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

[comicwiz]

On 9/21/2024 at 11:20 AM, VintageComics said:

Kirby's 40s and 50s success was based on a partnership with Simon and his 60's success was based on a partnership with Lee. The difference was that Simon was more forthcoming with Kirby's credit toward his work, but it always took someone to channel Kirby's visceral output of art to make him the most successful person he could be. That's all anyone disagreeing with you is trying to say and every time someone brings that point home it's dismissed, reduced or put on the backburner. I see Simon and Lee as having similar roles in Kirby's life.

I'll agree to disagree, especially on the part about "channeling Kirby's visceral output" - whatever that means.

Byrne without Austin is ordinary. And I would argue, a decline evident in the work he decided he needed to ink himself. Why, one can only go by fandoms viewpoints on this. This is a mistake I can empathize with as well, because I don't like the thought of lines being moved on my work, but in Byrne's case, it really departed to the point where it was noticebly lesser in quality. Collectors have spoken, because you see a MASSIVELY marked difference in the way his Austin inked OA is valued compared to the stuff he inked himself. I don't really need the validation of what the artists thought, because the fans have settled that argument. This marked condition simply does not exist with Kirby's work, early or later, it's all treated in the highest regard of cartooniing titan and King.

Edited 7 hours ago by comicwiz

[comicwiz]

On 9/21/2024 at 11:34 AM, sfcityduck said:

Glad you now recognize it. The points in my above post explain why the question was reasonable - hope you see that too.

I did, and I omitted them deliberately. If you can't see how they contradict one another, then I'd rather leave it at you at least acknowledging you accepted his answer. I'm not Bleeding Cool either, but if I was, you'd be answering to a lot more.

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/21/2024 at 7:16 AM, Inhuman Fiend said:

An obsessive vendetta that serves no useful purpose other than creating division among comic fans? 

[Prince Namor]

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

What benefit has this had at all throughout the entire conversation?

 

The same reason as to why Lennon or McCartney weren't ever as successful without each other. 

 

Mark Evanier - assistant to Jack Kirby: "Joe handled the business relationships. He was a very good editor. He was very good at talking to publishers."

Steve Sherman - assistant to Jack Kirby: "Joe handled the business because he had a very different background than Jack did. Joe was from upstate New York. He had gone to college. He had a better grasp of business than Jack did because Jack never really had to get involved in business because of his environment."

Source - Jack Kirby: Storyteller documentary

 

Jack Kirby's output was his gift and it was also his shortcoming. Not everything he put out was hugely successful (Fourth World) even if it was appreciated by Kirby fans in much the same way that not everything Frank Miller put out was appreciated as much by non-Miller fans but still adored by people who had an emotional attachment to Miller.

Kirby's 40s and 50s success was based on a partnership with Simon and his 60's success was based on a partnership with Lee. The difference was that Simon was more forthcoming with Kirby's credit toward his work, but it always took someone to channel Kirby's visceral output of art to make him the most successful person he could be. That's all anyone disagreeing with you is trying to say and every time someone brings that point home it's dismissed, reduced or put on the backburner. I see Simon and Lee as having similar roles in Kirby's life.

LOL

[Bookery]

On 9/21/2024 at 11:52 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

Hardly.  Historically, lies about persons or people have caused far more division and harm.  There was, after all, that whole Holocaust thing and all... 

[Dr. Balls]

 

On 9/20/2024 at 4:22 PM, Lazyboy said:

Another? Who was the first?

William Randolph Hearst. He ran his media empire from 1887 to 1940 - at the end, he had a very different outcome than Stan. There may be others, but Hearst is the obvious first, with Lee being the second. At least in my opinion.

[jdandns]

Are we sure Stan Lee actually wrote the "Origins" book, though? Maybe someone else did, like a ghost writer? He was pretty busy at the time.

Looking back on the 1960's Marvel stories now, they're generally pretty weak whoever wrote them, which I could already sort of tell as a kid reading comics in the 80's who'd sometimes happen across Silver Age originals and reprints. Even the high water mark, Spider-Man (which I read monthly, in order, when re-published in 80s' Marvel Tales), had great art and dialogue, but the stories were only so-so. Stan was a great pitchman, though, and was always good at selling less than quality material. I think that was his biggest contribution to comics, an ever-smiling public face and an encouraging attitude toward his readers. His spoken intros to the early 80's Saturday Morning Spidey cartoon were enormous to my generation. I can't imagine that good will fades for any substantial portion of us, despite his known shortcomings. 

"True Believer: Rise And Fall of Stan Lee" (Riesman) is a thorough look at all of this, and along with "Marvel Comics: The Untold Story" (Howe), the full story is related. Both are well-written in an objective style of writing, even when the information presented is damning. 

Now, none of you fellas think Stan didn't actually write the Vera Valiant newspaper strip, do you?

    ...cuz that would kill me.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

The same reason as to why Lennon or McCartney weren't ever as successful without each other. 

Lennon and McCartney were both extremely successful outside of the Beatles.

