Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Romance Novels I Read in 2019

I read 20 books in 2019, all of them romance novels (if you count The Scarlet Pimpernel as a historical romance, which I do). The books are listed below in the order in which the books were published, from oldest to newest. I have also included my Goodreads reviews and ratings for each novel, as well as the days that it took me to read them. (Some of my Goodreads reviews have been revised and expanded for this blog.)

A note about the ratings: Goodreads uses a 5-star rating system, with 5 stars being for the best books, 1 star being for the worst. There are no half-stars given, which unfortunately tends to lump some books together even if you may have liked one slightly better than another with the same rating. I consider 5 star books to be books that I found outstanding and very highly recommend. I consider 4 star books to be above average, still recommended but not a peak example of the form. I give 3 stars to books that I enjoyed reading but that I don't think are exceptional or notable works; they are good books and entertaining at the time but may be not particularly memorable. 2 star books are those which I had a serious problem with or had difficulty finishing due to my lack of enthusiasm for it; I cannot recommend a 2 star book.  I have not yet given any book only 1 star, but that rating would be for a book that I hated, one with few or no redeeming features.

BOOKS I READ IN 2019:

THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL by Baroness Orczy (1905)
Rating: 4 stars
Read: June 11-28, 2019
Review: I apparently neglected to pen a review after reading this novel, but suffice to say that I found it an enjoyable old-fashioned adventure story with a strong romantic theme (often told from the perspective of the Pimpernel's wife Marguerite Blakeney) as well as an old-time mystery with its use of disguises and escapes. My copy is a Pyramid Books edition, an 8th printing from May 1966.


HOPE FOR TOMORROW by Anne Weale (1959)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: Dec. 8-17, 2019
Review: This book was originally published by Mills & Boon in the UK in 1959, and reprinted in North America as Harlequin Romance #901 in March 1965. My copy (shown here) is a 1976 facsimile reprint edition.
     One of the things that I didn't know about old Harlequin novels until obtaining them for myself was that many were reprints of British novels. I've always been interested in England, so it's fascinating to read material from there, especially older work that reflects how life used to be. For example, on page 20 our hero Simon asks our heroine Jan if she would "like to see the new Kenneth More film at the Odeon." I became aware of Kenneth More a few years ago when watching the original 1967 BBC TV mini-series The Forsyte Saga, in which he starred. And near the end of the novel, we get a chance to listen to the Home Service on "the wireless" (i.e., the radio). So, an old Harlequin romance novel combines two of my very favorite things: old stuff and British stuff!
     One drawback to romance novels of the 1950s-60s is that they often focus on the woman's perspective at the expense of the man's. The reader is denied access to the hero's thoughts while the heroine spends the novel wondering whether he really loves her or not. That question is the crux of the novel, as Jan wonders if her playwright husband Simon is still in love with his former girlfriend who has since become a famous Hollywood star. Some of his actions suggest that such is the case, but the reader cannot be sure of his motivation because we don't learn what he is feeling about the matter until the end when he finally voices his thoughts to Jan. 
     This is a lowkey romance, about a gentle young woman in love with an artistic man who appears content to be with her but reluctant (until the end) to say the words that she longs for -- "I love you" -- that will put her doubts to rest. The characters were vividly realized and interesting, except for Jan herself who by her own admission is not as interesting as the rest of her family. I enjoyed this book and enjoyed spending time in its pages despite its leisurely pace. 

THE SHOW MUST GO ON by Rose Meadows (1968)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: April 2019
Review: This paperback edition titled FAREWELL TO LOVE was published in the US by Pocket Books in Dec. 1973, but was originally published in the UK in 1968 under the title THE SHOW MUST GO ON.
     The novel is only around 190 pages but takes place across a large span of time, from 1780 to 1816. So this is both a Georgian and Regency novel. I didn't realize until I was over halfway through the book that the characters in the novel actually existed. This includes the novel"s heroine, the actress Dorothy Jordan, whose Wikipedia page can be found under the name Dorothea Jordan. However I would recommend reading the novel before reading the Wikipedia entry, to prevent spoiling the story.
     The fact that this is a novelized biography of a real person helps to explain why so many of the characters in the novel had the same name. There are several men named George and at least two Fannys. As a reader, it was sometimes difficult to remember who was who because of this. Although marketed as a romance novel, one shouldn't expect to find the obligatory happily-ever-after here. It's a real woman's life story that had much happiness along the way but also much tragedy.
     There's very little info about this novel or its author online. I"ve not been able to find an image of the cover of FAREWELL TO LOVE on the web. (The cover image shown here is a scan of my own copy.) The story appears to be heavily researched but I don"t know if Rose Meadows pieced together the life story of Dorothy Jordan from various sources or simply dramatized someone else"s biography of the actress. If she did the research herself (as Georgette Heyer was known to do) then the result is most impressive.
     This is a fairly obscure book, but definitely worth a read. Evidently Pocket Books published a few other books by Rose Meadows at this time and I look forward to finding them in my book-sale searches. I'm only rating this book 3 stars (out of five) simply because of the difficulty I had keeping track of all the characters. I do recommend the book, however.

THE BROKEN MELODY by Ellen Jane Macleod (1970)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: May 8-20, 2019
Review: THE BROKEN MELODY by Ellen Jane MacLeod was an "Easy Eye" (i.e., large print) paperback published by Magnum Books (the successor to Lancer Books). Inside, the publisher is listed as Prestige Books (presumably a Magnum imprint) and copyrighted 1970 to Lenox Hill Press. I know nothing about the author; the book itself appears to be pretty obscure.
     At only 192 pages, this should be a quick read (which is why I selected it to read), but it ended up taking me a couple weeks to finish, since its leisurely pace doesn't exactly make it a gripping page-turner. On the other hand, I enjoyed the story while I was reading it, enjoyed the company of the characters (though most have fairly bland personalities) and wouldn't mind reading the book again (though hopefully faster this time) in case I missed anything the first time around.
     The main character is Jenny, a young woman who lives in Portland that appears to have a bright career ahead of her as a concert pianist. Her hopes are dashed, however, when she injures her wrist in a car accident. During her recuperation at home alone (both her parents are dead), she discovers her mother's old diaries which inspire her to visit her mother's homeland in Scotland. She makes new friends there (including a potential love interest, a fellow American named Richard) and ends up staying in the large mansion of her grumpy, unhappy grandfather (who would prefer her to take a romantic interest in Michael, the son of his best friend).
     At times the novel reads like a travelogue as Jenny visits various picturesque areas of the countryside. There's a scene near the end where Jenny accompanies a friend who drives a bookmobile, distributing books to people living in isolated rural areas. It contributes nothing to the plot, has no reason to be there, and yet I found it to be one of the most touching scenes in the book and the novel would have been the poorer without it.
     The prose is written in a straight-forward plain style, not unlike the kind of novel aimed at a teenage audience. There is no sex in this romance novel, and only a couple kisses. Pages from the book could be mistaken for a Nancy Drew novel at times. It's a bit of simple escapism and literary tourism that doesn't wear out its welcome. Overall I enjoyed it for what it was: a brief trip to Scotland to make some new friends.


GOODBYE TO YESTERDAY by Arlene Hale (1973)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: Sept. 28-Oct. 6, 2019
Review: GOODBYE TO YESTERDAY by Arlene Hale (Little, Brown & Co., 1973) is actually a hardcover book (all the other books on this list are paperbacks) and my copy is a worn, ex-library copy. According to the Fantastic Fiction website, there was a paperback edition published in 1978 (I've not seen the cover anywhere online) and will likely replace this copy with the paperback if I ever find one.
     This is a pleasant, easy-to-read, fast-paced novel, only 226 pages long. I'd never read a book by Arlene Hale before, although I have recently acquired several of her books. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed her simple, to-the-point writing style. It reminded me of the style of a mystery novel.
     In fact this romance novel is a mystery story as well, where our heroine, a young librarian named Heather is tasked with indexing a dying old rich man's personal library of vintage books. He also wants her to find a missing letter that he believes has been misplaced within the pages of one of the books -- a letter that pertains to one of his nephews who has recently returned from Vietnam.
     The novel contains numerous main characters and at least four romances (plus one misguided, unrequited love) happening through the book. The meaning of the book's title becomes clear by the end of the penultimate chapter. Despite the large cast of characters, the reader is able to keep them straight because they all serve various roles. Overall I enjoyed the book and give it 3 out of 5 stars.


AN OFFER OF MARRIAGE by Lynna Cooper (1976)
Rating: 2 stars
Read: March 16-April 16, 2019
Review: AN OFFER OF MARRIAGE by Lynna Cooper was published by Signet in August 1976. "Lynna Cooper" was actually a pen-name for Gardner Fox. best known for writing DC comics during the Golden and Silver Ages of comic books, and science fiction novels in the pulp era. Fox wrote over a dozen romance novels for Signet in the 1970s and early 1980s under the Lynna Cooper pseudonym. Given this background, I was eager to read this novel. Sadly, however, I found it a hard slog despite the book's brevity.
     This is a romantic suspense novel that fails on both counts. The heroine isn't sure if the wealthy man that she married really loves her, or even if she loves him. (She married him, a total stranger, to satisfy his deathbed request, but he soon made a full recovery.) Does he really love her or is he just using her? Questions like that are repeated throughout the book, always from the heroine's perspective; the man's thoughts are not shared with the reader, making him seem more of a remote figure. This contributes to the "suspense" I suppose, but the question drags on too long. The real "suspense" aspect concerns a bearded man who apparently is trying to kill our heroine. He is spotted hanging around outside her cottage, but no clue is given to solve this mystery until literally 10 pages before the novel ends, and the action involving the bearded man is wrapped up way too quickly. (There is one offhand comment made halfway through the book that turns out to be a clue to what is going on, but it would have been more satisfying if additional clues had been given.) Skipping so fast past the only "action" in this story was a missed opportunity.
     The book is written professionally, but there are some annoying quirks, particularly the constant references to one of the characters as "the blond woman." The hero's car is constantly referred to by what kind of car it is (an Iso Grifo) as if that matters (it doesn't). The heroine "giggled" a lot when "laughed" would have seemed more appropriate for her serious personality.
     There's not much that happens in this novel. It's only 173 pages, but entire chapters could have been eliminated without affecting the story. The book wasn't all bad --- it had some atmospheric outdoorsy scenes that I enjoyed -- but overall it was disappointingly dull.


