• 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 Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics'
7 7

Started by Prince Namor,

326 posts in this topic

  • Popular Post
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I'm proud to announce my latest book - Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics', available now on Amazon!

Just in time for the 50th anniversary of this infamous book!

In 1974, Stan Lee released the ‘Origins of Marvel Comics', laying claim to the creation of some of the greatest superheroes in the history of comic books. For 50 years, the lies and inaccuracies of this book have been not only overlooked or outright ignored by the mainstream media (and even many comic journalists), but repeated as FACT.

For the first time, an in depth look at just how inaccurate Lee's story is - fact-checked with modern updated means of information collection and later interviews with the people who were there.

Stan Lee Lied. A LOT.

And that's a fact.

 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DGLQ6BXV

 

Cover.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
s-man

s-man

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Is there a Stan Lee signed copy somewhere? :wishluck:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrc

mrc

Posted
Posted

"Yesterday, Bleeding Cool reported on a new book by Chaz Gower called Stan Lee Lied. Full title, Stan Lee Lied: Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in The Origins of Marvel Comics.

As we reported, this is a case for the prosecution; there is no attempt to be even-handed, but we have been given an extract to reproduce to give you a flavour of the book. Bleeding Cool welcomes more perspectives from others on this issue"

 

:popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
On 9/13/2024 at 12:44 AM, mrc said:

there is no attempt to be even-handed

 

On 9/13/2024 at 1:43 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

Origins: One of the Highlights of the Seventies

:whistle:

No kidding. I guess I don't understand the perspective about needing to be even-handed with someone being shown as telling lies.

"You lied about this, but I understand that you were quite hungry that morning, so that's ok, I think. We've all been there, buddy."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
NEW ESSAYS
 
TALKING POINTS FROM: 'Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the Origins of Marvel Comics’:
 
“Joe Maneely to me would have been the next Jack Kirby. He also could draw anything, make anything look exciting, and I actually think he was even faster than Jack.”
- Stan Lee, from Secrets in the Shadows: The Art & Life of Gene Colan by Tom Fields. Raleigh, North Carolina: TwoMorrows Publishing (2005)
 
If you’ve ever heard less informed Lee fans make this claim - or just find it laughable that Lee would make it himself… you have to ask, “Well why didn’t you, then?”
WHY DIDN’T YOU?
Consider this… it’s July 1957, and Martin Goodman has made a critical error in business and now has to make a deal with DC Comics-owned Independent News to get his books distributed. Goodman limits Lee to 8 titles a month, as it’s… well it’s all he can handle by himself as Goodman has fired everyone.
(If you’re under the impression that DC limited Goodman to 8 titles a month, you can read about THIS most probabale lie… in my NEXT essay.)
So Lee has the opportunity… WOULD have the opportunity to do whatever he needed to do, to save the business. Create something. Anything. He HAS his #1 artist Joe Maneely available to him as a freelancer…. so what does he do?
From my Book:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Consider this: In July of 1957, when Atlas/Marvel’s line of comics goes to 8, Stan Lee has a little over a year to try and create something to energize the line, before Kirby comes and saves the day.
ANYTHING to try and get sales up.
The first month he releases Cartoon Kids #1, a comic he does completely with Joe Maneely, featuring Willie the Wise Guy, and Dextor the Demon (a more mean-spirited Dennis the Menace rip-off) in 20 one page gags and 6 half page gags. It’s canceled after ONE issue.
Dexter the Demon #7. It was canceled after this issue. All Stan Lee and Joe Maneely.
Nellie the Nurse #1, a reboot of an old series, NOT by Stan Lee, who does write this one - though most likely Bill Everett, the artist, helps. It’s canceled after ONE issue.
Homer, the Happy Ghost #16. This blatant rip-off of Casper the Friendly Ghost (All Stan Lee and Dan DeCarlo), would last 6 more issues, but get canceled the month before Kirby returns in the ZERO title release month of August 1958.
------------------------------------------------------------
So to all those people who say, Joe Maneely could’ve been the next Jack Kirby… well, he wasn’t. He had his chance. And that’s nothing against Maneely, who was an AMAZINGLY gifted artist. What you have to really ask yourself is…
…Where were Lee’s ideas then?
Could he have looked around the world of comics and seen anything going on at the time? (In the ‘Origins of Marvel Comics’ he says nothing much was happening!)
Let’s have a look!
Superman still has 5 books he regularly appears in, Batman has 3, Superboy is chugging along nicely, and Wonder Woman is still in print. Lois Lane is just a few months away from getting her own book. Superman's TV show is in it's 5th year.
Jack Kirby is at DC and has created the Challengers of the Unknown just 3 issues earlier in Showcase. They’d appear in 4 of 7 issues before getting their own title early in 1958. Only Lois Lane would get her own book faster.
Must’ve been a pretty good seller! How’d Lee miss that?
The Modern Flash has already debuted and he’d have 4 apperances, two of them over the next year. How’d Lee miss that?
Kirby would also do Sci-Fi, Monster and Alien stories for DC in House of Secrets, House of Mystery, My Greatest Adventure, Tales of the Unexpected,
DC also did Sci-Fi Adventure with Mystery in Space, Adam Strange, and Space Ranger. Was Lee asleep?
At Harvey Comics, Kirby would do Sci-Fi Horror in Alarming Tales, and Black Cat and begin work on the Sci-Fi Space Comic ‘Race For the Moon’.
Charlton Comics would up their book count to 20 books a month.
Stan Lee? He had no answers.
Everyone seemed to be growing and expanding… except Marvel Comics.
From my book:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The books that DO survive during this time are the longest running books Goodman has:
1. Kid Colt Outlaw, which began in 1948 with no involvement from Lee, would last through all of this. Lee would inherit it, as there was no one else to handle it anymore, and was giving artist Jack Keller purchased scripts (mainly Joe Gill) to keep it going during this time, before taking over signing his name to the stories a few issues later.
2. Millie the Model. Not created by Lee, but taken over about 20 issues into it, this is another long running Marvel title that would survive the implosion. Dan DeCarlo most likely wrote most of these, simply recopying the same gags and themes over and over.
3. Miss America (starring Patsy Walker) and Patsy Walker are two more long running titles, not created by Lee, that Al Hartley has said he would both write and draw, though Lee quickly begins to sign his name as ‘writer’ to the stories.
 
