Fierce rivalry or overblown? Stan Lee vs Jack Kirby

The legacy of Jack Kirby and Stan Lee, the team that brought about the modern Marvel era, is one that is often described in terms of conflict and disagreement. While there is no doubt there was plenty of both... what was the real working relationship between the two legends of the comic industry?

[@meganw.4927]

I got to go to a Stan Lee panel about 5 years before he died and someone asked about this. He seemed to think that a lot of the tension between him and Kirby was due to him being better at schmoozing the people above them and getting treated better because of it. He also said he regretted not advocating for Kirby more but hadn't realized his job was secure enough to do that at the time.

[@randalldowling1068]

Kirby is kind of like my dad. The older I get, the more I appreciate how smart he was. Stan is like grandpa. The older I get, the more I realize he wasn't always the lovable old guy I grew up with. Neither is perfect, neither was a bad guy.

[@wtk6069]

Good post. Nice way to sum things up.

[@r.j.macready5541]

Well said

[@xanetas]

I empathize much more with the figure of Kirby (Jewish hardworking man from a working class family, amazing artist way ahead of his time) but I also think that we tend to forget that Stan Lee was also a very creative guy, not just a marketing wizzard with charisma. You need to be creative as fuck to work as an editor, and in my opinion he was a terrific and effective writer for the kind of stuff that was published by Marvel on those days...

[@xanetas]

@Aye Yuh Aye Yuh you really think thats why a guy like Denny O'Neill, a respected writer, was widely regarded like one of the best editors on the bussiness? Just for give his opinion? A good editor can literally transform a story for the better with his or her feedback. And for that you need not only need to be creative, you need to know the characters, the mythos, the continuity, wich writer and artis are the best for your title. That requires to give yojr opinion, sure, but it also require creativity and forward thinking. And Im not the only one saying these kind of things. Lots of writers give credit to good editors. Its an essential part of the industry. In fact, lack of good editorial stuff is one of the big problems on comics these days.

[@pulsarstargrave256]

I've stuidied this for years, the "controversy" and what actually happened! It all comes back to the Marvel Method, where Lee would type up plots that he and the artist would develop in a conference; the artist would develop the drawings and storytelling and Stan would later write captions and dialogue! The problem is in the credits, Stan would credit himself as the writer, but Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby were each decent writers capable of coming up with plots on their own! Kirby in particular in the early 60s (before Marvel could afford additional writers to help Lee and his brother Larry Leiber) was working on 8 SERIES providing plots and visual breakdowns for other artists! Ditko demanded a Co Plotter credit while Kirby apparently got the credits ammended to Stan Lee and Jack Kirby without the writer and artist designations! Due to Stan's media appearances, people assumed Stan was the sole genius and Stan didn't do much to disabuse them of that notion. Kirby really started to resent it and in retaliation he stopped volunteering to add new characters if Lee himself didn't contribute them! I don't necessarily agree with that but I understand his frustration! If he wasn't going to get a Co Plotter credit, he should definitely have gotten a raise! He was offered an editorial position but it required he live in New York, which he had to reject because he and his family moved West for personal reasons! Ultimately, WALT DISNEY and his success as an artist cast a gigantic shadow over not just the animation industry but comics creators in both the newspaper strips and comic books! A LOT of people fantsized about being the next Disney, including Stan Lee and Bob Kane, and like Disney, they saw their staff members as interchangeable and replaceable, regardless of whether or not they would admit otherwise to themselves! Eventually, they both appreciated the people who worked for them, but it took an awful long time!

[@bc4315]

The sort of resentment that bubbles up when the media take it upon themselves to crown a single individual in a group effort as the king is something all young creatives would benefit from learning how to manage, however creatives are not educated in any of the disciplines they need to survive in this world, so it's no surprise that artists across the board are experiencing this same effect to this day. It's also been the cause of many a rock band disbanding - one member of the band speaks more than the others, is dubbed the lead/darling of the band by the media and gets all the questions, then all the attention, and members of the band begin to resent that individual through no fault of their own (besides, as you say, doing nothing to disabuse the public of the notion (which is a bit unfair to ask them to do)) but due to the circumstance of being communicative and subsequently focused upon by misled gossip mongers trying to serve the latest batch of fresh meat to their mentally deficient and careless readers.

