Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics' 9 9

[Larryw7]

I got my copy in the mail today, and I’m looking forward to reading it. Congratulations, @Prince Namor!

Stan more than likely committed perjury when he was deposed in 2011 for the Kirby versus Marvel lawsuit. There’s no question in my mind that Stan lied an awful lot. I don’t even know why there’s still any argument about it. It’s historical fact.

[mrc]

On 9/17/2024 at 6:39 AM, Larryw7 said:

Stan more than likely committed perjury when he was deposed in 2011 for the Kirby versus Marvel lawsuit. There’s no question in my mind that Stan lied an awful lot. I don’t even know why there’s still any argument about it. It’s historical fact.

...............because, in certain circumstances it can be morally dubious to judge the past by todays standards.

[VintageComics]

On 9/17/2024 at 2:42 AM, mrc said:

...............because, in certain circumstances it can be morally dubious to judge the past by todays standards.

Agreed, and I already stated the same. This is a mistake almost everyone makes. 

 

[Larryw7]

So lying under oath that he wrote synopses for artists to follow(lie) , that he had all of the ideas for all the superheroes and just gave lip service to Kirby and Ditko was to make them feel better is a certain circumstance where it’s okay to lie? The family of the creator of the Marvel Universe wanted justice for Jack, so that he could be given equal credit, and Stan blatantly lies to a judge to save face.

Sorry. That’s indefensible.

Edited yesterday at 12:19 AM by Larryw7

[comicwiz]

On 9/16/2024 at 11:10 PM, VintageComics said:

Who motivated and drove the bullpen?

If by motivated, you mean stories like the one below, retold by Stan Goldberg's, then I'm not sure our definitions of "motivation" align: Reads more like stealing credit and pay, not to mention that your notion of "bullpen" would be seen in today's workplace as intimidating or undermining employees by demeaning their work standards, not giving them credit, setting them up for failure and constantly reminding them of old mistakes.

On 9/16/2024 at 11:10 PM, VintageComics said:

Who created that culture that was the brand that Marvel became?

You say that like it was some model that others should emulate as far as workplace standards are concerned. The "culture" required Will Eisner Studios to write an open letter (when it became public that Kirby's work was being held as ransom against signing a release he wouldn't sign) telling them to stand down, because everyone was watching, which included a new generation of creators. To say nothing of the theft that was happening of original art, some of it by artists - a form of cannibalizing that only could occur under circumstances where workers were being set-up for failure, lack of pay, recognition and low self-worth. The EIC himself was seen selling art at a show in 1968, despite him being quoted at one point about how the art was being thought of as some retirement fund for the artists. When you have editors setting-up workers for such a steeped degree of exploitation, I'm not sure how you can even expect anyone to take the questions you're asking seriously. Especially since you write them like they were anything worthy of sentimentalizing or reminiscing over. It's a tarnished legacy of dengrating and exploiting workers. Kirby tried to warn us all, and it should have all been straightened out by now, with a course correcting that sets us on the pathway of undoing the wrongs of the past.

Instead, the former EIC is still on the take, using the same exploitative toolkit of taking undeserved credit at a fortuitious moment when a movie credit and convention show schedule might translate to financially benefiting him. Not to mention Disney/Marvel is set to release a 50th Anniversary edition of the origins of Marvel, which is very likely going to push a lot of the same old narratives that have been entrenched. Instead of using these examples in "how not to run your business or company", they're double and tripling down on their indoctrination and lies because there's money involved. 

Edited Tuesday at 01:03 PM by comicwiz

[Forbush-Man]

On 9/16/2024 at 5:14 AM, mrc said:

...............but, IMHO without Stan (and the emotional connection he created with the readers) the books would not have sold nor, made any money for literally decades to come.

Just an observation, but Stan Lee's personal touch was added slowly to the books over time, it wasn't there at the beginning of the Marvel Age of Comics.  The books came out and started moving based on the characters, stories & art.  Early SA Marvels from 1961-1962 did not yet have checklists, Stan's Soapbox, etc., and were selling well.  I'd wager to say the idea of the Marvel Corner Box in the upper left-hand side of the cover was a bigger marketing move then than anything Stan Lee was doing as an extra at that time, and that was an idea from Steve Ditko, it made finding the book you wanted the much easier & quicker on spinner racks. That was marketing genius!