“Stan Lee didn’t come up with most of the ideas. He really gave me free rein. Actually, I’d just go ahead and write and draw the stories and then send them in.”
- Al Hartley, Alter Ego #61, August 2006
 
Miss America would be canceled the month before Kirby returns in the ZERO title release month of August 1958 with issue #93. Patsy Walker would survive.
--------------------------------------------------------------
How was Editor and ‘Writer’ Stan Lee so inept as to not have a single book of any importance during the most critical time in his career? He even had the benefit of Maneely freelancing at the same time for DC! He KNEW exactly what they were thinking. The books Maneley did there? House of Secrets, House of Mystery, Tales of the Unexpected…
The answer was right in front of Stan Lee’s face the whole time. Yet neither he or Maneely realized it or did anything. A year had passed, and Marvel’s books are as bland as it gets. Then Maneely tragically dies in a commuter train accident. Marvel publishes ZERO books for the month of August. Goodman is making plans to shut down the comics division.
Then Jack Kirby walks in the door.
 
“Marvel was on its , literally, and when I came around, they were practically hauling out the furniture. They were literally moving out the furniture. They were beginning to move, and Stan Lee was sitting there crying. I told them to hold everything, and I pledged that I would give them the kind of books that would up their sales and keep them in business, and that was my big mistake.”
- Jack Kirby, Interviewed by Gary Groth, from The Comics Journal #134 (Feb 1990)
 
Guess what books he creates? Monster/Sci-Fi books. They end up selling better than anything Marvel has. They keep the doors open for another year…
So the next time you hear someone, obviously misinformed, talking about how Joe Maneely could’ve been the next Jack Kirby… tell them. He had his chance.
It didn’t happen.*
*And again, that’s no slight on Maneely who was a fantastic artist. It’s really about Lee, who… once again, without Kirby had NOTHING.
Chaz Gower’s book ‘Stan Lee Lied- Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the Origins of Marvel Comics’ is available now at Amazon!

Screen Shot 2024-09-13 at 3.21.25 PM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul © ® ⚽️💙™

Paul © ® ⚽️💙™

Posted
Posted (edited)

I wonder if Stan's family will sue based on the title alone??

I 'd certainly pay to see that.

Surprised CGC allowed this thread to be honest. They are usually more cautious with legalities.

For context I once created a thread called 'Alex Baldwin kills...'

I was asked to change the name of the thread....which I did....even though he did kill someone.

Their decision was correct, so I find a thread which accuses Stan Lee of lying via way of a book self published by someone with an axe to grind, who is a member here, to be extremely surprising and uncautious given the financial muscle of the Lee family.

Nuff said.  

Edited by Paul © ® ⚽️💙™
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justafan

justafan

Posted
Posted
On 9/13/2024 at 12:50 PM, Prince Namor said:
 
Then Maneely tragically dies in a commuter train accident. Marvel publishes ZERO books for the month of August. Goodman is making plans to shut down the comics division.
Then Jack Kirby walks in the door.
 
“Marvel was on its , literally, and when I came around, they were practically hauling out the furniture. They were literally moving out the furniture. They were beginning to move, and Stan Lee was sitting there crying. I told them to hold everything, and I pledged that I would give them the kind of books that would up their sales and keep them in business, and that was my big mistake.”
- Jack Kirby, Interviewed by Gary Groth, from The Comics Journal #134 (Feb 1990)
 
Guess what books he creates? Monster/Sci-Fi books. They end up selling better than anything Marvel has. They keep the doors open for another year…
So the next time you hear someone, obviously misinformed, talking about how Joe Maneely could’ve been the next Jack Kirby… tell them. He had his chance.
It didn’t happen.*
*And again, that’s no slight on Maneely who was a fantastic artist. It’s really about Lee, who… once again, without Kirby had NOTHING.
Chaz Gower’s book ‘Stan Lee Lied- Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the Origins of Marvel Comics’ is available now at Amazon!

