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

[Prince Namor]

So Roy ( @VintageComics ) is saying that... despite some who may find it to be a scam that took advantage of freelance talent... we must look at the SUCCESS of the system as to what is really important. If it produced results, it must be ok? Morally, who cares, as long as bg bucks are made?

I've heard this from Lee apologists over the years and it still BAFFLES me...

If many great musical artists... let's use Prince or Kurt Cobain from Nirvana... grew up in an abusive environment as a kid, BUT the end result produced great art. Is it then, ACCEPTABLE to allow that to go on, so that.... ya know... we can get some good music? How is it different?

If some employees at CGC decide to shift some grades around and throw some big submitters some grade love... big money is made - they're successful. Is that acceptable?

Honor. Honesty. Doing what's Right. Being a stand up guy. A Hand Shake means something. Stabbing people in the back.

Nah.

None of that matters, as long as I got mine!

Wow.

 

"I love the free market of ideas. Their entanglement allows you to uncover all the angles and really get to the heart of a matter. 

Glad we got all that straightened out. " - Roy

Indeed.

[Silver Surfer]

Great marketing job. 

[Prince Namor]

On 10/20/2024 at 6:02 AM, Silver Surfer said:

Great marketing job. 

It is. Every day I sell more copies. 

It's weird - the MORE people come at me in here... the more sales go up. The days that the back and forth get to their most extreme are my best sales days.

The only one's actually OFFENDED here are the Stan Lee apologists. THEY weren't going to buy a book anyway. What do I care?

You may THINK it's working against me. It's truly not. It's working in my favor.

The fact that no one's been able to refute a single thing I've said really helps.

So thanks for the pat on the back, I appreciate it!

[Silver Surfer]

Time to pull the pin on this thread. You took the bait and showed your true motivation. The title of the book should read, Stan Lee Lied and after reading this thread no one cared…

[Prince Namor]

On 10/20/2024 at 7:34 AM, Silver Surfer said:

Time to pull the pin on this thread. You took the bait and showed your true motivation. The title of the book should read, Stan Lee Lied and after reading this thread no one cared…

Yawn.

[Mmehdy]

On 10/19/2024 at 5:34 PM, Silver Surfer said:

Time to pull the pin on this thread. You took the bait and showed your true motivation. The title of the book should read, Stan Lee Lied and after reading this thread no one cared…

If you lived thru any of the great marvel ages.  1960-65, 65-01, etc you care about its history. The spin Stan Lee gave it is OVER. The book Stan Lee Lied should of said many many times. If Stan is your hero, you can deny reality.......I care about the truth, and what really took place in the house of ideas.....to create and sustain character creation and story line, that today is looked back upon with greatness.

This was a very brave book, which goes against the currents, the disney's spin, the Lee spin and the origin of marvel comics spin.......

This is not just an ordinary thread, it is a game changer...which is why SS you read it and will continue to read it, as we are both learning about the real marvel comics history and I find it somewhat amusing that your name SS is the only solo credited character that Stan Lee admitted that it was a Jack Kirby creation. The back and forth debate shows just how powerful these concepts are....

 The world moves on, I agree, but not before rewriting history the way it should have been all along.

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/19/2024 at 5:34 PM, Silver Surfer said:

Time to pull the pin on this thread

[Silver Surfer]

So lame.

[Mmehdy]

On 10/19/2024 at 6:58 PM, Silver Surfer said:

So lame.

The truth can be a hard thing to accept...I understand that. But Chad did not go out into his 300 plus page investigation cherry picking things for his point of view. The evidence was out there just waiting for someone to put the pieces together. This reconstruction takes months and months on the silver age board, one of the best posts ever...on a timeline. For those who have not read the book, I direct  all of you to his SA theads..but be warned they are powerful evidence...issue by issue of the  Lie/Con that his been repeated over and over, year after year. SO, SS I challenge to take a look at those, if you are not going to buy the best read out there on comic book history for 2024....just read some them and come back in this thead with your best game!

Edited Sunday at 02:26 AM by Mmehdy

[Prince Namor]

On 10/20/2024 at 8:49 AM, Mmehdy said:

If you lived thru any of the great marvel ages.  1960-65, 65-01, etc you care about its history. The spin Stan Lee gave it is OVER. The book Stan Lee Lied should of said many many times. If Stan is your hero, you can deny reality.......I care about the truth, and what really took place in the house of ideas.....to create and sustain character creation and story line, that today is looked back upon with greatness.

This was a very brave book, which goes against the currents, the disney's spin, the Lee spin and the origin of marvel comics spin.......

This is not just an ordinary thread, it is a game changer...which is why SS you read it and will continue to read it, as we are both learning about the real marvel comics history and I find it somewhat amusing that your name SS is the only solo credited character that Stan Lee admitted that it was a Jack Kirby creation. The back and forth debate shows just how powerful these concepts are....

 The world moves on, I agree, but not before rewriting history the way it should have been all along.

Thank you, Mitch. This thread has even given me ideas for my next book...

[Prince Namor]

On 10/19/2024 at 11:28 PM, sfcityduck said:

Carry on I have to focus on my father’s 85th B-Day (his childhood comic collection, now part of mine,is only around 76 years old).

Enjoy your father's 85th B-Day, and when you get done and come back, let's pick a specific topic to discuss in this and show we can dissect in good faith and provide some entertainment and information for those who are interested. 

I pledge to be civil, and tolerant, and open-minded. 

