When The Comics Went To War
Posted: 01 Dec 2009, 00:04
Some days ago I said I would read When The Comics Went To War and then post my comments about it. I can start by saying that all the favourable things I had to say about Football's Comic Book Heroes can be applied to Adam's second book. The presentation, the format, the writing style, the use of illustrations and the design of the pages are all excellent, not least because the two volumes are like a matching pair. From those points of view I would be proud to have written either or both myself. I do, nevertheless, think it fair to say that I would have been more careful both with the research and the quality control. Despite all that follows, I would still buy this book and recommend it to others.
For a start there are too many spelling mistakes. On page 42, in a description of the second illustration, the word fiece should be fierce, on page 48 treacherous is rendered as trecherous despite the fact that the word treachery is spelt correctly on page 72. On page 98 plausability should be plausibility. This is disappointing because the word is in a quotation. Adam quite properly acknowledges his source, but one should always quote accurately from sources. To do otherwise suggests a lack of respect. I have three versions of ES Turner's Boys Will Be Boys, the Michael Joseph first edition from 1948, the 1962 Daimon Press (Background Books) paperback and the Penguin that Adam used. In all instances, Turner's words are transcribed correctly. Kit Carson becomes Kim at one point on page 101, on page 118 the Wolf of Kabul is called Bill Sampson rather than the correct Samson, on page 132 cotttage has acquired an extra 't', tired on the first line of page 137 should be tried, a serious of trials on page 196 should be a series of trials, equivilent should be equivalent in the margin comment about the second picture on page 209, and on the following page seemigly should be seemingly.
There are other more general language issues. On page 21 there is an intrusive apostrophe in gallow's literature, which makes it look as if gallow owns the literature. It couldn't anyway because gallow does not exist. To be fair, as I have not read Lord Shaftesbury's speech, I am allowing for the possibility that the mistake is his. On page 37 the phrase the enemy would be able to fire would only make sense if it read the enemy would not be able to fire. I have sometimes seen the hyphenating of words like re-fuel and re-stock (page 78), re-invigorated (page 86) and re-appearance (page 105), but such a usage is pointless. The hyphen used this way is only important to distinguish between two words spelt identically but with completely different meanings, eg resign (from a job) and re-sign (for a football club on a further contract, or on returning to a club after a period playing for a different team). Also on page 78 is rendezvous. Adam is using this word as a verb, in which case it should be spelt rendezvouses. The reason this form is so rarely seen is that rendezvous (the 's' not being pronounced, as in French) is almost always used as a noun, so the phrase would be better rendered as for a rendezvous. In a marginal note on page 84 Sexton Blake is described as a phenomena, a plural noun. This should be the singular form phenomenon because Sexton Blake is singular, even though some of his adversaries might believe he is in several places at the same time. In a sentence that starts on page 133 and ends on 134, when talking about Battler Britton in Sun Weekly, we find the expression much aerial high-jinx, which contains three mistakes in four words. The hyphen is not used here, jinx should be jinks, which is plural therefore much should be many. On page 154 text-based story should either be text-based stories or the text-based story, on page 159 'to' is missing from they set out rescue, and on page 188 an historic day should be a historic day. In Lancashire and elsewhere people might say an 'istoric day, but the 'h' should be pronounced and therefore in print an is wrong. Finally, on page 204, in failing to protect a Zeppelin, protect should be prevent.
Turning to factual errors and other general carelessness. On page 10 Lion and Tiger are included in a group of comics said to have been introduced during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Lion launched in 1952, Tiger in 1954. On page 48 Champion of the Week should be Our Champion of the Week, clearly visible on the facing page, the statement on page 85 that The Dreadnought And War Pictorial dated 3 October 1914 was a Special War Supplement is misleading. It was actually just a normal 28-page issue but with pages 13 to 16 being called and presented as a supplement, which it obviously wasn't. On page 100 Whippets O' War!, an illustration of which appears at the top of the page, is referred to in the margin as The Whippets O' War (no exclamation mark either). The reference on the same page to Donald Dane as a veteran story paper writer is misleading because at that time he was only just beginning his career. According to Steve Holland's entry for him in his British Juvenile Story Papers and Pocket Libraries Index, Dane was born in 1902 and would therefore only be about 30 and had only written three stories for The Triumph before Whippets O' War! On page 107 The Secret Of The Hated Hunchback is said to run throughout 1939. It actually started in December 1937 and ran for 13 weeks to the end of February 1938. A similar error occurs on page 115 where The Yellow Ghost is said to run throughout 1943. It didn't even start till the end of May. On page 120 we are told that Raiders From The Depth started on 23 January 1943. Depth should have been Depths anyway but the serial actually began on 28 November 1942. The 23 January instalment was the fifth of six. On page 122, referring to They'll Try It Again!, the text states that it began on 27 March 1945, but the comment in the margin claims it was the 26th. It actually started on the 24th. Also on page 122 it is claimed that war stories continued for the following five decades. In DC Thomsons' defence I would like to point out that there were no textual war stories after 1945 until The Phantom Flyer in August 1950. The mammoth Squadron X was the precursor of the great Matt Braddock sagas that started in 1952, 12 serials and 2 repeats before the launch of The Victor. Not that you would notice from Adam's chapter on the Fifties where Matt doesn't even get a mention! What we might call Adam's 'Cannonball Kidd moment' occurs when he claims on page 168 that The Yellow Sword in The Hotspur (The Hornet according to page 170) in 1968/69 was originally called Will O' The Whistle. The latter certainly appeared in The Wizard in 1957/58, and was set in 1993, but it recounted the second invasion by the Kushanti, and much of the drama was played out in Wales. It was repeated with some modifications with the same title in The Victor early in 1973 but the story in The Hotspur was essentially a repeat of The Yellow Sword from The Wizard in 1955/56, which told of the original futuristic 1968 invasion and the resistance led by John Maitland.
On a couple of occasions Adam missed the opportunity to refer back to points already made. On page 136, when dealing with boxing airman Rockfist Rogan, he could have linked him with Dan Dare on page 92 from The Boys' Realm Of Sport And Adventure, and similarly, on page 171, when linking Danger Island with The Naval Castaways in Lion in 1952, he could have redirected the reader to his reference on page 130. There are other points I could raise but the above will have to do.
For a start there are too many spelling mistakes. On page 42, in a description of the second illustration, the word fiece should be fierce, on page 48 treacherous is rendered as trecherous despite the fact that the word treachery is spelt correctly on page 72. On page 98 plausability should be plausibility. This is disappointing because the word is in a quotation. Adam quite properly acknowledges his source, but one should always quote accurately from sources. To do otherwise suggests a lack of respect. I have three versions of ES Turner's Boys Will Be Boys, the Michael Joseph first edition from 1948, the 1962 Daimon Press (Background Books) paperback and the Penguin that Adam used. In all instances, Turner's words are transcribed correctly. Kit Carson becomes Kim at one point on page 101, on page 118 the Wolf of Kabul is called Bill Sampson rather than the correct Samson, on page 132 cotttage has acquired an extra 't', tired on the first line of page 137 should be tried, a serious of trials on page 196 should be a series of trials, equivilent should be equivalent in the margin comment about the second picture on page 209, and on the following page seemigly should be seemingly.