By 1963 Stan Lee was becoming the face of Marvel Comics, and I did enjoy reading his soapbox, editorials & reviewing the monthly checklists, but I was not buying Marvel for Stan Lee's extras, I was buying based on the characters, the art & the stories. 

Edited Tuesday at 12:08 PM by Forbush-Man

[Forbush-Man]

On the being constricted to 8 titles per month claim, I'd like to know if Martin Goodman cut any of his digest pulps & magazines, or other publications he was doing at this time. Red Circle products were being produced & distributed at that time, perhaps someone has information in that area? @Bookery 

If his magazine line were similar in size before & after the Atlas implosion, I would think that to be a strong argument in favor of the comics being driven by staff. 

Edited Tuesday at 12:19 PM by Forbush-Man

[Buzzetta]

So @VintageComics and @Prince Namor, 

Is Stan Lee now more like a Steve Jobs character who has a vision for what he wants even though he did not directly create it? 

 

My copy arrives today. 

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:06 PM, Forbush-Man said:

Just an observation, but Stan Lee's personal touch was added slowly to the books over time, it wasn't there at the beginning of the Marvel Age of Comics.  The books came out and started moving based on the characters, stories & art.  Early SA Marvels from 1961-1962 look did not have checklists, Sytan Soapbox, etc., and were selling well.  I'd wager to say the idea of the Marvel Corner Box in the upper left-hand side of the cover was a bigger marketing move then than anything Stan Lee was doing as an extra, and that was an idea from Steve Ditko, and it made finding the book you wanted the much easier & quicker on spinner racks. 

By 1963 Stan Lee was becoming the face of Marvel Comics, and I did enjoy reading his soapbox, editorials & reviewing the monthly checklists, but I was not buying Marvel for Stan Lee's extras, I was buying based on the characters, the art & the stories. 

Exactly.

In the 70's when I first began reading comics, it didn't make a difference to me at all what was in Stan's Soapbox (I didn't even know it was being ghost written at the time), if I liked a comic, I liked it and if I didn't, I didn't. I always followed my favorite characters - and artists - and was always annoyed when they WEREN'T on the character I wanted to follow. 

I thought most of the Bronze Age Marvel stuff was hideously dumb. As a 12 year old, I wasn't entertained. I collected Amazing Spider-man and Jim Starlin's Captain Marvel (and later Warlock and MSE #15), as well as Dave Cockrum (and then Mike Grell's) Legion of Super Heroes and Jack Kirby's Kamandi. I had a few of the Aparo Spectre stories in Adventure Comics too, that I thought were cool. I'm sure I'm missing something, but in general, I was as uninterested in Superman as I was the Avengers. I tried to read them, I just thought they were somewhat silly.

The idea of 'only Marvel' never even crossed my mind. They had an advantage because of the Marvel Magazine's - I loved Savage Sword of Conan and especially Tales of the Zombie. To me, even at that age, they made the mainstream Marvel and DC stuff look childish.

The first Marvel Zombie I ever encountered was many years later at a local comic shop at college. He was going on and on about how he only collected Marvel titles. I was standing in line buying my books, a month's worth after coming back from Christmas break, and which included all 4 Spidey books, Daredevil (Mazzucchelli issue), Starlin's Dreadstar, Byrne's Fantastic Four, Miracleman, and Nexus.

I just thought, "What a doofus."

Even now it just seems weird to me. To what end, would you limit yourself on reading comics? Duh.It's like saying, "I only watch Channel 4!"

Weird.

[Forbush-Man]

On 9/17/2024 at 5:41 AM, Prince Namor said:

Exactly.

In the 70's when I first began reading comics, it didn't make a difference to me at all what was in Stan's Soapbox (I didn't even know it was being ghost written at the time), if I liked a comic, I liked it and if I didn't, I didn't. I always followed my favorite characters - and artists - and was always annoyed when they WEREN'T on the character I wanted to follow. 

I thought most of the Bronze Age Marvel stuff was hideously dumb. As a 12 year old, I wasn't entertained. I collected Amazing Spider-man and Jim Starlin's Captain Marvel (and later Warlock and MSE #15), as well as Dave Cockrum (and then Mike Grell's) Legion of Super Heroes and Jack Kirby's Kamandi. I had a few of the Aparo Spectre stories in Adventure Comics too, that I thought were cool. I'm sure I'm missing something, but in general, I was as uninterested in Superman as I was the Avengers. I tried to read them, I just thought they were somewhat silly.

The idea of 'only Marvel' never even crossed my mind. They had an advantage because of the Marvel Magazine's - I loved Savage Sword of Conan and especially Tales of the Zombie. To me, even at that age, they made the mainstream Marvel and DC stuff look childish.

The first Marvel Zombie I ever encountered was many years later at a local comic shop at college. He was going on and on about how he only collected Marvel titles. I was standing in line buying my books, a month's worth after coming back from Christmas break, and which included all 4 Spidey books, Daredevil (Mazzucchelli issue), Starlin's Dreadstar, Byrne's Fantastic Four, Miracleman, and Nexus.

I just thought, "What a doofus."

Even now it just seems weird to me. To what end, would you limit yourself on reading comics? Duh.It's like saying, "I only watch Channel 4!"

Weird.

I became a Marvel Zombie after one summer when I bought Tales of Asgard #1 and Silver Surfer #1 & #2.  That pretty much lasted, undisturbed, until Kirby went over to DC Comics in 1970. I rarely bought DC except for Kirby's work.  I did enjoy buying a few others like Green Lantern/Green Arrow by Niel Adams, and whenever a Wrightson cover caught my eye... 

Edited Tuesday at 12:53 PM by Forbush-Man

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:35 PM, Buzzetta said:

So @VintageComics and @Prince Namor, 

Is Stan Lee now more like a Steve Jobs character who has a vision for what he wants even though he did not directly create it? 

 

My copy arrives today. 

No. Stanley had no idea what was coming. They bungled merchandising all throughout the 60's. Lee in interviews at the time doesn't really even know what's going on sometimes in the comics he claims to writing (In the infamous Herald Times article he says, "The Silver Surfer Returns from Outer Space..." The Surfer was BANISHED to earth by Galactus just a few months ago - he couldn't be in space!).

Lee was more of a Oz. A nobody pulling on levers to make a big production to hide the fact that... they were operating by the seat of their pants throughout most of the decade.

The 'bullpen' that Roy refers to is a perfect example. There was NO BULLPEN. Kirby, Ditko, Heck, Ayers.... they were all freelancers - they worked from home. Romita didn't move into an office (or had an office to move into) until around 1966. Marie Severin came on board, early 1965. Herb Trimpe didn't start until, either very late 1966/early 1967. There's your Bullpen of the 60's.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:52 PM, Forbush-Man said:

I became a Marvel Zombie after one summer when I bought Tales of Asgard #1 and Silver Surfer #1 & #2.  That pretty much lasted, undisturbed, until Kirby went over to DC Comics in 1970. I rarely bought DC except for Kirby's work.  I did enjoy buy a few regularly, like Green Lantern/Green Arrow by Niel Adams, and whenever a Wrightson cover caught my eye... 

So that makes you NOT a Zombie. You bought DC books even without it being Kirby. And those are good one's to have bought!

But Stan would be very disappointed...

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/17/2024 at 6:35 AM, ttfitz said:

Take off you hoser, eh?  

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:18 PM, Forbush-Man said:

On the being constricted to 8 titles per month claim, I'd like to know if Martin Goodman cut any of his digest pulps & magazines, or other publications he was doing at this time. Red Circle products were being produced & distributed at that time, perhaps someone has information in that area? @Bookery 

If his magazine line were similar in size before & after the Atlas implosion, I would think that to be a strong argument in favor of the comics being driven by staff. 

Bob Beerbolm seems to have thought they did, but... in talking with artist Drew Friedman via e-mail, his dad, who pretty much ran the Men's Mag department (and wrote his first novel on the train ride home each night) operated undisturbed throughout the Implosion, so... I don't think there was a disturbance of that line. Just my own observation. 

From my Interview with him for my book:

"I can’t really speak for my dad who died two years ago, but he always told me he liked Stan very much. Stan’s office was right next to my dads so they saw each other all day, and he did feel bad for him during those lean years for Atlas comics because he felt the company’s owner Martin Goodman was trying his best to humiliate Stan by constantly downsizing his office and his assistants, attempting to phase out the comics line altogether without actually going as far as firing him, probably because he was the cousin of Goodman’s wife. My dad said he really admired how Stan held on, held his ground, even when he was down to the lone desk in a cubicle, one secretary, and hardly anyone else around him. Of course Stan would later have the last laugh when Marvel exploded in the sixties."

"I don’t think my dad and Stan socialized out of the office but they might have gone out for drinks a few times after office hours."

- Artist Drew Friedman

His dad speaks as if the issue was all comic related, and in no way makes it sound as if HE was going through the same problems in the Men's Magazine department. 

[Bookery]

   On 9/16/2024 at 7:14 PM, Bookery said:  "Lee didn't run Marvel. "

LOL.

Okay, you want to have it both ways, I see.  On one hand, Lee had nothing to do with the success of Marvel... it was all Kirby, but on the other hand, he ran the whole shebang!  An editor is an employee, just like everyone else.  If upper management doesn't like the way things are going, he gets fired.  I'm not a Lee apologist... though it seems you think everyone trying to get a full picture of the history is.  I didn't even like Marvel comics as a kid... I read pretty much everything except Marvel (though that was primarily because I only got to town to buy comics once in awhile, and Marvel's stories were long multi-issue tales whose beginning and endings I never got to see... other publishers at the time were more self-contained).  I ran into Stan Lee in the hall of a convention along with my manager.  He and Stan Lee exchanged greetings, shook hands, and my manager posed for as picture with him (which I took).  But I never said anything to Lee, nor walked up to greet him.  No animosity.  I've just never been impressed by celebrity.  I've had celebrities come into my shop... I never felt it necessary to come out of my office to meet them unless they had a specific question about something.  I like or don't like books by the authors I read, but don't feel the need to meet them personally.  

[Bookery]

On 9/16/2024 at 11:18 PM, Prince Namor said:

You're speculating, as you 'have never read the book'.

All are liberally quoted in the book that you haven't read. 

Well, except for Mitch, at this point in the discussion nobody has read the book since it just came out.  I'm simply responding to what you've written here... in this thread.  I've even appealed to your expertise on a couple of questions for which I honestly didn't know the answers.  Now... maybe we're asking too much... understandably, you might not want to go into too much detail, and give away all the points in your book.  And, as for not reading your book... it would be pointless, at least, without reading "Origins", since you've essentially proclaimed the whole raison d'etre for your book is to respond to that one.  I've tried to put some things into historical perspective, without regard to simply categorizing individuals as heroes and villains (though now that I think about it... maybe this is a natural course for those deeply invested in super-hero mythos).  Everyone has an agenda.  You do, I do, everyone writing here (or simply responding with emojis) certainly does.  My agenda, I suppose, is that I don't like historical events being judged only through the lens of today's moment and culture.  So I mentioned that the "villainy" of not giving credit to creators was pervasive throughout the industry at the time.  If Stan Lee did indeed run roughshod not only over his writers and artists, but apparently over his own superiors and executives at Marvel as well, then I find that interesting and am curious how that went down.  When I raise issues or questions, in a reasonable fashion I believe, I get this...

On 9/16/2024 at 11:18 PM, Prince Namor said:

At this point, it's not worth it.

 

LOL.

 

Ok. Whatever.

So... I'm done.  But in all sincerity, as one writer to another, I wish you well on your sales.  No book is an easy task.  And in fact, whether you are aware of it or not... I think you've picked up a few pointers from Stan himself in the ballyhoo department... you chose a title that screams for for attention, stirred controversy by a contentious and highly emotional response style, and have elicited a multitude of responses both here and at Bleeding Cool.  'Nuff said.

 

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/17/2024 at 2:36 PM, Bookery said:

I think you've picked up a few pointers from Stan himself in the ballyhoo department... you chose a title that screams for for attention, stirred controversy by a contentious and highly emotional response style,

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 8:16 PM, Bookery said:

   On 9/16/2024 at 7:14 PM, Bookery said:  "Lee didn't run Marvel. "

LOL.

Okay, you want to have it both ways, I see.  On one hand, Lee had nothing to do with the success of Marvel...

I didn't claim that. Never have claimed that. Never would claim that.

I'll say it again, for maybe the 10th time on this forum:

"Marvel Comics wouldn't have been the same, without Stan Lee. But without Jack Kirby, they never would've existed in the first place."

On 9/17/2024 at 8:16 PM, Bookery said:

 

it was all Kirby,

I didn't claim that either. Never have claimed that. Never would claim that.

