Why was Stan so horrendous at writing girls? Marvel Girl, Invisible Girl, Karen Page, Pepper Potts, Jane Foster, Betty Ross, etc. all awful characters. The only one with a spark of life was Betty Brant in ASM because of the brother issues.
You can say it's a product of the era but look at pic related from X-Men. Jack Kirby clearly plotted and drew Marvel Girl using her powers to save the team but Stan awkwardly crammed in text bubbles to give Xavier the credit.
Other urls found in this thread:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
zak-site.com
twitter.com
>ck Kirby clearly plotted and drew Marvel Girl using her powers to save the team but Stan awkwardly crammed in text bubbles to give Xavier the credit
The Marvel Method at work, my friend!
...
>Jack Kirby clearly plotted and drew Marvel Girl using her powers to save the team but Stan awkwardly crammed in text bubbles to give Xavier the credit
That's exactly why it's a product of the era. Kirby was progressive, believed women were just as heroic as men, and drew his female characters with equal (and sometimes greater) participation compared to their male counterparts.
Stan, the businessman, was concerned about the bottom line. And in Stan's eyes having the lady save the day in the 60s was bad for business. Of course he changed his tune in the 70s when he realized he could make a buck off feminist characters.
I don't mean for this to turn into rampant Stan-bashing, the guy's business smarts are half the reason why Marvel became so successful. Kirby's genius is of course the other half and unfortunately their personalities proved to mix like oil and vinegar. But them's the breaks.
Stan would always write women this way, even if he came back to a book later.
He was never a feminist.
Irl women aren't strong as men.
>feminist getting triggered over trivial shit no one else notices or cares about
No one in here is triggered. It's called a discussion. Please fuck off forever.
>Irl women aren't strong as men.
That's irrelevant when telekinesis and other super-powers are involved.
Not really. The male brain has more neurons.
That's true, but it's more complicated than that
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
New shitposter for the filter. The trips make it so easy
Yeah that happened a lot
>It's called a discussion. Please fuck off forever.
Pretty one-sided discussion there, faggot.
In what way?
>implying either of them put effort into Uncanny X-men
Why did Jack care so little about the X-Men? Especially when Magneto is a GOAT design
Why are your panties in such a bunch? Triggered much?
This
On the first Singer X-Men DVD there's an interview where Stan tries to take credit for X-Men being a metaphorical look at social issues and outsiders and minorities as if his X-Men run wasn't adding shitty dialogue to the comic that Kirby liked the least out of the 7 that he was probably writing and drawing that month.
Why didn't she just untie herself with her telekinesis in the first place?
Professor X didn't tell her to.
man if stan live longer than me im gona be realy mad
This. It was a part of the era. Stan wasn't uniquely regressive, Kirby was unusually progressive.
I wouldn't put too much stock in that. I heard an interview with Kirby the other day where the interviewer started asking him questions about his thought process behind Spider-Man, and Kirby went on for several minutes as if he came up with the whole thing. Memory fades as you age.
man i miss the times wen "progressive" acualy mean something
Thing is, comics oughta be the great equalizer. With superpowers everyone is on a level playing field, within reason. Women can and should be portrayed with as much heroism and agency as their male counterparts.
What gets me is the excessive navel-gazing these days. You don't have to touch on sexism issues with superheroes, just tell a good story! There's no explaining or excuses required because this is a fantasy world where the only difference between men and women is how they got their powers! Why on Earth would you want to waste panels using it as a platform to air your gender identity grievances?
What a silly post. Power is political. Art is political. Pop culture is political. Superhero comics which is pop media art about power in particular have ALWAYS been political.
Thats more of crime not social issues.
I'm not saying comics shouldn't be political, I'm saying cape comics occupy a unique space where the only difference is power set. There is no reason Jane/Thor would be viewed as any less capable than Thor, so why bother inventing one?
>There is no reason Jane/Thor would be viewed as any less capable than Thor
Did you read the posts on Sup Forums after it was announced?
and this is an example of why current marvel is shit, odin was alwasy show to be stronger than thor but jane is capaple of figth him because she is a girl
You can't take anything most people here say seriously cause they don't actually read comics.
Jane/Thor has a great design, with a good story behind her people would have warmed up to her no problem. Hell, she had pretty great sales anyway right? Needling the naysayers in a meta way just stokes the fire. But Marvel knows all about that.
You don't know that. stop making assumptions.
As far as I know Jack doesn't provide any notes of how his panels were carried out story wise (only art wise for his colorists/inkers to work with)
it's perfectly possible that Lee and Kirby had different ideas about that particular part of the comic but didn't bother talking them out, so lee's idea was the one put to print because he was just the last one to handle the comic. Specially considering they were rather busy all the time.
Read your comic history and stop bashing stan.
zak-site.com
theres was also an article showing the change susan had afther stan toke over the book but i cant find it
It's actually pretty egregious, especially in Fantastic Four. Jack's views on women are well-documented.
What did it actually mean? I think it's still the same, the internet just turned everyone into hordes of assholes. I don't know why the Web 1.0 was fun and games and Web 2.0 is now serious business and total war, but I don't like it.
>As far as I know Jack doesn't provide any notes of how his panels were carried out story wise
You don't know much then. Kirby's margins had plot notes and basic dialogue
you know i think the main diferense is how back in the day you just did it instead of saying it, just like kirby showing woman just as capable as men of stan making a cool black hero
Thers also the fact that saying "women are as capable as men" is way difent than "women are better than men just because they are women" witch apear to be the trend
Woah, daddy-o! I thought you were with it, but it looks like you're a thousand miles from groovesville after all. That really breaks me up, Clyde.
Mind that I'm not denying Stan was a rather orthodox/predictable writer. behind all the excelsior stuff he had a basic approach, like it was said above he did bottom feeder stuff with the occasional challenge like the howling commandos.
speaking of your link
>(...)Jack would absolutely forget what Stan said, and Stan would forget what Jack said. [laughter] I would bet my house that Jack never read the books after Stan wrote them; that’s why he could claim with a straight face that Stan never wrote anything except what Jack put in the notes. He was kidding himself; he never read them.
I think we can agree this is pretty much what happened back then. lee drops some ideas, jack proceeds to ignore one half and replace it with his own, then lee proceed to ignore one half and replace it with his own. This was a nice read until it came up to "the case against jack kirby" and went out of the window
Honestly i'm tired of people trying to pin shit on the 60s team. They knew what they were doing and had almost no drama. Kirby's problem with marvel was because by the turns of the 70s the company was starting to suffer from internal fatigue (the 70s were an administrative disaster for marvel) and he didn't agree with contract renewal terms he was given.
It's particularly annoying when they accuse lee of deliberately taking credit through the "stan lee presents" and not just recognizing it for the business gimmick it was.
The comics aren't just a writer-artist process. There's a whole lot of steps to take into account and they are all important, this includes presentation and brand, which was Lee's priority number one and one of his chief roles as editor. You can't just take anything that the dude who's getting paid to sell you comics at face value. It's all tailored to make you buy it.
Hell, that article accuses Lee of putting his name on the movie posters when he barely figures as nothing more than a paid figurehead without control of anything.
You should read further into that site, dude is actually really fair to both Stan and Jack. It's no secret that Jack held a lot of animosity towards Stan, and he examines that, but he doesn't ever make a personal judgement on Stan's character or Jack's feelings. He just examines the facts.
Are you fucked in the skull or something?
Even if these weren't comics about SUPERHEROES, who are generally supposed to be better than other people, the limitation that "women can be equal to men but can NEVER-EVER be portrayed as better than all men" still forces women to be written as all inferior to at least one man at all times.
Just to clear up this mental block of yours:
Imagine how racist it would be to demand that no minority should ever be portrayed as better than all white men in their immediate vicinity "just because they aren't white men".
That's how fucked up and wrong your logic is here.
Can you explain how it's equality to always-always be portrayed as inferior to *a* man.
I have no idea what you're trying to say
Stan's view of women was old-fashioned even in the '60s, but I think he was probably right that most readers of the time didn't want to see women brawling and punching. Boys found that kind of character threatening and girls (like my mom) preferred Lois Lane and other more traditionally "femnine" characters. There was very little market for a Big Barda type of character.
That's also why the female characters have powers that don't distort their bodies, while all the original FF and X-Men guys are deformed. The assumption was that girls wanted to see women who looked pretty all the time, and this was probably true at the time.
Though I think Stan's writing of Scarlet Witch was slightly better than his norm. She didn't punch, of course, but she sometimes got to save the day. Maybe because she was an ex-villain.
>I think he was probably right
>Boys found that kind of character threatening
>There was very little market for
>The assumption was
>this was probably true
Why can't you just speak for yourself instead of pulling a muscle jumping through hoops to make it sound like your opinions speak for everybody?
Because I wasn't a kid in the '60s so I can't speak for kids in the '60s?
I mean, even if I was a kid in the '60s I couldn't speak for kids in the '60s, but all anybody can do is guess what people want. We're all just projecting.
Although given that Millie the Model and Patsy Walker were successful, I assume Stan Lee knew more about the comics female readers liked than you or I. But that's a low bar.
And given how Jack Kirby essentially invented romance comics with Joe Simon I assume Jack knew more about the comics female readers liked than you or I or Stan.
wew
If Jack wanted to call the shots and make the bucks he should have married the owner's cousin like Stan did
It was a different time.
I'd just like to remember Stan/Jack as two sides of the same coin who made magic together. Both of them contributed to Marvel, and without either of 'em nothing would've been made.
Ever the romantic...
A hard truth as we saw with both their independent works. Very little stuck and even less is remember today.
>Kirby's independent work
>Very little stuck and even less is remember today
Seriously, what the fuck are you even doing on Sup Forums with ignorance like this?
>
its pretty well known stans dialogue is bad
>Independent work
>DC
Uh, I don't mean to tell you how to live your life, user, but...
>independent work
>DC
Also user that shit was whored hard because it was Marvel's Jack Kirby making those characters. Even Darkseid keeps his fame because of who created him rather than his own character. Hell Thanos a copy of a different New God is held in better memory than Darkseid.
i thought it was pretty clear user meant independent of each other.
You worded it in such a way that it seemed like you meant "independent from each other". Also, although they never became as popular, Captain Victory or Silver Star were great.
I'm
and I meant their indy work. You have to understand that you can't look at the main publishing because they have agendas and angles.
That said New Gods is more remembered as Kirby's solo thing than the characters themselves which echos even more at what I was getting at.