THE WHISPERING GATE by Mary Wibberley (1976)
Rating: 3 stars
ReadDec. 28-30, 2019

ReviewThis novel was Harlequin Romance #1994, published in August 1976. Although I'm rating it 3 stars, I found the book to be an enjoyable read, closer to 3-and-a-half stars. The story begins almost in a kind of gothic or romantic suspense manner, where a young woman named Andrea finds herself fascinated by a painting depicting a woman somewhat resembling herself standing in front of an old arched gate. The artist notices her at the gallery observing the mysterious painting and invites her to stay with his family for the purpose of deceiving his uncle that she is his long-lost granddaughter. The deception is well-intentioned, to comfort the dying old man in his final months of life. Another family member, however, former race-car driver Dominic Faro, objects to this scheme, and so Andrea and Dominic find themselves continually at odds despite their attraction to one another. The ending is predictable, but satisfying nonetheless. I found the story to be well-told, fast-paced and engrossing, with enjoyable characters and settings throughout.  If I could find a flaw, it would only be that the story seems a little old-fashioned for 1976, the innocent young heroine and her workplace friends seeming more like inhabitants of the 1950s. But that old-fashioned quality perhaps adds to the charm, and makes the story seem more universal and timeless than the addition of dated 1970s references would have caused. It's a solid entertaining read, typical of the consistently professional quality that Harlequin is known for.


THE WINDS OF PARADISE by Grace Caldwell (1978)
Rating: 2 stars
Read: Feb. 12-26, 2019
Review: This was book #9 in the MacFadden Romance series, published in 1978. This was a run of paperback books put out by MacFadden (a division of Kim Publishing Corp.) to compete with Harlequin, but lacking Harlequin's quality and using mostly unknown writers. Apparently the only other book that "Grace Caldwell" ever wrote was another MacFadden Romance (#18, "The Stranger and the Sea"), which makes me wonder if it was simply a pen-name.
     The book has its good and bad aspects. The biggest flaw is that it's uneven, which can be demonstrated just by looking at the page lengths of the chapters. The book is 192 pages long and has 11 chapters. Chapters 1-4 comprise pages 1 to 99 whilst the remaining 7 chapters are crammed into pages 101 to 191. Those first four chapters tell an interesting story about a 19 year old woman named Celeste Montaque (misspelled Montique on the back cover) who has lost both her parents and lives alone, her only friend being her father's best friend, Dan Nelson who checks in on her from time to time. Dan has an artificial leg and is in his sixties; he ends up in the hospital and Celeste becomes his caretaker, moving in with him. Eventually Dan proposes that Celeste marry him (with the understanding that there will be no romance or sex between them) simply so she can inherit his estate when he dies, which he expects to be soon.
     Celeste agrees to the arrangement and appears to be happy with things. She has lived a sheltered life, and her experience with men is very limited. She had gone on a date with a young medical student named Anthony, but his kissing her without consent caused her to push him away despite her being attracted to him. So we never hear back from Anthony, but their relationship foreshadows what is to come with Gerald. Who is Gerald (the man mentioned on the back cover description)? Well, he is not introduced or mentioned at all until page 128. If we omit blank pages between chapters, page 128 is only 60 pages until the novel's last page. So this is all a bit sudden!
     On page 106, Dan expresses some guilt to Celeste that she is spending so much time with an old duffer like him and not with people her own age. So, on page 108, he recommends that she go on a cruise by herself for a while and have some fun. By page 112, she agrees to go on the cruise. She finally gets on the boat on page 119 and says goodbye to Dan on the next page. She then spends the next several pages trying to fit in, but not doing too well at it. She becomes fascinated with the mysterious Gerald (a fellow passenger), although she realizes that he is a rude and arrogant person and exhibits none of the positive personal qualities of her husband Dan. But for some reason she is in love with him. I won't spoil the ending, but it's fairly predictable -- involving the usual comeuppance that an arrogant romantic male lead must undergo to make him a suitable husband for our heroine.
     For me, the first half of the book was more interesting because it was less predictable, a more unusual premise than the romantic dancing around each other that takes place in the second half of the book. The entire book is written in a simple, matter-of-fact style, but the second half appears to be more clumsily written, containing a few typos. In one instance, the word "said" was used when evidently "sat" was meant instead, which caused me to wonder if what I was reading was a transcript from dictation, and the transciber had misheard the word "sat" for "said." After that, it was harder to read the novel without "hearing" it as a writer simply talking into a dictating machine, trying to get the novel done as fast as possible. Perhaps the uneven quality is the result of chapters 1-4 having been done earlier and then left unfinished, and then the second half of the novel completed later in a hurry -- or even the result of putting two unrelated short stories together and making one novel out of them. That's purely guesswork on my part, based on how it felt reading it.
     The sloppy quality is reinforced by the late introduction of the hero (the writer's fault) and the bland, dollar-store presentation by the publisher, MacFadden. The other MacFadden Romance books that I've seen have subpar cover artwork, no match for the Harlequins of the day. The artwork on the cover of this book isn't too bad, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the story inside, since our heroine is blonde, not red or dark haired like the woman on the cover. One thing that I did like about the novel is that Grace Caldwell at least knows the difference between "blonde" (referring to women) and "blond" (referring to men) -- I'm a stickler for the proper use of the word and it's always jarring when I see it used wrong. So kudos to Grace Caldwell, wherever she may be, for using them correctly.
     Despite my complaints about the novel that I've outlined above (and I could go on), I did enjoy spending time with these characters. It's too bad that Celeste was stuck in a romance novel and forced into the conventions of that genre, instead of in another kind of novel (as the first half of the book felt like) where she could have more time to grow up as a person before becoming romantically involved with a potentially unworthy mate. I think what Celeste really needed was not a boyfriend or husband, but just a female friend or two her own age with whom she could confide and be with, before taking a leap into love with a stranger.


SAFFRON MOON by Lillian Crawford (1978)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: June 7-11, 2019
ReviewSAFFRON MOON by Lillian Crawford is book #37 in the MacFadden Romance series, published in 1978. I enjoyed the book very much and thought it was well written, although I am only rating it 3 stars because I thought that the story was fairly simple. It was very nearly a 4-star book for me, however, because of my enjoyment reading it. So let's say this book was 3 and a half stars.
     I know nothing about the author and, judging by the lack of info I found online, neither does anyone else. According to the site FictionDB, Lillian Crawford only wrote four novels, all of them for MacFadden Romance. I find that unlikely, given the quality of her writing, and I suspect that she wrote more books under other names.
     The story starts out in New York (which suggests to me an American author) but the rest of the novel takes place in Columbia. The author presents such a detailed picture of the country that one assumes that she must have visited there herself. Interestingly, on page 159 the author uses the word "centre" (instead of "center") which makes me wonder if Lillian Crawford was perhaps not an American author.
     As with most MacFadden Romance novels, the cover artwork has nothing to do with the story and the typography (the actual text on the page) is sometimes unevenly spaced. The effect of the packaging suggests a slapdash production, which is unfortunate because the writing itself is very good. Hopefully the writer continued writing novels for a publisher that was better able to showcase her work.
     The novel does have a twist on the last page that caused me to groan a little, like reading a mystery where a pertinent detail had hitherto been left out. But it still works and does allow for the obligatory HEA.



THE DEMON COUNT by Anne Stuart (1980)
Rating: 4 stars
Read: Jan. 1-23, 2019
Review: THE DEMON COUNT by Anne Stuart was originally published as book #557 in Dell's long-running CANDLELIGHT ROMANCE series in March 1980. I thought the book was very well written -- so much so that I've now begun reading another book by the same author. (There is a sequel to this novel, titled The Demon Count's Daughter, see below.)
     The novel takes place in 1840, as Charlotte Theresa Sabina Morrow leaves England for Italy to be with her guardian (whom she has not met before) after the death of her parents. Her guardian is the mysterious and dangerous Count Luc del Zaglia who lives with his servants in an old decaying mansion in Venice. Charlotte finds herself both attracted to and repulsed by the demonic-seeming Count. She begins to believe that he may be a vampire based on some baffling murders that are happening in town. The central question of the novel is whether Luc is what he appears to be, man or beast?
     If I had a criticism to make, I'd suggest that the mythology of the vampire (avoiding daylight, mirrors, garlic, ability to change into a bat) may be too familiar to the characters in the story, before such vampiric characteristics had become pop-culture staples through fictional representations created after 1840. However such references do add to the spooky atmosphere of the book. If you enjoy old-fashioned gothic romances, you should like this one.


