Jack Kirby's Superman

Click above to enlarge

Apparently, a number of comic book discussion boards are simultaneously discussing the fact that when Jack Kirby drew the Jimmy Olsen comic book in the early seventies, the company retouched his work. I am suddenly receiving a flurry of e-mails asking me to clarify what was done, who did it, etc. Here's the answer to the best of my knowledge. If you're immersed in one of these discussions, please enter the following into evidence or link folks to this page…

The first five stories Jack wrote and drew for DC were, in this order, Forever People #1, New Gods #1, Mister Miracle #1, Jimmy Olsen #133, and Jimmy Olsen #134. Superman appeared in the Forever People, and Superman and Jimmy Olsen appeared in the last two. When Jack delivered the material in pencil, some folks up at DC said, in effect, "We can't have Superman and Jimmy Olsen looking like that." The company went through periods when they felt it was essential to their merchandising plans for certain trademarked characters to not deviate from the approved company model.

I happen to think they were too fussy about this, and I'm sure that other management at other times wouldn't have cared. But at the time, that was the policy. (Retouching was also being done occasionally to other artists. Superman heads were redrawn in one or two of the Supergirl stories that Mike Sekowsky was then drawing for DC, even though Sekowsky's interpretation of The Man of Steel had appeared, usually unexpurgated, for years in the Justice League of America comic. Alex Toth drew a new story and new front and back covers for a 1975 Super-Friends special. Toth's version of Superman was left "as is" on the story and the back cover, and of course was appearing on TV every week. But for the front cover, the head of his Superman figure was replaced with an old Curt Swan photostat.)

At right, published version retouched by Murphy Anderson

So that's one reason they made the changes they made.  Another, perhaps lesser one, was that DC was then very into cultivating a "DC look," with some there taking a certain pride in the fact that the art in their books didn't resemble the inferior (to them) artwork in the Marvel titles.  So along comes Jack Kirby and what he does, almost by definition, is a "Marvel version" of the jewel in the DC crown, Superman…and to some in the office, that just didn't look right.

Anyway, Vince Colletta had been assigned to ink Kirby's DC work and he was asked to try and bring the Kirby drawings more into line with the "official" versions of Superman and young Olsen. A few other hands pitched in but after they'd done a few pages, it became apparent that they hadn't been improved. Some there felt they were worse with impersonal, frozen faces.  Mr. Colletta has his defenders but I don't think any of them would claim he was as skilled a pencil artist as Jack Kirby.

Whatever, Kirby's DC debut was highly touted and it was decided that the books could not go to press with those drawings of Superman and Jimmy Olsen. (The Jimmy Olsen issues were scheduled to be published first, then Forever People would be the first of the new "Fourth World" books.) So they had veteran Superman artist Al Plastino take care of all the Superman figures and most of the Olsen heads.

At right, published version retouched by Murphy Anderson

Thereafter, except for two issues, Jack drew Superman and Jimmy Olsen his way, and Murphy Anderson did the adjustments. Sometimes, Anderson would re-pencil and then Colletta would ink the entire page. More often, Colletta would ink the pages and leave the Olsen and Superman drawings for Anderson to finish.  The above panels represent a "before and after" of a panel that Jack pencilled and then Colletta inked the cape while Anderson inked the face.  There were two issues of Jimmy Olsen that were inked by Mike Royer and on those, Mike did some "correction" of the Superman and Olsen drawings as he inked. Many of Jack's covers were inked by Neal Adams who brought the drawings more in line with accepted company policy.

Jack hated that they were doing this, though he was such a "good sport" about it that he apparently convinced some at the office that he thought he was fine with it. But he thought it was insulting, and he also thought that it was just bad business. If you're selling the fans a Superman by Kirby, you ought to give them a Superman by Kirby. Moreover, he was never that wild about drawing other folks' characters anyway, and he felt that if DC didn't want to publish a Kirby Superman, they shouldn't have him on a comic that featured Superman.  He also thought it was odd that they were constantly talking about "modernizing" Superman and bringing him into the seventies…but confronted with a new approach, they immediately called in a guy (Plastino) who'd been drawing Superman since 1948.  Plastino was not even being given work on the Superman comics at the time because his style was regarded as "old-fashioned."

My own opinion — and that of several folks like Marv Wolfman who saw Jack's untouched pencils — was that DC overreacted.  Yeah, Jack couldn't draw Superman's chest emblem.  (It was the one thing in the world I drew better than Jack Kirby and he had me draw it for him in some issues.)  And yes, he often did not get that distinctive forehead curl right.  But I thought his Superman was otherwise just fine and by retouching, they wound up with a jarring clash of styles and a lot of puzzled readers.  I also think there would have been no problem if Colletta had been replaced with a better inker — say, Frank Giacoia or Wally Wood, both of whom were turned down for the assignment.  I believe either of them could have made minor adjustments that would have made Jack's Superman acceptable to all.  Even having Murphy Anderson ink the book would have lessened the awkwardness of two opposing styles in the same panel.

DC recently issued the first of two volumes reprinting Jack's Jimmy Olsen stories, just as they were originally published. There is no way to actually restore what Jack did — only a few stats of a few panels have survived — but there was once talk of having someone (probably Steve Rude) redraw the redraws into more of a Kirby style. In fact, I somewhat instigated such discussions before finally becoming convinced that it was impractical.  You really wouldn't be resurrecting what Jack did since those drawings are lost and gone forever.  You'd just be trading one set of non-Kirby drawings for another.  It might have a certain commercial appeal but it wouldn't exactly undo what was done to the work in the first place.

Rude did take an unused Kirby cover sketch and turn it into the cover of one of the Olsen reprint volumes. That's Jack's sketch that I've posted as an illustration above. If you click on it, you can see a larger version and get a little better idea of how Kirby drew Superman and Jimmy Olsen, even though this is a rough sketch and not a finished drawing.

As you can tell, I think DC made a colossal mistake in how they handled this.  One exec over in the licensing division at the time argued that it would seriously damage the value of the property to have Superman drawn "off-model."  I think hindsight has shown that far more harm was done to the character by putting out a bland, uninteresting product…even if it did stick to some official corporate interpretation.  One of the significant evolutions since then in the field of Creator Rights is that this kind of thing is never done to an artist's work now.

Recommended Viewing

I don't think I've mentioned him before but I really like Mark Fiore's little animated political cartoons. Here's a link to his latest one, which is about the George W. Bush action figures. You need the Macromedia Shockwave plug-in to view such things. If you don't have it, click here to get it.

Recommended Reading

Here's a good piece about how Urban Legends and other bogus bits of info fly around the Internet.

Fair and Balanced

Here's a brief excerpt from Al Franken's new book which the Fox people have helped to put on the Best Seller list.

Comic-Con Remembered

Over at Animation World Network, they've posted an article in which various attendees of this year's Comic-Con International discuss the event. I am among them. Go there by clicking here.

ME on the Radio

My deathless appearance this A.M. on The Paul Harris Radio Show can now be listened-to online at Paul's website. It's a little under 17 minutes, which is about how long I can stand me. Anyway, you'll need RealPlayer installed to listen to me, which on its own is not a good enough reason to install RealPlayer. So while you're there, listen to some of Paul's other fine interviews.

Free the Pre-Fab Four

Want to help get Eric Idle's new movie released? As noted, the folks at Warner Brothers presently have no plan to release Rutles 2: Can't Buy Me Lunch. Perhaps they'll come up with one if enough of us write letters to…

Mr. Eric Frankel
Warner Brothers Television
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91522

When you write such letters, the important things are to (a) be polite, (b) not sound like a form letter and (c) suggest that you will purchase or patronize the item and that you believe your friends will, as well. What I usually write is something like…

You are probably buried in letters from people who are eager to spend money on Eric Idle's new film. If you aren't, it's probably because most Eric Idle fans don't know where to write, because there certainly are a lot of us. Anyway, here's another one for the pile.

Will it work? Maybe. Some day they'll wise up and put it out and when they do, you'll be able to tell yourself that your letter was the one that brought Time-Warner to its knees.

Only in Vegas

As I mentioned here some time ago, the Imperial Palace hotel in Las Vegas is trying something new. In one section of the casino at specified hours, they have Blackjack dealers who are also celebrity impersonators. You can have your money taken from you by Elvis, Madonna or even a Blues Brother. They call them "dealertainers."

Here's an article about this. The thing I think is especially funny is that one of the dealers is playing Ray Charles. It's humiliating enough to be wiped out at the tables. But to be beaten by a blind guy–?

Many hotels also offer a line of slot machines that feature the real Ray Charles and his voice. As I mentioned in that piece, you kinda hope that when it takes your last coin, the machine doesn't start singing, "Hit the road, Jack."

Idle Gossip

Last Saturday, a local film festival held the world premiere of Eric Idle's The Rutles 2: Can't Buy Me Lunch. The infamous Monkeyspit gives us a brief I-was-there account.

When I saw the film two years ago, it was close to 75 minutes. The current cut is around 55, which is the preferred length for a possible BBC telecast. What I viewed was very funny with a few weak spots which I presume are now relegated to what filmmakers used to call "the cutting room floor." Now the preferred term is, "We'll include it on the DVD." Either way, I can't imagine the 55-minute version not being a joy.

But most of us will have to imagine or not for a while longer. Apparently, the lovely folks at Warner Brothers still have no plans to release Mr. Idle's film anywhere at any time. Petitions like this one are springing up to convince them that there's a market out here for this funny film. (I don't think online petitions do a huge amount of good. On the other hand, they don't do any harm, either, nor do they require great effort to sign. There's always the chance that if the folks making the decision are really and truly on the fence, something like this could nudge things over to the proper side. Nudge, nudge.)

In the meantime, the illustrious Idle is about to kick off another tour, singing his silly songs all across this great land of ours. This one is called The Greedy Ba$tard Tour and when I hear about a schedule being posted, I'll let you know. I saw him in his last go-round and had a very good time, even during the live, on-stage liver transplant.

Grousing Again About This…

I love my TiVo but I don't love the fact that so many TV networks play fast and loose with start/stop times. I have, of course, a recent example…

This evening, since Leno and Letterman are in repeats, I set my TiVo to record an episode of the old Banacek show off the Hallmark Channel. The episode was scheduled to run from 9:00 to 10:30, which was what TiVo recorded. If the Hallmark folks had actually broadcast the show from 9:00 to 10:30, all would have been swell.

But the start of my recording was the last few minutes of Son of Flubber, which was what was on just before. The Banacek episode didn't commence until around 9:04.

At its close, Mr. Banacek was just about to reveal whodunnit when the recording ended. I'm guessing the show actually finished around 10:35.

This was not a huge loss for me since Dick Van Patten was playing one of the suspects. If Dick Van Patten's in a mid-seventies Universal mystery show, you can just about bet the farm that he's guilty. (And also, I'd seen the episode before and remembered that.) But there had to have been some folks out there who had never seen the show, set a TiVo or VCR for it…and didn't get to find out how it ended. Yes, you can program your TiVo to record a few minutes beyond the scheduled end time but (a) who thinks to do that? And (b) that limits your ability to record another show right afterward on another channel.

I've groused about this before and will probably grouse again in the future. Perhaps if enough of us grouse, TV networks will start airing their shows when they say they're airing them. I don't see how they benefit from the way it is now. The folks who recorded Son of Flubber didn't get the whole thing, either.

Quick Comment #3

Hmm…Quick Comment #2 wasn't so quick. No wonder I'm behind on this assignment.

Quick Comment #2

The Internet is lousy these days with worms and viruses and trojans and things that want to sizzle your cable modem. The folks at Microsoft allowed some features into Windows 2000 and Windows XP that have made life way too easy for those who think it's fun to invade or crash others' computers. If you want to learn a lot about the problems and can deal with some high-tech lingo, visit Steve Gibson's website. For years, Mr. Gibson has been warning about these vulnerabilities and is now politely saying, "I told you so."

Even if you can't understand most of what he posts there, you can use an online service he provides called Shields Up! When you run it, it will attempt to contact your computer and, in effect, break in the way a malicious intruder might. It will alert you to potential weaknesses in your system and possibly send you in search of a good firewall program.

On the 'net these days, you need a good firewall (preferably, a hardware firewall) and a good virus checker. And it's becoming more than a matter of your own safety. If you allow yourself to be vulnerable, you make yourself a menace to both friends and total strangers.

One other point: We should make it a matter of Internet Etiquette that you should not post e-mail addresses. One of the major sources of mailing lists for those who send out spam is addresses posted on websites. They send out "spambots" (robotic scanners) to surf the 'net and record any text that appears to be in the form of an e-mail address. So if you post someone's address, you're setting them up to receive spam and perhaps a worm attack as well. The current Public Enemy #1 in the virus/worm world is a thing called W32.Sobig.F@mm, which harvests e-mail addresses posted on the Internet and then bombards those addresses with infected messages. (For info on W32.Sobig.F@mm, including removal tools, click here.)

It is possible to post an e-mail address in an encoded form so that the spambots cannot read it. But unless you're going to go to the trouble of doing that, you shouldn't post e-mail addresses — yours or anyone else's.

Lastly: We really don't like Spyware, which is a general name for software that you get on your computer — often without knowing about it — that tracks information about you and sends it on to someone. Some free programs you download will quietly put a piece of Spyware on your computer. Sometimes, just going to a website will install it, either as a cookie or a scripted program. However you get these things, they're bad news so you might want to scan your system for Spyware. There are several programs available for free that do this but the two best are Ad-Aware and SpyBot. Neither will catch everything so I run each of them once a week or so.

Back to work…

Quick Comment #1

Tomorrow (Thursday) morning, I'll be a guest on the most excellent radio program of my pal, Paul Harris. I'll be on around 10:30 AM Pacific time, which means 12:30 St. Louis time. You can listen online over at Paul's website. But if you go over there, you'll find RealAudio recordings of past guests on The Paul Harris Radio Show and you'll probably find someone there more interesting to listen to than me. All I'll be doing is talking about my book, Mad Art, which chronicles the splendid illustrators for MAD Magazine. And don't forget to check out Paul's weblog.