[Prince Namor]

On 10/20/2024 at 1:17 AM, VintageComics said:

Well ...

In the spirit of good will...

Let's pick a specific topic to discuss in this and show we can dissect it in good faith and provide some entertainment and information for those who are interested. 

I pledge to be civil, and tolerant, and open minded. 

Maybe we can even get a moderator we both can agree upon in case we get stuck.

[Plantman]

So a virtual unknown outside of his field -- who happened to write a book hardly anyone read -- becomes famous in his fifties after going on the university and college circuit. He is adept at convincing young people to fork over money every month, telling fans what they want to hear. For some reason he seems at times to despise the profession which has paid him very well for many years, seeking more money and admiration elsewhere. He later has his name attached to a much more successful book that combines classic material with questionable new sections. Among his quirks are the shameless promotion of a supposedly-talented daughter, the constant use of long words to try to appear smart, and a fixation on hierarchy over fairness.

I am starting to think Jordan Peterson based his persona on Stan Lee. 

 

[PreHero]

On 10/15/2024 at 12:24 PM, jimjum12 said:

Radio was the biggest game around for promotion in those days. Getting an interview would have been easy. Since I don't belong to the camp that assumes ALL Stan did was lie, I'm not convinced that an interview didn't occur early 60's, just that the subject likely would not have been Thor. Sorry. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Stan was using Radio and Speaking engagements to promote when NO ONE else was ... 

Question was specific to paragraph in Origins about Thor.  Question was vague, should've said Do we least agree a 1961 radio interview "about Thor's creation" is unlikely?  You're right, a 1961 radio interview was very possible.

Never said Stan lied in that paragraph.  He never clearly indicated what interview he was referring to nor when it occurred.  Others in this thread were claiming it occurred in 1961.

Actually, it would be easily to figure out what Stan said and when from his papers - have no plans to travel to Laramie: https://archiveswest.orbiscascade.org/ark:80444/xv636387#idm6902

[PreHero]

On 10/19/2024 at 8:32 AM, VintageComics said:

There is SO MUCH more context from entire, longform quotes than when people distill their interpretation down to what they perceive the words mean. Thanks for posting that!

Agree context matters.  Should not have assumed folks would search out original source for themselves.

Stan appears to be mixing comments from different sources - unfortunately the hero worship may've gone to his head in later years:

From Esquire (Sept 1966) article: As one Ivy Leaguer told Stan Lee. "We think of Marvel Comics as the twentieth-century mythology and you as this generation's Homer."

[Silver Surfer]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:25 PM, Mmehdy said:

The truth can be a hard thing to accept...I understand that. But Chad did not go out into his 300 plus page investigation cherry picking things for his point of view. The evidence was out there just waiting for someone to put the pieces together. This reconstruction takes months and months on the silver age board, one of the best posts ever...on a timeline. For those who have not read the book, I direct  all of you to his SA theads..but be warned they are powerful evidence...issue by issue of the  Lie/Con that his been repeated over and over, year after year. SO, SS I challenge to take a look at those, if you are not going to buy the best read out there on comic book history for 2024....just read some them and come back in this thead with your best game!

I was referring to the 14th meme that was posted. I’m not the only one that said if he came here with an more impartial tone I might of been more receptive to hear it out but the nagging wife approach tuned me off. That’s not the only reason but it was enough.

Edited Sunday at 09:25 AM by Silver Surfer

[mrc]

On 10/20/2024 at 3:25 AM, Mmehdy said:

The truth can be a hard thing to accept...I understand that. But Chad did not go out into his 300 plus page investigation cherry picking things for his point of view. The evidence was out there just waiting for someone to put the pieces together. This reconstruction takes months and months on the silver age board, one of the best posts ever...on a timeline. For those who have not read the book, I direct  all of you to his SA theads..but be warned they are powerful evidence...issue by issue of the  Lie/Con that his been repeated over and over, year after year. SO, SS I challenge to take a look at those, if you are not going to buy the best read out there on comic book history for 2024....just read some them and come back in this thead with your best game!

Yawn

[Zonker]

On 10/20/2024 at 2:27 AM, PreHero said:

Agree context matters.  Should not have assumed folks would search out original source for themselves.

Stan appears to be mixing comments from different sources - unfortunately the hero worship may've gone to his head in later years:

From Esquire (Sept 1966) article: As one Ivy Leaguer told Stan Lee. "We think of Marvel Comics as the twentieth-century mythology and you as this generation's Homer."

I think you nailed it! 

[VintageComics]

 

On 10/19/2024 at 7:38 PM, Prince Namor said:

The fact that no one's been able to refute a single thing I've said really helps.

It's impossible to refute someone who doesn't use rational logic and reason. 

I clearly showed that Stan's 'lie', the radio interview quote regarding the creation of Thor which you posted some 60 or 70 pages ago had taken Stan's words OUT OF CONTEXT and you EDITED THEM TO CHANGE THEIR MEANING to make your point. 

So a "Chuck Gower lied" exposé about Stan Lee's 'lie' was blatant and obvious to everyone, and yet you refuse to even acknowledge it. 

And then, you mischaracterize people as being "Stan Lee apologists" for pointing it out.

If you're 'not wrong' when you're CLEARY WRONG, then how can one have a reasonable debate?

Just start a poll and take a vote and see if people think that quote was taken out of context if you disagree. 

 

[DanJD]

Is it possible that all of them lied and none of them created any of the characters?  There’s probably some unknown person that did all of the work and will never make it into a book.  I feel bad for that person.