THE DEMON COUNT'S DAUGHTER by Anne Stuart (1980)
Rating: 4 stars
Read: Jan. 29-Feb. 10, 2019
Review: This book was #561 in Dell's Candlelight Romance series, published in April 1980. The novel was a sequel to Stuart's THE DEMON COUNT (Candlelight #557). The sequel has some references to the earlier novel, but takes place two decades later and contains a standalone story featuring mostly new main characters and therefore can be enjoyed on its own merits. But if one has read The Demon Count already, the sequel provides a welcome return to the setting of 19th century Venice and the theme of a strong-willed woman's fascination for an aloof and mysterious man. Like the earlier book, the novel ends back in England with a satisfying resolution.
     The first half of The Demon Count's Daughter has a much lighter touch than The Demon Count had, since that book hinted at supernatural possibilities and was more atmospheric in its descriptions. The daughter of the title, Luciana del Zaglia, is sent to Venice to obtain a secret paper that will expel the Austrians from Venice. That aspect of the story doesn't kick into high gear until the second half, which has a more serious, dramatic adventure feel (in keeping with the style of the earlier book), whereas the first half seemed more like a romantic comedy, with Luciana's servant Maggie and the fellow spy Tonetti providing comic relief.
     A few chapters in, I felt like this book would be a weaker work than its predecessor, but by the time I was finished, I found that I had enjoyed it just as much. There was a nice combination of humor and danger, and the hero was the most likable in attitude of the three Stuart novels that I've read so far. He was gruff and aloof, but his actions and attitude were understandable. As far as I know, Stuart never returned to these characters, which is too bad because there could be still more stories to tell about The Demon Count's family.


WATERS OF EDEN by Katherine Kent (1981)
Rating: 5 stars
Read: March 26-April 3. 2019
ReviewWATERS OF EDEN by Katherine Kent was a Gallen Historical Romance paperback novel published in August 1981. In the early 1980s, around 74 romance novels were published by Richard Gallen Books and distributed by Pocket Books, but this is the only one I've read so far. The novel is outstanding and kept my attention throughout its 297 pages. It was well-written with many memorable characters, events than run the gamut from amusing to touching to terrifying, and lots of action and adventure in addition to the main romance. I won't summarize the plot here and will just encourage you to read it. 
     If one were to draw an outline of the plot, there would be two big climaxes: one in the middle of the novel where the volcano erupts and nearly kills everyone on the island, and near the end during a convict uprising where total chaos reigns. Most novels would have had only one climactic moment and I wondered how the writer would be able to top the volcano's eruption in terms of excitement, but she manages to do so. I look forward to seeking out more novels written by Katherine Kent (a pen-name for Joan Dial).


FLAMES OF PASSION by Sheryl Flournoy (1982)
Rating: 5 stars
Read: Oct. 19-Nov. 7, 2019
Review: FLAMES OF PASSION by Sheryl Flournoy was the 4th book in Pocket Books' TAPESTRY line of historical romance novels. (There was a total of 94 TAPESTRY novels published from 1982 to 1986.) This novel was published in November 1982 and runs 304 pages. The bio page at the end of the book says this is the author's third novel. The FictionDB index lists only 4 of her novels, with this being the earliest one (she wrote another Tapestry novel later in the series). However she apparently also wrote two Silhouette Desire novels under the pen-name Sherry Dee (one of which pre-dates Flames of Passion). It's too bad that Ms. Flournoy wrote so few novels, since this one was a terrific read which captivated me from the first few pages.
     The book does contain aspects that some readers may find problematic, offensive, and/or annoying. The hero Captain Trent LeBlanc rapes the heroine Amber multiple times; within the first two chapters he has raped her twice. He also kidnaps her and forces her into marriage, locking her in a room until she agrees to marry him. He expects her to be completely submissive to his will and treats her as his possession. At the same time she fights his attempts at control, both in large ways (threatening to jump from his boat) and small (insisting on riding her horse despite his disapproval). The two lovers are like each other, both unwilling to voice the words "I love you." Their bond seems strongest in bed, lusting over each other, a mere physical attraction, and yet they are alike in their stubborness, their willingness to fight to protect each other from enemies. This duality is symbolized early on when Amber begins wearing Trent's clothing (since there is no suitable feminine clothing aboard the ship). When pirates attack them and Trent is knocked out, Amber assumes the role of ship's captain herself, leading his men during the battle!
     The matter of bad male behavior in a romance novel seems easier to forgive in a historical novel than a contemporary due to the lack of enlightened attitudes in the past for which there is no excuse in the present. Amber seems to suggest that the society in which she lived would frown upon her consenting at all to Trent's sexual interest in her, making the matter of consent moot since her agency is denied on both sides, and that the only true guide is her own body's response to his actions. On page 62 we read: "...Amber had begun to realize that her feelings for the man whom she professed to hate so intensely were not those of hatred at all. They were in reality the stirrings of love and passion, and they warred with her sense of decency and good breeding. She had fought her emotions, but with each passing day her frustrations had lessened, and she now readily admitted to herself that she had truly fallen in love."
     Another problematic aspect is the stereotyped dialogue of the hero's black servants (who are not slaves, despite this taking place in the South during the War of 1812). The maid Mattie seems based on "mammy" characters like in "Gone With the Wind," and the black characters' dialogue is always written in extremely broken English to evoke their dialogue. While this helps the reader to "hear" how they talk, it is a bit cringey to read, making them seem like comic relief unlike the white characters.
     Despite these problematic elements, I thoroughly enjoyed this thrilling novel and give it 5 stars. The story had a bit of everything: love, murder, action, espionage, secrets, villains, and a secondary romance among two supporting characters. I look forward to reading more by this author and more Tapestry romances.


CHAIN OF LOVE by Anne Stuart (1983)
Rating: 2 stars
Read: Jan. 21-28, 2019
Review: This was book #30 in the Harlequin American Romance series, published in 1983. The novel was well-written and enjoyable to read, although I disliked the hero, Sin MacDonald, because of the entitled way he treated the heroine, Cathy Whiteheart -- ordering her around and using his physical strength to get his way. This is particularly insensitive given that Sin knows Cathy has recently left an abusive relationship. Cathy rightly objects and resists Sin's control, a couple times calling him a sexist, but at the same time she is drawn to him and usually submits in the end. This may be a "lust story" more than a "love story" because the only thing that seems to keep these two together is their passionate physical attraction to one another.
     My discomfort with Sin's forceful attitude kept this book from scoring higher with me, despite Anne Stuart's storytelling skill. One Goodreads reviewer mentioned "Magnum P.I." (because of Sin's mustache). Tom Selleck was a popular sex symbol when this novel was published, so perhaps Stuart modeled Sin on the actor. It's a little easier to take Sin's behavior if one visualizes the affable Selleck doing it -- for example, when Sin threatens to knock Cathy unconscious and carry her to the airport if she doesn't go willingly. However it's hard to defend some of Sin's actions no matter how you look at it. Another reviewer mentioned when Sin slaps Cathy across the face after she had slapped him. (This to a woman that he knows has been abused by a man previously.) Much worse in my opinion is a scene near the end where he takes Cathy to bed by force, saying "I'm not going to rape you," but appears to do just that. Cathy tells him afterwards that she will never forgive him for what he did to her, and it's hard to see why she should.
     It's no spoiler to say that most romance novels have happy endings. As I got to the last few chapters, I wondered how that obligatory happy resolution would come about since it seemed like if the two went their separate ways then nothing worthwhile was achieved, but if Cathy submitted to Sin then she would be stuck in another potentially abusive relationship. Anne Stuart provides an ending that I can live with, where Cathy gets her man and Sin finally reveals a genuine love for her.


SCANDAL'S DAUGHTER by Margaret Summerville (1984)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: April 2019
Review: I found this to be a highly enjoyable and satisfying Regency romance novel with memorable and likable characters. Although the hero, Lord Bain, has the reputation as a rough sort, the reader is assured that he is honorable and thus worthy of the name "hero" (as the male love interest is referred to in the romance genre). The heroine, Gillian Ashley, is headstrong, which may be uncharacteristic of young women in that era, but such strength and determination is preferable to reading about a woman who lacks such a will and lets others take advantage of her. This novel was a quick read, a real page turner despite having a relatively simple storyline. This was Margaret Summerville's first Signet Regency (she had previously written a few Regencies for Dell's Candlelight series) and I very much look forward to reading more of her novels.


THE BARGAIN BRIDE by Barbara Cartland (1989)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: Oct. 6-16, 2019
Review: Back on Oct. 4th, I mentioned that I was going to try and read a romance novel in one day (as I hear that so many people do) and said that I would attempt it with a thin Barbara Cartland novel that I bought recently. Well, it took a few days, but I finished reading it, and I enjoyed it.
     This is THE BARGAIN BRIDE by Barbara Cartland, published by Jove Books in Dec. 1989. This was book #76 in a CAMFIELD NOVEL OF LOVE series that Cartland was churning out on a near-monthly basis.  This was the first Cartland novel that I've ever read. The thin page count, only 162 pages, plus Cartland's simple writing style (where most paragraphs are only a sentence long) made it an easy and pleasurable read.
     It's a Regency romance involving a young innocent woman named Aleda who must sell the family home to pay her brother's debts. The only one willing to buy the rundown place is a wealthy stranger who says he will buy it if she agrees to be his wife. The deal is made but Aleda fears that the man only wanted to marry her because of her title. In the end, the various mysteries surrounding his actions are resolved satisfactorily.
     The highlight of the novel for me was near the end when Aleda is kidnapped, and suddenly the novel feels like a thrilling Victorian-era adventure, where our hero ("an expert in disguise"), accompanied by his servant Chang, must invade an opium den to rescue her. If the whole novel was like this, it would have been a wonderfully old-fashioned (albeit politically incorrect) classic yarn. But if so, it would have been less of a love story. For what it is, a thin romance novel, it holds one's interest throughout and makes one enjoy one's stay in its pages, even for so short a time as it takes to read them. I enjoyed it and look forward to reading more from Barbara Cartland.


