Stan, Jack, and Steve - The 1950's. (1957) Jack Kirby's Marvel Age has already begun! 2 2

[sfcityduck]

On 7/20/2022 at 10:24 PM, Prince Namor said:

It didn’t come from “Let’s have the Human Torch guest star!” synopsis’. 

Agree. But it did come from the dialogue. And probably from the conversations that did take place to require that dialogue. There are lots of stories about Stan talking to artists about story ideas. He just didn't write them down. People tend to exaggerate. The multi-issue romantic arcs must have been discussed even if the set up for the fight of the month were not.

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 1:29 AM, sfcityduck said:

Agree. But it did come from the dialogue. And probably from the conversations that did take place to require that dialogue. There are lots of stories about Stan talking to artists about story ideas. He just didn't write them down. People tend to exaggerate. The multi-issue romantic arcs must have been discussed even if the set up for the fight of the month were not.

Betty Brant didn’t last but a few issues and never really went anywhere. Liz Allen was a non starter as well. 
Stan’s ‘romantic dialogue’ didn’t really begin until Romita. 

[bronze_rules]

On 7/20/2022 at 10:24 PM, sfcityduck said:

We can only speculate. 

I've seen the original art for AF 15. I don't recall seeing dialogue in the margins. Frankly, I don't think there was room for all of the dialogue in the margins SA art sheets. As a comparison, I bought this page of original art back when I first started collecting comics for $75 and I remember carefully scraping off white out to see the margin notes:

 

The margin note from Byrne to Austin could barely contain enough letters to get a single balloon of dialogue. (Too bad I sold it.)

Do have an example of the margin dialogue for ASM?

There's a lot of examples of penciled OA with early dialogue in the margins. I think by the time they got to the finished product (inked, lettered, etc), those notes were probably not copied over.

There were a few small notes on AF 15, but the version in LOC is also more of a finished version to me.

 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2022 by bronze_rules

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 1:24 AM, sfcityduck said:

We can only speculate. 

I've seen the original art for AF 15. I don't recall seeing dialogue in the margins. Frankly, I don't think there was room for all of the dialogue in the margins SA art sheets. As a comparison, I bought this page of original art back when I first started collecting comics for $75 and I remember carefully scraping off white out to see the margin notes:

 

The margin note from Byrne to Austin could barely contain enough letters to get a single balloon of dialogue. (Too bad I sold it.)

Do have an example of the margin dialogue for ASM?

Ditko wrote his notes on a separate piece of paper. 
 

Kirby’s notes started as reminders to Stan in what the story was about, and gradually became more detailed. 
 

There’s a whole website devoted to Kirby’s margin notes. 
 

https://kirbywithoutwords.tumblr.com/tagged/kirbywithoutwords

 

[Zonker]

On 7/20/2022 at 11:21 PM, sfcityduck said:

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.

This matches my view of how things rolled out.  @Prince Namor has effectively demonstrated that the work Stan was doing with his various 1950s collaborators was a lot less interesting than the work Kirby & Ditko were doing with theirs.  But that's not the same as demonstrating that Stan was no better than a hack writer, riding completely on the backs of others his entire career.  It was a rough decade all around for Stan.  Apparently, he and Joan lost their infant second child during this period.  No one is above occasionally phoning it in during such circumstances.

Paul Levitz tells a story about the difference in how someone like "Richard" Ayers worked for Levitz versus how Ayers worked for Stan.  Stan Lee's enthusiasm (when he was "on") not only inspired his reading public, it also no doubt motivated his collaborators (at least in the earlier days) to capture that lightning in a bottle. 

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 9:02 AM, Zonker said:

This matches my view of how things rolled out.  @Prince Namor has effectively demonstrated that the work Stan was doing with his various 1950s collaborators was a lot less interesting than the work Kirby & Ditko were doing with theirs.  But that's not the same as demonstrating that Stan was no better than a hack writer, riding completely on the backs of others his entire career.  It was a rough decade all around for Stan.  Apparently, he and Joan lost their infant second child during this period.  No one is above occasionally phoning it in during such circumstances.

