[SuperScrounge]

I'm almost afraid to ask, but what does the mother-in-law mean when she says 'He'll probably try to borrow a quarter and queer us?' (p. 33)

I believe she's afraid her son-in-law will try to borrow money from Mrs. Van Pickestaff and she'll get annoyed about it and never invite the Ginch's again to any party.

Scrounge,
I hope your Dad gets back on his feet and can come back home - and I'm glad that you want him to.
There is no better place to be when you are getting old, if you are loved, than home.

Hi Scrounge - Sorry to hear that your father was hospitalized and is now recovering at a rehabilitation facility.  Hope your Dad's health improves quickly and he comes home soon.

Thanks, guys! 
I visited him today, he seemed much better. The therapist started his treatment to strengthen his leg and back muscles and I brought him a small weight to help work on his arm muscles when he's in his room.

[The Australian Panther]

Quote from: Quirky Quokka on June 29, 2024, 02:46:54 AM

I'm almost afraid to ask, but what does the mother-in-law mean when she says 'He'll probably try to borrow a quarter and queer us?' (p. 33)

MY Macquarie Dictionary [that's a publication from Macquarie University for you non-Aussies] gives 7 definitions for Queer.
#7 'To spoil, jeopardize, ruin' - which is one of the meanings I have been familiar with since childhood.

cheers!

[Quirky Quokka]

Regarding the phrase 'to queer us' in the Milt Gross comic, SuperScrounge said:

I believe she's afraid her son-in-law will try to borrow money from Mrs. Van Pickestaff and she'll get annoyed about it and never invite the Ginch's again to any party.

And Australian Panther said:

MY Macquarie Dictionary [that's a publication from Macquarie University for you non-Aussies] gives 7 definitions for Queer.
#7 'To spoil, jeopardize, ruin' - which is one of the meanings I have been familiar with since childhood.

Thanks guys. That makes sense. I'd never heard it used in that way. Panther, I wasn't familiar with that definition. Maybe it's going out of fashion due to the other more common meanings of the word. I've only heard of it as a noun or adjective, not a verb.

And SuperScrounge, glad to hear that your Dad is doing a bit better.

Cheers

QQ

[Robb_K]

Regarding the phrase 'to queer us' in the Milt Gross comic, SuperScrounge said:

I believe she's afraid her son-in-law will try to borrow money from Mrs. Van Pickestaff and she'll get annoyed about it and never invite the Ginch's again to any party.

And Australian Panther said:

MY Macquarie Dictionary [that's a publication from Macquarie University for you non-Aussies] gives 7 definitions for "Queer".
#7 'To spoil, jeopardize, ruin' - which is one of the meanings I have been familiar with since childhood.

Thanks guys. That makes sense. I'd never heard it used in that way. Panther, I wasn't familiar with that definition. Maybe it's going out of fashion due to the other more common meanings of the word. I've only heard of it as a noun or adjective, not a verb.
Cheers 

When I was kid that definition as a verb, was common in Canada, especially to ruin something people were trying or planning to do, such as a planned project, caper, surprise party, etc.  (i.e. "Bringing in that guy will queer this deal.") or "Asking for that, over and above everything else we want, will queer this deal."). We don't hear that much, if at all, anymore, in Canada or USA.  But you can here it used in 1930sthrough '50s films, or read it in novels of that period.

[The Australian Panther]

Milt Gross Funnies #1 can be found here: 
https://comicbookplus.com/?dlid=27448

Cover - the gag would work if he was painting the mustache on a picture of mother-in-law.
page 1:- a text introduction to the characters is unusual. I'd prefer to be introduced to them through the stories. 
For me this just continually misses the mark,
Story
The second page rehashes the information on the opening page, so it's redundant.
The second page portrays 'POP' as kind of likeable and well-meaning. So there is no joy in laughing at him.
The gag about carrying Luggage goes 2 1/2 pages with a dud payoff. 
"Seems I,ve landed on my attic." redundant, and no real gag.
Mothers-in-law as protagonists are an easy plot line, but in this case it's hard not to sympathize with her. Doesn't work then.
Why does she keep saying, 'Out he goes!'? it's not her decision to make.
'The cream-pie in the face' gag works on stage or in a film where timing adds to the joke.
There is a reason why you don't see it in a comic.
Disappointing. Was the creator trying out things to see what might work?
I think I'm going to like the next one tho.
Cheers!         
 

[Morgus]

This was a nice change of pace, Robb, 3 work-a-day ‘funny books’ that probably tell us more about the market they were aiming for than anything else. It’s what I usually think of when I read an old time comedy comic...why did they think this was funny and who were they selling it to?
Robb and Q.Q.: girls weren’t seen with the noise makers on their bikes because they were SMARTER. You just know that four seconds after that scene went down, the guy on the bike was knocked to the ground, belted by beer cans and garbage from hacked off neighbours.

SPARKY WATTS anybody else reminded of Basil Wolverton’s style when it came to the critters in the lawn? Sparky isn’t a BAD read, but needs some work to be a classic. Can’t figure what I would change though.

MILT GROSS; yeah, I can see why it was all finished  in two issues. Nice amiable tone though. I have NEVER seen an art style like that before...

ELMO every now and then, the backgrounds would remind me of Harold Gray. I always nick named the layout Folsom Prison Funnies because the 12 panels make it look like you’re reading the thing through a jail house door.

Hey, Q.Q.; John Waters wrote about a freak show in one of his latest books...he got to be in it because he DIDN’T have any tattoos and just wore a mask on stage. And right now, I’ll tell you...just skip Tod Brownings FREAKS. It’ll be on TCM this Halloween season and it will bug you. I see that from here.
The circus performers were REAL. Torso man, the Siamese Twins, the whole lot And what remains now was heavily edited. STILL amazing and stunning, but...it will bug you.
THE ELEPHANT MAN pretty much sticks to the facts...Barnum was a complicated figure who could do something admirable on minute and totally hack you off the next. There is a distinct chance that fire at his museum was arson done by Confederate spies...he was anti-slavery. And yes, some of his ’special people’ came back to help him when his luck turned sour and he needed attractions for a new road show.
Glad to hear dad is better, Super. 88?? That’s better than my family does!

[The Australian Panther]

Morgus wrote,

And right now, I’ll tell you...just skip Tod Brownings FREAKS. It’ll be on TCM this Halloween season and it will bug you. I see that from here.   

Thanks Morgus, you reminded me that I had meant to respond to Robb's earlier comment,
Robb wrote,

But the 1932 film, "Freaks" was still a very popular filler "B" film for kids Saturday matinee several-hour shows at the movie houses in USA and Canada when I was a kid in the late '40s and early '50s.

At that I am totally gobsmacked! The Canadian government let children watch 'Freaks?!"
Freaks (1932)
https://horrorfilmhistory.com/wp/freaks-1932/

Freaks is a rarity, a horror film that horrifies rather than frightens.

The studio was very unhappy with the director’s cut and tried three alternate endings on preview audiences. When it was finally premiered, in San Diego in January 1932, audiences were horrified, rather than frightened. The backlash against the movie came from the public and critics alike, and it was quietly withdrawn from theatrical release

It was banned outright in Britain and other countries and languished in vaults for more than thirty years

The images shocked me when I first saw them as a teen, so I can't imagine what they would do to the sensibilities of children.
Have a look at some of them here.
As an adult, they are still shocking but you can also appreciate what the filmmakers were trying to do with the narrative. But not ever a pleasant film to watch. 
Incidentally, I've long believed that Circus and sideshow - larger than life imagery - had a strong influence on the work of Golden age comic creators. Jack Kirby comes to mind immediately [Stuntman and Mr Miracle to start with.]. Circuses and sideshows were common when they were growing up.   

[The Australian Panther]

Elmo #1 can be found here:    https://comicbookplus.com/?dlid=76249
The Enigma of Cecil Jensen, Part One: The Road to Elmo
https://www.tcj.com/the-enigma-of-cecil-jensen-part-one-the-road-to-elmo/

Cover
Given that when you smoke a cigar, you burn up all of it, that's not the silliiest idea I've ever seen.
Story
Clearly extracted from an on-going newspaper strip - unfortunately no context or origin for the characters means you have to figure it out as you go along.
I think if I was reading an installment a day in a newspaper, I would quite enjoy this.
There is a lot of deliberate silliness here, but kept low-key. Brings a smile to your face, rather than causes you to laugh out loud. And many verbal gags. ["Reduced prices on Steam Shovels"]
A gag-a-day strip always has a last panel that gets you coming back next day.
Example ' Sultry locks herself and Whiney in the vault' That would have been the last panel.
The suspense  is missing when you collate the strips into a comic, so the essential pacing of the narrative is lost. 
There is clearly story missing between [our] pages 8 and 9.
Apparently 'Elmo' didn't last long as a strip.
Reading a book full of 'Elmo' is a big much, it's too dense and it's hard to stay with it.
Clearly it is uniquely suited to the daily strip format.
I quite like 'Debbie' and the wisecracks Jensen gives her.
Elmo "waiting for somebody?'
Debbie "Yes, I'm waiting for a handsome knight riding a while horse to carry me away to his castle."
Next panel, "OK, I'll walk!"

I actually quite like the strip as a whole also.
Thanks Robb, for introducing me to this strip.
Just when I think I'm an expert on what's on CB+, I find out something I haven't spotted before.
Guest spot tomorrow!         

[Morgus]

See, FREAKS and some other indie road show movies were ‘4 walled’. Meaning the distributor would rent the theatre outright and keep the profit, and set up a great deal with the theatre for the concession,  NIGHT OF THE LIVNG DEAD pulled the same stunt in the 60’s in some Canadian and American markets. USUALLY this was used for stuff like Sun International movies  (GRIZZLY ADAMS) or those K Gordon Murray kiddie matinees like SANTA CLAUS or RUMPELSTILTSKIN. BUT not always.
I’ll bet you guys remember the ads that were on TV for GRIZZLY ADAMS or IN SEARCH OF HISTORICAL JESUS for instance; they’d announce the dates the film would play in towns and usually be out of the market in a week or so. In the case of the more controversial stuff, it was not a lot of time for any organized opposition. (FLESH GORDON or TRADER HORNEE would be examples.)
The rights to FREAKS had been passed to road show operators like that, and outright theft was common. You might get a double bill with WHITE ZOMBIE, and a spook show on top of it. Or maybe an old Bela Lugosi film from PRC or Monogram. But yeah, FREAKS even had a re-release trailer made for it. 1970. It’s the one that shows up on youtube, along with the original 1932 MGM trailer.

[Robb_K]

Milt Gross Funnies #1 can be found here: 
https://comicbookplus.com/?dlid=27448

Cover - the gag would work if he was painting the mustache on a picture of mother-in-law.
page 1:- a text introduction to the characters is unusual. I'd prefer to be introduced to them through the stories. 
For me this just continually misses the mark,
Story
The second page rehashes the information on the opening page, so it's redundant.
The second page portrays 'POP' as kind of likeable and well-meaning. So there is no joy in laughing at him.
The gag about carrying Luggage goes 2 1/2 pages with a dud payoff. 
"Seems I,ve landed on my attic." redundant, and no real gag.
Mothers-in-law as protagonists are an easy plot line, but in this case it's hard not to sympathize with her. Doesn't work then.
Why does she keep saying, 'Out he goes!'? it's not her decision to make.
'The cream-pie in the face' gag works on stage or in a film where timing adds to the joke.
There is a reason why you don't see it in a comic.
Disappointing. Was the creator trying out things to see what might work?
I think I'm going to like the next one tho.
Cheers! 

I agree on all counts.  Milt Gross' humour was very slapstick and Vaudevillian, which isn't really very clever, and, thus, not very funny to me.  I do like the zanyness of his artwork.  And I've always cared a LOT more about artwork than story.  Gross had several newspaper strips, but all were short-lived. 

[Robb_K]

This was a nice change of pace, Robb, 3 work-a-day ‘funny books’ that probably tell us more about the market they were aiming for than anything else. It’s what I usually think of when I read an old time comedy comic...why did they think this was funny and who were they selling it to?
Robb and Q.Q.: (1) Girls weren’t seen with the noise makers on their bikes because they were SMARTER. You just know that four seconds after that scene went down, the guy on the bike was knocked to the ground, belted by beer cans and garbage from hacked off neighbours.

(2) SPARKY WATTS - Anybody else reminded of Basil Wolverton’s style when it came to the critters in the lawn? Sparky isn’t a BAD read, (3) but needs some work to be a classic. Can’t figure what I would change though.

MILT GROSS; yeah, I can see why it was all finished in two issues. Nice amiable tone though. I have NEVER seen an art style like that before...

ELMO (4) every now and then, the backgrounds would remind me of Harold Gray. I always nick named the layout Folsom Prison Funnies because the 12 panels make it look like you’re reading the thing through a jail house door.

Hey, Q.Q.; John Waters wrote about a freak show in one of his latest books...he got to be in it because he DIDN’T have any tattoos and just wore a mask on stage. And right now, I’ll tell you...just skip Tod Brownings FREAKS. It’ll be on TCM this Halloween season and it will bug you. I see that from here.
The circus performers were REAL. Torso man, the Siamese Twins, the whole lot And what remains now was heavily edited. STILL amazing and stunning, but...it will bug you.
THE ELEPHANT MAN pretty much sticks to the facts...Barnum was a complicated figure who could do something admirable on minute and totally hack you off the next. There is a distinct chance that fire at his museum was arson done by Confederate spies...he was anti-slavery. And yes, some of his ’special people’ came back to help him when his luck turned sour and he needed attractions for a new road show.
Glad to hear dad is better, Super. 88?? That’s better than my family does!

(1) It was my experience, growing up during the late '40s and '50s, in a suburban, middle-class small town, that making noise to attract attention to one's self wasn't a young girl's thing.  I dson't think it was because they wanted to avoid trouble from adults.  Later, as teens, they wanted more attention, but would do that by wearing revealing clothing.  young boys and teenage boys liked to do that, and that's one of the motivations for them to later become motorcycle drivers and to tune their bikes or not replace old mufflers, to make the most noise possible. 

(2)  Absolutely!  Sparky Watts' style looked a lot like Wolverton's. 

(3) Yes, Sparky could have been a lot better.  Rogers dropped the ball there, in not making him a very dynamic character - who would be clever, and the initiator of action.  He was too much like a namby-pamby secondary character, who let things happen to him rather than instigating them.  Here and there, he displayed a wry humour. Rogers should have made that his calling card.  He was too much of a milquetoast, mild-mannered guy, who happened to be given super strength randomly chosen by Doc, and acted more like a victim of weird undeserved happenings.  Sometimes he should have been surprised, but then taken with the nice results, other times tired of the adulation, so that like Barks' Donald Duck, the reader would never know whether he was going to be a hero or a goat, or have an enjoyable or unenjoyable experience.

(4). I really didn't like the three-panels across format of crammed pages of re-formatted daily newspaper strips.  They were too crowded, and the artwork was displayed too small to enjoy.

[Quirky Quokka]

Morgus said:

Hey, Q.Q.; John Waters wrote about a freak show in one of his latest books...he got to be in it because he DIDN’T have any tattoos and just wore a mask on stage. And right now, I’ll tell you...just skip Tod Brownings FREAKS. It’ll be on TCM this Halloween season and it will bug you. I see that from here.
The circus performers were REAL. Torso man, the Siamese Twins, the whole lot And what remains now was heavily edited. STILL amazing and stunning, but...it will bug you.
THE ELEPHANT MAN pretty much sticks to the facts...Barnum was a complicated figure who could do something admirable on minute and totally hack you off the next. There is a distinct chance that fire at his museum was arson done by Confederate spies...he was anti-slavery. And yes, some of his ’special people’ came back to help him when his luck turned sour and he needed attractions for a new road show.

Thanks for the extra info, Morgus. Probably not high on my playlist. I think 'Freaks' would indeed freak me out. But this discussion reminded me of two fun books I bought in the 80s by Harry and Michael Medved - 'The Fifty Worst Movies of All Time' and 'The Golden Turkey Awards' for the worst achievements in Hollywood history. One of their awards was 'the P. T. Barnum Award for the worst cinematic exploitation of a physical deformity'. The winner was 'The Terror of Tiny Town' for its depiction of midgets. Other nominees included 'Little Cigars' (about five midget gangsters with a yen for a tall, busty blonde); 'Chained for Life' (featuring real-life Siamese twin Daisy and Violet Hilton); and 'The Brute Man' (starring actor Rondo Hatton who suffered from acromegaly--a rare disease that causes enlargement of the bones of the head, thereby earning him the title of the ugliest man in pictures). Hopefully there is more sensitivity in the way disabilities are portrayed today. 'Freaks' doesn't get a mention, but maybe it should.

Cheers

QQ

[Robb_K]

Elmo Comics #1

Dogcatcher's Date
Okay text story.

Elmo story
Uhhhh... reading this I wondered how it got approved and if the creator was related to the newspaper owner. Looking up info on the cartoonist I see he was the editorial cartoonist and to quote The Comics Journal:

Jensen created the strip in response to a challenge from his executive editor, Basil (Stuffy) Walters, to whom Jensen had confided that “the comics in the News smell.” To which Walters responded: “All right—you draw a strip.” And so Jensen did.

Which makes me wonder about the other comics that were running before Elmo. I won't say it's a bad comic, the art's okay, the tone is genial, once in a while there is something amusing, but that's about it. I just have trouble caring about a character as dumb as Elmo is.

Oddly enough some online places list Debbie as Elmo's sister which isn't true in this comic, but years after Elmo disappearing from the strip the author brought Elmo back retconned as Debbie's brother. Weird. The story of the comic is more interesting than this collection.

Yes, Elmo was just too bloody stupid.  That got old pretty quickly. The strip ran less than 3 years.  The renamed (offshoot) strip, "Little Debbie", on the other hand, ran closer to a decade; and Jensen brought back Elmo (as her brother) for a finale, in 1960-61, when his strip was dying (only running in 5 newspapers).  There were some weird scenes, early, with funny character facial expressions, and unexpected subtle humour.  but, on the whole, it was fairly dull, and got old fast.

[paw broon]

I tried Milt Gross Funnies.  Just as well the trades description act wasn't in force when this came out.  It's all too stupid to be anything other than annoying. 

[paw broon]

OK, Elmo. What is the point of this.  It's puerile.  Did I come in halfway through a story?  I disliked most of the language but the occasional panel stopped me for an instant as they looked well done.  I'm not saying this comic isn't funny but I didn't find it funny.  Or entertaining.

[Morgus]

The Medveds were right in not mentioning FREAKS. The performers in ‘the show’ were the heroes. The villains were the ‘normal’ people. The trapeze artist and the strong man are plotting to poison the male midget and take his money. The midget loves the trapeze artist and is totally suckered in. It all comes crashing down at the wedding night when the trapeze artist loses her cool and humiliates the midget in front of his circus family and the trope swears vengeance.
In the 1970 trailer, you see them coming for the couple, crawling under the trailers, through the mud. Always reminds me of Martin Sheen rising slowly from the river in APOCALYPSE NOW.
It is not a social call.
The trailer also lets you see the midget humiliated at the wedding party. Tod Browning, the guy who did DRACULA, directed and his sympathies were with show performers. After all, as a kid, he literally ran away with the circus.
Rondo Hatton has fared better over time, along with the Hilton sisters. There’s a sympathetic documentary out on the sisters now, and Rondo has a horror award named after him.

[SuperScrounge]

Glad to hear dad is better, Super. 88?? That’s better than my family does!

Yeah, my dad and his younger brother (84) are the two oldest living males on their side of the family. He visited my dad in the hospital a few weeks ago. We made sure to get some pictures of them. 

My dad is getting bored staying in the rehabilitation facility. Apparently they make their decisions on when to release people on Tuesdays. So we'll see what they decide.

(3) Yes, Sparky could have been a lot better.  Rogers dropped the ball there, in not making him a very dynamic character - who would be clever, and the initiator of action.  He was too much like a namby-pamby secondary character, who let things happen to him rather than instigating them.  Here and there, he displayed a wry humour. Rogers should have made that his calling card.  He was too much of a milquetoast, mild-mannered guy, who happened to be given super strength randomly chosen by Doc, and acted more like a victim of weird undeserved happenings.  Sometimes he should have been surprised, but then taken with the nice results, other times tired of the adulation, so that like Barks' Donald Duck, the reader would never know whether he was going to be a hero or a goat, or have an enjoyable or unenjoyable experience.

I wonder if his persona was because he started off in a comic strip rather than a comic book? It seems like the laid back persona would be better for shorter installments of 3 or 4 panels a day rather than a full story a month.

[Quirky Quokka]

The Medveds were right in not mentioning FREAKS. The performers in ‘the show’ were the heroes. The villains were the ‘normal’ people. The trapeze artist and the strong man are plotting to poison the male midget and take his money. The midget loves the trapeze artist and is totally suckered in. It all comes crashing down at the wedding night when the trapeze artist loses her cool and humiliates the midget in front of his circus family and the trope swears vengeance.
In the 1970 trailer, you see them coming for the couple, crawling under the trailers, through the mud. Always reminds me of Martin Sheen rising slowly from the river in APOCALYPSE NOW.
It is not a social call.
The trailer also lets you see the midget humiliated at the wedding party. Tod Browning, the guy who did DRACULA, directed and his sympathies were with show performers. After all, as a kid, he literally ran away with the circus.
Rondo Hatton has fared better over time, along with the Hilton sisters. There’s a sympathetic documentary out on the sisters now, and Rondo has a horror award named after him.

Thanks for the extra info, Morgus. Good to know people are viewed more sympathetically these days, though there are still some people of course who are scared or threatened by anyone who appears 'different'. Way back in my Uni days (1980s), I did an assignment and research project on the stigma of disability. Great to see more diversity now, though still a way to go in attitudes.

Cheers

QQ

[Robb_K]

OK, Elmo. What is the point of this.  It's puerile.  Did I come in halfway through a story?  I disliked most of the language but the occasional panel stopped me for an instant as they looked well done.  I'm not saying this comic isn't funny but I didn't find it funny.  Or entertaining.

Yes you DID come in in the middle of a story.  Certain segments of an ongoing newspaper daily strip were included, even with some days within the chosen period left out.  This should have included an introduction to the characters and story background narrative, or started at a more strategic beginning spot.  The problem was that this was a "test" publication that depended upon sales of its first issue to continue.  So, it would have killed the chances of it continuing by filling the first 2/3 of its test issue with necessary background or start-up situation, before moving into its interesting action.  Had at least 3 or 4 issues been "guaranteed" the start (introduction) and early pacing could have been better.

[Robb_K]

Glad to hear dad is better, Super. 88?? That’s better than my family does!

Yeah, my dad and his younger brother (84) are the two oldest living males on their side of the family. He visited my dad in the hospital a few weeks ago. We made sure to get some pictures of them. 

My dad is getting bored staying in the rehabilitation facility. Apparently they make their decisions on when to release people on Tuesdays. So we'll see what they decide.

(3) Yes, Sparky could have been a lot better.  Rogers dropped the ball there, in not making him a very dynamic character - who would be clever, and the initiator of action.  He was too much like a namby-pamby secondary character, who let things happen to him rather than instigating them.  Here and there, he displayed a wry humour. Rogers should have made that his calling card.  He was too much of a milquetoast, mild-mannered guy, who happened to be given super strength randomly chosen by Doc, and acted more like a victim of weird undeserved happenings.  Sometimes he should have been surprised, but then taken with the nice results, other times tired of the adulation, so that like Barks' Donald Duck, the reader would never know whether he was going to be a hero or a goat, or have an enjoyable or unenjoyable experience.

I wonder if his persona was because he started off in a comic strip rather than a comic book? It seems like the laid back persona would be better for shorter instalments of 3 or 4 panels a day rather than a full story a month.

Yes.  Your theory is the most logical conclusion.  The laid-back character doesn't work well for the long period of a book-long story of 36-52 pages, but IS effective in the light humour of a few panels daily strip, where the dwelling on the set-up and "punch line" or funny action of the one joke or single visual gag is much more important than the following of the on-going "story" of the strip overall narrative's saga.

[positronic1]

I posted this about a week ago in its own topic, but since I received no replies I'm copying it here, hoping someone posting on this thread can help.... First let me say that SPARKY WATTS was a wonderful strip, and Boody Rogers is one of the unsung cartooning geniuses of comics' Golden Age. Now my question involves Columbia Comics' reprinting of Boody Rogers' original newspaper strip (which ran in papers from April 29th, 1940 until May 9th, 1942, just about a week more than 2 years) -- I started out reading the strip by noting the publication dates of BIG SHOT COMICS #14-41, SKYMAN #1, THE FACE #1, COLUMBIA COMICS #1, and SPARKY WATTS #1-3, all of which reprinted stories from the original newspaper strip. BUT! ... As it turns out, Columbia editor Vin Sullivan for some reason did not follow the story sequence of the strip exactly in reprinting it in his comic books. The story in SPARKY WATTS #3 actually came from an earlier point in the newspaper continuity than SPARKY WATTS #2, and #2's story actually came from an earlier point in the continuity than SPARKY WATTS #1 -- !! I have figured out that the story in SW #1 continues from the point where the story in BIG SHOT #38 left off, and BIG SHOT #39 picks up the continuity immediately thereafter. Additionally, I detect major breaks in in the strip's continuity somewhere between BIG SHOT #24 and #25 --plus the supporting characters of Yoo Hoo and Sparky's sister Sue show up suddenly in BIG SHOT #35, as if from nowhere, living at Doc Static's house, but they had never appeared in any earlier issues of BIG SHOT (so either SPARKY WATTS #3 or #2, or both, probably fit somewhere in there). I also have no clue where the Boody Rogers reprints that appeared in SKYMAN #1, THE FACE #1 and COLUMBIA COMICS #1 fit in the continuity of the BIG SHOT and SPARKY WATTS reprints. GCDb is no help because while they note which Boody Rogers strips were reprinted from the newspaper continuity, they don't list the actual dates of the original strips. Fortunately, I think it all eventually becomes straightforward after BIG SHOT #41, which reprinted the last newspaper strip (except for those leftover strips they saved to reprint in SPARKY WATTS #2 and 3). Has anyone else here tried to figure out the original strip continuity order? I guess everything would be so much easier if one of those enterprising publishers of newspaper strip reprints would try to reprint The Complete Sparky Watts Dailies. There is too small a sample of the original Sparky Watts newspaper strips posted on ComicBook+ (the last five weeks' worth, plus a short sequence of 9 days from earlier in the continuity) to be of any help in figuring it out. Now none of these concerns usually matter in reading original Golden Age comic books, because mostly the stories were self-contained little episodes that made no reference to stories which had been published earlier. I started out innocently enough, and began reading Sparky Watts in BIG SHOT #14 -- but as I went along, it became obvious that there are some breaks in a couple of places where continuity of the strip is missing, and things begin to get a little confusing. And other than the two obvious breaks I noted (between BS #24-25 and #34-35), there may also have been other gaps that I completely glossed over.