[@pulsarstargrave256]

@@bc4315 I agree with most of what you say, but I don't think it's "unfair" for the one getting the .lion's share of credit to speak up and correct things. Jim Morrison admitted in public that all The Doors worked on the songs. When Bill Finger same forward and admitted he wrote most of the early Batman stories, Kane never called him a liar and later corraborated Bill's account of his contributions to the development of the sereis (he never made him a full partner, but neither would I, given some of Bill's known problems) but there's no doubt in my mind Kane probably helped him get other jobs at DC because he did the same for others, like Moldoff. I don't think Stan was scared, I just think he was Old School in that he believed "....the guy who comes up with the idea is the creator!" and the rest of the staff are merely appendages! Anytime I had a boss like that, I would work on my own stuff on the side and polish up that resume, just in case!

[@bc4315]

@@pulsarstargrave256 I can see that. I wasn't quite sure if I thought it was fair or not when I typed it. It's a strange thing to me to ask for someone to continuously correct other people's mis-perceptions, it's not like it's the fault or intention of the "Star" in these specific cases, it's more like a situational consequence.

[@pulsarstargrave256]

@@bc4315 In fairness to Lee, I don''t think comic book creators back then were as experienced with dealing with the media as much as creators in other fields, and I think that's true today as well.

[@bc4315]

@@pulsarstargrave256 Totally agreed, that's a good point.

[@deveraalmestica5838]

Stan Lee and Jack Kirby are The best comic writers and comic Artist in comic history .in the1960s No one could replace them .

[@wtk6069]

In Kirby's early-80s Comics Scene Magazine interview, he clearly felt like he had been taken advantage of, and he was very jaded about it. As he said, laughing bitterly, the only thing he didn't write in his classic stories was the credits. Kirby got screwed over many times in his career, and Stan Lee was only one example. The only reason Jack was even at Marvel is DC had blacklisted him because of his feud with Jack Schiff over ownership of the Sky Masters newspaper strip and a land deal. He was a comics genius but naive.

[@pulsarstargrave256]

Indeed, Kirby DEFINITELY had issues with Lee, he created the Lee parody FUNKY FLASHMAN and would mention Lee a lot in interviews unless his wife was there to calm him down. Stan could have eased a lot of the heat if he had said "we" more often while Jack was alive!

[@bobbuster2209]

An interesting topic for today man. I always saw Kirby as the main driving creative force behind the creation of Marvel Comics in the silver age. And like you pointed out Kirby experimented a lot more when he went to DC, though yeah he was almost holding back when he came back to help usher in the Marvel Age of Comics. A lot of people agree that Stan was always the scripter, this statement works with a lot of the things Kirby said in his last interview about Stan and his creative input in those comics. It’s safe to say that Kirby provided the art, stories and a lot of the ideas which Lee then would make changes to those stories or hire inkers to redo a lot of the rougher drawings Kirby made or just remove pages from the story completely. A good example is the death of Bucky Barnes, Kirby said he never had Bucky die or have his death mentioned and was shocked to hear that it was written in that Bucky had been killed in the plane explosion. This makes me think Stan did this from a lot of his statements on sidekicks in the past. Thanks for bringing up Martin Goodman, not too many people remember his involvement and treatment with Kirby. If you can’t tell which side I’ve fallen on in this debate, I’m more on Kirby’s side. I’m more fair to Stan than Alan Moore, though I still recognize Stan did some shady things behind Kirby’s back. Though yeah like you said at the end, both men together brought us almost a decade full of some of the greatest comics ever produced.

