Slashdot Mirror
Stan Lee: The Rise and Fall of The American Comic Book
If you don't know who Stan Lee is, you will have little to no interest in this book. But who are we kidding? Any geek worth his or her metal knows Stan "The Man" Lee, the co-creator of Spider-man, The Hulk, The Fantastic Four and countless other beloved Marvel Comics characters. What most people don't really know is the real story behind the creation of these characters. Many have never heard of the artists Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko, who contributed a great deal to the creation and development of these superheroes. In the past years a bit of a rift has formed in comics fandom, the hard-core siding with the late Kirby, claiming that Lee and Marvel did the artist wrong. The other side blithely backs the amiable Lee. Through interviews with artists, family members and Stan Lee himself, Spurgeon and Raphael try to shed some light on the subject.
Anyone who's read Michael Chabon's The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay will notice a great deal of similarities between Stan Lee's origins and the fictionalized settings Chabon created for his book. Both stories start in the time of the pulps, when publishers cranked out fantastic publications by the truck-load. The parallels are fascinating. If you're a comic book fan and you haven't read Chabon's book, you need to read it.
Anyway, the book I'm supposed to be reviewing tracks Stan Lee's star from his position as a lowly writer at Timely Comics, to the editor behind the most famous run of comic books in history; Marvel's Silver Age comics. This is when the Fantastic Four, Spider-man and The Hulk were born. The book doesn't stop there. It follows Lee through the decades detailing his involvement with the Marvel titles all the way. It examines his rocky relationship with Hollywood and decades of attempts to bring Marvel characters to life on television or in the movies. Even more fascinating are the segments of the book that deal with Stan Lee Media and the enormous financial flame-out that occurred when the business went sour.
The book paints Lee in a very humanistic light. It brings his flaws into sharp contrast and at the same time gives him credit for his amazing accomplishments, unceasing drive and wild imagination. Most interesting is the way the book tells the story of all comics in the context of Marvel and Lee's story. As much as underground geniuses such as R. Crumb or Art Spiegelman must hate the association, it's hard to argue that the fates of all comics are influenced by Marvel's gravitational pull.
There's been a mild knee-jerk reaction in the comics community that the book is blatant attack on Lee, being that both Spurgeon and Raphael both worked at The Comics Journal, a publication that has publicly supported Jack Kirby's claims against Lee. To be fair, the authors put an exceptional amount of work into trying to tell the truth, which is reflected in the sheer number of annotated resources they've provided in the book's source notes.
In all seriousness, try to forget for a moment that I'm friends with the authors. As a lifelong comics reader I found the information presented in this book fascinating. It made me want to run to my comics shop and buy reprints of the old issues. Don't take my word for it, though.
There are several excerpts of the book available online. You can read the prologue at the book's official website. Part of Chapter 17, "Stan in Hollywood" is excerpted at The Comic's Journal's website."
You can purchase Stan Lee: The Rise and Fall of The American Comic Book from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Manga tend to last a certain amount of time and then end. They don't frequently switch writers and/or artists. Popular stories are not necessarily stretched and reinvented in order to increase sales. (This point is arguable. There were 37 volums of Ranma 1/2 IIRC.) Artists are treated as talents rather than commodities.
Who reads and sells more comic books than any other nation in the world?
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Now I know who I am.. hmm..
There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us
Is the Things 'thing' made of rock as well?
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
Shouldn't Spiderman be prounounced more like Goldman? What I mean is not saying it like it's two words (Spider Man).
Then again, we should have a superhero called GoldMan (Gold Man)! That would kick ass! Why didn't Stan Lee think of that?
I remember reading some potshots the two were taking at each other back in the mid-80s. It was stupid then and it's stupid now. It was a collaborative creation -Lee readily admits he just wrote outlines of the comics, let Kirby draw them and then added dialogue afterward. Lee will be dead soon and Kirby is already gone, so how about leaving it be?
