sfcityduck

Back when Marvel started there was no standard superhero melodrama. That was Marvel's chief innovation. Having a guy shrink was just a new iteration of Doll Man. Having a guy stretch was just a new iteration of Plastic Man. Pretty much every Marvel hero was unoriginal in concept and a retread of prior ideas (Thor the God of Thunder? Hercules?). But the energy of the art and more sophisticated dialogue made the concepts work. Characters who voiced insecurities and had bad days and melodrama was a new concept. Since you are obviously not of "that generation" in what decade did you discover Marvel and Kirby?

Many is still a small percentage of overall comic fans. I don't know anyone who believes New Gods is Kirby's top work. I view it as being past his prime. I'd probably rate Boy's Ranch higher than New Gods. I'd definitely rate the first 60 or so issues of FF way above New Gods. So far above that New Gods would look like an ant. Do you really feel New Gods is Kirby's top work? Honestly?

Stan did not write full scripts. He did write the dialogue. The person who does that is often called the scripter or writer. You know that. In any event, yes, I mean that the combination of energetic art and Lee's dialogue created a comic unlike anything seen before. Kirby couldn't write that kind of dialogue. He never did it before or after his main stint on Marvel superhero books. His writing is ponderous. Challengers doesn't read like a Marvel superhero book. It reads like a DC adventure book. Which is exactly what it was. The scripting on Challengers was solid. The book is an above average example of the genre. Not as good as Danger Trail in my view but entertaining enough. DC comics generally had well written books. The Wood brothers were solid writers, which is why Kirby hired them for his shot at a syndicated cartoon. I get that you think no one deserves any credit but Kirby but your view ignores that the creative process often thrives the most when synergy exists.

That’s what Jack said. Jack said a lot of things. Some of them are really absurd. I can't wait until you get to the whole who created Spiderman controversy. My guess is you'll side with Kirby against Ditko.

Don't you tell them what the book is on the submission form? Including version? Could be a submission error.

And the supporting facts for these assertions are ...? Marvel was down to 8 monthly slots. Do you really think that Goodman wasn't making the decisions?

Neither I nor anyone else is going to argue that Stan was doing more interesting work in the 1950s than Kirby. Instead, we argue the opposite: Stan was bored and burned out by the work he was doing. He was ready to give up. And so when he got the opportunity to do superhero work, he basically said "F it" I'm going to write dialogue that I think is fun and interesting. He mashed up genres. He blazed a new trail in the dialogue and interactions. Sure he had the advantage of working with great pencillers, but he was a great scripter. And nothing about the origins or plots of Marvel comics was original or profound. What made Marvel vibrant was the combination of energetic art with an energetic and fresh writing style. Nothing Kirby did prior to Marvel has really stood the test of time. Marvel does. There's a good reason for that. It's called synergy.

Not "HIM" or even Wally. It was the Wood brothers, (short for Richard) and Dave. Dave's first work on Big Town 1 and Danger Trail in 1950 was pretty awesome. He also worked on Rex the WD 1, Our Army at War 1, and a lot of genre work SF / adventure ./ war / Wester (including Tomahawk). DC must have trusted him, and that's an endorsement of his quality. (Short for Richard) had been working in comics since the 1940s for Lev Gleason (Silver Streak, Daredevil, Boy, Crime Does Not Pay), Hillman (Airboy), Quality (Blackhawk, Doll Man, Plastic Man), DC (Action, House of Mystery, World's Finest) and Gold Key (Star Trek, Dr. Solar). Kirby must have liked their work because he hired them to write Sky Masters of the Space Force around the same time he was working with them on Challengers. I get you think everyone is a hack but Kirby, but the reality is that Kirby worked with a lot of good writers.

If it were silly, you could probably come up with some facts and substance to rebut it.

Kirby's work with Stan Lee reads completely differently than his work with Joe Simon or his attempts to write on his own later in his career. I get that you believe FF 1 is a self-plagiarism of Challengers 3, and it probably is in part. But that book had writers and the methods used varied from Stan's.

Trolling? No. Don't you know who the Wood brothers were?

