Stan, Jack, and Steve - The 1960's (1963) Butting Heads, Unexpected Success and Not Expected Failures! 3 3

[sfcityduck]

Now, it is worth noting that Jack Kirby was given co-credit by Joe Simon for Captain America.  Joe did this despite that he alone created the character design (the concept of a patriotic hero was being copied from others), he at least co-scripted the first story, and he did some pencils and inks. Why? Because Joe Simon had an expansive view of what creator credit meant. Frankly, way broader than Jack Kirby's view as applied to him and Stan -- except when Jack wanted to get credit for creating Spiderman (and deny that credit to Ditko) in which case Jack's view of what is enough to entail creator credit became too broad to be taken seriously.

Edited July 9, 2023 by sfcityduck

[Prince Namor]

On 7/4/2023 at 8:52 PM, Mmehdy said:

I just wish I was a fly on the wall.......Your thread here really issue by issue gives us look of the marvel reality...it is paying attention to detail that derails Stan and his co-credit /creator  status. I will give Stan the editor of the year award, even the best promo master of all time when it comes to comic book marketing but keep going forward issue by issue.....the evidence is does not hype or lie...thanks for this thread and every opinion we get including the above video adds to the treasure trove of finding out the truth. I learn something from everything.

Thanks Mitch!

Anyone who's been here through the majority of this can SEE very clearly, the topics discussed. It's as plain as day. With 1964 coming up next, we can see that Kirby will do just a few more issues of Avengers, a few more of X-Men a few more of Sgt. Fury - concentrating on just three storylines - FF, Thor and Cap. 

He'd create only one new title for the rest of the decade - Nick Fury in Strange Tales.

Strangely, when Jack decides to back off from giving Marvel anymore books, Stan Lee's creativity suddenly drys up. Hmmm....

Of course, we've already seen Stan's 'ideas' in JIM, TTA and TOS when Kirby was off those books, and it hasn't been pretty! 

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 2:41 PM, sfcityduck said:

Here's where we disagree: Comics are a unique medium. The story is told in both art and words. Even with a "full ----script" by the writer, the artist will still be contributing significantly to the creation of the story by providing the visuals. We all know the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words" and, while overblown, it does have truth in the comic book context.  Every comic artist is a co-creator to some degree in every story they touch.

But so too is the writer of the dialogue that accompanies the pictures. A picture without words can depict a scene, Bernie Krigstein proved that in the early 1950s, but a wordless story can only very very rarely depict characterization better than dialogue. Dialogue tells us much about the background, intelligence, inner feelings, attitudes, and actions of the characters, amongst many other things. Dialogue is essential. Dialogue is what conveys most of the character of the characters - especially for superheroes who wear costumes which cover their facial expressions.

Which is why in the movie business the folks who write dialogue are referred to as writers even when those writers were working off of a "full ----script" in the form of a book. They call that an "adapted screenplay." That's why Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, & Peter Jackson each have an Academy Award for making a fairly faithful adaptation of someone else's story. The art they brought to the process was taking someone else's dialogue and adapting it. That scripting of disalogue is rightly viewed as the very important role of "writing" in the movie industry, despite that the Director and actors and countless others are responsible over the look and sound of the overall film.

Worth noting that many works share the same basic plots. Often one of the key things that distinguishes good implementation of a plot from bad impletmentation is the dialogue.

So yeah, even a guy who only writes the dialogue is a writer and is a co-creator of the story told in a comic book.

Which gets us to the question of whether Jack Kirby "wrote" the dialogue for the stories he did with Stan Lee.  Jack claimed he did in a rather infamous 1990 interview by Gary Groth published in the Comics Journal.

It wasn't a good day for Jack or Groth. Groth was trying hard to fan the flames between Kirby and the publishing industry and Kirby was disappointing him with his answers, especially earlier in the interview. Jack was also feeling rather pugnacious, repeatedly telling stories about the physical altercations he had as a kid and boasting that he'd "bent steel." Jack was also suffering from a number of memory lapses and both Groth and Jack's wife Roz had to repeatedly correct him. it's a strange interview. And it led to some of Kirby's most outrageous claims. This was one of them:

That claim was so outrageous that Roz felt the need to correct him:

But were those margin notes really the "dialogue" for the stories? Nope. They were mostly just layout notes. Certainly evidence of Kirby's very significant contributions to the visuals for the story and its pacing, as well as the contents and plot of the story, but not the actual dialogue.  An example from the Kirby Museum website:

Kirby's margin notes often read as directions to himself, not Stan, regarding the topic of the story. This is supported by other examples in which the margin notes provide nothing but an explanation of the visuals, not dialogue at all.  This is in line with the method Kirby stated in the interview he used when working on the stories. Kirby contradicted himself on whether he had a plot in mind when he started work on a story. At various times he claimed he did develop a plot and that he and Stan had cursory discussions about. At others he claimed he never had a plot before he sat down at the drawing board. Regardless of what you think about that massive contradiction, what does have the ring of truth is that Kirby came up with the story layout and pacing on the fly. He most likely visualized a page, layed out the panels, and then made margin notes to remind himself what to put in those panels. Still, I'm sure they also were a great help in ascertaining what the gist of the dialogue should be.

When you contrast the margin notes with the actual dialogue, you see that the dialogue is radically different. The dialogue captures the subjects character, their emotions, and generally expands greatly on the thought in the margin note's sketch. The dialogue is far from verbatim of the margin note. The comic would have been an unreadable mess if the margin note was the dialogue. Not sure how anyone can view this contrast as evidencing mere "editing" and not writing. The evidence is clear and this example proves the dialogue is essential to the story.

Personally, I think the solution that Roz favored for assigning credit was the right one.  I don't agree with her comment that taking a writing credit is the same as taking "all of the credit" when it comes to a comic book, far from it, but the best solution would have been this:

To her credit, Roz did admit that "Every so often he’d [Stan Lee] put down, “Produced by." But she was right it would have been better if used consistently.

Sorry, I'm not going to re-post it for you. It's been posted if you choose to look.

When he came back to Marvel full time in 1958, Kirby wrote the words in the word balloons right on the page. There's plenty of proof if you choose to research it.

Stan was the boss - when he decided he wanted in on Kirby's ideas Lee laid down the law - Kirby was no longer allowed to write the dialogue in the word balloons. So Jack wrote it in the margins. Lee then told Kirby he couldn't write the dialogue in the margins - he could only write notes. 

And Stan didn't just take credit. He took the PAY for the writing as well. 

Edited July 9, 2023 by Prince Namor

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 1:31 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

When he came back to Marvel full time in 1958, Kirby wrote the words in the word balloons right on the page. There's plenty of proof if you choose to research it.

 

We are not talking about monster books here.  The Groth interview is a bit of a mess, but it also gets taken out of context.  The part I am quoting is not about monster books.  I have looked for pencilled balloons on superhero OA and I have not seen. I have done the research and the superhero OA cited on this topic is largely not supportive of a Kirby wrote all the dialogue theory.

I am happy to post more. But the piece posted above is a very good example that does not support your position.  Perhaps you should consider it instead of ignoring it.

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 2:41 PM, sfcityduck said:

So yeah, even a guy who only writes the dialogue is a writer and is a co-creator of the story told in a comic book.

Which gets us to the question of whether Jack Kirby "wrote" the dialogue for the stories he did with Stan Lee.  Jack claimed he did in a rather infamous 1990 interview by Gary Groth published in the Comics Journal.

It wasn't a good day for Jack or Groth. Groth was trying hard to fan the flames between Kirby and the publishing industry and Kirby was disappointing him with his answers, especially earlier in the interview. Jack was also feeling rather pugnacious, repeatedly telling stories about the physical altercations he had as a kid and boasting that he'd "bent steel." Jack was also suffering from a number of memory lapses and both Groth and Jack's wife Roz had to repeatedly correct him. it's a strange interview. And it led to some of Kirby's most outrageous claims. This was one of them:

From 1968:

EXCELSIOR: Do you plot the Fantastic Four stories by drawing the basic story and then having Stan write the dialogue?
JACK: This is Stanley’s editorial policy. As a Marvel artist, I carry it out.

FROM Interview originally published in Excelsior #1, 1968

From 1970:

Well, in the case of Marvel, most of the plots, I handle myself. It’s easy enough to do it after 30 years. I would discuss it with Stan, I would tell him what I was going to put in it, and it was either approved, or I would change it, you know, to maybe further the plot. In my case, it was done that way. I’ve always done my own stories. I’ve never done anything else.

FROM SDCC Speech 1970, one month before Jimmy Olsen #133

Again from 1970:

Was the concept of the Fantastic Four your idea or Stan Lee’s?

JACK:It was my idea. It was my idea to do it the way it was; my idea to develop it the way it was. I’m not saying that Stan had nothing to do with it. Of course he did. We talked things out. As things went on, I began to work at home and I no longer came up to the office. I developed all the stuff at home and just sent it in. I had to come up with new ideas to help the strip sell. I was faced with the frustration of having to come up with new ideas and then having them taken from me.

FROM Bruce Hamilton Interview,  originally published in Rocket’s Blast ComiCollector #81 (1970)

From 1970:

AUDIENCE: Would you say that Stan Lee added revolutionary ideas to comics?
KIRBY: I’d say that Stan Lee quoted me quite a good deal.

FROM SDCC Speech 1970

 

From 1975:

SHERMAN: As the fifties drew to a close, the super-heroes began to return. When you began the Challengers of the Unknown, were you striving more for a super-hero rebirth or for breaking into science fiction and adventure material more?

KIRBY: The issues I did were still formative and I can’t answer for what DC did with them. But they were heading for the super-hero image when I left. In many ways, they were the predecessors of the FF.

FROM Steve Sherman, 1975, reprinted in The Jack Kirby Collector #8, January 1996. (Originally presented in the 1975 Comic Art Convention program book.)

 

From 1986/87:

The idea for the F.F. was my idea. My own anger against radiation. Radiation was the big subject at that time, because we still don’t know what radiation can do to people. It can be beneficial, it can be very harmful. In the case of Ben Grimm, Ben Grimm was a college man, he was a World War II flyer. He was everything that was good in America. And radiation made a monster out of him–made an angry monster out of him, because of his own frustration.

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

 

Also From 1986/87:

KIRBY: What I’m trying to do is give the atmosphere up at Marvel. I’m not trying to attack Stan Lee. I’m not trying to put any onus on Stan Lee. All I’m saying is; Stan Lee was a busy man with other duties who couldn’t possibly have the time to suddenly create all these ideas that he’s said he created. And I can tell you that he never wrote the stories– although he wouldn’t allow us to write the dialogue in the balloons. He didn’t write my stories.

PITTS: You plotted and he did the dialogue?

KIRBY: You can call it plotted. I call it -script. I wrote the -script and I drew the story. I mean, there was nothing on the first or second page that Stan Lee ever knew would go there. But I knew what would go there. I knew how to begin the story. I wrote it in my house. Nobody was there around to tell me. I worked strictly in my house; I always did. I worked in a small basement in Long Island.

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 4:44 PM, sfcityduck said:

We are not talking about monster books here.  The Groth interview is a bit of a mess, but it also gets taken out of context.  The part I am quoting is not about monster books.  I have looked for pencilled balloons on superhero OA and I have not seen. I have done the research and the superhero OA cited on this topic is largely not supportive of a Kirby wrote all the dialogue theory.

I am happy to post more. But the piece posted above is a very good example that does not support your position.  Perhaps you should consider it instead of ignoring it.

KIRBY: What I’m trying to do is give the atmosphere up at Marvel. I’m not trying to attack Stan Lee. I’m not trying to put any onus on Stan Lee. All I’m saying is; Stan Lee was a busy man with other duties who couldn’t possibly have the time to suddenly create all these ideas that he’s said he created. And I can tell you that he never wrote the stories– although he wouldn’t allow us to write the dialogue in the balloons. He didn’t write my stories.

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 3:03 PM, sfcityduck said:

Now, it is worth noting that Jack Kirby was given co-credit by Joe Simon for Captain America.  Joe did this despite that he alone created the character design (the concept of a patriotic hero was being copied from others), he at least co-scripted the first story, and he did some pencils and inks. Why? Because Joe Simon had an expansive view of what creator credit meant.

Yeah. THAT'S consistent with the history of comics. Someone does all the creating and then just GIVES 40% of ownership of it to someone else. Sure.

On 7/9/2023 at 3:03 PM, sfcityduck said:

Frankly, way broader than Jack Kirby's view as applied to him and Stan -- except when Jack wanted to get credit for creating Spiderman (and deny that credit to Ditko) in which case Jack's view of what is enough to entail creator credit became too broad to be taken seriously.

He didn't deny credit to Ditko. 

"And so, I came up with Spider-Man. I got it from a strip called the Silver Spider. And I presented Spider-Man to Stan Lee and I presented the Hulk to Stanley..."

"My initial concept was practically the same. But the credit for developing Spider-Man goes to Steve Ditko; he wrote it and he drew it and he refined it. Steve Ditko is a thorough professional.... There are many others who take credit for it, but Steve Ditko, it was entirely in his hands. I can tell you that Stan Lee had other duties besides writing Spider-Man or developing Spider-Man or even thinking about it."

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

[sfcityduck]

You say in response to my post of Kirby's margin notes, not dialogue, on a Marvel superhero page (because we're talking here about superheros not monsters):

On 7/9/2023 at 1:31 PM, Prince Namor said:

When he came back to Marvel full time in 1958, Kirby wrote the words in the word balloons right on the page. There's plenty of proof if you choose to research it.

I respond:

On 7/9/2023 at 1:44 PM, sfcityduck said:

We are not talking about monster books here.  The Groth interview is a bit of a mess, but it also gets taken out of context.  The part I am quoting is not about monster books.  I have looked for pencilled balloons on superhero OA and I have not seen [them]. I have done the research and the superhero OA cited on this topic is largely not supportive of a Kirby wrote all the dialogue theory.

I am happy to post more. But the piece posted above is a very good example that does not support your position.  Perhaps you should consider it instead of ignoring it.

You then post Kirby siding with me that he wasn't "writing dialogue in the balloons":

On 7/9/2023 at 1:46 PM, Prince Namor said:

KIRBY: ...  he wouldn’t allow us to write the dialogue in the balloons. He didn’t write my stories.

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

So where was Kirby supposedly writing all of the dialogue?  Roz says the margin notes. 

But the margin notes I post above don't amount to dialogue. Here's another example:

Look at the note immediately above at the bottom of panel 4. That's not dialogue, that's a margin note by Kirby to himself regarding what he wants in the panel. Same with the first line of panel 5.

The margin notes for panels 1-3 and 5 do contain suggested sketches of what the gist of the dialogue should be. But, that isn't dialogue. It's not spoken in the character and cadence of Surfer or Doom. The margin note above panel 1 isn't even coherent. The dialogue actually used is light years better than what Kirby "suggests" (and to be clear, I seriously doubt Kirby intended his margin notes to be suggested dialogue - he knew Stan was great at dialogue).

So why are you telling me that Kirby wrote all the dialogue?  The evidence does not support that assertion.

Again, Roz is right: Stan Lee and Jack Kirby each were bringing value to the creation. They should have been billed as "Co-Producers" of the product with the inker and letter given separate credits for their more mechanical work.

And for his business or publisher or executive editor role, whatever you want to call it, I see nothing wrong with giving Stan that credit on all books of that time period - even if he was not at all involved in the creative process for books bearing that separate credit.

 

 

[Dr. Haydn]

We have seen Kirby’s handwriting in the word balloons in some of the 1962 superhero stories (Ant-man, Thor, and the Human Torch solo stories). 

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 5:58 PM, Dr. Haydn said:

We have seen Kirby’s handwriting in the word balloons in some of the 1962 superhero stories (Ant-man, Thor, and the Human Torch solo stories). 

Yep. And he would've continued writing it, but Stan made him stop. 

All anyone has to do is read those monster stories, which are the natural progression OF the superhero stories, and you can very clearly read KIRBY's dialogue. 

More proof is when you compare it to the work he did after Mainline and Prize ended for him (he actually continued writing and drawing solo on romance stories at Prize for a bit) and at DC in his stories (as well as his Yellow Claw issues).

It continues in the superhero stories that Marvel lies about Larry 'scripting', as we can see just how much of a novice Larry is once Kirby quits the book (see: JIM #90 and #91. Worst written superhero books of the entire Marvel Silver Age and the first where Larry's byline doesn't have Kirby's work behind it)

MEANING: Kirby's dialogue was used in those early superhero stories.

[sfcityduck]

You don't want to give any credit for participating in the creation of the FF.  Jack in 1970 disagreed:

On 7/9/2023 at 1:44 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

From 1970:

Well, in the case of Marvel, most of the plots, I handle myself. It’s easy enough to do it after 30 years. I would discuss it with Stan, I would tell him what I was going to put in it, and it was either approved, or I would change it, you know, to maybe further the plot. In my case, it was done that way. I’ve always done my own stories. I’ve never done anything else.

FROM SDCC Speech 1970, one month before Jimmy Olsen #133

Again from 1970:

Was the concept of the Fantastic Four your idea or Stan Lee’s?

JACK:It was my idea. It was my idea to do it the way it was; my idea to develop it the way it was. I’m not saying that Stan had nothing to do with it. Of course he did. We talked things out. As things went on, I began to work at home and I no longer came up to the office.

By 1986, Kirby's heyday was over. Other younger creators at Marvel, DC, and independents had come to the fore. Jack was around 70, and he took a more cantankerous tone:

On 7/9/2023 at 1:44 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

From 1986/87:

The idea for the F.F. was my idea. My own anger against radiation. Radiation was the big subject at that time, because we still don’t know what radiation can do to people. It can be beneficial, it can be very harmful. In the case of Ben Grimm, Ben Grimm was a college man, he was a World War II flyer. He was everything that was good in America. And radiation made a monster out of him–made an angry monster out of him, because of his own frustration.

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

And by 1990, Kirby was firmly in his 70s, even more cantankerous, and his recollection even faultier:

Quote

GROTH: Looking back on it, do you see the Challengers as a precursor to the Fantastic Four?

KIRBY: Yes, there were always precursors to the Fantastic Four — except the Fantastic Four were mutations. When people began talking about the bomb and its possible effect on human beings, they began talking about mutations because that’s a distinct possibility. And I said, “That’s a great idea.” That’s how the Fantastic Four began, with an atomic explosion and its effect on the characters. Ben Grimm who was a college man and a fine looking man suddenly became the Thing. Susan Storm became invisible because of the atomic effects on her body. Reed Richards became flexible and became a character that I could work with in various ways. And there were others — mutation effects didn’t only affect heroes, it affected villains too. So I had a grand time with the atomic bomb. [Laughter.]

 

 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 2:58 PM, Dr. Haydn said:

We have seen Kirby’s handwriting in the word balloons in some of the 1962 superhero stories (Ant-man, Thor, and the Human Torch solo stories). 

Feel free to post the examples! But didn't Larry Lieber get the writer credits on 1962 Human Torch stories?

 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 3:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

It continues in the superhero stories that Marvel lies about Larry 'scripting', as we can see just how much of a novice Larry is once Kirby quits the book (see: JIM #90 and #91. Worst written superhero books of the entire Marvel Silver Age and the first where Larry's byline doesn't have Kirby's work behind it)

MEANING: Kirby's dialogue was used in those early superhero stories.

Where does Kirby make that claim?

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 6:13 PM, sfcityduck said:

You don't want to give any credit for participating in the creation of the FF. 

Where do you get this?

No one is claiming Stan did NOTHING.

It is STAN claiming HE created it ALL and then merely assigned an artist. 

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 1:53 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

He didn't deny credit to Ditko. 

"And so, I came up with Spider-Man. I got it from a strip called the Silver Spider. And I presented Spider-Man to Stan Lee and I presented the Hulk to Stanley..."

"My initial concept was practically the same. But the credit for developing Spider-Man goes to Steve Ditko; he wrote it and he drew it and he refined it. Steve Ditko is a thorough professional.... There are many others who take credit for it, but Steve Ditko, it was entirely in his hands. I can tell you that Stan Lee had other duties besides writing Spider-Man or developing Spider-Man or even thinking about it."

FROM Conversations with Comic Book Creators by Leonard Pitts Jr. 1986/87

He sure did in your quote: How is "I came up with Spider-Man. My initial concept was practically the same." He only credits Ditko with "refining" his creation. 

This is even more clear from the 1990 Groth interview:

Quote

 

GROTH: Can I ask what your involvement in Spider-Man was?

KIRBY: I created Spider-Man. We decided to give it to Steve Ditko. I drew the first Spider-Man cover. I created the character. I created the costume. I created all those books, but I couldn’t do them all. We decided to give the book to Steve Ditko who was the right man for the job. He did a wonderful job on that.

 

Lee and Ditko both disagree. Ditko hasn't held back. He's rebutted Kirby's dis of him by creating the below diagram of Kirby's original costume design was a redux of Kirby's GA standby style used for Captain America/Sandman/Fighting American of a covered head, open eyes and mouth, boots, shorts, and sometimes a gun.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 3:25 PM, Prince Namor said:

Where do you get this?

No one is claiming Stan did NOTHING.

It is STAN claiming HE created it ALL and then merely assigned an artist. 

What was his contribution in your view?  And does he deserve co-creator credit for that contribution?

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 6:36 PM, sfcityduck said:

What was his contribution in your view? 

He was an editor. He did what an editor does.

On 7/9/2023 at 6:36 PM, sfcityduck said:

And does he deserve co-creator credit for that contribution?

It would've been created without him. That's what Kirby did his whole life. 

Stan... not really much at all. 

But it was different because of his involvement. So yeah, he would get co-creator credit.

[Prince Namor]

On 7/9/2023 at 6:36 PM, sfcityduck said:

He sure did in your quote: How is "I came up with Spider-Man. My initial concept was practically the same." He only credits Ditko with "refining" his creation. 

This is even more clear from the 1990 Groth interview:

Lee and Ditko both disagree. Ditko hasn't held back. He's rebutted Kirby's dis of him by creating the below diagram of Kirby's original costume design was a redux of Kirby's GA standby style used for Captain America/Sandman/Fighting American of a covered head, open eyes and mouth, boots, shorts, and sometimes a gun.

He did create A Spider-man, but the concept was NOT 'practically the same', he's wrong.

So what's your point?

If Kirby never brings the idea to Lee - and there's plenty of proof of Kirby's involvement with the idea PRIOR to Marvel (Archie's The Fly for one) - then it never happens. 

The over arching point Kirby is making is - NONE of it would've happened without HIM. 

Which is true.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 3:59 PM, Prince Namor said:

He was an editor. He did what an editor does.

It would've been created without him. That's what Kirby did his whole life. 

Stan... not really much at all. 

But it was different because of his involvement. So yeah, he would get co-creator credit.

Editors of literary works don't write the dialogue.  They mainly evaluate and advise. They don't get a writer's credit or a co-creator credit. If Lee really was an "editor" who does "not much at all," then why do you think he deserves a co-creator credit?  The reality is that you minimize Lee far too much.