No. No one's beyond that. 

But it wasn't just the mid-to-late 50's that Stan struggled - he never really did any work that can be seen as anything more than basic genre writing for his entire career.

What did he write in the 40's that had great success and/or had any kind of lasting appeal?

What did he write in the early 50's that had great success and/or had any kind of lasting appeal?

What did he write in the 70's that had great success and/or had any kind of lasting appeal?

What scripts can we look at of Stan's that show his 'writing' abilities to tell a story?

He never really did any work that can be seen as anything more than basic genre writing for his entire career. Until he teamed with Jack Kirby.

When SickDuck says 'Kirby's Golden Age output is overrated' its so laughable to think - if you believe THAT, then what was Stan's? Kirby worked on some of the biggest selling books of the Golden Age. Stan... never did. 

And once Kirby and Ditko were gone from Marvel... the creativity suddenly dried up. You're right, Stan got the best out of Gene Colan, or what little he worked with John Buscema, and certainly John Romita, but... it was nowhere NEAR the level of creativity he 'suddenly' had with Kirby and Ditko. 

He BAILED when the talent to do the work FOR HIM had left.

Trying to read those Silver Surfer stories from that first series is painful… great art, but geez, Stan turned the Surfer into the most annoying character ever with that constant blabbering - minus Kirby, THIS is the best example of Stan at his peak - alone to flaunt his own idolization as if every word he uttered was gold. Gross.

The two greatest stories of the Marvel Silver Age - The Galactus trilogy and The Master Planner Saga were both written behind Stan's back. 

Stan had his huge effect on the 60's - but it can certainly be argued that without Kirby, it wouldn't have happened. 

On 7/21/2022 at 9:02 AM, Zonker said:

Paul Levitz tells a story about the difference in how someone like "Richard" Ayers worked for Levitz versus how Ayers worked for Stan.  Stan Lee's enthusiasm (when he was "on") not only inspired his reading public, it also no doubt motivated his collaborators (at least in the earlier days) to capture that lightning in a bottle. 

I respect your input on these things, and I've always enjoyed your writings on here, and THIS is probably as close to what it is as it can get to Stan's editorial importance for that period. Stan BADLY wanted to succeed, and he certainly saw Kirby and Ditko as a way there at some point, and his editorial input (at first), I believe, DID play a huge part in stimulating their creative thinking, challenging their creative thinking, maybe even aggravating them to do some of their best work (that’s what an Editor SHOULD do). His input in this way was critical to the success of the era for them.

And of course, his hype, his PERSONA to the public - the way he took things from others and incorporated it as his own to make others believe he was creative - spotlighting the artists (which had been done previously), presenting work aimed at an older audience (which had been done previously), over hyping the stories even if they weren't the 'greatest ever told' (which had been done previously) - he MADE people believe it was something special and THEY were a part of it. Look at how dearly some of the Marvel Zombie's still cling to that memory of their childhood/adolescence... it's as if Stan Lee personally helped them get over wetting the bed and was so understanding about it, that it helped shape their life. 

But MY contention is with Stan the WRITER. (Just looking at the work vs Kirby, it’s EASY to discredit Lee as a creator - I'm just puzzled some believe he was a writer) The ‘modern’ Shakespeare just never really did anything we can SEE.

Look at what some of his contemporaries did:

(From wikipedia) During his career writing for DC Comics, Gardner Fox wrote novels and short stories using a variety of male and female pseudonyms for a number of publishers, including Ace, Gold Medal, Tower Publications, Belmont Books, Dodd Mead, Hillman, Pocket Library, Pyramid Books and Signet Books. Then from 1969 to 1970, Belmont Books published a series of sword and sorcery novels by Fox, featuring the barbarian character Kothar.

(From wikipedia) Cary Bates was head scriptwriter on the 1988–1992 live action Superboy television series, and co-wrote (with Mario Puzo and John Briley) the 1992 film Christopher Columbus: The Discovery, produced by Superman: The Movie producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind. He also wrote for Disney's Gargoyles during the 1990s.

Jim Starlin has written novels. Chris Claremont has written novels. Dennis O’Neil has written novels. Even John Byrne has written novels.

But the ‘modern Shakespeare’? Nothing. 40+ years in Hollywood trying to make something happen and we got no novels, no screenplay, nothing…. (Well there IS one screenplay, but it’s never seen the light of day and… the stories about it are not good…)

Others got into the business and basically lapped him - getting work, writing screen plays, etc. while Stan just didn’t produce anything. He had ideas… he just didn’t have anyone to do the ACTUAL WORK for him, and in Hollywood… if all you are is an idea man…. Well THEY are a dime a dozen.

In his later career he did what does best - he promoted himself and the characters. THAT is who Stan really is.

And THAT part of him was great. It just sucks that he had to screw over the one person who MADE him - Jack Kirby. To LIE under oath in a court of law…

Stan deserves to be seen and appreciated for what he DID and what he WAS. And you highlight it there.

I just don’t see any evidence he was an actual writer of any accomplishment.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Prince Namor

[sfcityduck]

On 7/20/2022 at 11:42 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

There’s a whole website devoted to Kirby’s margin notes. 
 

https://kirbywithoutwords.tumblr.com/tagged/kirbywithoutwords

 

The margin notes seem vague and the article appears to mainly be about how Stan did not follow them.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/21/2022 at 8:02 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

When SickDuck says 'Kirby's Golden Age output is overrated' its so laughable to think - if you believe THAT, then what was Stan's? Kirby worked on some of the biggest selling books of the Golden Age. Stan... never did. 

 

Childish response. Here's the answer to your question: Stan Lee was not a major figure in the Golden Age. I can't think of any particularly profound or important work he did. I can think of work I enjoyed.

Same for Kirby. The Golden Age was before his full powers blossomed. Kirby was a hard worker in the Golden Age. But he and Simon mainly followed trends, borrowed ideas, and rehashed their successes over and over. Kirby's art in the Golden Age is not near the quality of his Silver Age output. It was not until the 1960s that he truly became the "King" of an era.

Working on big selling books is not the same as quality. If it were, we'd all be looking at C.C. Beck and a host of Batman and Superman pencillers as the greatest artists of the Golden Age. A lot of comics were top sellers at one time or another. We generally don't look to sales. Instead, we look to the work of artists who were not huge sellers because of the quality of their work.

Do any of the S&K creations really matter?  Simon created Captain America, and it sold, but it was just a Shield rip-off that caused MLJ to threaten Timely with suit twice. S&K had to redesign CA's shield because the swipe of Shield was too obvious. It was trend following that hit the stands with perfect timing. None of the S&K GA creations stayed in continuous publication throughout the 40s and 50s like Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Plastic Man, Blackhawk, etc. or had the staying power of Marvel.

S&K did make bank with the kid gang concept - Young Allies, Boy Commandos, Newsboy Legion, Boy Explorers, and Boy's Ranch but talk about milking a concept. The original kid sidekick superhero was, of course, Robin. And Robin clearly was the inspiration for Human Torch's Toro (by Burgos) and the subsequent Bucky, S&K's first foray into kid heroes. Later in their careers, S&K ripped off told the story of the circus aerialist who is the only survivor of a sabotaged highwire act that left his two parents partners dead -- Robin Stuntman - so they clearly took Robin's influence deeply to heart. Unfortunately, there is a definite formula and sameness to S&K's kid gang stories (Boy's Ranch is in my view the best) and some of the racist characters like the watermelon loving caricature "Whitewash Jones" don't help. It takes an effort to read a Newsboy Legion or Boy Commandos archive. These are not stories that will be taught in comic history classes except for the wrong reasons. Similarly, S&K's work at DC on Manhunter and Sandman is also far from classic, and really not as good as the original Sandman stories or the later rework of Manhunter in the 70s. 

