Steve Ditko actually wrote about Spider-man... A LOT 5 5

[theCapraAegagrus]

10 minutes ago, F For Fake said:

Stan was great at selling Stan, for sure. And he was a great mascot for Marvel. No question.

Kinda like your cat and Frosted Flakes?

[F For Fake]

3 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Kinda like your cat and Frosted Flakes?

Well I never...!

[Prince Namor]

That’s absurd. There are plenty of individual creative people in the world of comics who both write and draw their own material. 
 

The truth is STAN couldn’t stand on his own because he can’t DRAW. 
 

Jack wrote and drew the 4th World stuff just fine on his own. Marvel fans hate it, because it doesn’t hold their hand and spell out everything going on - but people who enjoy comics for the visual aspect of it, see it as some of Kirby’s best work. 
 

Would it have sold more if it had been dialogued by Lee and sold at Marvel? For sure. But I don’t measure success by sales. Marvel is the biggest publisher of comics in the USA right now, and I can’t read a doggone thing they publish. 
 

Most of my favorite creators write and draw their own work: Charles Burns, Dan Clowes, Geof Darrow, Richard Corben, etc. 

There’s plenty of creators throughout history who did it on their own: Will Eisner, Mike Allred, Frank Miller (in his prime), Mike Mignola, Jim Starlin, Darwyn Cooke, etc  

It’s mainly in mainstream comics, where a need arises to pump out an assembly line of grossly repetitive nonsense on a weekly basis to keep its endlessly dwindling collector base hypnotized that they feel the need to make everything a group project.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Chuck Gower

[theCapraAegagrus]

"I entertained the man who entertained a thousand men." - Michael Scott

Stan Lee made Ditko better.

[VintageComics]

1 hour ago, Chuck Gower said:

The truth is STAN couldn’t stand on his own because he can’t DRAW. 
 

Jack wrote and drew the 4th World stuff just fine on his own. Marvel fans hate it, because it doesn’t hold their hand and spell out everything going on - but people who enjoy comics for the visual aspect of it, see it as some of Kirby’s best work. 

These two statements really catch my eye.

Stan Lee without an artist to collaborate with wasn't much of a force in the sense that he couldn't create alone. All of his 'best' efforts were obviously collaborative. I always draw things to automotive analogies because I spent 22 years in that industry. The Germans and the British and the American created all sorts of original things over the years  but the Japanese manufacturers came in and took over the automotive markets not by creating much new but by perfecting what the Germans, British and Americans couldn't. And they're still doing it today, putting out amazing world class automobiles using the ideas of their predecessors.

But Jack could tell a story without Stan. And while I have never read or look into DC's 4th world stuff, I have heard several people say (on this forum) that it's some of their favorite Jack Kirby material. It's a matter of taste of course, but I've heard it several times.

I would liken Stan to David Lee Roth. Amazing within the band of Van Halen, decent on his own but really had nothing left by the time he left his prime. David Lee Roth still does a great job of pumping himself on the media but I didn't like the last Van Halen album, I don't like his voice any longer and I find him annoying individually.

I would like Jack Kirby to Sammy Hagar (or even Joe Walsh) in the respect that no matter which band he was in (solo, in an early band or a later band) there was some form of success.

I don't know enough about Ditko to comment (except what I've read here) but he sounds like the dude who would leave a band on principle and never play with them again, even if it meant zillions of dollars.

On a side note, a local guy used to be Justin Bieber's guitarist growing up. He refuses to play with Bieber because he doesn't like the music. All of his friends are saying "Just play with the dude for a year and make your million and then do what you want!" He refuses to out of principle. He doesn't like the music.

Is one greater of the 3 than the other?

That's a different debate and probably impossible to answer.

Edited February 19, 2020 by VintageComics

[Timely]

Based on the recent info & interviews, here's my take on Ditko's beliefs.

1. Any art given back is considered a gift... if no prearranged contract exists as to its ownership.

2. The art was made by many people, so single ownership of a page by an artist would not be acceptable.

3. Marvel owned the art as they paid all involved to have it made.

[NoMan]

I believe SD went to the 1964 NYC comic con. He saw some fans pass some art work (his?) to each other and found it disrespectful as SD claims they "threw without care" the art to each other. Those involve dispute this and say some air caught the artwork it and it only seem to slam down between them. Or something like this. Because of this evil event he never went to another convention.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of that book about the 1964 NYC comic con can add to this, or correct it.

I love my letters from SD. They are in bags and boards with more care than the comics themselves. And yes he was fine with you writing him as long as you asked a particular question. 

Does anyone know the story about all the dead babies found in brown paper bags (to make some political point) all over NYC that SD wanted to put in a SM comic?

Gotta love my wife. She insisted on knocking on his door. I felt it was wrong, but hell, anybody else married here. A happy wife is a happy life. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by NoMan

[MetalPSI]

5 hours ago, BaronSamedi said:

Well Put!

Hard to argue that Scars on Broadway was successful without Serj Tankian (System of a Down) despite a pretty decent solo effort and whatever happened to Jason Newsted after he left Metallica?

When it comes to creative productivity, two minds will always operate with more effectiveness then one, so long as those two minds work in unison for one objective. And that objective was to build Marvel into what it is today, by continuing to entertain the masses while lining the owners pockets

Steve Ditko has to be honest with himself in this regard, and maybe he never wanted the spotlight to begin with.

Aging millionaire takes segway into a young band, who think they are awesome because they landed Newsted, only to find fat millionaires are lazy and want to do what THEY want to do.

Jason Newsted is a very sad example of what happens when bands fall out due to creative differences, and you can add Serj to that pile as money is exactly what has gotten in the way of greatness of that band. SOAD was the voice of a genre, pioneering a niche and fell apart because money DOES change people, whether they think so or not.

Haha, sorry, forgot I was on a comic forum for a minute...

[topofthetotem]

2 hours ago, IkewithMike said:

Aging millionaires 

That’s a great band name! 

[sfcityduck]

17 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

 

The notion that Stan Lee sucks because he does not draw the stories he writes is absurd.  The history of comics is full of great writers who work with artists.  In fact, it is fair to say that comic’s most influential character, Superman, was largely created by a writer and many of the greatest comic stories were the product of writer-artist collaborations.  Comics by writers like Gaiman, Moore, etc. are more than ample evidence to establish the import of writers and writing to the creation of great comics.  

So this line of attack on Stan is way over the top.  

I like Kirby, but his best work was in collaboration with others. Nothing wrong with that.  So Too for Stan.

 

[Bronty]

1 hour ago, sfcityduck said:

The notion that Stan Lee sucks because he does not draw the stories he writes is absurd.  

 

Yeah.    Its like attacking Kirby because he was too busy drawing to run the company like Stan did.    The eyes roll.

Clearly one of the philosophical divides here is whether or not the success of Marvel is solely due to creative or whether its due to creative plus administrative and promotional.

I tend towards the latter.    Chuck seems to tend towards the former and seems to have the idea that as long as you made a good comic, enormous success would take care of itself.    I don't agree.    

Edited February 20, 2020 by Bronty

[VintageComics]

1 hour ago, sfcityduck said:

The notion that Stan Lee sucks because he does not draw the stories he writes is absurd.  The history of comics is full of great writers who work with artists.  In fact, it is fair to say that comic’s most influential character, Superman, was largely created by a writer and many of the greatest comic stories were the product of writer-artist collaborations.  Comics by writers like Gaiman, Moore, etc. are more than ample evidence to establish the import of writers and writing to the creation of great comics.  

So this line of attack on Stan is way over the top.  

I like Kirby, but his best work was in collaboration with others. Nothing wrong with that.  So Too for Stan.

 

He didn't say Stan sucks, though. He said Stan couldn't stand on his own without the artist and there is a lot of truth to this.

Just playing Devil's advocate here because I don't think Stan sucks, but what has Stan done without a great artist behind him?

Here is another way of looking at this.

Stan Lee did the 'writing' and dialogue for all the early issues, right?

Don Heck was a great journeyman artist but his early Marvel stories aren't nearly as compelling as the Ditko or Kirby stories of the same early 60's era (they weren't for me, anyway). How about when Al Hartly or Joe Sinnott did the early Thor / JIM issues? Or the Werner Roth or Jack Sparling early X-me issues? Not nearly as appealing as the stories with Kirby artwork.

So there is some truth to the argument that Stan's stories were only as good as the artist that rendered them and brought them to life.

As a counterpoint, it's also true that Ditko and Kirby weren't as great without Stan but in comics, being a visual medium they seemed to have more legs than Stan in comics.

I don't see the same demand for Heck, Roth, Sparling or Sinnott artwork that I see for Kirby and Ditko artwork either.

Did Stan every write anything great outside of comics?

 

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by VintageComics

[theCapraAegagrus]

6 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

...Did Stan every write anything great outside of comics?

I don't think so. Not that I am aware of.

[bb8]

1 hour ago, VintageComics said:

He didn't say Stan sucks, though. He said Stan couldn't stand on his own without the artist and there is a lot of truth to this.

Just playing Devil's advocate here because I don't think Stan sucks, but what has Stan done without a great artist behind him?

Here is another way of looking at this.

Stan Lee did the 'writing' and dialogue for all the early issues, right?

Don Heck was a great journeyman artist but his early Marvel stories aren't nearly as compelling as the Ditko or Kirby stories of the same early 60's era (they weren't for me, anyway). How about when Al Hartly or Joe Sinnott did the early Thor / JIM issues? Or the Werner Roth or Jack Sparling early X-me issues? Not nearly as appealing as the stories with Kirby artwork.

So there is some truth to the argument that Stan's stories were only as good as the artist that rendered them and brought them to life.

As a counterpoint, it's also true that Ditko and Kirby weren't as great without Stan but in comics, being a visual medium they seemed to have more legs than Stan in comics.

I don't see the same demand for Heck, Roth, Sparling or Sinnott artwork that I see for Kirby and Ditko artwork either.

Did Stan every write anything great outside of comics?

 

 

Silver Surfer 1-17 stands out to me as his best material not connected immediately connected with Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko. I realize Silver Surfer 1 is a re-telling, but it's one of the best origin stories I've ever read in comics. The introduction of Mephisto stands out to me as well. His over-the-top, melodramatic writing style lends itself very well to the Surfer. I actually also remember enjoying his collaboration with Moebius on Parable as well. Now, I can't say how much is John Buscema and how much is Moebius, but I did find it to be some of his most enjoyable work.

[VintageComics]

15 minutes ago, bb8 said:

Silver Surfer 1-17 stands out to me as his best material not connected immediately connected with Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko. I realize Silver Surfer 1 is a re-telling, but it's one of the best origin stories I've ever read in comics. The introduction of Mephisto stands out to me as well. His over-the-top, melodramatic writing style lends itself very well to the Surfer. I actually also remember enjoying his collaboration with Moebius on Parable as well. Now, I can't say how much is John Buscema and how much is Moebius, but I did find it to be some of his most enjoyable work.

The Surfer run is one of my favorite runs in comics, for sure, and that's a great observation. 

I would venture to say that it wouldn't have been nearly as successful if Kirby had drawn it (issue 18 not being on par with 1-17).

I think that after seeing a lot of Buscema's work in Avengers, his art really complimented the melodrama well that always surrounded the Surfer. John's art looks dramatic even without words.

Does anyone have any excerpts or discussions about who did what with Stan in regards to the Surfer story lines? Or any uber Buscema fans who may know John's work better than the average reader have any comments? 

I think that it's far to say that at the very least the success between artist and writer!scripted should have been split 50/50 (letters don't really sway a reader, do they? And colors weren't advanced enough back in the 60's to really influence me - that came in the 80's when printing techniques advances to where colors and letters DID influence stories).

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

On a side note, I read an interesting interview with Mark Tremont of Alterbridge (formerly Creed) and he said that even though he and Myles Kennedy do most of the writing they split all credits equally among the band members. 

That's a very refreshing example in a capitalist world where everyone is fighting for their fractional share. 

[shadroch]

Just read a very old interview where Stan is talking about Ditko. He mentions how he spoke to Steve about a one time return to do a Spidey story and Ditko responded by saying he wouldn't do another Spider-Man story until Martin Goodman paid him the royalties he promised him. 

Seems there might be more than one side to the story.

[sfcityduck]

3 hours ago, VintageComics said:

.

Did Stan every write anything great outside of comics?

 

 

There are many great writers who never write anything great outside of their chosen medium.  In fact, the number of book authors who write great movies is very very small.  So too with tv writers.  And there are a lot of great playwrites and -script writers who can't write a book.  So this is not an argument that works for me.

Comic book writing is its own art form.  Being a great comic writer is cause for celebration.  Comic writers do not need to cross-over before they can be celebrated.

[sfcityduck]

1 hour ago, VintageComics said:

 

On a side note, I read an interesting interview with Mark Tremont of Alterbridge (formerly Creed) and he said that even though he and Myles Kennedy do most of the writing they split all credits equally among the band members. 

That's a very refreshing example in a capitalist world where everyone is fighting for their fractional share. 

U2 and Led Zeppelin and a number of other bands did that.  I think it was largely a reaction to the Beatles' unfortunate way of assigning credit.

[theCapraAegagrus]

2 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

There are many great writers who never write anything great outside of their chosen medium.  In fact, the number of book authors who write great movies is very very small.  So too with tv writers.  And there are a lot of great playwrites and --script writers who can't write a book.  So this is not an argument that works for me.

Comic book writing is its own art form.  Being a great comic writer is cause for celebration.  Comic writers do not need to cross-over before they can be celebrated.

I have a feeling that Metallica would be poor at writing/performing pop music...

[sfcityduck]

3 hours ago, VintageComics said:

He didn't say Stan sucks, though. He said Stan couldn't stand on his own without the artist and there is a lot of truth to this.

What he actually said is this:

23 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

That’s absurd. There are plenty of individual creative people in the world of comics who both write and draw their own material.  The truth is STAN couldn’t stand on his own because he can’t DRAW. ... It’s mainly in mainstream comics, where a need arises to pump out an assembly line of grossly repetitive nonsense on a weekly basis to keep its endlessly dwindling collector base hypnotized that they feel the need to make everything a group project.

Sounds to me like he's making a judgment call against collaborative work (like Stan's) and for one-man shows, with the collaborative work being denigrated.