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

[Prince Namor]

On 9/19/2024 at 4:33 AM, VintageComics said:

Correct. 

Comics in the GA had 1MIL print runs. Not because they were better, but because they were a new art form with few titles.

As the titles spread in breadth and other forms of entertainment came out, comics diminished and have been diminishing every since.

It dropped to 100,000s of 1000s to 10,000s of 1000s to 1000s. 

Only a handful of titles sold in the million copy a month range during the Golden Age. When Captain America #1 sold a million copies for Goodman, it was the first, and last he'd ever have.

By the 60's, you STILL had Mad selling a million, Walt Disney Comics and Stories hit a million, Superman regularly sold over 800,000 throughout the first half of the 60's, Batman because of the TV show hit 800,000 and almost 900,000.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/19/2024 at 5:07 AM, Bookery said:

I think some assumed, as did myself, that in the course of your research you might have come across some of this information.  That's why we asked.  We didn't even assume it was covered in the book... just that you might happen to know (or not).  We're discussing it with you here and now... not some other author of some other time.  But it's your thread, and your right to focus as narrowly on a subject as you choose to.  As you say... have at it.

I have no issue discussing anything relating to it when its done in the spirit of information sharing. I find that fun.

But some here are just trying to play 'gotcha' and simply want to temper the topic with their own agenda.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/19/2024 at 5:12 AM, bc said:

Even back to Captain America Comics #3 (May 1941), Stan signed his initial 2 page text story. He signed every job he did until Cap 19 (where he disappeared from the title).

Speaking of 2 page stories, why are none of the Pre-code Atlas/Post-Code Atlas/Pre-Hero Marvel/Marvel Comics 2 page text stories written and signed by Stan? That's hundreds (if not thousands) of jobs that he could have utilized his storytelling capabilities.

For someone credited as being a prolific writer, there's very little evidence of that outside of his work in the post-code GGA titles (I'm not keen on the "dumb broad" name for this genre) until he became involved the new Marvel Comics.

-bc

Absolutely.

He talked about writing the Great American Novel, but...

The guy who sat next to him in the 50's, Bruce Jay Friedman who ran Goodman's Magazine Management* wrote his first novel on the commuter train home each night from work. Mario Puzo who wrote for him, wrote HIS novel at night during that time. 

Lee did write one Fantasy Novel though. The Origin of Marvel Comics!

 

*Friedman was buying 50 to 60 stories a month to put together material for those magazine!

[jimjum12]

On 9/18/2024 at 5:33 PM, VintageComics said:

Comics in the GA had 1MIL print runs. Not because they were better, but because they were a new art form with few titles.

You forgot the elephant in the room. 

Periodicals of all sorts were allegedly used to launder large sums of profit, accrued from the prohibition speakeasies and the booze, gambling, and prostitution vice rackets they supported. National (DC) was purportedly knee deep in this, and while a million units may have been printed and REPORTED sold, those sales figures were often inflated, and product destroyed or stashed away, the funds effectively laundered. It's been alluded to and written about for decades. As bookkeeping became more and more digitized, this type of scam became less viable. It worked well with disposable commodities and merchandise, it got thrown away, can't prove it. Anyway, it is what it is. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/18/2024 at 3:51 PM, jimjum12 said:

prohibition speakeasies

On 9/18/2024 at 3:51 PM, jimjum12 said:

National (DC) was purportedly knee deep in this,

[VintageComics]

On 9/18/2024 at 5:46 PM, Prince Namor said:

On 9/18/2024 at 5:26 PM, VintageComics said:

as 'Stan'

Large is relative. We'd need a better idea of exactly how much he was making and when to understand how much he was making relative to the people working with him. 

And also how much work he was actually doing compared to the people around him. 

Who needs a better idea of exactly how much? I don't. The guy could afford to buy a Rolls Royce in the 50's.

I'm asking because to me it's relevant if, for example he's getting paid something equal or close to the other creators but doing work between clearly defined jobs that he gets no or little compensation for. In a case like this, each hungry dog fighting for their own piece of meat in a tight business, while arguing over grey areas would be more understandable. For example, OK, Stan Lee may not have written this story but received a credit, but did he write more on the previous story? etc and did Kirby do less on that previous story? A little give and take grey area is very normal in creative relationships where each party accusing the other of not doing as much. 

