Stan VS. Jack : Who was the real creator ?

[Peter_Parker59]

I was reading an inerview of Jack Kirby about his Silver Age Marvel years.

 

Jack explains he was the one (and not Stan Lee) who actually created every major character in those years. Not only did he create their visual aspects, but he says he was the one to actually think about them.

 

What's more, Kirby says he (not Lee) wrote the stories that he penciled. According to him, even the dialogues were written by him on the side of the pages he drew.

 

Kirby has it that in those days, all Lee had to do is receive a nearly complete story from Kirby and say "Great !".

 

I must say that interview was conducted by Gary Groth and first appeared in February 1990 in The Comics Journal #134 and was actually conducted in the summer of 1989. It's now reprinted in "The comics Journal Library" (in the volume on Jack Kirby).

The interview was conducted after Kirby's unsuccesful claim to get his original art from Marvel. Kirby was mad about that, so that could explain that Kirby's words may be beyond the truth.

 

But anyway, what Kirby says is far from the story as we often hear it from Stan Lee. Stan says he usually gave the storyline to Kirby who put it in pictures, and that Lee wrote the dialogue after that.

 

So what do you guys think ?

Who's telling the truth ? Did Stan Lee only took advantage of Kirby working for him ?

[awe4one]

I tend to think they both (as well as Ditko and others) all had a hand in creating the Marvel Universe. The way Marvel worked, Stan did an outline, the artist created the art, and then Stan added the words suggest all had creative input....

 

Jim

[FFB]

I'm a big Jack Kirby fan, but all of the Marvel Silver Age books that I buy (Spidey, FF, Avengers, TOS, TTA) read as though Stan wrote them. All you have to do is read his more recent stuff or read a book that Kirby didn't work on (like Spidey) and you can see that the dialogue is his. There is no disputing that Kirby did the lion's share of the work in terms of laying out the story from a rough story idea given by Stan. But the dialogue is clearly Stan's on the books I read.

 

I was reading an inerview of Jack Kirby about his Silver Age Marvel years.

 

Jack explains he was the one (and not Stan Lee) who actually created every major character in those years. Not only did he create their visual aspects, but he says he was the one to actually think about them.

 

What's more, Kirby says he (not Lee) wrote the stories that he penciled. According to him, even the dialogues were written by him on the side of the pages he drew.

 

Kirby has it that in those days, all Lee had to do is receive a nearly complete story from Kirby and say "Great !".

 

I must say that interview was conducted by Gary Groth and first appeared in February 1990 in The Comics Journal #134 and was actually conducted in the summer of 1989. It's now reprinted in "The comics Journal Library" (in the volume on Jack Kirby).

The interview was conducted after Kirby's unsuccesful claim to get his original art from Marvel. Kirby was mad about that, so that could explain that Kirby's words may be beyond the truth.

 

But anyway, what Kirby says is far from the story as we often hear it from Stan Lee. Stan says he usually gave the storyline to Kirby who put it in pictures, and that Lee wrote the dialogue after that.

 

So what do you guys think ?

Who's telling the truth ? Did Stan Lee only took advantage of Kirby working for him ?

[DDPGambit]

In the Daredevil DVD, Gene Colan (Or Romita, I can't recall) says that Stan wrote up a basic plot, and then the artists would have to flesh it out. Then Stan would go back and add in and change up the dialog as he saw fit.

[JohnBull]

Stan Lee. Kirby drew pretty pictures.

[fiendish]

Stan confirms that in Son of Origins of Marvel Comics. In planning FF #48, he briefly discussed the Galactus character with Jack, and days later Jack came back with breakdowns that featured a shiny guy flying around on an ironing board. Stan was delighted with the idea, but it's clear that Jack was the one whose visual imagination created the Silver Surfer, among others.

 

Jack may have suggested some dialog, but Stan's voice is unmistakable in their scripts, as unmistakable as the scripts he wrote for books illustrated by Ditko, Colan, Buscema, Romita, et al.

 

One need only read enough dialog in any of Jack's DC work to notice the difference. I'm a big fan of Jack's 70s stuff, but as narrative, it's a mess. Jack had a love of plunging interesting, exotic characters into dangerious situations, but once there, he rarely had any idea how to build on it or get out of it (other than a big brawl).

 

 

[Peter_Parker59]

Well, thanks to you all for your input.

 

I knew already what was Stan Lee's version. But you have a point when you suggest going back through reading someries like ASM, on which big Jack didn't work.

It's true the words always sound the same (Lee's style...).

 

Anyway, I'm a big Kirby fan and I think he was a monster of a creator.

 

But I think he really got upset by not being able to retrieve his original art. That probably made him cross the line of historical truth

[Zonker]

Well, thanks to you all for your input.

 

I knew already what was Stan Lee's version. But you have a point when you suggest going back through reading someries like ASM, on which big Jack didn't work.

It's true the words always sound the same (Lee's style...).

 

Anyway, I'm a big Kirby fan and I think he was a monster of a creator.