Talk about your tempest in a teapot.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
...that was NOT the
Worst review ever. </comic book guy>
'Nuff said.
Between Diamond killing off independents by making them IMPOSSIBLE to get distributed and the basic stigma behind comics books, the only thing that wil truly re-invigorate comics is the internet and reinventing the distribution method.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
lee did an interview a number of years ago and answered that very question: yes.
i'm not sure whether it's more embarrassing that there is an answer or that i know it...
ed
As Mark Evanier (once Jack Kirby's Assistant) said "Well, it's safe to say Jack did all the pencilling. Beyond that, we run into all sorts of semantic arguments having to do with definitions of the word "writing" and with the fact that Mssrs. Lee and Kirby both have/had notoriously poor memories. You also have the fact that, when two creative talents get together and come up with an idea, each of them might honestly believe that he suggested at least the core of the concept if not the entire thing. This happens in any collaboration anywhere and, ultimately, you usually have to just say that they both had the idea. Ergo, I say that the Lee-Kirby creations are Lee-Kirby creations."
I think that quote says it all--except for the fact that Stan Lee created/inspired a whole generation of HUMANISTIC superheroes--ones with flaws, foibles and problems that were not outweighed by ultra-human abilities. Peter Parker was still somewhat introverted and Geeky, Stephen Strange was still an alcoholic and somewhat arrogant, Ben Grimm had self-esteem problems relating to his appearance. The list is Endless.
Stan Lee and Marvel Comics brought us some of the greatest comics and heroes. Thanks Stan!!
In America today you can murder land for private profit. You can leave the corpse for all to see, and nobody calls the c
It always amazes me how few comics you find in the US compared to walking into any book store, news-agency, or grocery store in continental Europe.
The "most important book ever to be written about the subject of comic books" is Understanding Comics.
It's in comic book (more accurately, a graphic novel (even more accurately, graphic nonfiction)) form, which is the right medium to actually describe the craft.
Holy crap! I suggest you immediately step away from the computer screen, pack a bag, and move out of your parents' basement.
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
When you've been raised reading belgo-french heavy-metal comics, and as you grow-up, see the same character take on adult stories (and I mean with explicit, graphic sex), it's no wonder that american comics don't look too exiting.
I really wish comics were more popular than they are in America. The reasons why have been hashed out ad nauseum but I think it boils down to a bad stereotyped image ... that comics are for kids and mostly center around superheroes in spandex, muscles, with a hugely breasted babe on each arm. It's because companies like Marvel and DC saturate the market with their corny superhero escapades, leading people to assume that's all comics can be and all they're about.
There's a lot of great stuff there, but in order to truly break through the aformentioned kiddie / funny / superhero / alienated loser stereotype something more mainstream and substantial needs to come out of the comics world. My primary gripe is not about the art. The art is great and wonderful things are being done every day. It's the subject matter and the writing.
The handful of comics folks I really admire these days are Chris Ware, Posy Simmonds and Dan Clowes. Chris Ware's stuff transcends narrative and writing. Posy Simmonds' "Gemma Bovery" is a re-telling of Madame Bovery with a really complex merging of novel and art. It doesn't look that great at first but there's subtle patterns to when it lapses into comic and back to novel. Dan Clowes I mention because he's done comics that read more like films and his latest 8ball, frankly, blew me away with it's genere hopping and Altmanesque interweaving story lines.
I've been hopeful as of late as finally we got to see Ghost World, American Splendor, heck even Road To Perdition which are great examples of films based on comics that do not have the aforementioned superhero complex. For better or worse, it's hard to tell they in fact were comics to begin with. Now don't get me wrong, I still enjoy X-Men and Hulk, but I don't think these films are doing anything to break down the stereotypes of what comics are.
Frankly, we need more boundry-breaking artists than Stan Lee, who keeps rehashing the same old archetypes. Otherwise we'll just continue with the situation we have now, where comic book stores go under, fewer people can make a living at it, and the comics section is delegated to some far corner of the bookstore near the porno mags...