When Stan Lee wrote the dialogue on a Marvel comic, he was doing something much more valuable than editing. Even the often biased website that calls itself the "Kirby Museum" had this to say in its Ditko minimizing view of Spider-Man's creation:

Quote

There is one aspect of Peter Parker that was consistent to Stan Lee, and that is Peter’s personality. Besides being a science geek, (complete with pocket protector) Peter is shown to be somewhat angst-ridden; doubting of his own worth and unable to fit easily into society. His uneasiness with his new- found powers is atypical of Kirby’s heroes. Kirby’s men were fighters, despite their shortcomings. This inner conflict, and sometimes, outer rage is pure Lee, it is this deeper human psychological aspect that Lee imbued into all of Marvel’s heroes. It is the difference between Ben Grimm of the Fantastic Four, and Rocky Davis of the Challengers of the Unknown.

They are right about that.

Following Kirby's lead, they also make comments which minimizes Ditko's contributions, if any they imply, by stating:

Quote

 

The very last costumed super-hero book that Kirby produced, prior to Marvel, featured an insect hero able to climb walls and ceilings; had super strength, the agility of a bug, and, amazingly, an extra sense that warned him of danger. Steve Ditko has said that all of this was in place before he got involved. If so, then what was changed from Kirby’s Spider-Man? It seems all the changes were made to Peter Parker, so a full half of the premise remained the same. Ditko made no changes to Spider-Man.

....

And without Stan Lee, in my opinion, we would have been without the single most vital ingredient that made Spider-Man the most unique character in comics. Human frailty!!! More than any other character he worked on, Stan identified with Peter Parker. His vision of the everyman as hero made Spidey the most conflicted, the most human, and the most unique hero ever created. His blueprint was the perfect recipe for a super hero in the post war era. It was an age when the common man, no longer felt in control of his own destiny. Spider-Man was not just fighting bad guys; he was fighting our doubts, our rages, and our feeling of helplessness. He, like most people, (especially the teens reading his books) was looking for their role in society, and was turned away at every stop. Stan Lee made Spider-Man one of us. This is why Spidey not only continued, he thrived, long after both Kirby and Ditko, no longer had any input.

 

So does Ditko deserve co-creator status?  

To be clear: I call the Kirby Museum biased because they make claims that Jack Kirby did NOT, and which are supported by nothing more than wishful thinking and rank speculation. For example, the Kirby Museum claims that Kirby plotted the first three Spiderman stories. Kirby never made that assertion. And that assertion is contrary to how Kirby claims he worked - with basically no plot until he sat down at the drawing board and began visualizing a story - something he did not do for Spiderman. Furthermore, everyone seems to agree that Kirby's basic idea for the first Spiderman story was rejected as too similar to the Fly, so why would Stan and Ditko have gone to Kirby to get plots? It is a view that only makes sense to a "true believer." The Kirby Museum further implies that as late as issue 10 of Amazing Spiderman Kirby's plots were still being used, which again Kirby never claimed and Stan and Ditko rejects. 

Edited July 10, 2023 by sfcityduck

[sfcityduck]

On 7/9/2023 at 4:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

He did create A Spider-man, but the concept was NOT 'practically the same', he's wrong.

So what's your point?

If Kirby never brings the idea to Lee - and there's plenty of proof of Kirby's involvement with the idea PRIOR to Marvel (Archie's The Fly for one) - then it never happens. 

The over arching point Kirby is making is - NONE of it would've happened without HIM. 

Which is true.

The Silver Spider idea was Joe Simon's. Kirby took Joe Simon's idea to Marvel. So under your reasoning Joe deserves the credit, not Kirby. Without Joe, it never happens.

But then again, without Martin Goodman, the FF never happens either. So is he a co-creator of FF?

This is just Butterfly effect theory.

What we do know is that Lee, Kirby and Ditko each had much more than a "Butterfly effect" on the creation of Marvel's superhero universe and the success of the company.