 |
| Copyright MARVEL COMICS |
One of the many amazing things about the human mind is that it's tremendously susceptible to suggestion. For example, ask someone what the difference is between two seemingly identical objects, and you've planted the notion in their heads that there is a difference (even when there might not be), and their thoughts then set off in search of an answer which didn't exist before you asked the question. Many poems, for instance, arise from a line suddenly popping into the writer's head and them then making it up line-by-line as they go along (following rather than leading), not necessarily because they decided to write something on a particular subject.
It's almost as if the idea has a life of its own and must simply take its course, quite independent of the writer. However, ask what their inspiration or motivation was, and they respond as if there'd actually been one, and do so quite unconscious of the fact that they'd never even thought about it until you asked. They recount what seems most likely now that they've been directed down that avenue of thought, and by the time they've finished, they've come to subconsciously believe their explanation as the truth simply because it seems entirely plausible and even extremely likely.
 |
| The Mystic Master's debut issue |
I've done that, and so has Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, and just about any other creative person you care to name. Ask them for a reason for doing something and they'll give you one, even if there was no specific reason other than trying to earn a living. In my case, I was once asked how I came up with the idea for Spider-Man, so I gave what seemed to me an entirely plausible account of watching a spider crawling up or down a wall one day, and getting the idea from that. I was also, as a kid, a big fan of The Spider radio show, and that also figured in my thinking when relating my inspiration for Spidey years after the fact. Contrary to some assertions, the two accounts are not mutually exclusive; both could have played a part, but I suspect I hoodwinked myself into believing the 'spider on the wall' tale because, hey, it might've happened and, besides, it made for a much more interesting 'reminiscence'.
Jack did the same thing when he later recounted that he'd created The Hulk because he'd once seen a woman lift a car off her son who was pinned underneath, and the idea that rage could fuel some kind of super-strength was his inspiration (or part of it) for the character. The only thing wrong with his reminiscence is that Jack wasn't responsible for Bruce Banner's rage-induced transformations, which didn't happen 'til after Steve Ditko had taken over the strip. Whether it was Stevey or me who came up with that angle, or whether it came from both of us after talking things over is something else lost in the mists of history.
However, don't think I'm suggesting that Jack was lying; what likely happened was, looking back years later when The Hulk's rage-morphs were long established, his subconscious mind joined the dots to come up with a 'picture' of events which made some kind of sense. However, he just misremembered, joined the dots up in the wrong order and thereby came up with the wrong picture. Sometimes we just don't remember, and in trying to recall what we've forgotten, we come up with what seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation and then find ourselves believing that it really happened that way.
Which now brings us to Doctor Strange.
While writing my best-selling book, Origins Of Marvel Comics, I cast my mind back and recounted what I felt must have happened, based on whatever sequence of events I could remember, even when I couldn't recollect absolutely everything. I didn't deliberately or knowingly lie, but I probably didn't represent the full unedited picture. If you ask me now who came up with the idea of Doctor Strange, Steve Ditko or myself, I can't actually remember whether it was him or me, though I felt it was me back in 1974 when I wrote Origins. (Having said that though, nowhere do I explicitly state in my intro to the reprinted strips that I created the character, even if that's the impression given.)
Steve's version of events is that he brought the fully illustrated first story in to me with no prior involvement on my part, but whether he's referring to the character or the plot is by no means certain. As the commissioning editor, it's not altogether impossible that I said "Hey, Stevey, why not do a strip involving a sorcerer?" and left him to it. I'd already done Doctor Droom with Jack Kirby (which Steve had inked), but that hadn't really worked and was short-lived, so maybe I wanted to see how Ditko would do with a similar idea. Now, I know what you're thinking. What about my letter to Dr. Jerry Bails in 1963 in which I say " 'twas Steve's idea" ? Below is the paragraph in full - click to enlarge.
Read it carefully. I say that the first story is nothing great and that it was Steve's idea, but what precisely am I referring to - the plot or Doctor Strange? If I meant the character, wouldn't I have said "he was Steve's idea"? It could be interpreted either way, so it's not exactly conclusive proof that I had nothing to do with initiating the Doctor's existence - even his name was down to me. However, for the purpose of discussion, let's assume that Ditko dreamt up the character and the plot on his own before bringing it in to show me. As Steve has so often said himself, an idea is not fully realised until it's brought to fruition. Steve might have created the look of Strange, but 'twas me who christened him, supplied him with his origin (significantly similar to that of Doctor Droom), scripted his sorcerous dialogue and mystic incantations - in short, his character and personality, which are all part of bringing a comicbook hero (or villain) to life for the reading public.
And there's always a chance that Steve misremembered things. Below, in his own handwriting, he admits that just like Jack and me, he didn't have a perfect memory either. If Steve deserves the credit of being the published Spidey's co-creator for his input into the web-spinner, then I'd say I'm entitled to be accorded the same respect for my input into the Sorcerer Supreme. What the readers saw was the result of both of us, not just Steve on his own. Sure, he gets full credit for the visuals and most of the plots, but dare I say there was an equal measure of magic in the scripting and characterisation? So who created the Doctor Strange that Marveldom Assembled saw in the pages of Strange Tales and the Doc's own mag?
Well, it would be no lie to say that we were both responsible for the finished creation. That's just the way comic mags are usually produced. Anyway, you'll believe what you want to, but I'm giving it to you straight, I'm not trying to hoodwink you into believing a deliberate untruth. There are always alternative explanations to any contentious issues that are worth considering and I've presented you with one that I think is entirely reasonable. Whether you see it that way or not is entirely up to you.
'Nuff said!
11 comments:
With my limited knowledge of these types of things I would say that Dr Strange was more likely to have been a genuine team effort between Steve and Stan. It has the Ditko look and ideas with Stan's flair. Regardless those early Dr Strange tales were wonderful.
Apologies for the delay in responding to your comment, McS, was visiting the care home tonight, not long back. Anyway, without Stan's scripting, we'd still have had Steve's wonderful art, but the stories would've been a dry read if SD's later solo work is anything to go by. So I'd say you're right - the strips - whether Ditko came up with the idea of Dr. Strange by himself or not - were a genuine team effort and both men deserve co-creator credit.
I'm glad to see you mention all possible interpretations of the famous "'Twas Steve's idea" line, because an awful lot of fans interpret it to mean just one thing, and the wording is, as you say, not unambiguous.
Sadly, such is the antipathy towards Stan from some Steve and Jack fans, GP, that they only seem capable of interpreting everything in a way that's detrimental to him.
The Marvel Method is at the root of most of these conundrums. The traditional approach to comics was for an artist to get a script and draw that. The writer wrote and the drawer drew. Stan for reasons which made sense, didn't have the capacity to generate that many tight scripts, so he adopted a technique which allowed the artist much more freedom to create. That heady brew produced the Marvel Age targeted at a mass audience eager for something a bit more sophisticated. Stan was given the unusual opportunity to tell version of events first. He promoted Marvel and he promoted himself. Artists like a shy Jack Kirby and an indifferent Steve Ditko chose to do the work they had set for themselves. If Stan had been more careful in his renditions of the Marvel mythology, we'd all be a good deal more sanguine about how it all went down. As it developed, he became the "The Man" and most folks with limited knowledge of Marvel's history just assume he created them all. The players are long gone now, so we will never know. I base my judgements less on what they said at different times and more on what they did. In concert with Kirby and Ditko Stan created icons. Without them, with exceedingly few exceptions he didn't. But Marvel wouldn't have happened without him. That's for certain.
In the beginning (now there's a catchy start to a sentence), Stan wasn't slow about crediting Jack's contribution in their collaborations, saying that he was as much the writer of the stories as he (Stan) was. I think Kirby and Ditko enjoyed the freedom they had at Marvel under the 'Marvel Method', and Jack most likely wouldn't have stuck to any script he was supplied with in advance of drawing a strip. (He often tweaked Challengers Of The Unknown scripts supplied by others to suit his own creative urges.) Having met Stan back in 1991, I can say that he was a charismatic force of nature so it's completely understandable why he attracted attention from the media and interviewers, but he often also sang the praises of those he worked with, and had it not been for Stan crediting the artists in the comics, the general public (and even many comics fans) would probably have been mostly unaware of them.
Stan may not have created much without Jack and Steve, but Jack and Steve didn't create much (if anything) of note without Stan. (I know you'll disagree in regard to the New Gods, RJ, and even a few other characters.) Kirby's and Ditko's most notable achievements were at Marvel with Stan, and though their art was just as good (for a while) after they moved on, neither of them ever again scaled the heights they'd attained at the 'House Of Ideas'.
I'm in complete agreement with your last statement of course.
Working at a library, I was on hand when a person with no knowledge of comics sought to create a record for some Batman book. She made some comment about how she thought Lee had created Batman because she apparently thought he created every known comics character.
Si yeah, the general public's ability to recall things like who created what is extremely limited.
And most people seem to think that every superhero is a Marvel character, GP. I've seen, heard and read (quite a few times) Superman and Batman, etc., described as Marvel creations.
The general public are extremely thick - er, generally.
Jack = New Gods, Forever People, Mister Miracle, Kamandi the Last Boy on Earth, The Demon, OMAC One Man Army Corp, Atlas, Dingbats of Danger Street, Manhunter (Revised), Eternals, Devil Dinosaur, Captain Victory, Silver Star, and more.
Steve = Blue Beetle (Revised), The Question, Nightshade, The Creeper, Hawk and Dove, Mr. A, Stalker, The Destroyer (with Archie Goodwin), Missing Man, Shade the Changing Man, Odd Man, Squirrel Girl and more.
Stan = She-Hulk.
I agree that the Marvel period was a fecund one for all these gents. But the evidence suggests the creative engines for that period were likely less Stan and more Jack and Steve among others. Stan was integral to the success of Marvel, but more as an excellent writer able to tap into true human emotion and as a legit and skilled huckster able to get attention for the books under his charge.
Like I said, RJ, they didn't create much (if anything) of NOTE after leaving Marvel - at least, not anything that was as memorable or successful as their Marvel collaborations. (I consider most of Jack's DC work - Jimmy Olsen excepted - and just about everything that Steve did post-Marvel as second-rate, certainly as a reading experience.) And remember, Stan had no need (nor the time) to create anything else at that stage in his career, whereas Jack and Steve HAD to because it was their main livelihood. I think we should also remember that, back in the '60s, Stan was commissioning editor, and it's unlikely that he never said to either gents "Hey, how about we do a strip about..."
Stan was responsible for the 'atmosphere' in which Kirby and Ditko could thrive, and he could channel their work along more fruitful avenues, yes, but I think that he was not only integral, but also essential. Without him, the Marvel output of the time would have been a somewhat lacklustre (if well-drawn) reading experience, and may not have survived.
And believe it or not, everyone, there really is a distinct difference between 'integral' and 'essential'. Check it out.
Post a Comment