On 9/17/2024 at 8:16 PM, Bookery said:

but on the other hand, he ran the whole shebang!  An editor is an employee, just like everyone else.  If upper management doesn't like the way things are going, he gets fired. 

Upper management was the Owner. That's it. And the owner was his cousin's husband. Lee was as safe in his job as you can be. 

On 9/17/2024 at 8:16 PM, Bookery said:

I'm not a Lee apologist... though it seems you think everyone trying to get a full picture of the history is. 

I never claimed that. Or thought it. 

On 9/17/2024 at 8:16 PM, Bookery said:

I didn't even like Marvel comics as a kid... I read pretty much everything except Marvel (though that was primarily because I only got to town to buy comics once in awhile, and Marvel's stories were long multi-issue tales whose beginning and endings I never got to see... other publishers at the time were more self-contained).  I ran into Stan Lee in the hall of a convention along with my manager.  He and Stan Lee exchanged greetings, shook hands, and my manager posed for as picture with him (which I took).  But I never said anything to Lee, nor walked up to greet him.  No animosity.  I've just never been impressed by celebrity.  I've had celebrities come into my shop... I never felt it necessary to come out of my office to meet them unless they had a specific question about something.  I like or don't like books by the authors I read, but don't feel the need to meet them personally.  

Ok.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/17/2024 at 8:36 PM, Bookery said:

Well, except for Mitch, at this point in the discussion nobody has read the book since it just came out.  I'm simply responding to what you've written here... in this thread.  I've even appealed to your expertise on a couple of questions for which I honestly didn't know the answers.  Now... maybe we're asking too much... understandably, you might not want to go into too much detail, and give away all the points in your book.  And, as for not reading your book... it would be pointless, at least, without reading "Origins", since you've essentially proclaimed the whole raison d'etre for your book is to respond to that one.  I've tried to put some things into historical perspective, without regard to simply categorizing individuals as heroes and villains (though now that I think about it... maybe this is a natural course for those deeply invested in super-hero mythos).  Everyone has an agenda.  You do, I do, everyone writing here (or simply responding with emojis) certainly does.  My agenda, I suppose, is that I don't like historical events being judged only through the lens of today's moment and culture.  So I mentioned that the "villainy" of not giving credit to creators was pervasive throughout the industry at the time.  If Stan Lee did indeed run roughshod not only over his writers and artists, but apparently over his own superiors and executives at Marvel as well, then I find that interesting and am curious how that went down.  When I raise issues or questions, in a reasonable fashion I believe, I get this...

He went behind Martin Goodman's back to Cadence Industries (according to Roy Thomas) and convinced them to push Goodman's son Chip out of that position (fire him) and that HE should be Publisher because he created all the characters.

Goodman was furious and that's the reason he decided to suddenly publish comics again. He'd given Lee a cush job for 20 years, then DIDN'T fire him when he did nothing to save the company and then LET him basically run things for the last 10 years. Only to get stabbed in the back. I believe... Lee said they never really talked in Goodman's last few years of life. 

On 9/17/2024 at 8:36 PM, Bookery said:

So... I'm done.  But in all sincerity, as one writer to another, I wish you well on your sales.  No book is an easy task.  And in fact, whether you are aware of it or not... I think you've picked up a few pointers from Stan himself in the ballyhoo department... you chose a title that screams for for attention, stirred controversy by a contentious and highly emotional response style, and have elicited a multitude of responses both here and at Bleeding Cool.  'Nuff said.

Thank you. 

I was never really influenced by Lee's hype. Too many 'Greatest story you'll read this month!' on a Romita drawn cover, then follwed with Interior art by Bob Brown with Vince Colletta inks.

My two favorite hype machines growing up were David Lee Roth in the orginal Van Halen and the National Football League. They both made exciting presentations and they both generally delivered what they promised. 

[jimjum12]

On 9/17/2024 at 10:42 AM, Prince Namor said:

David Lee Roth in the orginal Van Halen

That was probably the lousiest concert I ever saw ... couldn't differentiate from one song to another. Just LOTS of noise. Different strokes, I guess. ...Now, YES, the Stones, Allman Brothers, and even the Jackson 5, now you're talking. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Just for old time's sake...

Marvel without Kirby wouldn't have been the same, without Stan Lee, it wouldn't have existed at all ... you had it backwards. 

Edited Tuesday at 03:14 PM by jimjum12