Needs Help: Archie Comics

I've been mildly bugged by the current Archie Comics image for a while. While it is indeed a typical cover gag, it's not actually a cover. And while the Male Gaze is indeed present, the caption's focus on it kind of gives a false "Archie Comics: Your Number One Choice in Male Gaze Comics!" impression. It also appears to have been recolored or digitally altered for brighter color than the actual print comics.

I generally favor "first appearance" images for comic book features, which in this case leads to a couple options:

• First page of the first Archie story:

• First cover appearance, which also has an interesting "Twilight of the Supers" angle:

Agree that the current should probably be replaced. I like the first suggestion.

Boy, Archie got less goofy-looking over time. Had no idea.

Yeah, he's almost Alfred E. Neuman-esque in the first story.

I wouldn't mind to switch the pic to a full cover, but I'd much prefer to use one that features the characters in their most familiar designs...the differences in those are so striking that I think it might be better to have them on an Image Links page, or linked in the description to note the Art Shift.

Personally, I hardly think "having too much of a sense of history" has ever been a problem at TV Tropes, and that we could do with a little more "Yes, sometimes it's interesting to look at stuff that was created before you were born."

Obviously, the caption would make note of the visual differences, and it's not like it's difficult to see what the characters look like in their current incarnations.

He is nearly unrecognizable.

Seems like the page image for a work should instead be quintessential.

Would it work if someone found a better quality scan of this picture◊?

Seems to be a broken link.

It's not working for me, either.

If you remove the hyphen and space in the URL, you'll find a watermarked image.

The progression pic might work, but I think finding it in a form we could use could be a pain.

Here's some more options: 1◊, 2◊, 3◊

I'm also working on a separate pic that I'm going to have to upload because the link is redirecting to another site.

edited 20th Sep '12 8:10:33 PM by Willbyr

I like the Pep Comics cover, but does anyone suspect that having other, less-known characters on the cover distracts from Archie himself?

Here's the upload; I really like this one.

edited 20th Sep '12 8:52:24 PM by Willbyr

That's good.

Another vote.

A vote for the image on #14. The first comic page would be good for Image Links, but I agree we'd need a quintessential look for the page image.

• 1 for #14!

I guess I'm outvoted, but I still think TV Tropes should be a place where the "Nothing worth knowing happened before I was born" trend is bucked instead of coddled.

Historical perspective is useful. And it's not like it's difficult to figure out what Archie looks like now, in the somewhat unlikely event that you don't know. Just type "Archie" into Google Image Search, and you'll get pages and pages of "classic-look" Archie. (And that's without qualification - it's many pages before any OTHER person named Archie — Archie Manning — even makes an appearance.)

I see what you mean but I think a cartoon character that has looked (roughly) a certain way for 95% of its existence is the wrong time to play that card. Even 1950 Archie◊ would be better than the really early version.

I think there's a different between "that's how he used to look like" and Early-Installment Weirdness. Sure, it's far longer than the latter usually is, but from a historical standpoint, it's not that much.

edited 23rd Sep '12 9:07:16 AM by AnotherDuck

Bump; anyone else?

Hearing nothing else, I'm gonna put the gang pic up since it's got some consensus. Locking up.