Dennis Wilcutt — who is well known in various collecting circles, and who is one of the key researchers on Frank Godwin — recently left a comment regarding an earlier post of mine — a post which dealt with a strip that I believe to be one of the final Connie Sunday comic-strips. I appreciate very much his making the comment. You can read his comment there, but basically he asks if I can post the final strips (December 29, 1940 and January 5, 1941). (Maybe Dennis is also alluding to the rest of the December strips — which I only have in the form of the Paulette comic strip, which was basically a French version of the Connie Sunday comic-strip.) Dennis also asks whether the story appeared “to end in a logical manner.”
As to the first question, there are several reasons why I prefer not to post those two strips, in their entirety, on this blog. For one thing, I don’t really consider this blog a very dignified place to post the images — and it certainly would not be an ideal way to show them. Secondly, I am unsure of the copyright status of the strips. There are other considerations as well. I am currently rethinking my ultimate plans for those two strips, and the question of what might be considered an appropriate place to publish the two in their entirety (assuming that there are no copyright problems).
Nonetheless, I have posted segments of the two strips. Actually, the day after I posted the post that Dennis commented upon, I posted (on November 23, 2013) another post — which contained some additional thoughts on the December 29, 1940, Connie Sunday. It was entitled, “A few more comments about the non-Frank Godwin ‘Connie’ of the preceding post . . . .”
For some reason, I took that post down six days later — on November 29, 2013. I’m not sure why I did that. I think I did that because I felt that the blog was becoming top-heavy with posts that did not deal with Rusty Riley. I have actually taken down a lot of posts, in order to keep the blog from becoming too unfocused. I’m not sure why I left the post that Dennis commented on!
Anyway, I am going to re-post that “additional” post. It will become a more recent post, and it will appear “above” this post.
I hope in the near future to discuss the “plot” of that story — which may at least partially answer Dennis’s second question.
Dennis, thanks again for the comment!
February 6, 2014
About 409 words.
Revised February 21, 2014