Weekend Finds: You're in the Army Now (Matthew in WWII Uniform)

Good morning!

How was your weekend? You can about guess how I spent mine-- shoppin', readin', hangin' with friends (added wild card: got really into season 2 of Hannibal...talk about RAMPED UP from season 1, thank you Kelsey for encouraging me to continue watching). I finished Big Bill Broonzy's memoirs and launched into silent film scribe/Mary Pickford intimate Frances Marion's autobiography, and am almost through that. I ordered new glasses (pics to come when they get in with their lenses). As for estate sales, we made it a SUPER family affair this weekend-- my mom joined in, and we had a ball! As usual, I bought the most stuff-- but the NEATEST thing I bought of the stuff I bought, was in Donelson at an estate sale that was almost all kind of eh 80's and 90's stuff....and an entire closet full of WWII and later uniforms. AAAH!

Naturally, with that kind of buy-bait, I bit, and look at my little guy in his circa 1945 splendor:

Note: I am not actually eight feet tall, this photo was taken from the vantage point of
an ottoman. Still, I love this angle, and feel a little like David Bailey.

Could you die?

I might have mentioned before, but for the record-- my dad is not your casual WWII enthusiast. In the same way as some people collect the odd record here and there, and then there are rabid, down-to-the-bone vinyl enthusiasts, my dad is probably the most knowledgeable Second World War enthusiast you will meet outside of a professional academic setting. Since childhood, he's inhaled every kind of militaria book, magazine, pamphlet he could get his hands on, and with the same diligence with which I apply myself to, oh, 1800's portraits or thirties' dresses. Dude knows his onions, if those onions are MacArthur's family background or Pacific theater air attacks. Accordingly, when I see estate sales with 1940's-era content, you'd better believe we make a beeline, hoping I can score big band sheet music and he might lay hands on a service medal or a copy of Yank magazine. We went to this one and I dragged him to the closet going, "LOOK! Look at all of this!" He agreed that the items from the forties' were all in tip top shape, but he's a 42L, and the sizes on the clothes were 34S. Guess who I know who's a 34S? My long-torso'd little husband! With pants and shirts at $5 apiece, and the jacket itself at $15, I was like...well, one of us is buying this ensemble, Pappy...and it turned out to be me.

Rumpled Stiltskin.

We cherry picked the best shirt and pants out of the closet, and grabbed the officer's service jacket. While I was bummed it didn't have a matching belt, my dad mentioned a forties' looking leather belt could stand in pretty well in its stead. When Matthew put the jacket on, he went, "There's something in the pocket!" I was holding out for Krugerrands, or maybe at least a tie to complete the ensemble, when what should he produce from said pocket but the belt! YESSSS. There was an officer's hat, but it was $20, and a quarter inch too small for either of our heads. Maybe I'll find another!

What was so neat about seeing my guy in this uniform? Getting an idea of how little WWII era women lost their hearts to men in service uniform. Seriously? It's not like I don't already find my guy super attractive, but PLUS an army uniform? I love thinking about 18 year old farm kids or kids who had never had anything joining the Army and being given a suit of clothes better than what they'd wear to church on Sunday. How proud they must have felt in these Brooks Brothers esque uniforms, and oh my goodness how dashing when they went to town on leave from training and hung around the movie theater or the restaurants trying to pick up girls. If you were halfway cute, I bet you went from a score of 5 to a 15 out of 10 when you donned pinks and greens (as my dad just this weekend taught me the dark green service jacket and lighter green pants were called...this would be greens and like tans, haha). The pants need pressing, but look at how grown up and formal Matthew looks:

I was going to try to edit out my skull necklace and Matthew's copy of Mario Kart, but it adds anachronistic 
ambiance, right? That and I can't figure out how to, lol.

Second thought-- when or where can you wear something like this outside of a costume ball or Halloween? The very last thing I would want to do is show some kind of disrespect to actual servicemen, but as this uniform hasn't been used by the US Army since 1955, it's not like anyone would mistake my thirtysomething husband for a) having worn it for real the first time around or b) being an active member of the military. I don't know! Being the daughter of someone really into army surplus, I definitely wore my share of olive drab in high school, but I'm not sure how this works on guys and in the 21st century. What I do know? Dude looks like this coat was made for him:                         

Anyway, I gotta shuffle off to Buffalo...but how about you? Do you know any WWII nuts? How are you fixed for vintage Army or other service uniforms? What kinds of collections run in your family? WHERE or when do you wear something like this without giving offense? Let's talk!

