in their Elseworlds line, but the most successful merely told a DC story with captions taken from a classic book (Superman : War of the Worlds), while others seemed to just drive off the nearest cliff without really knowing what they were doing (Batman: Master of the World).