 

I wonder if Maneely hadn't died and continued to string it out for another year or two with Marvel if Kirby wouldn't have been motivated to go check in on them when he did.  Maybe he would have instead brought those characters and ideas up with DC or maybe he would have eventually made his way over to Marvel further down the road.  Not saying it's a good thing Maneely died but the way it is presented sounds like his death left Marvel with no artist they could afford and was the catalyst for their impending closure.  Kirby makes it sound like he swooped in at the right time.  These artists and freelancers didn't operate in a vacuum.  There's probably more to the story as Kirby and Maneely probably spoke about the situation at Marvel and perhaps the reason Maneely never copied any of the ideas from DC for Marvel was out of professional respect but that's just speculation.  I wouldn't be surprised if Stan Lee or Goodman tried to poach or pry Kirby or other artists from DC for some help prior to Kirby coming over. 

No doubt the timing of Kirby's arrival and the explosion of really cool ideas coincides perfectly. 

However, it poses the question of why was Kirby holding these ideas back from DC?  Not sure if you cover it in your book but when he says it was his "big mistake", does he regret that he gave them to Marvel as a way of saving the company in hopes that in return they would compensate him in some way he was expecting?  Was there some kind of gentleman's agreement they shook on but was never fulfilled or was it just that DC wasn't interested in Kirby's ideas and he had nowhere else he could think of to go to give his ideas life?  If it was the former, well that's a shame-on-Kirby-for-trusting-them kinda deal. If I were about to save a company I'd be asking for a lawyer to draw up a licensing agreement or negotiate for ownership before I hand over my ideas.  If it's the latter, then Kirby has to see it as a gift he was not only giving to his creations but to the world for they may never have been given the chance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul © ® ⚽️💙™

Paul © ® ⚽️💙™

Posted
Posted

I have no dog in the fight about Stan Lee whatsoever. I have my own personal opinions like everyone else but I don't really care enough one way or the other to argue about it.

What I am genuinely interested in is this....where does the Company CGC stand on this issue?

We all know Stan signed anything that moved in his latter years and CGC attended many conventions and facilitated the signing of books by Stan. These books are obviously in many collections and freely circulate amongst collectors for their top dollar price because of Stan's sig.

IF CGC recognise that Stan was a monumental fraud as is postulated, are they then complicit in exploiting collectors to a degree, because they knew Stan deserved no credit whatsoever for the actual 'credit; and money he was making?

OR

Do CGC stand by their stance of promoting Stan as a comic book legend, and therefore are not at all happy with the man being vilified to the extent that someone entitles a book calling him a liar and basically saying he was a complete charlatan?

I'd love to know what CGC feel about this given they have had a huge hand in perpetrating his legend.

Again I am completely neutral but I think some clarification from CGC is in order so that Stan Lee followers and collectors know where they stand.

2c  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
AlterEgo2024

AlterEgo2024

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 9/13/2024 at 4:24 PM, Paul © ® ⚽️💙™ said:

I have no dog in the fight about Stan Lee whatsoever. I have my own personal opinions like everyone else but I don't really care enough one way or the other to argue about it.

What I am genuinely interested in is this....where does the Company CGC stand on this issue?

We all know Stan signed anything that moved in his latter years and CGC attended many conventions and facilitated the signing of books by Stan. These books are obviously in many collections and freely circulate amongst collectors for their top dollar price because of Stan's sig.

IF CGC recognise that Stan was a monumental fraud as is postulated, are they then complicit in exploiting collectors to a degree, because they knew Stan deserved no credit whatsoever for the actual 'credit; and money he was making?

OR

Do CGC stand by their stance of promoting Stan as a comic book legend, and therefore are not at all happy with the man being vilified to the extent that someone entitles a book calling him a liar and basically saying he was a complete charlatan?

I'd love to know what CGC feel about this given they have had a huge hand in perpetrating his legend.

Again I am completely neutral but I think some clarification from CGC is in order so that Stan Lee followers and collectors know where they stand.

2c  

Why does CGC have to acknowledge any stand at all? I think you're reaching for something that's probably unknowable and not exactly pertinent to their core business of grading comic books. Whether Stan was a fraud or not has nothing to do with CGC's business model. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ken Aldred

Ken Aldred

Posted
Posted (edited)

To CGC it’s just a signed comic for which they’re providing a grading service. Clinical as that. Even if it’s something as ridiculous as a Batman 1 reprint signed by him.

 

Edited by Ken Aldred
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
7 7
Go to topic listing