That's all for today, but I'll be back tomorrow with some more things I found out on the junk trail. Have a fabulous Monday! I'll see you then.

Photo Friday: Ed and Elsie Edition (1938-1940)

Good morning!

It's Friday! We made it! I'm stuck at the library this morning/afternoon, but later I have a lunch/shopping date with a friend and yea-bo aren't I excited to get out into the wide world that isn't work. I'm going to, too! :) Before I make tracks, however, what kind of Friday would it be without other people's family photos? No kind of Friday at all, that's what!

This flickr account features a number of photos of the user's parents in the late thirties' and early forties', and you want to talk about some sharp dressed folks...they really do look like Errol Flynn and Sylvia Sidney's stand in's on some Warner Brothers picture of the time. Sharp dressed and good looking, if I were them , I would have taken a million photos of myself, too! Let's take a look, though, here's Ed in 1938:

That foulard makes Ed look particularly dashing, though the sweet car he's standing in front of and his neatly tailored sports jacket aren't hurting his case, either. Here's the car from the same set in a long shot:

Does it or does it not look like something out of the Sunday morning comics in the late thirties'? This car is something straight out of Dick Tracy, all sleek thirties' Art Deco lines. My kingdom for a coupe! I wish you could get a car with half this wagon's handsomeness on the market today.

Let's not forget Elsie, though:

There's something about her wardrobe in all these pictures that perfectly captures a kind of thirties' ladies' clothes I like...I don't know what you'd call it! All the soft edge, round collars, and dainty details...she's pretty to begin with but these clothes make her look like an absolute doll.

Edwin later grew a pencil mustache, which gives him even more of a movie star look:

And I really like this series of photos taken at home. Something about them reminds me of early Hitchcock movies made in England, think The 39 Steps or The Lady Vanishes. I think Ed in particular looks like Robert Donat or another actor I cannot think of to save my life... I'll have to scribble it in later when it comes to me in the middle of the night. At any rate, the couple's dramatic clothing and the starkness of the black and white photography is something else, isn't it?

And closer up:

NOW we're talking though, look at Elsie's high collar, flat shoulder coat, belted, with that HAT, THAT HAT:

I think this is the same ensemble maybe later, as taken by a professional photographer and with a matching handwarmer (you know I'm well nigh choking down jealousy here to even type out a description-- this is AMAZING in that exotic elegant way the thirties' were so famous for).

In street clothes the year before (check out Elsie's pocketbook and shoes) :

This is my favorite Elsie outfit other than the Travis Beaton looking thing from the earlier photo spread. The bell sleeves on that coat! The round hat! The dress clasps on her coat!

Paging Rita Hayworth? Also, where can I get a hat like this, please?

Elsie in slacks and a pretty turban, Ed in rolled up sleeves with their first born, 1940:

From there, the photography starts to center (as it should) on their cute little kids. But wasn't it fun to look at them as just engaged and newlyweds in their dapper-to-beat-the-band young people's clothes? I'm copying that fur ensemble as soon as I can get the pieces together...unh! Such style!

I gotta get going, but have yourselves a FABULOUS weekend. Maybe I'll see you out at the sales! I'll be back Monday in any case with more vintage finds and we'll talk then. Be good! :)

Chiara Ferragi Shoes (Novelty Loafers on Parade)

Good morning!

I was looking for some kind of novelty shoes the other day when I stumbled across these loony loafers on a website called Luisaviaroma.com. While I'm in no danger of owning a pair because a) I don't think I've spent more than $50 on a pair of shoes EVER and b) they don't even carry my size, I can't say I didn't do a double take on some of the kooky designs available. "WHY can't you ever find things like this in non-kawaii, grown up, but also not octogenarian shoe choices?!" is a question Chiara Ferragi, fashion blogger and now shoe designer, answers with a resoundingly cheeky exclamation point of a festive footwear collection. Winking eyes, Hollywood sign, and ME...I would just love to see the former and the latter in an otherwise black-on-black blouse and cigarette pant combination, with a vintage chunky gold necklace and charm bracelet to bring in the color. If wishes were fishes....but still!

Take a look at these gorgeous shoes:

10MM BLINK EYE GLITTER LOAFERS

At first, I thought-- now, would I look like Sylvia Fine from The Nanny in something like this? And then I thought-- Lisa, you are saying that like it's a bad thing. Do you remember the spate of late 80's/early 90's novelty sequin items that all the flashiest grandmas were wearing in those halcyon days? I know the fuschia Impressionist windbreaker/pants ensembles were bad, but I can't help but admit that I am drawn, moth-like, to a lot of the glittering, over-the-top, funny sequined vest and dresses and other festive apparel that pops up in estate sales that I go to. I like that vintage mind set of, "If I'm going to get dressed, I'm going to get dressed." While in a senior citizen's heyday in the 1960's, that might have meant coordinated sherbet colored pedal pusher and shell top and sunglasses and sun hat and sandals, maybe in that same person in their seventies', having lived through Dynasty, after all, decided to cut loose in wild, embellished satin and bedazzler abandon. I think these shoes are heir to that sense of whimsy-meets-look-at-me-now.

10MM GLITTER HOLLYWOOD SUEDE LOAFERS

Some of the designs are a little "boutique" ish...do you know what I mean? But honestly, the same designs in a different choice of material (say matte black on matte solid color, no metallics or denim as in the spaghetti kiss loafers), would read Jeffrey Campbell or some other out there but up there designer. I FULLY SUPPORT THE IDEA OF THESE SHOES if not all the execution (especially if I am to hypothetically spend upwards of $200 on these hypothetical shoes in my noway land scenario we're cooking up here). How cute is the spaghetti kiss even with its flaws?

10MM SPAGHETTI KISS DENIM LOAFERS

If you always wanted your own Hollywood Walk of Fame star...well, at least you could have the shoes to match WHEN THAT DAY COMES:

10MM HOLLYWOOD STAR GLITTER LOAFERS

I wish both of these were just lips and in a non-doily fabric, but again, the "x" and "y" format of these are kind of cute, too.

10MM LIPSTICK LACE LOAFERS

This one, piggy backing off the last one, is just weird with the fingers, but it might just be my third favorite, after the Hollywood sign and the blinkies:

NAIL POLISH GLITTER LOAFERS LOAFERS

And for reference, Mama Fine in her leopard print on leopard print finery (I vote yes on Prop Leopard Print):

source

So! What do you think? Too cool for school or certifiably insane? If you were going to make a pair of these, what two related things would you want to see together? Which pair sings to you? Do you have any secret or not so secret love for glitz, glamour, and gaudiness? What's the most out there pair of shoes you've taken to the street? Let me know!

That's all for today, I gotta scoot, but I will see you back here tomorrow for Photo Friday! Be good, we'll talk then. :)

Your Right Glove (When to Wear What Kinds of Vintage Gloves, 1947)

Good morning!

How's it going today? Construction is still underway on the third floor of the library-- I was perched at the temporary nonfiction desk yesterday afternoon, reading a bound copy of 1947 Woman's Home Companion (which I assure you, you'll be hearing more about from me soon, haha), when what to my wondering eyes should appear but this one page item, by Emily Post Institute etiquette maven Anne Kent, on a subject that has been bugging me about since I started taking mid century seriously around seven years ago.

Folks, gloves-- when do you wear them? What kind of gloves do you wear? WHERE do you wear what gloves? When do you take what gloves off? When do you leave what gloves on? THE PERMUTATIONS OF THE GLOVE DILEMMA are practically endless. Written out as I just wrote them, they sound like some foreign language grammar exercise, but it's no laughing matter...how is a Truman-era loving, but not Truman-era contemporary, supposed to suss out what goes where with what? Lucky for us, 1947 WHC has 21st century you and me covered. Check it out!

