web stats

CSBG Archive

Comic Book Urban Legends Revealed #113

This is the one-hundred and thirteenth in a series of examinations of comic book urban legends and whether they are true or false. Click here for an archive of the previous one-hundred and twelve. Click here for a similar archive, only arranged by subject.

Let’s begin!

COMIC URBAN LEGEND: Jack Kirby left DC because he thought they lied to him about the sales of his New Gods titles in order to pay him less money


This one is an oldie, as reader Dave sent it to me in October of 2006, but I figure now is as good a time as any to address.

Right off the bat, the answer sounded false to me, mostly because, as I understand it:

A. Kirby was not working on a royalty system with the Fourth World books


B. Kirby DIDN’T leave DC after the Fourth World books were canceled, he stuck around working on other projects until his contract expired.

So right away, I’m pretty confident that we can say “false” for this one, but just to be sure, and I’ll be honest, I was interested in the specifics as well, I posed the question to the greatest Jack Kirby expert I know (don’t you worry, Harry Mendryk, I didn’t say Simon/Kirby! And even if I did, I guess Joe Simon, still being alive and all, would probably be the greatest Simon/Kirby expert, right?), Mark Evanier.

Here is what Mark had to say on the subject:

Jack’s deal with DC was not linked to sales. That is, he was not on a royalty deal with them. Presumably, had the books been huge sellers, he would have been in a great position to negotiate better terms when his contract expired but that was not what happened.


Jack left DC because at the time his contract expired, he wasn’t getting along well with them. The company was in trouble — it was not long before the publisher was dismissed — and there was a general panic in the office. Jack thought they were giving up too quickly on almost everything they published, cancelling books upon receipt of the slightest poor sales reports. He didn’t feel he could work in that environment.


In the case of the Fourth World books, there are different reports of how they sold and Jack was told many things. Clearly, they were not the Marvel-destroying hits that some expected of him. Paul Levitz went into the files at my request and reported back that they were “mid-range” sellers. From what I can tell, they sold decently until DC upped the price across their line from fifteen to twenty-five cents, whereupon everything plunged in sales. When the whole line went to twenty, most books recovered somewhat but Kirby’s, because of their intricate continuity, recovered slower than others.


I go into this in more depth in the books I’m writing on Jack, one of which will be out later this year.

Thanks, Mark!

Folks, when Mark Evanier’s book on Jack Kirby comes out, you better darn well buy a copy, for it will be AWESOME!!

COMIC URBAN LEGEND: The Superman radio show had a drastically different origin for Superman


Tom Foss wrote in to me with this one, and it is a real hoot!

We are all used to the various changes that media adaptations have made to the origin of superhero characters, whether it be the whole crystal thing in the more recent Superman films, or basically everything on Smallville.

However, one of the most dramatic changes to Superman’s origins for media was in the Superman radio show, which came out very soon after Superman first appeared!!


Debuting in 1940, the first episode of the Superman radio show was standard enough, telling the now-familiar tale of the destruction of Krypton.

The second episode, though, veers DRAMATICALLY from what we are now used to, as the youth sent from the dying planet of Krypton aged as he flew, so when the ship crashlanded on Earth in the desert, the boy was now a grown man!!

This “Superman” saves the lives of a professor and a young boy (named, oddly enough, Jimmy). He wants information about this planet, so they suggest he check out the metropolitan newspaper – the Daily Planet!

Story continues below

It is Jimmy who coins the name “Clark Kent,” and by the end of the episode, “Clark” has a job as a reporter via Perry White (who made his debut at this time, which is something we addressed in a previous installment of Comic Book Urban Legends Revealed).

Pretty crazy changes, eh?

Thanks to Tom and the Superman SuperSite for the information!

COMIC URBAN LEGEND: JM DeMatteis changed a storyline in Justice League of America because he didn’t know how the story was supposed to go.


Reader M. Bloom was wondering about an old Justice League of America storyline…

Matt wrote:

Back at the tail end of the first volume of Justice League of America, Gerry Conway devoted several issues to an ongoing plot where Zatanna was abducted by a cult and had her genes copied into a man named Adam, who was clearly depicted as having some fairly nefarious aims for Zee’s homo magi power.


This all came to a head in issues 255-257 of JLA, but it took a sudden turn at the very end when Gerry Conway left the book for the final time and J.M. DeMatteis came in to write the last few issues before the relaunch set up in Legends. Adam suddenly switched from being an ominous potential villain to having a sever mental breakdown and needing Zatanna’s help to stabilize himself.


What I’ve been wondering since I first read this is how much of the final published storyline followed Conway’s original plan, and how much did DeMatteis add himself. To me, it read like Conway left the title before the final countdown to cancellation, and DeMatteis took the ongoing plot and added his own ending to it that didn’t perfectly mesh with the set-up. So I’m wondering if you can find out what the story is behind this story.

So I hit up J.M. DeMatteis, who has been pestered by me so many times that he and Evanier ought to get co-authorship of these pieces, and he gave a nice simple reply.

He had taken over the book when Conway left, and he and editor Andy Helfer had no idea what Conway was planning with the current storyline, so DeMatteis had to make up a plot of his own, all with the knowledge that he was there to specifically draw the series to a close for an upcoming relaunch, so it appears that he just decided to use the storyline as a way to write Zatanna out of the book, turning a villain into, well, not a villain.

So there you go – mystery solved!

Thanks to Matt for the question and Mr. DeMatteis for yet another answer!!

Okay, that’s it for this week!

Feel free to drop off any urban legends you’d like to see featured!


“Jack left DC because at the time his contract expired, he wasn’t getting along well with them. The company was in trouble — it was not long before the publisher was dismissed — and there was a general panic in the office. Jack thought they were giving up too quickly on almost everything they published, cancelling books upon receipt of the slightest poor sales reports. He didn’t feel he could work in that environment.”

Geez, he’d have an aneurism now.

The third “legend” is wrong.

Robert Helmerichs

July 27, 2007 at 5:24 am

[quote]The third “legend” is wrong.[/quote]
When cut-n-paste goes bad…

(That was a relic from last week.)

Just a couple of months ago, I started to collect Jack Kirby’s Marvel work from 1978, the first nine issues of Machine Man and Devil Dinosaur. The final issues of each were dated for the same month, and I believe that it was a shift in editorial policy that did them in. I’d love to hear anyone with authority on this matter weigh in — were M.M. and D.D. killed off because they were both selling abysmally, or because the Marvel powers that be just weren’t all that interested in publishing Kirby’s wild, experimental tales? Or was it some other reason?

Interesting are the “Kirby’s here!” proclamations on the 4th World covers. I never noticed them before. Is that the first time a creator was touted on the cover like that? This may be a “comic book question.”

Thanks for the answer, the way that story changed midstream has been bugging me for awhile. It’s pretty much what I assumed had happened: Conway jumped ship before it crashed, and DeMatteis had to make the best out of what was already there. It’s nice to know for sure.

It’s funny, in the Fleischer Superman cartoons from the 40’s (which are fun and incredibly animated, but very campy) his origin had him landing on Earth as a child and then we were given a quick line about him growing up in an orphanage, and then on to an adult at the Daily Planet!

My guess as far as that and the radio show is that they figured the quicker they could bypass supposedly unnecessary origins about growing up in Kansas and skip right ahead to normal stories the better.

Derek B. Haas

July 27, 2007 at 7:59 am

Although Smallville wasn’t really in Kansas until the movie, and then not in comics until the ’80s.

“Although Smallville wasn’t really in Kansas until the movie, and then not in comics until the ’80s.”


I’m sure you meant to say the ’50s….

Did he? Or was Smallville just one of those cities that never got assigned a state? Yes, Smallville itself was around, but was there any statement that it was specifically in Kansas?

yeh right on the Kansas part, but not on Smallville…sounded like his first exposure to Smallvile was The New Adventures of Superboy

Brian asked about the “creator touted on a cover” thing some time back, and people found examples all the way back into the Golden Age. The earliest I know of is an old, pre-Batman issue of Detective Comics with a cover boasting Fu Manchu comics written by Sax Rohmer himself. (They were reprints of a newspaper strip version of Fu, but Rohmer had written the strip.)

jack kirby would eventually get royalties for the fourth world characters when he redesigned them for the super powers action figure line.

Concerning Kirby’s mid-70s departure from DC:

He had been working pretty independently in his California studio, being editor/writer/penciler and using his own letterers and inkers, often the same person on any given comic (Mike Royer, D. Bruce Berry, Greg Theakston). When that contract Evanier mentioned came up for renewal, DC told him they wouldn’t let him work that way anymore, and a quick check with Marvel told him that THEY would. So bye-bye DC. Indeed, to keep that from happening again, they soon initiated two policies, neither of which lasted very long because both were unattractive to name talent: No editor could write for his own comics, and art asignments were handed out by then art director Vince Coletta. The latter resulted in editors being called “story editors” and was rescinded in little more than a year. Those two policies WERE put in place shortly after Kirby’s departure, he DID turn up at Marvel almost immediately, and as for the rest, you’ll never convince me otherwise.