Superman and Batman were always successful (not Wonder Woman who was down to one title) and they were considered sui generis. The only hero who could compete was Captain Marvel (who DC sued out of existence). All superhero revivals of the 1950s failed. Until Flash. And that's why Flash led to other revivals at DC and later Marvel. This is not a hard concept.

Who knows why Challengers got their own book? In the same time period DC put out Charlie Chan and House of Secrets - neither of which had a try out. So I'm not sure at all that Challengers got its own title (after a four issue tryout instead of Lois Lane's two issue tryout) because of Kirby. Could have been the writing. Who knows. Flash did not inspire the plot, art, or scripting of FF 1. But it did indirectly inspire Marvel to do a superhero revival. And that's what mattered and why we view Showcase 4 as the beginning of the Silver Age. Challengers didn't inspire Marvel to put out FF 1 either. It wasn't a superhero book. Kirby had an art style, if Ditko had done FF 1 it would have looked different. However, because Kirby worked on both books, it seems certain that he swiped Challengers issue 3's plot device of Rocky gaining fire, ice, giant man, and invisibility powers by being exposed to cosmic rays in space during an experimental rocket flight to use for the FF origin (just the flame and invisibility). But that swipe is not something to boast about, especially since that issue was scripted by the Wood brothers (who also scripted Sky Masters).

Allegations in the class action lawsuit include that:

Lois Lane had its own title before Challengers, based on a tryout of only two issues instead of four. What's this prove about the birth of the Silver Age? Nothing. Because Lois Lane was just another Superman title like Superboy and Jimmy Olson, and Challengers was just another genre title. But Flash was the first successful revival of a golden age DC superhero. Flash led to Green Lantern, etc. Challengers weren't an inspiration for DC superhero revivals for the simple reason that Challengers weren't a DC superhero book. They were just another genre book like My Greatest Adventure, Strange Adventures, Mystery in Space, Tales of the Unexpected, etc. The first no. 1 after Challengers 1 was Charlie Chan.

Saying Al Jaffe left in 1956 before the implosion does not support your assertion that: "This [1957] would be the year that Atlas would lose many of the artist and writers who helped keep it together," an assertion you support by citing to the example of Al Jaffe. Instead, that Al Jaffe left in 1956 rebuts your assertion when coupled with your stats that show Atlas was going strong until they got hit with the title limitations in mid-1957. Simply put, the Atlas implosion was due to a bad distributor deal, not bad relationships with creators. Why not just admit that?

I'm not impressed with the OP's tone towards Joe's grandkid, but hey he gets to be him. My only correction of Simon Comics is that Kirby agreed to Simon getting a bigger cut of S&K's share of the CA royalties than that Jack was to receive. That's according to Joe. Makes sense given the facts. I also believe that Joe continued to get more than Jack's share for a while during their partnership, but I don't have the source on that handy.

Aside from the copyright violations (hint: Yellow Claw, Challengers, Fighting American, Atlas books etc. are all available in archive formats), this thread is little more than inaccurate propaganda aimed at the single-minded goal of glorifying Kirby to a degree that puts even Stan Lee's over the top hype to shame. I really hope that no one views the "history" being told here seriously. It is far from fair or balanced. The OP has buried his head in the sand using the "ignore" button to ensure he does not have to glimpse posts which raise facts contrary to his views. That in itself speaks volumes.

So much is wrong with this "history" it is astounding! You have turned the real facts on their head. 1957 was actually the year of the legendary "Atlas implosion" caused by Martin Goodman's bad distributor deals. The implosion required Atlas to basically fire all of its creative talent. The did not "lose" those artists when the artists "departed". They were just not hired by Atlas anymore (remember those artists were independent contractors) because Atlas was scrambling to cut costs due to a lack of revenue resulting from being able to publish fewer comics. Here's an objective view by someone who actually knows what they are talking about: The upshot was that by 1959, Stan was running out of the inventory of already made stories and was back to hiring artists. Kirby and Ditko both lept at the chance.

