If extreme analysis is not your thing, look away now! 

Hi guys.   Long time visitors (is there any other kind?) may recall that I once mused about a thread where I do nothing but analyse the cover of Fantastic Four Issue 1 for several weeks. You thought I was joking. 



What began as a thread grew so long that it turned into a book. The first 180 pages or so analyse the whole issue, page by page, then there are a hundred pages or so of appendices etc. I know what you're thinking, "how did he keep it so short?" Well I'll tell you. I only focused on one question: who did what? (Maybe a second volume would be two hundred pages of art criticism. The book contains a lot of pictures!)  Fantastic Four 1 contains a lot of clues that something weird was going on: dialog that contradicts the art, pictures that look heavily edited in very specific ways, etc. I examined those to see what the comic itself said about its creation. 

The conclusion was stark. I finally had to change the title, from "Fantastic Four 1" to "who did what", to "The Case Against Stan Lee". Please note that this is only about the question of who created the original comics. If your love of comics comes from nostalgia then this is not he book for you. Stan Lee is still a peerless cultural icon, fun writer, and the name will forever be the source of endless warm childhood memories. But this book is just for people who love nerdy details.

zak-site.com/Case_Against_Stan_Lee.pdf

(web version for slower connections: zak-site.com/CaseAgainstStanLee.html)

Journey into Mystery 115: more changes to the art
(Marvel Database details)

I think the "awake" Jane Foster was added after this story was submitted. I don't think she was in the original version. Perhaps even the "asleep" Jane Foster was added, but on balance I think Jack had her sleeping through the whole thing.

EDIT: some pictures...

Jane was supposedly kidnapped. This is how Kirby draws an attempted kidnapping, from the very same issue:

Note the artistic composition of each frame: the subject (the woman) is large and prominent, near the center. She is always doing something, not just standing around. There is space around the essential art for word balloons to be added. This is just comic art 101, and we should expect nothing less from any competent artist.

Now look at Jane at the start of the same issue: the kidnapping is not shown, and she is squashed into the corners. Look at the art style: the main characters are clearly Kirby art, but who drew Jane?



In previous posts I made my case that (1) Jack Kirby plotted these stories, (2) Jane Foster was not important to the plot, and (3) Stan wanted more Jane. (I hope that's not a euphemism for something.) This issue is the clearest case yet of Jane being added as an afterthought. Here is the evidence:

The evidence
Look at every picture of Jane in this issue (other than her final page). Notice anything odd? If you have read previous Kirby comics you will. Heck, if you know anything about artistic composition or storytelling you will. If you don't see it, then compare the last few pages of this story: it also features a woman in distress. Like any competent artist, Kirby places her large and center on the frame. Now look back on the Jane pictures. See the difference? I'll discuss each one. The worst examples are later, so please look at them all before making your judgment.

In general: the story is supposed to be about Jane being kidnapped. But we never see her kidnapped. In fact we never see her as the subject of a frame at all, until the end where she is asleep. Before that she is squashed into spaces that are usually left blank. 

The splash page: Jane is squashed into the corner of the page that is normally left blank (or has art that can easily be pasted over) so the letterer can add whatever text is needed. Compare other splash pages: I'll wait. They have one major image at the bottom, with either blank space each side, or details that can be covered without losing the general shape. I also wonder if Loki here has been cut out and repositioned, perhaps even rotated (except for his left arm): the layout is odd, with spaces where his body would be if he was drawn in a more normal fashion. The story is about Loki on top of a tower, suggesting it is about his triumph over Asgard, a much more satisfying story than just another hostage situation. By the way, I think it's brilliant how Kirby shows Loki both at the top and at the bottom simultaneously. This is a reminder that Kirby is a pro, and not the kind of artist who would just squash major characters in as an afterthought.

The next frame: Jane is squashed onto the side. My guess is that the main action has been cut out and shifted left. The space occupied by Jane would make more sense as a reminder of the distant ground. The composition just looks wrong to me. Plus, Jane is in such a generic helpless pose. Compare the other woman in the story (and why have two helpless female subplots?): that woman actually has interesting poses, she DOES things. Kirby's women always do. Kirby is not one for passive characters.