When cut-n-paste goes bad…

And usually, it’s oh so good! :)

It’s funny, this morning, I was thinking…”How did I phrase the DeMatteis one?” Now I know why I couldn’t remember. ;)

Thanks for the pick-up, Bill!

The Rural Juror

July 27, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Actually, the person who followed Kirby on his last DC assignment, Kamandi, was writer-editor Gerry Conway. And Denny O’Neil was writer-editor on Richard Dragon, Kung Fu Fighter a few months after that. And Murray Boltinoff was writing & editing in The Witching Hour around that same time, post-Kirby.

“I’m sure you meant to say the ’50s….”

Smallville was not in Kansas until the Mid-’80s relaunch. Before that Smallville was clearly a suburban community on the eastern seaboard, not far from Metropolis.

The Smallville bit was handled in a previous Urban Legend installment here.

So was the Kirby Writer/Editor bit (here), but I understand that Ted differs with the statements made there, so I wouldn’t cite that to dispute Ted’s position here.

“It’s funny, in the Fleischer Superman cartoons from the 40’s (which are fun and incredibly animated, but very campy) his origin had him landing on Earth as a child and then we were given a quick line about him growing up in an orphanage, and then on to an adult at the Daily Planet!”

Actually, this was from an early version of the comic strip that Siegal and Shuster shopped around to various publishers. Another version had him found by a passing (lone) motorist, taken to an orphanage, and adopted by the Kents, who never knew why he was different.

Harry Mendryk

July 27, 2007 at 5:14 pm

Who can argue with Joe Simon being the greatest Simon and Kirby expert? I for one hope he retains that position form many years to come.

Seriously I am only one of a number of people who study the Simon and Kirby period. But if you are going to seek information about Jack’s final DC period you simply cannot go to a better source then Mark Evanier.

Darren J Hudak

July 28, 2007 at 8:57 am

Or was Smallville just one of those cities that never got assigned a state?

In the early days Smallville was in the same state that Metropolis was in, if Metropolis was NY then Smallville was upstate NY. There were many Superboy comics where Clark’s class took a bus trip to Metropolis, (sometimes to visit the Daily Planet). When it was decided the Smallville was in Kanas, (in the first Movie), the two cites were put in different states, (becasue even though it was never stated that Metropolis was really NYC, many of the editors, writers and artist treated it like it was), and the Superboy stories with class trips to the Daily Planet just went away.

Smalleville the show put MEtropolis back in the same state as Smallville, or at least within driving distance. Unfortunatly that state is still Kanas which really doesn’t work. (for me, anyway) but there you go.

I meant my “You’ll never convince me otherwise” closing as an acknowledgement of the earlier piece. That was originally posted at the previous web address, and the message board discussion there no longer exists. The item started from an inquiry on my part, in which I wrongly suggested that those policy changes were made to make Jack leave, which was absurd; I don’t at all believe DC wanted him out, just under control, my bad. I pointed out that Evanier’s response ignored Kirby’s fairly autonomous status, which I had expressly included as a major factor. Several folks here have since acknowledged that this was his situation, if unwittingly corroborating me, on the “Jack’s Superman faces got redrawn” installment’s board, CBUL #105. This, as I said back then, lay Kirby’s commercially failing products all the more clearly at HIS feet, and in turn renders much of what Evanier said in his denial of any relationship between Jack’s departure and the new policies invalid. Another poster, C. Elam, apparently took offense at the very idea of the word “failure” being attached to any part of Kirby’s comics career, and engaged in a series of distortions and illogics, and in his final posting there one outright lie, that were obvious to anyone reading that board with a significant degree of intelligence and objectivity; he even submitted Jack’s presumably-editorially-rejected “pilots” that were thrown away in DC’s short-lived anthology, 1ST ISSUE SPECIAL, as if they were somehow evidence Kirby WASN’T producing numerous commercially failing comics for that company. Hence, my standing by the position in post #14, correcting the one error conceded to above.

