Lost respect for Stanley Lieber

[TempusFugitivus]

I always think of the John Lennon/Paul McCartney of the Beatles when I think of Stan Lee/Jack Kirby and Marvel Comics.

 

Both combinations were much much better together than apart.

 

Kirby was a fantastical visionary and a truly prolific artist. But without Lee's humanizing of the material, you get something like Kirby's DC work: the same art but incredibly stilted dialogue and a depth of characterization suitable for those under ten.

 

The whole concept and characterization of Spider-Man is proof of Stan Lee's input. Despite Kirby's early artwork on the character (and his cover to AF 15), nothing that would make Peter Parker so memorable a character came from Kirby.

 

The reason Stan Lee gets so much credit for what happened at Marvel in the 1960s is that he deserved it. He took the entire super-hero concept, which since it's beginning had been mostly aimed at the I-can-read-now to age 12 bracket, and changed it to the age 13 to 18 set.

 

Stan Lee saw that, by aiming the material at this bracket, you would still get those underage readers but also pick up some adult readers too. Kirby had nothing to do with that.

 

It is, of course, a shame that Kirby did not get compensated as he should have for what he had a hand in creating.

 

But even that cannot be pinned on Stan Lee.

 

Lee, just like Kirby, was an employee [there is, of course, the charge of nepotism but it really doesn't stick because when Lee's uncle, Martin Goodman, sold the company in the early 1970s, Lee pretty much got nothing but what he could negotiate on his own from his new bosses].

 

It hardly seems fair (and perhaps a trifle jealous) to be upset that Lee was more successful in negotiating his rewards later in life than Kirby. Was he supposed to look after Kirby's interests after Kirby had left the company?

 

If I remember correctly, there is a very telling passage in the book cited here [could be another book though]. When Kirby returned to Marvel after his DC stint, he still wanted to Lee to write the scripts for him. Kirby, in his heart, knew exactly what Lee brought to his table.

 

 

[AtlasFan]

Let me start out by saying that I am a huge fan of Kirby's 50s and early 60s work.

 

However,I think by 1970, Jack over-played his hand when he was renegotiating his contract with Marvel. His art-work was simply not what it was 5-6 years earlier. By the late 60's, Kirby's work became looser and more abstract when the fans were looking for more Buscema/Romita or Neal Adams/Bernie Wrightson styles. Stan new this was the case.

 

Jack was given a wonderful chance to basically start his own line of books at DC -- and like it or not -- the whole "Fourth World" hype ended up as one of the biggest f@rts in comic book history. It fell flat. Too many characters, not enough characterizations. I thought it was a mess.

 

Even though "Evil" Stan knew that Kirby's popularity was on the way down, he took him back -- not only did Stan put Jack back on Captain America and FF covers, but also allowed him to create new titles like Devil Dinosaur, Machine Man and even recycle the New Gods as the Eternals. What happened? They all went the same way as the Fourth World. Stan must have know that this would happen.

 

At this point, Jack was also taking a lot of criticism from the comic book "gurus" of the day...just read any COMICS JOURNAL or fanzine's review of Jack's books from the mid/late 70...they are less than flattering. Most comics fans dont like to remember this.

 

What I always thought Jack should have done was to go into animation full time after he left Marvel in 1970. He could have come up with some fantastic stuff that would have made Doug Wiley's (creator of Johnny Quest) stuff look second rate.

 

[Whizzer]

While I am a big Stan the Man fan and will always defend his massive contribution to both comics and Marvel, I can't help thinking that it would have been really nice if Jack had lived long enough to partake in the whole Signature series/blank cover explosion.

 

It would have made for a nice pension and perhaps he could have gone to his grave feeling a little more valued and justly rewarded than perhaps he actually did.

[comix4fun]

While I am a big Stan the Man fan and will always defend his massive contribution to both comics and Marvel, I can't help thinking that it would have been really nice if Jack had lived long enough to partake in the whole Signature series/blank cover explosion.

 

It would have made for a nice pension and perhaps he could have gone to his grave feeling a little more valued and justly rewarded than perhaps he actually did.

 

 

Jack would have probably preferred the almost 7,000 pages that Marvel was supposed to return to him and didn't. Now THAT would have made for a nice pension.

[Ogami]

[Ogami]

But is Stan Lee responsible for that?

[Ogami]

That was a sincere question. I don't know the answer.

[Whizzer]

Oh, no doubt that should have happened. I was merely saying that I think Jack would have enjoyed the interaction of doing sig series/blanks. He seemed to enjoy talking about his work, and as Stan does so many signings it must be fairly lucrative.

 

The money and recognition entailed in the now prevalent large scale con signings seem to be two things which Jack felt he had missed out on.

[comix4fun]

But is Stan Lee responsible for that?

 

 

Well, Stan was Editor in Chief from 1945 - 1972.

 

Jack was demanding his artwork back starting in the 60's. Under Stan nothing was getting returned to anyone.

 

Roy Thomas took over as EIC in 1972 and had the reins until 1974 and started returning artwork to the creators at that point. Kirby's beef with Marvel was for all his old art, when Stan was Editor in Chief.

