So how much work did Bob Kane actually do?

[sacentaur]

Now, if somebody asks me if I painted his last six prints, I'd say "yes," but I have no problem with Kane claiming he did. That's what he paid for.

 

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

But that's not what we paid for.

 

STEVE Got Larson?

[Koko]

 

The Marvel way of making comics was for the artist to first draw the story & then dialogue was added (therefore most of the creative effort for story & characters would be on the shoulders of the artist). Basically all Stan had to do was write dialogue for pictures, easy enough to do.

 

 

This is totally incorrect.

The story was hashed-out between Stan and the artist, a typed transcript of the session was supploed to the artist, and they drew from that. Stan, finally added dialogue prior to the inks. And if you think that it's easy to do good dialogue, much less great, you're kidding yourself.

 

 

There are, in my mind, a lot of similarities between Challengers of the Unknown & early Fantsatic Four. This leads me to believe the original concept for the FF was Kirby's.

 

 

I've already chimmed in here.

 

 

 

Kirby was not a great writer, but he came up with characters like no one else. Stan was a good writer, P.R. man & had his finger on the pulse of the fans. He was not a creative genius though and, if not for Kirby & Ditko, would have continued to edit mediocure comics. Just MHO.

 

 

Kirby not a great writer? Go re-read the post-War Boy Commandos, and get back to me.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

 

[ciorac]

 

The Marvel way of making comics was for the artist to first draw the story & then dialogue was added (therefore most of the creative effort for story & characters would be on the shoulders of the artist). Basically all Stan had to do was write dialogue for pictures, easy enough to do.

 

 

This is totally incorrect.

The story was hashed-out between Stan and the artist, a typed transcript of the session was supploed to the artist, and they drew from that. Stan, finally added dialogue prior to the inks. And if you think that it's easy to do good dialogue, much less great, you're kidding yourself.

 

 

There are, in my mind, a lot of similarities between Challengers of the Unknown & early Fantsatic Four. This leads me to believe the original concept for the FF was Kirby's.

 

 

I've already chimmed in here.

 

 

 

Kirby was not a great writer, but he came up with characters like no one else. Stan was a good writer, P.R. man & had his finger on the pulse of the fans. He was not a creative genius though and, if not for Kirby & Ditko, would have continued to edit mediocure comics. Just MHO.

 

 

Kirby not a great writer? Go re-read the post-War Boy Commandos, and get back to me.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

 

 

Practice the quote feature so we can differentiate between what you are saying and whom you are quoting.

[BLBcomics-migration]

1934-1935 Bat-Bandit

 

Interesting -

 

From page 23 of BATMAN AND ME By Bob Kane 1989,

 

"....I used to copy Floyd Gottfredson's MICKEY MOUSE newspaper strip all the time and my best feature for Eisner-Iger during the late 1930s was done in a Disney style. It was called Peter Pupp...."

 

Not once does Kane mention he would have read the Bat Bandit sequence, probably one of the most famous Gottfredson MM stories, definitely one of the most reprinted over the years, a true classic - ranks with the Phantom Blot story line

[ciorac]

 

I know you were kidding Bob, and Kane probably was a jerk, and a crook. But all that matters to me is he gave us all the Batman!! As you know, Bats is my "be all end all", so I have to have a soft spot in my heart for old Mr. Kane.

 

Hey, buddy, don't talk about my friend that way.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

I'm the only one here, until you popped in, that was on Kane's side. So chill.

[BLBcomics-migration]

 

The Marvel way of making comics was for the artist to first draw the story & then dialogue was added (therefore most of the creative effort for story & characters would be on the shoulders of the artist). Basically all Stan had to do was write dialogue for pictures, easy enough to do.

 

 

This is totally incorrect.

The story was hashed-out between Stan and the artist, a typed transcript of the session was supploed to the artist, and they drew from that. Stan, finally added dialogue prior to the inks. And if you think that it's easy to do good dialogue, much less great, you're kidding yourself.

 

 

Kirby was not a great writer, but he came up with characters like no one else. Stan was a good writer, P.R. man & had his finger on the pulse of the fans. He was not a creative genius though and, if not for Kirby & Ditko, would have continued to edit mediocure comics. Just MHO.