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

Mark Evanier - assistant to Jack Kirby: "Joe handled the business relationships. He was a very good editor. He was very good at talking to publishers."

Steve Sherman - assistant to Jack Kirby: "Joe handled the business because he had a very different background than Jack did. Joe was from upstate New York. He had gone to college. He had a better grasp of business than Jack did because Jack never really had to get involved in business because of his environment."

Source - Jack Kirby: Storyteller documentary

And?

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

Jack Kirby's output was his gift and it was also his shortcoming.

LOL.

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

Not everything he put out was hugely successful (Fourth World) even if it was appreciated by Kirby fans 

How are you measuring success? 

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

Kirby's 40s and 50s success was based on a partnership with Simon and his 60's success was based on a partnership with Lee.

How do you explain Challenegrs of the Unknown then?

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

The difference was that Simon was more forthcoming with Kirby's credit toward his work,

What???

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 PM, VintageComics said:

but it always took someone to channel Kirby's visceral output of art to make him the most successful person he could be. That's all anyone disagreeing with you is trying to say and every time someone brings that point home it's dismissed, reduced or put on the backburner. I see Simon and Lee as having similar roles in Kirby's life.

Well good for you.

[Bookery]

On 9/21/2024 at 11:38 AM, Mmehdy said:

Back in the day, one of the major pulp heros...you could say the Doc Savage ad...had a superman effect on the comic book....so I get your point...EVERYONE WAS STEALING FROM EVERYONE.....makes sense

"Stealing" might be a bit harsh.  But you've noticed I've stayed away from the parts of the thread about who did what first, or who stole credit from whom.  I've chimed in when I felt there were misconceptions about the publishing world at the time, or there were some historical gaps presented.  Or I simply had questions that piqued my curiosity.  But maybe there's a good reason that by far the "heroes" or "giants" or whatever you want to call them in this industry stem overwhelmingly from the art side rather than the writing.  I am hard-pressed to think of anything in comics... at least in hero-adventure comics -- that didn't come directly out of the pulps.  Pulps were written for older teens and adults, and I think the goal of the golden-age period in particular was to take (or "steal") all of these ideas, dumb them down for a younger audience, and illustrate them in bold colors to get that age group's attention.

If you see a broader context of popular culture history, it becomes difficult to assemble the kind of passion one sees for determining who was responsible for what comics creation when in the end... whether it was Lee or Kirby or Simon or whomever... it was pretty much all swiped from someone else altogether.

[Krismusic]

On 9/14/2024 at 7:06 PM, Prince Namor said:

LIE #3.7

 

“Just for kicks, I wanted to try something different… for a while I’d been toying with the idea of doing a strip that would violate all the conventions - break all the rules. A strip that would actually feature a teenager as the star, instead of making him an (ugh!) adult hero’s sidekick.”

 

Wow! A teen age superhero who wasn’t a sidekick?

You mean like Superboy, who’d been one of the best selling comics since it first hit the stands 13 YEARS AGO (1949)? That currently outsold the JLA, who you say you based the FF on by DOUBLE the monthly sales (655,000 to 335,000)?

That kind of comic that featured a teenager who wasn’t a side kick?

Or what about Charlie Biro’s ‘Crimebuster’, in Boy Comics? He fights crime to avenge the death of his parents, dressed in a hockey uniform, and attending high school. He also has a pet monkey named Squeeks. His stories ran in Boy Comics for 14 years (1942-1956, over 100 issues)!

What about the Legion of Superheroes? That was a whole TEAM of Teenage Superheroes from throughout the entire universe! Created in 1958, the Legion had made at least 12 appearances by the time Spider-Man first appeared.

What about Captain Marvel Jr., who appeared solo in his own comic book from 1942 to 1953 (11 years)? (With some of those early Mac Raboy covers!!

Kid Eternity for Quality Comics had his own series for 3 years - the Star Spangled Kid appeared in Star Spangled Comics from 1941 to 1948 - along with Jack Kirby and Joe Simon’s Newsboy Legion from 1942 to 1946.

This is yet another instance of Stan Lee claiming something and no one in the media knowing enough about comics to call him out on it. And we’d see it year after year and decade after decade - Lee throwing around unchecked claims that even comic fans knew weren’t true, and the media completely allowed to pass.

They had no clue.

If this is from your book i don't think it does a good job of arguing a point you taking Stan Lee saying of that he wanted to try something different from what he was doing, doesn't sound like he claimed his the first to do a teenage star instead of a sidekick... Also super boy could still be considered a sidekick in superman stories. I don't think you can call a Lie of something someone thought of its not really a statement just a description of his thoughts and/or action your kinda of imposing extra statements assumed into his saying.

That's how i see it, just keeping a open and healthy debate about some of your writing is all. Hopefully as i dig through the forum you have some more convincing or better arguments to support your books title and statement of the Lies told. As this one isn't really a lie in my eye unless there's missing sentences not quoted in your quote that better support your argument.

[jimjum12]

On 9/21/2024 at 1:11 PM, Bookery said:

and I think the goal of the golden-age period in particular was to take (or "steal") all of these ideas, dumb them down for a younger audience, and illustrate them in bold colors to get that age group's attention.

Though not this, at least until the Bronze Age  GOD BLESS ...

-jmbo(a friend of jesus)

 

[Bookery]

On 9/21/2024 at 1:53 PM, jimjum12 said:

Though not this, at least until the Bronze Age  GOD BLESS ...

-jmbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Are you trying to say "Satan's Roadhouse" didn't become a comic hit?  

However... I do think comics did steal this stuff a bit sooner than the Bronze Age (E.C.) 

[jimjum12]

On 9/21/2024 at 1:59 PM, Bookery said:

Are you trying to say "Satan's Roadhouse" didn't become a comic hit?  

However... I do think comics did steal this stuff a bit sooner than the Bronze Age (E.C.) 

Absolutely right. That's why the assertion of a comic pro creating anything is laughable. For a while there, no names, I knew what would be comiicg up in a few months by what was published in the current issue of Discover. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Edited 4 hours ago by jimjum12

[DC#]

This topic (current and historical versions of it) would seem to be very similar to our current political landscape in US.    Small percentage of undecided voters who say little while the opposing views shout at each other despite almost no chance of ever changing the others mind.  

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/21/2024 at 4:52 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

This is the kind of nonsense that is seen constantly on Facebook, with people posting 'meaningful' memes about their take on life.

What's next? Pictures of a plate of toast?

Banal at best. Lazy, unintelligent and trite, not to mention inane at worst.

Stick to emojis!  

Edited 4 hours ago by Paul © ® ⚽️💙™
ytpo

[Bookery]

As for the Fantastic Four... which kicked off all of Marvel... it seems a bit silly to worry about the nitty gritty of who came up with what, because it's pretty obvious everything about it was a cobbling together of other people's ideas.

The core concept was no doubt inspired by The Cosmic Monsters which came out just 3 years prior, and was about a scientist whose accident with cosmic rays creates mutations in animals surrounding the lab.  The Invisible Girl goes back to H.G. Wells, and probably more directly from 1940's The Invisible Woman.  Mr. Fantastic is a rip-off of Plastic Man.  The Human Torch revisits Marvel's own golden-age Human Torch (created by Carl Burgos before Simon & Kirby ever arrived at Marvel) obviously, and The Thing looks almost exactly like The Hideous Sun Demon from the 1958 movie.  Besides a long litany of pulp "borrowings", it appears that Marvel itself would never have existed without more than a few trips to the Drive-In!

[KCOComics]

On 9/21/2024 at 12:35 PM, jdandns said:

Are we sure Stan Lee actually wrote the "Origins" book, though? Maybe someone else did, like a ghost writer? He was pretty busy at the time.

 

I bet Kirby actually wrote it and Stan put his name on it!! 

 

 

[Albert Tatlock]

https://jeetheer.substack.com/p/podcast-steve-ditko-spider-man-and

As this podcast explains, the heirs and successors of Kirby, Ditko and others still hope to obtain something of what Lee and Goodman promised them.

History repeats itself, as Siegel and Shuster can attest.

Edited 2 hours ago by Albert Tatlock
correct typo

[sfcityduck]

On 9/21/2024 at 8:42 AM, comicwiz said:

I did, and I omitted them deliberately. If you can't see how they contradict one another, then I'd rather leave it at you at least acknowledging you accepted his answer. I'm not Bleeding Cool either, but if I was, you'd be answering to a lot more.

I'd suggest you learn a bit more about the topics under discussion before you wrongly imply I or anyone else has committed defamation or should be "answering" to Bleeding Cool.

Bleeding Cool has a whole archive of articles under the heading "Sponsored by Heritage." They are all articles about auction items being sold by Heritage. They include articles about the Promise Collection which appear to be news articles unless you look at the tags and see the "Heritage Sponsored" tag at the top of the article. 

Here's a link to the archive: https://bleedingcool.com/sponsored/heritage-sponsored/

Here's a link to a "Heritage Sponsored" article on the Promise Collection: https://bleedingcool.com/comics/the-promise-collection-one-of-the-greatest-comic-finds-of-all-time/

Feel free to apologize. We all make mistakes and admitting them is always a good idea. I certainly have done so repeatedly on this site. So no shame.

[bronze_rules]

On 9/21/2024 at 6:54 AM, Bookery said:

So now we've had all of this discussion.  With all of the data and the opinions and the back and forth, surely we can determine who actually created the concept of a Spider Man?  After all... it's pretty revolutionary.  A spider had always previously been tied to villainy, not heroism (the Spider-woman in the Sherlock Holmes movie, for example).  So can we just finally settle who it was...

Was it Stan Lee?

Was it Steve Ditko?

Was it Jack Kirby?

 

No, no and no.

 

In truth, it was Harry Steeger.

 

with a touch of Ben Cooper for the costume? Poor Ben never got to see the billions tied to his creation.