Not precisely a CIDU, but raises the question, Are these linked by anything besides alluding to Houdini?
Related
5 Comments
I’m not sure how restrictive you intend “besides alluding to Houdini”. Besides directly mentioning his name? Then sure, because all show a scene where something / someone has gone missing, or by extension has escaped — just like Houdini’s act.
Yes, it seems to be about missing or disappeared things, which then are said to be Houdini’s. The don’t all work the same way (or maybe they just don’t all work, period). Only “Houdini’s Wake” could actually be his — if he was there in the coffin and now has disappeared. The others are more like “a Houdini-like circumstance with this thing / person”. Even if “Houdini’s baby” is supposed to be actually his kid, we don’t think the baby has performed a Houdini escape – it’s just missing.
Well two of the three could be take-offs on books with titles of the form “person’s object” (Rosemary’s Baby and Finnegans Wake) but the bike one breaks that pattern AFAIK.
I interpreted the first one as the baby having performed an actual escape, not just going missing somehow.
Comics I Don't Understand 
I’m not sure how restrictive you intend “besides alluding to Houdini”. Besides directly mentioning his name? Then sure, because all show a scene where something / someone has gone missing, or by extension has escaped — just like Houdini’s act.
Yes, it seems to be about missing or disappeared things, which then are said to be Houdini’s. The don’t all work the same way (or maybe they just don’t all work, period). Only “Houdini’s Wake” could actually be his — if he was there in the coffin and now has disappeared. The others are more like “a Houdini-like circumstance with this thing / person”. Even if “Houdini’s baby” is supposed to be actually his kid, we don’t think the baby has performed a Houdini escape – it’s just missing.
Well two of the three could be take-offs on books with titles of the form “person’s object” (Rosemary’s Baby and Finnegans Wake) but the bike one breaks that pattern AFAIK.
I interpreted the first one as the baby having performed an actual escape, not just going missing somehow.
@CaroZ, I tend to agree on that one.