 

 

Kirby not a great writer? Go re-read the post-War Boy Commandos, and get back to me.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

 

 

Yo Greg

 

I was coming off that 1966 NY Herald Trib interview with Stan, and also Jack sitting the corner, where Stan is quoted saying Jack is so good he sometimes just says to jack what villain to be for next month, and then Jack does it all by himself, bringing back the pages for dialogue.

 

Jack was a great writer - me, i think he simply was burned out by the time he moved out to California and got away from Marvel when he cranked up the 4th world.

 

And your defense of Bob Kane taking credit for all things Batman reminds me, i do not know why, of people sending in bucks to the Roy Rogers Museum when it was in Victorville Calif to get a RR autograph, and Roy was so old and worn down that last decade in his upper 70s, early 80s in age, his son Roy Rogers Jr, nicknamed Dusty, would take the autograph money and sign his name, leaving off the Jr portion

 

- but people were thinking they were getting "real" Roy Rogers autographs, and in a way they were, but not what that thought they were paying for

[Koko]

 

Bob B. wrote

Irwin was adamant Jerry & Joe would have been taken care for life like Kane was if they had not sued the Donenfelds following WW2 over Superboy which soon escalated to an attempt to wrest total control of Superman away from the publisher who had taken the bigger risk publishing Action in the first place. #4 was hitting the stands before final sales figures were in on #1. for example

 

Bob,

All major publishers had field-men who would report the sales of the titles while they were on-stand. They always knew if they had a hit, or not, some three weeks after publication.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[Koko]

Bob B. wrote

 

I have not written here that either Kane or Lee had nothing to do with the comics business and/or co-creating best selling comics scenarios but they had a lot less to do with the creations than they have stated in comicons and/or in print. That is a simple fact, no trash

 

I'd agree with Kane, but you insist that it's a fact that Lee tries to take more credit than he is due is not a fact.

 

 

i have been working on an impartial history of the comics business

i stress impartial

Most assuredly he was "an ambassador and spokesperson for comics in general," but Lee fronted for the owner of Marvel, claiming more than he created. Ownership of copyright was all about money, promises of royalties were made which never followed thru on.

 

 

I find it curious that you claim inpartiality, then turn around and say Lee "fronted" for Goodman. When you couch it that way, it sounds illicit. Like Goodman was some mysterious villain operating in the shadows. Everybody who cared to know knew Lee worked for Martin. You continue to claim Lee is a credit hog, but I never see any specifics.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob B. wrote

Irwin was adamant Jerry & Joe would have been taken care for life like Kane was if they had not sued the Donenfelds following WW2 over Superboy which soon escalated to an attempt to wrest total control of Superman away from the publisher who had taken the bigger risk publishing Action in the first place. #4 was hitting the stands before final sales figures were in on #1. for example

 

Bob,

All major publishers had field-men who would report the sales of the titles while they were on-stand. They always knew if they had a hit, or not, some three weeks after publication.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

I know all about the field men most publishers had also, especially Harry Donenfeld.

 

Irwin and i talked extensively about their field person system - i have some 18 hours of taped interviews with Irwin done back 1998-2001 and he showed me documents he had saved

 

Superman covers on Action sez it all re if they really knew what they had:

 

Action 1 7 10 15 17 onwards plus a couple heads on 13 14 16, if i remember correctly, as Gerber is not handy to check it out

 

There were early sales figures, then final sales figures

 

Final sales figures took a few months to work their way thru the system

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob B. wrote

 

I have not written here that either Kane or Lee had nothing to do with the comics business and/or co-creating best selling comics scenarios but they had a lot less to do with the creations than they have stated in comicons and/or in print. That is a simple fact, no trash

 

I'd agree with Kane, but you insist that it's a fact that Lee tries to take more credit than he is due is not a fact.

 

 

i have been working on an impartial history of the comics business

i stress impartial

Most assuredly he was "an ambassador and spokesperson for comics in general," but Lee fronted for the owner of Marvel, claiming more than he created. Ownership of copyright was all about money, promises of royalties were made which never followed thru on.

 

 

I find it curious that you claim inpartiality, then turn around and say Lee "fronted" for Goodman. When you couch it that way, it sounds illicit. Like Goodman was some mysterious villain operating in the shadows. Everybody who cared to know knew Lee worked for Martin. You continue to claim Lee is a credit hog, but I never see any specifics.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

Ok, greg, what did Stan Lee create after jack Kirby left the building and moved to California?

 

"Fronted" means he was the front guy - the guy you "see", the PR man, like Tony Snow for Bush, in a way,

 

It seems like some of the listers here view Marvel with Stan at the top of the pyramid and do not take Martin Goodman into account as to what, how, why stuff unfolded the way it did

 

not you, your thing on Martin Goodman in your Pure Imagination mag (#2??) in the early 1990s is still a classic study on Marvel's long time owner

 

That was directed at people who were not taking the Goodman factor into account. I do not think of Goodman as a villain per se. The old adage goes something like this: "The person with the most toys when he dies, wins."

[Koko]

Norinn wrote:

 

I got really into GA Captain America earlier this year and did a ton of research online about the character's history. Here is an excerpt about the early days.

 

"So Simon and Kirby, influenced by current events, created a new character, one who would embody the patriotism that the Timely staff felt. They came up with Captain America. (Who exactly created him seems to be in dispute. Joe Simon claims that he came up with the idea for a patriotic hero, and did the first sketch. Jack Kirby claims that he co-created the character, with Simon.)

 

 

As Simon was editing at the time, I don't doubt that he came up with the costume, but Goodman, Simon, and Kirby conspired to rip-off MLJ's The Shield, and all must have been involved in the rest of the creation.

 

 

It should be noted that Captain America was actually created the previous fall, but Simon and Kirby, entertaining offers from Timely's rivals, had had Goodman over a barrel and had managed to get an agreement from him: Simon would get 15% of the profits from the sales of Captain America Comics, and Kirby would get 10%. Such an agreement, needless to say, was unknown in comics at the time.

 

As the kids say "That's wack!"

I don't know where you heard different, but S&K had been working for Goodman for Months before Cap was created. The figures, however, are correct.

 

 

This precedent must have occurred to Goodman, who, after meeting with John Goldwater, the publisher of MLJ's comics, agreed to change the shield, something that Kirby, for one, was happy about (he'd always preferred the round shield as being both more effective and a better design).

 

 

Good evidence that Jack Didn't create the costume. If he had, he'd have gone with the circular shield from the get-go.

 

 

 

Very soon after Captain America #1 was published Timely hired Syd Shores to help with the inking. He became Timely's third employee. It was at this time that Jack Kirby was made art director for Timely.

 

 

Also wrong. Simon and Kirby came to Goodman as a package deal:Editor/art director.

 

 

Towards the end of 1941 Simon and Kirby had done ten issues of Captain America and made him Timely's most popular book; it was selling on a level only Superman and Batman could touch. Simon and Kirby were not, however, pleased with Timely. Both Simon and Kirby were acting as editors and art directors, and between those jobs and their work - not only for Timely, but for other companies (Kirby and Simon were continuing to work on Blue Bolt, for one) - their schedules were quite busy - Kirby was doing up to nine pages a day. Worse still, from their point of view, they were getting relatively little money, despite the popularity of Captain America Comics.

 

 

S&K dropped Blue Bolt to do Captain America.

 

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[Koko]

Bob B. wrote:

 

In the 1960s history kind of repeats itself, royalties promised when the initial Marvel Universe is created beginning in 1961 when Marvel is close to bankrupt, the doors were closing soon,

 

 

Can you present some evidence to back up this claim? Frankly, I don't believe this to be the truth.

 

 

A proper share of the good fortune not delivered, Marvel ends up being sold by Goodman in 1968, Stan is there, reaps rewards,

 

 

So why be mad at Stan because he earned his reward? Don't smear Stan for Martin's misdeeds.

 

 

Kirby gets nothing (Ditko was already gone for a couple years), finally is fed up, moves west,

 

 

You suggest that Kirby quitting and moving west are somehow connected. They are not, Jack moved the family west to help Roz's health.