So much wrong here: (1) Fighting America and Yellow Claw were by no means important "pre-Silver Age" or "pre-Marvel Age" series. Fighting American was not Marvel at all, it was mostly a superhero parody in response to the Atlas revival of CA (and HT and Subby) which was a far more important event for Marvel. Yellow Claw was not a superhero story, but a very short run 50s version of Fu Manchu. (2) Challengers was also not a superhero series. It did not usher in the superhero revivals which define the Silver Age. It was just another genre series (adventure / monsters / sf) like many of the tales in the Atlas books, and like many of the tryouts in DC's Showcase, and of the same tone as DC's 50s titles (Mystery in Space, Space Adventures). (3) The most important "pre-Marvel Age" series was the Flash. It was the superhero book which broke DC out of its fixation on Superman titles (Superboy, Jimmy and Lois were all started earlier in the 50s) and instead ushered in a revival of the previously cancelled DC superheroes. Unlike numerous failed attempts to bring superheroes back to their previous market dominance (Stan's Marvel Boy (1950-1951) and the subsequent Atlas revival (1954-1955); S&K's failed Fighting American parody superhero (1954) in response to Atlas' revival of Captain America; ME's introduction of the Avenger (1955); etc.), Flash stuck and spurred other DC revivals until a new universe of characters existed. Without Flash, there is no "Marvel Age." Prior to Flash, all of the successful action at DC on the superhero front was limited to expanding the number of Superman titles.

Worth noting that Showcase 6 & 7 would have been scheduled in the tryout series without the benefit of any sales numbers. It was likely a refinement of the concept of the series to see if DC could get repeat buyers. It was not a compliment to Kirby. Flash got a second appearance in Showcase 8 followed by back to back debut issues for Lois Lane in 9 & 10, a second back to back tryout of Challengers in 11 & 12, a back to back of Flash in 13 & 14, back to back debut of Space Ranger in 15 & 16, and then the format changed again with three and four successive issue debuts starting. Probably all dictated by DCs desire to get marketing data. So the fact Challengers started with a back to back debut was no compliment to Kirby. Your hype on this is a homage to Stan Lee. Also worth noting that Lois Lane got a new series sooner than Challengers, without four issues of tryout, despite having debuted second. My guess is that just shows DC’s confidence in the Superman franchise as Jimmy and Superboy already had gotten books before Showcase started. Challengers was clearly a genre adventure / sf / monster type book like most of the early Showcase titles and some DC titles started earlier in the 50s. It was a known quantity and probably viewed as safe by DC (but not as safe as Superman). It was Flash which broke the mold by starting a new universe of DC superhero revivals.

You might have more credibility if you got the facts straight. 1956 is Silver Age!

To recap: * Stan was very active in editing the art, including asking for extensive redraws when he felt the art didn't advance the story. We also know this from tales about mounds of rejected pencilled pages by Kirby, etc. sitting in the office that were used to test out prospective inkers. * Stan was dialoguing the books from dinner time to 2 or 3 in the morning. We know Stan dialogued because Stan's dialogue was distinctive, in a similar style on all books, and very very successful. The info on how late he was working is telling and positive. * A book he didn't dialogue was one Daredevil book Wood wrote. We all know this because Wood was credited in the book for the --script! Cuts against the assertion Stan was taking credit for work he didn't do. Taken together, the above quotes do not add up to Stan not doing any work. Sounds like there's no dispute that Stan was doing a lot of editing and dialoguing work. He must have been a very hard worker. The only dispute appears to be the division of input on plots. That was the essential attribute of the Marvel method - the artists not working off of full scripts. Some artists liked it, others didn't. Hardly, the criminal case the OP is trying to make out.

They were printed in different print runs. And they were sold in different countries. So they are two different sets: (1) The U.S. set and (2) the U.K. set. An analogy. As an aside: FDR was the leader of the U.S. and Churchill the leader of the U.K. despite the fact that they both had American mothers. What matters is not where you start out, but where you end up. Otherwise, a lot of "U.S. comics" these days would be deemed foreign issues because while they were sold in the U.S., they were printed outside of it.

A giveaway for the giveaway collector who thinks they have everything. Caniff did a stint working for the government as an illustrator during WWII. Here's a little known Caniff art job for a government publication with a number of illustrations and even comic book style work: