|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Mar 30, 2024 18:29:29 GMT -5
Why would someone take the time to do all that? There are so few people around who even know what Atlas was much less care about what Stan wrote. It seems kind of just angry to me, it's all ancient history at this point. He could be reading those same comics instead, that sounds like more fun. Why do historians take the time to correct the myths and propaganda of the past? Because facts matter. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 30, 2024 18:46:29 GMT -5
Why would someone take the time to do all that? There are so few people around who even know what Atlas was much less care about what Stan wrote. It seems kind of just angry to me, it's all ancient history at this point. He could be reading those same comics instead, that sounds like more fun. Each to their own, but if I was gonna do any kind of statistical project (which in my case, would be related to wrestling), it’d have to be based on something fun and positive. I can’t ever envision doing ANY kind of statistical project that was based on a negative premise or subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2024 19:14:23 GMT -5
Why would someone take the time to do all that? There are so few people around who even know what Atlas was much less care about what Stan wrote. It seems kind of just angry to me, it's all ancient history at this point. He could be reading those same comics instead, that sounds like more fun. Why do historians take the time to correct the myths and propaganda of the past? Because facts matter. Yeah...I don't think this guy was doing a rigorous graduate school thesis on the ancient trade routes of the Mediterranean region. I think this was an angry person who already knew the answer he wanted and was determined to find data to support it. Facts in principle most certainly do matter, but especially in these modern times, those claiming they do it to "correct" myths and propaganda I find are often rather dubious in both their agendas and methods. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2024 19:19:54 GMT -5
We have had 50 years of Marvel corporate history that Stan "created everything" Disney has gone to court over giving other creators credit. And now, when some comic historians try to set the record straight, they are met with derision and attacks on their motives. Yep. Now, if they chilled WAY out and wanted to present some historical findings in a more balanced approach that allowed people to derive their own conclusions, I could see that adding some perspective. But no, putting together a spreadsheet with a STATED agenda to take out Stan, I just can't trust that I'm getting the whole picture. But I'll say it again, not sure why this is such a burning agenda. It's all over, they are all deceased, at some point maybe it's time to move on? |
|
|
|
Post by commond on Mar 30, 2024 19:42:55 GMT -5
If you think the spread sheet is bad, give the Facebook Group a wide berth... Yeesh.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 30, 2024 21:51:18 GMT -5
If you think the spread sheet is bad, give the Facebook Group a wide berth... Yeesh.
I never look at stuff like that and I think doing so may have given you and others a distorted picture of the situation because it seems to me you're mostly concerned with redressing a perceived injustice that doesn't actually exist in the real world outside comic book fan forums and not even most of those (or maybe I just don't see them, this being the only one I look at regularly). |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 31, 2024 7:00:03 GMT -5
Yeah...I don't think this guy was doing a rigorous graduate school thesis on the ancient trade routes of the Mediterranean region. I think this was an angry person who already knew the answer he wanted and was determined to find data to support it.Bingo! Correct answer. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Mar 31, 2024 9:52:13 GMT -5
We have had 50 years of Marvel corporate history that Stan "created everything" Disney has gone to court over giving other creators credit. And now, when some comic historians try to set the record straight, they are met with derision and attacks on their motives. Yep. Now, if they chilled WAY out and wanted to present some historical findings in a more balanced approach that allowed people to derive their own conclusions, I could see that adding some perspective. But no, putting together a spreadsheet with a STATED agenda to take out Stan, I just can't trust that I'm getting the whole picture.
No, you are not getting the whole picture. Propaganda designed to to demonize, then erase one man from a history he shepherded rarely works when objective researchers exist with countering, factual information. It also rarely works when questions are submitted which the propagandists never answer, such as why the post-Stan influenced work of Kirby (IOW, post-60s Marvel) was never held as in high a regard (this includes New Gods) or successful as the work produced when he was working with Stan Lee--the person falsely accused of "stealing" ideas / taking "undeserved" credit.
Again, that fact is never analyzed, as it turns the light of judgement back to Kirby's creativity apart from Stan Lee--which requires comparisons that do not lead to "Kirby is god" conclusions, if one is an honest historian. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Mar 31, 2024 10:43:16 GMT -5
. But I'll say it again, not sure why this is such a burning agenda. It's all over, they are all deceased, at some point maybe it's time to move on? I guess finally acknowledging how much Bill Finger contributed to the creation of Batman was all a silly waste of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2024 11:22:36 GMT -5
. But I'll say it again, not sure why this is such a burning agenda. It's all over, they are all deceased, at some point maybe it's time to move on? I guess finally acknowledging how much Bill Finger contributed to the creation of Batman was all a silly waste of time. I think it's more about when historical curiosity and research (healthy activities I think) turn more into vendettas, or the appearance thereof. As a classic comics reader like all of us here, of course I'm interested when there's new information to consider, and I think we're all sympathetic in general to creators who have received the short end of recognition. But I think there needs to be balance in the approach. That's all I was trying to get at with my statement above, if you find yourself really spiraling on a topic that isn't going to change much of anything in the long run, is it really worth it? But not mean to suggest that history and research don't matter in general. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2024 12:18:44 GMT -5
And in the spirit of trying to bring some of that positivity, I'll just give an example of maybe how the Atlas example could have been alternatively presented:
"Did you know? During the 1950's 'Atlas Comics' era that preceded Marvel's rise to major fame in the 1960's, there were a number of staff writers that included Stan Lee. However, this was prior to Stan taking on much larger prominence in the 60's, co-partnered with heavy collaborators such as Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko among others, who collectively produced the well-known historical phenomenon of the Marvel Comics world. Today I'd like to talk about that earlier Atlas era, and the several writers who had large roles in the creative content of that era."
That feels maybe more objective in tone to me, and personally more interesting as I'd love to learn more about those other writers. And then I could also gain better insights to Stan's history along the way, but again, not as an "agenda".
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 31, 2024 16:23:20 GMT -5
^^ Yeah, there's definitely an agenda at play in that spreadsheet. To be honest, as a fan of all three principal players -- Lee, Ditko and Kirby -- that blatant attempt to sway my opinion and demonise Lee turns me completely off anything that guy has to say. He may have some good points to make, but such a blatant agenda makes me suspicious of the veracity of his evidence and conclusions.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Mar 31, 2024 18:17:53 GMT -5
^^ Yeah, there's definitely an agenda at play in that spreadsheet. To be honest, as a fan of all three principal players -- Lee, Ditko and Kirby -- that blatant attempt to sway my opinion and demonise Lee turns me completely off anything that guy has to say. He may have some good points to make, but such a blatant agenda makes me suspicious of the veracity of his evidence and conclusions. The whole point of it just seemed weird to me, is it really a common belief that Lee created everything or even the majority of the books back in the Atlas age? |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 31, 2024 18:21:20 GMT -5
^^ Yeah, there's definitely an agenda at play in that spreadsheet. To be honest, as a fan of all three principal players -- Lee, Ditko and Kirby -- that blatant attempt to sway my opinion and demonise Lee turns me completely off anything that guy has to say. He may have some good points to make, but such a blatant agenda makes me suspicious of the veracity of his evidence and conclusions. The whole point of it just seemed weird to me, is it really a common belief that Lee created everything or even the majority of the books back in the Atlas age? That’s a good point. |
|
|
|
Post by jason on Apr 1, 2024 17:25:12 GMT -5
A thread devoted to discussing/reviewing the Atlas books would actually be a pretty good idea. Talk about what ideas worked and didnt work, any storytelling innovations, etc. It's kind of a forgotten era of Marvel since, aside from Marvel Boy and the short-lived returns of Sub-Mariner, Captain America, and Torch, there were no superheroes (not counting Groot) and they were basically trying everything to stay alive.
|
|