 

 

 

Did Stan The Man have a hand in creating the Marvel Universe - of course he did

Both, though, played a much smaller role, albeit important, to be sure, in the "creation"

 

 

This argument about creation needs to be addressed. Lee comes up with an idea for Spider-Man, wants him to be a teen. Stan Lee just created Spider-man. Ditko DEVELOPED it. Ditto Kirby on the FF, Hulk, and Ant-Man. Jack and Steve made the books great, but Lee "created" them.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob B. wrote:

 

In the 1960s history kind of repeats itself, royalties promised when the initial Marvel Universe is created beginning in 1961 when Marvel is close to bankrupt, the doors were closing soon,

 

 

1) Can you present some evidence to back up this claim? Frankly, I don't believe this to be the truth.

 

 

A proper share of the good fortune not delivered, Marvel ends up being sold by Goodman in 1968, Stan is there, reaps rewards,

 

 

2) So why be mad at Stan because he earned his reward? Don't smear Stan for Martin's misdeeds.

 

 

Kirby gets nothing (Ditko was already gone for a couple years), finally is fed up, moves west,

 

 

3) You suggest that Kirby quitting and moving west are somehow connected. They are not, Jack moved the family west to help Roz's health.

 

 

 

Did Stan The Man have a hand in creating the Marvel Universe - of course he did

Both, though, played a much smaller role, albeit important, to be sure, in the "creation"

 

 

4) This argument about creation needs to be addressed. Lee comes up with an idea for Spider-Man, wants him to be a teen. Stan Lee just created Spider-man. Ditko DEVELOPED it. Ditto Kirby on the FF, Hulk, and Ant-Man. Jack and Steve made the books great, but Lee "created" them.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

1) I know what Steve Ditko said to me on the phone back in 1969

 

I also know what Jack Kirby and Roz told me at San Diego comicons at the El Cortez Hotel in the 1970s, back when comicon was smaller in size, much more intimate, people could talk with each other. In 1974 i walked across the street from the dealer's room to where my wife Susan was waiting for me by the pool. She introduced me to her new friend, Roz, who was also waiting for her husband. Me, then, i did not connect the dots who was who.

 

I had just purchased a S&K original page form the Newsboy Legion Star Spangled story where the Nazis conquer New York City, was that #19?, long time ago, do not remember the exact number right now, but was I just gushing over this, then, the earliest then known S&K page.

 

Long story short, Jack & Roz and Susan & myself went out to dinner that night, Roz asked me that since i had bought that early page, was i interested in a pile of Kirby pages, as in 50 pages for a grand, $20 a page, to which i replied by pulling out a grand in cash - and i had a pile of Marvel CA pages plus Jimmy Olsens and I forget what else. wish i still had em

 

Anyway, i asked Jack about what Ditko said to me in 1969 about royalty promises and he confirmed much the same story

 

2) Stan was a good front man back then - that is not a smear to expound truth

 

3) i did not mean to connect those dots you mention - merely getting the time line down

 

4) where is your proof?

[Koko]

Bob B. wrote:

 

I only talked with Ditko once back in 1969, in a moment of lucidity he told us that he left because of promised royalties, again, back when Marvel in 1961-62 was borderline bankrupt, one foot was in the grave, promises given, soon thereafter lies were told, dreams shattered

 

Bob,

Much of your research is masterful. You really know a lot about Comics. However, you seem to have some blind spots about the early days at Marvel. Once again you incorrectly state that Marvel was almost bankrupt circa 1961-62. Flatly incorrect. Here are figures Marvel claims for the period

1960-16,100,000

1961-18,700,000

1962-19,740,000

Hardly your dramatic, but incorrect "one foot in the grave," scenario.

 

 

 

"and Stan jumped in when Ditko popped his cork and split over to Charlton, then DC, but he had to slow down a lot in 1968 cuz he had a re-bout with Tuberculosis, something he came down with for sure circa 1958. His recurring TB has played a role in his life"

 

 

The TB bout was in 1954.

 

 

"Ditko stayed far away from Stan in his final time during that tenure time he spent injecting into the persona of Peter Parker, the buy who became Spiderman".

 

Ditko stated that he had no problem with Lee, it was Goodman who had his dander up.

 

 

"What Stan did was not different, ultimately - he did his boss's dirty work, got paid well to keep the talent silent, mollified, as a daddy would do for his "boys", a common publisher ploy."

 

Impartial?

Quite a charged statement, Bob.

Exactly what "dirty work" did Stan do? He created what he said he created. What "dirty work?" Keep the talent silent? Silent about what?

"As a daddy would do for his boys"? What in the world does that mean?

Your take on Marvel is highly partial.

 

 

"Business is business and the man who dies with the most toys wins."

 

 

Actually, during the last decade of his life Goodman suffered from Alzheimer's. Hardly a winner.

 

 

"Here is a hypothetical: if Stan is/was such a creator, where are all his creations from the 1940s and 1950s, and where are all his creations after Kirby split town, moving out west?"

 

 

What makes you think he cared much until 1960, and much after?

 

 

"Please answer this one for me, so i can understand"

 

Hope that helps.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[BLBcomics-migration]

I am only coming off the concepts as laid down by Stan, jack, others, that Goodman was going bankrupt, at least the comics division when FF was thought up - so Stan has said many times

 

Ditko's TB bouts were more than one. The last one i know of was when he left Hawk & Dove and Creeper cuz of TB. He also had a TB bout in the late 50s

 

Ditko told us in 1969 that Goodman and Lee promised royalties. He left in 1966 because of broken promises. He distinctly said he tried to get Jack to leave at the same time

 

Kirby was a time proven creator of "new" ideas in comic books - Lee was not - prior to FF coming along - all of sudden, Lee is the Master, Kirby is not, then Kirby splits for DC, creates all kinds of "new" characters, and all Lee comes up with is Stripperella?

 

sure, works for me

[Koko]

Bob B. wrote:

 

i wrote here earlier that i think Kirby was burned out by the time he escaped Marvel and created the 4th world stuff. He had been creating comics for 30 years by this point

 

 

Hardly. The man was on fire with ideas, and nobody to say "no" to him. In fact, that's one of the reasons the series didn't succeed.

 

 

"By the 70s Stan was not doing much in the comics as he had been either"

 

 

He retired as editor.

 

 

"What did Stan create after Jack left?"

 

Was he even interested in creating anything after 1970?

 

 

 

"Weren't Marvel artists ordered to draw like Jack Kirby?"

 

No. Lee stressed Kirby's dynamic approach.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[Koko]

Bob,

I don't believe Kirby is in the S/W cover at all. Solo Simon is my call.

Regards,

GT

 

I believe you're mistaken, it's definitely Kirby. Here's a solo Simon cover, different from S/W #7

 

 

Well, I've never seen a Kirby cover where a foot and a hand are cropped off.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[Koko]

Now, if somebody asks me if I painted his last six prints, I'd say "yes," but I have no problem with Kane claiming he did. That's what he paid for.

 

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

 

But that's not what we paid for.

 

STEVE Got Larson?

 

Bob penciled the art, so you really did get what you paid for.

Same thing with a Kane comic page.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[Koko]

 

 

Yo Greg

 

I was coming off that 1966 NY Herald Trib interview with Stan, and also Jack sitting the corner, where Stan is quoted saying Jack is so good he sometimes just says to jack what villain to be for next month, and then Jack does it all by himself, bringing back the pages for dialogue.

 

Jack was a great writer - me, i think he simply was burned out by the time he moved out to California and got away from Marvel when he cranked up the 4th world.

 

And your defense of Bob Kane taking credit for all things Batman reminds me, i do not know why, of people sending in bucks to the Roy Rogers Museum when it was in Victorville Calif to get a RR autograph, and Roy was so old and worn down that last decade in his upper 70s, early 80s in age, his son Roy Rogers Jr, nicknamed Dusty, would take the autograph money and sign his name, leaving off the Jr portion

 

- but people were thinking they were getting "real" Roy Rogers autographs, and in a way they were, but not what that thought they were paying for

 

I didn't say Kane did it all on Batman. He certainly didn't.

Regards,

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[RareHighGrade]

Greg, it's nice to hear a different point of view from someone connected to the business. Thanks for posting, and hope to see more of you on the boards.