King Kirby and the Bronze Age: A Period of Decline?

[Zonker]

From Mark Evanier's web page

 

In the early seventies, my mentor Jack Kirby created, wrote and drew for the folks at DC, three interlocking comics which collectively were to form a long, finite epic. Alas, for reasons that remain controversial, the books were cancelled before Jack could even reach the halfway point in his saga. Many years later, he did a kind of "noble effort" quickie ending that satisfied no one, himself included. Insofar as most of us are concerned, the "Fourth World" — as it was called, God knows why — will remain forever an unfinished work.

 

But, to me, it's a wonderful unfinished work, one that was way ahead of its time and so has aged well.

 

 

And then M.E.'s intro to the New Gods tpb

 

Now, before I explain why, I want to discuss my objectivity on this topic. I have very little, I'm afraid. I love the comic and I even more loved the guy who did it. I had the honor of being an utterly-useless assistant to Mr. Kirby at the time, so I got to be on the premises as he brought forth this masterpiece.

 

My contribution was darn close to non-existent, for New Gods was a unique and deeply-personal work — one that I have read maybe a hundred times since I first read it, right off Jack's pencilled pages. (And with no disrespect to any of our industry's fine artists, there has never been, nor will there ever be, anyone who could have inked that work and captured 100% of what was in those pencils. Not humanly possible. Mike Royer, who embellished the latter half of the run, came as close as anyone could.)

 

What most impresses me about it is that, with every reading, I find something that wasn't there before. This was the special talent of Kirby on almost every comic; His work was so rich, so filled-to-overflowing with ideas, that writers still fight to take over the characters he began. There simply is so much there to work from, so many concepts on which one can expand.

 

If anything, New Gods was too rich in ideas. Jack thought he would do perhaps forty, maybe fifty issues of it and as many of its two allied titles, Forever People and Mister Miracle, culminating in a grand finale of the entire trilogy. Then, he hoped, his 3000-page epic would be condensed and reissued as a series of mass-market books, preferably in hardcover. (On college campuses, J.R.R. Tolkein's famed trilogy was then enjoying a renewed popularity, selling faster than the answers to an Anthropology final; Kirby thought the comic business was nuts not to be going after that audience.)

 

Since he never got to complete his epic, New Gods and the other two are crammed with ideas and characters he intended to develop, explore and later explain. Even hanging around him, as I got to do in those days, I didn't understand everything he included in those early issues, and still don't.

 

But I'll bet I would have, by the time he'd finished.

 

 

 

The format he devised was not mere vanity at work. Comic books then were under an atrophying system of newsstand distribution. This was before the days of direct sales, and the comic book shop as we now know it. The market was dying, and there were ominous predictions that in 5-10 years, the comic book industry would be about as viable as the manufacture of flea collars for mastodons. Kirby felt that comics, to survive, would have to move into upscale formats and legit bookstores.

 

Today, many of comics' best work appears in similar, albeit shorter packages. But back then, Jack was, as usual, ahead of the industry. He envisioned, long before anyone else, the mini-series, and the idea of collecting an entire one in book format.

 

To pioneer this form, he devised the series that, for reasons that remain in dispute, came to be called the Fourth World. The characters, and a rough idea of their milieu, had come to him in his latter days at Marvel. You can see the embryonic stages in the last Tales of Asgard stories he did in the hindquarter of the Thor comic for a time. At the time, he was, as is well known, unhappy with his lot at Marvel. He had co-created some of the most popular and profitable characters in comic book history only to quickly lose both copyright and creative custody of them.

 

Back then, it was an inviolate rule of comic book publishers not to allow creators to retain even a fraction of either. As Jack was unable to change this, he decided instead not to give this newest idea to Marvel. He drew up some prototype sketches, made some notes, and put it all in a drawer. A few years later, when he had the chance to go over to DC, out it came.

 

He briefly talked of only plotting and editing the whole series, with writing and art to be done by others under his supervision. Then, when DC insisted he handle it all, he turned it into his most personal work ever.

 

This was in 1970. Jack Kirby had worked in comics for thirty-some years — about as long as there'd been comic books — but usually in collaboration with others. He had written or co-written many of the comics he'd drawn, but had rarely had the opportunity to find his own voice without a scripter or strong-willed editor hovering nearby.

 

Most of those comics were quite wonderful, but some were wonderful in spite of Jack and his collaborator pulling in different directions. This was especially true his last few years at Marvel, when Jack would pencil and largely plot an issue of Fantastic Four or Thor, and then Stan Lee would compose the dialogue to fit the pictures. Stan was and is a very clever wordsmith, but when you put two writers in a room, you wind up with two different points of view, often more.

 

Sometimes, two differing viewpoints can coalesce and enhance one another. Sometimes, they neutralize each other and you wind up with a compromise that embodies neither standpoint. You and I look at those last few years of Lee-Kirby creation and see some fine, fine comics. But Jack looked at them and saw comics wherein he was telling one story and the text was relating another. For that, and many reasons having to do with the way he felt Marvel was treating him, he felt things had to change.

 

 

 

This can be hard for those of us in the audience to accept; that most creative people feel the need to progress, to not do the same thing forever. We, however, find something we love and want it to go on forever, delivered to us in endless supply. We forget that creators grow, or even burn out on one subject, and that they need to follow their muses, often into uncharted territory.

 

It isn't just comic fans who feel this way. I recently read an unpublished manuscript about the Beatles. In it, John Lennon is quoted complaining about those who didn't grasp that he could no longer run in place, cranking out Beatles music with Paul McCartney. They'd done wonderful things together but he'd been there, done that, and felt compelled to move onward. It wasn't so much that he wanted to leave Paul but that he could no longer stay. He didn't see why his followers couldn't grasp that.

 

In 1971, when New Gods was first published, it was greeted with mixed reactions. Some loved it, some seemed puzzled. I think many of the latter were expecting another Fantastic Four or Thor. A lot of fans felt Kirby belonged, if not on those specific books then certainly back at Marvel. Others expected or wanted something that read like the Marvels he'd done with Stan Lee.

 

That, Kirby never attempted. Just as Lennon wasn't out to make Beatles music without Paul, Jack wasn't trying to do Marvel Comics without Stan. He was after something new, something different, something more thoroughly Kirby. Even though I worked with Jack at the time, and thought I knew him better than any reader, I don't think I appreciated how autobiographical and personal a story he was constructing.

 

It's in the drawings, it's in the plot, but it's even more in the dialogue, which he wrote in a quirky, almost operatic style. Some complained that it didn't sound like natural speech, missing the point that Jack was no more interested in realistic conversation than he was in realistic anatomy. (I was one of those who found the speech awkward, and even said so in a few interviews. Today, as I re-read those books, I think I was out of my ever-lovin' mind. The dialogue is, for me, the best part.)

[awe4one]

Thanks for the info Zonker...I had not read that before...

 

Jim

[Zonker]

You betcha. I thought Evanier's essay touched on a number of the points raised in these couple of threads. Especially liked his Lennon/McCartney analogy vis-a-vis fans' expectations of Stan & Jack.

[Sal]

hell, i love the Eternals. first purchase i made on ebay was a full run of the books in NM for $17. good deal for me.

 

i think that Jack Kirby's 70s work is absotively chock-full of action. i don't know what it is, but that Eternals series is packed full of the kind of vibrancy most artists just can't pull off. the creator's excitement at what he is doing literally leaks off the page, and you need a sponge to soak it up the little puddles that accumulate at your feet when you finish reading a book like the Eternals. it's childlike escapism combined with a master storyteller, albeit a rather overworked one.

 

sure, some of the costuming is dorky, the names of some characters are...odd...people's hands look effed up purt bad, but you cannot deny the exuberance these books have

[Zonker]

Zonker, thanks for posting the Harlan Ellison letter. I can see his points, but I would agree with every word of his letter if he had written it to praise, say, SWAMP THING, which I think fits the bill as a TRULY great Bronze comic.

 

 

 

 

And it should be noted that the first time I posted these letters in this thread forum member Proverbs22_2 helpfully pointed out the absurdity of Ellison using the "once in a generation" hyperbole twice within the span of a couple of years!

[ComicBookGuy]

Cool letter, Zonker! You are quite the comic scholar, and I appreciate you sharing this.

 

What's interesting is that Ellison talks about lots of stuff, but nothing specifically about Swamp Thing. His rants in the 1970s about High Art and the common man are classic journalism that so many people riff off of now.

 

There could be a couple of explanations for using the generational argument:

1) Wrightson is a different generation from Kirby's

2) Ellison's writing style is prone to hyperbole & superlatives, and

3) one generation could have just ended when he wrote one and a new one began when he started another.

 

 

 

Maybe not...

