While the 1960 annual was aimed at girls who had outgrown Twinkle but were not old enough for romance comics, the 2009 one does give the impression that it is aimed at a teenage audience.
I don’t think that was particularly surprising, nor that it mattered greatly, because by the end of 2008 when girls were getting the annual for Christmas, they had been without the weekly since 2001, the best part of eight years since the link between the weekly and the annual had been severed. Girls who were nine in 2001 will have been sixteen in 2008, and probably felt no great nostalgia for the weekly. It is also important to remember that in any case the weekly had started to feature boy/girl relationships a good while before its demise, when it introduced the mixed secondary school The Comp. Many individual serials thereafter were based around such relationships.
Two’s Company… could be loosely based on the Saturday Date picture story in the Judy 1999 annual (reprinted as Is it a Date? in the Bunty 2002 annual) because both stories feature a boy asking a girl if she has a date for a disco or a prom but when the girl says no, the boy walks away. While I quite liked Two’s Company…, I agree that Choices is the better photo story because it has a more original storyline.
Regarding the Carly’s Cats! reprint, some of the panels were removed in a similar manner to a few panels being removed from The Four Marys story (reprinted from the Bunty 1995 annual) in the Bunty 2008 annual and a few photographs being removed from the Wrong Number! photo story (reprinted from Time to Talk in the Mandy 1999 annual) also in the Bunty 2008 annual. Maybe the removal of panels from some stories in the Bunty 2008 and 2009 annuals is one reason why both annuals have fewer pages than the previous ones.
Interesting about the removal of panels, it’s only know that you point it out that I realise there is a 2 page difference in Carly’s Cats, 9 pages in the original and 7 pages in the reprint. It does appear they may have been keeping costs down in the last annual by limiting the pages.
Twos company does seem to reuse idea though not a straight reprint. That wasn’t uncommon either to see storylines reused.
I think it’s cheating, what Cotty does to help Carol – adding touches to Carol’s entry and worsening her own – even though Cotty means well. It’s grounds for disqualification for Carol. Carol should win by her own efforts and against genuine competition.
I agree, I think even if Cotty just altered her own work it wouldn’t be so bad, but to add to Carol’s really does diminish her efforts and is cheating.
While the 1960 annual was aimed at girls who had outgrown Twinkle but were not old enough for romance comics, the 2009 one does give the impression that it is aimed at a teenage audience.
I don’t think that was particularly surprising, nor that it mattered greatly, because by the end of 2008 when girls were getting the annual for Christmas, they had been without the weekly since 2001, the best part of eight years since the link between the weekly and the annual had been severed. Girls who were nine in 2001 will have been sixteen in 2008, and probably felt no great nostalgia for the weekly. It is also important to remember that in any case the weekly had started to feature boy/girl relationships a good while before its demise, when it introduced the mixed secondary school The Comp. Many individual serials thereafter were based around such relationships.
Two’s Company… could be loosely based on the Saturday Date picture story in the Judy 1999 annual (reprinted as Is it a Date? in the Bunty 2002 annual) because both stories feature a boy asking a girl if she has a date for a disco or a prom but when the girl says no, the boy walks away. While I quite liked Two’s Company…, I agree that Choices is the better photo story because it has a more original storyline.
Regarding the Carly’s Cats! reprint, some of the panels were removed in a similar manner to a few panels being removed from The Four Marys story (reprinted from the Bunty 1995 annual) in the Bunty 2008 annual and a few photographs being removed from the Wrong Number! photo story (reprinted from Time to Talk in the Mandy 1999 annual) also in the Bunty 2008 annual. Maybe the removal of panels from some stories in the Bunty 2008 and 2009 annuals is one reason why both annuals have fewer pages than the previous ones.
Sorry, Saturday Date was in the Judy 1990 annual. There was no Judy 1999 annual because the last one was the 1993 one.
Interesting about the removal of panels, it’s only know that you point it out that I realise there is a 2 page difference in Carly’s Cats, 9 pages in the original and 7 pages in the reprint. It does appear they may have been keeping costs down in the last annual by limiting the pages.
Twos company does seem to reuse idea though not a straight reprint. That wasn’t uncommon either to see storylines reused.
I think it’s cheating, what Cotty does to help Carol – adding touches to Carol’s entry and worsening her own – even though Cotty means well. It’s grounds for disqualification for Carol. Carol should win by her own efforts and against genuine competition.
I agree, I think even if Cotty just altered her own work it wouldn’t be so bad, but to add to Carol’s really does diminish her efforts and is cheating.
It’s called unauthorised assistance I believe. For this reason I do not think this will be one of my favourite Four Marys stories.