There are other more general language issues. On page 21 there is an intrusive apostrophe in gallow's literature, which makes it look as if gallow owns the literature. It couldn't anyway because gallow does not exist. To be fair, as I have not read Lord Shaftesbury's speech, I am allowing for the possibility that the mistake is his. On page 37 the phrase the enemy would be able to fire would only make sense if it read the enemy would not be able to fire. I have sometimes seen the hyphenating of words like re-fuel and re-stock (page 78), re-invigorated (page 86) and re-appearance (page 105), but such a usage is pointless. The hyphen used this way is only important to distinguish between two words spelt identically but with completely different meanings, eg resign (from a job) and re-sign (for a football club on a further contract, or on returning to a club after a period playing for a different team). Also on page 78 is rendezvous. Adam is using this word as a verb, in which case it should be spelt rendezvouses. The reason this form is so rarely seen is that rendezvous (the 's' not being pronounced, as in French) is almost always used as a noun, so the phrase would be better rendered as for a rendezvous. In a marginal note on page 84 Sexton Blake is described as a phenomena, a plural noun. This should be the singular form phenomenon because Sexton Blake is singular, even though some of his adversaries might believe he is in several places at the same time. In a sentence that starts on page 133 and ends on 134, when talking about Battler Britton in Sun Weekly, we find the expression much aerial high-jinx, which contains three mistakes in four words. The hyphen is not used here, jinx should be jinks, which is plural therefore much should be many. On page 154 text-based story should either be text-based stories or the text-based story, on page 159 'to' is missing from they set out rescue, and on page 188 an historic day should be a historic day. In Lancashire and elsewhere people might say an 'istoric day, but the 'h' should be pronounced and therefore in print an is wrong. Finally, on page 204, in failing to protect a Zeppelin, protect should be prevent.
Turning to factual errors and other general carelessness. On page 10 Lion and Tiger are included in a group of comics said to have been introduced during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Lion launched in 1952, Tiger in 1954. On page 48 Champion of the Week should be Our Champion of the Week, clearly visible on the facing page, the statement on page 85 that The Dreadnought And War Pictorial dated 3 October 1914 was a Special War Supplement is misleading. It was actually just a normal 28-page issue but with pages 13 to 16 being called and presented as a supplement, which it obviously wasn't. On page 100 Whippets O' War!, an illustration of which appears at the top of the page, is referred to in the margin as The Whippets O' War (no exclamation mark either). The reference on the same page to Donald Dane as a veteran story paper writer is misleading because at that time he was only just beginning his career. According to Steve Holland's entry for him in his British Juvenile Story Papers and Pocket Libraries Index, Dane was born in 1902 and would therefore only be about 30 and had only written three stories for The Triumph before Whippets O' War! On page 107 The Secret Of The Hated Hunchback is said to run throughout 1939. It actually started in December 1937 and ran for 13 weeks to the end of February 1938. A similar error occurs on page 115 where The Yellow Ghost is said to run throughout 1943. It didn't even start till the end of May. On page 120 we are told that Raiders From The Depth started on 23 January 1943. Depth should have been Depths anyway but the serial actually began on 28 November 1942. The 23 January instalment was the fifth of six. On page 122, referring to They'll Try It Again!, the text states that it began on 27 March 1945, but the comment in the margin claims it was the 26th. It actually started on the 24th. Also on page 122 it is claimed that war stories continued for the following five decades. In DC Thomsons' defence I would like to point out that there were no textual war stories after 1945 until The Phantom Flyer in August 1950. The mammoth Squadron X was the precursor of the great Matt Braddock sagas that started in 1952, 12 serials and 2 repeats before the launch of The Victor. Not that you would notice from Adam's chapter on the Fifties where Matt doesn't even get a mention! What we might call Adam's 'Cannonball Kidd moment' occurs when he claims on page 168 that The Yellow Sword in The Hotspur (The Hornet according to page 170) in 1968/69 was originally called Will O' The Whistle. The latter certainly appeared in The Wizard in 1957/58, and was set in 1993, but it recounted the second invasion by the Kushanti, and much of the drama was played out in Wales. It was repeated with some modifications with the same title in The Victor early in 1973 but the story in The Hotspur was essentially a repeat of The Yellow Sword from The Wizard in 1955/56, which told of the original futuristic 1968 invasion and the resistance led by John Maitland.
On a couple of occasions Adam missed the opportunity to refer back to points already made. On page 136, when dealing with boxing airman Rockfist Rogan, he could have linked him with Dan Dare on page 92 from The Boys' Realm Of Sport And Adventure, and similarly, on page 171, when linking Danger Island with The Naval Castaways in Lion in 1952, he could have redirected the reader to his reference on page 130. There are other points I could raise but the above will have to do.
