Ditko's Intended Direction For Spidey in Masterworks Message Board Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

Ditko's Intended Direction For Spidey

Author	Comment
jhz1963	Ditko's Intended Direction For Spidey	Lead	[-]
Posts: 124 (09/29/10 10:13 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tags : None Remove this ad I re-read the Lee/Ditko Spider-Man run every other year or so. On the last re-reading, I was struck by what appears to be evidence of how Ditko planned to evolve the character. As we all know, #33 was the culmination of Pete's heroic progression, as he pushes himself beyond his limits and ends up saving Aunt May. Beyond just bringing her the needed serum, it looks like Ditko wanted to show that Peter, in Peter's own mind, finally "settled accounts" and would no longer have the compulsion to make up for his irresponsibility in letting the burgler run past the guard. What's my evidence? Two things: for the remainder of Ditko's run it seemed that Spidey went into action either for fun, to generate news pics or, as in #34, to clear his own name. Secondly, if you look at page 6 in #34, the issue immediately following his aforementioned triumph, the middle tier shows Pete consciously making the decision to not follow racing police cars and to focus on his studies instead. This, needless to say, is not how Stan would portray Pete once Ditko left. With that scene, Ditko's tale reaches completion. I know he told Marv Wolfman and others that Peter, if he was going to screw up all the time, shouldn't progress beyond 16 years of age, since (in Ditko's opinion) one is still learning at that age and, as the idealized hero that Ditko preferred, would become quite different once reaching maturity. With the decision to take Pete out of high school, it seems that Ditko wanted to make Peter something other than the guilt-ridden kid he'd been up til that point. I believe that Stan Lee most likely felt Ditko's intentions would take Peter away from the reader identification angle which was key to his popularity in Stan's mind. I think that Ditko would eventually have made Pete a cross between his Vic (Question) Sage and Jack (Creeper) Ryder, someone whose motivations would stem not from guilt but from both a drive to stand for Truth as well as the need to let loose. This is all just speculation, but those 3 panels in #34 really struck me as representing a deliberate move away from Stan's vision. In the Beach Boys, Mike Love resisted Brian Wilson's artistic leanings, telling him "Don't F*** with the formula". Ditko must've realized that though he was the plotter, Stan was the Editor and that the formula was there to stay. I came to this insight a few months ago, but reading Quesada's interview about making Pete single (on comicbookresources.com) brought it to the surface. Please tell me what you all think. Last Edited By: jhz1963 09/29/10 10:24 PM. Edited 1 time.
profh0011		#1	[-]
Posts: 2429 (09/30/10 12:03 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I agree. I tend to think that in any hero's life, ONE great tragedy is enough, to serve as a springboard to turn a "normal guy" into something more. Uncle Ben was that tragedy. The last thing Peter wanted was a repeat of that. Hence his total focus on May in ASM #31 (screw the self-serving idiots who couldn't see he had something on his mind) and his "rampage" in ASM #32. It wasn't beating Ock that counted (in fact, Ock escaped). It was saving May. He did! And I LOVED the scene, after, when Pete STANDS UP to Jameson and you can see he no longer intends to put up with his S*** anymore. Even Jameson realizes something changed. And THAT is a very big problem, if you continue reading past where Ditko left. I initially came to SPIDER-MAN via the 1967 Grantray-Lawrence cartoons. Those 20 episodes show a much more relaxed, fun-loving hero than Ditko portrayed-- but now that you mention it, he may very well be the kind Ditko might have done had Pete continued to evolve. Instead, on the one hand you have a "softening" and "nicening up" of a number of the supporting cast (some of whom were borderline scum before this-- I simply cannot believe Flash ever "grew up" when I read Ditko's stories), and on the other, a Peter who continually, repeatedly, has self-doubts, doubts about other people, puts up with harrassment and abuse from others (especially Jameson), and just seems incapable of ever being happy. I'm dumbfounded that so many readers over the years seem to accept this as normal, and somehow ENJOY it, even INSIST on it. it got worse when Gil Kane got on the book (twice), and it somehow continued to get worse with Ross Andru, etc. etc. etc. Spider-Man is the only series I can recall where I got FED UP with it and quit buying it... THREE times over the years. After the third time, that was it. I have never picked up a current issue in ages now. I've read very few QUESTION stories by Ditko, but it struck me that Vic Sage looked a LOT like I imagine Peter would when he "grew up". Meanwhile, and this somehow completely slipped my notice, someone else pointed out that Ted Kord ALSO resembled a grown-up Peter to an extent. The thought being, Sage was like Peter if he'd stayed in journalism, Kord if he'd followed a career in science. Looking back, I'd have liked to have seen Ditko continue on Spidey... IF he could have avoided all that "objectivism" CRAP. Imagine if Ditko had written & pencilled Spidey... and John Romita had INKED it! When he left DC, Romita told Stan all he really wanted to do was ink. But Stan wouldn't have it. I sometimes wonder what kind of editor Stan might have been if comics were run like a REAL business... and creators OWNED the characters, instead of the publisher. Last Edited By: profh0011 09/30/10 12:06 AM. Edited 1 times.
jhz1963		#2	[-]
Posts: 125 (09/30/10 12:37 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I, too, first discovered Spidey in the cartoon. In 1968, I wore a Spidey hallowe'en costume, most likely one of the earliest pieces of Marvel merchandise ever. I later went from Adam West reruns to DC comics but Amazing #121 was my very first Marvel. I didn't know who the hell most of the folks on the cover were but I was intrigued that one of 'em would die. Most of the '70s for Spidey were indeed all about gloom. I enjoyed Spidey as an alternative flavor (was pretty strictly a DC fan til '76) but as a character he was 100% as Frank Miller put it: "smaller than life". It's ironic that Stan eventually chafed enough at Spidey's limitations to marry him off- he would've been better off allowing Ditko to take him wherever he would've 20 years earlier. I still enjoy the character, especially when written by Marc Dematteis. However, he's a far cry from the guy who starred in probably my favorite comics ever (which I first read via the Pocket Books reprints).
gp.thenegativezone		#3	[-]
Posts: 257 (09/30/10 1:13 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Another thing worth considering, though, is that after #33, Ditko seemed to kind of check out of the book and go on automatic. The art became rushed, and the plot lines seemed to degenerate into overly extended fight scenes. Those issues left me with feeling that Ditko was probably having thoughts about leaving and that he sort of considered #33 his swan song. I think he was just gradually coasting to a stop on those last 5 issues and not giving them a whole lot of thought, one way or the other.
jhz1963		#4	[-]
Posts: 126 (09/30/10 1:48 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Totally agree! Considering the quality of his final 4 or 5 issues, it was for the best that he left. He phoned in those issues big-time! It's funny- when Kirby was at that point on FF and Thor, he was just getting revved up!
fubarthepanda		#5	[-]
Posts: 2828 (09/30/10 2:09 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	For the most part, I think Ditko successfully told the story he wanted to tell. I'm not so sure that you can really do a "happy ending" in a continuing fiction serial, so perhaps things turned out for the best. I also enjoyed both Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita, and don't think the character would be what he is today without either run. I agree, though, that the book loses some steam post-Lee/Romita, but I think things turned out quite well for ol' Spidey considering that he remained Marvel's flagship title throughout the seventies and is their top licensed character today. Not a bad run!
Steven Utley		#6	[-]
Posts: 837 (09/30/10 8:05 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Coincidentally, I started re-reading the Spider-Man Masterworks just last night. I have only the first four volumes, containing the Steve Ditko-illustrated issues; back in the day, I followed the monthly Spider-Man comic until sometime in the early 1970s, but the fact is that my interest declined precipitously following Ditko's departure from the feature. I wonder how many other readers can say the same.
AussieStu		#7	[-]
Posts: 8866 (09/30/10 8:12 AM) Golden Age Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	... until MJ showed up The Negative Zone Stan Lee, 1968: " ... And we talk it out. Lately, I've had Roy Thomas come in, and he sits and makes notes while we discuss it. Then he types them up which gives us a written synopsis. Originally-I have a little tape recorder-I had tried taping it, but then I found no one on staff has time to listen to the tape again later. But this way he makes notes, types it quickly, I get a carbon, the artist gets a carbon...so we don't have to worry that we'll forget what we've said. Then the artist goes home...or wherever he goes...and he draws the thing out, brings it back, and I put the copy in after he's drawn the story based on the plot I've given him. Now this varies with the different artists. Some artists, of course, need a more detailed plot than others. Some artists, such as Jack Kirby, need no plot at all. I mean I'll just say to Jack, 'Let's make the next villain be Dr. Doom'... or I may not even say that. He may tell me. And then he goes home and does it. He's good at plots. I'm sure he's a thousand times better than I. He just about makes up the plots for these stories. All I do is a little editing... I may tell him he's gone too far in one direction or another. Of course, occasionally I'll give him a plot, but we're practically both the writers on the things. "
BillyBatson4360		#8	[-]
Posts: 1763 (09/30/10 9:03 AM) Golden Age Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Steven Utley wrote: Coincidentally, I started re-reading the Spider-Man Masterworks just last night. I have only the first four volumes, containing the Steve Ditko-illustrated issues; back in the day, I followed the monthly Spider-Man comic until sometime in the early 1970s, but the fact is that my interest declined precipitously following Ditko's departure from the feature. I wonder how many other readers can say the same. I was one of those readers as well - although obviously we were in the minority as sales of Amazing Spider-Man continued to climb until it finally passed the FF to become Marvel's top-selling title. I agree with many here - that although I was unhappy about Ditko leaving the book at the time, it was probably for the best as his descent in Ryandian pseudo-philosophy would not have suited the book. It was better that Stan continued to guide Spider-Man and Ditko went on to create characters like the Question & Creeper that were much better suited to his ideas.
Andy Sheets		#9	[-]
Posts: 1309 (09/30/10 9:53 AM) Registered Member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	profh0011 wrote: Looking back, I'd have liked to have seen Ditko continue on Spidey... IF he could have avoided all that "objectivism" CRAP. I'm not sure you could really separate them. I think Ditko was already getting into Objectivism during the latter half of his Spidey run.
kirbyfanatic		#10	[-]
Posts: 658 (09/30/10 10:35 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Remove this ad I would have liked for Steve to do some more issues of Spider-Man, but as far as having him on Spider-Man for 100 issues or more, no. The truth of it is that the FF and Spider-Man were not the same characters after Kirby and Ditko left, while I enjoyed Romita's Spidey run, the FF could have ended when Jack left and it would have made no difference. Allen Smith
Steven Utley		#11	[-]
Posts: 838 (09/30/10 10:54 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Given Ditko's attraction to Ayn Rand's Objectivism -- which I regard as a philosophy crafted by a misanthrope for narcissistic sociopaths -- it's probably just as well for Amazing Spider-Man, in terms of its sales and its hero's popularity, that the book passed into other hands when it did. Still, I missed Ditko's angular, rather creepy-looking Spider-Man and never really warmed to John Romita's or anybody else's sleeker, slicker Spidey. Like kirbyfanatic, my interest in both ASM and Fantastic Four ends with the departure of their original artists.
kirbyfanatic	Stan Lee on Steve Ditko	#12	[-]
Posts: 659 (09/30/10 11:35 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4z7xuDhMeg Allen Smith
kirbyfanatic		#13	[-]
Posts: 660 (09/30/10 11:47 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	In looking at this video, while I disagree with Stan that the person who had the idea for a character is the sole creator, he does give a serious answer and is trying to be as fair to Steve as he can. Comics is a visual art, so to me the depiction of a character is as important as the conception and the writing. In a novel, or short story, it's different because the writer has sole control over the character. Not so in comics. I wish there were more serious interviews with Stan as this little interview was more entertaining and informative than all of the Marvel-speak interviews he gave combined. Allen Smith
profh0011		#14	[-]
Posts: 2431 (09/30/10 12:04 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Coming from the Grantray-Lawrence cartoons (the Krantz Films episodes did not exist yet when I found the comic-books), my FIRST Spidey comics were Romita (and looking back, I now feel it was Romita at his absolute PEAK!!!). It took me a LONG time to "get into" Ditko, partly for reading just the odd stories here and there, partly for the really BAD reproduction in reprints. (Ditko's Dr. Strange I dug IMMEDIATELY, and still do.) It was only when I read the entire Ditko run in sequence for the first time (for me, in the 80's) that I finally came to appreciate just what he'd done, and how good he really was. Reading his entire run a 2nd time (within the last few years), I find that Stan's origins (the first 2-3 episodes) are so aggressively DOWNBEAT AND DEPRESSING, I have to say Steve taking over the plotting was a DAMNED GOOD thing. However, re-reading the entire Ditko run and then continuing straight into Romita, as I said, you notice some jarring, abrupt changes in several characters you might never have noticed if you only read Romita's run, or only read the odd issues here and there. it wasn't so much a slow, natural evolution... it was more like what happened to ROOM 222 between its 3rd & final seasons, or HUNTER betweeen its 6th & 7th seasons. Like-- WHAT just happened here??? That said, it has been increasingly evident in recent years that John Romita was plotting his entire run ALMOST entirely on his own, even the issues where he wasn't doing the pencils (Buscema & Kane), and my feeling is, it would have been better if Stan had LET Romita do 100% of the job, instead of sticking his nose in here and there to keep things as miserable as possible. Stan spent the whole of the 50's writing teenage humor mags, apparently embarrassed by all that fun and funny work. I love his sense of humor, but sense that in the 60's, the more the decade went on, he was actively trying to be "serious", and Stan's "serious" books tend to just SUCK, big-time. (I mean... look at SILVER SUFFERER... or, DON'T, for God's sake, DON'T!!!) Jameson, annoying but funny in both the Ditko run and the '67 cartoons, became a completely out-of-control MANIAC in the Romita run. The guy should have wound up in a strait-jacket. Or at least, the target of countless lawsuits. (He single-handedly put the lives of every single person in that theatre in mortal danger when he got Electro to attack Spidey on live TV. It boggles my mind that he was walking around free, never even arrested by the cops, after that incident.) Last Edited By: profh0011 09/30/10 12:08 PM. Edited 1 times.
