Well, maybe I'm a realist...but, when I see SUGAR AND SPIKE #1 reproduced with altered art, it just drives me nuts. Sheldon Mayer is (was) perfectly capable of producing top-quality comic art. He certainly doesn't need someone to clean up after him.


I don't know that what I'm going to say applies to that in particular (mostly because I'm not sure what your objecting to in that reprint of Sugar and Spike #1), but mainstream comics have long been a collaborative form, with uncredited contributions behind-the-scenes by Production Artists, Colorists, Color Separators, Editors -- lots of different people. I don't think you can look at a printed page of comics and be sure that it is entirely the work of the person credited for it.

In the case of comics that are reprinted, it may be that the best source material to draw from has been damaged, and needs restoration. Look at the more recent Masterworks reprints of Silver Age Marvel material -- they look terrific, and they're perhaps as close to the original works as a reprint has ever come. But a substantial amount of work has been put into them, including redrawing, and to the purist, it's difficult to quantify how much of the original work remains unaltered.

The EC Library reprints are a standard that would be difficult (or impossible) for most projects to meet -- when the publisher retains the original artwork, that's almost like turning back the clock!


If a publisher were to put out an edition of "Of Mice and Men" or "The Martian Chronicles" or "The Lord of the Rings" with reconstructed contents which were really nothing more than a well-crafted facsimile...would that be acceptable to you?


Speaking as someone who has published the type of "well-crafted facsimile" editions that you're describing here (and whose interest in doing so was sparked by better, even more carefully-crafted facsimile editions!), I really don't see how that example fits with the others -- particularly if every effort has been made to reproduce the physical qualities of the original book. (But perhaps I misunderstood what you were getting at.)

But again, speaking as someone with experience in publishing, whether you consider comics to be art or junk (and honestly, I think there's much to be said for both), practical limitations still apply. As I've said before, I agree that much greater care could be taken in packaging this material -- but publishing remains a business, and when interest in this material is so limited that most books of this sort sell considerably less than 5,000 copies, it's probably not reasonable to expect the same degree of care and investment that's put into restoring other works with greater cultural importance.

A Week Ago Tuesday: My blog, where I never, ever write about comics (though I think I did, once or twice).
Last Edited By: Fin Fang Foom May 5 10 10:10 AM. Edited 2 times.