Yes S&K made bank on Simon's idea of doing romance comics, which already had been done as one offs, but not in the style of the romance magazines that "inspired" Simon. Again, Simon knew how to spot a trend and exploit it. He was a smart businessman. Kirby's romance work, however, was far from his best work. It was far from the best romance work in comics. I seriously doubt that Kirby enjoyed telling those stories which did not play to his strength in depicting action. He did however like the big sales figures.

S&K also did genre work. Kirby did enjoy westerns. Bulls Eye and Boys Ranch are both on the upper end of the spectrum in that work. Not the master classes that, for example, some of Toth's stories were, but very enjoyable. Kirby was a solid craftsman who excelled at action. And that description pretty much sums up his GA. It is a far lesser accolade than he deserves for the 60s.

If Marvel had not happened, Kirby would likely not make a top 10 list of GA artists. Kirby's GA art was far from the New Gods style you like and far from his Marvel work. Look at these covers - the anatomy looks like an anorexic version of Rob Liefield level fidelity to the proportions of the human body.

What's up with those legs? Kirby's art was far more cartoony in the GA than it would become later. I can think of a host of GA artists I rate higher than Kirby for their GA output. I'm sure you can too.

[shadroch]

If not for Marvel, I think Kirby would be honored and respected as Joe Simon's junior partner.  His work after Joe was nice, but not memorable.  Challengers #3 is only notable because the plot was reused by Marvel. If not for Marvel, Stan Lee would be about as well known as whomever was the editor of Captain Marvel.

Joe Simon, who the OP thinks  did and accomplished nothing on his own, must have gotten really lucky being hired as Editor in Chief of Goodman's new comic line.

Perhaps he was another distant relation in law.

[Zonker]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:02 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

And once Kirby and Ditko were gone from Marvel... the creativity suddenly dried up. You're right, Stan got the best out of Gene Colan, or what little he worked with John Buscema, and certainly John Romita, but... it was nowhere NEAR the level of creativity he 'suddenly' had with Kirby and Ditko. 

He BAILED when the talent to do the work FOR HIM had left.

Trying to read those Silver Surfer stories from that first series is painful… great art, but geez, Stan turned the Surfer into the most annoying character ever with that constant blabbering - minus Kirby, THIS is the best example of Stan at his peak - alone to flaunt his own idolization as if every word he uttered was gold. Gross.

 

<snip>

I just don’t see any evidence he was an actual writer of any accomplishment.

Yeah, Stan's heart-on-his-sleeve Silver Surfer never really worked for me.  But maybe that is because I encountered the character relatively later in life, through the reprints in Fantasy Masterpieces. But those stories were very well-regarded by the age-appropriate fans of the day, winning a couple of Alley Awards in the late 1960s.  His other post-Ditko, post-Kirby triumph I think was the next 60-some-odd issues of Amazing Spider-Man after Ditko left.  We now know that Romita co-plotted most of those stories as well, but I've read interviews with Romita where he stresses the importance of Stan's wordsmithing in tying together all those issues into a complete saga, regardless of whether a particular issue's pencil breakdowns were done by Romita, Buscema or Mooney.  

It was essential they invent the Marvel Method to exploit Stan's strengths and work around his weaknesses.  Maybe having the patience to produce a complete body of work (novel, screenplay, etc.) starting from a blank sheet of paper was not Stan's forte.  But sparking an idea-- whether Stan came up with it himself or inspired the artist to do so-- then adding that distinctive voice through dialogue and captions to the penciled artwork, now that was the winning formula.  And I do think it qualified as "writing" of some accomplishment.

In the end we can't really point to one person as the writer of the early ASM or FF.  Comics are a collaborative medium, especially when done by the Marvel Method. Just as with the film Citizen Kane:  Is its author Herman J. Mankiewicz?  Or Orson Welles?  Do we really need to pick only 1?