 

It wasn't until 1987 that Jack started getting the old artwork back..He received 2100 pages out of almost 9,000 pages. Most of the big books and first appearances were missing, along with the lion's share of everything else. 7,000 pages that were created by Jack when Stan was Editor in Chief never made it back to the Kirby's.

 

 

 

 

[sassemble]

 

There is another book on the Lee-Kirby collaboration called "Tales To Astonish" by Ronin Ro. It is more neutral but still sides with Kirby.

And I believe about half of it.

What I do believe is that they would not have reached the heights they reached without each other. Kirby was awesome and had wonderful vision and creativity. Stan had the gift of promotion and the ability to keep Kirby focused as an editor.

 

My two cents.

 

[Whizzer]

There is another book on the Lee-Kirby collaboration called "Tales To Astonish" by Ronin Ro. It is more neutral but still sides with Kirby.

And I believe about half of it.

What I do believe is that they would not have reached the heights they reached without each other. Kirby was awesome and had wonderful vision and creativity. Stan had the gift of promotion and the ability to keep Kirby focused as an editor.

 

My two cents.

 

 

That is exactly how I see it too (thumbs u

[Mr. Zipper]

Don't forget that Evanier was an assistant for Kirby in the early 70s and is quite partial in the Kirby/Lee/Marvel debate.

 

 

I came here to post this.

 

Evader is hardly impartial.

 

 

Long live the King.

 

And

 

Stan is still the Man.

 

(thumbs u

[Ogami]

I think I roughly knew those facts, c4f, but can't quite pin blame on Lee for it.

 

I need to do more research on this. My understanding was that most of his art was pilfered as oa became more valuable, outpacing marvel's office security.

[comix4fun]

I think I roughly knew those facts, c4f, but can't quite pin blame on Lee for it.

 

I need to do more research on this. My understanding was that most of his art was pilfered as oa became more valuable, outpacing marvel's office security.

 

 

The value of the OA didn't become a factor until long after Stan was out of the office. It was a corporate stance, direct and enforced by the EIC, that creators got NOTHING back.

 

It changed in a heartbeat when Thomas took over.

 

It's probably not entirely Lee's fault. It was the standard in the industry at the time. However, no one held more sway than Lee. If Thomas could change the rules, you know Stan could have.

[AtlasFan]

This is pure speculations, but perhaps Stan kept the originals close in case there was a need to publish reprints. Original art inventory had saved Atlas in the past and Marvel made a lot of $ from reprint titles in the sixties (Marvel Tales, Collectors items classics, Fantasy Masterpieces...) and even more in the 70s.

 

Perhaps it was easier/better quality to reprint from the originals, rather than stats or microfiche - or - maybe after Roy came in, better technology existed so that they could take quality pics of the art and didn't need the originals any longer to make reprints?

 

[VintageComics]

There is another book on the Lee-Kirby collaboration called "Tales To Astonish" by Ronin Ro. It is more neutral but still sides with Kirby.

And I believe about half of it.

What I do believe is that they would not have reached the heights they reached without each other. Kirby was awesome and had wonderful vision and creativity. Stan had the gift of promotion and the ability to keep Kirby focused as an editor.

 

My two cents.

 

I read that an agree with your assessment.

 

(thumbs u

[Prince Namor]

But is Stan Lee responsible for that?

 

 

Well, Stan was Editor in Chief from 1945 - 1972.

 

Jack was demanding his artwork back starting in the 60's. Under Stan nothing was getting returned to anyone.

 

Roy Thomas took over as EIC in 1972 and had the reins until 1974 and started returning artwork to the creators at that point. Kirby's beef with Marvel was for all his old art, when Stan was Editor in Chief.

 

It wasn't until 1987 that Jack started getting the old artwork back..He received 2100 pages out of almost 9,000 pages. Most of the big books and first appearances were missing, along with the lion's share of everything else. 7,000 pages that were created by Jack when Stan was Editor in Chief never made it back to the Kirby's.

 

That says more to me about this than Mark's whole book.

 

[Prince Namor]

After all of this, I'm sure Stan's happy as heck Steve Ditko ain't talkin'.

[comix4fun]

This is pure speculations, but perhaps Stan kept the originals close in case there was a need to publish reprints. Original art inventory had saved Atlas in the past and Marvel made a lot of $ from reprint titles in the sixties (Marvel Tales, Collectors items classics, Fantasy Masterpieces...) and even more in the 70s.

 

Perhaps it was easier/better quality to reprint from the originals, rather than stats or microfiche - or - maybe after Roy came in, better technology existed so that they could take quality pics of the art and didn't need the originals any longer to make reprints?

 

 

That's possible, it was the industry standard to not return artwork.

 

Of course that doesn't explain the stories of pages being given away to kids delivering food to the editorial offices and pages being sent to folks who wrote letters in as well.

 

I don't think anyone, aside from artists who drew them, valued OA from those books very much back in the early-mid 60's.

[Whizzer]

Stan has answered numerous questions about this whole subject many times, even to the point of writing an open letter to Ditko acknowledging that they were co-creators of Spidey.

 

Ditko refused to accept the content of the letter based on a small point of semantics( which I forget for the moment), at which point Stan (metaphorically) threw his hands in the air and said whatevers.

 

Ditko is notoriously intransigent in such matters as I am sure you know.