• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Stan, Jack, and Steve - The 1960's. (1960) Showing Signs of Life!
2 2

Started by Prince Namor,

254 posts in this topic

Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ON NEWSSTANDS SEPTEMBER 1960

From Superman's Girl Friend Lois Lane #21 - cover by Curt Swan

I wasn't much of a Curt Swan fan, but I always liked this cover, for a number of reasons. Fan reaction to Lois Lane was also very high and DC was really on top of it. And just in case you're wondering how the story ended...

RCO001_1469548105.jpg

RCO022_1469548105.jpg

RCO032_1469548105.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted
On 11/5/2022 at 10:00 AM, Prince Namor said:

ON NEWSSTANDS SEPTEMBER 1960

From Superman #141 - I love reading these letters pages too - people were really excited and interested in these comics! 

Those letters pages are fascinating. And cringe-worthy at the same time when read through current sensibilities. :blush:

- fatso
- blubber boy
- only book Lana is interested in is a cookbook
- bend her over his knee and give her a super-spanking

It is also interesting that they came up with "photographic vision" to describe what I've heard of most of my life as "photographic memory."  Which may or may not be a thing in the real world, but nevertheless interesting that as recently as 1960 a new term had to be invented to describe the concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 11/5/2022 at 9:54 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

ON NEWSSTANDS SEPTEMBER 1960

From Superman #141 - Jerry Siegel had a very tempestuous relationship with DC, despite creating the most important and famous superhero character in history, but during his run at the start of the 60's he did some memorable stories, that show just how far ahead of the game DC was to a lot of what was being done in comics at the time. Curt Swan cover, Wayne Boring Interior art. 

Part ONE

 

RCO003_1665010841.jpg

 

Growing up, when I would encounter Wayne Boring's reprinted artwork, I always thought he was incredibly stiff compared to the then-gold-standard for Superman art, the Curt Swan / Murphy Anderson team.  And I hated that Boring drew Superman with that receding hairline, making him look 40 years old.  But that started to change after I saw this story reprinted in one of the 80 Page Giants.  Boring really excelled in drawing alien landscapes, such as this Krypton scene, and could certainly draw some exotic women.  No doubt he was instructed to draw the man of steel to resemble then TV Superman George Reeves, who was himself in his forties when he portrayed the character.

 

Edited by Zonker
Quote fail
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/5/2022 at 11:51 AM, Zonker said:

Growing up, when I would encounter Wayne Boring's reprinted artwork, I always thought he was incredibly stiff compared to the then-gold-standard for Superman art, the Curt Swan / Murphy Anderson team.  And I hated that Boring drew Superman with that receding hairline, making him look 40 years old.  But that started to change after I saw this story reprinted in one of the 80 Page Giants.  Boring really excelled in drawing alien landscapes, such as this Krypton scene, and could certainly draw some exotic women.  No doubt he was instructed to draw the man of steel to resemble then TV Superman George Reeves, who was himself in his forties when he portrayed the character.

 

I had to look but, yep, this is where I first read it too. GCD says this is a Curt Swan cover, but Murphy Anderson might've done more than just ink it...

image.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ON NEWSSTANDS OCTOBER 1960

For October, Marvel would again release 10 titles to the newsstand, but all was not good...

As yearly averages were being prepared, Goodman had to see that Stan's line of comics had again failed to meet whatever expectations he had at selling only 16 million copies for the fiscal year. As these issues hit the stands in October, Goodman had already made his decision to again shut the comics division down...

He had to be aware that the line was inexplicably filled with non-sellers like Kathy, Life with Millie, and My Girl Pearl, while his best sellers all seem to be coming from the work that Jack Kirby is doing. They try to get Kirby doing Westerns, and maybe that'll help... but Jack knows what he wants to do most... and he almost has Goodman talked into it...

Am I speculating? 1961 will tell the story...

 

Stan Lee would write 6 of the titles for the month of October.

 

Millie the Model #101 - with art by Stan Goldberg 

Life with Millie #9 - with art by Stan Goldberg.

Patsy Walker #93 -  with Al Hartley art 

Kathy #9 - with art by Stan Goldberg. 

Kid Colt Outlaw #97 - 2 stories with Jack Keller art (one a 13 pager) and 1 with Paul Reinman.

Two Gun Kid #58 - 2 stories with Jack Kirby art (one is a 2 part 13 pager) and 1 with Don Heck. 

 

The other 4 were:

Tales of Suspense #15

Tales to Astonish #17

Journey Into Mystery #65

Strange Tales #82

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ON NEWSSTANDS OCTOBER 1960

In Two Gun Kid #58, Jack Kirby mixes genre's with Westerns and Monsters. It's very clearly Kirby written (the artwork from this era has him writing the dialogue within the art) even though it says 'by Stan Lee'. My feeling is that because Marvel 'owned' Two Gun Kid, Lee convinced Kirby that he had to sign his name to it. Kirby would fight for the next few years over anyone 'writing' dialogue for his work, and I'll show exactly where it happens, how we know it happened, and the results of it. D. Ayers would ink the cover, both chapters of Kirby's lead story and the final story of Kirby's. 

