Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics' 11 11

[Silver Surfer]

The book might be spot on, who knows, but the way the writer viewpoint was presented here makes me not want to buy the book. Just sayin. 

[Albert Tatlock]

This thread is a great ringside seat.

Keep it up, fellas, and remember, protect yourself at all times.

 

[JollyComics]

On 10/18/2024 at 9:53 AM, VintageComics said:

I would just like to point out that I haven't received any strikes or warnings from this thread and that makes me happy. 

How many days since you were suspended?

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 2:07 AM, sfcityduck said:

Kirby created Iron Man. He didn't create or work on the Spider-Man book. There's no "proof" he gave Lee a single idea used in ASM. In fact, Kirby says he didn't do any work on the book. And yet think its "very likely"? That's just an assertion that is unsupported by anything other than your hunch -- which even Kirby would not support.

Jack did do ST Annual 2 and half of ASM 8. I always admired those, but Ditko they ain't. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[VintageComics]

On 10/18/2024 at 12:32 PM, JollyComics said:

How many days since you were suspended?

Days?!?!? It's been MONTHS!  

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 2:09 AM, sfcityduck said:

Neither one of us is bullying by "a barrage of posts." 

 

[CGC Mike]

On 10/18/2024 at 12:49 PM, VintageComics said:

On 10/18/2024 at 12:32 PM, JollyComics said:

How many days since you were suspended?

Days?!?!? It's been MONTHS!  

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 3:04 AM, bronze_rules said:

ditko and maybe Stan a very distant second. The fact we can find images that resemble Peter Parker in earlier Kirby work doesn't mean much.

This is only my opinion, but I don't really see Ditko being the sole catalyst for the HS angst and humanistic approach to ASM's characterization, as he never really did much of that theme, if any, outside of ASM. Lee's daughter J.C. was, however, in Junior High and High School when this was all happening. They say writers feed off of what's around them, but that would spoil the narrative a bit, you know, all that annoying reality. I do think the 5 pager O Henry type stories were a lot Ditko, as he was churning out that sort of anthology fare both before and after Stan. His heroic fantasy stuff was limited to Captain Atom, Mysterious Traveller, Blue Beetle, and Creeper, none of which had much of the tongue in cheek spirit that PERMEATED the ASM work. Melodrama and sensationalism were hallmarks of both Ditko and Kirby's solo efforts, with little to no humor. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

*ahem* I hate to be always right, it's just what I'm used to, but Stan was "fun at parties" and Steve and Jack were both buzzkills, overthinking. even perhaps their own grocery lists.

 

 

Edited Friday at 07:27 PM by jimjum12

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 7:47 AM, Zonker said:

But if Lee only added those flourishes later on, are they still part of the creation of the character, or instead only subsequent refinements of a character already "created?"  Because we don't see either in the first published appearances of Doctor Strange or Thor.  I'm trying to wrap my own mind around the question of whether a character creation happens all at once, or is actually an evolving thing over a period of time.  

No easy answer.

GOD BLESS.... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

I personally thought that the character continued to evolve and gestate for the first decade, and that Romita added as much as anyone did to the spirit of it.

[Zonker]

On 10/18/2024 at 1:21 PM, jimjum12 said:

No easy answer.

GOD BLESS.... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

I personally thought that the character continued to evolve and gestate for the first decade, and that Romita added as much as anyone did to the spirit of it.

Next, let's do DC's Sgt. Rock.   

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 8:25 AM, comicwiz said:

This topic is subject to further analysis in an FB group post from yesterday, particularly in relation to Bill Everett and Daredevil #1

"DAREDEVIL #1 original art has Bill Everett's border notes for Lee but also shows Everett's penciled lettering in the balloon and caption areas.  Odd because if Everett was working from a full script why would Everett include border notes? 

In addition Everett did the inked lettering as evidenced in places where a paste-up lettered by Sam Rosen has fallen off. 
Lee doesn't make any changes to Everett's text in this case. Lee simply has Rosen write out the same words in a different style. 

Everett's border notes, penciled lettering on the page and Everett being the original inked letterer suggests it's not unlikely Everett wrote DAREDEVIL #1. 
Other pages from the published story show considerable evidence of tampering with a number of whole panels having been pasted down over top of artwork which is now hidden beneath the new panel. Page 13 is a good example with five panels having been pasted over with new art."

"The fact Everett completed the story including the lettering tells us Lee blaming Everett being late is a lie. We know Everett lettered several of the pages because the paste-overs have fallen off. Since Everett also inked the story and inking is done after lettering that means Everett penciled, lettered, inked and probably wrote a complete story he turned in to Lee. The delay was caused by Lee not Everett. Lee blaming Everett also resulted in numerous fans and "historians" feeling the need to blame the lateness on Everett having a drinking problem.
My assumption is Everett left the title not because he blew a deadline and was replaced but because Lee wanted the writing money."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My take: I'll leave it for the board members to decide if this reveals more proof that Lee was only doing dialogue and nothing else. 

