home

How fans sometimes change when they learn about Lee Norris Burroughs 14 May 2017 This guy posted on Comic Book historians. I would say that his article is along the lines of many folks' thoughts here. http://www.comicbookhistorians.com/jack-kirby-co-creator-of-the-marvel-universe/ Patrick Ford: That post is by a guy who was calling himself Alex Marvel. When he was Alex Marvel he was a big supporter of Stan Lee. Then he suddenly began calling himself Alex Grand and became critical of Lee. Frequently hyper critical. Then he decided the Comic Book Historians group was no place for criticism of Lee and told Michael Hill to basically drop dead. I don't much care for people who change their mind every couple of months. Norris Burroughs: I doubt if he's going to change his mind back to that of a Lee supporter. Even in Trumpworld, hopefully there comes a point when the evidence will become overwhelming. Chris Tolworthy: I often make the comparison between Lee-worship and the cult-like church I used to belong to. What we see with Alex is normal and healthy. Psychologists call it the five stages of grief, and it applies to losing a cult just as it applies to losing a loved one. https://psychcentral.com/lib/the-5-stages-of-loss-and-grief/ Stage 1. Denial. The Lee worshipper is presented with evidence that Lee lied. So he doubles down and supports Lee even more. Stage 2. Anger. The worshipper ignores so many problems, putting them on his mental "shelf" for later, that eventually the shelf breaks. His world view in ruins, he reacts with anger, and attacks Lee with passion and venom. Stage 3. Bargaining. All his Lee-worshipping friends now reject him So he tries to backpedal and be in both camps at once. This is where Alex would have attacked Michael. The worshipper believes that fence sitting is possible, and so he attacks the unbelievers as being weak or unsophisticated in their thinking. Stage 4. Depression. The old fire has gone. The former cultist has lost everything that gave his life meaning. Stage 5. Acceptance. Finally the former cultist is at peace. They have lost the magical world of Deal Leader, but have gained a much bigger world: the real world. There may be millions of True Believers, but there are far more people who know that comics are just a business. And business is full of managers claiming credit for others' work. Welcome to reality. Patrick Ford: Chris Tolworthy , You are probably correct. He would seem to be in stage three. Perhaps he was not close enough to fandom to understand the level of hostility? As I recall according to Andrew McAdams and Michael Hill he tried to explain things to them via private messages which mentioned his "friends." I've seen numerous people on FB bemoaning that politics and religion (two very important issues with grave consequences) should not come between friends. At yet apparently Stan Lee is above politics and religion, because you just don't criticize Lee and expect to remain friends. Chris Tolworthy: Just to be fair, I'm not suggesting that Lee-ism is a Jim Jones level cult, or that losing faith in Lee is the same as losing a family member! I just see parallels, that's all. Patrick Ford: Chris Tolworthy , I understood you on that. What is amazing is some people who are willing to put aside issues with have life and death repercussions are not willing to put aside discussion of Lee. It's where they draw a line in the sand. Norris Burroughs: It's odd, in that it was basically Kirby's Fantastic Four that set the pattern for a family, a dysfunctional family that created the atmosphere. I started reading that book around 1962 and it still gives me a powerful feeling of emotional strength and security. I would have to say that Kirby's FF art was the primary foundation for the expansion of my own artistic ability. The fact is that the Marvel Universe thrived for the period around my late childhood into my late teens as a support system. The only comparable thing in my life in that period was the Beatles, which was obviously another cult-like phenomenon. Michael Hill: Norris, if you'd been born twenty years earlier, you might have said precisely the same thing about The Newsboy Legion, but you'd have been part of a much larger crowd. It's funny what Lee convinces us to forget about history. Norris Burroughs: No, I don't think Lee ever me convinced me to forget about anything. As much of a Marvel zombie as I might have been, I never bought into Marvel's Commie bashing. It was the family I came from. Patrick Ford: I get that feeling from the platter we used to serve the Thanksgiving turkey from as long as I can remember until now. Norris Burroughs: I think we should acknowledge the fact that Marvel was like a powerful cult, and those that were it's victims need a great deal of deprogramming to come to terms with the reality that their Guru was and is such a fucking liar. Very painful to be so disillusioned. I include myself among those, because Marvel and was such a part of my childhood, but it was not quite so hard for me because I always knew that Kirby was the supreme one of the duo. [Chris, can't access the "1 reply" that follows this comment by Norris, https://www.facebook.com/groups/1758159214462637/permalink/1947316585546898/] Jim Van Heuklon: Jack Kirby, the Marvel version of Bill Finger. Patrick Ford: He may not revert to advocating for Lee but his personal attack on Michael Hill was totally out of line. Michael explained what happened to me and Andrew posted part of the discussion. The person who instigated the trouble as someone named Al Bigley. He flatly insulted Michael. Grand should have instantly stepped in and reminded Bigley that the group was set up as a historians group and criticisms of Lee were a subject that fit the groups mission. He also should have reminded Bigley that personal insults would not be tolerated. Instead he congratulated Bigley and Michael for a good debate and then commented that the subject of Lee ought to be dropped. When Michael asked him if the subject was off limits he began playing games. He asked Michael if there were any other subjects concerning comics which Michael would care to comment on. Chris Tolworthy: I want to cut Alex some slack here. As I discussed in a reply to Norris, what Alex did was normal for people who discover their world view is in tatters. At first they react with anger, then they try to go back and have both sides. These stages are temporary, and are part of the five stages of grief. They are part of the recovery process. Michael Hill: Alex chose to pretend my questioning of Lee's writing credits on stories unsigned by Lee was equivalent to Bigley attacking me personally, and that we should both take a breath. My regret in the situation is that I didn't play by the imaginary rules of the group so I could stick around and continue to get under their skin by repeatedly raising the Lee issue. Instead I gave them the message that their tactic of attacking the messenger was all that was required to keep the truth suppressed. Patrick Ford: Group moderators should take care to make sure everyone knows what is and is not allowed. If Grand does not want criticism of Lee on his page then he should write that into the groups rules. If criticism of Lee is allowed then he should actively inform anyone complaining about the subject that they might want to avoid posts which upset them. It's really that simple. It's one way or the other. Norris Burroughs: Well, Alex is not part of this group. In he end, it would be up to Mike to pass judgement on this guy. Still, I though it was cool that someone else on a historians site has taken Kirby's part. Michael Hill: To be fair, Alex was undoubtedly responding to complaints. He privately agreed with me, and when Bigley attacked me for my "vicious Lee hatred" (ie calmly stating the facts), Alex diplomatically told us both to knock it off ("it's clear that you guys will never convince each other, let's move on"). I didn't complain about the personal attack, but Bigley and Pearl complained about the anti-Lee sentiment. As Chris says, having won them back as an audience, it was more important to keep them as happy contributors than it was to have an honest discussion. There can't really be effective moderation in that situation. The joke lies in applying the "Historian" label to ignorant people rudely shouting down questions without addressing them. Patrick Ford: I think you are being more than fair. Grand could have nipped the whole thing in the bud by stepping in immediately and telling Bigely to avoid reading posts concerning Lee if he didn't care for them. He might also have mentioned his article at the blog (the one Norris linked to) and said that he had cribbed heavily from your Kirby Museum articles when writing it. Michael Hill: I think Alex would prefer to keep the article, like his own FB page, separate from the group, lest some of his "friends" who object to the idea of Kirby writing or creating, leave. Chris Tolworthy: Michael Hill The crazy thing is that his article is so kind to Lee! He is unbelievably generous given the evidence. Alex calls them "co-creators" as if they are equals. Yet his examples are damning: he shows that Kirby not only drew, but also created the original ideas, and also plotted the details of individual issues. And he shows enough original Kirby work (Sky Masters for example) to show that Kirby did not need help with dialog. The implication is damning to Lee's claims and to his honesty. So to call Lee "co-creator" is extraordinarily generous. Perhaps Alex's crime was to confronted self-proclaimed historians with facts they should have known. The truth has been loudly proclaimed for over 30 years now The primary evidence is widely reprinted (the pre-1961 Kirby comics are there for all to read). By drawing attention to it, Alex implies that the "historians" are merely nostalgic kids without critical faculties, and on the wrong side in the greatest conflict in their field. Nobody wants to hear that. Patrick Ford: Michael, Which to me begs the question, "Why are these friends important to him?" They would quit a group if Lee is the subject of criticism, but say things like, "Who lets a silly thing like politics come between friends."

home