Or, was he living "high on the hog", collecting an exhoribtent salary, while stealing wages from co-workers and doing almost nothingin return, because that's the picture you're painting? If that's the case, it makes him look like a predatory, evil scoundrel and that's a very different thing. 

 

From everything I've read in this thread so far, you seem to be painting a picture of the latter.

On 9/18/2024 at 5:46 PM, Prince Namor said:

No one said he was. I stated Roy Thomas and Stan Lee both said that he was in the office 2 to 3 days a week.

You also stated he was working from home, but he couldn't have always been at home when he was doing PR so I'm trying to figure out how much of his job was PR, who was directing that PR and how it was being compensated. 

On 9/18/2024 at 6:06 PM, Prince Namor said:

And no, a million copies was not a NORMAL amount for a book to sell in the Golden Age.

I didn't say a million was normal, though. That's a subtle shift, which changes the conversation. 

I said GA books had million copy print runs and it was obvious that I meant they had those print runs near their peak - 1938 to the early 1940 range.

They dwindled post 1945. They dropped further by the mid 1950s, by the 60s, they were selling 100,000s at their peak, and so on, ever dwindling. 

The point was that you can't attribute sales just to an artist or a creation at the exclusion of all other factors. 

You're trying to make the case that Simon and Kirby are the reason Cap #1 sold 1 Million copies, but then why did Action #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't there?

Why did Marvel #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't present?

It wasn't that Cap was that appealing compared to other characters. It was that Cap was early out of the gate relative to the comic book universe and almost everything decent that came early did well and sold a million copies, so there were other factors outside of Kirby that caused that book to sell and we have to take into account all of those factors if you're going to try to articulate why it sold so well rather than just chalk it up to Kirby's creative genius.

If you can prove that Kirby's titles always sold better than either direct competitors or his peers within the same publishing firm, consistently across each era, comparing apples to apples, that's a different discussion (and would make for an interesting one)

On 9/18/2024 at 6:17 PM, Prince Namor said:

No I don't disagree that his role was important and made a difference. 

Again, I say, 'Without Stan Lee the Marvel Universe would not have been the same.' (But without Jack Kirby it never would have existed)

The Marvel Universe COULD have occurred - Kirby was always going to create - it just would most likely not have been anywhere near the same without Lee's contribution. He very obviously altered the output of those artists. His part in the cultural impact of it is essential.

But without Kirby, it never gets created in the first place. (And without Ditko and his contribution on Spider-man, it never acheives the level of cultural significance).

What is the timeline of the creation of FF vs Spidey (and then the other, succeeding characters)?

Was the FF created first? 

Who created the FF? Kirby obviously took his Challengers of the Unknown characters and revamped them...but who made the FF relatable and personal? Was it Kirby? 

My take on Kirby's flavor of storytelling (and you're a more experienced reader than I am) is that Kirby was mostly an 'action' guy. He didn't really do the personal stuff very well. It was either action or it was dull, and my perception was that Kirby was always a little primitive in this regard. He pushed more primal emotions like anger, vengeance and strength through his superhero work. 

The reason I ask, is because I think most people believe it was Stan's subtle flavoring of characters that became the Marvel flavor, and it was that subtle, personal flavor that took Kirby's work and made it more palatable than Kirby's work alone, without Stan. 

 

Another way to look at this is the Silver Surfer #1-18 run. 

Who was responsible for the lovesick, humanitarian angle that the Silver Surfer was known for during this run (and in my opinion made this run great)?

The reason I ask, is because the tone in the Silver Surfer run was clearly an extension of Stan's Marvel Philosophy and culture, which the entire brand was inundated with. 

It wasn't Jack Kirby, was it?

To show how different Kirby was, his influence became apparent in the last issue, #18 where Kirby takes over and the Surfer takes a much more aggressive, familiar, Kirby-like "good guy / bad guy" tone that is less Stan Lee-like and it mirrors much more with the dryer tone of FF #48-50 where Kirby had more influence. 

