|
|
Post by berkley on May 20, 2019 19:03:42 GMT -5
I think you are missing the point to Darkseid's appearance. It is not about Darkseid watching events from close quarters, it is about the truth of war, as Jack Kirby found it, in WW2. So much talk is made of valor and glory and grand crusades, when in the end, there is only butchery. Kirby was haunted by it and Darkseid gives voice to it. It is one of his most powerful and profound pieces of writing, in the saga. The 4th World is not writing, in the conventional sense. It is more of an epic poem, crossed with a philosophical tract, delivered in a sci-fi adventure story. To me, this is what people miss when they say Kirby couldn't write. Kirby could write and brilliantly so. He just didn't write like Stan or others within the field. He was more abstract, more poetic, in a crude way. His meanings often come far later than first reading. Or you could make the same argument based on symbolism and the poetic structure of the worldbuilding. That might be a better option that "Darkseid is the chilling-est." (BUT HE IS!!!)
At the symbolic level, I think it's tied in with the idea that Darkseid is in one sense our 'dark side': as he says in that 'Grandpa' scene we were all talking about on the last page, "And still the cosmic joke escapes him! For how can he cope with me by shunning me - his other face."
So for me, when Darkseid is seen lurking around the corner of a building, or you find him sitting in your living room chair, it's a manifestation of this idea that Darkseid is never far away - because he's a part of you.
But this is only one aspect of the character, so I don't see a conflict or contradiction between the 'grandly distant or strangely casual', as rberman put it. Both aspects are valid and either (or both!) can come to the fore depending on the situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on May 20, 2019 21:25:35 GMT -5
Fame can really go to a person's head, especially if they have a vain streak to begin with. Yes.
Now, I wonder if anyone here can guess who my comics-shop guy was actually referring to when he said what he said ("he USED to be such a nice guy!"). Heh.
It was somewhere around 1979 or 1980........
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 20, 2019 21:41:14 GMT -5
I think you are missing the point to Darkseid's appearance. It is not about Darkseid watching events from close quarters, it is about the truth of war, as Jack Kirby found it, in WW2. So much talk is made of valor and glory and grand crusades, when in the end, there is only butchery. Kirby was haunted by it and Darkseid gives voice to it. It is one of his most powerful and profound pieces of writing, in the saga. The 4th World is not writing, in the conventional sense. It is more of an epic poem, crossed with a philosophical tract, delivered in a sci-fi adventure story. To me, this is what people miss when they say Kirby couldn't write. Kirby could write and brilliantly so. He just didn't write like Stan or others within the field. He was more abstract, more poetic, in a crude way. His meanings often come far later than first reading. Well said.
A lot of people to this day continue to accuse Jack Kirby of being a bad writer, or not being able to write, or not being good at writing dialogue. And it seems to me it always comes down to people who are STAN LEE fans. Not only are they completely enamored of Lee's writing style, and his whole persona, and the way so many who worked for Marvel tried to one level or another to imitate what he was doing and how (to various degrees), but they also have memorized his every word, those he and his cronies have and continues to say, on so many things. And some of that is a feeling of betrayal, for Kirby leaving Marvel when he did, and worse, "saying bad things about STAAAAAAN".
All that aside... Kirby had a UNIQUE style. And I think we need more of that.
You know, for the last 4 years, for "fun", I've been translating foreign Edgar Allan Poe comics into English. And more and more, as I go, I try to use as much original, authentic Poe dialogue and narration as possible when I do. Sometimes, an adaptation changes the presentation of a story so much, that can't be done, but when a scene is right out of the original story, I'll go out of my way to see how much original text I can fit in the panels. I don't see the point in making uncalled for changes. I'd prefer keeping it as Poe wrote it.
I like to think I'm doing the same thing Jeremy Brett did when he got permission to re-write the dialogue in his SHERLOCK HOLMES tv episodes, to bring the scripts more in line with what Arthur Conan Doyle wrote.
I think there are some writers whose work you just should not F*** with. Like Jules Verne... Arthur Conan Doyle... Edgar Allan Poe... and Jack Kirby.
Writers-- and fans-- who think Kirby didn't write characters like Darkseid properly are forgetting... Jack Kirby CREATED those characters. And a big reason he went to DC when he did... was so that after 10 years, he would no longer have to put up with somebody else SCREWING OVER his writing.
Oh boy. I have opinions. I don't think Kirby was a naturally verbal guy. His interviews are always interesting but he ain't Oscar Wilde. I like Kirby's pulp-meets-opera writing but at the same time there are limitations. Like the stuff with the O'Ryan gang in this issue. I think it's an effort to write Stan Lee style - in this specific case to create urban-setting-as-character. And it doesn't really connect, IMO. Kirby's weirdly more comfortable and adroit with Gods/living symbols/personifications. Kirby's characters constantly verbalize their inner nature, essentially sharing their greater purpose, their spiritual essence, through dialog. Aaaand this works better with some characters (the New Gods) than with others. (The Dingbats of Danger Street.) Although Street Code is up there on my all-time-favorite-things-Kirby-ever-did list, and the domestic drama stuff in Mister Miracle with the family unit and the (sort of) adopted son completely works for me. Also, I think working with Stan improved Kirby's writing immensely. (And vice versa, of course.) The stuff that Kirby wrote solo in the '50s (I'm thinking of Yellow Claw in particular) was often fairly awful, weirdly paced, too rushed... not good. Kirby's solo-written stuff from the '70s is multiple orders of magnitude better. And Stan is the most likely reason for this. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 20, 2019 22:23:51 GMT -5
Well said.
A lot of people to this day continue to accuse Jack Kirby of being a bad writer, or not being able to write, or not being good at writing dialogue. And it seems to me it always comes down to people who are STAN LEE fans. Not only are they completely enamored of Lee's writing style, and his whole persona, and the way so many who worked for Marvel tried to one level or another to imitate what he was doing and how (to various degrees), but they also have memorized his every word, those he and his cronies have and continues to say, on so many things. And some of that is a feeling of betrayal, for Kirby leaving Marvel when he did, and worse, "saying bad things about STAAAAAAN".
All that aside... Kirby had a UNIQUE style. And I think we need more of that.
You know, for the last 4 years, for "fun", I've been translating foreign Edgar Allan Poe comics into English. And more and more, as I go, I try to use as much original, authentic Poe dialogue and narration as possible when I do. Sometimes, an adaptation changes the presentation of a story so much, that can't be done, but when a scene is right out of the original story, I'll go out of my way to see how much original text I can fit in the panels. I don't see the point in making uncalled for changes. I'd prefer keeping it as Poe wrote it.
I like to think I'm doing the same thing Jeremy Brett did when he got permission to re-write the dialogue in his SHERLOCK HOLMES tv episodes, to bring the scripts more in line with what Arthur Conan Doyle wrote.
I think there are some writers whose work you just should not F*** with. Like Jules Verne... Arthur Conan Doyle... Edgar Allan Poe... and Jack Kirby.
Writers-- and fans-- who think Kirby didn't write characters like Darkseid properly are forgetting... Jack Kirby CREATED those characters. And a big reason he went to DC when he did... was so that after 10 years, he would no longer have to put up with somebody else SCREWING OVER his writing.
Oh boy. I have opinions. I don't think Kirby was a naturally verbal guy. His interviews are always interesting but he ain't Oscar Wilde. I like Kirby's pulp-meets-opera writing but at the same time there are limitations. Like the stuff with the O'Ryan gang in this issue. I think it's an effort to write Stan Lee style - in this specific case to create urban-setting-as-character. And it doesn't really connect, IMO. Kirby's weirdly more comfortable and adroit with Gods/living symbols/personifications. Kirby's characters constantly verbalize their inner nature, essentially sharing their greater purpose, their spiritual essence, through dialog. Aaaand this works better with some characters (the New Gods) than with others. (The Dingbats of Danger Street.) Although Street Code is up there on my all-time-favorite-things-Kirby-ever-did list, and the domestic drama stuff in Mister Miracle with the family unit and the (sort of) adopted son completely works for me. Also, I think working with Stan improved Kirby's writing immensely. (And vice versa, of course.) The stuff that Kirby wrote solo in the '50s (I'm thinking of Yellow Claw in particular) was often fairly awful, weirdly paced, too rushed... not good. Kirby's solo-written stuff from the '70s is multiple orders of magnitude better. And Stan is the most likely reason for this. I suspect it is as much Stan as editor as Stan as writer. At the same time, maybe it took Kirby that time to find a story that really inspired him. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 21, 2019 6:30:52 GMT -5
Mister Miracle #4 (September 1971) The Story: Barda teleports herself from Apokolips to Scott’s house with the power of her Mega-Rod. I didn’t realize she could teleport without Boom Tubes. Other writers have seemed unaware as well. Anyhoo, Barda smashes a few things, interrogates Oberon, and then teleports to rescue Scott from Doctor Bedlam.  Scott is still falling down the stairwell center in a locked trunk from last issue. Barda arrives just in time to catch the trunk at the bottom. She thinks she has saved Scott, though of course he would have been turned to jelly by the sudden deceleration, just as surely as if he’d hit the floor. Happily, he’s somehow escaped from the locked trunk and is standing on a balcony several stories above. What a guy!   Scott dodges some more maddened civilians bent on driving a stake through his heart or spraying him with a fire hose or shoving him into an iron maiden. He escapes each time and meets Barda. Doctor Bedlam appears, looking like the Kree Great Intelligence, and complains that Scott is cheating by accepting Barda’s help. Actually, Scott has escaped all these threats with the help of his tiny “multi-cube.” It even protects him from illusory monsters and puts all the civilians to sleep, allowing Scott and Barda to exit the building unharmed, winning the bet with Doctor Bedlam. Why didn’t Scott do that last issue?  My Two Cents: This issue is mainly about Big Barda, an Apokolips soldier who for as-yet unknown reasons in their shared past is helping Scott. Doctor Bedlam is an afterthought whose story is half-wrapped up in a flashback after Scott and Barda return to his home for dinner. I wonder whether 1971 readers were surprised to find the man cooking a pot roast dinner for his lady friend. They were probably surprised by her choice of dinnerwear.  The multi-cube is quite a Deus ex Machina, solving whatever problem is at hand, like the sonic screwdriver on Doctor Who. Already the lettercol is running complaints from readers who want to see Scott’s escapes make some kind of logical sense, but there are so many of them, coming so quickly on each other’s heels, that an appeal to magic would be just as useful. One of the letter writers is “Mark Gruenwald, Oshkosh, Wisc,” who recommends that Darkseid’s attack on Earth should be reflected in all of DC’s titles, not just the ones helmed by Kirby. Gruenwald also wonders aloud, given how well Kirby is handling both writing and art here, whether Stan really had much to do with Kirby’s work at Marvel. The editor responds cryptically: “As to Marvel, more imagination is used in the credits than in any given story. So wonder no more, Mark.” That is to say, Stan putting his own name in the credits was his most creative contribution to Kirby’s work at Marvel. Ouch!
|
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on May 21, 2019 11:26:55 GMT -5
There are days when I dearly wished Gruenwald would have stuck to writing. When he became an editor, his arrogance was magnified a thousandfold.
Something many remain unaware of (or simply refuse to accept) is that at Marvel, Jack Kirby wrote ALL his stories. With ZERO input from anyone. And came up with "story ideas" for countless more he didn't illustrate.
The editor would re-write the stories at the dialogue stage. Sometimes he would follow what the real writer would put down, but just as often, he would make arbitrary changes, which simplied things, dumbed them down, sometimes mutilating the personalities of the characters involved, and even destroying the logic or intent of the stories. Plot holes & continuity problems abounded, NONE of which existed in Kirby's intended work.
In effect... there was NEVER any "collaboration". There was only "mutilation". Like a brand-new house, conceived, designed & built by one man. And then someone comes along and scrawls all over it with a can of spray-paint.
I can never remember the guy who wrote the specific article for THE JACK KIRBY COLLECTOR, but... check out FANTASTIC FOUR #6: "Captives of the Deadly Duo". It's the single BEST portrayal of Sub-Mariner in all of the 60s. And for decades, I never quite knew why.
JACK KIRBY wrote the published dialogue in that issue. It's 10 times better than any of the issues that surround it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 21, 2019 12:05:57 GMT -5
Something many remain unaware of (or simply refuse to accept) is that at Marvel, Jack Kirby wrote ALL his stories. With ZERO input from anyone. And came up with "story ideas" for countless more he didn't illustrate. The editor would re-write the stories at the dialogue stage. Sometimes he would follow what the real writer would put down, but just as often, he would make arbitrary changes, which simplied things, dumbed them down, sometimes mutilating the personalities of the characters involved, and even destroying the logic or intent of the stories. Plot holes & continuity problems abounded, NONE of which existed in Kirby's intended work. In effect... there was NEVER any "collaboration". There was only "mutilation". Like a brand-new house, conceived, designed & built by one man. And then someone comes along and scrawls all over it with a can of spray-paint.  |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 21, 2019 12:32:07 GMT -5
This road is heavily travelled and gets pretty heated. I tend to side with Mark Evanier, who witnessed things first hand )as well as corroboration from others at Marvel): Stan and Jack had story conferences. Both talked like they were agreeing on the same story. Jack plotted the story based on his ideas and drew it at the same time, adding dialogue in the margins. Stan dialogued the pages, based on the plot in his head, ignoring much (if not all) of Kirby's suggested dialogue. Rarely were their plots the same; yet, the finished product was something more, a synthesis of the two ideas. Same with Ditko. Stan added much of the personality and characterization, while Kirby and Ditko were more often coming up with the villains and situations. That was most evident on FF and Spider-Man. Kirby had more input on Thor and the Tales of Asgard stories and it reflected his storytelling more. Ditko did the same on Dr Strange. Even Stan said he was less involved on those titles.
Jack and Steve were doing more than drawing Stan's plots and Stan was doing more than just writing Jack & Steve's words. Stans writing was best with Kirby and Ditko, who were storytellers (plotters and artists) of great magnitude; but, Jack and Steve were also better when Stan was writing their dialogue. Stan as editor did write the credits and Stan was the company man and had an ego; but, too many of these arguments seem less about acknowledging the strengths of the artist at the expense of Stan; or, vice-versa. Their work was a synthesis; a collaboration. Steve and Jack wrote great things without Stan; but, they lacked a certain element that was there in FF and Spider-Man. That element came from Stan. Stan lacked a certain spark when he worked with other artists or characters; without those two great idea men, Stan struggled with creating something fresh and would fall back on soap opera or cliches, when he was stuck for an idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on May 21, 2019 12:40:15 GMT -5
I feel Kirby was probably like Kurtzman and developed stories visually, letting the images tell it and adding words as needed.  |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 22, 2019 6:34:10 GMT -5
Forever People #5 “Sonny Sumo” (October 1971) The Story: 8.5 pages are devoted to Sonny Sumo fighting a giant robot in some sort of private exhibition match. He wins but suffers grievous wounds. In his dressing room he finds the Mother Box, which communicates with him, heals him, and then teleports him to the Happyland amusement park in which the Forever People are being tormented.  Sonny Sumo frees each of the Forever People in turn with the aid of Mother Box. When confronted by a dozen armed guards, Mother Box puts them to sleep. There’s a lot of Deus in this Machina! But Sonny Sumo appears to deserve some of the credit; Big Bear declares that Sonny Sumo must be the one who knows the secret of Anti-Life. Sonny doesn’t know that he knows any such thing, though. Darkseid electronically overhears this conversation, so now he knows that Sonny Sumo is his next target.  My Two Cents: Kirby makes good on his commitment to introducing a new character in each issue, and also the cover blurb about seeing Anti-Life in action. I thought it would involve mental domination; I guess putting people to sleep counts. This time, the Forever People play damsel while Sonny Sumo does, um, the heavy lifting in this issue. No explanation yet as to how he can shred steel with his bare hands. I guess he’s just that awesome. 
|
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on May 22, 2019 15:11:38 GMT -5
NOBODY ever witnessed a story conference between Kirby & his editor. Certainly not ever Mark Evanier.
But multiple interviews over the years have been published with other people who worked for "ye editor" in the 60s... Bill Everett, Dick Ayers, Joe Orlando, Wally Wood, John Romita, Stan Goldberg, etc. Every one of them has told the identical story. THEY wrote the stories with ZERO input from the editor, who just sat there with nothing to say, except for "That's good! Give me 20 pages!"
And then he would write the dialogue, any damn way he cared to. I know one person online who pointed out, the problem isn't that he didn't do enough, the problem is that he did TOO MJCH. Not only should he not have been writing dialogue for other people's stories of which he had no comprehension or respect... he should not have been RE-WRITING the stories, changing them into things they were never intended to be.
And he got WORSE at it in the late 60s, especially after Martin Goodman sold the company, and the new owners got terrified when they found out NO written contracts of any kind existed between the company & Kirby.
They spent 3 years trying to "run him off" and make him quit.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 22, 2019 16:59:54 GMT -5
NOBODY ever witnessed a story conference between Kirby & his editor. Certainly not ever Mark Evanier. But multiple interviews over the years have been published with other people who worked for "ye editor" in the 60s... Bill Everett, Dick Ayers, Joe Orlando, Wally Wood, John Romita, Stan Goldberg, etc. Every one of them has told the identical story. THEY wrote the stories with ZERO input from the editor, who just sat there with nothing to say, except for "That's good! Give me 20 pages!" And then he would write the dialogue, any damn way he cared to. I know one person online who pointed out, the problem isn't that he didn't do enough, the problem is that he did TOO MJCH. Not only should he not have been writing dialogue for other people's stories of which he had no comprehension or respect... he should not have been RE-WRITING the stories, changing them into things they were never intended to be. And he got WORSE at it in the late 60s, especially after Martin Goodman sold the company, and the new owners got terrified when they found out NO written contracts of any kind existed between the company & Kirby. They spent 3 years trying to "run him off" and make him quit. Actually, John Romita has told stories of Stan & Jack conversing, with each not really hearing the other and acting like they were in total agreement. i distinctly recall an interview with him on the subject, in either the Jack Kirby Collector or Comic Book Artist. |
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on May 22, 2019 17:16:20 GMT -5
And now back to the Fourth World discussion. Sonny Sumo. Typical Kirby craziness with creating something distinct and unusual from a culture he likely knew little about but had heard of or read some little bits of Japanese Sumo wrestlers. It stuck in his and eventually came to fruition on the drawing board. Sonny no more looks like a sumo or acts like a sumo than I do, and I ain't no sumo, let me tell ya!!! And yet there is something unique about Sonny that wishes there was more about him in comics. Why hasn't anyone taken this concept and ran with it all the way, crafting some funky fun over the top comic book creativity? I want to see a Sonny Sumo and Flex Mentallo monthly right now! Let the oiled pose downs begin!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 22, 2019 17:45:29 GMT -5
And now back to the Fourth World discussion. Sonny Sumo. Typical Kirby craziness with creating something distinct and unusual from a culture he likely knew little about but had heard of or read some little bits of Japanese Sumo wrestlers. It stuck in his and eventually came to fruition on the drawing board. Sonny no more looks like a sumo or acts like a sumo than I do, and I ain't no sumo, let me tell ya!!! And yet there is something unique about Sonny that wishes there was more about him in comics. Why hasn't anyone taken this concept and ran with it all the way, crafting some funky fun over the top comic book creativity? I want to see a Sonny Sumo and Flex Mentallo monthly right now! Let the oiled pose downs begin!!!! Sonny did get a large part of Morrison's Final Crisis #2 but then basically disappeared from the "story," which was really more an extended sequence of Fourth World homages. He does get to fight a giant robot again, as in his appearance in The Forever People.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 23, 2019 3:33:53 GMT -5
NOBODY ever witnessed a story conference between Kirby & his editor. Certainly not ever Mark Evanier. But multiple interviews over the years have been published with other people who worked for "ye editor" in the 60s... Bill Everett, Dick Ayers, Joe Orlando, Wally Wood, John Romita, Stan Goldberg, etc. Every one of them has told the identical story. THEY wrote the stories with ZERO input from the editor, who just sat there with nothing to say, except for "That's good! Give me 20 pages!" And then he would write the dialogue, any damn way he cared to. I know one person online who pointed out, the problem isn't that he didn't do enough, the problem is that he did TOO MJCH. Not only should he not have been writing dialogue for other people's stories of which he had no comprehension or respect... he should not have been RE-WRITING the stories, changing them into things they were never intended to be. And he got WORSE at it in the late 60s, especially after Martin Goodman sold the company, and the new owners got terrified when they found out NO written contracts of any kind existed between the company & Kirby. They spent 3 years trying to "run him off" and make him quit. Actually, John Romita has told stories of Stan & Jack conversing, with each not really hearing the other and acting like they were in total agreement. i distinctly recall an interview with him on the subject, in either the Jack Kirby Collector or Comic Book Artist. Both. THe Journal Interview is offline (unless somebody has a suscription): But here's his Comic Book Artist Interview:We would have a verbal plot together. First it was two or three hours, then it was an hour. Stan would tell me who he would like to be the villain, and personal life "threads" he would like carried on. Generally we would select the setting; sometimes we wouldn't even have time to select the settings, like "it takes place on a subway." He would give me that, and tell me where he wanted it to end. I would have to fill in all the blanks.
CBA: You would take care of all the subplots? John: A lot of times I injected stuff in there. For instance, when he asked me to do Robertson, I think I decided to make him a black man. I can't swear to that.Romita ALSO says: 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. Then he would say "The Kingpin.
Contradictory, but it's explained a lot better in TCJ interview. I'll see if I can dig it up in the next couple days. And since we're here. Dick Ayers says he originally worked full script at Marvel: ( Comics Journal Online, May 2014) Well, for a long time. Stan, as fast as I brought in a story — first, I’d pencil it, then put the lettering in, then he’d say, “Don’t bother with all that. Just bring in the work when you get it done.” So that was great. I loved working that way. And every time I went in with a story, I went home with a script.(Also note that Ayers recalls a hands-on editorial conversation between Lee and Ditko.) Later on that switched to short synopsis: ( Comics Interview Magazine, 1991) DICK: Like you were saying, the synopsis that I would get a few short lines, that’s all, or a conversation on the telephone like we’re talking, and don’t take shorthand. I could just keep tabs on what I could and then right away after I hung up to go write out my plot.
I can't find much from Gil Kane about working with Lee, but Gil is always effusive in his praise for Stan: ( Sparring with Gil Kane pg. 60) It would be as though Stan and Jack were two berserkers who compulsively pounded everything with the same intensity, exactly the same focus, the same kind of effort. What they've really done is converted the entire field. Conversely: Stan Goldberg was pretty much left alone on the coloring front ( Interview with Comic Book Resources, Jan 20 2012.) A lot of material but Stan always wanted me to do the covers. I knew what he liked and he left it up to me.
Although Stan would offer the occasional suggestion. Re: The Hulk. I'm almost sure I came up with the idea of green. The jolly green giant was very popular in advertising. If I'm not mistaken, I think the first issue he was in gray and I think that was Stan's suggestion. I told him it's not going to work. He said, "Give it a shot,"
Wally Wood was definitely angry that he did more than his fair share of the writing, though: (From The Life and Legend of Wallace Wood, page 248.)" I enjoyed working with Stan [Lee] 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 like I was writing the book but not being paid for writing.
"Evanier: You did write one issue, as I recall-- Wood: One yes [Daredevil #10]. I persuaded him to let me write one by myself since I was doing 99% of the writing already. I wrote it, handed it in, and he said it was hopeless. He said he'd have to rewrite it all and write the next issue himself. [Wood later says that Stan Lee changed "five words: and published the story as written.]
Although I guess this interview should not be accepted as truth because it is written by Mark Evanier, who was Kirby's assistant, biographer, and close friend. But, I mean, really. Who are you gonna believe? The guy who knew Kirby and devoted his life to Kirby-ology or an angry guy on the internet. Obviously we SHOULD discount everything EVANIER SAYS because he CLEARLY does not WRITE in ALL CAPS at RANDOM intervals and THEREFORE has NO AUTHORITY. I'm honestly not finding a full inteview with Joe Orlando (Who I remember being pretty angry with Stan) or Bill Everett (who quite liked Stan, IIRC, although Everett was never a model employee.) I'll try to head on over to the Comic Art Collection at Michigan State in the next couple days and do some research. Edit: If someone wants to make this it's own thread that would be cool. I used to have this argument all the time, it's been a while, and I've missed it. I also got better at it in the interim. Edit 2: Here's an unsourced mini-quote from Orlando. Being of a scholarly bent we will not accept this as accurate, but it does strike me as fairly true to the kinds of things I remember Orlando saying about his 3 issue run on Daredevil. Edit 3: Orlando did a fair amount of work for pre-Marvel Marvel between 1956-58. I assume he worked full script there - All evidence seems to indicate the Marvel Method debuted in the early '60s - but I don't know how many of those scripts Stan wrote personally. (If any) |
|