Concerning The Rural Juror’s credits contradicting me, I forgot to admit to one other error in my original inquiry, that those two policies themselves were the cause of Kirby’s departure. As I said in post #14, they “WERE put in place shortly after [Jack’s] departure,” and according to the GCD, the last issue of KAMANDI with Kirby interiors was February 1976, and as of the September ’76 issue, Denny O’Neil was writing while Conway continued to edit. RICHARD DRAGON’s August-September ’76 issue had Conway editing and David Kraft writing. THE WITCHING HOUR? The only writing credits Boltinoff is given there are two letter columns—one in 1973, the other in 1978, and which obviously don’t count to this point anyway—and a one page story in September ’78, with a question mark indicating that it is actually uncredited and they aren’t certain HE wrote it, which would explain how it got past that prohibition, IF he indeed wrote it. When I suggested on the message board for the aforementioned CBUL about Kirby’s Superman faces being redrawn that there probably weren’t too many of them since the series under discussion was JIMMY OLSEN, somebody pointed out that the Man of Steel got a great deal of on-panel exposure during Jack’s run. He then said I should read the stories before I comment on them, as if I hadn’t prefaced my comment with , “I bet…,” indicating it was educated speculation (admittedly, I could have checked the GCD then, too, and found Supes in every Kirby issue’s “character appearances” list—except for his last, which doesn’t have one, but the index notes the redrawn faces, so he IS there, too—even getting top billing on several instances). YOU made no such qualifying remark, and are therefore much more deserving of THAT criticism than I was. I am getting sick and tired of people posting alleged but actually non-existent “facts” on these boards to say I’m wrong.

The Superman radio show probably streamlined the backstory to reduce the number of voice actors – and the number of characters the listener had to keep straight by voice alone.

The Rural Juror

July 28, 2007 at 7:59 pm

I don’t know what the whole Superman heads thig has to do with what I said.

Murray Boltinoff wrote under the pseudonym Wesley March (verify this at Jerry Bails’ Who’s Who http://www.bailsprojects.com/(S(3ocq0355ylopy4va1xihetfi))/whoswho.aspx), which you can find in Boltinoff-edited comics into 1977 http://www.comics.org/search.lasso?type=writer&query=wesley+marsh&sort=alpha&Submit=Search

Denny O’Neil’s last writer-edited issue of Richard Dragon is actually #13 (cover dated January-February 1977) http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=30636

Kirby was far ahead on Kamandi when he left DC. His first work back at Marvel actually appeared before his last Kamandi.

So it looks to me that the no writer-editor rule, if it existed, may have been instituted by Jenette Kahn, who came to DC in late 1976, but who didn’t deal with Jack Kirby in the mid-70s.

You’ll also notice that nowhere in my original post did I say you were wrong. All I did was point out that the writer-editor existed for about a year at DC after Kirby’s final work appeared there.

Rural Juror: “All I did was point out that the writer-editor existed for about a year at DC after Kirby’s final work appeared there.”

That’s a lie. I defy you to point out where you said any such thing. What you did was cite what you claimed to be a few instances of people working as editor/writer on the same, mid-70s published, DC comic, and that is ALL you said. Given the entire context, the only sane interpretation is that this was supposed to somehow contradict my argument about the “no editor–writer” rule & Kirby’s leaving the company (I concede that you didn’t come right out and SAY that I was wrong, but BFD!). You’re “…the no writer–editor rule, if it existed…” does nothing but prove that you don’t know enough about the period to be taking part in a discussion of it. Check out CBUL #48, the original discussion of Kirby’s departure, and you’ll se that no less than Mark Evanier stipulates to its existence.

I postulated on the original board that “Kirby was far ahead on KAMANDI when he left DC” and got castigated by the aforementioned “C. Elam” for it. I’d say “Thanks for the corroboration” but I’ve already pointed out that you’ve revealed a significant ignorance of the period, so I can’t take your word for it.

The “redrawn Superman heads thing” was about the criticism I got there for not having read the comics under discussion before commenting on them. I had qualified my statement there to indicate that it was an educated presumption making that shot less than entirely justified, but here you stated as flat facts things I was easily able to disprove. I point out that Boltinoff’s pseudonym, if it was such, was used probably because of the rule. As for RICHARD DRAGON, look closely, and you’ll see that the editing and/or writing credits on that series had been changing almost every issue for several in a row at that point, and would continue to do so for awhile, so this was an isolated incident just slipped by. I repeat (albeit rephrased and expanded somewhat), I am sick and tired of people posting unsupportable crap to contradict what I’ve posted, and also of them misrepresenting what they or I had previously said and flatly ignoring my most telling points (which is not to say that ALL of these happened this time; I’m getting general here, I admit) to “defend” themselves against my refutation of said crap.