AND IF TRUE that Everett was unfairly blamed, then that's a pretty heinous thing to have done to blame Everett for being late due to having a drinking problem. Both inexusable, and indefensible IMO.

We learn of Bill Everett's career in the book Fire & Water, but also about Daredevil #1's "lateness" through a post in 2011 by Tom Brevoort

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ESO Network April 13 2011:

"Tom Brevoort, currently Marvel’s senior vice president of publishing, has been answering fan questions over on formspring, and he recently revealed that the whole reason an Avengers comic had to be created was because Daredevil #1 was late."

According to Brevoort:

"Bill Everett, with whom Stan co-created Daredevil, had both a day job and a drinking problem. And so production on Daredevil #1 fell way behind. In those days, you booked print time way ahead of time--and if your book wasn't ready, you paid for the printing time anyway. So it was vital to get something to press on time. But Bill Everett was a favorite of Martin Goodman, stemming back to the 40s when he created the Sub-Mariner."

As a fan of literature and the written word, I will often mention theme, tone, voice, and spirit, when comparing one wordsmith to another. As has been said before, NONE of us were there, but I've read that Everett both penciled, plotted AND dialogued the Sub Mariner revival of #33-42. That being said, I have NO problema in recognizing a similar tone, voice, and spirit in DD 1 that parallels Everett's earlier work. One chief characteristic it lacks, as an aside, is San Lee's zany undercurrent that was mostly ALL his own. GOD BLESS...

jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Stan loved working with Everett, and I'm sure he would have offered Bill the moon to lure him from his stable and lucrative advertising career, unlike Kirby, who showed up bawling and begging after D.C. had put the foot upside his rump and his wife was, allegedly, packing to go home to mama.

 

Fun fact for today, Everett also lettered much of his Timely and Atlas work, being an early work-at-home freelancer, making it easier for him to get his drink on. 

Edited Friday at 06:11 PM by jimjum12

[JollyComics]

On 10/18/2024 at 11:49 AM, VintageComics said:

Days?!?!? It's been MONTHS!  

I think 4 months or 120 days.  Great job!!! 

Edited Friday at 05:40 PM by JollyComics

[VintageComics]

On 10/17/2024 at 1:30 AM, Prince Namor said:

Or you could just look at the quality of work the two people did outside of each other and see the difference.

Not based upon how Stan Lee fans view it - just in terms of how creative it is.

Lee before Kirby and Lee after Kirby... didn't have any creativity. He didn't do anything. 

You keep reiterating that you're not saying Stan didn't contribute to the success of Marvel, but you also consistently say Stan wasn't creative when it comes to the creation of the characters.

Is that your position more or less?

[JollyComics]

On 10/18/2024 at 12:46 PM, VintageComics said:

You keep reiterating that you're not saying Stan didn't contribute to the success of Marvel, but you also consistently say Stan wasn't creative when it comes to the creation of the characters.

Is that your position more or less?

Have you bought his book?

[jimjum12]

On 10/18/2024 at 9:31 AM, CGC Mike said:

Easy guys.  Maybe it's time to agree to disagree...

OR ....

 

[VintageComics]

On 10/17/2024 at 10:32 AM, Zonker said:

On 10/17/2024 at 9:44 AM, sfcityduck said:

What happened in issues of ASM have zero relevance to the creation of Spider-Man because Kirby admits he was not involved in any issues of ASM;

Here I think you're not doing justice to the Stan Taylor / Chuck Gower argument.  As far as we know, Kirby never spoke directly to Ditko about his Spiderman concept or the eventual Amazing Spider-Man, and from what I've read of Ditko's writings, his only contact was Stan.  So it is possible that some of what wound up in early issues of ASM was the result of either Kirby's original pitch to Stan, or a pre-ASM plotting conference Stan & Jack had before the concept was ever brought to Ditko.  I believe the argument is it was Kirby's ideas that were transmitted to Ditko via one or more of the Stan synopses.  We can argue the strength of the evidence for making that claim, but the claim doesn't require Kirby to be knowingly feeding Ditko with ideas, or for Ditko to maintain his own comic collection. I'm not entirely convinced that Kirby is the source of most of what Stan brought to Ditko's Amazing Spider-Man, but it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

So you're saying Stan was a conduit between all of the creatives at Marvel?

As editor, that makes sense, and this aligns with how I pictured Stan working - constant discussions, back and forths and massaging of ideas until they hit print. 

I've always pictured Stan as the main information highway at early Marvel, tying it all together and so far, nothing in this discussion has contradicted that concept.

Also worth pointing out that it's very hard to do in just a few '5 minute meetings' (because there was an assertion that all Stan did was a few minute meetings a day early on in this thread) which I think is absurd, to put that sort of time limit to attempt to plot out Stan's day.

Edited Saturday at 04:15 PM by VintageComics

[grendel013]

On 10/18/2024 at 9:31 AM, CGC Mike said:

Easy guys.  Maybe it's time to agree to disagree...

 

[Iconic1s]

This thread is amazing!  I love the book but have really enjoyed the back and forth between opposing viewpoints here…

I haven’t seen anything here yet that will make me a Stan Lee fan once again.  I think I said around page 3 or 4 that I was a fan until I started hearing rumors and then did my own research… Alan Moore’s thoughts on the subject are what sold me that all was not as Stan had said.

I have tried to read this thread with an open mind (not sure how successful I have been at that) and like I already said… I’m even more convinced now that he lied.  But now I understand just how much and have a better sense of who those lies hurt.

Besides arguing over the meaning of “recent” or “the” I believe that intuition is pretty important to human beings.  I was always disgusted how Stan carried himself in a perpetual state of self-gratification as he asserted over and over again how amazing he was and how all should worship his creative genius.  It was pretty disgusting, but then again I was never a good at buying what people like that were selling.

He sure did a number on everyone though… imagine if he had been just a little honorable in how he treated people he had authority over!  If he had, there certainly wouldn’t be the ambiguity we see today and people still arguing over the context of everything everyone said, exactly the words used, when said.. and what was written in the margins…

If he was decent there would be no question of who did what and when.  This is actually some pretty sad stuff all around.  Fans still confused and misled well after his death… maybe in denial… defending or looking for an excuse for him.

In light of everything, my gut says he just wasn’t a good dude… I’m gonna leave this thread now because I know all I need to know.

[Mmehdy]

On 10/18/2024 at 11:02 AM, VintageComics said:

So you're saying Stan was a conduit between all of the creatives at Marvel?

As editor, that makes sense, and this aligns with how I pictured Stan working - constant discussions, back and forths and massaging of ideas until they hit print. 

I've always pictured Stan as the main information highway at early Marvel, tying it all together and so far, nothing in this discussion has contracted that concept.

Also worth pointing out that it's very hard to do in just a few '5 minute meetings' (because there was an assertion that all Stan did was a few minute meetings a day early on in this thread) which I think is absurd, to put that sort of time limit to attempt to plot out Stan's day.

Whatever Stan says...take it with grain of salt. Stan Lee does not exist in the real world, what has been blown up, hyped up( he is hid  #1 cheerleader), and over decades of unanswered origin of marvel comics, son of origin's of Marvel comics myth building, it has been blown down by the "Stan Lee Lied" book. Yes, it has taken a number of persons to resist what was spoon fed to you over the years...that your hero...is not really a hero...but cardboard.

 No credibility here what so ever ....you can nick pic  Jack and Steve and John R all you wants VC...but the bottom line here is that Stan created slowed and probably in his own mind the fact that everything except the Silver Surfer originated from the "house of ideas" himself...Stan the Man....

 Look at it this way: The "house of ideas" implies a collective....but the Origin of Marvel comics.....a big step to tilting everything in his direction. After reading this book, I went back and looked at old Stan Lee interviews....and wow I came away with a much different reaction, especially the interview with young lady......

he was spinning up the spin....a pretty amazing thing.......

 I will say this, he knew probably with the sales number that they were on to something big.. very early on, before Jack and Steve had a clue how big this was gonna get .and what does he do....he puts his name on everything...even the Spiderman issues he had nothing to with.

 Here is my challenge to everyone on this board....Read the book, and go back for yourself and rewatch 3/4 over the years of his last interviews......you are gonna have a feeling of being let down, or lied to....but at least you can understand the truth.......

 

Edited Friday at 07:07 PM by Mmehdy

[Zonker]

On 10/18/2024 at 2:02 PM, VintageComics said:

So you're saying Stan was a conduit between all of the creatives at Marvel?

 

It's not really me saying it, but sure, that's possible.  It's also possible that Kirby departed from his usual write-everything-as-I'm drawing-it mode, and that his "blitz" of new characters for Marvel included sample plotlines for the first 4 or 5 issues, just to demonstrate how his ideas could be played out into ongoing series that would have legs.  Unlike say "Fireman Farrell" at DC, who headlined the first issue of Showcase and then was never heard from again.

Note, I'm not saying that's what happened with Spidey.  Were I to do so, I'm pretty sure @sfcityduck would point out I'd be assuming facts not in evidence.  And we'll have none of that here, thank you very much.