One of the more poignant offerings regarding the unprecedented output and creativity of Jack Kirby can be found in one of the recent issues of the Jack Kirby Collector, where one-time Kirby assistant Mark Evanier commented that while Jack could churn out page after page of incredible art and despite his ability to come up with new ideas, Jack was at a loss as to HOW exactly comics could be made to sell more, do more and evolve out of the standard 17 page format that he know doubt felt trapped in. It's all about execution (in the business sense) and I have a suspicion that more than a few artistic powerhouses felt the same way: all this talent but how the heck can it be harnessed?

Probably the inverse is also true. I wonder if Stan Lee or any writer would have been nearly as popular if the Fantastic Four or Thor or the Hulk was illustrated by someone other than Jack Kirby. Can great writing save poor art? Can awesome art save poor writing? It's a valid argument and I'm not sure what the correct answer is. There are some great talents out there. Jim Shooter comes easily to mind. His reboot a while back of Turok and Magnus Robot Fighter went nowhere after only a few issues. And you know I thought the writing on those efforts was pretty good! The art not so much. But that's me. Go back to the mid-to-late 1960's and Wally Wood was illustrating Thunder Agents. Superb artwork, right? We're talking Wally-flipping-Wood, the master of Mad Magazine! But the writing sucked! I guess my point is that Stan Lee could have had a master plan: paste comic books all over the place: on milk cartons, cereal boxes, where ever, and I don't think the FF would have registered a blip on the radar if it weren't for Jack Kirby!!

Before Jack came back to Timely/Marvel, Stan had several "go-to" guys and perhaps the most prolific was Joe Maneely. Maneely died a tragic death when he fell in front of an on-coming train. You can say all you want that if Manleey hadn't died and Jack hadn't came back to Marvel, that the FF and other books would have still reached unheard of heights. But I'm not so sure! And keep in mind that Stan - as an editor and relative of Martin Goodman - had the mechanics via Goodman's publishing machine to get the books on the racks. But not even that could save Marvel at the time! Like I said, it's all about execution.

I remember back in the late 70's Jack was supposed to have had the financial backing to put out a line of comic books (Thunderfoot and others). An interview with Jack in Comics Scene shed some light on Jack's mindset but it had nothing to do with the business-end of publishing. Jack was all for giving artists a chance and keeping them on a book in order to let their talent develop, but in terms of execution, he was shooting blanks.

It wasn't Jack's fault. The guy was a creator. He was a producer. He needed a salesperson like Joe Simon or Stan Lee in the same way that they needed an artist like Jack!