Much is being written online about the recent Stan Lee documentary and it has rekindled an old debate that many thought had been more-or-less settled. The family of Jack Kirby sure thought so. One of the sharpest comments I've read was written by Rob Salkowitz over at Forbes magazine. I'll quote just this much of it here…
It is no scratch on the creative imaginations of his collaborators to credit Lee with brand-building genius that helped turn those creations into something that echoed far beyond the confines of the comic book industry. Whatever virtues Ditko, Kirby and the others had as makers of awe-inspiring comics, shameless self-promotion was not among them, and that's what was required to catapult Marvel into public notice. It is also enough to cement the reputation of Stan Lee as one of the most significant figures in the history of American comics and American business.
But somehow it was never enough for Stan Lee to be known as a master marketer. He always fancied himself a creator and a storyteller, and never considered comics to be a big enough canvas for his ambitions. According to his biographers, he liked the limelight and needed the money. And having the avuncular and charismatic Lee, who was a career salaryman and never asserted personal claims to ownership over Marvel's corporate property, as the father-creator figure suited both his ambitions and Disney's agenda.
I would quibble with two teensy things Rob says in the above paragraph. Stan didn't like the limelight…he loved the limelight. Becoming rich was important to him but becoming famous was even more important…and he achieved it. Fame in and of itself didn't matter much to Kirby — he was too busy creating — and Ditko didn't even want his picture taken. But Stan, when he was surrounded by cameras and being offered money to sign his name, was just about the happiest human being on this planet.
And secondly, once Marvel largely dispensed with his services, he did make some claims about ownership of those characters. It was a bluff and most knew that but he did seek to gain some leverage by occasionally threatening that battle. And some of the investors in Stan's failed company Stan Lee Media (for which — full disclosure — I briefly worked) thought they were investing in a firm that would someday wrest Spider-Man, The Hulk and the others from Marvel…or at least receive compensation for their value.
And I would also add that even the best salesperson in the world can only do so much to promote an unremarkable product. Kirby and Ditko — and lesser but still vital contributors like Don Heck, Wally Wood, Bill Everett, Larry Lieber and others — gave Stan a remarkable line to sell. But yes, Stan does keep getting credit for what he didn't do instead of what he did.