Chapter ONE:

RCO001_1490760314.jpg

RCO003_1490760314.jpg

RCO004_1490760314.jpg

RCO005_1490760314.jpg

RCO006_1490760314.jpg

RCO007_w_1490760314.jpg

RCO010_1490760314.jpg

RCO011_w_1490760314.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted
On 11/5/2022 at 7:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

 

 

Stan Lee would write 6 of the titles for the month of October.

 

Millie the Model #101 - with art by Stan Goldberg 

Life with Millie #9 - with art by Stan Goldberg.

Patsy Walker #93 -  with Al Hartley art 

Kathy #9 - with art by Stan Goldberg. 

Kid Colt Outlaw #97 - 2 stories with Jack Keller art (one a 13 pager) and 1 with Paul Reinman.

Two Gun Kid #58 - 2 stories with Jack Kirby art (one is a 2 part 13 pager) and 1 with Don Heck. 

 

 

So what's the thinking on the Stan Lee signed Westerns not done by Kirby? I see that Jack Keller wrote some of his later Charlton stuff, so maybe he did for Stan what Kirby and later Ditko would be doing.  But is it suggested that Don Heck and Paul Reinman were also making up their stories from scratch, with Stan Lee just re-writing their dialogue and signing his name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/6/2022 at 10:13 PM, Zonker said:

So what's the thinking on the Stan Lee signed Westerns not done by Kirby? I see that Jack Keller wrote some of his later Charlton stuff, so maybe he did for Stan what Kirby and later Ditko would be doing.  But is it suggested that Don Heck and Paul Reinman were also making up their stories from scratch, with Stan Lee just re-writing their dialogue and signing his name?

Those guys only had to make up stories from scratch when Stan had absolutely nothing. Remember, he had inventory scripts and would regularly have artists 'rework' a past story, take an idea from a competitor's comic and have the artist 'rework' it, or just have the artist have to come up with an idea on their own. Though I suspect he played it by ear, depending on the artist too. 

I've also heard of Stan telling the artist how it should begin (Two Gun Kid is riding into town and someone shoots at him, knocking his hat off) and how it should end (Two Gun Kid chases the rustlers off the ranch) and leaving it to them to put together.

In reading these issues - and I stopped adding them here because they're just SO repetitive and BLAND, it's completely obvious this is happening. There's only so many times you can read these same stories over and over...

When Stan starts doing the Western 'with' Kirby, it's amazing how quickly they suddenly perk up. But it makes sense, because Kirby was writing the majority of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 11/6/2022 at 10:36 PM, Prince Namor said:

Those guys only had to make up stories from scratch when Stan had absolutely nothing. Remember, he had inventory scripts and would regularly have artists 'rework' a past story, take an idea from a competitor's comic and have the artist 'rework' it, or just have the artist have to come up with an idea on their own. Though I suspect he played it by ear, depending on the artist too. 

I've also heard of Stan telling the artist how it should begin (Two Gun Kid is riding into town and someone shoots at him, knocking his hat off) and how it should end (Two Gun Kid chases the rustlers off the ranch) and leaving it to them to put together.

In reading these issues - and I stopped adding them here because they're just SO repetitive and BLAND, it's completely obvious this is happening. There's only so many times you can read these same stories over and over...

When Stan starts doing the Western 'with' Kirby, it's amazing how quickly they suddenly perk up. But it makes sense, because Kirby was writing the majority of it. 

So I thought the theory was when the artist was working from an inventory --script or reworking an old story, that would be one of those unsigned jobs, such as many of the non-Kirby monster stories we've seen?

But I think this is certainly true:  "I suspect he played it by ear, depending on the artist too." 

What I'm coming to understand from reading these threads is Stan was, among other things, the production manager extraordinary, getting comics out the door as efficiently as possible and with the highest quality control he could manage.  We have to keep remembering that comic books during this period were 90% commerce and maybe at most 10% "art."  The whole division of labor between penciler + inker had been created simply to maximize throughput, not because it necessarily made for the best artwork. So, Stan's innovation of idea => pencils => dialogue => inks gets the artist started without waiting on the bottleneck of the writer getting all the words written down first.  And if we're continuing with the analogy of Stan as production manager, he can see one of his human resources is the most productive, he can back off and let Kirby run with it, and instead devote more of his energy working with the Don Hecks and Paul Reimans.