 

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Childish response. Here's the answer to your question: Stan Lee was not a major figure in the Golden Age. I can't think of any particularly profound or important work he did. I can think of work I enjoyed.

Yup.

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Same for Kirby.

Jack Kirby WAS a major figure in the Golden Age. YOU denying this makes you look silly. He did profound and important work. It's not even a question. If you can't acknowledge this, then there's no sense in even continuing. 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

The Golden Age was before his full powers blossomed.

He was a storyteller. He was an action artist. He had both of these qualities in the Golden Age. Did he get better at it? Most all of them did. 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Kirby was a hard worker in the Golden Age. But he and Simon mainly followed trends, borrowed ideas, and rehashed their successes over and over.

So now you're saying they WERE successful?

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Kirby's art in the Golden Age is not near the quality of his Silver Age output.

 Neither was John Romita. Neither was Gil Kane. There's plenty of artists who got better. Just silly. 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Working on big selling books is not the same as quality.

Yeah just because it was universally praised by those in the business, including other artists and even publishers, AND it SOLD well is no reason to think it had historical merit. 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

If it were, we'd all be looking at C.C. Beck and a host of Batman and Superman pencillers as the greatest artists of the Golden Age.

Uh... we DO. Curt Swan - Hall of fame. Jerry Robinson - Hall of Fame. Bob Kane - Hall of Fame. CC Beck - Hall of Fame. 

Guess who the first three creators inducted were? Will Eisner, Carl Barks and.... Jack Kirby.

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

A lot of comics were top sellers at one time or another. We generally don't look to sales. Instead, we look to the work of artists who were not huge sellers because of the quality of their work.

 And for its time, Jack's work was considered quality. It was seen as groundbreaking. The artists and writers all talk about it in interviews. I've read every interview in TCJ, and Alter Ego and the overwhelming consensus amongst Golden Age artists and writers who talk about it is that Kirby was highly admired for his work during that time. 

Whatever YOU are talking about is just silly.

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, sfcityduck said:

Do any of the S&K creations really matter?  

No. And neither do you, troll. Back on ignore. 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:11 AM, Zonker said:

Yeah, Stan's heart-on-his-sleeve Silver Surfer never really worked for me.  But maybe that is because I encountered the character relatively later in life, through the reprints in Fantasy Masterpieces. But those stories were very well-regarded by the age-appropriate fans of the day, winning a couple of Alley Awards in the late 1960s.  His other post-Ditko, post-Kirby triumph I think was the next 60-some-odd issues of Amazing Spider-Man after Ditko left.  We now know that Romita co-plotted most of those stories as well, but I've read interviews with Romita where he stresses the importance of Stan's wordsmithing in tying together all those issues into a complete saga, regardless of whether a particular issue's pencil breakdowns were done by Romita, Buscema or Mooney.  

It was essential they invent the Marvel Method to exploit Stan's strengths and work around his weaknesses.  Maybe having the patience to produce a complete body of work (novel, screenplay, etc.) starting from a blank sheet of paper was not Stan's forte.  But sparking an idea-- whether Stan came up with it himself or inspired the artist to do so-- then adding that distinctive voice through dialogue and captions to the penciled artwork, now that was the winning formula.  And I do think it qualified as "writing" of some accomplishment.

In the end we can't really point to one person as the writer of the early ASM or FF.  Comics are a collaborative medium, especially when done by the Marvel Method. Just as with the film Citizen Kane:  Is its author Herman J. Mankiewicz?  Or Orson Welles?  Do we really need to pick only 1?

 

Great post!  But when I was 10 reading Silver Surfer 1 as reprinted in Son of Origins, I thought I'd discovered the greatest insights and philosophical musings ever. The dialogue made the story for me.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:19 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

Jack Kirby WAS a major figure in the Golden Age. YOU denying this makes you look silly. He did profound and important work. It's not even a question. If you can't acknowledge this, then there's no sense in even continuing. 