BIRDIE by Taylor Ryan (1996)
Rating: 5 stars
Read: June 28-Sept. 5, 2019
Review: Finally finished reading BIRDIE by Taylor Ryan after a couple months. No fault of the book that it's taken me so long really (although it is 291 pages with small text) but I've been reading other things off and on as well.
     BIRDIE by Taylor Ryan (copyrighted to Taylor Robbins inside) is Harlequin Historical #312, released in 1996. According to the internet, Taylor Ryan has only written four novels (BIRDIE was her second), all for the Harlequin Historical series, her other three being #262 (Love's Wild Wager), #342 (Beauty and the Beast) and #368 (The Essential Wife), all from 1995-1997. I have the last book, too, and am tempted to start reading it now, based on how good BIRDIE was. It always surprises me that an author can write a great novel and then basically is never heard from again, as appears to be the case here.
     BIRDIE takes place in Regency era England following the title character from her childhood living in the slum to a kind of arranged marriage as a teenager to getting kidnapped by Irish rebels to having kids and finally finding happiness with her husband after another attempt on their lives.
     While reading it, I thought that the author had made a misstep by jumping ahead two years between pages 165 & 166. It seemed like there could have been at least an extra chapter added to cover the events of those missing years. However after reading through, I think the writer needn't have covered that part since the focus of the novel is the relationship between Birdie and her husband Temple, and they were apart for those two years. An additional chapter would have involved more characters and a loss of focus on the two.
     Overall this was a highly satisfying and well-written novel that grips you from the first page. The misunderstandings between Birdie and Temple can get frustrating, but the reader knows that they will get back together in the end so the fun is seeing how that happens.


PASSION IN THE FIRST DEGREE by Carla Cassidy (1996)
Rating: 4 stars
Read: Nov. 10-16, 2019
Review: This book is actually one that I got from a local library's "free" box recently (which is primarily stocked with romance novels). "Passion in the First Degree" by Carla Cassidy is Harlequin Intrigue #379, published in July 1996. The front cover, with its sexy couple in bed surrounded by a bright pink border, is almost guaranteed to ensure that no male reader would ever be caught dead with a copy. I'm a curious sort, though, and found the swamp setting in the prologue to be intriguing and kept reading to the end (though not all in one sitting... I'm a slow reader and so it took me around a week).
     The plot revolves around two sets of murders that may or may not be related: the killing of random denizens of the swamp by a serial killer who the townspeople have dubbed "the swamp serpent," and the recent murders of a man and woman who were close to Billy, the novel's hero and a resident of the swamp. (Don't worry, it turns out that he's also rich, despite appearances, as with so many romantic heroes.)  The murdered man was Billy's best friend and the woman was his estranged lover. Were they having an affair and then killed by a jealous Billy? That's what many people in town suspect, including the cops, who eventually charge Billy with the crime. Billy brings in an old flame, lawyer Shelby Longsford, to defend him.
     I won't say more without giving away the plot, but I will say that I was surprised by the reveal(s) at the end. As I got to the last few chapters, I was sure that someone else was going to be revealed as the killer and I was happy to be proven wrong.
     The novel is a well-written mystery that is also a romance, a true romantic suspense. It's well-written, a real page turner, with memorable characters. I enjoyed it from beginning to end. The only reason that I gave it 4 stars instead of 5 is because I save that highest rating for my particular favorites. I enjoyed this novel a lot, enough to make me want to read more books by its author.


ONE NIGHT IN HIS ARMS by Penny Jordan (1999)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: Nov. 21-Dec. 7, 2019
Review: "One Night in His Arms" by Penny Jordan was Harlequin Presents #2002, published in Jan. 1999. I gave it 3 stars because it was an enjoyable book but I felt it had some minor flaws in both the writing style and characterization. The strongest aspect of the novel is the premise of renovating an old estate, which makes the reader feel like they are getting a behind the scenes view of a tourist attraction.
     The writing flashes backwards & forwards in time to fill in the gaps in the reader's knowledge about the characters' history, although I sometimes felt that important facts were only revealed later (such as that Ran and Sylvie had made love prior to her leaving the UK). Sometimes the writing style is a little convoluted, like on page 48 which consists of only 5-and-a-half sentences. The author also occasionally mentions the "maleness" of Ran, which gets a little silly when she refers to him (on page 150) as "a very male man."
     Another thing I didn't like is how all of the problems between the two lovers was due to lack of communication, miscommunication and misunderstandings. If the two had simply spoken honestly and not assumed that they were sleeping with other people, then a lot of their problems could have been avoided. Sure, they get it all resolved 10 pages before the novel ends. But realistically, what kind of stable relationship could two such distrustful people have in real life? One can imagine the same miscommunication problems happening again, destroying their relationship.
     The cover image seemed a bit off to me at first, but the scene does occur later in the book when Ran discovers a sleepwalking Sylvie and carries her to his bed.
     So, to sum up, an OK novel, but for me not a keeper.


FORBIDDEN NIGHT WITH THE DUKE by Annie Claydon (2018)
Rating: 3 stars
Read: Feb. 27-March 12, 2019
Review"Forbidden Night with the Duke" by Annie Claydon is HARLEQUIN MEDICAL ROMANCE #933 (January 2018), and the most current romance novel that I've read, after having read a few from the 1970s-80s. Thankfully the hero of this novel is more respectful of the heroine than in those old novels. I liked how the two main characters were frank with each other about their feelings, rather than dragging things out with misunderstandings, etc. My only complaint is that the happy ending seemed a bit forced; presumably the problem that kept the two from being together (he was her boss) still existed at the end, and so that dilemma was never really solved. There was also the issue that the hero had misled her by making her think that another person in the organization, John, made the decisions about her advancement, when actually it was the hero himself. This secret is apparently never revealed to her.
     Don't judge a book by the cover or its title. "Forbidden Night with the Duke" is a steamy-sounding title characteristic of today's Harlequins. In the 1960s, it might have had a bland title like "Nurse Megan's Dilemma" or "Doctor from Sri Lanka." In the 1970s-80s, it might have had a more mysterious title like "Eastern Heat" or "Follow Me." But today we get titles like "Forbidden Night with the Duke," which more accurately might be reworded as "Potentially Inappropriate Relationship with One's Boss (Who Also Happens to be a Duke)." There really is only one "forbidden night" in the novel, a steamy sex scene on pages 227-232 (aside from a brief attempt early on which is abruptly curtailed before anything really happens). The story has some twists and turns which kept things moving dramatically, and I really did wonder if the two lovers would get their happy ending after all.
     Overall the book is well-written and I enjoyed it. I look forward to reading more by the author. I'd not read a "Larger Print" Harlequin before, but after a few pages I got used to the larger size of the typeface and in fact now even prefer it. (When I went to read another paperback novel after finishing this one, the smaller typeface of a normal book was bit jarring at first.) I did find one tiny mistake in the text: On page 66, Megan says "When I found David down in the kitchen," she actually means Tim. (I also seem to recall seeing Jaye spelled as Jay once early on but can't find it now.) Despite any above-stated flaws, I would recommend this book to anyone wanting to read a current romance novel -- even someone like myself who prefers the older stuff. 

Saturday, November 2, 2019

Confessions of a Male Reader of Romance Novels

Although I never bought a romance novel until April 2018, my path had intersected with the romance genre over the decades. I'm a longtime fan of comic books, and as a teenager in the 1980s I began to explore other comic book genres besides the superhero titles that I'd followed religiously during my pre-teen years. I started buying war comics, ghost comics, humor comics, western comics, and was open to buying any genre that was available in comics form -- including romance. Romance comic books, however, had died out by the 1980s and back issues were rarely seen in most comics shops (though I did acquire quite a few).

I was intrigued by the gothic romance subgenre and watched the revival of the "Dark Shadows" TV series in early 1991. I saved (and still have) the local TV guide featuring "Dark Shadows" on the cover from that time and kept a newspaper clipping about a planned protest of the show's cancellation. It was around then that I bought two old gothic romance novels at a local church's book sale, one of them being "The Silver Ladies" by Margaret Erskine. I've forgotten the other book I had and some years later traded them both to a used bookstore, having never read either one. Sometime in the 2000s, I bought several 1960s "Dark Shadows" paperback books (written by Marilyn Ross) for dirt-cheap at a library sale, but I no longer have those either.

These particular romance-buying activities seemed acceptable to me. Gothic romance was an offshoot of horror and mystery which are taken seriously by young men. Romance comic books were another kind of comic book and therefore a logical purchase for an ardent fan of the comics medium. That is quite a bit different than if I were to buy an honest-to-God Harlequin Romance novel or something like that. The thought of doing THAT never occured to me in all those years. I loved reading about the past, even occasionally buying the nostalgic "Good Old Days" magazine as a teen, but somehow it never occurred to me to buy a Regency romance, despite the fact that the covers screamed out their appealingly old-fashioned style. When my family would go to the mall, I would spend most of my time in the B. Dalton bookstore, finding all sorts of intriguing titles, but I don't recall ever even looking at the romance novels. When we would go to K-Mart, I would gaze at shelves of paperback books and occasionally try something different, but never a romance novel. Perhaps I didn't permit my gaze to linger too long over the romance section in the same way that today I avoid investigating other things that are not aimed at me. One doesn't browse a place that one has no business being in without feeling weird about it. And besides, there were plenty of other genres on the book shelves to look at instead which might be more interesting and worthwhile.



If I had been told somewhere that romance novels were worth reading, then I probably would have taken a look at them. But whenever I encountered a mention of romance novels, the consensus seemed to be that they were mindless fluff, simply the "guilty pleasure" of many women readers. The fandoms that I knew about, such as comics and science fiction, had vocal proponents for the artistic and literary merit of their own favorite genre/medium. I saw no such position being advanced by those in the romance novel genre, or by anyone who read it, or by anyone at all. Fans of comics and SF have an obsessive interest in their own histories, with their own "Golden Ages," with outlets like fanzines to defend their fields from dismissive outsiders. Both have longed for respect, to be taken seriously, and the worth of the material is taken as an article of faith by its fans. (Witness the fury of said fans when any outsider challenges its value or puts it down.)

In contrast, most fans of romance novels freely admit that what they are reading is simply escapist fun, even though an inherent part of the work addresses the human condition. Romance novels that deal with love and sex and society are left undefended, to be derided as fluff, while imaginary space operas are claimed to be deeply philosophical and meaningful. A casual observer might therefore assume that a paperback romance novel does not have any great value and therefore is not worth one's time. Of course most people don't need to be convinced of literary merit before unashamedly buying a book and recommending it to others, but at the very least it helps not to have the book prejudged as unworthy of consideration based on its bad reputation.

I'm convinced that for many men in particular, that negative judgement of romance novels is not based on personal experience of reading them, but based solely on what they've heard others say. That disregard may have also been influenced by what people have NOT told them. They have not heard: This novel is worth reading, this novel is worth your time, you may like this. They have heard that said of other books, but not romance.

One obstacle for the male reader of romance is that they are not its intended audience. Romance novels are for women in the same way that "men's adventure" novels are for men. Recently I've seen YouTube videos by women romance readers talking about their favorite romance novels (most of which are new-ish looking modern releases) and the giddy manner in which they express their opinions of the books' characteristics is foreign to me. (You can view my own YouTube videos about my romance novel collection here.) I don't think that I've ever read a novel of any type (romance or otherwise) where I practically swooned over the relationship of the two leads. I have patiently rooted for the two lovers to work out their differences. I have laughed aloud at humorous banter, I have thrilled at action sequences, I have worried over the fates of characters in danger or distress, and most of all I have enjoyed being in the company of the characters as I read about them. But I have never truly "fallen in love" with a fictional character. I've liked them, enjoyed reading about them, but have never desired to bed them or see them bed another. If that is in fact a genuine response to reading romance novels for women, and indeed a factor in their popularity, then men are at a disadvantage in appreciating the genre (assuming my own response is typical of most men). 



And yet, there is much in these books that may be enjoyed by a male reader. For those who like mystery and suspense, the romantic suspense subcategory is a longstanding staple of the romance genre. For those who like history, there is historical romance, covering a wide range of time periods and places. Even among the regular contemporary romance novels, one may find the distant locales in which they take place to be an armchair traveler's delight. (Most of the older Harlequin novels were reprints of books published by Mills & Boon in the UK, which may interest Anglophiles of any gender.) While the novels may be written with a female reader in mind, with certain aspects geared toward that reader, some things in life can be considered universal regardless of one's gender. For example, when I was a child, me and my male friends often played with dolls. Only we didn't call them "dolls," we called them "action figures." Playing with such dolls was not considered strange and was not frowed upon in the least. (My dad even made a short stop-motion home-movie using my large collection of Mego superhero action figures.) Perhaps the "gothic romance" was another example of a label making something seem acceptable to someone who would have ignored it otherwise. Perhaps it's just the words that are used which determine our response. 


So, what changed for me? How did I suddenly decide to take a look at romance novels, and begin buying them, and even collecting some of them for myself? The short version is that last year I took a chance and acquired a huge library of old paperback romance novels that had originally belonged to one collector who had passed away. I bought over a thousand of her books with the intention of selling them to others. I kept some of them, though, and gradually began buying some for myself to read. Having a lot of these books in my possession gave me a more tangible sense of the evolution of the genre from the 1960s to the 1980s. For the first time I realized that there was a difference between the various writers (just like with, say, the individualistic styles of comic book artists). The original owner of the book sometimes wrote a brief review on the front inside covers: "Very good!" "Excellent!" and (to a lesser extent) an expression of disappointment. ("No female over the age of 10 would be this stupid," she wrote inside one book.) She had her favorites, but occasionally I'd find in her collection a random title from a publisher she didn't normally buy, and written inside would be "a gift from [someone else's name]" which suggested to me that her uninformed non-fan friend had meant well but bought the wrong type of book. No, all romance novels are not alike; she had her favorite authors, her favorite publishers, her favorite subcategories, and so on. That's a lot of preferences for something that doesn't really matter, for allegedly mindless fluff. It became clear to me that the only "mindless" thing going on here was the mindless dismissal of the entire genre by those who knew nothing about it.

Sometimes you need to get your hands on a large amount of something, to immerse yourself in the experience, to really understand it. Sometimes you need to be able to see something through another person's eyes before fully appreciating it. And then you can discover that it was there under your nose all the time and will be wondering "Why did no one ever tell me all this before?"



As I alluded to earlier, fans of comic books tend to have an interest in not just new comics, but older ones. Exposure to comics of the past is considered important in being able to appreciate today's comics. One should be aware of what came before in order to know what is going on and to be able to place events in their historical context (hence the naming of various eras to signify publishing trends). I was introduced to the comics medium by books like "Superman from the 30s to the 70s," which placed importance on the years when the comics came out (and which meant that as a child I was reading reprints of work that was published long before I was born). Some comics fans favor certain eras and try to ignore new comics altogether. There are numerous Facebook groups devoted to old comics, even ones from a specific decade. For example, in 2013 I created a Facebook group about independent (i.e., non-Marvel and non-DC) comics of the 1980s, which has over 1800 members. This would be comparable to a Facebook group devoted to non-Harlequin romance novels of the 1980s, a decade that had such explosive growth among a variety of publishers that it was known as "the romance wars." And yet, as far as I'm aware, no such Facebook group exists (although if someone did create one, I think "Romance Wars: Romance novels of the 1980s" would be a catchy name). Earlier this year I created a Facebook group named Vintage Paperback Romance Novels, but it has fewer than 50 members. To my knowledge it is the only Facebook group to focus exclusively on 20th century romance novels (not including those few groups devoted to a specific author or to gothic romance).

The lack of critical appreciation of the genre's output (among knowledgeable and respected critics, not mere Goodreads reviewers like myself) means that many worthwhile romance novels of the past are denigrated or ignored, even by self-described romance novel fans. If one is unaccustomed to reading old novels, their older style may be off-putting. Some readers, however, prefer older books, finding them more inviting or appreciating them on a retro level. I belong to a Facebook group about old paperback novels that has over 13,000 members, most of whom appear to be men (at least among those who post there regularly). They talk about old science fiction books, old westerns, even old sleaze novels, but not romance. During the rare times that the topic of romance novels have come up, the genre is treated dismissively. Two different members mentioned that their mothers read them, but they couldn't understand what she got out of them. Among the members who have owned used bookstores, they stated that they declined to take such books in, despite admitting that the books were popular. Since so many romance novels are published every year, more than any other genre, some places like libraries will not accept donations of them which again reinforces the notion that they have no value.

Despite the high volume of romance novels being produced each month, interest in the genre's history appears thin among romance readers. Could it be that readers are so busy trying to keep up with the new releases that they don't have much time to dwell on the past? 


Thankfully there are some impressive exceptions, such as the Vintage Nurse Romance Novels blog and the Mills & Boon and Harlequin Historical Romance Fan Site.  There's also the Regency Retro Reads site, which has reviewed 500 old Regency romance novels (primarily ones from the 1980s & 1990s). Among Facebook groups devoted to older romance writers, there is an active Georgette Heyer (1902-1974) Appreciation Group of over 3,000 members and a Betty Neels (1909-2001) group with 600 members. Among current romance writers who have been active since the 1980s, there are several groups devoted to Nora Roberts (one of which has almost 9,000 members) and a Jude Deveraux group with over 2,000 members. (Some "like" pages have many more thousands of likes, but I distinguish between pages and groups because the groups enable members to better engage in discussion and initiate topics whereas the "like" pages are used most often for self-promotional purposes.) Again, to compare it with the comics field: there are numerous Facebook groups devoted to comics creator Jack Kirbywho died in 1994. Such groups are a hotbed of debate over the work of a man who basically stopped drawing comics around 1985. Two Kirby groups have over 10,000 members each.


When it comes to romance novel readers, there is less interest about the genre's past, much more on the present. There is good and bad about this. The good is that it's an indication of a healthy, vibrant field full of new stories and new writers that are keeping up with what current audiences want to read rather than mired in trying to recreate the enthusiasm of past glory days. The bad part, though, is that older work gets buried and forgotten once it is no longer current. This fate will eventually befall today's fan-fave releases, too, as the years roll by and they get eventually dismissed as "outdated," replaced by the next generation of writers. This dismissing of past work is in stark contrast to many other genres and media (think, for example, of old movies & TV) where older work is often still being enjoyed, analyzed, and even preferred. Are old romance novels worse than old movies, less worthy of being revisited?



Most of the romance novels I read tend to be older ones, but then I'm a fan of vintage things in general. Most of the older romance novels that I've read have been from the 1970s and 1980s. The most recent one I've read was a Harlequin Medical Romance from 2018. To my surprise, I enjoyed the newer novel and felt that the more sympathetic (or at least non-abusive) hero was an improvement over some of the older romance novels that I've read. However, newer novels have their own annoying quirks, too (for example, I noticed in two other recent Harlequins where the heroine was described as having "fisted" her hands, which evidently is a real word, but may carry a connotation unintended by their authors). The photoshopped front covers of today's romance novels are less appealing to me than the beautiful illustrations on the covers of the old books. While the old paintings run the risk of looking corny, I find them more inviting than the lettering-dominated or photo covers of today which reinforce the colder corporate aspect of "the product" rather than as a work of art.

Of the 16 romance novels that I've read so far, my favorites have been three historical novels from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s, all three of which were around 300 pages each and loaded with drama and adventure in addition to the central romance. All three books had foreign locales, a bit of time spent aboard a boat, feisty heroines and larger-than-life heroes, and writing that gripped me from the first page. Strangely, all three authors are little known (Katherine Kent [Joan Dial], Taylor Ryan [Taylor Robbins] and Sheryl Flournoy) and it makes me wonder why. I know that I need to read more historical novels of this type to be a better judge of what is the best work that has been done, since it may be that what I'm responding so favorably to are things which have been done before in other novels. So, my journey as a romance reader has just begun and I'm looking forward to learning more about the genre in the years to come.

Saturday, February 16, 2019

My History of Buying Comics: 1977-1990

The following is a chronology of my history of buying comics as a child.  One of the useful things about comics is that they usually have the date on them.  If you remember buying the comic when it first came out, the publication date will confirm when you bought it, at what age.  Then you can reconstruct a timeline of your purchases later, which is the purpose of this blog post. 

     The first comic book that I ever remember owning was JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA #143, which shows Wonder Woman and Superman fighting on the cover.  According to Mike's Amazing World of Comics, this issue was released on March 3, 1977, with a cover-date of June 1977.  (Traditionally the date on the cover is a few months ahead of the actual date on which the comic appears on the stands.  All of the on-sale date information and cover images in this blog post comes from the aforementioned website.)

     I no longer have JLA #143, so I don't know if I would recall any of the interior pages.  Even as a child, though, I remembered this particular issue as being my first comic, and that JLA was the first series that I followed with any regularity.  I'd bought JLA simply because it had the most recognizable heroes in it (Superman, Batman, etc.) which I was probably familiar with from merchandising and other media, such as the Superfriends cartoon.  (Incidentally, the TV show is apparently spelled as two words -- Super Friends -- but I always spelled it as one word, and old habits are hard to break.)

      I was born in November 1970, so I would have been 6 years old when I obtained this comic, sometime in either March or April of 1977.  I was not yet a comics fan or collector, and most of my comics purchases would be bought around the time of their release at the local drugstores and convenience stores like 7-11, as well as local bookstores (my hometown had two bookstores for most of the 1980s).  I wouldn't learn about comics shops until around 1980.  The only way that "old" comics could be obtained back then was either from an older acquaintance (hand-me-downs) or in one of the bagged comics, usually 2 or 3 for $1, that could be found at supermarkets and some department stores.  Such bagged comics were usually only a couple years old at best -- most were fairly recently published.  Prior to visiting a comics shop circa 1980, the "oldest" complete comic book that I had in my possession would generally be no older than 1975.

     The first Marvel comic that I ever bought, if my memory is correct, would be WHAT IF? #5, which presented a parallel universe story about Captain America.  (Therefore this is also the first Captain America comic that I ever bought.)  This double-sized issue went on sale July 26, 1977 (cover-date Oct. 1977).  I'm not sure, but I may have gotten this at a local drugstore, Chuck Gerlach Drugs, which for some reason I associate with some of my earliest comics purchases.  (I don't recall the store carrying comics in later years, or even recall my family going in there much at all.) 

     Another comic that I recall getting early on was WORLD'S FINEST COMICS #248, which went on sale Sept. 20, 1977 (cover-dated Dec. 1977/Jan. 1978).  This was a Dollar Comic, a format that was popular at the time because it was a lot thicker than a regular 32-page comic.  (This issue ran 80 pages.)  Judging by the above comics purchases, it appears that all of my initial comics were thicker and more expensive than the traditional comic.  Incidentally, at age 6, I'm sure that my comics were purchased for me by my mom.  Soon however I would get an allowance or occasional spending money and would purchase comics on my own.  There were a few other kids my age on my street, and we tended to agree that DC's Dollar Comics were a good bargain and especially good for keeping one occupied during long road trips.  (I would keep this advice in mind when my family took a vacation two years later, when I bought an issue of World's Finest in Missouri.)

   I recall buying AVENGERS #170 (cover-date April 1978; on sale January 17, 1978) and KARATE KID #14 (cover date May/June 1978; on sale February 7, 1978) around the same time, perhaps even in the same purchase.  I recall that I bought the Avengers comic at West Grange Drugs, at its old location, a year or two before it moved a couple doors down to an expanded location (and would eventually stop carrying comics for most of the 1980s). Both covers featured a silver artificial woman as the central figure. But the Avengers cover showed the heroes opposing each other, unlike the DC cover. I asked my dad (or so I remember) which cover he thought was better, and he said the Marvel one because it was more detailed. I agreed, and began buying Avengers regularly, gradually abandoning DC for the next few years. I liked the strong friendship of Captain America and Iron Man shown in the issue ("You lead, I'll follow. That's enough," I recall Cap saying).


     My first real exposure to Superman comics was in March 1978 when my oldest brother gifted me a copy of the hardcover Superman from the 30s to the 70s book. As the title suggests, this book consisted of reprints from the earliest Superman stories in 1938 to the more recent (early 1970s) tales of note. My awareness of cultural/societal changes through the decades can be traced to this book, and its Batman counterpart volume (which I was gifted with the same month, according to the front inside cover's inscription, shown above). I was given the Shazam! from the 40s to the 70s book the following year (Feb. 9, 1979, as the red image above shows). These books not only helped make me a comics fan for life, but also increased my interest and awareness of history, with their focus on how each decade affected the comics.


     Being only 7 years old in 1978, I didn't understand that an advertisement asking readers to request the Superman comic strip in their local newspaper was reprinted from Superman #1 (in 1939), and thus no longer valid. Not realizing that I was nearly 40 years too late, I dutifully filled out the form (I've edited-out the street address here) but thankfully didn't cut up the page and mail it in.  Although I greatly enjoyed the Superman and Batman stories in these books, I wouldn't begin to regularly buy new issues of either series until 1985 (age 14).  I assume now that the reason for that is my drift toward Marvel partisanship at this time.  Marvel titles were generally viewed as more "serious" and "realistic" by the kids on my street, and since I couldn't buy everything, I decided to focus on Marvel over DC.

     Another inducement to buying Marvel was their reliance on continuing stories.  To keep up with the latest developments and not feel left out, a reader had to buy the next issue -- and sometimes even another series (if there was a crossover).  My discovery of The Avengers happened to coincide with a multi-issue story arc that would later be called "The Korvac Saga" where members of the team began to mysteriously disappear.  I think that I missed both Avengers #171 and 173 when they were released, but I recall getting #172 (on sale March 21, 1978).  The thing I remember about this comic is that one of my sisters showed me how the lettering inside comic books use all-caps instead of a combination of upper and lower case letters as most printed text uses (such as this blog entry).  Upon learning that, I would try to emulate comic book style lettering in my own amateur comics. 

     The first issue of Cap's solo series I bought new was #229 (Jan. 1979). I may be wildly misremembering all this (I had just turned 8, after all), but here goes: I was angry because I'd wanted a Star Trek toy at K-Mart the previous day and my mom hadn't let me get it. So my oldest sister took pity on me and took me with her to West Grange Drugs -- at its new (present) location by this time, I believe -- and let me get any comics I wanted. 


     I think I may have gotten 7 comics that day, which would have been the most comics I'd gotten at one time. (This was back when new comics were 35 cents each, so she spent less than $3 total on them, but at the time I was greatly impressed by her generosity!) I believe that I got the 3 comics shown here on that November day, plus Avengers #180 as well. No wonder I became a comics fan! At the impressionable age of 8, I was thrown into the middle of a crossover between Cap's series and the Hulk's comic (far from being confused by the concept of a crossover, I found it thrilling), plus got a reprint of a classic 1968 Cap comic (also guest-starring the Hulk) drawn by the innovative Steranko!

     Prior to the 1990s, I bought most of my new comics at local drugstores, not comics shops, and therefore I occasionally missed issues -- some I never even saw till years later. Thus, the next issue of Cap, #230 (Feb. 1979), I didn't buy (or see) when it came out new. It was probably a year or so later that I spotted the issue sitting on a table in a local paint store, among some other comics (such as Charlton's E-Man) that were meant to occupy children while their parents shopped in the store. It wasn't intended for sale: it was being used like the magazines in a doctor's office. By 1980 (age 9) I had decided that Captain America would be the one series that I'd deliberately collect, so one day (probably that year) I worked up the nerve to go in the paint store and ask if I could buy #230 from them. I can't remember what they said (perhaps they gave it to me for free), but that well-read copy of #230 remains in my collection to this day.

     The first issue of Daredevil I ever saw (not counting the reprint of #1 in Son of Origins, which was at the local library) was #155 (Nov. 1978), shown below at left. I found the character intriguing and began buying DD regularly with (I believe) #156 (the middle cover shown here), which would mean that I bought my first issue of DD the same month I bought my first new issue of Cap (#229, Jan. 1979). 


     DD's writer was Roger McKenzie, who was also writing Cap at the time. DD would soon guest-star in Captain America #234-236 (June-Aug. 1979) at the same time that DD was acquiring a new penciler, Frank Miller (beginning with DD #158, May 1979). I bought DD regularly until #164 (May 1980) when I abandoned DD (except for buying #169) for the next few years -- not buying it again until #189, when Miller's run was ending.  Why did I drop DD? By 1980 (age 9), I'd decided to "collect" Captain America and traded away most of my DD issues to a neighbor in exchange for some of his 1975-77 Kirby Cap issues. I'd picked Cap over DD, Kirby over Miller, and figured there was no reason to keep buying DD after having traded away those issues. Ah well!


     By the summer of 1979 (age 8), I was buying more comics than ever. For example, I know that I bought new at least six Marvels cover-dated Sept. 1979: ASM #196, Avengers #188, Cap #237, Defenders #75, Iron Man #126, and X-Men #125. The month before, I'd bought Cap #235-236 (perhaps in one purchase), the last 2 parts of the team-up with Daredevil (which I was also still buying at this time). 


     The first 8 pages of #236 (Aug. 1979) showed Cap plummeting thru the sky while DD was in a WWI plane that was likewise crashing toward earth. This scene showed that a comics page could be as thrilling and unpredictable as any movie (and, in fact, anticipating the thrills of Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I saw at age 10 when it came out in June 1981).

     I bought Marvel Premiere #49 (Aug. 1979) when it was first released, at age 8. This issue was a mystery tale, which I remember thinking clever at the time (mysteries were the genre that I recall preferring as a child), written by Mark Evanier, penciled by Sal Buscema and inked by Dave Simons. (As many know, Dave died of cancer in 2009.  I was extremely humbled when he friended me on Facebook a few months before he passed away.)

     The Falcon was the first mainstream African-American superhero, debuting in Cap #117 (Sept. 1969). Ten years later he finally had this try-out issue of his own solo comic. Falc had shared billing on Cap's series for most of the 1970s, but the team-up ended in 1978. In Avengers #181 (March 1979), Falcon was recommended for membership in the team for affirmative action reasons (causing Falc to sarcastically refer to himself as "The Token"). Falcon returned from his Marvel Premiere solo adventure at the beginning of Avengers #189 (Nov. 1979), but left the team in Avengers #194 (April 1980). It seems like Marvel didn't know what to do with the character. He had a 4-issue solo mini-series in the early 1980s, but has mainly been a supporting cast member in Cap's comic for the past 30 years. I've long thought that Falcon deserved his own regular solo series, though (more on that perhaps in a future post).



     One of the cool things about comics is that if you remember when and where you bought an issue, you can pinpoint the date of purchase fairly easily. To me, the two comic books shown above will always be "the new issue" because I bought them the day that they were first released at the local Lawson's convenience store.

     According to The Comic Reader #177 (Feb. 1980), Avengers #196 and Incredible Hulk #248 (both cover-dated June 1980) were released the week of March 18, 1980. (No DC comics were released that week.) I was only 9 years & 4 months old that week when I walked up to Lawson's with some friends to buy comics.

     But the clerk had a surprise for us. As we were looking at the comics on the spinner rack, he informed us that the new comics had just arrived and were still stacked and bundled on a back counter. He cut open the bundles and let us buy any that we wanted before they had even had a chance to be put on the racks! We felt like we would be among the first people in the country to read these brand-new issues.

     Shown at the bottom of the above image are TCR's list of other comics that came out that week. The only other issue on the list that I know I bought new was Tales to Astonish #7 (an unusual photo-backdrop cover); I probably bought that issue on this day as well, although I don't know for sure. (I may have bought Hulk #247 that day, too, since I seem to recall getting both #247 & 248 together.)

     Thanks to the dates printed in the published comics, one can confirm one's memory of a notable day in one's distant past.


     Looking at a cover gallery of Amazing Spider-Man issues online, I was struck by the fact that I became a regular buyer of that series (and many other Marvel titles) at such an early age -- this information made clear by the fact that the dates were listed below the covers on the website I was looking at.

     The first issue of ASM I ever recall buying was #184 (Sept. 1978). I seem to recall buying it at Gerlach's Drugs, which would mean that I was 7 years old. The next issue I bought was #185 -- pretty unusual for me back then, to happen to buy two issues in a row, when it was more common for me to somehow miss large numbers of issues in a run. I bought a few issues of ASM after that, although the only one of these early acquisitions I still have in my collection (my original copy, that is, and not a replacement bought later) is #196 (Sept. 1979; age 8) which I seem to recall getting at Page One bookstore.

     The ASM cover gallery at left shows the starting point of my more dedicated buying of the series. I bought ASM #209 (Oct. 1980) and did not miss a single issue of the series for the next few years, until around #253. What prompted this new dedication? I was only nine years old, soon to be ten, and had finally begun to self-identify as a comics fan. 
In Sept. 1980 (age 9), I wrote a letter to my older brother (who had helped foster my interest in comics) letting him know what comics I was collecting, all of them Marvel titles.  I considered myself a collector, but was really just a little kid buying comics off the spinner racks at local drugstores, with only an occasional trip to a comics shop when I was lucky. But being a "collector" means that I still have most of the comics that I bought back then. How many people still have things that they bought when they were nine years old?


     Another explanation for my increased interest in comics, as I look at the cover dates, could be that 1980 (or late 1979) was (I believe) the year that the Lawson's convenience store opened, located only a few blocks from my home. Lawson's was the place that I bought comics the most through the 1980s, so if Lawson's happened to carry a comic, I'd be less likely to miss an issue. (I seem to recall that Byrne's FF run was not available at Lawson's, and I had to get that when I could at the 7-11 which was further away, and ended up missing issues as a result.)

     I had a mail subscription to ASM by #219 (Aug. 1981, age 10) and would continue to get the series in my mailbox every month until I finally let it drop with #251 (April 1984, age 13). I had grown bored with Marvel superheroes by this point and was branching out, trying other companies and genres. The month after I let my sub lapse, however, I went to Lawson's and saw the cover of #252, showing the debut of Spidey's new black costume on the cover. That issue went home with me.

     However, I stayed away from picking ASM up again semi-regularly until 1986, after I'd acquired some recent issues in a trade with a classmate. But once again, my interest soon waned and I was picking it up less frequently in 1987 and 1988. Todd McFarlane began his ASM run with #298 (March 1988, when I was 17) -- two issues after I'd dropped ASM again -- and I gave it a try with #301 (June 1988). But the novelty wore off quickly, and I didn't buy another issue of Spider-Man again for almost 10 years. Another factor may have been my lack of spending money after high school graduation (and the increase in the price of comics), but my lack of enjoyment was also a big factor. Also, the local Lawson's store, where I had bought so many comics over the years (and which had been renamed "Dairy Mart" in June 1987), closed down in mid-1989. New comics purchases became less frequent and didn't generate the excitement or wide-eyed wonder that they had ten years before, when it was all new to me.

     Everyone has their Golden Age when they first became a fan of something, first loved it, and then gradually became disillusioned and moved on to something else. Sometimes I forget how early it was that my interest first began (which would be at 9 years old, if we cite #209 as the starting-point of the "never miss an issue" mentality) and how early that interest fades (dropping my sub in boredom with #251 at age 13). Sometimes that interest can reoccur, but sometimes (as with, for me, Amazing Spider-Man), that interest peaks around age 11 and never returns.


     One difference between then and now was that you could be a "comics collector" and still get the majority of your comics at the local 7-11 rather than a comics shop. The spinner rack of new comics at the local bookstores (my local hometown had two bookstores for most of the 1980s) received their new comics a week or so before the local convenience stores did, so it was a way of getting a jump ahead of one's friends about what was happening in a title that we followed. (This was back when I was around 10 to 12 years old. After that, reading comics was primarily a solitary activity. But before age 13, there was always some excitement on the block whenever a new issue of Avengers came out, especially to see what was on the cover.) It's hard to believe now, but in the 1980s, almost every town in my Downriver neighborhood had at least one bookstore.

     Comics shops in the 1980s tended to be much further from home and sometimes short-lived enterprises. The first comics shop I went to as a child, a store called Book Bin, was actually a used paperback book store which had comics as a sideline, on one side of the room. That store was still in business until just a few years ago, but was not really a "fan" hangout or anything. Comics were just a sideline there, not the main business. But it had more comics than could be found elsewhere around here at the time, including some new independent titles (like Cerebus) and a small back issue section.

(BOOK BIN in 2006, a few years before it closed.)
     At the time, the main attraction of comics shops were the back issues -- something you couldn't get anywhere else. In 1980, you could still find Marvel comics with 30-cent cover prices in the bagged comics at grocery stores. 25-cent cover priced comics could also sometimes be found, but were considered by the kids on the block to be the oldest comics around -- until we found out about comics shops. And that's when we started getting the 1960s stuff. We were "collectors" now, after all, so we had to build up our collections. The kid down the street specialized in Avengers. Not wanting to repeat his collection, I had chosen Captain America to be my focus. The kid next door collected Iron Man. Of course we also bought other titles, but we felt like we had to choose one long-running title to specialize.

     By the end of the year (Dec. 1980, shortly after I turned 10 years old), I had a letter published in Captain America #255 (cover-dated March 1981). The letter asked a question about Cap's origin and made references to previous depictions of his origin in #109 and #176, so clearly I had already started buying old comics at a comics shop (which, at this time, was still the half-a-comic-shop Book Bin).

     In 1983, a new comics shop appeared in the neighborhood, one called Comics Galore. This was a full-on comics shop, with a wall full of new releases, boxes of bagged back issues, and on the floor the cheap bins of unwanted comics (25 cents each or 5 for $1.00). It was in the cheap bins there that I discovered the "pre-Marvel" 1950s/early 1960s horror & monster comics, via 1970s reprints in Weird Wonder Tales, Chamber of Chills, etc. On the new comics shelf there, I discovered the Red Circle (Archie) comics which were a welcome respite from the Marvel comics that I'd grown bored with. You can read more about my purchases at Comics Galore at this previous blog entry which explains in detail how I first became a fan of Steve Ditko. (In fact, you might want to go read that entry now and then come back here to read this one, since it helps fill the gap of an important year, 1983, in the evolution of my reading tastes.)

     Comics Galore had a copy of Tales of Suspense #4 (July 1959) under glass by the register. If I recall right, the price was $18, a huge amount of money. As a collector of Captain America, I knew that eventually I'd have to get every issue of Tales of Suspense as well, so I saved up and eventually had enough money to buy TOS #4. But I had waited too long. During the next family outing, sometime around late 1983 or early 1984, when we went to the place where the shop had been located, we found that it had been replaced by a pizza shop.

     In 1985, I ordered from Mile High Comics for the first time, through the mail. I'd gotten my hands on mail-order comic catalogs before, but this was the first time that I finally ordered from one. They had been advertising comics in Marvel at the time for cheap prices, so I bought several issues of indie titles that I had not yet seen -- Jon Sable Freelance, Destroyer Duck, Twisted Tales -- as well as 1970s titles like Where Monsters Dwell and Shade the Changing Man. Getting a box in the mail from Mile High was quite an event; those comics still feel "new" to me because I remember what it was like getting them in the mail. 