 

Anyway, it's a cool letter and I enjoyed reading it. What issue of Swamp Thing was it in, by the way? I have all those issues 1-24 and never noticed his letter before...

 

Joe

[Sharkey]

Thanks Zonk, I knew I had read that but thought it was in an old Kirby Collector.

 

[Zonker]

It was originally printed in #6.

Though I first came across the letter when DC was hyping the series in one of the Original Swamp Thing Saga reprints in the late 1970s...

[bronze johnny]

But Johnny - -- it seems a bit contrived to state that the fourth World series suffers because it was cancelled too soon...... It wasnt clicking because it wasnt written well, and wasnt what we all were expecting. Kirby is Here!!! Well, this wasnt the Kirby we were waiting for. In retrospect, what we really wanted from DC was "Lee and Kirby are Here!!" THAT woudl have been DCs version of the Marvel Age of Comics.

 

 

 

 

Hi, I understand your position. In retrospect, I just think that in regards to the Fourth World, Kirby was way ahead of his time and perhaps ahead of the Bronze Age as well. Moreover, Kirby may have also been ahead of many comic book readers who might not have been interested in the subject of his work. My initial reaction to first reading the Fourth World was less than enthusiastic. But after revisiting it many times, and further studying Kirby himself and what he sought to accomplish, my view of this particular Kirby work has changed. And Kirby, as Evanier points out, attempted to make this his "magnus opus." But the Comic Book medium was not ready to accept something so grand. The artistic intentions of a master were defeated by poor sales and the business decision to cancel his work before it could come into fruition. So all that remained was a series of comic books that raised many questions and a view that the Fourth World was a disappointment. And if the Fourth World is analyzed without taking into account Kirby's vision and what might have been, then we are merely looking at the "part" without taking into account the "whole." It is my firm belief that in order to study Kirby, it is not enough to always look at his final product, for he was not only the giant among comic book artists and creators, but also ComicBookDom's great visionary. And a great comic book visionary like Kirby deserves much more attention.

 

Finally, think of the challenge Kirby left for later generations of comic book artists who would set out to write and finish their own "Fourth Worlds."

[awe4one]

I don't agree. It's like having the first chapter of a book and saying the novel would have been great if only it had been completed.

 

There's no way to judge whether this "grand opus" would ever have made sense or even been any good. We only have the comics which were released to judge. And based on those, the story was severely lacking in both flow and coherency.

 

This is what I find hard to understand...you are praising hypothetical work that never was released. What was released doesn't hint at anything approaching greatness. Yet you keep mentioning it was only a part of a master work so it's not fair to criticize the released work on it's own. That's bull in my opinion. Good intentions or not, the released work was sub-par. Would it have eventually made sense if Kirby been allowed to continue despite falling circulation? Maybe...but it's irrelevant as we will never know and this line of thought just provides an out for people to make excuses for an inferior story...

 

Jim

[jamesmatt]

Never liked Kirby. I understand he is an icon of comic artwork, but just never liked his stuff. Machine Man, Devil Dinosaur. Yuck My two cents

[bronze johnny]

I don't agree. It's like having the first chapter of a book and saying the novel would have been great if only it had been completed.

 

There's no way to judge whether this "grand opus" would ever have made sense or even been any good. We only have the comics which were released to judge. And based on those, the story was severely lacking in both flow and coherency.

 

This is what I find hard to understand...you are praising hypothetical work that never was released. What was released doesn't hint at anything approaching greatness. Yet you keep mentioning it was only a part of a master work so it's not fair to criticize the released work on it's own. That's bull in my opinion. Good intentions or not, the released work was sub-par. Would it have eventually made sense if Kirby been allowed to continue despite falling circulation? Maybe...but it's irrelevant as we will never know and this line of thought just provides an out for people to make excuses for an inferior story...

 

"We only have the comics which were released to judge."

 

Jim, your criticism is valid in circumstances where the comics that were released are the only historical sources. There are other historical sources to derive information from; i.e. Evanier. Whenever possible and where there are historical sources in addition to the comic book in question, we should look at the"totality of the circumstances" when attempting to evaluate any point in the history of the American Comic Book.

 

I respectfully disagree with you on the Fourth World work that was released. It is my belief that Kirby's Fourth World concept and work is exemplary, one of the great events of the Bronze Age, and will only rise in stature as time goes on. Art does not have to be popular to be great.

 

Thanks,

John

[awe4one]

Jim, your criticism is valid in circumstances where the comics that were released are the only historical sources.

 

The comics released are the only historical sources.

 

There are other historical sources to derive information from; i.e. Evanier.

 

Evanier is only giving his opinion. It's not a source as he readily admits to not knowing where Kirby was going with the story and speculates that it would have been great

 

Whenever possible and where there are historical sources in addition to the comic book in question, we should look at the"totality of the circumstances" when attempting to evaluate any point in the history of the American Comic Book.

 

This sounds smart but isn't really relevant to this discussion. We are discussing Kirby's Fourth World and 70s work in general. There isn't any other factors at work here other than the released comics and the anticipation of a grand opus. The released comics weren't very good in my opinion and the opus is pure speculation with no merit in fact other than good intentions.

 

I respectfully disagree with you on the Fourth World work that was released. It is my belief that Kirby's Fourth World concept and work is exemplary, one of the great events of the Bronze Age, and will only rise in stature as time goes on. Art does not have to be popular to be great.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree then...you obviously see something in these titles you quite like. More power to ya I say...I don't share your view but respect it nonetheless...

 

Now go pull FF Annual #6 out and savor Kirby when he was truly "Great"...

 

Jim

[shadroch]

Thirty years from now,will we be re-evaluating Liefields Youngblood books,based on some interviews where he discusses what he intended to do in years ten thru twenty?

BJ,You are askng us to judge Kirbys work based not on what he did,but on what he didn't do. Your whole premise seems to be-ignore what you read and concentrate on what you might have been able to read in the future.

Yes,Kirby was trying to do something new,something revolutionary. But he failed.

He failed because he was unable to attract enough fans to buy his books.He failed because

thiry years later,his work is still not accepted as a masterpiece. Neal Adams Green Lantern and Starlins Warlock were both commercial failures that are now recognized as superior.Kirbys Fourth World was a commercial failure that is still not recognized as being superior.Did The Forth World properties have potential? Absolutely. But creating characters with potential is a far thing from crating greatness.I'm not sure it was all that much of a coincidence that the most successful Fourth World series to date has been The Super- Powers books,geared to a much younger audience.

[Sal]

Jim - michelangelo frequently left statues unifinished, not because he couldn't sell them upon completion, but rather because they dissatisfied him.

 

does that mean they cannot still be regarded as works of high merit and worthy of our appreciation? an incomplete work can still be regarded as a "masterpiece," although i don't consider the Fourth World to be an example of this.

 

shadroch - the liefeld comparison is a straw man. no one, to my knowledge, considers mr. liefeld an auteur, and thus there cannot be any parallel drawn here. if you wanted to say that, oh i don't know, She-Hulk (the Byrne years) then that might be a more interesting example, even though Byrne wasn't attempting anything of the sort that Kirby was.

 

 

i suspect Johnny is asking you to judge the Fourth World as much on potential - givent the VAST amount of genius-level work the creator had done previously - as anything. i further suspect that this request is a singular occurrence, reserved only for someone of Kirby's puissant magnificence.

 

personally, i never much cared for the Fourth World, but i cannot deny the man's creative spirit that pulses through its pages

[shadroch]

When Youngblood was released,Mr Liefield was featured on one of the late night talk shows(Jay leno?),had a Levi's commercial and had more publicity about a new comic than any new book in the history of the busines.

Everybody was phsyched for the start of the Image age. I think comparing Youngblood to The Fourth World is a fair comparison.They were two of the most anticipated events in comic history.While Liefield proved to be a flash in the pan,at the time of Images formation and Youngbloods debut,he was a comic god.

[Sal]

understood and agreed with. but a comic god is still a far cry from the Kirbys of the industry. one has stood the test of time, the other is....well, lets just say not everybody's favourite

[the blob]

"just never liked his stuff. Machine Man, Devil Dinosaur. Yuck My two cents"

 

you can't judge a guy by what he was doing as an old guy.

 

you don't think those first 5-7 years of FF and Thor were pretty good?

[Foolkiller]

Look, Kirby was a genius in the Silver Age. I never thought his GA work was that great, and I thought his BA stuff was mediocre. I can't give credence for what the work might have been, we can only judge it for what it actually was. If we rated things on their potential alone, many artists might rate higher. We judge accomplishments, not potential.

[tth2]

We judge accomplishments, not potential.

 

Except when the NBA and NFL conduct their annual drafts!