 

You have a very open mind ... not. Look, I get you can't stand disagreement with your pet views, but that is not the way to find the truth. So enjoy burying your head in the sand. 

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 12:52 PM, shadroch said:

If not for Marvel, I think Kirby would be honored and respected as Joe Simon's junior partner.  His work after Joe was nice, but not memorable.  Challengers #3 is only notable because the plot was reused by Marvel. If not for Marvel, Stan Lee would be about as well known as whomever was the editor of Captain Marvel.

Nice try, slugger. But your game is WEAK. 

Jack Kirby without Joe Simon... uh Marvel Silver Age? Fourth World?

Joe Simon without Jack Kirby? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha .

Let me know when they get around to making a Brother Power the Geek movie. 

On 7/21/2022 at 12:52 PM, shadroch said:

Joe Simon, who the OP thinks  did and accomplished nothing on his own, must have gotten really lucky being hired as Editor in Chief of Goodman's new comic line.

Perhaps he was another distant relation in law.

You're using his first job in the business as an example? Hilarious. How'd that work out?

He WAS the business side of S&K... how'd he do there?

Timely - Got him and Jack ripped off.

Crestwood - Got him and Jack ripped off.

Mainline - talked Jack into giving his life savings to start the business (was supposed to be BOTH of them doing that) and it went under after the Code hit. Jack spent the next few years working where he could - Simon bought a couple of mansions. Hmmm....

 

 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:27 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

You're using his first job in the business as an example? Hilarious. How'd that work out?

 

These are the kind of factual mistakes that destroy credibility. Joe joined Jacquet in 1940 doing work for Centaur, Lev Gleason, Curtis, Fox, Timely and other publishers before he became an editor for Timely.  Before that he did illustrations and cartoons for newspapers starting in 1932. And even before that his very first comic work appeared in Dell's Funnies weekly issue 34 according to the GCD, which came out in 1930 when Simon was still in High School.

[Prince Namor]

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

Yeah, Stan's heart-on-his-sleeve Silver Surfer never really worked for me.  But maybe that is because I encountered the character relatively later in life, through the reprints in Fantasy Masterpieces. But those stories were very well-regarded by the age-appropriate fans of the day, winning a couple of Alley Awards in the late 1960s. 

Built in audience. The numbers had to be abysmal though. Stan loved that character, and it only went a short time compared to the others that started around the same time: The Incredible Hulk (endlessly), Captain America (for decades), the Sub-Mariner (which made it for 72 issues!), Iron Man for decades... that 18 issues was probably pushed as hard to last that long as it could.

Sure, Nick Fury only lasted 18 issues as well, but the Surfer was Stan's pet project and even he couldn't justify keeping it going. 

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

His other post-Ditko, post-Kirby triumph I think was the next 60-some-odd issues of Amazing Spider-Man after Ditko left.  We now know that Romita co-plotted most of those stories as well, but I've read interviews with Romita where he stresses the importance of Stan's wordsmithing in tying together all those issues into a complete saga, regardless of whether a particular issue's pencil breakdowns were done by Romita, Buscema or Mooney.  

I don't doubt that at all. That's what Editors are supposed to do though. 

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

It was essential they invent the Marvel Method to exploit Stan's strengths and work around his weaknesses. 

Personally, I don't think that's why they did it. Knowing all we know now - I think Stan tricked Jack into the partnership. Jack NEVER let Stan have a part in those monster stories. But suddenly they're a team with Fantastic Four #1?

Jack always was pushing to do superheroes... even before returning to Marvel. Stan liked the idea too, but HE wanted in on it - he knew what Jack could do. So he told Jack, "Lets' do this together and I can probably talk Martin into giving it a chance..."

I'm sure Stan made suggestions, maybe even important one's... but that story is classic Kirby style storytelling for its time. 

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

Maybe having the patience to produce a complete body of work (novel, screenplay, etc.) starting from a blank sheet of paper was not Stan's forte.  But sparking an idea-- whether Stan came up with it himself or inspired the artist to do so-- then adding that distinctive voice through dialogue and captions to the penciled artwork, now that was the winning formula. 