     By 1987 (age 16), a new shop arrived in Wyandotte called Comic Gallery which epitomized why the late 1980s was such a great period for comics. I bought my first issues (#3 and #7) of Yummy Fur there (a comic that I sought out after learning about it in the January 1988 issue of Comics Buyer's Guide when Mark Burbey praised the series in the letters page). I bought Murder #3 there (edited by Robin Snyder), my first issue of Love & Rockets (#20), even my first issue (#37) of Gene Kehoe's It's a Fanzine (a small-press fanzine normally available only by mail). I bought The Killing Joke there, and read it on a bench near the store, waiting for my family to finish their shopping in lovely downtown Wyandotte before we went home. (Wyandotte Record Exchange was nearby, too, and Stoner's Hobby Shop was on the next block, both of which were also highly influential to me.)  Unfortunately, Comic Gallery was not long for this world, closing sometime in 1989.

     I was reduced to going back to Book Bin after that and thinking how pathetic it seemed, this place that had once been so exciting. In a letter dated November 8, 1989 (a few days before I turned 19 years old), I wrote to a friend: "I went to Book Bin today; they're 25-cent thing sucked, so here's what I ended up getting: Warlock Special Edition #4 ($1.00), Ms. Marvel #17 (25 cents), Strange Suspense Stories #66 (Charlton 1963 issue, $1.00), Tower of Shadows #8 (Marvel, $1.00), Defenders #42 (50 cents), 57-60, 67, 68 ($1.00 each). Believe it or not, that Ms. Marvel ish & an issue of Nova were the only 'old' Marvels in the 25-cent boxes! Everything was failed new stuff. If I had wanted to, I'm sure I could have bought up a whole collection of Power Pack, Alpha Flight, & the New Universe titles for under $10.00! While I was there two guys my age came in, buying comics & -- I felt like I was 'slumming' actually buying, y'now, superhero comics, even if they are better than current superhero comics -- and I overheard the two guys talk about some comic & the other goes 'Yeah, well, I don't buy DCs' & the other says 'Oh, well, me neither, but this one was a good one...' It's like... what morons. I thought 1986 had changed all that. It's like I told you before, Book Bin exists in a time warp where 1986 never happened! It's weird." (1986 being the year that Watchmen came out. I bought the first two issues of that series in one purchase when #2 was released, having been informed about its impending arrival in the Dec. 1985 issue of Mile High Futures, which contained a long interview with Alan Moore. I may have initially bought Watchmen at Book Bin, come to think of it.)

     By the time I was 18 or 19, and reading The Comics Journal, buying Love and Rockets (both of which I got mail subscriptions to at that time, to make sure I'd not miss an issue), I felt isolated and disparaging toward new mainstream comics. What I saw, I couldn't stand. I'd stopped "collecting" Captain America for a year back in 1984-85 (missing #301-311), and bought it semi-regularly until 1989 when I had to give it up -- it couldn't hold a candle to my memories of the comic's glory days. It's funny to think how old I felt then, but how young I seem to myself in retrospect. 

     Here are some quotes from my letters during that period which provide a real-time record of my attitude toward comics at the time:

- May 14, 1989 (age 18): "Maybe, on second thought, a few minutes after pondering, I shouldn't go to 7-11 & get comics. It'd just be a waste of money. Yeah. Besides, I've enough to read as it is. I have comics at home I've never read (almost complete runs of Marvel-Two-In-One, Powerman/Iron Fist & Micronauts, in fact, which I've never touched). Maybe I should sell all my Spideys, Hulks, Avengers, etc. I dunno. It all seems so pointless. I have a lot of old Defenders & I keep saying one day I should get all the issues I don't have, but who cares? I've (the new) Superman #1-23, but I've stopped buying it. It's just a waste of time & money. I don't rilly care about All-Star Squadron now that it's cancelled (cancellation tends to plague my faves), but I've a lot of 'em. But why bother to get the missing issues now?"

- June 3, 1989: "DC has rilly sold out. I have here & now decided that I shall never buy a comicbook by the following publishers: MARVEL, DC, ECLIPSE, FIRST, ARCHIE, HARVEY, COMICO, NOW, or any other comics publisher that supports assembly-line production."

- June 23, 1989: "I feel so lost w/the Marvel & DC comics, that's basically why I don't read them anymore. Like I was saying, when I used to read Batman, CRISIS was just winding up, every DC series was getting rearranged & renumbered & it was pretty exciting. You had Moore on Swamp-Thing (and planning to do WATCHMEN), Miller on Dark Knight and Batman for 4 issues, Byrne beginning the Superman mini-series which reintroduced the character, nobody was sure whether Batman had a yellow circle around his chest or not after CRISIS (and here CRISIS was done to END confusion!), so some issues he did, some he didn't [this comment was likely prompted by a sentence in Gene Kehoe's "It's a Fan-gene" column in IAF #37], you had the last issue of WW, a 4-issue L.S. [mini-series], & the new #1 all within about 8 months span [actually 12 months]. IT WAS COOL! Then it collapsed. Byrne's Superman got dumb, Miller left to do Elektra: Assassin, WW got too confusing for me, all the new #1's (Flash, JL, etc.) were dumb & the Batman creative team changed so many times & the tie-ins with Millenium so confusing, Moore left Swamp-Thing, & the only good DC comic was Watchmen. Now, the only good DC comic is V For Vendetta. I think V's already over, but I'm missing some of the last issues. On the Marvel front, I stopped buying Cap because of Gruenwald when Cap became The Captain, & I stopped buying Classic X-Men when the Bolton back-up tales got boring, & Thor & Spidey are just getting a wee bit too involved for me. I just want to buy a comic where I don't have to have been following it for the past ten issues to know what's going on. Besides, I'm growing sick of mainstream comics overall; I hate their "product" mentality. So, now the only things I read are Comics Journal and Love & Rockets. ....One of the problems is that I can never get the comics I'd like to get because, even when Comic Gallery was around, they're so hard to find. While every comic shop carries junk like Suicide Squad and Doom Patrol, & you can find all their back issues in there, good comics like Raw, Hup, Rip Off Comix, [all three of which I'd never actually read but wanted to] & the like are unbelievably difficult to find. The only place I've ever even SEEN an issue of Rip Off was in one on the shops in Lansing [waaaayy far away] & I've NEVER seen the other two. That's why going to a comics shop isn't such a big thrill for me because I know I prolly won't see anything I want except for maybe a Cerebus or a graphic novel, or a Weird Wonder Tales in the grody comics box, if I'm lucky."

(Note: June 23rd was the day that the Tim Burton-directed Batman movie premiered, but to this day I have never seen it, nor most of the other superhero-based movies.)

- October 2, 1989: "....Whereas I used to buy Marvels & DCs every time I went to Lawsons, since Lawsons closed, I've stopped buying them & neither company holds any interest for me WHATSOEVER, ever since I've been buying more independent comics. Oh, by the way, there's a difference between 'independents' like Eclipse, First, Now, Dark Horse, Comico, etc. which are more like DC or Marvel than independents (REAL independents) like Catalan, Raw, Fantagraphics, Last Gasp, Kitchen Sink, Rip Off, etc. which have practically no similarity to Marvel, DC, Eclipse, Dark Horse, etc.-type books."

- June 14, 1990 (age 19): "I haven't bought a Marvel comic (or DC, Eclipse, First, etc) in ages & have no intention of buying them in the future!"

- October, 1990: "I was surprised [at a friend's house]; he had recent issues of various DCs & Marvels lying around -- I haven't seen a recent DC or Marvel in ages -- but they were the same old Marvel/DC superhero tripe. Can't see why he wastes time on it."

- December 5, 1990 (a month after I turned 20 years old): "I bet I prolly praised DC a lot [in my late 1980s letters]. Well, I did that because of the DCs being done at the time; 1984 to 1988 was, like, DC's little 'DC Age' I guess. They had nothing to lose so they took some chances and they did better comics than Marvel was doing at the time (Romita Jr. on X-Men (ugh!), Secret Wars II, "The New Universe," DeFalco & Frenz on Spider-Man, etc.) (even Cap, Hulk, Iron Man, Avengers, Defenders, Daredevil, etc, sucked at the time & Thor was getting run into the ground by Simonson (he started out good) & Byrne was doing the same to the FF (Byrne's first 25 issues of FF were great; after that, it got stupid!)) In fact, Marvel still sucks! (as does DC now). Maybe I liked Marvel back in the late '70s & early 80s 'cos I was a kid then. Anyway, back to DC: they had Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Howard Chaykin, Jack Kirby, John Byrne, Stephen Bissette, George Perez, Keith Giffen, Bill Sienkiewicz, Jerry Ordway, Gil Kane, Marv Wolfman, Roy Thomas, Todd McFarlane, Brian Bolland, etc.! I think DC's last hurrahs were Arkham Asylum, V For Vendetta, & Perez's run on Wonder Woman. Now it's over! Around ten of the above names no longer work for DC. They still have some pretty weird titles (Hellblazer, The Sandman, Pirahna Press titles, etc.) and are prolly more 'adult' (i.e. trying to be adult by using bad words, extreme gore, sex & naked women) than Marvel in the 'Recommended for Mature Readers' line, but their regular 'Comics Code Approved' comics look just like Marvels!....So, to summarize, my current feelings are that DC & Marvel & Eclipse & Comico & First, etc. suck. I seriously doubt that I'll ever change my mind about that. What comics am I excited about these days? Mainly Love & Rockets. I haven't seen too many truly alternative comics 'round these parts (the reason I can get L&R is I have a sub!)."

     Around 1991, I let my subscriptions to the Journal and L&R lapse and I stayed away from new comics for the most part until early 1997 when I started hanging around internet message boards about comics and pre-ordering new stuff from the Previews catalog (which a local shop heavily promoted, to get people to start pull lists). As I look at my evolution outlined above, I'm reminded of Dylan's line from "My Back Pages": "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."