There's a flash card like guide here to three categories of advice-- "gloves on, off, or optional", "types of gloves", "lengths of gloves". Let's start with the ever mind-boggling to-me "on, off, optional":

When to keep your gloves ON:

I am wanting to be involved in each of these hypothetical situations, and secretly love that there's a sixth bullet point with nothing on it. Cue forties' era Anne Kent, EP's right hand woman in the topic of do's and don'ts in burgeoning midcentury America, saying "Leave one of the bullet points blank, I know I'll think of something I've left off before we go to press", and then never doing it. Or maybe some 1940's reader at the Carnegie Library (what the downtown branch was called before it was Ben West and before it was Main, in its Carnegie endowed original building on Polk Street) inked in their own spot. Who can say! A tea dance, by the way, is apparently "a summer or autumn afternoon or early-evening dance from four to seven...In the United States, the term has been broadened to refer to any casual afternoon dance event." Ah, bon! I was worried I didn't understand that, but it does conjure up the organza dress and sash primness I was thinking of!

When to take your gloves OFF:

I was cracking myself up thinking of how taking gloves off would be like today a lady taking her earrings off to scrap ("oh, it's ON!"), but no, actually, there are simple, social convention based rules for taking your gloves off. I am a fan of any sentence with practically synonymous verbs or nouns or adjectives (I'm from the South, where no baby is small, but "a little bitty tiny baby"; also see this to-do list's "a tune or song", which still kills me every time)-- if I am eating, am I not also munching? Think of how the woman who gives speeches at her local Junior League probably knows to take off her gloves first, though I wouldn't.

When gloves are optional:

The girl in this panel is enjoying the best of both worlds by wearing one glove and going gloveless on the other. Very proto-Michael. I guess in some situations you just have to wing it. Kind of like hats, I find, on the few occasions that I've worn short, black cloth gloves, it feels so weird to have them on indoors, or in any temperature above 50 degrees. I LOVE the Sabrina-esque neat-as-a-pin look they give some outfits I've worn, but don't like the idea of looking like I just escaped some Miss Marple's Dinner Theater stage production set in 1940.

Speaking of short gloves, HERE we go:

"With giddy little prints" is killing me. KILLING ME. Also, I would gladly borrow your 1947 glad rags here, stick girl-- saddle shoes and bobby sox and a wrap plaid skirt, sign me UP.

As for longies:

Did you know what a "two piece faille" or a "dressmakers suit" was? From this (fabulous) blog:

I envisioned what is known as a “dressmaker suit.”  Fairchild’s Dictionary of Fashion (3rd edition, Fairchild Publications, Inc, New York, New York, 2003) gives this definition:  “Woman’s suit made with soft lines and fine details, as contrasted with man-tailored styles that have the sharply defined lines of a man’s suit made by a tailor.  Fashionable in 1950s and revived in the mid-1980s.

I've had the pleasure of googling those terms and adding to my list of mid century clothing vocabulary. Ugh! Do you have any idea how long I've called either just "1960's suit" when that is not at all appropriate? For shame, Lisa.  I had a little more trouble pinning down the previous, but it appears to just be a more narrowly tailored women's two piece suit, nipped at the waist and with or without peplum. I can just see fifties' Dietrich wearing a charcoal grey suit like this with black long cloth gloves and a black wool hat ((as the clouds part, and angels sing)).

Now, how about materials:

Which material goes with which:

Well! I think that about covers it! Now if I catch any of you out on the street with your wrong gloves, don't worry, I'll have these laminate panels in my faux crocodile black trapezoid purse to harass you with slash inform you, haha. I certainly think this was an edifying experience for me, and I hope you, too! It's hard to get vintage things "right" some times without the intuitive cultural knowledge women would have had back then, but never fear, I'll keep digging up artifacts like this to keep us on the straight and narrow.

How about you? Where do you wear vintage gloves? Which of these seems the most obvious/obscure use of gloves? Do you remember your mom or your grandmother's way of wearing certain accessories? Share your knowledge!

I have to get going--this dang blogger ate my post AFTER it was posted, which was some kind of Poltergeist like experience for me, let me tell you, and I have dinner to cook now that She Was a Bird has been set to rights! Have a great Wednesday night, and we'll talk soon. Later, gators!

Millicent Rogers's Closet (Met Museum Clothes, 1930's-1940's)

Good afternoon!

And boy, what an afternoon-- I made the good/bad decision to overindulge in pad thai from across the street for lunch, and while my raging, breakfast-less appetite is sated, dear Lord I am dragging this afternoon. Luckily, only three more hours left at work, and then some friends are coming over to play Matthew's recently acquired copy of Mario Kart WhatevereditionitisIwillbeluckynottoembarrassmyselfatthisgame. :) However! You didn't think I'd forgotten about you? Fallen into the chasm of Internet Archive scary comics? Nope, I'm still here, though weighed down by my lunch choices, and ready to tell you about a gal who I'm frankly surprised has 'scaped my laser-like notice of vintage socialite fashion icons (say that three times fast).