Absolutely. It didn't sell as well as DC did during the 60's... The Batman TV show had more to do with saving comics than anything, but the people who DID read Marvel were very much programmed to LOVE it. It was a winning formula. 

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

And I do think it qualified as "writing" of some accomplishment.

See I just can't agree. Editors and agents do that, they don't get a byline. Writers write. 

That's why Stan failed so badly in Hollywood - people BELIEVED he wrote all of those stories and kept waiting for him to WRITE something. But he didn't because he couldn't. It wasn't his, as you put it, forte. 

You go to the money people in Hollywood and say, "I got an idea and in a nutshell it's this, this and this!" They'll say, you have juice? You did all those comics? Great, put together a treatment or -script and let's see what we can do. 

He couldn't do it.

He was used to OTHERS doing the actual writing.

On 7/21/2022 at 2:11 PM, Zonker said:

In the end we can't really point to one person as the writer of the early ASM or FF.  Comics are a collaborative medium, especially when done by the Marvel Method. Just as with the film Citizen Kane:  Is its author Herman J. Mankiewicz?  Or Orson Welles?  Do we really need to pick only 1?

Ooooohhhh... you chose the right example. It's Welles of course. Movies are a visual art. Different directors can present the same story in as many different ways. However, when a studio says, "You have to put one of the investors nephews in the movie" or "You can't use the 'f' word", that doesn't necessarily give them writing credit. Editorial direction can come from a LOT of different directions and reasons... experience, censorship concerns, ego, assembly line mentality, etc....

I gladly give Stan his credit for his part in things. It was crucial for the success of it.

I just don't think he was a writer of any substance and without someone to WRITE for him, he was average at best. 

To lie in a court of law, under oath and say, 'I wrote and created all of those characters, and then I assigned an artist to draw it' just irks me to no end. The pathetic need to have that attention - to cr*p on those who helped you achieve success he'd never have had without out them... just grotesque. 

[Prince Namor]

ON NEWSSTANDS MARCH 1957

For March Stan Lee wrote:

Sherry the Showgirl #6 with Al Hartley art 

My Girl Pearl #5 with Dan DeCarlo art 

Melvin the Monster #6 with Joe Maneely art

 

 

Even though Stan cut back his titles for March (he may have taken a Christmas Holiday when these books were put together), Atlas itself put out 35 titles and seemed to still be full steam ahead. And the return of My Girl Pearl which hadn't been around for a few years (#4 was June of 1955), shows us that the looming doom still was still unknown. 

 

[shadroch]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:27 AM, Prince Namor said:

Nice try, slugger. But your game is WEAK. 

Jack Kirby without Joe Simon... uh Marvel Silver Age? Fourth World?

Joe Simon without Jack Kirby? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha .

Let me know when they get around to making a Brother Power the Geek movie. 

You're using his first job in the business as an example? Hilarious. How'd that work out?

He WAS the business side of S&K... how'd he do there?

Timely - Got him and Jack ripped off.

Crestwood - Got him and Jack ripped off.

Mainline - talked Jack into giving his life savings to start the business (was supposed to be BOTH of them doing that) and it went under after the Code hit. Jack spent the next few years working where he could - Simon bought a couple of mansions. Hmmm....

 

 

Where would Kirby have published The New Gods?  He had worn out his welcome at DC and was out of options when he showed up at Marvel.  Without Stan, Kirby more likely than not would have gone into advertising, which paid much better. 

[Prince Namor]

ON NEWSSTANDS MARCH 1957

For March, Jack Kirby wrote, penciled and inked a story for House of Secrets #4 (Ruben Moreira cover)....

[Prince Namor]

ON NEWSSTANDS MARCH 1957

Jack Kirby also, penciled and inked a story for My Greatest Adventure #15 (Ruben Moreira cover)....