Something I observe with comics is the constant looking back on the characters creation. To the general public (at least), the story of the characters creation is the most important, definitive dimension of the character.
Spider man was bitten by a radioactive spider. The Hulk was shot with Gamma rays. These are all examples of the basic knowledge most individuals have about comic book characters.
I know it is proper story-telling to introduce characters and dramatize again and again their beginnings or history, but with comics it seems to be a big thing to recreate the character (even if in the same vein) every so often (usually in another medium I guess).
While this brings new readers and maybe reminds current readers of why they enjoy the comic, I wonder if it discourages the developement of the character (i.e. a change that redefines the character and is generally unreversable or undefiable, even in the comic book world).
I'm not saying characters don't change, but it seems when it comes down to it, the characters are always in the shadow of their original creation. I don't if this mirrors real life or not (though one could suppose so in most cases).
Affiliate-free link for price searches
.sigs with affiliate links, just to keep Amazon thinking it's a good idea.
Why FP with a link that bypasses Slashdot's BN link? Whether you're a fan of the editorial staff or not (and since you're here, they must be doing something right), you've got to agree that they've got certain non-zero expenses to cover, such as massive bandwidth. Otherwise, Slashdot would Slashdot Slashdot (/././.)!
If you're going to post an alternative purchase link, at least make it benefit someone we know -- even if it's you. I make it a point to click
Besides, it's hardly accurate to say that ISBN.nu is an "affiliate-free link". It's informative, but each of the links given appears to be an affiliate link. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not "affiliate-free" -- it's just funneling the money to someone other than CmdrTaco.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
The proper use of the phrase is worth your "mettle" not "metal."
Revemnge of the English Majors . . .
I just finished reading this book and it's wonderful. I don't have time (or will) to write a full review, but if you've any interest in comic books or in very good historical fiction, I'd suggest picking up a copy
Let's not overgeneralize the geeks & comic books thing, okay? I read a few when I was a kid, but have no interest at all now.
Scott McCloud's books, Understanding Comics, tries to answer your question. One big historical situation was back in the 40's and 50's when there was a genre of comics dealing with crime ... they would depict sex, drugs, grisly murders. There was a huge backlash and the "comics code" was created which basically censored the crap out of comic books in America. So, along the way, comics couldn't talk about "adult" subject matter, and due to all the media coverage, a lot of people were told that comic books were evil, brain washing, exploitative, etc.
Frankly you could see some parallels there and with what some people say about videogames today. Just imagine what would happen if the government decided to crack down on video games ... and all we were left with were Mario and Dance Dance Revolution etc....
Anyhow during the 60's a whole underground movement started which did a lot to revitalize the "adult" nature of comics ... starting with Crumb ... Spiegleman is a direct offshoot of what Crumb started with his autobiographical comics style.
But I would dare say the underground comics movement at least in it's inception, over compensated for all the censorship. They went far left, delving into drugs, nudity, sexual hangups, racism. So you get comics that are all about superheroes on one hand and alienated losers on the other, and not a whole lot inbetween.
The inbetween is what I think needs to be filled out.
In Japan they've got everything covered. There are comics for kids, adults, women, jocks, pervs, working class people. It is socially acceptable to read a comic. Nobody thinks you're a deviant, a perv or a stunted adolescent as they seem to in the States. And a lot of this stereotype has to do with the history, and the inability of the comics makers to breach the social walls with some truly mainstream material.
I'm thinking, American comics needs a "Harry Potter" or "Sims" equivalent.
While it is always dangerous to assume that a Slashdot reviewer actually knows what they're talking about, the review does present me with several reasons I might not want to read the book:
1. Calling Marvel's Silver Age comics "the most famous run of comic books in history" is a highly subjective and arguably mistaken statement. More famous than the early years of DC, with Batman and Superman? I don't think so.
2. While I have no objection to a book about Stan Lee per se, calling it The Rise and Fall of The American Comic Book suggests a rather serious overreach. The fact is that the decline in the quality of Stan Lee's Marvel stable happened at the same time of perhaps the most impressive ferment in comics and graphic novels in history, i.e. the mid-to-late 1980s, a renaissance lead by a handful of exceptionally influential DC titles (especially Alan Moore's Watchman, Frank Miller's Dark Knight, and Neil Gaiman's Sandman), together with a number of important independent comics (Dave Sims' Cerebus, etc.).
3. The review does not mention it, but the true "Fall of the American Comic Book" occured in the mid-1990s due to largely economic circumstances, i.e. the collapse of the speculator market and a disasterous consolidation of comic distribution companies set in motion by Marvel's decision to make Heroes World their sole distributor. (I published an article by Paul T. Riddell on this very subject in the Fall/Winter 2000 isssue of Nova Express, but there are also several online summaries of those events you can Google.) The fact that the book focuses on Stan Lee, and that the review makes no mention of this (an event quite apart from the Dotcom-like collapse of Stan Lee Media) makes me fear that this book either gives a very distorted view of this economic cataclysm, or no view at all.
That is not to say that it might not be interesting to Stan Lee fans. But Stan Lee != American Comic Books, no matter emblamatic his work may have been in the 1960s.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
This is probably the most biased review I've ever read. Somebody should be ashamed to write it even in a press release. It is the most important book about commics just for the authors and their friends, or if you think Marvel is really important in comic book history.
In the realm of comic books, sequencial graphic storytelling, Marvel and DC just publish a very limited set of themes: collant-dressed-anabolised-fantastic-powers heros. Comic books are a much richer form of art than this, see Moebius, Alan Moore, Crumb, Will Eisner and a lot of others.
If you really want the best book ever written about comics, read Scott Mccloud seminal Understanding Comics.
Sure, Marvel went bankrupt a while back, but that's because they were headed Ronald Perelman, a so-called "turnaround specialist," who actually behaves much like the executives of SCO, whom we love so dearly. He pumps up stock prices, issues junk bonds, then bails and lets the company crater. As a brief aside, he now heads Revlon, which is trading around $3 per share.
Sure, I suppose if one were writing a book in the midst of Marvel's bankrupcy, one would be tempted to write a book called The Rise and Fall of American Comics, but in fact that was an artificial situation, and the industry has recovered quite well since then.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
the most important book ever to be written about the subject of comic books
Most would probably say that honor belongs to "Comics and Sequential Art" by Will Eisner.
I also would highly recommend "Understanding Comics" by Scott McCloud.
Such as Bone, Cerebus, Ghost in the Shell, and so forth, you'll see that Marvel is the AOL of comics.
I think I will wait for the movie adaption of this book. We will see what CGI can do with Stan.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Does the book explain how Iceman travelled? As far as I can tell a stream of water shot out of his hand and froze instantly in what just happened to be a perfectly smooth track that was strong enough to support him no matter how long it got. And he always managed to have enough momentum to slide along it, was this momentum an undocumented feature of his power?
Drill baby drill - on Mars
"Oh, Beneficent Deities Who smile down upon our bandwidth and HTML, please don't make the posting of completely counter-productive and useful-to-no-one "non-affiliate links" assume the same popularity with the /. High School set as "registration free" links, "Soviet Russia" Jokes, "Obligatory" anything, and Subject lines consisting solely of the words "One Word." Let us grow together into maturity, with the realization that even a site catering to the rants and tirades of pseudo-socialist geeks still has to make a buck somehow. Give us the discipline not to try and undermine every commerce-oriented Internet endeavor we stumble across, and the wisdom to find where our energies might be directed to stimulate Growth rather than Anarchy."
Amen.
So it's the most important book ever written, but if I don't know who Stan Lee is, I won't care?
I was so ready to buy the hyperbole, and then you just shot me right down, didntcha.
Do you mean the old X-Force with Cable, Shatterstar, etc? Fuck that noise. The new X-Force, now X-Statix, beats the old X-Force like a red headed stepchild.