The reason I'm writing this is obvious. 

There seems to be a constant effort to undermine Stan's contribution to Marvel, and in every relationship I always say it's 50/50

50 percent of what you do, and 50 percent of what you ALLOW.

And as long as Kirby allowed Stan to be Stan (and let's face it, he did allow it or he would have left sooner) Marvel was at the pinnacle of it's quality story telling output.

Ditko stopped allowing it and the relationship ended and Ditko was never as successful again.

Nor was Kirby for that matter. 

Edited 17 hours ago by VintageComics

[jimjum12]

On 9/18/2024 at 7:14 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

There was a LOT of illicit funds stacked up in basements, warehouses, and backrooms across the country. Allegedly, "sales" of things like comics and crossword puzzles were used to disguise the sales of pornography in states where that sort of thing was taboo. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[VintageComics]

On 9/18/2024 at 6:28 PM, Prince Namor said:

But some here are just trying to play 'gotcha' and simply want to temper the topic with their own agenda.

I don't think a single person is trying to play gotcha in this discussion, and I can speak for myself that I'm certainly not but you're responding that way and I'm actually trying to prevent this from being a 'gotcha' discussion.

Some people are just not seeing your take on Stan's role the same way, and are in a periphery way trying to show how you're undermining that role.

This character picture that you're painting of Stan and the different character picture that myself, Bookery, Jimjum12 and a few others are painting are relevant because eyewitness testimony is often colored by personal emotion, and it's not a black and white matter. It's shades of grey. 

So we're just trying to figure out whose shades of grey are closer to the truth. Yours or ours?

It's truly meant in good spirit as far as I can tell. I've learned a lot from this discussion. 

Edited 17 hours ago by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 9/18/2024 at 7:20 PM, jimjum12 said:

There was a LOT of illicit funds stacked up in basements, warehouses, and backrooms across the country. Allegedly, "sales" of things like comics and crossword puzzles were used to disguise the sales of pornography in states where that sort of thing was taboo. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

You're saying they laundered the stacks of cash that was sitting around through magazines, and that makes sense.

[jimjum12]

On 9/18/2024 at 7:36 PM, VintageComics said:

You're saying they laundered the stacks of cash that was sitting around through magazines, and that makes sense.

Just what I've heard and read. Periodicals were only one way, sold in liquor stores, gas stations, and newsstands across the country. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[Dr. Balls]

On 9/18/2024 at 11:34 AM, JC25427N said:

But you have the truth already, and apparently you've known the truth for a long time, so haven't you already gotten what you want? If you didn't care about impacting anyone else then why care enough to publish a book about it and post about it on these boards so eagerly? You must want to effect some change somewhere to some people. There must be something more you want that made you take up the spear and join "the front-lines of correcting the history of Comics in America". If this isn't to impact people or effect some change, Is this for some sort of glory or prestige? 

Not to speak on Namor's behalf, but somewhere in between "impacting people with the proof" and "glory and prestige" lies the ever-present reasoning of "gonna sell some books and pay some bills".

I admire the investigative process of what Namor has done here. Hell, he gathered up his materials and published a book on it, I applaud him for the focus and drive to see those things to completion.

'

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/18/2024 at 10:32 PM, thehumantorch said:

I'd be knitting sweaters.

Put me down for one of these Dave.  

Can you do it in Everton Blue please?  

 

 

[Prince Namor]

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm asking because to me it's relevant if, for example he's getting paid something equal or close to the other creators but doing work between clearly defined jobs that he gets no or little compensation for. In a case like this, each hungry dog fighting for their own piece of meat in a tight business, while arguing over grey areas would be more understandable. For example, OK, Stan Lee may not have written this story but received a credit, but did he write more on the previous story? etc and did Kirby do less on that previous story? A little give and take grey area is very normal in creative relationships where each party accusing the other of not doing as much. 

Creative relationship. That's funny. Lee couldn't even come up with ideas for Millie the Model.

“One time I was in Stan’s office and told him, “I haven’t got another plot.” Stan got out of his chair, walked over to me, looked me in the face, and said very seriously, “I don’t ever want to hear you say you can’t think of another plot.” Then he walked back and sat in his chair. He didn’t think he needed to tell me anything more. After that, I could think of a plot in two seconds.”

- Stan Goldberg, interviewed by Jim Amash, Alter Ego v3 #18, October 2002.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

Or, was he living "high on the hog", collecting an exhoribtent salary, while stealing wages from co-workers and doing almost nothingin return, because that's the picture you're painting? If that's the case, it makes him look like a predatory, evil scoundrel and that's a very different thing. 

The people 'who were there' paint the picture that he was living 'high on the hog'.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

From everything I've read in this thread so far, you seem to be painting a picture of the latter.

It's not ME painting the picture. It's quotes from people who were there. 

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

You also stated he was working from home, but he couldn't have always been at home when he was doing PR so I'm trying to figure out how much of his job was PR, who was directing that PR and how it was being compensated. 

Lee's first college appearance was in 1966 at Princeton. That was the only one of the year. He had one Herald Tribune story that year where they interviewed him on one day at work. No TV. I have no idea if Goodman paid him for these things, but the colleges paid him for his appearance.

He was coming into the office 2 to 3 days a week. The math is pretty easy to work out.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

I didn't say a million was normal, though. That's a subtle shift, which changes the conversation. 

I said GA books had million copy print runs and it was obvious that I meant they had those print runs near their peak - 1938 to the early 1940 range.

They dwindled post 1945. They dropped further by the mid 1950s, by the 60s, they were selling 100,000s at their peak, and so on, ever dwindling. 

False.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

The point was that you can't attribute sales just to an artist or a creation at the exclusion of all other factors. 

Never said you could.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

You're trying to make the case that Simon and Kirby are the reason Cap #1 sold 1 Million copies, but then why did Action #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't there?

Why did Marvel #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't present?

It did not break a million even with the combined 2nd printing.

And duh, no one said a book had to have Kirby to make it a million selling copy. But go ahead and make a list for me of the artists who worked on multiple million selling comics of different characters AND GENRE's in the Golden Age. 

You can't. There was only one. Kirby & Simon.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

It wasn't that Cap was that appealing compared to other characters. It was that Cap was early out of the gate relative to the comic book universe and almost everything decent that came early did well and sold a million copies,

False.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

so there were other factors outside of Kirby that caused that book to sell and we have to take into account all of those factors if you're going to try to articulate why it sold so well rather than just chalk it up to Kirby's creative genius.

Never attributed it to that. Straw man.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

If you can prove that Kirby's titles always sold better than either direct competitors or peers within the same publishing firm, consistently across each era, comparing apples to apples, that's a different discussion (and would make for an interesting one)

Captain America was the best selling Golden Age book Goodman ever had. (ie it outsold everyone else's books)

When he was with DC Comics just after leaving Marvel - you know, when Superman and Batman were the biggest selling books in America - Kirby & Simon's Boy Commandos was DC's #3 selling book (according to DC). 

At Crestwood? When Kirby & Simon kick started the Romance genre, Young Romance and Young Love outsold everything else they had, including their Crime comics.

Back at DC? The Flash in Showcase #4? The start of the Silver Age?

Challengers of the Unknown appeared two issues later and was in 4 of 6 issues before it got its own book - faster than the Flash did and faster than any of the early features did other than Lois Lane, who was a part of the Superman family of book. Draw your own conclusions.

Marvel Comics. It was pretty much Spidey (Ditko or Romita) then FF (Kirby) and then Thor (Kirby) through the whole Silver Age.

I'd say he consistantly performed to the highest levels wherever he was.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

What is the timeline of the creation of FF vs Spidey (and then the other, succeeding characters)?

Was the FF created first? 

Who created the FF? Kirby obviously took his Challengers of the Unknown characters and revamped them...but who made the FF relatable? Was it Kirby?

I'm not teaching a class on this.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

My take on Kirby's flavor of storytelling (and you're more of an experience reader than I am) is that Kirby was a mostly 'action' guy. He didn't really do the personal stuff very well. It was either action or it was dull, and my perception was that Kirby was always a little primitive in this regard. He pushed more primal emotions like anger, vengeance and strength through his superhero work.

You have no idea. Kirby's storytelling and writing on the Newsboy Legion features human stories, humor, people doing great things despite all odds, etc - ALL of the things we'd see in the Marvel Universe. Lee's pre-Silver Age work featured NONE of that. 

Kirby's Romance comics weren't stereotypes - they were amazingly nuanced acts of complicated human emotion - far superior to the cliched genre ripoffs on the market - Lee's pre-Silver Age work featured NONE of that. 

Read Fighting America.... holy moly - or just read his monster stories at DC before he came back to Marvel and then read his monster stories AT Marvel and then read an early FF... it's the same writer with Lee's brand of dialogue added.

Lee had a dialogue style. You can go back and read it in Millie the Model pre-hero. But he never had quality character emotion. He wrote dumb blonde comics and genre westerns that AVOIDED the main characters, so he didn't have to remember specifics. 

Do some research and stop listening to what people tell you.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

The reason I ask, is because I think most people believe it was Stan's flavor that became the Marvel flavor, and it was that flavor that took Kirby's work and made it more palatable than Kirby's work alone, without Stan. 

Up to that point, Kirby's work never sold less than it did with Lee in the Marvel era. And for the first time in his career it WASN'T one of the top sellers in the market. 

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

Another way to look at this is the Silver Surfer #1-18 run. 

Who was responsible for the lovesick, humanitarian angle that the Silver Surfer was known for during this run (and in my opinion made this run great)?

The reason I ask, is because the tone in the Silver Surfer run was clearly an extensive of Stan's Marvel Philosophy and culture, which the entire brand was indoctrinated with. 

It wasn't Jack Kirby, was it?

Jack Kirby's influence became apparent in the last issue, #18 where the surfer takes a much more aggressive, familiar, Kirby-like "good guy / bad guy" tone that is less Stan Lee-like and it jives much more with the dryer tone of FF #48-50 where Kirby had more influence. 

The reason I'm writing this is obvious. 

Dude if you're going to try and convince me that the writing in the Silver Surfer series was GOOD, you're barking up the wrong tree. 

Go read those 18 issues consecutively and keep your firearms locked up.

That series is vapid and lacking of everything that makes comics great, other than Buscema's artwork - which Lee critcised at the time (per JB).

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

There seems to be a constant effort to undermine Stan's contribution to Marvel, and in every relationship I always say it's 50/50

50 percent of what you do, and 50 percent of what you ALLOW.

LOL. I'll let the artists who were there decide that.

On 9/19/2024 at 6:18 AM, VintageComics said:

And as long as Kirby allowed Stan to be Stan (and let's face it, he did allow it or he would have left sooner) Marvel was at the pinnacle of it's quality story telling output.

Ditko stopped allowing it and the relationship ended and Ditko was never as successful again.

Nor was Kirby for that matter. 

So... monetary success is what is most important?

Edited 15 hours ago by Prince Namor

[Prince Namor]

On 9/19/2024 at 6:23 AM, VintageComics said:

I don't think a single person is trying to play gotcha in this discussion, and I can speak for myself that I'm certainly not but you're responding that way and I'm actually trying to prevent this from being a 'gotcha' discussion.

Some people are just not seeing your take on Stan's role the same way, and are in a periphery way trying to show how you're undermining that role.

This character picture that you're painting of Stan and the different character picture that myself, Bookery, Jimjum12 and a few others are painting are relevant because eyewitness testimony is often colored by personal emotion, and it's not a black and white matter. It's shades of grey. 

So we're just trying to figure out whose shades of grey are closer to the truth. Yours or ours?

And it's truly meany in good spirit as far as I can tell. I've learned a lot from this discussion. 

It's not ME. It's the artists who worked with Lee. 

And sometimes even Lee.

I let them do the talking.

 

Edited 16 hours ago by Prince Namor

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/19/2024 at 1:30 AM, Dr. Balls said:

I applaud him for the focus and drive to see those things to completion.

A bit like Stan Lee  

[Prince Namor]

I would tell Gene (Colan) as little as possible, knowing he could flesh out everything else."

- Stan Lee with Gene Colan interviewed together by Tom Field in December 2004.

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

Hall: In one of the annuals there was even a sketch of the two of you working up an issue. He basically gives you a one sentence plot and tells you to go with it. How close is that to correct?

Colan: Oh, that's the real thing. That's what he did.

- Gene Colan, interviewed by Kevin Hall, May 1988 (https://www.manwithoutfear.com/daredevil-interviews/Colan)

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

“I enjoyed working with Stan on DAREDEVIL but for one thing. I had to make up the whole story. He was being paid for writing and I was being paid for drawing but he didn’t have any ideas. I’d go in for a plotting session and we’d just stare at each other until I came up with a storyline. I felt that I was writing the book but not being paid for writing.”

- Wally Wood, Mark Evanier’s unpublished interview with Wallace Wood, Kirby-L, the Jack Kirby Internet mailing list, 5 July 1997.

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

I don’t know quite when it was. Stan asked me, “What would you like to do next?” I said, “Y’know, Stan, I would love to work on a Thor with you.” He said, “Really?” So then Stan asks, “What do you think you want to do?” I said, “Well, do you have a story?” Stan would go, “What do you think you want to do?” (rather than say no). So I said, “I’d like to change identities between Thor and Loki.” He said, “Oh, that’s fine. Go ahead and do that.” I said, “I’d like to do that for two issues. Is that okay?” He said, “Yeah, sure, sure. Go ahead and do it.” So that was pretty much the story conference.

-Neal Adams, interviewed by Arlen Schumer, Comic Book Artist #3, Winter 1999.

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

"Dick told us how Stan called him one day and said, “I can’t think of a story for Sgt. Fury #23. We won’t have an issue unless you think of something!” A worried Dick could not sleep that night and kept Lindy awake too. They talked about story after story until, in the middle of the night, Lindy came up with the idea of the Howlers saving a nun and her young charges. Dick said, “Stan will never go for that, he wants nothing about religion… But I’ll ask him.” When Dick did, Stan said, “What a great idea, I’ll use it.” So they put together a terrific story. When Dick’s finished pages were shown to him, he saw the credits where he was only listed as artist. He went to Stan’s office and asked if he could also be listed as co-plotter. Stan yelled, “Since when did you develop an ego? Get out of here!””

- Dick Ayers interviewed by Barry Pearl, “The Yancy Street Gang visits Dick & Lindy Ayers,” Alter Ego #90, December 2009. Ayers worked Marvel Method with Lee from 1959 to 1965.

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

“The only thing he used to do from 1966-72 was come in and leave a note on my drawing table saying “Next Month, the Rhino.” That’s all; he wouldn’t tell me anything; how to handle it.”

- John Romita - Comic Book Artist #6 Fall 1999.

(That’s why ASM turned into a romance soap opera after Ditko left… Romita had been doing romance at DC for 7 years and that was what he learned from the writers there.)

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

“I was sitting in Charlie (Biro)’s office one day and the phone rang, and he said, “Hi Stan. what’s up?” Then he holds his hand over the speaker. “it’s Stan Lee. He’s asking if I have any good stories for him.” That always stuck in my mind. When I hear all these stories about what a great guy he was, I remember Charlie Biro saying, “That f****g Stan Lee, he’s always calling me for stories. One of these days I’m going to tell him I want a cut on these things.”

- Bob Fujitani - Hogan’s Alley #23 (2022) (Fujitani wrote for Atlas from 1952-54) 

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

“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. It was really remarkable because, normally, an editor goes over the script before sending it to an artist. Stan gave me total freedom and always accepted my work. Stan and I were on the same wave length.”

- Al Hartley (Alter Ego #61)

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

"An imitator par excellence," Rice remembers. "A tireless reader of the competition. I never saw any sign of originality on Lee's part. He always had the competition's books strewn around his desk. He has a reputation as a pioneer, but I laugh at that. Mimicry was the main thread in his mind.”

- Pierce Rice from Comics: Between the Panels (1998) (Rice joined the staff at Timely in 1948 and worked closely with Lee)

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

“He really didn’t seem to have any ideas, but we worked out a plot, and he sent me the synopsis. I couldn’t believe it when I saw it. In one line, Stan indicated that he wanted a three-page fight sequence, in a garage, or whatever. Nothing else. So I called and asked him what I should do. He said, “You know, throw some tires around, do something with some oil, make it up as you go.'”Well, that didn’t help…”

- Joe Orlando from Daniel Best’s 20th Century Danny Boy Blog.

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

“Yes, it was the drug issue – a sensational way to grab the headlines. I made up a story and Stan put in the copy.”

- Gil Kane from a 1986 interview published in the print version of FA the Comiczine and posted online to: https://comiczine-fa.com/interviews/gil-kane

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

“On CAPTAIN AMERICA, Stan constantly tinkered with my straight, dramatic dialogue to glitz it up, which chaffed me - I wrote every caption and dialogue balloon, and felt many he “edited” were arbitrary, sometimes just - switching sentence structure, but keeping all the words intact. I never complained to him because he was the editor - But I was loud and clear about making changes on my TOWER OF SHADOWS tale - and was FIRED for having integrity.”

- Jim Steranko on Twitter, September 1, 2013

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

JOHN BUSCEMA (SDCC, 2001): "Did I work at Marvel? I mean, I'm hearing stories I never heard. I don't recall Stan jumping or dancing because we worked over the phone.”

JOHN ROMITA: "And you used to love the plots right?”

BUSCEMA: " I hated it.”

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

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/18/2024 at 10:46 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

And?

And? 

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

Don't know.

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

 

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

I'm not being defensive.

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

 

 

On 9/18/2024 at 11:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

 

These are all topics YOU made up.

My book is about the Lies he told in the Origin of Marvel Comics.

 

I gotta say....you have the strangest and most unique approach to PR and goodwill from a potential author that I have ever seen.  

 

[Lazyboy]

On 9/18/2024 at 4:12 PM, VintageComics said:

One thing is certain, the human memory is very subjective / suggestive, and well established that eyewitness accounts are not accurate. This why it's one of the premises that the Western legal system is built on.

You do understand the difference between eyewitness accounts of specific (and usually quick) events and accounts from people about a significant, ongoing part of their lives, right?

[Lazyboy]

On 9/18/2024 at 6:18 PM, VintageComics said:

why did Action #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't there?

That one is really easy. It didn't. It wasn't even close.

On 9/18/2024 at 6:18 PM, VintageComics said:

Why did Marvel #1 sell 1 Million copies when Kirby wasn't present?

And again...

[thehumantorch]

On 9/18/2024 at 4:17 PM, Prince Namor said:

No I don't disagree that his role was important and made a difference. 

Again, I say, 'Without Stan Lee the Marvel Universe would not have been the same.' (But without Jack Kirby it never would have existed)

The Marvel Universe COULD have occurred - Kirby was always going to create - it just would most likely not have been anywhere near the same without Lee's contribution. He very obviously altered the output of those artists. His part in the cultural impact of it is essential.

But without Kirby, it never gets created in the first place. (And without Ditko and his contribution on Spider-man, it never achieves the level of cultural significance).

And I think that's where we disagree.  Without Stan Lee - or Kirby - the Marvel Universe wouldn't have been created.  The collaboration of the two somehow resulted in the birth of a universe. 

And let's be real here;  Stan Lee prior to the Marvel Explosion was essentially a hack writing unremarkable repetitive turd-like stories.  And prior to the Marvel Explosion Kirby, as much as I love his work, couldn't hold a candle to the greats like Schomburg, LB Cole, Matt Baker, Wally Wood, or a dozen other artists.  Even the first dozen or more issues of FF had charm but the art was bloody awful, the stories were lame, and the villains were essentially monsters or aliens or recycled characters from the past.  Early FF couldn't hold a candle to the art and writing of the work that EC had put out 10 years earlier.  

I suspect that Kirby hit his prime when Lee let him plot the stories and let his imagination soar.  There's a world of difference between FF 3 and FF 45 in the quality and originality of the work.