The bottom of page 2: This is a bad one. Can anybody pretend that Jane was supposed to be in that frame? Who would compose a frame like that? 

The bottom of page 4: THIS IS THE SMOKING GUN. I challenge anybody to look at that picture and not conclude that Jane was added later.

Middle of page 5: again, Jane is tiny, squashed into a gap at the side of the picture.

Page 5, panel 4: the framing is all wrong. A major event - Jane faints - is squashed into a corner. This is the first time that the art shows that Thor even knows she is there. I see two possibilities:
(1) If I had more time I would go back and see if this was cut from a previous issue, or drawn by someone else from a similar pose. But then again, this was a time when Jack still lived in New York, so Stan could have had him make the change.
(2) This is the first time Jack had her in the story. Then the small image size makes sense: she is not doing anything new here, Thor is just picking her up. See next point for why.

Page 6: finally, for the first time, Jane is clearly a part of the art. Possibility 1 is that this page was added after the others, replacing some (now lost) art. But on balance I think it's more likely that Jack intended Jane to be asleep for the whole thing. Why? Because she does not fit in the story, but Stan's dialog in the previous issue means she had to be there. Solution? have her asleep, and rescued at the end.

Why does Jane not fit the story? The cover and the splash page both show that this is about Loki triumphing over Asgard. This is a bigger threat to Asgard (and hence a better story) than simply kidnapping a mortal. The art shows Thor and Loki in combat, ignoring Jane completely. Then Odin returns and takes his rightful place as ruler. Then the art is "oh yes, Jane is around here someplace, asleep". 

The dialog version makes no sense. Even in Stan's dialog, Odin does not care much for Jane, so why pluck Thor out of a serious battle just to rescue her? Stan's compromise explanation, that Odin just wants her removed, does not work. Because even in Stan's dialog we see that he does not believe Loki's claim that Thor invited Jane there. Nor is there any art showing Jane being kidnapped, arriving, or doing anything active at all. She is just irrelevant to the story.

Why asleep? Stan said Jane was there. So she had to be there. But she plays no other role in the story, plus a mortal in Asgard is a big thing, and not an opportunity that Jack would miss. When a mortal first sees Asgard we should expect dazzling art. Not this non-event. Solution: she sleeps while the real action (defeating Loki so Odin can return) takes place. 

The last page: here we see Jane as Jack usually draws her: a decent size, part of the layout. Being asleep is important to the story. Because this is a big event: Thor has passed the test, defeated someone as powerful as he is. Jane is now history (or should be, if Stan would allow it). So Thor says goodbye to her sleeping form, and the final frame show Thor crossing the threshold in the hero's journey: finally worthy to walk across the rainbow bridge enter Asgard!!!!! Goodbye, Jane. Hello, destiny!

Tales of Asgard: Stan slips up again

I don't have time to examine the ToA in any detail (sounds of cheering), except to note Stan's comment at the start: "once again, more of the early life of Loki". This suggests that the previous story was not about Loki. Except that it was: Stan seems unaware that Fenris is Loki's son, and that Loki was the star of the original Apples of Idunna story. Maybe Stan meant "that was the LATER life of Loki"? No, because he began the previous story by saying "we interrupt our biographies in depth series of the life of Loki". No, Jack was simply jumping forward in Loki's life, but Stan did not realise that Loki was central to that story.

Conclusion: Stan Lee did not know the Norse legends. But lucky for him, Jack Kirby did.

Journey into Mystery 113: changes to the art?
(Marvel Database)

Asgard at last!!

Last issue we saw Thor finally accept his role among the gods. And this issue starts with a dramatic scene of Thor leading a ship in battle! At last! For the first time! (Other than the Tales of Asgard, which reminded us of what Thor's existence pre-Don Blake)

I think Lee does not understand the story

Lee's text on the splash page text, concerning Thor in Asgard, says "this doesn't have much to do with the main part of the story". Yet this *IS* the main part of the story: Thor in his rightful place at last! But on page 3 we see that Thor wants it both ways. He wants Asgard, but he also still wants to maintain his small-minded, pointless, wasteful life on Earth. He is like an addict who recognises the need to come clean, but still wants to keep his drug. He is the married man (he is married to Sif) who wants to come home, but still wants his mistress (Foster).

I call this "Small-minded" because it is unethical for Thor to waste his power with Jane Foster when he should be saving worlds (or worse, becoming Thor and then Jane would be a dazzled groupie). "Pointless" because all Thor's Earthly battles could be handled by the Avengers. And if the Avengers need more power they can just make another Iron Man suit. "Wasteful" because anything he achieves on Earth, e.g. in medicine, could be done better using Asgardian technology.

Thor creates his own problem

The Grey Gargoyle story is also "the main part of the story" as it is a problem created by Thor's weakness. Previously, Blake defeated GG by sending him off to sea, where he would sink into the mud. But Blake obviously did not tell the authorities, probably because that would risk revealing his relationship with Foster. So his mistaken attachment to Foster means this deadly menace returns. And the menace is only concerned with finding Thor: again, Thor creates his own problems. The return of the Gargoyle is a story of Thor's folly.

Lee versus Kirby

Lee's story is simple. Odin wants Thor in Asgard. Thor does not want to, but wants Jane Foster instead.

Kirby's story is more subtle: Thor wants BOTH Asgard and Foster. This is superficially the same as Lee's version, except this is not a story of "the man chooses the woman he loves". It is a story of "the man cannot face his responsibilities: he chooses his mistress, not his wife"

The wife and the mistress

Thor and Sif are essentially equals. Both are divine. Sif is not impressed by Thor's muscles or his confidence, as every god has that. She is only impressed when he goes beyond that. But Jane Foster is not a goddess. So she is much easier to please. Even when Thor is in his Don Blake form, he has supreme confidence, and that dazzles Jane. Probably his skill at surgery is part of the Asgardian package as well. So Thor/Blake loves the easy life: using his Asgardian heritage to get an adoring woman who will do anything for him. We recently saw her make him dinner: I think we can safely assume she does more than that.

This explains this issue's story. Thor has decided he wants to come home. Odin is happy. But Thor wants to keep his mistress. Odin cannot allow that. And when Thor wants to use his full Asgardian power to impress Foster, Odin definitely cannot allow that.

Changes to the art?

It looks to me like two of the images in this issue were altered, but I could be wrong.

The panels in question are on pages 3 and 4. The context is important. Thor just had his first taste of Asgard, and obviously loves it. Then he returns to Earth and is sad. Stan's dialog makes it look like his decision, but the art seems to tell a different story. There are only two parts of the art that support Stan's dialog, and they both look oddly drawn to me, as if added later:




In the first picture, Odin raises his arms to rage against Thor. But this is out of character:

This makes Odin seem weak, unable to get his way. But Kirby's Odin is never weak! The arms look wrong to me, and the body does not fit the arms. In fact, the body looks better without the arms. And the fact that the body is in silhouette makes me doubly suspicious.

Think back to the similar pose I posted with JiM 111, the dream sequence, when the woman (who I think is Sif) has her back to the man (Odin?). Here we have parallel imagery. The focus is on the person at the front, and the powerful man at the back must just accept it. "Arms down" works, "arms up" does not work. In my opinion.

In the second picture, Blake smiles when he meets Foster. But it's a weird looking smile. His eyes don't smile, and every other image shows him looking very serious.

To my eyes, these are changed in order to make this Thor's decision, but all the other art suggests it's Odin's doing and Thor just has to accept it. But for Stan, the male hero always has to be the winner, so I can see why he would override Kirby's story.

Throwing food

"But wait" you say, if Odin raising his arms is out of character, how do I explain him throwing his food a few pages later? I think they are different things. One is a threat, the other is an act of judgment.

When you raise your fists to an opponent you are threatening him, showing your potential for violence. Odin does not need to do that - his power is never in doubt. Does the president of the United States need to rise his fists when an employee refuses to obey?

But when Odin refused the food it was judgement: his servants thought he wanted food. Can't they see that he has more important things on his mind than to waste time feasting?

Odin's sadness

How then do I explain Odin's raised fist on the next page? Ignore Stan's dialog, look at Jack's art. The other hand is open, powerless. Odin is in a lower position than Loki, so this is not a statement of power. Odin's face does not show anger, but perhaps sadness? I asked my wife (a non comic reader) how she interpreted that frame, and she said it looked like triumph. Which is another interesting possibility. But is not anger.

Tales of Asgard: Loki's childhood

This issue gives another contrast between Stan and Jack: the role of Loki. Why does Odin keep Loki around, as in Stan's story Loki is always the cause of problems. How stupid is Odin, exactly? But if we reject the "stupid Odin" hypothesis a much richer story appears.

In this issue we learn of Loki's childhood. Lee's dialog makes Loki look shallow and spiteful. But take away the dialog, and what do we see? One child is the son of gods, the heir to the kingdom. Naturally he is clever and confident and strong. The other child is the runt of the giants, he has no natural advantages. He grows up seeing Thor win at everything. And he is the last survivor of his species (the giants), feeling very weak and vulnerable, surrounded by the people who killed your family and your people. What would you do in the circumstances?

So Loki uses magic to get an advantage. (Remember, this is from the art, not the simplistic dialog.) And that makes Loki a villain? Now look again at the main story...

Loki and Thor compared

In the main story we see Thor in the same position as Loki. As Don Blake he is weak. He canot get what he wants: free access to Asgard. So he wants to break the rules and use magic. (Turning into Thor in front of Jane Foster, which is forbidden.)

Put yourself in Loki's shoes

We are used to thinking of Thor as the good guy, and Loki as the bad guy. But only because Thor has all the natural advantages. While in Asgard, Thor benefits from playing the hero, and doing The Right Thing, because it makes people admire and support him. But take him away from Asgard, remove his natural advantages, and he cheats just like Loki would.

This raises the question, what if the previous issue's Tales had ended differently? What if the giants had not been killed by Odin? What if the giants had won? Loki was the royal son. What if the giants had found Thor as a baby? He would be growing up in a foreign culture where his natural abilities might not have been valued. Loki would be the adored one who fit in nd naturally won. Thor would be the one using his magic to cheat.

Seen in this way, Odin is not stupid. He does not keep Loki around out of foolishness, but because Loki reminds them that other people and cultures exist. In trying to become ruler, Loki is just doing what any culture does when faced with a stronger culture: trying to survive. Loki's efforts keep the gods on their toes. He keep them alert and thus healthy.

Hints of Ragnarok

I just asked "what if the giants had won"? Remember that this was a real possibility. Norse gods are not superheroes who always win in the end. Their myths all point to Ragnarok, where eventually they will lose. Loki survived the giant's own Ragnarok, by being hidden in a corner. It is my thesis that Thor is hidden ion Earth (or later allowed to range the galaxy) for exactly the same reason: so that some part of the gods can survive their final destruction.

Do I read too much into this?

Why do I insist that Kirby's art shows a different, deeper story? Because Lee's dialog makes no sense. His dialog makes Odin all-powerful, all-knowing and all-wise, yet frustrated and angry at his inability to control his son! And so stupid (or malicious) that he keeps Loki around just to cause evil. And we are to believe that Lee knows all the names and relationships in the Norse legends, except for the one that matters: that Sif is married to Thor. And whereas the Norse legends all have a direction (gods grow up, gods finally die) Lee's dialog shows a simplistic story that repeats forever (Thor versus Loki, Thor wants Jane, Odin is frustrated, repeat, repeat, repeat).

To me, Lee's dialog and his choices range from "makes no sense" to "why should anybody care?"
But Lee's dialog is perfect for short term cash flow: simple, familiar ideas he can repeat forever. Lee's job was to make money from comics, a medium he didn't care for (he wanted to leave in 1961, and finally DID leave soon after Kirby left Marvel). Kirby did what Kirby did (create stories), and Lee did what Lee did, persuade kids to spend money. 

Jack Kirby was not Stan Lee. Jack Kirby knew the classic legends. His stories were packed with new ideas. His fights show that he thought carefully about every frame. His solo work shows that he was obsessed with big ideas, with power struggles, with discovering the unknown. Kirby's stories go somewhere. Kirby's stories make sense. Those are the stories I am attempting to recover.

Journey into Mystery 111: the power of groups
(See the Marvel Database for cover, story summary, etc)

Overview: what drama!

What a dramatic story! This is why  love Kirby's Thor. The art, and the story it tells, is breathtaking. That cover, Odin's dream sequence, Baldar sending bis sword and catching it again, are unforgettable.
It's beautiful stuff.

A historic issue: united we stand

This is a watershed issue because it shows the gods at last working as a team: Baldar saves Thor. This is what Thor needs to learn: he is wasted on Earth, but with the other gods he can do anything!

This is one of those big real world themes that raises this above simple escapism. It's a message about being better individuals, and working with others, particularly with our family.

The next issue is an even bigger milestone in the story of mankind and the gods... but let's not get ahead of ourselves!

The cover with no dialog:

The cover says that no words can do it justice. But I don't think this is a joke. If we look at Lee's dialog on the covers, it deals with simple conflicts, especially with name checked characters (e.g. Cobra, Hyde, Magneto, etc). But how do you dialog a story about Baldar and time stopping and Odin holding back in order to train Thor?

I don't think Stan would plot a story like that. I think he had no dialog on the cover because he could not think what to write. I see this as yet more evidence that Stan did not plot these

The dream sequence

It's hard to say how far Lee changed Kirby's story, but one sequence stands out as highly suspicious: the sequence where Odin thinks of two lovers.
Here it is without Stan's dialog, together with some Tales of Asgard art that I'll get to:


What's odd about this sequence:

First, look at the amount of text crammed into the last three frames (the dream sequence and where it is described). Kirby was a visual storyteller. it makes no sense to have a two frame dream sequence that requires a ton of explanation. It seems unlikely to me that Kirby intended so much text. 

Second, look at Stan's text (if you have the original comics): the first frame supposedly introduces a major character (Odin's wife) who is not seen before or since, and is not even given a name. The second frame introduces a major event and location, "their last rise over the enchanted chasm" that is similarly never seen before or since. This to me is bad story telling, and screams "changing the story".

Third, the lover is facing away from Odin, and perhaps looking sad. If this is the one frame that introduces two lovers then they should surely be looking into each others eyes.?

Fourth, this is so out of character: it has Odin being powerless, and Baldar as the trickster and Loki arguing for honesty!

Something is wrong here. Now imagine the art without the text, and we perhaps see a different story:


The Sif theory

Odin is thinking about an innocent faced woman with huge blg hairdo. There is not enough text space for this to be a new character, and she looks like Sif from issue 102. This explains Baldar's presence. According to issue 102, Sif is Baldar's sister.

Sif of course is Thor's wife in the legends. The strange shaped flowers in her hair and her extra bulky two shouldered cloak might be a reminder of Thor's costume, or might be coincidence. Sif is sad, because Thor has left her for Earth, and is spending time with another woman. Odin is far behind her, because he is either unwilling or unable to help: this has to be.

The next frame shows Sif leading a male warrior. If this was Odin, wouldn't Odin be leading? And the art looks like it symbolises destiny: it looks like the woman is leading to her destiny. So this is a woman we should expect to see later, triumphant in some way. Odin is literally behind her all the way. The clouds and stars and upward journey suggest hope: one day Thor will be worthy of her. It is possible that the male figure is Thor himself: the winged helmet might be ambiguous in the pencils, I don't know. But for now I conclude that this is Odin thinking about Sif and her destiny to be with Thor.


Tales of Asgard: Sigurd

Once again the Tale of Asgard reflects the themes of the main story. Sigurd, like the Greek giant Antaeus, is an enemy who cannot be defeated as long as he is on the Earth. So the only way for Thor to triumph is to take the battle off the Earth. This will happen soon enough.

I mentioned my theory that Thor is given a human disguise, and the power is put in the hammer, as a way for something of the gods to survive Ragnarok. This would also explain Thor's need to go off world in later issues: as long as he is not permanently based in Asgard he has a chance to survive. Later he will explore other galaxies and learn of evolution. This is exactly what he needs to do if faced with the end of his world: he needs to find another home, and how to re-create his species.

Healing

Last issue I suggested that Odin is training Thor, to improve his game. Thor should not need more than five minutes to beat lightweights like Cobra and Hyde, and he should not be stopped by one human hostage.

As mentioned before, Thor's excuse for not embracing his divine role is that he likes being a doctor. He can use the excuse "but the humans need my human skill". But this is self deception. This story reminds us that Asgardian medicine is far beyond anything humans can do: if Thor really cares about medicine he will embrace his destiny.
Physician, heal thyself!

Footnote: the dimensional barrier power

At first it might seem hokey for Thor to create a dimensional barrier. But we know the gods can journey to Asgard, and humans cannot. So dimensional barriers are part of their normal skill set. Having time more at different speeds is routine for other dimensions (see relativity, Narnia, the Christian idea that "a thousand years to us is like a day to God", etc.



Next: Thor finally chooses to be a god!

Journey into Mystery 110: Odin trains Thor
(Marvel Database)

This is a two parter where Odin trains Thor. (Note the comparison with the Tales of Asgard where Odin holds back in order to train people to be more godlike)

Thor and Loki compared

I discussed before how Jane is a problem: Thor is a god, he is supposed to act on a godlike scale, saving millions of people. But spending time with Jane means he is busy saving one person  he is not reaching his potential.  Note the contrast with Loki, another who does not reach his potential:

Thor has the quality (he cares for the heart) but not he quantity (he thinks small). Loki has the quantity (he thinks big)  but not the quality (he does not care for the heart).

The TofA in 112 will deal with the birth of Loki. Without Lee's addition of Cobra and Hyde, this comic would more clearly be about Thor and Loki a tale of two half brothers. 

Not allowed in Asgard

Here again we see Thor is not allowed in Asgard. This is one of many evidences that Stan has no idea what is going on in these plots: when Jack was away, Thor was seen in Asgard as if he could come and go as he pleased.
 
This is something I saw a lot in the FF as well: Stan had only a vague idea of the plot. The famous 1967  newspaper article was a perfect example: when a reporter visited, Stan put on a show of plotting the FF. This is often used as proof that Stan plotted the stories.  But I think it shows the opposite: Stan had no idea what was going on,  e.g. thinking the surfer was away in space,  whereas the whole point of the surfer was he was trapped on Earth. And Stan's suggestion for that issue (Thing versus Surfer) interrupted the otherwise smooth flow of the Wakanda storyline.

In my opinion we see this time and again, that Stan was unaware of the plot, and would simply suggest ideas that did not fit, then wrote dialog that often contradicted the art. (I did warn you that this thread would be unashamedly pro Kirby!) But I digress.


Why Cobra and Hyde again?

Cobra and Hyde are not important to the story:  Any threat could have served the same purpose . E.g. a falling building, plague, etc.  This suggests to me that the plot did not have them in mind, but Lee required them.

Then why add them? I think this is Lee's commercial instinct coming in. And not just because Lee invented them and felt more comfortable with familiar superhero tropes and was less comfortable with mythology and the epic literary form.

Jack's story seems to have a definite direction.  As far as I can see, Thor is being trained, ready for Ragnarok . Both "training and Ragnarok are once-only ideas. The story has an end in sight. This is not good for long term sales! Kirby's instinct was to tell a story then tell a completely new story (though I argue that they are linked thematically). But Lee's instinct was the opposite: if it sells, do more of it! So Stan created Cobra and Hyde, villains with no sell-by date: they can come back forever. The more he can tie them into Thor, the longer he can sell Thor. Jack thinks story, Stan thinks sales.

Another possible reason is a real world power play.  If. as I argue, Jack created Thor,  this is a problem as the stories become more popular. What if Jack ever left and made trouble?  So the more involved Stan is, the more that he creates characters as well, the better it is for the company. Stan was a company man to the bone, and it worked well for him. And for Marvel, if sales are any guide.

A final reason could be cognitive dissonance. when Stan and Jack have their plotting sessions, Stan seems to be mainly editing Jack's ideas. But Stan thinks of himself as a writer, as the top line creator.
 So he would want to inject his own creations as often as possible. Which means Cobra and Hyde again and again.

Odin training Thor

Stan's dialog focuses on Cobra and Hyde, who do not matter (see above). But the art and the issue by issue context shows that Odin is training Thor:  

As a god, Thor needs to solve single person problems in seconds, so he can focus on global problems . But still his mind is on earthly things like being a doctor, and a single hostage can stop him. This is unacceptable for a god!  So Odin puts him in a position where he has to up his game.

 
Note the implied rebuke in JiM 111 by solving the problem with a healer. Thor is wasting his time with earth medicine, when Asgard medicine is far more advanced. If he REALLY wants to heal people, Don Blake would put Thor first Every. Single. Time.

Thor's weakness, and Loki in a new light

We are used to seeing Loki as the bad guy, but Thor is just as ungodly (see above). The whole Thor comic series is about Thor rising to his potential. Just as we humans must all improve our game.
In Tales of Asgard 112 we will be given the opportunity to see things from Loki's point of view: watch this space!  

Journey into Mystery 109: gratuitous crossover
(Marvel Database details)

Tales of Asgard



I mentioned how (in my view) Tales of Asgard story reflect the main story, giving the idealised version of the main story. "As above, so below." This issue (like those either side of it) is a good examples. In one of the tales, Thor goes among men in order to save them. In another, Thor is banished from Asgard, but it is all part of Odin's plan to escape destruction.



This is exactly what I have argued is the main story: Thor has become half human in order to hide among men, so something of the gods can survive Ragnarok. The main story adds the detail (due to Lee's insistence that Thor act more like a superhero, see below) that by taking on human form, Thor also takes on human weakness, and he has to learn to be godlike again.



If we see heaven as an abstract concept, an ideal, then this two-sided storytelling is particularly pleasing: we are seeing a story on Earth, and then seeing its message in an idealised, timeless form, the underlying morality tale. A very nice touch.


Magneto, at Lee's request

There is no compelling story need for Thor to meet Magneto here. In fact Thor was not needed at all: he didn't prevent Magneto lifting those cars,
 and in the end Magneto's plot was solved by the X-Men. here I will argue that Kirby did not want magneto, but it was a requirement handed down by Lee.



I have argued here and elsewhere that Kirby and Lee have dramatically different writing styles, so much that it is relatively simple to separate them. To those of us who love Kirby's writing it's as easy as "if it's good it's Kirby, if it's bad it's Lee". But a more diplomatic way to put it is to compare their solo work. We can probably agree that Kirby created epic, god-like plots, and Lee preferred conventional villains and love interests. We can come to the same conclusion by comparing their interviews, or examining places where the dialog clearly contradicts the art, or looking at their attitude to salesmanship. It al tells a consistent story. Lee goes for whatever sells the most, whereas Kirby goes for epic themes with the maximum power.



So when we see that the Magneto story is a conventional villain from another title, and that the Magneto story does not progress the long term plot, it has Lee written all over it. Whereas the way that Thor responds fits well into the long term theme (of a god with human weaknesses) so that shouts Kirby.


Kirby and human weaknesses



I just said that Kirby provided the human weaknesses. "But wait", I hear you cry, "surely that is Lee's hallmark?" I disagree. Lee made his characters think like the audience, but not weak. That's a big difference.



Take the Jane Foster love story for example. This is clearly Lee's idea, and is avery human thing: male hero, female assistant, of course she will be attractive, and of course they will fall in love. But Love is not a weakness. Even for a superhero it is not a weakness, it just makles them relatable. However, if Kirby is telling the story of a god who must rescue groups of people (all gods in Asgard, all humans in Asgard, all humans on Earth, etc), then too much focus on one human IS a weakness. So the weakness comes from Kirby's godly focus, not from Lee's reader focus.



We see the same principle in the Fantastic Four. It is very clear that Lee likes his male heroes to be always heroic. Frequently Kirby would draw Sue and Reed as equals, and Lee would add dialog making Sue submissive to Lee. Or Kirby would draw Reed making a bonehead mistake (like opening the negative zone to stop the sandman, but that released Blastaar) but Lee's dialog would not give the lightest hint that this was Reed's fault. So Lee liked Thor and Reed to be infallible (any "mistakes" would be very short lived), but it was Kirby who made them fallible. (Whether this applied to Spider-man is a different question, as Ditko gave the character such an indelible stamp of making mistakes. Here I'm just discussing the more Kirby style heroes)



So Magneto was almost certainly mandated by Lee, in an effort to increase the relatively poor sales of the X-Men. But despite this ignominious plot origin, Kirby's art shows the long term themes of the book, themes we cannot attribute to Lee:


Thor is under-performing



The central crisis happens because of Thor's carelessness: allowing himself to turn mortal. Also notice the initial hunt for Magneto: powerful though he is, hiding in a submarine puts Magneto in a class below the global threats that Thor should be facing.



Compare Thor's struggle here with his triumph in the previous issue's Tales of Asgard where Thor is far more capable and impressive.


The Thor-Blake relationship



On the surface, Thor-Blake is just a routine secret identity. After all, they share the same thoughts, must change in secret, etc. But when we compare this Thor to the Tales of Asgard Thor, we see a big difference: Blake is not just a disguise, but actually weakens Thor. But Lee's dialog hides this.


Kirby wanted to move more quickly



As far as I can tell (based on the use of Loki, how Kirby moved off world as soon as Lee became too busy to be much involved, and and what I have heard from Kirby experts) Kirby wanted Thor to be off world, having adventures in Asgard. But Lee felt that adventures on Earth would be easier to sell. So a Kirby-only Thor would have perhaps much less time to leave Earth, instead of the two or three years the comic actually took.


Thor without Lee: the timeline



How quickly would Thor have left the Earth if Lee had not kept him earth bound? The only other Kirby stories I know well are the FF and Captain Victory. In both cases it took a year for the comics to tell the story of their change of heart. Captain Victory has around 12 issues where he ponders the meaning of life, before his "happy ever after" finale. And I have elsewhere argued that the first eight issues of the FF show them leaving Earth for cosmic adventures, but Lee reigned Kirby in, and the stories become more earth bound with issue 9. (The first 8 issues took just over a year, due to issues 1-6 being bi-monthly sales) So my guess is that, if Kirby had his way, both the FF and Thor would have reached their cosmic phase after a bout a year, instead of waiting for 1965 when Lee became too busy to be much involved in plotting.


Conclusion



So it seems that Lee's influence changed the Thor-Blake relationship in the following two ways:


1. A story about man becoming godlike is sold as a conventional superhero with secret identity.


2. The process of becoming god-like took three years instead of one. the extra padding was mainly stories with Cobra, Hyde, and crossovers with other Marvel characters.


The long term theme of Thor: "If he is worthy"



So Thor under performs because he lets himself be too human. This is an epic theme: the god being human, the human needing to be god. It is the oldest theme in the world: our need to do better. comes more human, with human weaknesses and interests.



Thor wants to come and go between heaven and Earth, but he is not yet worthy: Odin will not let him into Asgard until he has shaped up. Becoming worthy is perhaps the central theme of Thor: can man become god? This is also a central theme of the 1960s in the real world: mankind reached space, and the "death of God" movement reached its peak. Were men becoming as gods? Were gods becoming as men?


Other points to note



I note that Blake goes home to Jane, they act as lovers, and she cooks him dinner. They are not married. Did the comics code notice?