in house dollar bill thumbnail
 Total: 42,782 books
 New: 187 books




small login logo

Please enter your details to login and enjoy all the fun of the fair!

Not a member? Join us here. Everything is FREE and ALWAYS will be.

Forgotten your login details? No problem, you can get your password back here.

Croydon

Pages: 1 [2] 3

topic icon Author Topic: Croydon  (Read 26022 times)

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #25 on: November 16, 2009, 01:24:48 AM »

I'm getting old, Ken,
Yes, I meant to say Baily, but was thinking about Jacquet and Variety and just had a brain fart. Sorry.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #26 on: November 16, 2009, 01:53:58 AM »

I'm getting old, Ken,
Yes, I meant to say Baily, but was thinking about Jacquet and Variety and just had a brain fart. Sorry.


Not a problem, Jim. You just had me doubting my own research as I'm used to you always being right!

Regarding this whole ongoing debate: The likeliest scenario I can see is that a larger publisher would either have an excess of paper (as the war restrictions were ending) and wanted to use it up on a quick profit such as comic books or the same such publisher just wanted to cash in on the comic biz without having their "good" name involved and used a surrogate. They in turn would hire an editor who would contact a comic book packager, such as Baily or Jacquet, who then would supply the content. There may be little or no linkage between publishers, but there are definite links between packagers. Baily and the others would supply the content, hence the usage of the same characters from comic to comic. It probably didn't matter much to the editor as to what the content was, and probably didn't matter at all to the publisher. It was a quick buck.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #27 on: November 16, 2009, 02:22:35 AM »

Nobody's "always right", Ken.
Least of all me. That's why I'm glad that there are people like you keeping me honest. I've gone back and revised my comment to reflect the Baily connection.

Thanks again. (|:{>
ip icon Logged

narfstar

  • Administrator
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #28 on: November 16, 2009, 02:35:17 AM »

Things are a little testy on the GCD lists right now. This place is such a breath of fresh air. Love learning from those who have done so much research.
ip icon Logged

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #29 on: November 16, 2009, 03:29:47 AM »


Things are a little testy on the GCD lists right now. This place is such a breath of fresh air. Love learning from those who have done so much research.

One of the main reasons I'm anxious to share my comics, narf, is so that anyone can do the research. That post took me all of 30 minutes. I just looked up the Croydon titles and checked two boxes for the six Croydon books I owned and collated and reported the results. If all the Croydon books were on GAC, then ANYBODY could do what I did. It's a great advantage to own the books and have them in boxes instead of slabbed or bagged/boarded. If they were all on GAC, it would be just the same.
Quote from: kquattro
Regarding this whole ongoing debate: The likeliest scenario I can see is that a larger publisher would either have an excess of paper (as the war restrictions were ending) and wanted to use it up on a quick profit such as comic books or the same such publisher just wanted to cash in on the comic biz without having their "good" name involved and used a surrogate. They in turn would hire an editor who would contact a comic book packager, such as Baily or Jacquet, who then would supply the content. There may be little or no linkage between publishers, but there are definite links between packagers. Baily and the others would supply the content, hence the usage of the same characters from comic to comic. It probably didn't matter much to the editor as to what the content was, and probably didn't matter at all to the publisher. It was a quick buck.

I totally agree, Ken. We are so used to equating characters with companies, but it wasn't (and ISN'T -- think Groo) always like that. I believe your scenario explains much, but NOT ALL, of the confusion. Like I said earlier: someone should  trace Rewl, Rural Home, etc. Now THERE'S a company (companies?) that really is confusing and very interesting.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
ip icon Logged

jrvandore

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: jrvandore
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #30 on: November 16, 2009, 01:12:39 PM »

I did a little work on Rural Home for the GCD (relying on GAC scans of course) and I came to the conclusion that "Enwil is never listed as publisher, only as copyright holder. Universal Comics Group is likewise never listed as publisher, only as advertising representative." (quoting myself)  Universal is how BIP/Gifflefunk defines this group.  I have recorded on the GCD whatever indicia publishers I was able to confirm from GAC scans.  So if anyone wants to do further investigation on Rural Home, starting here (http://www.comics.org/publisher/138/) might be a good place.  And I/we would love to see any additions or corrections.  (I already know that Baird is misspelled under Meteor...just can't fix it right now.)
ip icon Logged

John C

message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #31 on: November 16, 2009, 01:24:47 PM »


8.   I have no idea why Cole and Kramer chose Croydon for the name of their paperback company. Perhaps it
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #32 on: November 16, 2009, 02:06:04 PM »

It doesn't answer your question directly, but a quick web search on the names (Croydon and Croyden) turned up no prominent mention of either publisher, but many locations in New York, New Jersey, and England, including the college in the last case.  So it's not as unique a name as it first seems.


I get a feeling I may just complicate matters a bit by relaying this information, but...

Croydon Publishing was an established publisher prior to the existence of the comic book company. I've found a reference from 1938 that states, "The Croydon Publishing Company has been in existence many years," and several references to it publishing business texts. HOW or IF it was somehow related to the comic book company I have no idea. Could it have been one of the larger publishers wishing to get into comics without sullying their "good" name? Or did it go out of business and someone used their name? Or is it just a coincidence? I don't know, but I have found that some of the names used by the small publishers we have been discussing here were previously used by "legitimate" publishers. Rural Home for one.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #33 on: November 16, 2009, 02:12:34 PM »

Here's a followup to my previous post.

I did a little checking and one of the books published by Croydon Publishing in 1941 was entitled, "Income Tax Simplified for the Wage-Earner and Professional Man" and it was credited to...

Jerome A. Kramer

Link established.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

archiver_USA

  • VIP
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #34 on: November 16, 2009, 02:44:58 PM »

Occam's Razor POV: Croydon/Kramer was a book publisher, just like Ace and Avon, and Croydon experimented with comics between 1944-1946 getting content from Jacquet and other studios. Kramer started Star as a companion company to Croydon (per the pulp digest research), two years later Premium sold their titles to Kramer and Cole who used Star to publish the line.

I think its clear that Croydon Publishing Co. existed before, during and after the comic books were published by Croydon. Croydon published Kramer's book, Croydon is linked to Kramer by the pulp digest people, the Croydon addresses sync up with the Star addresses. I'm not sure what more information people want other than digging Kramer up and re-animating his corpse and asking the man directly. Any more talk about mysterious third party companies being involved fronting for Croydon and Star hence the same address, or that some mythical "Croyden" is involved other than being a typo in the OPG, or the back-dating of all Croydon paperbacks to establish a history to 1941, and I'm going to start thinking that 9/11 Truthers are rational people.

Now, does anyone think that Rural Home and Croydon should be in the same category? I understand the view of having some shop content in the same category, but then shouldn't we be placing the Fox, Ajax, and Fiction House books in the same category to reflect they came from the Iger shop?


Here's a followup to my previous post.

I did a little checking and one of the books published by Croydon Publishing in 1941 was entitled, "Income Tax Simplified for the Wage-Earner and Professional Man" and it was credited to...

Jerome A. Kramer

Link established.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #35 on: November 16, 2009, 02:55:32 PM »

Here's a followup to my previous followup...

Jerome A. Kramer was credited with the copyright to the book I cited on Dec. 12, 1941. Whether he wrote or edited the book I don't know.

Secondly, and this is ONLY speculation on my part, if this info on Kramer and Croydon proves anything (and I don't know that it does), it may show that he was one of several (many?) persons/publishers who wanted in on the comic book biz and were coming to it from an unrelated part of the publishing industry.
It's my belief that these "wildcatters" put up the money (or received backing from someone) and had someone else handle the content. If he (or any of these other people/companies) was unfamiliar with the comic book industry, it's likely they'd hire someone--an editor--who was and they in turn would be responsible for the product. Packagers such as Baily, Jason Comic Art and Jacquet would provide the content.

While certainly some ownership linkage is provable with the various Temerson ventures (Holyoke, Continental, Et-Es-Go, etc.), there may be little linkage between many of these other guys other than similar content provided by the packagers they all used.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

John C

message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #36 on: November 16, 2009, 04:14:43 PM »


Any more talk about mysterious third party companies being involved fronting for Croydon and Star hence the same address, or that some mythical "Croyden" is involved other than being a typo in the OPG, or the back-dating of all Croydon paperbacks to establish a history to 1941


Well, as long as you're interested in open debate and not shouting people down when they don't take you at your word...
ip icon Logged
Comic Book Plus In-House Image

bchat

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: bchat
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #37 on: November 16, 2009, 05:22:58 PM »

Quote
Now, does anyone think that Rural Home and Croydon should be in the same category? I understand the view of having some shop content in the same category, but then shouldn't we be placing the Fox, Ajax, and Fiction House books in the same category to reflect they came from the Iger shop?


Regarding the grouping together of "shop content" ... if you mean "features" or "characters" that popped-up in different titles, then I personally see nothing wrong with having books "out-of-place", especially for these smaller publishers.  I don't see that as being the same as "let's put all of this shop's output in one folder".  I certainly wouldn't want to see all of Funnies Inc's output in just one folder because that wouldn't make any sense at all.

There are features that bounce from one book/publisher to another, so why not put them all together in one folder, or at least have a link leading to the correct spot?  Personally, I think it's wrong to assume that everyone knows everything, that any given person knows that publisher A published Captain Man's first appearance while publisher C published his last and publisher B had everything in-between, so why make less-knowledgable fans jump through hoops to find all of their favorite obscure character's appearances? 

I know people come here and use the files to do some research, but at the end of the day, aren't we all just comic fans?  Why make things more complicated "just because we can"?
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #38 on: November 16, 2009, 05:38:08 PM »

Regarding the grouping together of "shop content" ... if you mean "features" or "characters" that popped-up in different titles, then I personally see nothing wrong with having books "out-of-place", especially for these smaller publishers.  I don't see that as being the same as "let's put all of this shop's output in one folder".  I certainly wouldn't want to see all of Funnies Inc's output in just one folder because that wouldn't make any sense at all.


I still believe simply changing the name of this category to "Miscellaneous Publishers", for comics that don't have enough entries to justify their own category, would settle the issue. Adding further information linking to characters or features in other comics could go into the "Comments" section.

If further research reveals definite links between certain publishers, then at that time they could all go into their own category.

Just my 2
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 05:41:58 PM by kquattro »
ip icon Logged

archiver_USA

  • VIP
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #39 on: November 16, 2009, 05:39:14 PM »

at least have a link leading to the correct spot?


I think having a Character category with specific characters beneath it with virtual links to books would be very cool. A Phantom Lady category that linked to Quality, Fox, and Ajax books would be great, not to mention some of the lesser characters that show up across a few fly-by night companies.

It just seems haphazard and more confusing to have categories based on publishers for nearly all the books, and then a category with a publisher name that ends up being a catch-all for books unrelated to that publisher. However, if someone did something like Yoc did for the IW virtual section, but for characters, that would be very useful IMO.
ip icon Logged

bchat

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: bchat
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #40 on: November 16, 2009, 06:12:28 PM »

Quote
Adding further information linking to characters or features in other comics could go into the "Comments" section.


But searching for The Duke of Darkness, whose appearances are noted in the appropriate comments sections, turns-up ... nothing when I do a search.  A "newbie" would have to know which Titles to look for before seeing the Comments.
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #41 on: November 16, 2009, 06:48:39 PM »

But searching for The Duke of Darkness, whose appearances are noted in the appropriate comments sections, turns-up ... nothing when I do a search.  A "newbie" would have to know which Titles to look for before seeing the Comments.


Then add the character links to the "Descriptions" section. Apparently the Search is set up to "read" the "Descriptions" but not the "Comments". Try doing a search for "Frazetta" as an example. If character appearances are noted in "Descriptions", then it should work.

--Ken Q
ip icon Logged

John C

message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #42 on: November 16, 2009, 07:00:14 PM »

At one point, Zog asked about interest in setting up a wiki for (I assume) exactly this sort of purpose.  It'd allow us to create relatively freeform categories for whatever sort of groupings make sense.  Like, for example, when talking about Phantom Lady, since she was mentioned, you probably want to also talk about the handful of other characters who had darkness-projecting devices, other scantily-clad action-heroines, or any of the companies where she was a feature.

The existing software could probably be forced to support that indirectly, with comments and crosslinks and the like, but it would never be "pretty."
ip icon Logged

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #43 on: November 16, 2009, 09:47:11 PM »


Occam's Razor POV: Croydon/Kramer was a book publisher, just like Ace and Avon, and Croydon experimented with comics between 1944-1946 getting content from Jacquet and other studios. Kramer started Star as a companion company to Croydon (per the pulp digest research), two years later Premium sold their titles to Kramer and Cole who used Star to publish the line.


This new information from Ken regarding Croydon and Kramer adds to the data, archiver, but I don't think it "proves" anything other than Kramer knew of Croydon Publishing Co. in 1941. It's a LONG leap to suggest that a text book manufacturer suddenly "decided" to publish comics. From my point of view, it's equally (if not more) likely that Croydon the non-fiction publisher had a paper allowance during WWII and a vastly depleted audience who were either working in War production or in the services. They would be ripe for some comic hustler to make a deal for their paper allowance and to start publishing comics. That hustler MIGHT have been Kramer, and perhaps likely WAS Kramer, but we can't say with any more certainty than before just who owned and financed '45 Croydon comics.

Quote
I think its clear that Croydon Publishing Co. existed before, during and after the comic books were published by Croydon. Croydon published Kramer's book, Croydon is linked to Kramer by the pulp digest people, the Croydon addresses sync up with the Star addresses. I'm not sure what more information people want other than digging Kramer up and re-animating his corpse and asking the man directly.


I agree with most of that. The fly in the ointment is Cole's declarative statement that the paperback and digests of Croydon Publishing were published in 1951 and backdated to 1945. That weakens the link between Kramer's Star and '45 Croydon. Doesn't break it, I agree.

Let's assume that the owner of '45 Croydon IS Kramer. The comic company lasts for 3 years, at best. Mr. Tax Expert keeps the name and office on the books for tax purposes (remember he wrote a book on it in 1941) and then in 1949/50 enters into a partnership with L.B. Cole and starts a new company, Star. The partners publish comic books and paperback. Kramer revives the Croydon name and applies it to the paperbacks and backdates them to 1945 for reasons I mentioned before.

That assumption matches all the facts that we know, and it DOESN'T make '45 Croydon published by Star. They are two distinct companies from two distinct time periods and the owner of one became the co-owner of the other. That's what needs to be established: Croydon (the comic company) and Star (the comic company) are NOT the same or in any way connected other than the shared address and, perhaps, Kramer.

Quote
Any more talk about mysterious third party companies being involved fronting for Croydon and Star hence the same address, or that some mythical "Croyden" is involved other than being a typo in the OPG, or the back-dating of all Croydon paperbacks to establish a history to 1941, and I'm going to start thinking that 9/11 Truthers are rational people.


Again, I'm pretty much agreeing with except the part about trying to connect Croydon paperbacks to 1941. I don't think anyone was attempting that, nor should they. There's a disconnect in 1944 when someone usurps/buys/rents the Croydon name and paper allowance. The original text book publisher doesn't resurface, so let's assume it's a "buy" and that there is now a clean break between owners. I suggest this because with the G.I. Bill and the end of the war, there would likely be an upswing in the market for text books, yet Croydon doesn't enter that market.

Quote
Now, does anyone think that Rural Home and Croydon should be in the same category? I understand the view of having some shop content in the same category, but then shouldn't we be placing the Fox, Ajax, and Fiction House books in the same category to reflect they came from the Iger shop?


No, I don't think Rural Home and Croydon are the same, but there is a connection. Rural Home was a publisher before it published comic books. It, too, has a history. It catered to women in the rural areas of the country. With the war, their market either got involved in other things or didn't have the money or time to devote to magazines. But they DID have a paper allowance because they published magazines before the war. They, too, were sold and transformed into a comic book company. They lasted a while. Another such magazine, Farm Women's Publishing, didn't survive the transformation and only managed two issues of Circus.

The period is FULL of these and other attempts to circumvent the paper rationing. Keep searching and speculating and... More later. I'm nursing Karen through her home recovery from knee-replacement surgery and must run. Sorry.

Fascinating subjects... Bye (|:{>
ip icon Logged

archiver_USA

  • VIP
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #44 on: November 16, 2009, 10:26:09 PM »

I fully agree that Croydon is probably not Star, but Croydon is more than likely Kramer. I wouldn't mix Atlas/Seaboard in with Marvel comics just because both are Martin Goodman companies.  And I'm not saying we should combine Croydon and Star.

What I've asked is if Croydon is the best name to be using for a hodge-podge section that contains Croydon, Rural Home, and who knows what else, mixed together, when there is ZERO evidence from any quarter that links Croydon to Rural Home other than the fact that they both used the same outside contractors for content.  I'm willing to put forth that Kramer may not have been part of Croydon and that the pulp digest research is wrong. I don't have their evidence, only their conclusions in the PDF document. But I haven't seen anything to contradict their conclusions (not counting claims of Croyden not being Croydon and Boatner's Cole article, both of which seem far less reliable).

The categories here are based on publisher names (for the most part), if we want to keep some books in the hodge-podge mix all I'm suggesting is we change the name instead of attributing all the books to "Croydon". Or if we split the current "Croydon" into two (or more groups) that would make sense also; perhaps we should be consulting more with the GCD folks to keep things heading in the same direction when it comes to categorization?



ip icon Logged

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #45 on: November 16, 2009, 10:35:43 PM »



What I've asked is if Croydon is the best name to be using for a hodge-podge section that contains Croydon, Rural Home, and who knows what else, mixed together, when there is ZERO evidence from any quarter that links Croydon to Rural Home other than the fact that they both used the same outside contractors for content.  I'm willing to put forth that Kramer may not have been part of Croydon and that the pulp digest research is wrong. I don't have their evidence, only their conclusions in the PDF document. But I haven't seen anything to contradict their conclusions (not counting claims of Croyden not being Croydon and Boatner's Cole article, both of which seem far less reliable).



I am in 100% agreement that EACH of these companies should have their own section. I've yet to research the connections, IF ANY, between Rural Home and Croydon (at least not in the last 25 years), but if you have any specific questions about RH, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
ip icon Logged

kquattro

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: kquattro
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #46 on: November 16, 2009, 11:45:46 PM »

Mr. Tax Expert keeps the name and office on the books for tax purposes (remember he wrote a book on it in 1941)


Kramer was also a professor of Business Law at New York University. (I know, that's more than anyone cares to know about Mr. Kramer)

And it just occurred to me that the Boatner interview with Cole may have had a transcription error in it that changes the meaning of a key sentence.

When Cole states, "Mr friend Jerry Kramer...was interested in entering the publishing field. Again, coincidence enters the scene," the period at the end of the first sentence may have put in the wrong place. If it is moved over one word, the sentence reads: "Mr friend Jerry Kramer...was interested in entering the publishing field again. Coincidence enters the scene," which indicates that Kramer had once been in publishing. Just a thought.

--Ken Q 
ip icon Logged

archiver_USA

  • VIP
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #47 on: November 17, 2009, 01:32:12 AM »

if you have any specific questions about RH, I'd be happy to try to answer them.


Thanks, I do have a ton of questions, but I need to get my thoughts organized first.
ip icon Logged

JVJ

  • VIP & JVJ Project Member
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #48 on: November 17, 2009, 02:47:52 AM »


if you have any specific questions about RH, I'd be happy to try to answer them.


Thanks, I do have a ton of questions, but I need to get my thoughts organized first.


Take your time. I'm pretty preoccupied with stuff, but it's particularly interesting and a favorite topic of mine, so I'll do what I can.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
ip icon Logged

Yoc

  • Past Member
  • avatar for old site member: Yoc
message icon
Re: Croydon
« Reply #49 on: November 17, 2009, 03:23:36 AM »

I'm enjoying this topic a lot myself!
:)
ip icon Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
 

Comic Book Plus In-House Image
Mission and Disclaimer: The mission of Comic Book Plus is to present completely free of charge, and to the widest possible audience, popular cultural works of the past. These records are offered as a contribution to education and lifelong learning. They are historical documents reflecting the attitudes, perspectives, and beliefs of different times. We at Comic Book Plus do not endorse the views expressed in these, which may contain content offensive to modern users.

We aim to house only content in the Public Domain. If you suspect that any of our material may be infringing copyright, then please use our contact page to let us know. So we can investigate further.