|
|
Post by MDG on Mar 1, 2016 16:12:46 GMT -5
I don't consider Stan as a malicious man. He certainly contributed much to the comics industry in his own right. However he was always a self-promoter. No one ever described him as a humble man. Many here grew up with Stan as the public face for Marvel, with his Presenting Banner adorning decades of comics he never looked at and they are willing to cut him as much slack as possible. Again, to me, Stan is not a "bad" guy. Not quite as bad as a Bob Kane for instance. But he certainly had his faults in his handling of Kirby and Ditko and other bullpenners by not championing their creator rights and not giving them proper credit for far too many years. I remember when that Stan Lee Presents banner first appeared and I was very upset by it. And I would say that Stan Lee benefited more from his association with Kirby and Ditko than they benefited from him. Sooner or later someone would have tapped into the genius of Kirby and Ditko. My biggest "What If" is what if Joe Maneely had lived. He was Stan's favorite artist at the dawn of the Marvel Age. He probably would have been Stan's go to guy on FF or Spiderman.  Agree, agree, and agree. Of course it's no guarantee that Maneely would've had the character-defining and storytelling chops of Ditko and Kirby. I really like his work that I've seen, but it was mostly short western or horror stories. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Mar 1, 2016 17:37:06 GMT -5
Sooner or later someone would have tapped into the genius of Kirby and Ditko. I'm not as sure about that. Twice, in the late 50s and the mid 70s, Stan hired Kirby at a time when no other publisher would. In the 50s, the Sky Masters debacle got Jack blackballed at DC and made other publishers leery. In the 70s no one else would give him the creative freedom he wanted. And Ditko did work for others but never got the kind of support that really unleashed his genius. His DC books all got cancelled quickly. And if Joe Maneely had lived, there's a good chance that he and Stan would have gone into syndicated newspaper strips fulltime. They already had Mrs. Lyon's Cubs going, and Stan would probably have tapped Joe for Willie Lumpkin, which started a year and a half after Joe's death. |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 1, 2016 17:59:15 GMT -5
Sooner or later someone would have tapped into the genius of Kirby and Ditko. I'm not as sure about that. Twice, in the late 50s and the mid 70s, Stan hired Kirby at a time when no other publisher would. In the 50s, the Sky Masters debacle got Jack blackballed at DC and made other publishers leery. In the 70s no one else would to give him the creative freedom he wanted. And Ditko did work for others but never got the kind of support that really unleashed his genius. His DC books all got cancelled quickly. And if Joe Maneely had lived, there's a good chance that he and Stan would have gone into syndicated newspaper strips fulltime. They already had Mrs. Lyon's Cubs going, and Stan would probably have tapped Joe for Willie Lumpkin, which started a year and a half after Joe's death. Yeah, Kirby's relationship with DC in the silver age was not too good. I couldn't see editors like Weisinger or Julius Schwartz giving Jack any creative leeway. Possibly Jack would have wound up with Tower Comics since he had a brief partnership with Wally Wood but more than likely, as Ditko did, Jack would have gone to Charlton Comics where he could get complete freedom but be paid starvation wages |
|
|
|
Post by Red Oak Kid on Mar 1, 2016 18:38:38 GMT -5
Sooner or later someone would have tapped into the genius of Kirby and Ditko. I'm not as sure about that. Twice, in the late 50s and the mid 70s, Stan hired Kirby at a time when no other publisher would. In the 50s, the Sky Masters debacle got Jack blackballed at DC and made other publishers leery. In the 70s no one else would give him the creative freedom he wanted. And Ditko did work for others but never got the kind of support that really unleashed his genius. His DC books all got cancelled quickly. I think you are right. DC only gave out finished scripts to their artists in the 60s. It was Stan's Marvel style of scripting that unleashed Kirby and Ditko. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2016 17:52:31 GMT -5
I don't consider Stan as a malicious man. He certainly contributed much to the comics industry in his own right. However he was always a self-promoter. No one ever described him as a humble man. Many here grew up with Stan as the public face for Marvel, with his Presenting Banner adorning decades of comics he never looked at and they are willing to cut him as much slack as possible. Again, to me, Stan is not a "bad" guy. Not quite as bad as a Bob Kane for instance. But he certainly had his faults in his handling of Kirby and Ditko and other bullpenners by not championing their creator rights and not giving them proper credit for far too many years. I remember when that Stan Lee Presents banner first appeared and I was very upset by it. And I would say that Stan Lee benefited more from his association with Kirby and Ditko than they benefited from him. Sooner or later someone would have tapped into the genius of Kirby and Ditko. Oh. My. God. do I disagree. Kirby would probably be best known for his early romance work and would probably have the same reputation as someone like Mort Meskin today. Ditko would be as well known as other major post-code horror artists like.... well there's always.... Dang. I can't think of any major post-code horror artists who entered the field between '54 and the late '60s. Conversely, in actual reality..... The freedom of working Marvel style allowed Kirby and Ditko to tailor their work to their own strengths, and grow and develop as artists. Kirby wouldn't be KIRBY!!! today if he spent the same period working for Archie or (God Forbid) Mort Weissinger - note how (relatively) weak his work immediately after the Simon and Kirby break-up was. His '60s development required a partner (not a boss) who understood his talents and let him have relatively free reign. And this was a very, very rare situation in the '60s, where The Editor Is God at DC and most of the other companies as well. |
|
Pat T
Full Member
Posts: 103 
|
Post by Pat T on Mar 3, 2016 19:26:46 GMT -5
Hearing people tear down Stan Lee because he promoted himself leads me to wonder why creators like Kirby and Ditko
didn't do the same for themselves. If Stan truly didn't do shit, what kind of men were they to never dispute anything
he said until years later. They both always sound like resentful, jealous kids, because the guy who actually had some
balls made sure he got his. It never was Stan's responsibility to prop up those guys. That was their own choice. Crybaby
pussies who couldn't fight their own battles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2016 20:00:58 GMT -5
Well, that was very poorly phrased.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 20:03:58 GMT -5
Hearing people tear down Stan Lee because he promoted himself leads me to wonder why creators like Kirby and Ditko didn't do the same for themselves. If Stan truly didn't do shit, what kind of men were they to never dispute anything he said until years later. They both always sound like resentful, jealous kids, because the guy who actually had some balls made sure he got his. It never was Stan's responsibility to prop up those guys. That was their own choice. Crybaby pussies who couldn't fight their own battles. Go eat a Snickers... |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 3, 2016 20:27:56 GMT -5
Hearing people tear down Stan Lee because he promoted himself leads me to wonder why creators like Kirby and Ditko didn't do the same for themselves. If Stan truly didn't do shit, what kind of men were they to never dispute anything he said until years later. They both always sound like resentful, jealous kids, because the guy who actually had some balls made sure he got his. It never was Stan's responsibility to prop up those guys. That was their own choice. Crybaby pussies who couldn't fight their own battles. I nominate this as the "Most Like CBR" post of the year.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 3, 2016 20:34:41 GMT -5
Dang. I can't think of any major post-code horror artists who entered the field between '54 and the late '60s. Maybe that's because the comics code killed the horror genre within those years |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Mar 3, 2016 20:37:24 GMT -5
Hearing people tear down Stan Lee because he promoted himself leads me to wonder why creators like Kirby and Ditko didn't do the same for themselves. If Stan truly didn't do shit, what kind of men were they to never dispute anything he said until years later. They both always sound like resentful, jealous kids, because the guy who actually had some balls made sure he got his. It never was Stan's responsibility to prop up those guys. That was their own choice. Crybaby pussies who couldn't fight their own battles. I'd love to hear more pearls of wisdom from you |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2016 21:08:51 GMT -5
Dang. I can't think of any major post-code horror artists who entered the field between '54 and the late '60s. Maybe that's because the comics code killed the horror genre within those years Well yeah. Without Stan/Marvel, Ditko would probably have a reputation as the best of the post code horror artists. For whatever that's worth. (Although I think he did a little bit of work pre-code, but the bulk of his horror stuff was published after 1954.) I would be surprised if he made significant inroads in other genres. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 21:12:37 GMT -5
I have always wondered what comics would be like today if superheroes had not been responsible for the Silver Age.
|
|
Pat T
Full Member
Posts: 103
|
Post by Pat T on Mar 3, 2016 21:15:47 GMT -5
Hearing people tear down Stan Lee because he promoted himself leads me to wonder why creators like Kirby and Ditko didn't do the same for themselves. If Stan truly didn't do shit, what kind of men were they to never dispute anything he said until years later. They both always sound like resentful, jealous kids, because the guy who actually had some balls made sure he got his. It never was Stan's responsibility to prop up those guys. That was their own choice. Crybaby pussies who couldn't fight their own battles. I nominate this as the "Most Like CBR" post of the year. Actually, a large segment of the posters at CBR drag Stan through the mud too. I just see it differently and I do speak up after it gets piled on, while Kirby is made out to be some type of meek saint that Stan trampled over. Since Kirby's dead, nobody would dare start any negative rumors. But he took cheap shots at Stan that he can never recant, whether they are the truth or only part. And people just take these rumors at face value because it's easy to feel sorry for somebody who let opportunities just slip away. I know it's easy to mock me since I don't fall in line with everybody on this subject, but that's how I feel. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 3, 2016 21:16:59 GMT -5
And just in case this isn't blatantly obvious..
The reason Ditko/Kirby et. al didn't challenge Stan's (highly questionable*) version of events in interviews and books like <i>Origins of Marvel Comics</i> is that they felt it might brand them as troublemakers and endanger their livelihood. Stan, of course, was working from a much greater position of power. His editorial position (gained from nepotistic family connections, at that!) wasn't in any danger, so he could spout off whatever he felt like at the moment, and his job was secure. The old time freelancers had watched the industry boom and bust cycles and might not have recognized their own value.
* Highly questionable, but at least AFTER the book in the original post was created, Stan's reputation for ignoring and downplaying his artists does seem somewhat exaggerated. He might not have granted Kirby and Ditko's creative primacy on the Fantastic Four and Doctor Strange etc. (which has been basically proven as a stone cold fact) but he rarely (never?) left them out of the creative equation totally. In the aforementioned Origins of Marvel Comics (ferinstance) he does say that he talked the FF concept over with Kirby.... but doesn't mention how much of it was "borrowed" from Challengers of the Unknown.
|
|
