 |
| Copyright MARVEL COMICS |
Sometimes I just can't win. Back in the '60s I gave writer Arnold Drake a crack at writing the X-Men, only to later learn that he thought I'd ripped-off his Doom Patrol series for DC Comics. Both mags featured a wheelchair-bound leader of strangely-powered misfits, and each team had a group of baddies they fought on a regular basis. In Doom Patrol's case it was The Brotherhood of Evil, and in the X-Men's case it was The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. Doom Patrol debuted around 3 months before X-Men, but it usually took around 6 months to put a new comic together, so the timeline doesn't really allow for Arnold's claim. He tried to get around that fact by claiming I must somehow have learned of his idea before it appeared in print - perhaps in a tip-off from someone at DC.
Then there are those who claim it was Jolly Jack Kirby who dreamed up the X-Men and all I did was dialogue his pages based on his margin notes - yet Jack is never accused of ripping-off the Doom Patrol, only me. So if I had nothing to do with creating the X-Men, how can I have ripped-off the Doom Patrol? And if Jack came up with Marvel's merry mutants, why does he get a pass on having plagiarised DC's team? See what I mean? I lose out either way - it's no wonder I suspect there are some people who just plain don't like me. Anyway, contrary to those calumnious claims, I, along with Jack, created the X-Men, and the Doom Patrol had nothing to do with their birth. It was simply one of those curious coincidences that occur from time to time in the world of comics.
I was the first scripter of the X-Men, followed by Roy Thomas, Arnold Drake, and almost countless others since then. I gotta say I'm proud of Roy, who took on the mag without missing a beat and continued in a style almost indistinguishable from my own. If it hadn't been for the credits, I'd probably never have been aware that I wasn't still writing the strip. (I've got a terrible memory y'know - can't recall whether I've mentioned it before.) Good on ya, Roy. Incidentally, Arnold's up here too and I've forgiven him for his rash claims, so panic ye not, Merry Marvel Maniacs - harmony reigns in these here Heavenly Hills.
Excelsior! And may your amulet never tickle!
Incidentally, if you're interested in reading an informed take on the old 'who did what' debate, Amiable Al McKenzie has published a well-researched post over on his blog, which can be found by clicking this link.
 |
| My very own ish of DP's debut. Copyright DC COMICS |
10 comments:
On this we can agree. The similarities between the Doom Patrol and the X-Men are remarkable and are totally coincidental. As you say, the publication dates of the books precludes the chance that either party lifted ideas from the other. The X-Men were imitative of the FF and Spider-Man, combining youth with the team concept. I didn't know that Arnold Drake claimed that, but he's wrong. It's weird that he'd write the X-Men after he was shuffled off at DC and caught a job at Marvel. He was writing the title when I started reading it regularly.
It's sad that Arnold Drake seemingly wasn't more grateful to Stan for giving him an assignment, RJ, and instead accused him of plagiarism. Poor Stan seems to get it in the neck from more than his fair share of critics. It's worth using the link to Marvel In the Silver Age blog for some interesting and informative reading.
Strangely the Doom Patrol and those early X-Men comics were my least favourite of the DC and Marvel output from this time. I would say if Drake was trying to make a link between the Doom Patrol and X-Men then a similar connection could be made between the Doom Patrol and FF and no doubt many others share that kind of link.
The one that always got me was when DC said Cap Marvel (SHAZAM) was a copy of Superman, SHAZAM to me was pretty unique !
I suppose Captain Marvel can be seen as a 'copy' of Superman in as much that he's a being with superpowers and a secret identity, McS, but you can say that for just about every superhero going in that case. The similarities are rather superficial, it's the differences that really define them.
The only time I ever saw the early X-Men was in reprints in Fantastic and MCIC (or whichever one it was), not in the original issues. (I'm talking about the real early stories.) If I ever saw Doom Patrol, it was only in ads or coverless copies included in 'Double Double Comics', I don't really recall. Of the two, I'd say the X-Men tales were a better read than Doom Patrol.
I was only ever peripherally aware of Doom Patrol throughout all of my years of comic reading. I've recently been watching season one of the Doom Patrol TV series, which despite being rather edgy and sweary, is remarkably faithful to the original comic as printed in the recent DC facsimile edition.
I only really started paying attention to Doom Patrol when they were revived as the 'new' Doom Patrol in Showcase #s 94-97, B. I've got the Omnibus Edition of the original group, but it remains largely unread as, for some reason, the stories don't seem to draw me in. Not sure why.
I don't know anything about the Doom Patrol (great name though!) but the original X-Men were just boring in my opinion and they ended up being cancelled and replaced with a far superior team which shows that my opinion was shared by plenty of others!
But without knowing precisely how many others actually preferred the original X-Men, CJ, it's a big claim to say that the new team were far superior. I didn't think so. Sales, you say? Well, The Hulk was cancelled after only six issues, but went on to become one of Marvel's best sellers. Maybe fans were just so glad to see the name of the X-Men on a regular mag again that they bought it, even though there were some new members? And remember, the original mag was only cancelled after almost 30 issues of reprints, so there are two ways of looking at things. Either the original was only cancelled because it contained reprints or the reprints sold well enough that the decision was made to revive it?
Here I go again, being "that guy," but...
Stan is totally right, that the lead time between the respective first appearances of DOOM PATROL and X-MEN on the stands is too close for one comics-maker to imitate another one-- IF he got his info from reading the comics on the stands.
But consider that we get another instance of apparent imitation within about six months, when DOOM PATROL 386 and X-MEN #4 turn up on stands, debuting the Brotherhood of Evil in the first and the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants in the second. Both comics are cover-dated as March 1964, though that doesn't mean they were both on stands at the exact same time. But those issues also come out too close for one to be imitating the other, IF the imitator was working off something he saw on newsstands.
And yet-- Brotherhood of Evil. Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. Yeah, someone was biting someone else's style, maybe for no reason but petty amusement. And given those publication times, the only way the imitator could have known about the source of imitation would be if someone talked out of turn, in advance of the publications.
In the sixties everyone worked in New York. A lot of comics pros never met one another during that decade, but some did. I don't think the near-duplication of the villain-names is a mere coincidence, and the only way it could have happened if an employee of one company talked to the employee of another one.
And if a hypothetical conversation resulted in the duplication of villain-names, an even earlier conversation could have resulted in a second super-group emulating at least one element of an earlier super-group: that of a leader in a wheelchair.
One objection to the "talking out of turn" argument would be that most pros back then weren't all that invested in their projects. They were writing funnybooks for kids. But that doesn't mean that they NEVER discussed their projects, or the projects of other comics people, with fellow professionals.
Now in 1963-64, Marvel was still more likely to be imitating DC than the reverse. It would be a while before DOOM PATROL's characters starting cracking a lot of jokes; originally they were just like most DC costumed heroes, sober-sided all the way. So the creators of DP probably never knew about X-MEN.
So who at Marvel might have talked with someone at DC?
I would say, probably not Stan. I don't think Stan was above copying from DC, but as an editor focused on creating successful titles, he would've looked at those that were already successful, in my opinion, before he copied anything.
Jack, though-- Jack was IMO a magpie. He was immensely creative, and sometimes that had to do with intentionally re-purposing either earlier ideas he'd done, or ideas of others. NEWSBOY LEGION is, after all, nothing but THE DEAD END KIDS with a superhero added. Did he ever deliberately swipe another artist's work? Not that I know of. But if a DC employee said to him, "hey, we're doing a new book where a bunch of costumed freaks are led by a guy in a wheelchair"-- Jack might hear that, and later incorporate it into X-MEN without even remembering the employee's story. He might honestly think he came up with Professor X, or, for that matter, the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants.
For good measure, there's a story-- I forget from what source- that Robert Bernstein, a guy who wrote for Marvel and DC in the early sixties, was riding into NY on a train with Kirby. RB complained to JK that he needed to pitch a new story idea to DC, but he RB didn't have anything. JK just whipped out three or four story suggestions and gave them to RB. That's as far as the story went, though some fans think RB might have created the first and only "Original Metallo" story from a Kirby suggestion.
Mine is just another such fan-theory, absolutely unprovable. But-- still interesting, yes?
Definitely interesting, GP, but, when in the realm of speculation, absolutely anything is possible. What if there was something else around at the time - book, movie, or TV show - that had a 'brotherhood' of some sort and Stan or Jack and Arnold Drake subconsciously (and independently) absorbed the name and regurgitated it in their respective mags? Of course, Man-Thing and Swamp Thing are touted as being another such coincidence, even though either the writers or artists roomed or worked together (I forget which duo, but it may even be both) and deny ripping off the idea from their room or studio mate, however unlikely that denial sounds.
Jack certainly regurgitated ideas (his own and those he read or saw in other sources), but (in my view) what works against the suggestion that he 'repurposed' the Challengers into the FF is his use of the Human Torch, which was too blatant an imitation for it to have been his idea. That more likely seems to be as a result of editorial direction. Anyway, thanks for taking the time and trouble to comment, you've certainly given your fellow Crivvies lots to think about there as far as speculation is concerned. As I said, definitely interesting.
Post a Comment