Ditko In His Own Words: Stan Lee And Spider-Man 

I just added an Amazing Spider-Man #33 to my collection yesterday. Ditko knocks it out of the park in this issue. The first five pages showing Spider-Man’s struggle to free himself from the machinery so that he can survive and deliver the serum that will save Aunt May’s life is some of the best storytelling in any ASM comic, ever. Those five pages were planned out by Steve Ditko. He decided that was what the story and the character needed; a real struggle. When the artwork was seen by Stan Lee, he was surprised. He expected that Spider-Man’s struggle that was spread across those five pages was only going to amount to one page. I don’t know how Stan felt about this at the time, but the importance of the end result is still recognized and loved by Spider-Man fans almost 58 years later… and we have *only* Steve Ditko to thank.

Thank you so much for covering Ditko’s version of events. I honestly feel like Ditko, Kirby, and others were mostly being truthful about Lee. Please, cover more.

Years ago, before he passed, I had a distinct pleasure of catching Steve Ditko over the phone when he must've been in a chatty mood. We talked only for closer to 10 minutes, and I mostly wanted to ask him about Norman Osborn and the Green Goblin. He answered my question and even elaborated further on other parts. It was a very interesting phone call. Anyone else who has ever had the pleasure of speaking with him knows that you're not supposed to share what he says to you. So I won't be sharing what he said to me as a courtesy to him. That being said, he really did talk like he wrote. I wish he spoke more publicly, but the conversation I had with him reminded me of the famous David Lynch quote "As soon as you finish a film, people want you to talk about it. And its um. The film is the talking." He wanted his work to speak for itself. And it cannot be stated enough how cruel it is that almost all of his Marvel stuff had Lee writing dialogue over Ditko's work. Like a voice taken away.

Considering that he makes a lot of the same arguments that Kirby did I'm inclined to believe him. With all the other responsibilities that Lee had at Marvel it makes sense for the artist to carry most of the load creatively, especially where Jack was concerned.

This was covered in a Stan Lee documentary. He would have meetings of what he wanted for SEVERAL series. So he wasn’t writing in the conventional sense, but he was carrying the mental load for many titles. This would likely give an artist considerable creative license

Last time I was this early people still was giving Bob Kane credit for Batman

Thank you for covering this topic. I feel it’s important to challenge Lee’s legacy if it means getting a better understanding on how his artists (especially Ditko and Kirby) were instrumental in making Marvel the brand it is today and clearing up widespread ignorance.

When one reads the stilted scripting that was (rightfully) credited to both Ditko and Kirby (following their departures from Marvel) it is beyond apparent that Lee, a prodigious, playful wordsmith, was CLEARLY behind the scripting on the 60's era Marvel books he worked on with those two gentlemen. As far as plotting goes, that is an entirely different kettle of fish.

I don't have much to add, having scrolled through a lot of the comments, so will just drop this here -- it's really strange to think about how an industry built upon heroic, selfless characters can be so cutthroat and duplicitous behind the scenes. ("And there's profundity for ya!") Anyways! I love what you do and how you do it, and of course will always tune in next time.

It's a shame Steve had passed, but at least we have his words on paper and his legendary art to remember him and honor him

Ditko's commitment to objectivism is the most fascinating thing to me about the man. It's a philosophy that I have no love for myself, but I respect the passion he had for it and it's fascinating to pick apart how it shaped his work.

A while back I wrote an essay that goes over Ditko's history of his time at Marvel - using quotes from his various essays/letters. You can find this in the articles section of the 'Comic Book Historians' website ('The Ditko Version'). It goes into the creation of Spidey, Dr Strange, the Lee/Ditko Hulk, how Ditko took over plotting control, etc. It also covers Ditko's comments regarding credit/remuneration.

Ditko-Lee I think is in some ways more interesting than Kirby-Lee exactly because Kiby is such a well-known quantity in the medium's history, had his own public statements and seminal solo works while Ditko always remained this enigma by his own design and (IMO) struggled a lot more without Lee than Kirby. Muddying the waters further is that Lee did have success in the Spider-Man title without Ditko working alongside John Romita (e.g. the iconic "Spider-Man No More!" issue is in Lee-Romita). It'd probably be interesting to triangulate Ditko's perspective by seeing what Romita says as well. It's a very interesting subject. I personally think Spider-Man himself ends up as a amalgamation of Lee's (the down-on-his luck relatable guy), Ditko's (the angry misfit) and Romita's (the dashing nerd) ideas for the character.

The most telling thing for me, is how dry stan lee's creativity got when he broke with kirby and Ditko. Kirby and Ditko keep creating wild things for a loooong time. Stan lee just became marvel mascot.

Knowing Ditko, he deserves a lot of the credit to creating Spider-Man, the costume, the web-shooters, the dynamic/acrobatic movement, even Peter Parker's name. Having read the entire Ditko saga and some dramatizations of behind-the-scenes stuff involving Stan, I could definitely tell there were times where Ditko and Lee drifted apart. That was including how jerkish and standoffish Peter could be near the end of his relationship with Betty Brant. In my opinion, Stan had all of the ideas and spirit of Spider-Man while Ditko tried to translate that in a form familiar to them both. But ultimately, the more Stan got involved in the business side of Marvel (to a bit of Stan's frustration), the more Ditko couldn't put up with basically being on the sidelines. It's something I can compare with Ub Iwerks and Walt Disney in the creation of Mickey Mouse.

Steve Ditko referenced me in one of his essays. I felt honored, though he was complaining about me

Ditko was such an interesting person. Thanks for making this. The whole Lee vs Kirby and Ditko has been done over and over but publishing this essay really puts a cap on the whole situation. For all of his talents Lee was a glory hound. The “Funky Flashman.” It probably didn’t help he was related to the publisher

Is it just me, or are these Dr. Strange panels art just superb?

It's interesting that Steve actually gives Stan more credit than I normally would. And I'm a legit Stan Lee supporter! A basic one-page story synopsis and then doing the dialogue is enough to call yourself the "writer" in my opinion. I don't know. I think there is a lot more nuance and opinion to this discussion than the ant-Stan side likes to admit.

Another well-crafted video Overlord. Ditko responded to Lee's longtime claims in the only way that made sense & mattered to him. He probably figured as long as the truth was & put it out there for the public to decide who was right. I know you could argue this all boils down to semantics as far as where credit goes, but given how Lee publicly claimed credit for everything under the sun until later on in his life, you can't fault guys like Ditko or Kirby from attempting to set the record straight.

Stan got more credit then he deserved. Ditko got less credit then he deserved. Both were impossible to work with,had massive egos, and also incredibly brilliant. The problem with the Stan lee/Ditko/Kirby debate is it’s not a bob kane situation. It’s incredibly grey who was responsible for what.

It is perhaps always been Kirby and Ditko’s art and stories, but if you look at the Marvel Age books it is most definitely Stan Lee’s writing. It’s his script. That style goes across all of the books with Lee’s name on it no matter if it was Kirby, Ditko, Romita, etc drawing it. Stan Lee played his role with his witty and playful style of scripting that was so fresh in the 1960s. Not to attack Kirby, but you can see in the Fourth World, his style of writing is very wooden and not exactly captivating. So thank god Stan Lee was there to write Fantastic Four and other books

If Ditko wasn't such a recluse I'm sure he would have been nearly as popular as a figure as Stan Lee was

You should definitely do an entire video about Ditko's opinion on spider-man, maybe the algorithm will play it up because of the game being trendy rn

Looking for the truth in these matters is important. If no one does this then a hundred years from now, all people will know or be told is that Stan Lee created all of Marvel's Silver Age or the Marvel Age of comics. The truth is out there. Yes, many of the actual creators are long gone but the evidence is still there. Just look at the work output of Steve Ditko, Stan Lee and the great Jack Kirby. Look before the first issue of Fantastic Four and Amazing Fantasy #15. The works of both Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby speak for themselves on their imagination, creativity and intelligence both as artists and writers. Look at their output of characters before and after the Marvel Age of comics. Then look at Stan Lee's output as a writer before and after that same period. Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby created great characters before, during and after the Marvel Age. What does one remember of Stan Lee's work before and after the prolific 60's? Before, the Destroyer I believe and after that the first issue of the Savage She-Hulk. I do believe that without Stan Lee there would not have been the Marvel Age of comics or the IP that's worth billions of dollars now. I don't see many actively looking to collect the comics written by Stan Lee in the Golden Age. I have been a fan of Stan Lee forever but I had to accept the stark truth about him and the injustice done to Ditko and Kirby. I'm glad I know the truth and I celebrate both great creators. Early in my collecting comics I was told and believed that Stan Lee created Captain America. Ask 80-90% of the public today and they will say Lee was his creator. More needs to be said and done for Ditko and Kirby be it more documentaries, books, articles, etc. Please keep doing what you are doing and thank you for doing this

A very good overview of Ditko and his work at Marvel. Your postings are enjoyable and I look forward to them each week. Thank you for all of your hard work.

I don't know, Stan made no bones about the "Marvel Method." a method that puts the artist front and center. Now Ditko is probably right that Stan never wrote a full script. But he WAS Marvel at the time. meaning he delt with a lot of artists and inkers and letterers and so on. Should he have just gave himself an editor credit? Im not sure. he did provide the dialogue for each book. Considering the drama that comes with todays creators, maybe we should just be happy that Comics had icons like Lee and Ditko in time when the product was more important than the individual. does that make any sense?

To answer the question asked in the video. Yeah another one about Spidey would be very welcome. Interesting to get both sides of the story and while we'll never know for sure (despite some of the more absolute statements in these comments) looking at the evidence at least gives us a more rounded guess at what happened and who deserves cerdit for what.

Considering the “comedic” short Ditko did of him working hard to meet the deadline of illustrating Spider-Man while Stan Lee is interrupting him with calls including new ideas on the main character, there is probably truth in the fact that Lee threw out ideas for but not a script. Having just rewatched your video on Mr. A., I do wonder if Mr. A., a newspaper reporter, is not the mature Peter Parker having left the lying J.J.J., changed his name and identity to Rex, and became Mr. A. as his spider powers waned with maturity. Ditko is Peter/Rex and Jameson is Lee.

Wonderful ! Thank you very much, Ditko was such a fascinating character

I’m from Johnstown, Pa, Steve’s hometown, there are currently two officially licensed murals on the sides of buildings downtown, one with Spider-Man and Doctor Strange and another with more obscure characters like Eternity, Shade the Changing Man, Squirrel Girl, Mr. A and others, it’s super cool!! There also was (still is?) a gallery installation of his art and artifacts in a gallery called Bottleworks in Cambria City, Johnstown, Pa, it was fantastic when I saw it last, all of it is with the blessing of his estate and worth a visit to the area to see!!

I collect ALL Steve Ditko books going back before Spiderman in collections of PS Artbooks..etc. What i Never understood was why he never gave his fans or the world an interview or so during his last years to set the record straight. It just baffles me. I have a lot of Pre-Code comics era Ditko comics that I wish he had talkd about. A lot of the stuff he did had a lot of Paranormal connection that wish he explained how it came to him

Love your work!

For me, Ditko's Amazing Spider-Man remain the greatest comic books ever.

Intriguing video, I’d love to have more!

Thanks for doing this. Great episode. I'm always happy to hear more about and from Ditko. He was such an important part of Marvel history.

There are two comics professionals (at least) that I find fascinating, since I find them to be both inspiring and frustrating: Steve Ditko and Jim Shooter. Yes, please revisit Ditko and his viewpoints on various matters.

Ditko was a very interesting person hearing about and his history with Stan lee is kind of sad 😢 and depressing in my opinion.

I knocked out listening to your vids last night, your videos are very comfy

"True Believer: The Rise and Fall of Stan Lee" is hardly some objective examination of the crediting mess Lee found himself in again and again (+ the misuse of his name in the 90s and 00s) but that book is worth talking about. A video idea if this becomes a series.

i don't know. Bob Kane said he created Stan Lee and Steve Ditko...probably...lol

Yes, more Ditko please.

Steve does deserve more credit than Stan for Spider-Man's first 18+ issues

Wow, really glad to get this. I really would like more info on Ditko's perspective on things.

Great video. More on Ditko's POV of Spider-msn would be great. Would definitely click.

I would definitely would like to hear more about him

This sounds like a more detailed explanation of what any keened brain comics fan could infer by the way even Stan Lee described "the Marvel style". Even as a smooth brained youth I knew that it was a shyster's way of taking unearned credit, that clearly the artists were doing the majority of the work. This sounded more like a legal summary prepared for a potential lawsuit than anything, I would definitely be interested to see more regarding Ditkos more scathing essays

Intriguing. I'd like more Ditko content!

Enjoying the video so far. Commenting to boost algorithm.

Considering that Lee, Diko and Kirby are all gone the issue of credit seems moot though there may be a financial component for their heirs. Mainly, Ditko's and Kirby's stories are cautionary tales. Comics will break your heart

I can't agree with Ditko's words. Honestly, far from making me think of him deserving more credit, it makes me feel he doesn't respect, or gives enough credit, to artists that work with full script writers, e.g. anyone who has worked with Alan Moore. Ditko was a very influential artist and a very interesting man in general. Even though I don't agree with his rants (or this one in particular,) I would like to hear more of his words.

I need to watch this again. 👍

Only having been peripherally aware of this issue with Stan’s “Marvel Method” of collaborative creation, this may already be exhaustively addressed elsewhere; but I’ve yet to see Lee held to task for any evidence or validation of his creative input in the form of original script notes (something that’s become quite common place with collected editions of other writer’s works in recent years). I’d be curious to know if this has already been touched on in previous interviews or publications?

I would love a Ditko's perspective on Spider-Man, yes yes :)

Ditko was pretty talented and probably is the only person who made something useful out of Rand’s “philosophy”. If you consider Ditko’s evolution of characters contrasting Peter Parker to Mr.A you can see a scary almost Travis Bickle like nutcase emerging. A talented one, no discussion, but a nut nonetheless.

It's a pretty long drawn out argument. But Lee tended to largely credit himself with Dr. Strange and Spider-Man existing and the stories he wrote. He occasionally gave credit to Ditko for co-plotting, and some of the outcome of the story. It's difficult to not have been involved and be aware exactly of contributions, but It's obvious Lee did not give Ditko much effort in considering as a co collaboration in the stories, whatever that really means.

I think we all know Ditko and Lee are lying…it was Kirby who created Spider-Man! At least according to Kirby. Seriously though, with all the players now having passed on, the only people who should be debating this are the creators’ heirs and Marvel/Disney, because the Lee vs. Kirby/Ditko debate always ends up turning into one side taking/not giving enough credit to the other side.

Even though stan got way to much credit when it can to some of the works that him jack, and steve created I think we can all agree that Bob kane was an even bigger lying snake.

I understand his frustration, Stan always underplayed the contributions of these iconic artists while overstating his own. Lee was never a "share the spoils" type of guy. He died a millionaire, his fellow Marvel contemporaries died with almost nothing. Same reason all those 90's guys left and created Image.

It's a sad coincidence that Steve Ditko and Stan Lee died about 8 months apart from each other. Ditko often complained that while he worked with Stan Lee on the Spider-man Comic, he only got credit as an artist, but not as a co-plotter.

O o new musics

Cover art drawn by Jack Kirby Amazing Fantasy #15 Aug. 1962

The Amazing Spider-Man- created by Steve Ditko with a tiny smidgen of an idea by Stan Lee

To be fair, Stan didn't write scripts for anyone in the 60s after Marvel super heroes took off (scripts were more a pre hero thing for westerns, romance, horror, war books etc though he did give an FF one to jack for discussion which Roy Thomas saw back in '65 as I recall), he plotted/co-plotted the books with the artist, then let the artists draw them how he saw fit (often asking for changes/corrections), and added the dialogue later (often referred to as The Marvel Method), so this video is not revealing anything we didn't already know, it's not exactly a revelation. Stan was giving credit to the artists as early as '63 and telling us about the Marvel Method long before anyone actually cared about who did this or that, so it was well known how things worked around 60 years ago. It's only in recent years that there seems to be this anti Stan stable, which is a shame, because it's not supported by the bullpen when you read their interviews. Quite the opposite in fact. Ultimately it was the dialogue that really set Marvel apart from all the competition and made it the success it was, and that was all Stan. Just ask the bullpen who were there back in the day (read or watch/listen to their interviews, read their books that are available now), and they will all say how much of a difference Stans writing made. You just have to look at how unsuccessful Ditko and Kirby were after they left Marvel and went on to draw, write etc other books. Jack Kirby may have had some interesting ideas with his 4th world books, but they weren't well written and were cancelled very quickly due to poor sales. Infantino said each book sold less than the month before, and two of his 4th world titles were cancelled in 11 months, and another after 18. Ditko was equally unsuccessful with his books, and both Ditko and Kirby ended up back at Marvel. Roy Thomas said he even asked Stan to not let Jack write if he took him back, but Stan was a good friend to Jack and let him do everything. The books weren't that good as a consequence and was reflected in the letters pages, especially the Captain America ones. Romita has said in interviews just how much of a difference Stan's writing made to the finished book, and anyone who says otherwise just doesn't know the facts (Comic Book Artist #6). Gil Kane said it was Stans writing that made Marvel the success it was after they introduced super-heroes because Stan was the only one writing the way he did - that wasn't Jack (The Jack Kirby Collector, issue # fails me right now). Stan proved his worth by making Spider-Man a success after Ditko left, and Romita gives much of that success to Stan because of his writing (though Romita was knocking it out of the park with his work and plots so should take credit where it is due). Plenty of interviews and videos of him saying that, and many others telling how involved Stan was with plotting and writing. If the success was down to Ditko, the book would have failed when he left, but instead the opposite happened and Romita gives that credit to Stan. If Kirby had been the sole creative individual as some would like to believe, Marvel would have collapsed when he left, and DC would have taken sales away, but that didn't happen either. Stan was always of the opinion that he would give an idea to an artist, any artist, and go from there, and that's why there were so many successful books coming out of Marvel, Thor, Iron Man Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Hulk etc etc, and all under the control of Stan working with Colan, Tuska, Trimpe, Buscema, Adkins, Kane, Heck, Romita etc etc.

Yes, this needs to be addressed. Outlines are not full scripts. Fleshing out a Synopsis or outline can be a second job for the artist. If I didn't write the major plot elements, I'm not the "writer".

Marvelously edited video and well put together on a much controversial, concept? To the uninitiated perhaps but not to the creative and artistically inclined. Anyone with common sense will fully understand - and not taking anything away from the great imagination of Stan Lee - that Steve Ditko was and is the 50% creator of Spider-man (with 100% visual design of key SM characters and not Lee) and I would venture to say 100% creator of Doctor Strange, both the design and concept. As Steve wrote in his essay, decades after creating the design, environment, characters, all of what made SM incredibly popular and a world famous IP, seems to be true about what took place and what a creator is and is not. I love Stan's scripting and very few scriptures/writers of comics have yet to come close IMO to his level of mastery (except of course, Roy Thomas) but indeed, an idea is just an idea and scripting dialogue is much easier to script after every page of a comic magazine has been illustrated. The artist/visual creator/storyteller has all the creativity he possess in order to make a comic magazine depict a story, the design of environment, the actors/characters, the mood, et all of creating a visually aesthetic story, so when the script writer see the story visually, all arranged in sequential art form, it does not take a genius writer to write the captions and dialogue. Again, Stan was and will always be, in my comic fan opinion, best writer/concept creator in comics. But to take away from Steve, which Marvel and Stan did for decades, all that a co-creator of a world famous comic character, and not give the co-creator any financial benefits, is outright despicable and unthinkable today! Rest in Peace, Stan and Steve and I am sure that both of you are now reconciled and having a grand time, wherever you both maybe today and for eternity! AGL, ComicsCreator of all AGL COMICS comics characters that nobody else will ever have the rights to, for I have created my own concepts and made them into visual realities BUT all thanks to Stan and Steve as well as The King! For without them three, Marvel Comics would not be what they are today. And I would not have created my AGL Comics SupremeHumans Universe were it not for Stan, Steve and Jack! Maximus!

Good video! This argument around who did what surrounding Stan Lee has been going on for so long, I always get a little tired hearing about it but considering this is from a direct party’s own words, they are worth hearing out, any biases aside. Hearing his essay read out, I admit, I was half annoyed by how pedantic Ditko sounded, almost like a kid who likes to poke holes at every single chosen word to get one over his opponent. I can understand his frustration at how the division of labor is unfair compared to how he’s credited in the story (a one-two page synopsis vs. a 20 page fully drawn and composed comic with no real script to base on) and when he explained what a typical comic script had and what he has to compensate over the real lack of one, I was more won over to his side. But his manner of arguing was so drawn out and very accusatory when at one point even he admits that the error is on the industry’s standard of crediting, I thought the heaviness to how Stan credited himself seemed a little much. I know he’s writing this essay in reaction to press Stan was getting at the time but still, it just seemed too much. I admit I’m not on the method of “give credit to these people who deserve it by taking away all credit from one person” discussion that people like to use when talking about this topic so I’m nicer towards Stan despite knowing all the history and hearing what people have said. And one final note, with how Ditko disputes credits of “written by” and “art by” vs other descriptors, I could not imagine him in a setting like a TV writers room where people are throwing out ideas for things all the time and one person’s story can be wholly written by another person and crediting can get more complicated.

What I find curious is where are any scripts or initial plots in print that show what Stan's part of any of it was? I'm sure there are some (the FF concept being one I've seen, in your video on the subject), but it's just odd these never seem to surface.

Of course Stan didn't write a Spidey script in advance; that wasn't the Marvel method.

This is another reason why I've been pretty clear about my own IP & brand. No one else has done anything *SO* significant that it would really count in the long-term workload which I alone have crafted. Sure, someone might one day claim "Well, *I* suggested the name for X" or "I mentioned that having Y would be cool", or "you hired me to draw Z", but I'm the only one who outlined, wrote, edited, illustrated, formatted, and published my work. 🙂 That's just the way it is, and it isn't refutable by anyone on the planet. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨

Not a surprise. He got /had a million plus things to do or was wise enough

First of all I would like to say I’m a huge fan of Jack and Steve. But that being said, the marvel method itself involved the artist playing a huge role in the creation in the storytelling. So none of those guys got the credit they were truly do. But at the end of the day I felt Spider-Man was better after Steve left I thought the FF was just as good after Jack left I thought door was better after Jack left. What I’m saying is staying breathe life into the stories that these guys came up with the great plots for. As a team all of these guys were great together separately I felt Stan held his own I thought Jack and Steve stuff was never as good as it was with Stan. Just my opinion no disrespect to anybody I love all these guys they were a huge part of my childhood and I’ll never forget them.

All of what he says is true. Lee should have given his artists credit reflecting what he later called the Marvel method. Which was basically the "let's make Stan Lee's job easier than any writer has a right to expect" method. And the guy lied. We know this because his stories changed, in print and on camera. The guy was telling fish stories. However, all of this griping about not getting credit fails to point out that, for the entire period Ditko worked for Marvel, DC comics wasn't crediting anyone at all. If the artists didn't sign their work, fans needed to be able to recognize their styles to identify who did what. And it would be impossible to identify most writers that way. Marvel, on the other hand, was much more forthcoming simply because they were including credits in their captions. If Ditko was silent during this time, that was probably why. Credit may have been inaccurate. But at least it existed. Only now, after the world has forgotten it was ever any different, is it considered right and true to object. At the time, it would have seemed premature, possibly resulting in putting an end to such crediting. But that doesn't change the inequity of how it was done.

Speaking purely objectively, the difference between Ditko getting screwed over and Kirby getting screwed over is that I care a whole lot more about Kirby getting screwed over.

Ditko was a brilliant artist, but he did not have the ability to interact with people on a personal level. Stan Lee was charismatic and a good conversationalist and I don't believe Stan ever pretended a written script was part of the Marvel Method. As Ditko noted, he was not able to get along with Stan, a person who got along with virtually everyone. Yes, Kirby had issues with Stan, too. But, as in all things, Kirby was unique. It would be very interesting to compare the lives of Kirby, Ditko, and Bill Finger. It would also be interesting to look at earlier portions of Ditko's career in which scripts were provided with the expectation Ditko would behave as Ditko described an illustrator only for Ditko to complain about the constraints inherent in such a production system.

I thought everybody by now knew about the Marvel style of plot-art-script that Stan Lee used in the 60s so that he could "write" so many comic books. So when Stan credits himself with the "script", it might be considered misleading as Stan claiming to have written a full script, but it is technically correct. He wrote the words after the artist took the plot idea and fleshed it out into comic art pages. Even then, I suspect Stan had even less input into the plot as time went on, letting Kirby and Ditko control more of the the plot as well as the art pages, with only perhaps a suggestion or two on the plot. The creation of the characters in the first place is a little less well-defined, but probably doesn't differ too much. Spider-Man was complicated by the fact that Stan went to Kirby first to help create Spider-Man, and then switched over to Ditko. The other characters were obviously Lee/Kirby or Lee/Ditko. But even there, there are interesting suggestions. The Hulk, for example, was in his first six issues a very Jeckyll and Hyde type of character. Bruce Banner would change into the at night automatically. That was then changed to using a gamma ray machine to turn him into the Hulk. But Ditko took over the character for a short run and came up with the now iconic idea that Banner becomes the Hulk whenever he gets too angry or too stressed. So Ditko was very much responsible for "creating" the version of the Hulk we all know and love today. In a similar way, Ditko did the Iron Man story where Iron Man adopted the more familiar red and yellow armor that makes the character so recognizable. So Ditko not only created original characters, but would also take existing characters and ideas and improve on them. An excellent example of this is his revised version of the Blue Beetle that he did for Charlton Comics, taking the original Golden Age Blue Beetle and literally creating the Silver Age version of the character.

So for class, I've been reading Atlas Shrugged and the sexual dynamics are interesting to say the less, I genuinely wonder if this reflects in Ditko's work.

I’ve viewed dozens of pages of Ditko and Kirby pages that contain their own captions and dialogue b4 Lee changed it. I’m convinced Lee should have been “Editor/co-plotter” rather than writer or scripter. The final word (no pun intended) should be that Lee stopped “scripting” after Kirby quit.

Love ditko. Matched only by Bill Watterson on sticking to his morals

I fell bad that both Steve Ditko and Stan Lee broke up over this.

Stan Lee might be the luckiest man in the comics industry: a nepo baby editor that put his name on everyone else’s work and is remembered as the father of Marvel

As far as I'm concerned, they both made Spider-Man.

Stan lee stole alot from this Legend

Is that supposed to be Ayn Rand in that comic at 1:43? It’s funny if he didn’t intend that to be, but maybe he did it unconsciously

This is a shame. Jack kirby and steve ditko were the real fathers of marvel's silver age rebirth

All you need is the handbook of how to make comics the marvel way.

Everyone knows stan didn't write scripts he didn't have the time. No news there sorry. Stan would do a lot of verbal outlines or say let's have so and so show up and let the artists draw the story then he would do the dialogue patch up any holes in the story and continuity. He And ditko were fighting so much over plots he just let ditko do his thing. Once again that's on record.

Now this is news

You say Ditko was unwilling to speak out or give his side of things directly after reading an article of him doing exactly that. Perhaps that was the real problem: people didn't want to listen to what he said, and still apparently don't. You know the idiom of there being none so blind as those who don't want to see... No wonder Steve Ditko decided to spend his life NOT communicating with that 'community' of fans and creators who were disinterested in what he thought was 'justice' and truth.

Woof😊

I believe Stan Lee took far too much credit for things at Marvel's but it's hard for me believe he is on a Bob Kane level of scumbagery

Kinda like Bill Finger

I’m more inclined to believe Kirby and ditko than say romita. Romita benefited from Stan becoming the artist director, while Kirby was in the midst of negotiations with marvel, I believe that Stan undermined him. It’s common fact Stan didn’t write actual scripts, he would write basic plots and then piggyback off the art. What makes me distasteful of Stan is how he got top billing in the creative process when he was just an editor, and the actual writer Roy Thomas got second billing then the artist would be third. Stan was an egomaniac who only cared what the fans thought of him.

The stan lee kirby debate is pretty muddy unlike the ditko where if you listen to Lee he admits pretty much everything ditko says is true but triesbto argue that the name "Spider-man" is the main idea of the character so he should get credit as he "dreamed up the thing".

Hello. Did Jack Kirby help to create Spiderman?

You are one of the few observers to at least touch on the rather obvious point I've been saying privately for years. If Ditko wanted to correct or clarify the record, all he had to do was agree to an interview or two with a trusted reporter or write a book going into detail and giving his side of the story. It's one thing to criticize Stan Lee for taking too much credit, but the fact of the matter is that there were only 2 people in the world who knew the truth about their partnership, and only one of them seemed interested in talking.

How dare you disparage the cameo man?! I think I deserve a credit, because what good is a book if nobody reads it?

He takes a card and shades one half in dark So's he can demonstrate to you just what he means He says there is black and there is white And there is wrong and there is right And there is nothing, nothing in between That's what Mr. A said

I give what Ditko says a lot of weight based on what he doesn’t say in that he doesn’t claim to have created everything. He does give Stan some credit and provides a clear picture of their working relationship. I feel Stan and Jack are both unreliable narrators so we have to listen to others like Ditko, Romita, Wood and others to get to the truth.

Explain how Jack Kirby and Ditko could be "Robbed" for so long and in the open? S.Lee gave freedom to artist and they complain about the sunshine...