Folks, come hear the good word about Millicent Rogers!

Daughter of Standard Oil scion Henry Huttleston Rogers II, Millicent Rogers was born around the turn of the century with aristocratic good looks and a massive family fortune to back them up. In the thirties' and forties', the thrice married beauty cut a romantic figure in the pages of Harper's Bazaar and in newspaper gossip columns as her love life and eccentrically exquisite couture ensembles turned heads in America and Europe. There was a book written about her colorful exploits, creative endeavors, and philanthropic work published in 2011, called Searching for Beauty: The Life of Millicent Rogers, the American Heiress Who Taught the World About Style, which seems to sum up the life of this singular creature. While the reviews I've seen about the biography have been tepid, I'm looking forward to grabbing a copy from Interlibrary Loan anyway so I can find out more about the life of one of the most interesting looking people I can recall from recent history. 

"Lisa, how can you tell all that from the scant information available on Wikipedia and Pinterest?", you may ask. And shame on you for not knowing me better-- I have my sources (and a lot of free desk time to pursue them, haha)! I was trawling the Met Museum's online collection to begin with, and trying to pin point some of the donors for the more eye-catching 20th century pieces. A lot of them were listed as " Gift of Arturo and Paul Peralta-Ramos"...who would beeee.... Millicent Roger's sons and the executors of her estate! And some donated herself to the Brooklyn Museum for safekeeping before she shifted to a different, more Southwestern inspired look to go with her adopted home of New Mexico, where she spent the last years of her short life.

Ok, blah blah blah....but seriously, EXAMINE THESE CLOTHES. If there was ever so definite an example of my dream closet, it's Millicent Rogers. Three amazing designers dominate the collection, and those would be Mainbocher, Charles James, and Elsa Schiaparelli. As I actual faint from delight. Let's take a look!

1) Elsa Schiaparelli

source

I never save the best for last, and this is no exception! I'd actually featured a number of Millicent Rogers's Schiap designs, extolling the various virtues of the visionary designer, in an earlier blog post without ever realizing that the clothes shared a common wardrobe. What I love in the tongue-in-cheek-meets-opulence of these designs is the idea that the most absurd thing can be rendered elegant by the wearer's tone and mood. The genius of Schiaparelli, in my mind, is in making the outré look soignée, just on account of the confident, sure hand with which she presented the bizarre in her design. 

source

I'm reminded of a time in college when my completely awful freshman year roommate burst into fits of laughter over Harry Nilsson's "Lime in the Coconut" blaring over the speakers on my side of our rabbit hutch like dorm room, explaining, "Oh, it's that song from Kid Bop! I don't know how you're listening to this! This song is so dumb!" To a Tarantino-obsessed circa 2003 me, "Lime in the Coconut" held all the sinister undertones of QT's Reservoir Dog end credits. I firmly associate that song with the powerful last scene of that movie and my own shock watching Harvey Keitel actually keening over Tim Roth's nearly lifeless form. In the one context, sure, I guess it is dumb-- but I love the idea of Tarantino hearing something in that song that was a little dark, a little more foreboding than a straight reading of the lyrics...the sped-up, overlaid denouement of the song isn't funny so much as it's frantic and hypnotic, and that idea, coupled with the Keitel scene, is haunting.

I like to think of these clothes the same way-- they're only clownish if you think of them in a clownish context. On Millicent Roger's willowly, assured frame, I'm sure they looked sumptuously surreal, without a soupçon of silly...exactly as Schiap meant them. PS THAT HAT.

source

2) Charles James

source

I didn't know much about American couturier Charles James (1906-1978) until leafing through these stunning examples from MR's closet. He is actually the subject of a recently mounted exhibition for the Costume Institute, Charles James: Beyond Fashion. According to the Met website's bio:

Charles James produced some of the most memorable garments ever made. He began his design career in the 1930s. It peaked between the late 1940s and mid- 1950s, when his scarce and highly original gowns were sought after by society's most prominent women. Personally draping and constructing the garments that bear his label, he is considered to be the only American to work in the true couture tradition. James saw himself as an artist and sculptor of dress rather than a dressmaker. He manipulated fabrics into dramatic shapes using complex seaming and sometimes complicated understructures to create his singular vision of timeless elegance. A master of the relationship between form, color and texture, he often heightened the drama of his evening wear by combining several like fabrics of different colors, or different fabrics in like colors but with different light reflective qualities. Also a perfectionist, he worked for years on refining certain seam lines, shapes and constructs that particularly expressed his vision of artistry through rigorous engineering. Many of his pieces are conceived asymmetrically and possess a sense of movement and vitality that is a signature characteristic of his work. Many historical references in shapes and construction, especially the drapery forms of the 1870s and early teens, are also prevalent throughout his work.

I love the phrase "heightened the drama of his evening wear" ... because if the volume goes up to 10, James cranks it to way on past an 11. Look at the proportion and design of this evening dress:

source

The coat! The architectural pieces of the bodice! The bell sleeves! I don't know what to praise first, so I'll just go with an overall "WOW". And then, to the other end of the spectrum, this "simplicity-itself" marigold colored evening gown, which would look just as good on some in 2017 as it did on Millicent Rogers in 1947:

source

Can I please take a moment to remind you, these are all from the same woman's clothes. I can't get over it! I'd be happy just to have somewhere to wear most of these, much less own them myself!

3) Mainbocher:

source

Rogers collaborated with designer Mainbocher on a number of the creations he made. According to the Met entry for the next (completely gorgeous, completely bonkers) dress:

Millicent Rogers, the original owner of this ensemble, was a woman of great personal style. She often worked closely with designers to infuse her own sartorial aesthetic into her clothes, including touches authentic to her most current surroundings. This particular ensemble by Mainbocher is an example of the custom designs Rogers enjoyed wearing. One of three examples in the Brooklyn Museum's collection (see 2009.300.172), this design is inspired by the 1830s, the Biedermeier period, which held particular fascination for Rogers. She began to collect Biedermeier furnishings during her years in Austria before World War II, and upon her return to America at the onset of the war, she decorated her home in Virginia, Claremont Manor, built in 1750, with Biedermeier furniture. Often exhibited as an example of her unparalleled sense of style, this Mainbocher creation is also a unique example of Rogers' working relationship with many designers and her inimitable sense of style.

Can you imagine? "Yes, I have a houseful of 1830's furniture, can you make me match the chairs?" Enchanting. I can only hope (but not be 100% sure) that she eschew the hairdressing of that era (see this picture to find out why I would hold a strong opinion on that...pauvre femme!)

source

Re: this sari inspired dress:

Mainbocher was particularly well known for the diversity of designs he created using Indian sari silks. This evening dress is an exquisite example of one of his creations, which he likely discussed with its wearer, Millicent Rogers. She had a great affinity for non-Western materials and garments which no doubt inspired the designer, especially when he designed specifically for her.

source

Isn't it gorgeous? Couldn't you wear it tomorrow?

There are a million other editorial pieces from Rogers's closet on the Met website...why not go while away an hour or two poring over the oddball details and brave imagination of her sense of style? I really cannot wait to read a book about such an iconically well-dressed woman (when I grow up, I definitely want to be MR). What do you think? Could you wear some of these out on the town, or are you more sedate in style? Which one makes you want to learn how to sew so you could have one of your very own? You tell me!

I gotta run and sew up a few details before I get out of here for the evening-- a hopefully more punctual post will be waiting here for you tomorrow! Take care, we'll talk then. :)

"Creepy" Comics (1964-1983, Warren Publishing on Internet Archive)

Good afternoon!

How was your weekend, kiddlings? Anything exciting on the home front? We had an action packed (ish) weekend-- my dad and I hit the sales on Saturday (natch), Matthew and I went to a baby shower that night for two good friends who only has a little while left until we get to meet their daughter (so exciting!!), and as a married unit, we spent all day Sunday playing old CD-ROM scary video games and eating way too much General Tso's Bean Curd (which doesn't sound as appetizing as General Tso's chicken, but TOTALLY IS). As for this workday, I am ragged but I'm right!

What I'd LOVE to clue you in to today...the find of the century, as far as I'm concerned, for a penurious vintage horror comic lover...INTERNET ARCHIVE HAS OVER A HUNDRED ISSUES OF CREEPY. No, I am not kidding. Creepy fans, rejoice!

I'm a member ! Are you? (source)

Creepy was one of the first and best horror comics to come out of the post Comic Code Authority era. Similar to the film industry's 1931 Hayes code crackdown on Filmland "indecency", the ire of America's concerned parents and civic leaders was raised in the early 1950's by horror comics' shock-til-you-drop aesthetic. Your average horror title of that time managed to fit in a dizzying array of horrible, hideous, and hilarious fates for their characters with an economy of storytelling and excess of splattery gore that delighted its readers, both young and old. We're talking grave robbing ghouls, accursed shrunken heads, witches, goblins, decapitations, immolations, premature burials, zombies, gypsy curses...pretty much anything a Cramps or X song of the late seventies' would be about, Tales from the Crypt (in its original incarnation), Crime Suspenstories, and Vault of Horror had you covered. When William Gaines's EC comics, the parent company of each of those titles, was effectively shuttered by censorship, many of the industry's best artists moved on to satirical comics like Mad magazine, which held their own subversive (but code-approved) sway over the nation's youth. But what about us bats-and-moonlight loving spookies-seekers? That's where Creepy comes in.

source

Founded by Russ Jones in 1964, the idea behind Creepy was to round up some of the best comic book artists in the business back into the job that brought a lot of them to the field in the first place-- scaring the pants off people through beautifully executed, imaginatively rendered horror story panels. Sure, some of the issues may showcase familiar terror classics like Poe's "The Tell Tale Heart" or Ambrose Bierce's "The Damned Thing" (hey! They're in public domain, do you blame them?), but outside of your own imagination, I assure you, you haven't seen it done quite this well. With an average of seven individual tales, along with features like "Loathsome Lore" (an illustrated page of panels featuring "true" horror stories that actually do have some basis in fact) and "Dear Uncle Creepy" (where the magazine's mascot fields questions, comments, and brickbats), you are getting a lot of bang for your horror buck! The magazine ran 145 issues, and even had two sister publications in the horror genre, Eerie and Vampirella.

source

Look. At this Frank Frazetta. Cover. Is this real life? In terms of depth, skill, and creativity, these are to the horror comic what, say, N.C. Wyeth was to children's book illustrations. Meaning: the rest of y'all go home, a gold standard has been set!

See how each panel has about thirty-times the usual amount of attention to detail you would get in a similar comic book of the time? I can't get over the shading and the shadow

While I do miss the "people getting their heads grafted onto other bodies" and a "grave robber with a Frigidaire full of human cold-cuts" storylines of the fifties' pre-code EC output, and it's still technically my favorite type of scary comic, there's a calmer, less-hysteric feeling to these sixties' issues of Creepy while still keeping the wheels of one's imagination turning. The content reminds me less of a Stephen-King-edited-horror-anthology, in tone, and more of say the publication Weird Tales, with a mix of sci-fi and fantasy thrown into the mélange and not just horror. Take, for example, the popular Adam Link series that featured prominently throughout two years of Creepy. Link was actually a reboot, originally appearing in the pages of 1930's-era Amazing Stories. The titular character is a robot whose self-awareness predates Star Trek: TNG's Data and even Asimov's I, Robot (with which it actually shares a title in one installation) by some distance, and asks the same questions about how much humanity you can fit into a tin can, when that tin can can grow human emotions along with its steely, super-human strength and agility. I'm a fan, what can I say.

An example of the "Loathsome Lore" feature from issue 11 (source)

Anyway, I have to scoot back to work, but if you're into horror comics, profitez tout suite, avail yourself IMMEDIATELY to this online archive of full-page scans, there's no telling how long they will or won't be available (while Internet Archive is a totally above-board website, I worry about the nebulous copyright issues surrounding who-owns-what with regard to the Warren Publishing oeuvre). Start with issue one via this link, then scroll through the Warren entries (which are kind of jumbled up with others) via this one. And don't get too scared! Or if you do, come back and we can commiserate about how I have to check my chifferobe for ghosts at least once a calendar week because of my steady horror-intake. :)

Have a great Monday! See you tomorrow!