Here comes another special page, focusing entirely on ONE specific, very controversial comic-book story...
CHAMBER OF DARKNESS 4
"THE MONSTER"
By the end of 1969, writer & artist Jack Kirby had gotten fed up with working for Marvel Comics. In the 12 years since he'd been black-balled by DC editor Jack Schiff over the legal dispute surrounding the "SKY MASTERS" newspaper strip, Kirby had written & illustrated countless stories for Marvel, created an army of characters, concocted an endless supply of stories anbd story ideas that were passed on by his editor to other creators, and had almost single-handedly turned a comics publisher on the brink of shutting down into a major force that actually began to challenge DC Comics in the marketplace.
In all that time, with only the tiniest handful of exceptions, Kirby had not been allowed to write finished dialogue for his own stories, because his boss insisted on doing it himself, in order to STEAL both credit and pay for the full writing jobs, and make it appear that HE was the creative force behind the company's success, and therefore indispensible to the publisher.
When Martin Goodman sold the company to faceless corporation Perfect Film in early 1968, part of the deal was their insistence that Kirby's boss S*** L** was part of the package. However, once the deal was finalized, it suddenly became clear that no contracts of any kind whatsoever existed between the company and their number one creator, Jack Kirby-- and so, they became increasingly paranoid that Kirby, at some point, might decide to SUE for ownership of the characters and stories Kirby had single-handedly created!
And so, they began a systematic campaign to "run Kirby off". More and more, his art and his stories were altered for no reason, to no good purpose, in every single case to the detriment of the published work. It was more than just an editor with a completely out-of-control ego who far too much believed his own lies; it was a determined effort to make Kirby want to QUIT and go elsewhere.
Perhaps the single most blatent example of this happened in one of their new "horror" titles, where "ye editor" went out of his way to promote the book by making a point that Jack Kirby WROTE it all on his own-- while at the same time, doing all in hs power to DESTROY Kirby's work, and therefore, MAKE HIM LOOK BAD!!!
CHAMBER OF DARKNESS 4
cover sketches by MARIE SEVERIN
The discussion below comes from Facebook.
Michael Hill: “Kirby's original story thoroughly messed up by Lee, detailed (with pencil pages) in TJKC 13.”
John Bray: “Thanks, Michael for pointing us in the right direction. Jack's pencil layouts for that story indeed showed how Stan Lee royally messed up Jack's story as HE wrote it. Just compare the pencils to what was published. Plenty of redraws and a wholesale story change. In particular was the ending which Jack wanted to witches to unmask revealing him and Lee to the audience. Last series of panels would have been cool to include in the published version. As usual, leave it to Stan to mess with genius of Kirby. SMH!”
John Bray: “What is very troubling is Marie Severin's quote on all this.
"There are many stories that have been redrawn, replotted, etc. We made time for those things and Stan was the boss, and he must have been doing something right. So many people have no idea how much there is to produce a comic, and it is possible for the editor (in this case Stan) to control his product from plot to coloring - and he also was and is a pro."
Talk about the HIVE MIND SYNDROME!”
Henry Kujawa: “Marie Severin, like John Romita, was an EMPLOYEE. She worked IN THE OFFICE. Sometimes, you have to do and say things to keep your job.”
John Bray: “I know this, Henry, but compare the pencils with the published comic book. Total character and story change. Jack Kirby got screwed over... AGAIN! He was the WRITER. Her quote is pathetic and shows no backbone. Just another "drone" in the HIVE doing the queen bee's (Stan Lee's) bidding.”
Henry Kujawa: “Haven't had a chance to read it yet. Am downloading the pages right now-- THANKS, John! I recall now reading ABOUT this specific atrocity, and this will be my first chance to ever read it.
I've met Marie Severin, and my impression is she's one really nice, SWEET person. Knowing what she was dealing with, it's difficult for me to put any blame on her. Hey, for 2 years, I worked in a VERY unhealthy environment, and nearly ALWAYS did exactly what I was told to do (though not always how), and I was let go unceremoniously anyway. You wanna see REAL SCUM, go to the Harleigh Cemetery website and scroll down to the photo of the owner.”
John Bray: “OK, perhaps I was too harsh on Marie. I apologize to her and all her fans everywhere. Once you compare Jack's pencils to the published book, you'll see what that "editor" (see I'm doing what you do!) did to Jack. You're right of course. Marie's not to blame. It's the "queen bee" of the HIVE!”
And now, the published story...
"THE MONSTER"
Original story & art by JACK KIRBY, inks by John Verpoorten
Published story mutilated by Stan Lee & Marie Severin
Page 1
Henry Kujawa: “JESUS CHRIST!!! This is an ABOMINATION.
The published story barely makes it. Much of the art doesn't even look like Kirby at all, and the dialogue is awful, too.
Then I read the UNPUBLISHED version. W--T--F!!!!!"
Here it is-- Jack Kirby's original unpublished story.
Page 1
What kind of SICK, DEMENTED ASSHOLE of a so-called "editor" would TOTALLY F*** over someone's perfectly-good work like this???
You have-- JUST-- BARELY-- the same "general" story being told. But the result is 2 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT stories. It's like comparing the Basil Rathbone & Peter Cushing versions of THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES. Or maybe the Bela Lugosi & Christopher Lee versions of DRACULA. Except, I like ALL 4 of those movies, for various reasons.
I genunely think the WORST part of the whole thing, is that in the published credits, there is NO HINT that STAN LEE and MARIE SEVERIN did the re-written story, dialogue and SO MUCH of the pencils.
It seems to me that, having "graciously allowed" Jack Kirby to "write" his own story (that is, GET CREDIT & PAY for what he was doing anyway), that his "editor" (AND I USE THAT WORD LOOSELY) went out of his way to F*** it over, to MAKE KIRBY LOOK BAD. "See, kids? Ain't I such a nice guy, to let someone with NO TALENT WHATSOEVER have a shot at writing? Isn't it BETTER to just let ME write LIKE ALWAYS?"
And BY THE WAY, "editor"-- that 1ST sketch of Marie's, where the guy has his BACK to the camera, was FAR BETTER than the published cover.
This is sickening. If I were Jack Kirby, and I saw this, my anger & rage at my "boss" would know no bounds.”
John Bray: “Precisely WHY I was outraged! I mean, they FINALLY give Jack Kirby WRITING CREDIT, but the published story bears no resemblance whatsoever to his story. It should be noted that this particular story was published perhaps 1 to 3 months before Jack took off for DC. This may have been the "last straw that broke the camel's back" for Jack IMO. The "queen bee" of the HIVE butchered Jack's story and character so BADLY, that he (JK) must have been livid. I can just imagine he and Roz discussing this and coming to the decision that he just had to leave that unhealthy and insufferable HIVE perpetuated by said QUEEN BEE!”
Henry Kujawa: “It doesn't seem possible to me that ANYONE could do what this guy did here, and NOT know EXACTLY what he was doing. I'm sure L**'s fans would say, "Oh, look, he gave Kirby a chance to write! Wasn't he sucha terrific guy? TOO BAD Kirby couldn't hack it..."”
John Bray: “The drones of the HIVE would be saying that, Henry. You and I both know that. Face it. This is a hatchet job. Period. They played Jack like a fiddle and there wasn't anything he could do about it. He was royally fisted without lube. If people here at this group are on the fence on what kind a person the QUEEN BEE is, this thread should provide clear evidence to that!”
Henry Kujawa: “I was so angry, I didn't mention before... for a brief moment, when the villagers decide all their problems are the fault of the guy who lives in the castle outside town, put together a torch-wielding mob to storm his place, I was reminded of Roger Corman's "THE HAUNTED PALACE" (his adaptation of Lovecraft's "The Case Of Charles Dexter Ward"). But it goes in a different direction. The "monster" in Kirby's story is more like Quasimodo (something OBLITERATED in the published art), while he has an entire room full of mechanical merry-makers, just like in THE ABOMINABLE DR. PHIBES.
You know, if I were in charge of Marvel's reprint department, I'd go out of my way to "correct" the credits in reprints, to more accurately reflect the actual contents. I tried to do that when I was contributing to the GCD. It would not surprise me if THAT wasn't the REAL reason that MOTHERFUCKER Mark Gordon singled me out for harrassment.”
(3-9-2014)
Henry Kujawa: “JUST noticed... the same month "THE MONSTER" was published in MUTILATED form, "THE MONSTER FROM THE LOST LAGOON" was published in FF #97. Question: was "The Monster" (the most generic title imaginable) Jack Kirby's original title for HIS story?
It seems to me an (ALLEGED SO-CALLED) "editor" who was concerned about not having the same color on 2 covers in any given month, should also have been concerned about not having two story titles so similar come out in the same month.
But as has been pointed out, Marvel's "editor" didn't even both reading the comics was supposed to be in charge of.”
(3-22-2014)
(Continued in May 1970)
All Text (C) Henry R. Kujawa
Artwork (C) Marvel Comics
No comments:
Post a Comment