 

But I think he really got upset by not being able to retrieve his original art. That probably made him cross the line of historical truth

 

Well, I don't think Kirby literally wrote the words that wound up in the dialogue balloons in Silver Age Marvels. As noted above, just compare the Marvel Age dialogue (clearly Stan's) versus Kirby's Bronze Age DC Fourth World stuff (which I otherwise love). But I do think as the 1960s wore on, Stan's plots became looser and looser, eventually all but disappearing as a starting point for Kirby's storytelling.

 

And Kirby may have been remembering correctly that he supplied full dialogue on his original art. But it's likely he never compared his words to the exact published version. It's pretty clear Stan or someone else in the Bullpen wrote or re-wrote the dialogue before the letterers ever got it.

[garthgantu]

Good points, Zonker... I for one tend to believe Jack's version of events - up to a point. I think he WAS more instrumental in the "look and feel" of many of the early Marvel characters, and could well have been involved in the writing to a fair degree. No question that Stan Lee's 'voice' is evident throughout SA Marvel titles, but bear in mind, it's pretty easy to mimic a particular 'voice' in that sense... any of us could write a page of dialogue for between the Silver Surfer and members of the FF, without thinking twice or breaking a sweat. (Not saying it's not great stuff, mind you, but once you're immersed in it, it's comes pretty naturally I think.)

 

Further, Stan was always a consummate promoter - and self-promoter. So I've always taken everything Stan said/says with a big grain of salt.

 

But ultimately, I think Stan and Jack should get roughly equal shares of the credit for most of the early Marvel characters, with Ditko, Ayers and a few others taking the remaining kudos.

[blowout]

I tend to think that the creative side of things fell in between the two extreme views told by each party.

[COI]

But the dialogue is clearly Stan's on the books I read.

 

.....which is not necessarily a good thing.

 

I collect Silver, but being that I grew up on 80's books, I have trouble getting through most early S.A books written by Stan. I usually have to stop in the middle of a story, and pick up a John Grisham novel to repair the damage to my brain cells.

 

It's all very collectible, but not very readable. Thank God CGC has taken away the guilt of feeling like you have to read the damn things.

[blowout]

I collect Silver, but being that I grew up on 80's books, I have trouble getting through most early S.A books written by Stan.

 

Are you kidding? Have you read any of the SA stuff NOT written by Stan?

[COI]

I collect Silver, but being that I grew up on 80's books, I have trouble getting through most early S.A books written by Stan.

 

Are you kidding? Have you read any of the SA stuff NOT written by Stan?

 

Yes. Until around 1968, most Silver is unreadable for me, and even after that, it's sketchy. Early bronze gets a little better, with ASM 121, 122, Conan 1-24, etc. Keep in mind that I came up in the era of DD Born again, DKR, Batman: Year one, A death in the Family etc.... These are the kind of books that were on the stands when I was growing up, and I was exposed to this caliber of story from the very beginning. And my taste in comics(in terms of reading) is similar to my taste in movies; dark and gritty. So reading almost any S.A is painful, and almost patronizing to me. I just read FF #55 yesterday, and I didn't know whether to laugh, or burn it. And that book is in one of the better S.A era's.

[supapimp]

even early ASM's?

[blowout]

I know exactly where you are coming from and re-reading SA, post-bronze, can be difficult. It is easy to see that the books were aimed at a much less demanding younger age group back then.

What I was getting at with my earlier post though, is that Stan's stuff, despite its faults, was head-and-shoulders above just about everything else in the Silver Age.

[COI]

even early ASM's?

 

No, I like early ASM's because I was fairly young when I got the ASM 1-10 Masterworks(1987 or 88). They're nostalgic to me for that reason, and are good to read in that respect.

[COI]

is that Stan's stuff, despite its faults, was head-and-shoulders above just about everything else in the Silver Age.

 

I definetly can't argue there. I love S.A for its historical significance(to the hobby) and the fact that it's the birthplace of all my favorite characters. But in terms of compelling reading, it just isn't there.

[shadroch]

I've never seen an original Kirby page that had any writing or dialog on it. Has anyone?

If you read the early Avengers series ,you'll not see any dropoff in the writing quality from the early Kirby drawn stories to the Heck stories. Artwork yes,but not in writing.

I believe JK played a much bigger role in the creation of many of the characters then he was given credit for,but the words in that interview sound like those of a digruntled ex-employee.

As has been mentioned by others,a read of Marvels various books will show how consistent te writing was. Another case in point. The Early Hulk series.If memory serves me well,the later issues often had two stories,one drawn by Ditko and one by Kirby. There is no difference in the writing styles,that I ever noticed.

 

[fantastic_four]

even early ASM's?

 

I didn't read the early ASMs until recent years, and they're quite entertaining. I agree about a lot of the other early Marvels, though...the early X-Men and Daredevil issues are often PAINFUL to try to make it all the way to the end of an issue.

[Peter_Parker59]

Zonker,

 

I've just found some confirmation of what you said in Mark Evanier's web site.

 

Hope the link works :

http://povonline.com/JackFaq1.htm