home
When Lee misled the press
First, a very late example
16 July 2017
Another fabricated story by Lee
Here's a You Tube video of Stan Lee's acceptance speech at the D23 EXPO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyhmSRXFH3k
Lee begins with his standard self-depreciation bit. There is thankfully scant mention of Kirby. I've got to credit Lee with not taking the opportunity to identify Kirby as an artist. Lee then moves on to a completely fabricated story about wanting to purchase THE ART OF WALT DISNEY (Macmillan and Company, New York, 1942) when he was a penniless "kid of eight or ten" [he had to be 20 or more, and editor on Kirby's million selling Captain America]. Lee was still pretty young in 1942 when the first edition of that book was published but I find it hard to believe he was penniless? [he was ]
Patrick Ford
14 March 2017
THE COMIC READER # 44, Dec 1965.
As I posted below Stan Lee was interviewed by Nat Freedland in December 1965 (Thomas) or January 1966 (Kirby). In the article Lee insulted Steve Ditko and threatened to fire Ditko if sales of SPIDER-MAN declined.
The fact is Lee was fully aware that Steve Ditko had quit in Nov. of 1965.
Patrick Ford: Of course Lee's fans will no doubt say that the fanzine report is wrong, or that Roy Thomas is confused. Because Stan never lies. Except fans of Lee like to jovially admit that Lee lies. It's just that he lies in a nonspecific way. In every single case where Lee is caught in a lie the very people who think Lee's lies are as cute as a naughty puppy will insist that in the specific instance Lee was not telling a lie.
Patrick Ford: This is very much like the Lee-fan claim that Kirby was "incredibly creative." Kirby is always amazingly creative when they describe him except when it comes to specifics. Then suddenly Kirby created nothing except pencils. The Hulk? No that was Stan. The FF ? No that was Stan. And so on and on and on.
Dave Rawlins: Lee was setting up his "Spider-Man sold better under Romita" propaganda with the Herald-Tribune interview. His methods are so incredibly transparent to anyone who bothers to use a bit of critical thinking.
Dave Rawlins: I doubt that Lee made his remarks about Ditko while Kirby was present, since Kirby already knew Ditko was gone.
Dave Rawlins: I'd bet that Freedland asked to see a Spider-Man plotting session in advance of his visit and that's what prompted Lee's remarks about Ditko. He COULDN'T admit that Ditko had left because the entire NYC metro area would know when the article got published. And that means comic book fans, especially Spider-Man fans, all over the country would know before Lee was ready to tell them.
Patrick Ford: Dave published sales records show that SPIDER-MAN was already #1 under Ditko. Lee told the same lie about DAREDEVIL and the FF. Lee as well as Thomas and Romita always claim the sales of SPIDER-MAN, DAREDEVIL and the FF went up after; Ditko, Wood, KIrby left. That may be true as to S-M and DD, but it is clearly false as to the FF and the sales direction of S-M and DD were clearly a result of the work by Ditko and Wood.
Notice too that it is always Marvel employee Romita who is the person replacing Ditko-Wood-Kirby.
Patrick Ford: Dave, Good point about Kirby not being present. As revealed by Thomas, Thomas himself saw only a fraction of the PR event.
[Editor's note: the same article is packed full of other falsehoods. For example, Lee claimed that he won the Herald Tribune competition three times. That claim has been thoroughly investigated and found to be false. See "Stan Lee and the Rise and Fall of the American Comic Book" p.6. And of course the central claim that Lee wrote the stories, when he unintentionally revealed that he did not know what was going on in the books.]
home