What specifically made Marvel more mature than DC in the early bronze age?

[Jim Kelly]

Well some of us grew up in working class families, where the money didn't grow on trees. I guess I got the topic onto 12 cent comics, because I was trying to explain why I gravitated to DC in the first place over Marvel. No doubt those high school kids on the rich side of the city could afford to buy Marvel comics and follow them every month. But no way I could and 25 cents was a lot of money in the '60s.

The development of markets and trends is a continuum, so you can't say on this date in 1970, suddenly people began to buy comic books. People had been buying comics for decades, so to fgure out the trend, you have to look at the whole continuum. Since it was normal for kids to buy comics, I'm assuming that the teens who bought Marvel in 1970 were the same younger kids that were buying comics in 1967. And maybe they developed and matured with Marvel. Or maybe there's some other explanation, but you have to look at the longer timeline to see how that market developed.

I'm not sure how I could afford the DCs and the few Marvel comics that I bought circa '72. I had saved a lot of money from birthdays and allowance, to buy my chemistry set and then save more money to buy a three speed bike. How I had any money left over for comics, I'm not sure. Especially since many of these comics were priced at 25 and 50 cents. Maybe I was doing a lot of chores around the house to save the money. In any case, I was buying about eight issues a month in '72--give or take.

Around '73, I got a job as a paper boy and then I felt like I was rich--making as much as twenty dollars in profit in some months. But it was a lot of work, getting up early in the morning before school. And then every month trying to get my money from subscribers who were on welfare and wouldn't pay up. Or losing subscribers and trying to win new ones by giving them free papers, the cost coming out of my own pocket. But the upshot was I could put some money in the bank and still afford comics and magazines and the odd book. But I reckon I was reading an average of fourteen titles a month back then--most of them DC.

1974 was the challenging year for a DC reader--many of my favourite titles had gone up to 60 cents. But you got a lot for that money, with seven or eight stories in an issue of DETECTIVE COMICS.

[fumetti]

as I see it, DC's characters behaved as adults would like them to. These superheroes only made professional mistakes, never personal ones. The JLA were respected by all. You weren't supposed to identify with them, you were supposed to respect and want to be them.

You also wanted to be Marvel heroes. But you also were supposed to feel their pain as they struggled with the conflicts that came from leading double lives. Conflicts mostly absent from the lives of DC heroes.

DC's major characters are all based on 1930s heroic sensibilities. Those kinds of heroes are great guys who do great things because they're the right thing to do. They don't question themselves. They aren't screw-ups. It's as if they were born as adults who knew how to use their powers. None of this "year one" fumbling around. Why? Because you didn't look up to screw-ups in those days.

Stan Lee didn't buy into all that, I guess. He was a true geek, trying to work out how someone could have a life, family, and job while sneaking off to save the world. That kind of thinking undermines the whole classic hero concept. So, Stan had to create a whole new kind of heroism for the Marvel universe.

But I never wanted to be a Marvel hero. They're all screw ups in one way or another. I don't want to be responsible for getting my uncle killed. I don't want a heart problem. I don't want to be a mutated freak. I don't want to be blind. I don't want to be handicapped when I'm off-duty, or have a brother out to kill me when I'm on duty. I don't want to have created a bomb that makes a monster. And so on.

I wouldn't mind being the old Barry Allen Flash or old Hal Jordan. Or Carter Hall or Ray Palmer. Those would all be fun to be. I also wouldn't mind being Superman (sure, his original planet and race were destroyed but he didn't know them). I already feel like I'm an alien on this stupid planet, so why not do it with super-powers?

I'd never want to be Batman. Not ever. The origin sucks, and all those feelings of inadequacy around the JLA can't be fun either.

[fumetti]

Infantino ultimately went over to Marvel, but a lot of the life was gone from his work.

He ruined two years worth of Star Wars comics. Just dreadful art. The guy simply refused to look at any reference. Inexcusable, unprofessional.

As a kid, I groaned every time I opened up a comic he drew. (I appreciate it more as an adult, but those memories don't go away easily.)

[thetrellan]

Well some of us grew up in working class families, where the money didn't grow on trees. I guess I got the topic onto 12 cent comics, because I was trying to explain why I gravitated to DC in the first place over Marvel. No doubt those high school kids on the rich side of the city could afford to buy Marvel comics and follow them every month. But no way I could and 25 cents was a lot of money in the '60s.

The development of markets and trends is a continuum, so you can't say on this date in 1970, suddenly people began to buy comic books. People had been buying comics for decades, so to fgure out the trend, you have to look at the whole continuum. Since it was normal for kids to buy comics, I'm assuming that the teens who bought Marvel in 1970 were the same younger kids that were buying comics in 1967. And maybe they developed and matured with Marvel. Or maybe there's some other explanation, but you have to look at the longer timeline to see how that market developed.

I'm not sure how I could afford the DCs and the few Marvel comics that I bought circa '72. I had saved a lot of money from birthdays and allowance, to buy my chemistry set and then save more money to buy a three speed bike. How I had any money left over for comics, I'm not sure. Especially since many of these comics were priced at 25 and 50 cents. Maybe I was doing a lot of chores around the house to save the money. In any case, I was buying about eight issues a month in '72--give or take.

Around '73, I got a job as a paper boy and then I felt like I was rich--making as much as twenty dollars in profit in some months. But it was a lot of work, getting up early in the morning before school. And then every month trying to get my money from subscribers who were on welfare and wouldn't pay up. Or losing subscribers and trying to win new ones by giving them free papers, the cost coming out of my own pocket. But the upshot was I could put some money in the bank and still afford comics and magazines and the odd book. But I reckon I was reading an average of fourteen titles a month back then--most of them DC.

1974 was the challenging year for a DC reader--many of my favourite titles had gone up to 60 cents. But you got a lot for that money, with seven or eight stories in an issue of DETECTIVE COMICS.

My family was working class too. When I became near-sighted in my junior year, no one took me to the eye doctor. It waited until I graduated and joined the Air Force. I almost never got money gifted to me, and never had an allowance. I simply stopped eating lunch for 6 years. But it enabled me to keep up with everything. I loved comics so much that it was all I spent money on.

It's all about priorities. I suppose mine were a little out of whack, but there you have it. It all went to comic books, right up to that first regular paycheck.

Hell, not even the edicts of my drill instructor in basic training stopped me from keeping up. I would have gotten hell if a locker inspection had turned them up, but it never happened.

I know. When I started reading comics, it was 20 cents and 25 cents when I actually started buying them. You're mixing me up with someone else. BTW, I was being facetious about the padding (not that it hasn't happened with every company at one time or the other).

Well, this is the age of the 2-page spread and the formerly unheard-of 4-page spread. Padding like never before.

Funny phenomena about forum exchanges is how everything can seem so serious, even things which would get a laugh in spoken conversation. Something about seeing the comments in black and white, having the entire course of exchanges available, and having it be with total strangers. Normal email or chats don't have the same problem because the people know you and don't get confused for the most part. It's a little nerve wracking sometimes. I really don't mean to be a jerk and really hate when it happens. It's like all the anger I used to feel toward DC that Superman sucked so bad comes out and hits things.

It helps that most of the time others don't recognize that these feelings are behind my comments and don't feel offended. I do try to be polite after all.

He ruined two years worth of Star Wars comics. Just dreadful art. The guy simply refused to look at any reference. Inexcusable, unprofessional.

As a kid, I groaned every time I opened up a comic he drew. (I appreciate it more as an adult, but those memories don't go away easily.)

Pretty much sums up his time at Marvel. It wasn't reference he needed, though. No one in comics used references back then. The dude just got sloppy. You ask me, I think the thrill was gone, leaving just the stress of the job.

[2814sector]

If the bronze age is 1971, I don't see a lot of difference. I've been reading a few Showcase Presents recently and for the most part DC shifted gears with more mature stories. I find that most of the early to late 70's DC output hold up very well compared to 70's Marvel. there are some exceptions, If you just read Superman & Spider-Man, yes Spider-Man is much more complex.

[thetrellan]

In my mind this was nothing more than a cash grab. Stan Lee wanted to hook me and get me to buy every one of his comics. There was even stuff in one comic that continued over to a completely different comic. I would have had to go to the local loan shark to get the money that Stan Lee was expecting me to spend every week on his comics.

But I think for the rich kids who lived in other neighbourhoods this was the swell thing about Marvel comics--and why they could never give them up. It was an addiction

One final observation:

If you had so much trouble affording comics then it hardly seems worth reading them at all. You're complaining that you thought greed was the motivating factor for the longer stories. But one issue took 10 minutes flat to read. 20 minutes at most. That's shorter than the shortest tale of the Twilight Zone, and that show rarely told 2 stories in one episode. I hardly think wanting more space for the telling is even questionable. 10 minutes is barely enough time for a writer to present the conflict, let alone resolve it. Therefore anything they could do to extend it seems a pretty good idea.

So more than one issue to a story is financially prohibitive. This being the case, you would have been better served reading a paperback. Maybe one of those flip books that had 2 covers and contained 2 novelettes. Reading them would take much longer, several hours, making them well worth the extra cost- perhaps that of 2 comics. 4 at most. Or if that was too advanced a concept, regular visits to the library. Better still.

If your mom thought this way, then she surely must have considered comics a complete waste of money. Frugality would just have been an excuse. But a good one. She probably thought of them like any toy; a nice Christmas or birthday gift, but not something that should be a regular investment. A perfectly reasonable point of view, I'd say.

Of course, my own response to it today would be to ask if she had a paper subscription or bought a weekly TV guide. Nasty addictions, those.