[@Corrado9671]

One thing you guys ALL ignore as does most discussions of Stan Lee is that he was the EDITOR or Marvel Comics. It was his job to make editorial changes he felt were called for. Editors at all comicbook companies had this responsibility and it is not held against them. If you think Stan was the only one who ever exercised editorial control over Jack Kirby look at the Kirby work on the Green Arrow stories of the 1950's. Poor art, poor stories, poor dialog... DC felt they were creating stories for young children and Kirby's work there at that time showed it. Or how about Superman's faces being redrawn over Jack's art? I think a a great editor in books, movies or comicbooks is every bit as important and talented as a great artist (like Kirby) or author. For 25 years Stan Lee was the editor and art director at Marvel/Timely. He had to get the books out, on time and commercially viable. Let's give him some credit for that besides being a great promoter and co-creator with Jack.

[@wiseguymaybe]

@@Corrado9671 Stan said in an interview he rarely, if at anytime, ever edited Jack's work, he was that good, according to Stan. As for DC redrawing Superman's face after promising Jack full reign, shows me what kind of liars they are. I'm not so sure that was such a great idea as I would have liked to see Jack's full work on him.

[@billybarnett2846]

This wasn't a Bob Kane/Bill Finger situation where one party took credit for the ideas of the other and locked themselves into a binding contract with the company.

[@bc4315]

Kind of a strange thing to consider - the Bob Kane/Bill Finger situation - considering both of them stole the original idea from The Shadow.

[@mpjedi212]

@@bc4315 Inspiration, which is clear, and obvious, isn't the same as theft. Otherwise, EVERYTHING after 1938 is "theft" of Superman.

[@bc4315]

@@mpjedi212 True, and it's clear and obvious that Batman is straight up theft. I understand there's a lot of stealing allowed in comics, but when you take the name, the sub-title name, the story, and literally lift panels, then...yeah, it's a total heist. Luckily for Batman fans there's a huge history that goes beyond Batman's initial origins. But unless you feel like the only theft possible in comics is if you literally take a comic to the copy machine, then early Batman is straight up dolled-up plagiarism.

[@mpjedi212]

@@bc4315 While 'The Case of the Chemical Syndicate" (a story literally written, penciled, inked and lettered in 3 days) is pretty much lifted from "Partners of Peril," there's precious few other direct "A to Z" lifts in the subsequent early Batman stories, and certainly, but the time we get to BATMAN #1, only a year later, we have Finger and **cough**Kane**cough** introducing concepts like Robin and The Joker, which are groundbreaking and utterly without real precedent. There's no arguing that The Shadow was a tonal inspiration for Batman, and that first story may have been Finger just reaching for the last Pulp mag he'd read because, "holy shit, we need this yesterday!" That simply belies the myriad other inspirational factors, THE BAT WHISPERS, ZORRO, etc, etc....that formed the stew of ideas that allowed Finger and **cough**Kane**cough** to birth the character.

[@bc4315]

@@mpjedi212 I can concede those points as I haven't done exhaustive comparison research of a string of early issues yet, and adjusted my original comment to be less hyperbolic and unfair. I have no doubt that the subsequent history of Batman (even early-ish Batman) adds value. With the amount of theft that happens in comics all over the place, including the syndicate story (sorry, but they probably could only pencil, ink and letter it in 3 days BECAUSE they stole it - and the fact that it took 3 days is definitely not an excuse for stealing it - I could go to the copy machine and do it in less than 3 days, is that an excuse or a pardon for me, too? Would I also be the "creator" of my new character if I erased his ears before copying it and called him "The Dark King"?), I often find the various debates in comics about who did what strange because it's all convoluted and most of the time the people claiming they've been wronged have in turn wronged others, so it all comes off as highly hypocritical. Maybe they should have taken 30 days to write their own story? That way no one could truthfully claim that the original Batman was a complete rip-off. The thing is - the foundational story from which all Batman springs is total theft by any measure, regardless of the value added afterwords. This fact stands true ALONGSIDE the fact that that value was added, the fact that the value was added DOES NOT CHANGE that past or erase that blemish. It's a stain on their legacy, and I don't really feel that bad for either of them if they reap what they've sown. Finding out about this really changed my perspective on all the fans that jump to Finger's defense. Maybe he got what he deserved?

[@jimmyvolakis5194]

Charisma takes you a long way. Stan oozed charisma and that’s what made Marvel climb up. Kirby was the introverted artist and Lee was the extroverted face of the company.

[@robd1329]

I think your right about that. I saw some 70s interview of Stan and he had me in a trance. Imagine sweet talking honey everyday to your bosses at Marvel...im sure they loved Stan. As for Kirby..i dont know anything about his personality

[@jimmyvolakis5194]

@@robd1329 Kirby was a great artist but had the personality of a drywall. Literally the type of guy who’d cure your insomnia by talking

[@robd1329]

@@jimmyvolakis5194 lol. Ive seen his interviews. If i had his talent...shit id put Stan Lee in his place and would have developed an awesome persona! Stan Lee def was the talker.

[@AL-ws5yi]

How does the saying go? There are three sides to a story, yours, mine and the truth. I’m not sure we will ever really know the truth. We can only speculate. They are both still amazing in my book.

[@camoflage61821]

Great video. Stan and Jack are like many great comics teams (Claremont and Cockrum, Claremont and Byrne, Michelinie and Layton, Thomas and Windsor-Smith, Thomas and Adams) where the creative results are greater than the sum of their parts.

[@michaelbell6894]

There has been an historic injustice in the lack of credit Jack received over the years, and as a byproduct an overestimation of Stan's achievements. So naturally you now have an overcorrection in the other direction, where Kirby and Ditko were the true GENIUSES behind Marvel, and Stan just a huckster. Well, there is also the absurd feeling of superiority over normies who think Stan was THE creator of Spider-Man etc., which is essential for all subcultures.

[@Unqualifiedmedicalperson]

Jack: fantastic artist Stan: great writer Nuff said.

[@badfoody]

Stan Lee was a shit writer

[@superthorc6894]

Well regardless it live on vicariously through comics book fans But for me Stan knew how to writing the dialogue and marketing his stories Kirby is the big ideas and a great artist Both work well together as seen in their Fantastic Four run Separate Kirby narrative has been criticized at the time mind you in his new gods work as more people didn’t quiet get it Lee work well on the business side of things and his dialogue and the way he writes stories hasn’t really all change Could Stan have done better with Kirby or done more for him maybe but it’s one of those what if here

[@wtk6069]

Tweaking dialogue is an editorial function. Stan didn't deserve writer credit because of it. Julie Schwartz commonly did the same changes at DC without taking writing credit.

[@superthorc6894]

WT Keeton well that not what i meant more in line with his marvel method that Lee did in term of storytelling Sorry if I made it come off confusingly

[@wtk6069]

@@superthorc6894 But that is at the heart of a key dispute both Kirby and Ditko had with Stan. By at least the mid-sixties, they both were largely writing their own stories with Stan making only minor changes and taking writing full writing credit. Other Marvel books with other artists almost certainly required Stan to do more actual writing, but at least by a certain point, he didn't write and often didn't even understand everything happening in FF or Spider-Man. Evidence of this is Ditko's third year of Spider-Man where Stan's editorial captions don't always match up with the rather advanced story Ditko was telling and Kirby's original art for FF that has the final dialogue pencilled in for about 90% of the story, done before Stan ever saw the pages. As a good editor, Stan trusted his better-writing artists to carry their own load and saved his time for the books that needed him most. That was smart management, but he should have allowed these artists the proper credit due them.

[@nickjanecke6688]

Definitely interested in hearing more of this history if you’re willing to share

[@Popesize]

Would love to hear more on this. They were both two powers. From what i have understand, many of the ideas came from Stan. Jack then draw them, and Stan put the words on it. This might be right, this might be wrong. But none of them deserves all the glory for the masterpieces they created together. Another topic you maybe can shed some light on: How much of the creation of Batman and it's universe came from Bill Finger and how much came from Bob Kane. It starts to seem, that Kane only came up with the name, and Finger made the rest... Like how some people described Stan and Jack...

[@chuckleezodiac24]

Stan would say, "We need a new book with a team of superheroes!" Jack Kirby would do the rest. Stan would say, "Next issue Spidey fights a guy with lots of arms!" Steve Ditko would do the rest.

[@darkadmiralmarchhare1132]

I’d definitely like to see a follow up to this video. Two thumbs up 👍👍

[@kyleweaver2578]

Another three hours on this topic please.

[@MikeCoville]

THank you for the sober explination of the conflict. I find too many people are emotionaly attached to one side or the other, and you brought a very fact based presentation.

[@ronsaarna1235]

I so want to read a Kirby's Soapbox had Stan left: "Shuttup you hippies. Sue Storm is exactly where she belongs. Also Thor and Eternals. Excelsior!"

[@mattschroeder3432]

i heard they they both were hired to do a job and they both did what they were suppose to do by bigger people above them in the hierarchy.

[@bc4315]

Any sourcing or elaboration on this?

[@mattschroeder3432]

@@bc4315 stan lee said it in a interview so take it for what its worth.

[@Gamer-lq4wl]

The big difference is that Stan Lee was a formal employee of Marvel and Jack Kirby wasn't, he was a freelancer who worked in his garage. That's the reason Martin Goodman, the owner of Marvel commanded Stan Lee to put his name in every comic published by the company. He knew it was a big risk to have all of your famous characters created by a man who was not even an employee. By the way, Steve Ditko was a freelancer too.

[@bc4315]

@@Gamer-lq4wl This makes sense, thanks for the insight!

[@RegginaldRiglet]

Coming to this after watching the stan lee documentary on Disney+ love to see your opinions on that documentary and it’s takes

[@patrickmoreau7592]

I think you leave out Martin Goodman I think Goodman caused a lot of problems.

[@ComicsPerch]

True.

[@salamitommy9939]

I'm JUST finding some of these older videos. I would love to know if you checked out any of the Kirby Genesis stuff from Dynamite from a few years back. Some characters like Silver Star were pretty cool and... Alex Ross covers and art in a lot of it.

[@secondact77]

Jack Kirby was brilliant, and deserves all the plaudits that can be served his way. However, Stan Lee was absolutely essential for Marvel to become what is today, for better and worse. The Marvel Universe was a collaboration, taking the best (and some not best) ideas, from some wildly creative people. Unless you're talking something like Cerebus, no one does it alone. For instance, where's the credit and acclaim for Stan Goldberg? I bet most people don't even know his name, but he's the guy who made all the color choices for these costumes, that really haven't changed over decades now. Must have been doing something right. His color choices for Spidey's costume were brilliant, and I am not sure he reaches the heights he has if a different choice was made there. Stan Goldberg deserves some love. The list goes on and on, of people who didn't get credit or weren't recognized. Stan Lee wasn't getting percentages on Spider-Man, he didn't own or have rights to Hulk, he got a lifelong job, not as a writer, but more-or-less as a mascot, because he WAS Marvel. He was the face, and had been the ultimate company guy. He was leading the parade in the Merry Marching Marvel Society. But anyone who has worked for basically anyone knows that being a company man requires you to kiss a lot of ass, and eat a lot of shit. It requires a temperament that I am pretty sure Kirby and Ditko didn't possess. In a Capitalist economy, no one gets what they "deserve" (how would you even measure that?) they get what they can negotiate. Stan Lee was a better negotiator than most of his contemporaries. It took quite a while before artists were able to take advantage of this, and I guess you have the Image guys to thank for that. Again, for better and worse.

[@peace8381]

You are right about Stan Goldberg So underrated ! I also feel pity about Don Heck, knowing that his creation is one of the most beloved characters in the MCU (or maybe the most). He did the heavy lift in that comic, while others took the merit.

[@DrLynch2009]

Funky Flashman vs Ben Grimm

[@expressoric]

Stan Lee was only writer and editor up to the time that Jack Kirby left Marvel, Martin Goodman was the publisher, who, unlike Lee, didn't recognise Kirby's contribution, and only saw him as one of those who did the art. I think he thought of Lee as more of an office executive and Kirby as a blue collar worker. Lee wasn't in a position to persuade Goodman though as to how important Kirby was to the creation of the comics, it wasn't his fault if he got paid the full writer's money for what Kirby did. Stan Lee had ideas for characters and outlines for plots that he discussed with Kirby, and he was an excellent writer, who deserves recognition too for what he contributed, it's just that the full credit and honesty for what each of them did should be properly recounted.

[@41walmart]

kirbys art was a legend

[@dwaynemuth8775]

More people need to learn what a piece of work Martin Goodman was behind the scenes! The chemistry of Jack and Stan is the best thing at the right time! Once upon a time Marvel rolled through the 1960’s and into the 70’s and really had something to show for it and if you take Stan or Jack or both out of the equation you’ll have a totally different outcome! What I have no idea and don’t care! I’ve learned to appreciate what exists and enjoy it! Both men and others brought a helluva lot to the world and in my opinion is good 👍 enough!

[@latenite.comics4378]

I see Mr Kirby I click; currently reading his Losers run.

[@maureencora1]

Stan "the Man" Lee and Jack "the King" Kirby. Heaven is for Heroes, R.I.P.

[@simonbarnett8668]

I would like to hear more of your take on this. For most of my comic reading life I've been told that "Funky Flashman" was a very strong representation of Lee and based solely him, that Kirby used in an unkind way. In more recent years I've been told he was more of a composite character of more people and not meant in as hateful way as had been previously thought. Do you know which is more likely?

[@williamjackson6705]

I`ve always heard you can tell who did what in a partnership when it breaks-up. Jack was always creating new characters & concepts until the day he died. But he always needed someone to polish his writing. Stan never created anything of importance after Kirby & Ditko left. He was an editor & pitchman at best. Jack was the true creator. Wally Wood once said the only thing Stan ever created was a way to have artists write the stories then take the credit.

[@petermj1098]

Lol Stan Lee created Mary Jane Watson, Daredevil, Iron Man, Black Widow, Hawkeye, She Hulk, Mar-Vell, Kingpin, Black Knight, Mephisto, without Ditko and Kirby. Ditko and Kirby always got credit for their art had Marvel but never had ownership. Marvel had ownership. It was their own fault for not negotiating partial ownership in the first place. Ditko sure as hell didn’t write Spider-Man because he was an Ayn Rand Objectivist who literally believes in being selfish lol

[@Corrado9671]

Correct me if I'm wrong: Did the egotistical Stan Lee insist that all stories would have the writer, artist, inker, letterer and colorist proudly listed on the front page of every Marvel story. Or was that DC? Ah, who lettered and who colored all those DC, Archie and Charton comics. How many readers even knew there were inkers?

[@sketchasaurrex4087]

It's crazy to see the revisionist takes. I would like to see this as a long form video or livestream with another person very knowledgeable about them too.

[@nathangarcia7921]

Don't forget the reason Jack and Joe were taken off of Captain America was because they were ratted out to Martin Goodman for moonlighting at DC. One of the things that complicates the issue was the use of the "Marvel Method", which is messy to begin with. I'm on the side of Jack but as time goes on I do get the complexity. Would definitely like to hear more.

[@ronsaarna1235]

Keep in mind, Perch said 3 or 4 videos ago that comic youtubers sometimes put up "baiting" headlines :) So is it fierce rivalry or was it overblown?

[@step3892]

I recall being shocked and saddened when the great Kirby suddenly left the FF and Marvel. No one can adequately follow him on a title, especially the FF which he created and was so intimately identified with. As for his work at DC, Kirby was simply not a good writer and his writing at DC was amateurish and clumsy, with cardboard one-dimensional characters that delivered "superficial visual punch" but lacked substance. His word balloons and dialogue were especially hard to read and I had to keep rereading them to understand what was being said. Verbal communication between characters was very choppy, disconnected, and not fluid. In short, reading his words was like "skating over cobblestones." I also think Stan knows more about Kirby leaving Marvel than he usually says. To their credit, he and Jack always remained professional and respectful of each other and never resorted to mudslinging...good for these two great people!

[@matthewk822]

Rip both of them

[@peace8381]

Stop the discussion ! No Kirby = No Marvel No Stan Lee = No Marvel No Martin Goodman = No Marvel No Steve Ditko = What would Marvel be without its most valuable character ? I bet it wouldn't even exist today.

[@Corrado9671]

Well, you do have a point.

[@chuckleezodiac24]

case closed. what's done is done. thought, analysis & discussion are just a waste of time. who cares about how the shit went down?!

[@DialetoNerd]

Just one more war between fans

[@chuckleezodiac24]

how dare you?! for 20 years Stan Lee was astutely following industry trends and editing comics like Dippy Duck, The Ringo Kid & Millie the Model. then Kirby & Ditko showed up and in 1961 Stan decided to become a creative genius. good day to you, sir. i said GOOD DAY!

[@LarryKingUndead]

There's a interesting clip of Jack and Stan talking in 1987. kzbin.info/www/bejne/d2Lce42Bedx8iKc

[@KrowTheOmEgA777]

Rewriting someone else's dialogue, doesn't equate to partial ownership. Stan Lee was a Con-artist who stole credit from his coworkers creations. Nuff Said

[@petermj1098]

Kirby’s sole creations are about gods and cosmic beings and Ditko sole creations are more dark characters. When they worked with Stan the writing showed humanized characters and the stories are way more upbeat. I really don’t see how Stan didn’t write the characters cause Kirby and Ditkos own creations are very different than when they worked with Stan. It seems people only hate Stan cause he outlived Kirby and Ditko had like a polar opposite personality to Stan.

[@kobethegoat5324]

They should all get = amount including Steve

[@DialetoNerd]

Make more perch

[@Uncompletedrecall]

After reading "true believer" and many other sources surrounding this story my overall thought right now is that the collaboration was indeed the reason for Marvels success in the silver age. That being said, the problem I have with Stan is that he would say Jack and Steve were instrumental but only after a lot of negative press and pressure was applied. He was quite fine with being seen as the sole creator before hand.

[@petermj1098]

He never claimed to be sole creator. He never stripped away Kirby or Ditko’s name as a co-creator. People seem to only blame Lee for Kirby and Ditko’s own mistake in not investing in their marvel characters. Lee made the right choice to invest in his creations for the rest of his life - even when Marvel was economically bad - and of course it paid off. It was Kirby and Ditko’s choice to never negotiate for ownership in the first place. They always got the credit but never got the ownership out of their own mistake.

[@badfoody]

Whatever Stan says Whatever Marvel says Whatever some random mook says It Is Absolutely CLEAR That Jack Kirby felt taken advantage It is absolutely CLEAR That Marvel and Disney did not give him enough credit. Even after his death it took them so long to acknowledge his work. Jack Kirby was a victim

[@kobethegoat5324]

Spread the gospel before it’s to late Jesus Christ Is coming back no force of religion

[@michealworkman646]

this info is grossly inaccurate on so many levels.

[@ComicsPerch]

Nah, it’s sourced and confirmed by many sources.

[@enrgy-xh5uq]

Complex story? Stan Lee is burning in hell as we speak!

[@dechefmane3526]

Smh