Stan also gets criticized for stepping on top of Kirby's ideas (the FF #51 thread here, and the "Failure to Communicate" series at the online Kirby Museum). So he sometimes gets blamed for doing too much, sometimes too little.  He's not just the suit in the corner office, he is in fact getting his hands dirty in trying to maintain that quality control, whether it is plotting with a more junior artist, re-working something he gets from Kirby or Romita to have it better fit his own vision, or simply polishing some Kirby or Ditko dialogue before letting it get out the door. 

None of which disputes your primary point that Stan's role was largely editorial, not so much authorial.  (thumbsu  

Edited by Zonker
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

So I thought the theory was when the artist was working from an inventory ---script or reworking an old story, that would be one of those unsigned jobs,

Depends on the writer. Remember, Goodman had already learned his lesson in taking credit for other people's work - he'd been sued in court three times from his pulp days for changing the title and character names in a story and using it as free writing. If Stan had an artist rework a Carl Wessler -script, they may've just not given any credit, but he knew if HE took credit it could backfire on him.

There were plenty of small name scripts Marvel used that the writers had no idea the work was recycled - Atlas advertised not only in their comics, but in Reader's Digest, newspapers, etc. constantly looking for stories. Those stories got recycled. 

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

such as many of the non-Kirby monster stories we've seen?

Well... there's no writer listed because Kirby didn't sign his work. Until Ayers started inking it and signing 'Kirby & Ayers', there was nothing. 

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

But I think this is certainly true:  "I suspect he played it by ear, depending on the artist too." 

What I'm coming to understand from reading these threads is Stan was, among other things, the production manager extraordinary, getting comics out the door as efficiently as possible and with the highest quality control he could manage. 

When Atlas was at its peak, Stan oversaw the other editors. He scheduled the books, assigned the stories to the artists, approved covers. Had a couple of books he wrote with Dan DeCarlo, and occasionally something with Joe Maneely. I have no idea what was a big seller and what wasn't.

But I do know that, after the implosion, a great editor would've put together the 8 best titles he could. Marvel's line of comics was just a notch above Charlton, mostly due to better paper and better freelance artists. It didn't make a difference. Sales fell in the toilet. Stan no longer had Don Rico and Carl Kessler and Al Sulman and Al Jaffee and others to put out quality material... he was stuck using rejected scripts, rejected ideas and what he could come up with on his own.

It floundered. 

If Kirby hadn't shown up, Marvel would've gone out of business. 

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

We have to keep remembering that comic books during this period were 90% commerce and maybe at most 10% "art." 

I agree, but I think EC had shown that it COULD be a closer percentage than that, but yeah, in general the 'art' side of it was almost 0% to most publishers. 

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

The whole division of labor between penciler + inker had been created simply to maximize throughput, not because it necessarily made for the best artwork. So, Stan's innovation of idea => pencils => dialogue => inks gets the artist started without waiting on the bottleneck of the writer getting all the words written down first.  And if we're continuing with the analogy of Stan as production manager, he can see one of his human resources is the most productive, he can back off and let Kirby run with it, and instead devote more of his energy working with the Don Hecks and Paul Reimans.

Well, Stan wasn't actually a writer. He HAD to do it this way.

And when I say that I mean, most comic book writers, have at some point written a full -script we can SEE - something that stands on its own as a story - most have written a novel or TV -script or a movie -script or SOMETHING that we can actually see their ability to tell a story in words of their own. Never saw anything from Stan...

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

Stan also gets criticized for stepping on top of Kirby's ideas (the FF #51 thread here, and the "Failure to Communicate" series at the online Kirby Museum). So he sometimes gets blamed for doing too much, sometimes too little.  He's not just the suit in the corner office, he is in fact getting his hands dirty in trying to maintain that quality control,

I think people forget how often Stan's 'quality control' was anything BUT. The legend far exceeds the actual product created. Just wait until we get to the superhero stuff. The 'quality control' got better when Stan got a staff to do the actual work for him. By the time 1965 rolled around Stan was only in the office 2-3 days a week and production was done by everyone else. 

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

whether it is plotting with a more junior artist, re-working something he gets from Kirby or Romita to have it better fit his own vision, or simply polishing some Kirby or Ditko dialogue before letting it get out the door. 

I suspect most of Stan's tinkering was so he could sign his name to it.

On 11/7/2022 at 7:54 AM, Zonker said:

None of which disputes your primary point that Stan's role was largely editorial, not so much authorial.  (thumbsu  

Sometimes I wonder how necessary his editorial input was. He didn't edit or make changes to Kirby's monster stories and they read just fine... editorial quality actually improved when Stan stepped aside...

Personally I think Stan's biggest contribution was his overwhelming desire to be rich and famous. By doing everything he could to promote the brand and make himself the focal point of it all, it duped people into believing that one man was the 'modern Shakespeare' behind it all, making a great story for people to latch onto, and making the comics more popular than their sales ever showed they were...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2
Go to topic listing