The Rural Juror

July 29, 2007 at 1:39 pm

Wow, Ted, you’ve got a lot of anger about something going on. You seem to be assuming the worst and attacking me personally as hard as you can. I’m just presenting interesting facts for consideration.

You said: What you did was cite what you claimed to be a few instances of people working as editor/writer on the same, mid-70s published, DC comic, and that is ALL you said.

No, I didn’t. I didn’t talk about the same DC comic, but three DIFFERENT DC comics, across the twelve months (give or take) after Kirby left DC. In my follow-up I provided examples from two more comics (Unexpected and DC Special).

In my follow-up I provided a link to Jerry Bails’ Who’s Who. You can confirm Wesley Marsh is Murry Boltinoff there. I think you can trust the father of comics fandom on that.

I supported all the things I said with links to reputable sites. Gerry Conway was writer-editor on Kamandi after Kirby left DC and Denny O’Neil was writer-editor on Richard Dragon and Murray Boltinoff was writer-editor as well for quite a while after Kirby left DC. I would suspect that these three (at least) may have had contracts that stipulated writer-editor status that simply hadn’t expired when the new rule came in. Maybe. I don’t know, and can’t say

Ted Watson:

Here’s the image you are projecting. This vaguely paranoid dude who is easily driven to anger, and, with minimal prodding, can be driven to throw a temper tantrum.

And watching people throw temper tantrums is inherently interesting.

If you want people to get off your back, the absolute WORST thing you can do is act like you’ve been acting.

I am not seeing a grand conspiracy to make you angry. You’re argued with a couple different people in a couple different posts. They have a different opinion then you. It happens. Who cares? Assume that an intelligent reader can figure out who’s opinion is more in line with the actual facts, and move on.

And If someone IS trying to push your buttons they’ll say. “MAN! I TOTALLY got a reaction! This is AWESOME! Look at this guy freak Out! Let’s see what other buttons I can push to make this guy freak out some more!”

If commenting here isn’t fun for you, then leave. If it IS more enjoyable than aggravating then take a couple deep breaths and stop complaining about persecution. You’re either paranoid or giving the people who are against you exactly what they want. Either of these attitudes hurt your credibility.

Rural Juror: What I meant was that each was an instance of someone being both editor and writer on the same comic, not that all were on the same comic. As you specified three different titles and I repeated all three of them, you can’t sanely believe I meant what you are now claiming I did. No way! *I* stand by the GCD’s credits that Conway was not both writing and editing KAMANDI by late ’76 issues and the last O’Neil/DRAGON issue you cited was an isolated incident. Remember, I said that the rule came in a little while AFTER Kirby left, so these things don’t contradict my statement one little bit. While I don’t entertain, and did not mean to imply (though rereading myself I can certainly see how it looks that way and humbly apologize for it) serious doubts about the Boltinoff pseudonym (and repeat the suggestion that it was probably a way around the rule), with all due respects to the dead, trusting Jerry Bails is no option for me. His foreword to GOLDEN AGE SPECTRE ARCHIVES, VOL. 1 is a pile of rubbish, and a fair amount (but by no means anywhere close to all, to be fair to the man) of his “detective work” on ALL-STAR COMICS & the JSA, as described by Roy Thomas in his ALL-STAR COMPANION, is blatantly faulty. To give one (and as I recall, the most blatant) example of the latter, there was correspondence between Bails and Gardner Fox in the ’60s in which the fan surprised the veteran writer with his having correctly deduced that several stories near the end of Fox’s run were published well out of order (see? I said nowhere near all was faulty). The writer in turn surprised Bails by denying having written some published stories and giving titles of others he did write that never saw print. Bails eventually postulated to Thomas that #28’s “Paintings that Walked the Earth” was actually a retitling of what Fox had listed as an unused story. The problem with this is that Fox did indeed claim “Paintings…” as his own work as well (Thomas photographically reproduced the actual correspondence, so none of THIS is open to debate), and since his records, according to Roy’s text, were primarily financial, the only way Bails’ theory could be right was if Gardner collected two fees for the same piece of work and didn’t remember that was what had happened! Given the penny–pinching attitude the same book attributed to DC’s bosses of the day, I find it unlikely to have happened, and can’t believe at all that Fox wouldn’t have remembered it less than two decades later if it had. And these implications of Fox saying he wrote “both stories” jumped out at me big time the first time I read the COMPANION. Given the mistakes Mike Friedrich made in an interview Thomas conducted and transcribed in that same book, and the contrary facts Roy presented elsewhere in the volume and therefore was well aware of, yet didn’t make so much as a footnote or parenthetical aside at the interview to make sure his readers weren’t misled by Friedrich’s faulty memories (I figure he put his friendship with Mike ahead of being accurately informative to his readers), it is very possible Thomas did see the holes in Bails’ work and similarly declined to point them out. The point here is that I can’t, and no one should, trust Bails.

