Holyoke is a Myth...

[John C]

Neutral corners and a deep breath, everybody.  This is getting heated for no good reason.  Assuming this traces back to something I said, I apologize and insist that we all drop it (even if I'm wrong).  Anybody who can't should take their anger offline and you can feel free to bother me directly.

To those (like Mike, if I read his last post correctly) who would simply rather discuss other things than Holyoke, I believe everybody has permission to create threads.  From the main page, if you go into the "Comic Related Discussion" area, there's a little tab at the top of the message list labeled "New Topic."  The conversation at hand isn't "officially sanctioned," but rather something JVJ simply found worth pursuing.  It's that easy.

[JVJ (RIP)]

ditto (or amen).

(|:{>

[JVJ (RIP)]

I seem to be in an especially cranky mood today. My apologies for any offense I may have given, bchat, or anyone else whom I grouched at. Lots of reasons, but no valid ones. I'm sorry.

Peace? Jim (|:{>

[mmiichael]

Mike, you needn't be in awe of anything I ever did or might do. I'm just looking at my piece of the elephant. It's all any of us can really do. Thank you for the offer of "offlist" but at the moment that simply can't happen. I'm caught three ways to Sunday in real life - in a cast that keeps me for accessing my comics and data cards, preparing for a 6-week vacation in Paris (leaving Thursday if the Iceland volcano gives up) and several other ongoing projects with Hames Ware.

DCM is my window into the elephant room. If you can't post the details here, I'll simply have to pass for now. It would be extremely helpful if you could explain WHY you are reluctant to post specifics and sources here. As I said before, I think most of us here are receptive to your data, but we are searching for the source material that will allow us to view it and come to our own (perhaps different) conclusions based on what each of us know. In science, this is "peer review" and it's used to prove a theory. It is what differentiates the dilettantes from the professionals.

Here's just one point from your most recent post:

From what I have learned, Holyoke was Bowles using a Temerson front operation.

seems to be in direct contradiction of

Based on accumulated circumstantial evidence, I am pretty certain Temerson, originally a crooked attorney from Alabama was put in charge of a consortium of the a couple of the above interests, primarily Bowles, operating as Holyoke.  A somewhat suspicious operation according to those who interfaced with them,  with fancy offices in Lower Manhattan.

Was Temerson put in charge OF a consortium or BY a consortium? Big difference to my ears.
 

Jim,

So much misconstrued all around here.   Someone sent me a link to this forum because Bob Hughes inadvertently misquoted me on a point and I wanted to correct it.  Bob is an otherwise superlative and diligent researcher.

I have worked in publishing most of my adult life, more in Britain, France, Italy, South America than Canada where I now live.  There is no attempt on my part to be vague or withholding though I have had an unpleasant experience of feeding comic fans with information I wanted held onto which got blabbed online.

I have The World’s Smallest Comic Book Collection and have generally kept on the sidelines of the fandom.   But I have made a few friends online with whom I share insights and info.

My perspective is more business development, sociological, politically bent than just the contents of the old comics and who did them.  The history of the Democratic Party in the 20th Century, intertwined with the union movement, the rise of dedicated organized crime and gambling, and it’s interface with the print media, are subjects I pursue.  The trail is longer and deeper than most would think.  

The comic companies are a fascinating sub-component.  The product line evolves into a sort of soft-porn for kids in the post-War period, and I find that aspect particularly fascinating.  The infrastructure and personnel who became the progenitors of the American comic industry got their feet wet with nudie mags and racy pulps in the 20s and 30s.  Their methodologies and strategizing with their comic lines was no accident.

I hope your health and whatever other issues find a happy resolution and that your travel plans work out.  Paris is beautiful this time of year.  I lived there in my 20s.  Lots of comic stores and expertise to be found.  If you miraculously run into pioneer comic historian Pierre Couperie gently remind him he owes me a reciprocal ‘favour’ for  a pile of 19th Century comic sheets I laid on him 25 years ago.

Mike Feldman

[JVJ (RIP)]

Thanks, Mike,
we'll gladly accept however much you might like to share with us.

The infrastructure and personnel who became the progenitors of the American comic industry got their feet wet with nudie mags and racy pulps in the 20s and 30s.

While this is quite likely to be so, I don't believe it is applicable to the men and women in the "trenches" who were busy inventing a new medium and playing with the creative end of the business. It's the intersection of your studies and ours that cries out to be illuminated.

Paris is my second home. I am anxious to return, but Icelandic volcanoes may have other plans. We'll see. Seems that Couperie died the Jan. Never met him.

I've sent a PM.

Peace, Jim (|:{>

[JVJ (RIP)]

Sadly, it seems that this thread has reached the end of the spool. I hope it wasn't something I said. I'd really like to know more of how the machinations of the underworld affected the guys at the typewriters and drawing boards. Neither group worked in a vacuum and it would be beneficial to our understanding of the history to try to synchronize the sequence of occurrences in both worlds.

....

(|:{>

[Henry Andrews (fox_centaur)]

I, too, would love to see this go further.  At some point I will be working on improving the publisher data fields at the GCD and would like to make it possible to capture the most useful information on publishers and on what was going on behind the scenes.  The stuff that's printed in the comics is easy to figure out.  The behind-the-scenes stuff, however, is not something I understand at all well enough to design database fields to capture it.

We tentatively plan ways to record "associations" of various sorts so that we can show things more realistically than just dumping some corporate names in a bucket and labeling the bucket with something like "Holyoke" or "Temerson".  But it's not clear to me what sort of associations are really worth recording and how.

[darkmark (RIP)]

Well, that's another fine myth... ;-)

[Henry Andrews (fox_centaur)]

Vol. 1  No. 6                    August, 1941
GREEN HORNET COMICS is published monthly by Helnit Publishing Co., Inc., at Meriden, Conn.  Entered as second
class matter at the Post Office at Meriden, Conn.  Entire contents copyright 1941 by Helnit Publishing Co., Inc. for Green
Hornet, Inc. Editorial office 381 Fourth Avenue, New York City. Single copies 10 cents, yearly subscription $1.00 in U.S.A.
Printed in the U.S.A.  For advertising rates address Helnit Publishing Co., Inc., 381 Fourth Avenue, New York City.

:-)

So there you have some level of explanation for the confusion over "Helnit Publishing Co., Inc." vs "Green Hornet, Inc."

Back cover is an ad for "The Green Hornet", "The Cat-Man Comics" and ("NEW!!!") Captain Fearless Comics (oddly sans quotes).

Also in this shipment, Power Comics #4 and Contact Comics #2, neither of which I've even pulled out of mylar yet.

[JVJ (RIP)]

Merci, fc.
Info is greatly appreciated.

Peace, Jim (|:{>