fubarthepanda		#15	[-]
Posts: 2829 (09/30/10 12:11 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	profh0011 wrote: Jameson, annoying but funny in both the Ditko run and the '67 cartoons, became a completely out-of-control MANIAC in the Romita run. The guy should have wound up in a strait-jacket. Or at least, the target of countless lawsuits. (He single-handedly put the lives of every single person in that theatre in mortal danger when he got Electro to attack Spidey on live TV. It boggles my mind that he was walking around free, never even arrested by the cops, after that incident.) As opposed to when he hired Smythe's Spider-Slayers or created the Scorpion during the Ditko run?
King Nine to Firefly		#16	[-]
Posts: 1062 (09/30/10 12:29 PM) Registered Member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I enjoyed Spider-Man's run up to issue 100. The biggest mistake, I thought, back then was killing Captain Stacy and, later, Gwen Stacy. Made for great stories, but the fun in Spider-Man was over with for me.
MakeMineMarvel		#17	[-]
Posts: 4720 (09/30/10 12:37 PM) Registered Member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	profh0011 wrote: Imagine if Ditko had written & pencilled Spidey... and John Romita had INKED it! When he left DC, Romita told Stan all he really wanted to do was ink. But Stan wouldn't have it. I sometimes wonder what kind of editor Stan might have been if comics were run like a REAL business... and creators OWNED the characters, instead of the publisher. I can see your point, and i can understand how creators feel about creating a character that becomes property of a company. But at the same time- I WANT the company to own those characters. If the creators owned them, wouldn't they be able to take them if they quit? So Ditko leaves Marvel and goes to DC and then DC gets to publish Spidey and Doc Strange? It reminds me of the mess that Image Comics was. Maybe I'm wrong at how that would work, but if thats how it would be, I wouldn't like it. There would be no Marvel and DC universes
kirbyfanatic		#18	[-]
Posts: 661 (09/30/10 12:54 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	To me the "universes" are unimportant. The individual hero or character is what is important. I prefer comics featuring individual heroes in their own adventures, not team books (but make no mistake, team books can be fun!). Character development in team books is often nonexistent. If Ditko did take Spider-Man to DC or elsewhere, it wouldn't matter because it was his approach that made the character unique. Or, even if Stan had moved to DC, the same idea would apply to writing as well. Allen Smith
Torgo		#19	[-]
Posts: 780 (09/30/10 1:06 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think Spider-Man was just as good during the Romita run as the Ditko run. I think the killing of Gwen Stacy was a mistake that can never be fixed, its that point that the title changed forever IMO.
karl51		#20	[-]
Posts: 276 (09/30/10 1:26 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Remove this ad kirbyfanatic wrote: If Ditko did take Spider-Man to DC or elsewhere, it wouldn't matter because it was his approach that made the character unique. Geez, I know this is just speculation, but under what scenario would Ditko ever have been able to own Spider-Man and take him anywhere? He created a costume, wrist web-shooters and a Spider signal. And maybe "Spidey Sense". He didn't come up with the name, most of the powers, the alter ego, the nebbish teen-ager with problems concept, the radioactive spider/death of Uncle Ben/great power-great responsibility origin. I doubt he even selected the colors for the costume.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Ditko's Intended Direction For Spidey

Ditko's Intended Direction For Spidey