Happy 77th Anniversary to Detective Comics #1!

Detective Comics #1 was cover-dated March 1937, . . .


Among those appearing in that first issue were

* Bruce Nelson - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #36, February 1940


* Buck Marshall, Range Detective - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #36, February 1940


* Cosmo, the Phantom of Disguise - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #37, March 1940


* Bart Regan, Spy - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #83, January 1944


* Speed Saunders - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #58, December 1941

and

* Slam Bradley - last Golden Age appearance in Detective Comics #152, October 1949

Later on, guys like the Crimson Avenger, Batman, and others would appear.

(NOTE: many of the pictures originally were found at http://dccomicsartists.com/goldage/goldframe.htm)

Erm, isn't it more usual to celebrate 75th anniversaries rather than 77ths?

Lovely art, though...

tony ingram wrote:Erm, isn't it more usual to celebrate 75th anniversaries rather than 77ths?

So I guess "Happy 81st Anniversary!" wouldn't go over too well, either?

Next year will be the 80th Anniversary for the first appearance of Batman in Detective Comics!

MajorHoy wrote:

tony ingram wrote:Erm, isn't it more usual to celebrate 75th anniversaries rather than 77ths?

So I guess "Happy 81st Anniversary!" wouldn't go over too well, either?

Next year will be the 80th Anniversary for the first appearance of Batman in Detective Comics!

I don't think 81 is really considered to be a significant number.

tony ingram wrote:

MajorHoy wrote:

tony ingram wrote:Erm, isn't it more usual to celebrate 75th anniversaries rather than 77ths?

So I guess "Happy 81st Anniversary!" wouldn't go over too well, either?

Next year will be the 80th Anniversary for the first appearance of Batman in Detective Comics!

I don't think 81 is really considered to be a significant number.

But it is 9².

And is "69" a significant number?

I think it kind of has to be multiples of ten, really.

tony ingram wrote:I think it kind of has to be multiples of ten, really.

So "75th Anniversary" is no good?

MajorHoy wrote:

tony ingram wrote:I think it kind of has to be multiples of ten, really.

So "75th Anniversary" is no good?

OK, I'll give you that one.

We only think multiples of ten are significant because we count in base ten, because we have ten fingers. It's a very bigoted, human-centric way of thinking

Lucy McGough wrote:We only think multiples of ten are significant because we count in base ten, because we have ten fingers. It's a very bigoted, human-centric way of thinking

But I knew a guy back in college who only had nine fingers!

What happened to the other one?

Lucy McGough wrote:What happened to the other one?

Well, it was connected to his being married . . .

Go on...

Lucy McGough wrote:Go on...

He wore a wedding ring on his finger . . .

MajorHoy wrote:

Lucy McGough wrote:Go on...

He wore a wedding ring on his finger . . .

. . . then there was an "incident" . . .

I think I see where this is going...

tony ingram wrote:I think I see where this is going...

I don't know that I do. And I'm thinking that's a good thing.

MajorHoy wrote:. . . then there was an "incident" . . .

Mbast1 wrote:

tony ingram wrote:I think I see where this is going...

I don't know that I do. And I'm thinking that's a good thing.

. . . the "incident" involved one of those really tall windows that you might find in places like old college classrooms and such (back in the last century) . . .

Mbast1 wrote:

tony ingram wrote:I think I see where this is going...

I don't know that I do. And I'm thinking that's a good thing.

What Mike said.