MarkAndrew: You postulate that someone might be deliberately “trying to push [my] buttons…and make [me] freak out.” Anybody who would do a thing like that should have his or her posting privileges rescinded. So don’t expect me to let a message saying I’m wrong or otherwise out of line, accomplished by misrepresenting what I said or what they previously said or what the objective data are, stand unchallenged on THOSE grounds. “If commenting here isn’t fun for you, then leave.” THAT is fun; it’s defending my information, my logic, and myself against unmitigated bullshit from people who prefer to stand by their sacred cows than deal with the reality of the situation under discussion that isn’t. But if I leave, “the terrorists win!” (just a figure of speech, of course, but surely you understand my point).

The Rural Juror

July 30, 2007 at 3:38 pm

I looked over my Comic Readers and Amazing World of DC Comics from the era. Here is the timeline:

April 1975 – Gerry Conway hired as writer-editor [from TCR]

May 1975 – Jack Kirby quits DC and begins to work at Marvel. He leaves behind 8 drawn (some not scripted) issues of Kamandi (#33-40). [from TCR]

January 1976 – Jenette Kahn takes over at DC. [from TCR]

August 1976 – DC creates the position of Story Editor in an editorial realignment. [AWODCC…may have been reported there a month or two after the fact]

End of 1976/beginning of 1977 – last writer-editor work at DC during the 70s appears, work that had probably been begun just prior to the editorial realignment just mentioned.

So the facts certainly support the assertion that shortly (a year or a little more than a year) after Kirby left, DC instituted a new policy which forbid writer-editors. This policy was instituted by Jenette Kahn, who may have instituted this policy or been encouraged to institute this policy because of DC’s experience with Jack Kirby.

I sorry you took what I said to be a refutation of what you said. That was not my intention. I was just trying to add some more information into the mix.

We all good now?

Wow. I missed a pretty hilarious freak-out.

Rural Juror: You certainly didn’t seem to be trying to agree with me back then.

There may already be definitive information on this, but if not, I’d like to see this one checked out:

Urban Legend: The Avengers was created as a response to the Justice League.

The biggest fallacy of the Kirby DC era was that Jack asked that Vince Colletta no longer ink his books. Colletta was pretty much calling his own shots at DC and inking Kirby became less important to him than catching all the deadline bound books so they wouldnt miss the press runs. His attention to the company’s welfare resulted in his receiving the art director position shortly thereafter.

There are writers like Mark Evanier and Roy Thomas who have written that Kirby demanded Mike Royer as his inker but the true story was that Colletta decided to pass on future Kirby penciled books himself. It is a well-known fact that Jack’s layouts left much to be desired during the latter part of his career.

I must say, as someone who is currently reading through the back-archives in chronological order, as well as generally looking through the comments to each thread, Ted Watson certainly has, while perhaps not anger issues, some etiquette and attitude issues. He often tends to post in a very smug manner, and when information he posts is refuted, he rarely simply acknowledges his mistake. He also doesn’t seem to concern himself with being affable to other people in these commenting threads, unless they are on his side of the argument. I certainly don’t mean this as an attack, rather, as a simple statement of how you come off, from someone well-removed from the argument; and, as I’m not the first to mention such a notion through multiple threads, perhaps a subjective look at his own internet personality will bring to light that, while it certainly is an important part of many of our lives, it really is just a discussion about comics, and perhaps should be approached in a less serious manner?

That’s exactly why Ted Watson no longer comments here. ;)

Oh! Haha, makes sense, I suppose. I’ll not talk any more ill of him, as he can’t come defend himself and I don’t think it’d be fair; I will say, however, that I like the way you do things around here, Brian.

‘It is a well-known fact that Jack’s layouts left much to be desired during the latter part of his career.’ (Michael Koren). This is the first time I’ve come across this ‘fact,’ having been reading Kirby comics and involved in fandom for forty years.

The pencils reproduced in The Jack Kirby Collector leave nothing to be desired that I can see. I am specifically recalling those to New Gods No. 6, from a couple of issues after Colletta’s last issue inking.

Leave a Comment



Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives