Why Is Stan Lee’s Legacy in Question?

[drotto]

As several have voiced here, we should not be diminishing the place that Stan Lee has in the history of comics, but there should be more recognition that it was a collaboration with Kirby and Ditko that made it special. Pulling apart who did what is an exorcise in futility, based on how they made comics. What it also points out is how special the synergy was, and none of the parties involved ever reached the same creative level on their own.

 

As for the point hat the comic world has become more writer centric, I think many of the artists have brought it upon themselves. This is not to belittle the artists, but a result of slow production leading to constant artist rotation on books. I have a difficulty thinking of an artist that can put out a book on a sustained monthly basis (maybe Bagely or Capullo). So we have come to associate books more with writers who often stay on books for at least one year if not more. It is far easier to call that book theirs, as opposed to the artist that does 6 or 7 issue per year. Now I recognize that the art is the slowest phase in making a book, and a prolific writer can often do multiple titles, but it put the artists at a disadvantage when it comes to recognition. But, I also recognize people like Kirby again, who could be amazingly productive. According to Mark Evanier, "Jack often did more than three a day. During the 1963-1967 period, he often did five or six a day. His 1970 deal with DC required fifteen a week and he sometimes did twenty." Can you imagine any artist doing that today? That is an artist who deserves equal credit.

[JayT]

As several have voiced here, we should not be diminishing the place that Stan Lee has in the history of comics, but there should be more recognition that it was a collaboration with Kirby and Ditko that made it special. Pulling apart who did what is an exorcise in futility, based on how they made comics. What it also points out is how special the synergy was, and none of the parties involved ever reached the same creative level on their own.

 

As for the point hat the comic world has become more writer centric, I think many of the artists have brought it upon themselves. This is not to belittle the artists, but a result of slow production leading to constant artist rotation on books. I have a difficulty thinking of an artist that can put out a book on a sustained monthly basis (maybe Bagely or Capullo). So we have come to associate books more with writers who often stay on books for at least one year if not more. It is far easier to call that book theirs, as opposed to the artist that does 6 or 7 issue per year. Now I recognize that the art is the slowest phase in making a book, and a prolific writer can often do multiple titles, but it put the artists at a disadvantage when it comes to recognition. But, I also recognize people like Kirby again, who could be amazingly productive. According to Mark Evanier, "Jack often did more than three a day. During the 1963-1967 period, he often did five or six a day. His 1970 deal with DC required fifteen a week and he sometimes did twenty." Can you imagine any artist doing that today? That is an artist who deserves equal credit.

 

While I agree with your point almost completely, and while I often wonder why art takes so long now, we have to acknowledge that the expectation of art, whether subjectively good or bad, is different today in the mainstream now, and has been for awhile. Art Adams, Travis Charest, etc, those type of guys, particularly the former who is cited as an influence by a lot who followed, aren't speed artists. When you see a comic today it looks completely different than the comics from the 60s.

 

These artist can produce monthly if you want but they wouldn't look like comics as people have known them for the last 30 years, it's not like manga where it's pretty much stayed keep-it-moving and we are disposable entertainment from its inception.

 

But, even though it won't ever happen, I'd love to see the immense talents we have just cut lose and go for it. In and out and see what it looks like.

 

Point is if Jack type pages were turned in today on a main book, they'd be rejected. People can view that as good or bad, but it's the truth. Whether we need it or not is worth debating but the level of detail some of these guys are putting on pages... I mean I can see why J.H. Williams takes longer than Mark Bagley for instance.

[drotto]

Point is if Jack type pages were turned in today on a main book, they'd be rejected. People can view that as good or bad, but it's the truth. Whether we need it or not is worth debating bu the level of detail some of these guys are putting on pages... I mean I can see why J.H. Williams takes longer than Mark Bagley for instance.

 

I do not disagree with you at all. The art is different today, and there are many artists out there producing from a diversity and quality standpoint some of the best (and worst) comic art I have ever seen. I find J H Williams page layout and quality both unique and amazing. While Bagely (who I brought up because he can be fast, and has done sustained long runs), has a much more "traditional" and simplistic style. We have clearly left the days of a house style far behind. Regardless, I do question why certain artists are so slow. The nature of the beast has changed, and it has hurt artist recognition in relation to their ultimate importance to the success of a book.

 

Ultimately however, these changes have made it difficult for a writer and artist to reach the level of synergy, and cohesive story telling that long runs enabled in the past. I would love to see a modern comic duo reach that level of chemistry again (again some modern books like TWD, Saga and a few others have this to an extent). It could lead to truly amazing things.

[Quicksilver Signs]

I would say the measure of success in comic books is cancellation or continuation.

 

Really?

 

There are many instances where a creative team is taken off of a book because it isn't working (cancelling their vision or because of conflict with the publisher) and even when some are cancelled altogether.

 

Does that make them a failure?

 

Green Lantern Green Arrow by Adams and O'Neil was a failure?

 

Swamp Thing by Len Wein and Bernie Wrightson?

 

Steranko on SHIELD?

 

Stan and John on Silver Surfer?

 

Are those all failures because they didn't work out?

 

Nonsense.

 

The measure of success is sustained interest.

 

And the Fourth World is still in print and sold today.

 

4th world was a failure which I've read Kirby's own admission to the fact.

 

The only admission of failure by Kirby is that he wasn't able to finish it.

 

What was done with the characters after that had nothing to do with the King.

 

Can we say the same thing about Marvel's characters for Stan?

 

Many of them bear no resemblance to what Stan had a part of...

 

The kids didn't dig the Fourth World, Kirby knew that. It had some nice art but pales to his success with Stan. They were Lennon and McCartney, there would have been no super stardom without each other, success for sure but not godlike status.

[shadroch]

What role did Kirby or Ditko have in creating The whole Marvel Bullpen idea? Did they ever work on letters pages? The MMMS? No Prizes? Who coined True Believers?

No imagine Marvel in the 1960s without any of those things. Sure some of that stuff didn't spring whole cloth from Stan's mind, but I don't see anyone belittling Thomas Jefferson because he borrowed a few ideas along the way.

Unless you are a Randian, tell me something Steve Ditko did without Stan that rises much above hack work? I may be in a minority, or perhaps not, but I would take Spidey post Ditko to his stuff any day.

Stan is Stan. Jack was Jack. Together they were great. Separate they weren't. Jack gave us Darkseid but he also gave us a Fighting Fetus and the Goobledoozer or whatever it was called.

[Comicopolis]

The Fighting Fetus should get his own show.

[shadroch]

http://thefifthbranch.com/gorilladaze/death-at-the-hands-of-an-unborn-fetus/

[Calidream'n]

If I could go back in time, I would ask Jack so many questions about who created what, instead of my lame "When did you first think of creating Captain America?" He was extremely chatty and we spoke for what seemed like a half hour.

[Prince Namor]

If I could go back in time, I would ask Jack so many questions about who created what, instead of my lame "When did you first think of creating Captain America?" He was extremely chatty and we spoke for what seemed like a half hour.

 

That's awesome.

[shadroch]

Did he answer- About fifteen minutes after Joe Simon gave me the character sketch and a six page plot breakdown?

I cant believe they had Jack wearing a name tag!

Nice photo opp. I never used to bring cameras to shows, thinking all I needed was my memories.

[shadroch]

Lets not forget Turbo Teen. A young boy wanders into a government experiment and is hit by massive doses of radiation. Sound somewhat familiar?

In this case, the radiation affects both the boy and his car, causing them to become one.

[Steviehuv66]

If I could go back in time, I would ask Jack so many questions about who created what, instead of my lame "When did you first think of creating Captain America?" He was extremely chatty and we spoke for what seemed like a half hour.

 

You and The King! Now that is cool.

[mrwoogieman]

If I could go back in time, I would ask Jack so many questions about who created what, instead of my lame "When did you first think of creating Captain America?" He was extremely chatty and we spoke for what seemed like a half hour.

 

"About fifteen minutes after our publisher told me and Joe to rip off the Shield..."

 

 

[Calidream'n]

Did he answer- About fifteen minutes after Joe Simon gave me the character sketch and a six page plot breakdown?

I cant believe they had Jack wearing a name tag!

Nice photo opp. I never used to bring cameras to shows, thinking all I needed was my memories.

I thought the same thing about the name tag back then; who doesn't know Jack Kirby? He was really nice. Spoke with a group of us military guys for a while. He even told some stories of his experience in WW II. Really approachable and down to earth.

[ComicConnoisseur]

I'm not saying artists resent the writers, obviously having a great writer often correlates with better money and opportunity, I just meant the way the industry has become more writer-centric. We are definitely in a time where the writer is king and often dictates story and how much initial interest a book has. There was a time where the writer/Artist or artists ascended, and we are just no longer a point where artists motivate sales on a wide level. There's not a guy whose name moves books at a particular threshold consistently in the way maybe only Lee might. Like if a top level Marvel books is coming out, it's gonna be one their top few guys - Opena, Weaver, Immonen etc etc - but it's the writer that you want to know about.

 

Also, maybe it wasn't worded correctly, I wasn't saying the Image guys were knocking Stan, I was saying they are like Stan in that they (the founders) have had a different level of monetary success than the vast majority of other comic creators, and like in most things, the top, whether currently or in the past, often has a minority hate group.

 

Yep....totally agree.

 

 

 

So... if there WAS an artist who could move a book.... who would it be?

We know Jim Lee doing the art can automatically increase the sales of it....

 

But who else?

 

Todd McFarlane? I think if he did an issue of Amazing Spider-man it would explode in sales....

 

Frank Miller? Most likely so.... not sure of sales of his last project (Holy Terror) though the reviews weren't so great... still if he DREW an issue of Batman, i think it'd be ordered like crazy....

 

That might be about it....

Alex Ross.

Even Ross though was somebody who was big 20 years ago,same like Jim Lee and McFarlane.

There really isn't no real big artist like that anymore.

It used to be fun back in the 80s and 90s discussing who the top artists were.

Simonson vs Miller vs Byrne or Jim Lee vs Todd McFarlane? There doesn't seem to be any of that now because there are no top dog artists.

Why? I don't know.

[JayT]

I'm not saying artists resent the writers, obviously having a great writer often correlates with better money and opportunity, I just meant the way the industry has become more writer-centric. We are definitely in a time where the writer is king and often dictates story and how much initial interest a book has. There was a time where the writer/Artist or artists ascended, and we are just no longer a point where artists motivate sales on a wide level. There's not a guy whose name moves books at a particular threshold consistently in the way maybe only Lee might. Like if a top level Marvel books is coming out, it's gonna be one their top few guys - Opena, Weaver, Immonen etc etc - but it's the writer that you want to know about.

 

Also, maybe it wasn't worded correctly, I wasn't saying the Image guys were knocking Stan, I was saying they are like Stan in that they (the founders) have had a different level of monetary success than the vast majority of other comic creators, and like in most things, the top, whether currently or in the past, often has a minority hate group.

 

Yep....totally agree.

 

 

 

So... if there WAS an artist who could move a book.... who would it be?

We know Jim Lee doing the art can automatically increase the sales of it....

 

But who else?

 

Todd McFarlane? I think if he did an issue of Amazing Spider-man it would explode in sales....

 

Frank Miller? Most likely so.... not sure of sales of his last project (Holy Terror) though the reviews weren't so great... still if he DREW an issue of Batman, i think it'd be ordered like crazy....

 

That might be about it....

Alex Ross.

Even Ross though was somebody who was big 20 years ago,same like Jim Lee and McFarlane.

There really isn't no real big artist like that anymore.

It used to be fun back in the 80s and 90s discussing who the top artists were.

Simonson vs Miller vs Byrne or Jim Lee vs Todd McFarlane? There doesn't seem to be any of that now because there are no top dog artists.

Why? I don't know.

 

Ross was a guy who came to mind and I almost mentioned him in my last post, but Ross books don't move like Lee and I think McFarlane would. I won't take Marvels or Kingdom Come away from him because those were two legit event level releases that have their place in history but Ross did a bunch of comics afterwards (was it with Dynamite? or somebody like that?) that nobody cares or cared about. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they sold more because he was on them, but they didn't pass a threshold where I think it moves the greater buying public.

 

I think in many ways Ross had this thing and we really really liked it, but it's one of those deals where I kind of wish he just dropped the mic.

 

I do think that if Ross was announced to do some premium book with mainstream characters with a big name/competent writer (ala a Busiek or Waid) that it would definitely be buzzy, but in an odd way I feel like Marvels and Kingdom Come became bigger than him, where I think when we are talking about Lee or McFarlane, I think if you give McFarlane any top book at the Big 2 and it would be a top 5 selling book that month, at least initially (and Lee consistently just charts), even if just out of curiosity. Ross and McFarlane have this odd relation in that I think once we saw too much Ross it diluted that brand that was unique to him, and with Todd we got a guy that really stopped drawing when he was on really one of the top 3-10 selling books in comics. I think Ross has this monumental quality to his work that when you see it too much, gets kind of boring.

 

I do think it would have to be a known character though. As much as I like McFarlane, I can't even tell you what happened in Haunt, never bought it.

 

But there is zero question IMHO if McFarlane was announced as the artist for an upcoming ASM issue, it's #1 that month barring incredibly unforeseen circumstance.

[Mr. 10%]

I'm not saying artists resent the writers, obviously having a great writer often correlates with better money and opportunity, I just meant the way the industry has become more writer-centric. We are definitely in a time where the writer is king and often dictates story and how much initial interest a book has. There was a time where the writer/Artist or artists ascended, and we are just no longer a point where artists motivate sales on a wide level. There's not a guy whose name moves books at a particular threshold consistently in the way maybe only Lee might. Like if a top level Marvel books is coming out, it's gonna be one their top few guys - Opena, Weaver, Immonen etc etc - but it's the writer that you want to know about.

 

Also, maybe it wasn't worded correctly, I wasn't saying the Image guys were knocking Stan, I was saying they are like Stan in that they (the founders) have had a different level of monetary success than the vast majority of other comic creators, and like in most things, the top, whether currently or in the past, often has a minority hate group.

 

Liefeld ?

 

Yep....totally agree.

 

 

 

So... if there WAS an artist who could move a book.... who would it be?

We know Jim Lee doing the art can automatically increase the sales of it....

 

But who else?

 

Todd McFarlane? I think if he did an issue of Amazing Spider-man it would explode in sales....

 

Frank Miller? Most likely so.... not sure of sales of his last project (Holy Terror) though the reviews weren't so great... still if he DREW an issue of Batman, i think it'd be ordered like crazy....

 

That might be about it....

Alex Ross.

Even Ross though was somebody who was big 20 years ago,same like Jim Lee and McFarlane.

There really isn't no real big artist like that anymore.

It used to be fun back in the 80s and 90s discussing who the top artists were.

Simonson vs Miller vs Byrne or Jim Lee vs Todd McFarlane? There doesn't seem to be any of that now because there are no top dog artists.

Why? I don't know.

[Mr. 10%]

If I could go back in time, I would ask Jack so many questions about who created what, instead of my lame "When did you first think of creating Captain America?" He was extremely chatty and we spoke for what seemed like a half hour.

 

"About fifteen minutes after our publisher told me and Joe to rip off the Shield..."

 

 

 

I wish I had such a Photo.

Me chilling out with a legend.

[RCheli]

I'm not saying artists resent the writers, obviously having a great writer often correlates with better money and opportunity, I just meant the way the industry has become more writer-centric. We are definitely in a time where the writer is king and often dictates story and how much initial interest a book has. There was a time where the writer/Artist or artists ascended, and we are just no longer a point where artists motivate sales on a wide level. There's not a guy whose name moves books at a particular threshold consistently in the way maybe only Lee might. Like if a top level Marvel books is coming out, it's gonna be one their top few guys - Opena, Weaver, Immonen etc etc - but it's the writer that you want to know about.

 

Also, maybe it wasn't worded correctly, I wasn't saying the Image guys were knocking Stan, I was saying they are like Stan in that they (the founders) have had a different level of monetary success than the vast majority of other comic creators, and like in most things, the top, whether currently or in the past, often has a minority hate group.

 

Yep....totally agree.

 

 

 

So... if there WAS an artist who could move a book.... who would it be?

We know Jim Lee doing the art can automatically increase the sales of it....

 

But who else?

 

Todd McFarlane? I think if he did an issue of Amazing Spider-man it would explode in sales....

 

Frank Miller? Most likely so.... not sure of sales of his last project (Holy Terror) though the reviews weren't so great... still if he DREW an issue of Batman, i think it'd be ordered like crazy....

 

That might be about it....

Alex Ross.

Even Ross though was somebody who was big 20 years ago,same like Jim Lee and McFarlane.

There really isn't no real big artist like that anymore.

It used to be fun back in the 80s and 90s discussing who the top artists were.

Simonson vs Miller vs Byrne or Jim Lee vs Todd McFarlane? There doesn't seem to be any of that now because there are no top dog artists.

Why? I don't know.

 

Byrne used to say he had a 30,000 readership bump whenever he went on a new title, as his followers would immediately start buying his stuff and increase sales.

 

It was true for a while. When he went to the Hulk, there was a big jump in sales. Same thing for West Coast Avengers. By the mid-90s, however, he had lost much of that. I mean, Next Men, other than the first couple of issues, didn't sell and his X-Men series had to be saved from cancelation.

[Logan510]

I'm not saying artists resent the writers, obviously having a great writer often correlates with better money and opportunity, I just meant the way the industry has become more writer-centric. We are definitely in a time where the writer is king and often dictates story and how much initial interest a book has. There was a time where the writer/Artist or artists ascended, and we are just no longer a point where artists motivate sales on a wide level. There's not a guy whose name moves books at a particular threshold consistently in the way maybe only Lee might. Like if a top level Marvel books is coming out, it's gonna be one their top few guys - Opena, Weaver, Immonen etc etc - but it's the writer that you want to know about.

 

Also, maybe it wasn't worded correctly, I wasn't saying the Image guys were knocking Stan, I was saying they are like Stan in that they (the founders) have had a different level of monetary success than the vast majority of other comic creators, and like in most things, the top, whether currently or in the past, often has a minority hate group.

 

Yep....totally agree.

 

 

 

So... if there WAS an artist who could move a book.... who would it be?

We know Jim Lee doing the art can automatically increase the sales of it....

 

But who else?

 

Todd McFarlane? I think if he did an issue of Amazing Spider-man it would explode in sales....

 

Frank Miller? Most likely so.... not sure of sales of his last project (Holy Terror) though the reviews weren't so great... still if he DREW an issue of Batman, i think it'd be ordered like crazy....

 

That might be about it....

Alex Ross.

Even Ross though was somebody who was big 20 years ago,same like Jim Lee and McFarlane.

There really isn't no real big artist like that anymore.

It used to be fun back in the 80s and 90s discussing who the top artists were.

Simonson vs Miller vs Byrne or Jim Lee vs Todd McFarlane? There doesn't seem to be any of that now because there are no top dog artists.

Why? I don't know.

 

Byrne used to say he had a 30,000 readership bump whenever he went on a new title, as his followers would immediately start buying his stuff and increase sales.

 

It was true for a while. When he went to the Hulk, there was a big jump in sales. Same thing for West Coast Avengers. By the mid-90s, however, he had lost much of that. I mean, Next Men, other than the first couple of issues, didn't sell and his X-Men series had to be saved from cancelation.

 

 

Please don't speak as if what you said is factual, because it's not. The truth shouldn't be thrown around like you're playing a game of horse shoes....close doesn't count.