And I don't disagree with that. Kirby was willing to borrow from Star Trek, The Prisoner, etc., and that's OK. But I don't believe that Lucas has ever cited Kirby as an inspiration for Star Wars. With that entire mythos now baked and hard-wired in the public's mind, a New Gods film with Fourth World ideas like "the Source" will be perceived as not just a copy, but a lame, obvious copy.
Well no, actually none of the above-listed people have created as many enduring, popular, commercially successful characters as Kirby has. Some (talented as they are) have not even created one well-known character. So if you feel they are Kirby's equals or betters in terms of character creation, you're not understanding what I mean by "character creation." And yes, most of the people you've listed are/were extremely talented comics artists. You could argue that any of them are objectively better artists than Kirby, and I might agree in some cases. But that isn't the point of this discussion... hence my comment that you'd missed the point. There's no comics artist who has been as influential as Kirby in the realm of superhero comics. And perhaps only a few who've been as influential as Kirby in the field of comics in general. Since you haven't bothered to indicate what you consider "bad information" in my statement, or presented any contradictory evidence, I'm left to conclude you are simply incorrect and/or not comprehending what I meant. In what way did Kirby or any other artist that Lichtenstein swiped from benefit? Art is often inspired by other work, and artists often swipe from other work. But great artists are able to build something original out of what they swipe, and they are capable of original creation. I've seen nothing to indicate Lichtenstein had these abilities.
And to really drive that point home: here’s just a small selection of characters that Kirby was a collaborator or sole creator on Ant Man Black Panther Bucky Captain America Doctor Doom Fantastic Four Nick Fury Groot Hulk Human Torch Iron Man Loki Magneto Red Scull Silver Surfer Thor Vision X-Men And I would wager that if you pulled anyone off the street (please don’t do that we’re in a pandemic ) they would recognize a majority of these characters. That’s how influential Kirbys work is.
Or he lost his old partner who he had an idiosyncratic and one sided creative process with. One in which he was an "artist" and an "overseer" at the same time. Jack was replaced by kids who Stan didn't have he same "agreement" with about creativiity. He was going to have to be more business-like and he tossed it in, and let Roy Thomas do it.
Some of the fan favorite artists could not handle a monthly comic, Steranko I doubt could, maybe the longest run of a full length comic was the firs three Nick Fury Of Shield issues? He did like only two X-Men in a row, and two Captain Americas in a row. Love the comics and every single other thing he did do, but can only wish he could've done more. It seems like he would've needed those split style books to have kept going as the regular artist, like he did in the Nick Fury/Doctor Strange shared Strange Tales. Other favored artists do more an illustration style with very detailed surface rendering, that's never going to be the same fit for a regularly published comic like Jack Kirby and Joe Kubert could produce. Neal Adams had some runs a bit longer than Steranko, but not so much longer, and most weren't monthly frequency. Jack Kirby did one hundred monthly issues of Fantastic Four plus annuals and other monthly comics for Marvel like Thor for a similarly long stretch. I'm all for quality over quantity, there should be room for both, but the real backbone was those guys who could reliably fill monthly issues with quality as well as quantity. I really got hooked on reading Marvel comics regularly as much through Sal Buscema comics (Hulk, Rom) as John Byrne (X-Men and always at least one other title in a month). A produce shop that just sells eggplant, watercress, celantro, kiwi fruit, is not going to survive like one that sells a lot of potatoes and carrots and apples. Jack Kirby was potatoes plus the wildest ideas in comics at the time! He also did loads of total classic eye-grabbing covers from the early '40s to at least the '70s. Maybe Carl Barks is a bit comparable for what he put into his Donald Duck adventures, but not in quantity nor the length of years.
Laughably one of the few innovations to 'his' works which Lichtenstein 'added' later was putting a zip-a-tone style shiny streak across the panels, making them even less readable or intelligible, which he then did over and over. I don't really know what people saw in much of his career myself. Past some brief 'Pop Art' moment of the mid '60s he doesn't seem at all worth even mentioning.
I have lots of nm Kirby including this book. Kirby was the king. Thor was a fantastic book in the silver age.
That's part of the maturing process of coming to grips with the heroes of your youth. Learning the comics business was a cynical endeavor, piloted by cynical people. Hopefully, one takes that disappointing realization, and applies the learning to other fields as well, and learns from that too. In my case, it made me appreciate more the ingenuity and creativity that can still come from such environments, and still prevail to give the world something beautiful. No matter how anybody can look at the business they saw past to get their entertainment, there is still opportunity to discover what is wonderful about the entire craft of graphic narrative. It's an artform I have given over 4/5ths of my life to absorbing, and coming to grips with the "collectors mentality" that comes from it, as well as the artists' triumph of communicating something fresh to an audience who, without his contributions, might have never seen their worlds in a different light. Even under any circumstances that made them seem to the public, like they were a lower form of artist, or producers of pablum. I've seen what a brushstroke can do in sequential narrative, that no amount of budgetary excess can bring to a flawed piece of film or television. And many other cultures know exactly what I'm talking about. Lee didn't give me the excuse the stop appreciating comics; he just gave me less reason to appreciate Lee.
I agree, I do wish Lee had made it right when it mattered most. Didn't all this blow up around the time movies were being made and big money rolled in ? I collected from around 72 to 2000 then lost touch. Had a family and couldn't afford to collect and maintain a analog rig and the books had to go. That was a rough one .
I was first reading about Jack's beef with Lee in The Comics Journal in the early 1980's. He wasn't shy about laying-out all the issues that made him bolt for DC in the first place. My first experience with Marvel was an early Spider-man issue my brother bought, involving a circus ringleader with a hypnotic hat, back in the early early days. I was still on Team DC though, having learned to read through Sugar & Spike, and mostly exclusive once Denny and Neil began their "relevance" phase. Probably didn't get any steady diet of Excelsior until the Starlin and Byrne days though, and it was only a "balanced part of this delicious breakfast". I was already looking into the fringes of the medium by the late '70s.
Star Wars has thousands of inspirations going back thousands of years; Darth is Doom is the Black/Green Knight, and this alone goes back centuries. I don't expect artists to footnote everything that inspires them, nor pay royalties to the estates of poets who died 500 years ago.
"Enduring, popular, commercially successful characters?" What do these words even mean, and why should anyone care? How many Smurfs films (for instance) are there? How many characters populate them? How many hundreds of millions of dollars made from them? What does "created" mean? Simon & Kirby swiped from everywhere all the time, from The Shield to kid gangs to (not) creating love comics, and that's fine, but you may want to bone up on your comics history to discover the extraordinary creations and contributions of the giants I mention (just a few of hundreds), because someone is struggling hugely with what "creation" is. The "point of the discussion?" Kirby was one of hundreds/thousands of gifted artists participating in a medium. He's no more "the King" of anything than you or I, though I welcome the celebration of his gifts along with the celebration of the gifts of his peers and betters. Kirby the most influential? Even in just the dead end arena of super hero comics? That's just silly, and completely false. I encourage you to learn more about the medium of which you speak, and maybe you could start with my (very) short list above of those who stood alongside, or towered above, Kirby. Incorrect information abounds in your comments - I truly don't know where to begin except to suggest that you could learn a great deal more about the history of the medium. Roy helped legitimize the medium; that benefitted everyone working in it, raising their status. If you don't like Roy's work, or don't understand it, that's fine. I do like it, as well as Kirby's work, and that of the hundreds who toiled/created along with him.
And to really drive my point home, here's a list of Smurfs (for instance) JUST covering characters whose names begin with A through D: Actor Smurf Alchemist Smurf Archeologist Smurf Architect Smurf Astro Smurf Baby Smurf Baker Smurf Barber Smurf Blacksmith Smurf Blue Overall Smurf Brainy Smurf Butterfly Catching Smurf Camper Smurf Carpenter Smurf Chef Smurf Clockwork Smurf Clockwork Smurfette Clueless Smurf Clumsy Smurf Coalminer Smurf Cobbler Smurf Complimentary Smurf Crazy Smurf Dabbler Smurf Disabled Smurf Doctor Smurf Dopey Smurf Dreamy Smurf Drummer Smurf And I would wager if you pull anyone off the street (please be gentle!), they could name a whole bunch of Smurfs characters, including many not listed above. The Smurfs franchise is beloved throughout the world, and has generated hundreds of millions in profits via merchandise, films, comic books/graphic novels, etc. Peyo was a genius, as was Kirby to some degree as well. But to say that either was "the King" of anything is silly. Let's celebrate the accomplishments of artists, not randomly lionize them as nobles.
Or he decided to go to more strip clubs, or REALLY work at finding a good toupee - anything's possible. Speculation is just that, and serves no real purpose in this discussion.
Some good points, and Kirby certainly has numerous rival stalwarts (in terms of a high quantity of quality) at other companies, many of whom I included in my list.
"Drive your point home?" Let's face it, your point is walking. In the rain. And you feel that each of these anonymous ciphers is the equivalent of the partial list of characters Kirby created? I get it now, you're not a troll, you're a Smurf.
What's an "anonymous cipher" and who decides, & what does "equivalent" mean, and why does it matter? Indeed, and of course the meaningless assignation of "troll" (often made ironically) is just code for "you're not bowing to the hat on the pole!!!" But one could use Archie or Casper or many other income generating properties to pursue the silly "this made a lot of money so it's important!" argument; how many Casper movies are there, and how many Archie TV shows have been made? Let's celebrate the work of Kirby as one of many kings & queens & jesters & *common folk* of a great medium, shall we?