You should check out the the Sandman Companion. It came out a few years ago, and covers the entire run of the Sandman, offering interviews with Neil Gaiman and others, and provides an excellent analysis of the BEST comic book series ever. Anywho, there is section in the book where Gaiman discusses the stigma attached to comic books. He recounted the story of when he was introduced to a person at a party. When the person asked him what he did for a living, he replied that he wrote comic books. Ther person acted like he just cut a fart in an elevator, but out of politeness, asked if he wrote anything that he might have read. When he told the gentleman that he wrote the Sandman, the guy became excited and said something like "Good lord! you're Neil Gaiman!. You don't write comic books, you write graphc novels." Gaiman compared it to being called a lady of the evening instead of a prostitute.
Incorrect.
Snow White: The Wicked Queen falls down a cliff and dies.
Little Mermaid: Ursula is pierced through the heart with a large sailing ship. Aside: in the Little Mermaid Two, Morgana, Ursula's sister, refers to this. "Now why couldn't dear Ursula attend? Oh, yes, I remember, it's because YOU ALL SISH-KEBOBED HER!' Morgana, at the end of the story, is imprisioned in a block of ice.
Disney's Atlantis: Helga Sinclair dies, after being betrayed and thrown off of an airship, and she tries to take said airship, and it's crew, with her. Note that we also see such wonderful things as the beating death of a king. One of the better Disney movies, with a concious effort not to include any cute anthropomorphic animal sidekicks.
Those are some that I can think of off the top of my head, at least.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Everything "used to be better" or "is better over there". The reason is that the crappy stuff made in the past or overseas never makes it to us; we only see the cream of the crop that has stood the test of time or been judged worthy for export.
I'm sure there is plenty of crappy manga, but only the good stuff gets exported because there is limited shelf space and marketing dollars for this genre here in the States.
An issue of Nick Fury was disapproved by the CCA and Marvel ran the story unchanged without the CCA sticker rather than change the story. Nobody noticed and their sales were unchanged.
What was the horrible depiction that caused the CCA to refuse approving the story, you ask? Nick and a female character decide that they have finished work for the day; then the next panel shows the working room empty, with the phone off the hook. Anyone who could figure out the subversive hidden meaning in the off-hook phone was old enough to not be influenced by it.
Underground Comics:
Daniel Clowes
------------
Ghost World (The Comic)
David Boring
20th Century Eightball
------------
Robert Crumb
------------
Book of Mr. Natural
The Life and Death of Fritz the Cat
Complete Crumb (several volumes)
------------
Harvey Pekar
------------
American Splendor: The Life and Times of Harvey Pekar
The New American Splendor Anthology
Our Cancer Year
------------
Maus: A Survivor's Tale (by Art Spiegelman)
Comic Culture:
Ghost World (the Terry Zwigoff movie based on the Daniel Clowes comic of the same name)
Crumb (a biography of underground comic artist Robert Crumb)
American Splendor (a biography of underground comic artist Harvey Pekar)
Online Comics:
Dilbert
Calvin and Hobbes
Ziggy
Sexy Losers (hentai parodies, Not Safe For Work)
This Modern World ("Fair and Balanced" political cartoons with a clear liberal slant)
The Editorial Cartoons of Clay Bennett (2002 Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist)
Daryl Cagle's Professional Cartoonists Index (2003 Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist)
Anyone who knows of more good, free online comics links, or of some little know starving underground artists with godlike skills, feel free to add to this list! (note: excessive use of adjectives due to attempt of avoidance of the overwhelmingly troublesome, inflammatory, odious, objectionable, innefective, senseless, inappropriate, obtuse, antisocial, disjunctive, annoying, obnoxious, irritating, monotonous, wearisome, dull, dispirited, lackluster, uninspired, babble bubble bobble, puzzling, bewildering, headache-inducing, useless, stupid, lame slashdot usefulness filter.)
"You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka