Kirby & Lee: Stuf’ Said!: The complex genesis of the Marvel Universe, in its

Can a book that is basically a succession of quotations from two people over time, albeit interspersed with the author's observations and analysis, make entertaining and absorbing reading? The answer is unequivocally yes, and that is a great tribute to John Morrow's skills at writing, selection, and organization. This fascinating book itself is, in addition, testament to his talent and proficiency as a researcher.With regard to the subject matter of the book, it might be worth setting the scene by juxtaposing two judgments about the development of the Marvel Universe. Both were made in 1980 in the U.S. comics press and were articulated by esteemed comics historians: Mike Tiefenbacher and Murray R. Ward. The amount of documentary material and research that has appeared in the intervening 40 years might lead one to stress that we know far more about the matter of Kirby’s and Lee’s contributions in 2020 than we did in 1980. But remember that, along with their own massive researches, Tiefenbacher and Ward both had the benefit of having been steeped in the convention discussions and other direct interactions with key figures in the 1960s and 1970s that were not recorded for posterity and are irretrievably lost today. So while we have acquired more data since 1980, we have lost information too, information that these two researchers had. What were their judgments? On the one hand, Tiefenbacher wrote in The Comics Reader #180 (June, 1980): “Jack [Kirby] had covered the same ground pretty well with THOR (which he did INDEED plot himself, just as he had with most of his pre-’70 Marvel work)…” Ward, on the other hand, wrote in Comics Feature #6 (October, 1980): “Lee, despite his current lack of involvement in the comics scene in any but a public-relations capacity, cannot be denied his place as the premiere comics scripter of the 1960s, the man who created the Marvel Universe.” As these quotations indicate, even experts have drawn greatly different conclusions from the available evidence.What I will largely focus on below is not the issue of 1960s Marvel Comics' creation but one even closer to the book’s main concern—whether Kirby received public creative credit, particularly after 1970, from Lee for his contribution to the creating and plotting of their joint 1960s work.I do not disagree with those who have remarked that it is likely that a stronger factual and historical case for Stan Lee's role in generating the Marvel universe (both characters and storylines) exists than the book implies. I also think that Stan Lee gave more acknowledgment of Jack Kirby's and Steve Ditko's status as co-creators than is implied by this and other accounts. Likewise, Marvel Comics executives gave verbal acknowledgment (as distinct from financial or legal acknowledgment) of the fact of Ditko's and Kirby's co-creator roles long before recent legal settlements. In that light, recent years' developments in the area of Marvel's acknowledgments to Kirby should be seen as breakthroughs that formalized the appropriate acknowledgments and gave a financial dimension to them, not as events that saw Kirby's co-creator status being explicitly accepted for the first time.Let me give a few instances that highlight the above points--as well as some material on the record that suggests that the Lee interpretation of events might be stronger than implied by this fine book.* I thought Morrow could include include more of Roy Thomas' 1970s statements that seemed supportive of the Lee interpretation. For example, Sean Howe's 2012 book (p. 119) quotes Roy Thomas in Comic Fandom Monthly #3 (November, 1971) on Kirby's “near-paranoid delusions” that he created and “even wrote” Marvel comics. Also, in the letters page of What If #11 (October, 1978), Roy Thomas said that that issue of What If “represents, in its own way, the first time Jack has *written* an F.F. story…” In the late 1970s, as in later years, Thomas was willing to depart publicly from Stan Lee's account of events on key issues (e.g., whether Lee knew in advance that the Gwen Stacy character was to be killed), so his 1978 remark is especially notable.* Morrow states of Lee's remarks over the years that while "effusive in his praise for Kirby," he typically stopped short of "giving him equal credit for creating" Marvel (pp. 151-152). While this may be true, I suspect that the record contains more substantial Lee acknowledgments of Kirby and Ditko as creators than the book implies. I am strengthened in this conjecture by the known existence of remarks Lee volunteered along these lines, such as his reference in his foreword to the 1979 Amazing Spider Man trade paperback (p. 7) to "Sturdy Steve Ditko, who was our first pace-setting, web-creating artist...." (This volume contained reprints of post-Ditko stories only, so this remark was not dictated by the literal contents of the book.)* With regard to Marvel executives' early acknowledgments, some examples are: (1) Jim Shooter's reference in "Bullpen Bulletins" (in Marvel comics dated August 1986) to "Steve Ditko, Jack Kirby and the many other outstanding artists/co-creators with whom Stan worked in the sixties creating and building the Marvel Universe"; (2) Shooter's reference (one of his last public statements as Marvel Editor-in-Chief) in "Bullpen Bulletins" (in Marvel comics dated January 1987) to "Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko and the other great artists who co-created with Stan many of Marvel's greatest characters..."; (3) Marvel executive editor Mark Gruenwald's remark, in Amazing Heroes #146 (August 1, 1988), that "Stan Lee, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko founded the Marvel Universe."* On page 129, Morrow gives an analysis of a 1979 Stan Lee quote "equating inkers... with the penciler," which Morrow suggests is not right on the grounds that the inker doesn't actually contribute to the story and plot. While I would agree that the other parallels Stan Lee made in the quotation (i.e., comparisons of the penciler with the colorist and letterer) are not well taken, it would seem that the inker's contribution is potentially so big that it can make a difference to the story as far as the reader's enjoyment is concerned (e.g., in making the drawings near-photo-realistic drawings when the original pencils did not have this quality; the vast differences in results across John Byrne's Fantastic Four issues, depending on who was the inker of Byrne's pencils, strike me as an example). Lee himself said (in Yorkshire Post, October 13, 1976): "A mediocre penciler's work can be made to look good by a skillful inker. Conversely, a bad inker can actually hurt the work of a good pencil artist."

This is a very important piece of work. Morrow very diligently excavates, examines, and parses every statement, interview, and passing comment from Stan Lee and Jack Kirby in an attempt to apportion credit and blame to these titanic creators. It's an engaging read, like a great police procedural. However, the author's attempts to claim objectivity are as transparent as Sue Storm: he says as much in the introduction, having been an expert witness for the Kirby clan in a seminal lawsuit. This is too bad; all of the Kirby enthusiasts enter this complex arena with a Skurge-size axe to grind. Also, there's a Mole Man-esque myopia (ok, I'll stop) about what makes comics--particularly the Marvel Age of Comics--so memorable. It's not just the action sequences or the panel-to-panel conflict; it's the characterizations, the interior monologues, the dialogue, the ongoing story lines, the catch phrases. There's no discussion about, say, the still-resonant Spider-Man#50, which Kirby had nothing to do with, let alone the innumerable soap operas, classics tag lines, and personal dramas that must of have been Stan's sole purview. And what's wrong with being the promotional voice of Marvel? Stan's Soapbox, small and large, was what told a generation of comic fans that they were to be respected and shared a deep personal commonality. Weighed against, say, Kirby's turgid, impenetrable Fourth World universe, I think Stan's vision for comics was more transformative and inclusive, when the day is done. Of course, Stan's passing, which was not anticipated by the author, makes this all the more poignant. I'd ask fans of the Universe--rather than Kirby partisans--what made the Universe so memorable and made it feel like a special club all their own. And a lot of that has to do with Stan.

I'm a sucker for these "behind the scenes" history of comics style books, especially Marvel history. Good stuff. It's obviously slanted towards the Pro-Kirby argument, but the author does his best to remain neutral and gives quotes supporting both sides of the "who created what" argument that's gone on for decades. When the author speculates something, or makes educated guesses, it is noted as such.I'd read/seen several of the quotes included in this book (mostly Stan Lee's) in various places over the years, MMW intros, interviews, etc. But they do a SUPER AMAZING exhaustive job on researching each key point in Marvel's history in an effort to root out exactly who contributed what. The book also contains insight and quotes from a who's who of all time classic comic creators besides Lee & Kirby, including Joe Simon, Roy Thomas, John Severin, Wally Wood, misc members of the Marvel staff in the 60s and more.They even dig deep in to letters that Lee wrote to fans back in the day with responses to letters published in the letter's columns. Like I said, exhaustive research. Well done!

...so well told. Black Bolt and his ironic screaming of the title on the splash page prepares the reader for a great ride. I'm sure, by now, everyone is set in their 'who said what/did what' point of view when it comes to Kirby and Lee and the story of getting proper credit and compensation for their work and this book will do little to change anyone's mind. However, it elegantly and eloquently gives us all of the quotes (in context) for the players in order to once again, revisit this sorry saga. With added input from Ditko quotes and many others, it gives a good account of this murky story. The book is the usual great quality expected from the publisher.So, 5 stars. Can't recommend it enough.

Another excellent from Twomorrows, with all information based on the spoken word / articles etc said at the time and then placed together to form a coherent timeline and offering some understanding to the creation of a number of the comics of the 60s and beyond by Jack Kirby, Romita, Wally Wood, Steve Ditko and Stan Lee. Guess this is about as comprehensive as it is ever going to be about the background to the development of Galactus, Surfer, Black Panther, FF themselves and many more as well as details of copyrights, disagreements, Marvel method, lettering, inking, resignations, etc. The book also includes many sketches, original pages, documents of the time, etc. Totally recommended.