Stickybuffalo.com

In a previous post I wrote of my objections to arguments that Marvel is or ought to be morally obligated to turn over profits made on the work of Jack Kirby to Mr. Kirby’s heirs. As noted in that post, I chose to focus on the issue of moral “rights” rather than legal rights because, particularly since the courts have rejected claims on the latter, proponents of the Kirby heirs’ case have generally argued that whatever the law says, moral standards demand compensation for the Kirby family.

This much is pretty much plainly-stated by the plaintiffs in this matter, at any rate the informal plaintiffs. But I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb, at least, and propose that underlying even the specific moral arguments, there’s a general sense among most comic creators and many comic fans that Jack Kirby was a hero and just deserved better. I don’t think this is much of a stretch, either, really; some might argue that their claimed moral imperative on Marvel’s part exists separately from any general obligation of life to have done better by Kirby, but they would probably at least acknowledge the latter as a belief and, for what my opinion’s worth, it’s unquestionably a factor in the decision to go all-in on angst and breastbeating in the case of Kirby as opposed to the many other (and still-living) comic creators who’ve received the short end of a work for hire stick.

For whatever my opinion is worth, though, I feel like this posthumous-martyrdom campaign on the behalf of Jack Kirby is deeply, deeply misguided. Because, so far as I can tell, Jack Kirby coaxed forth from the universe a life which, on balance, is to be admired, and perhaps envied, but certainly not condemned as an unjust raw deal. (more…)

I read comics. Sometimes. I used to read a lot more of them, and as a result I still read about them, online, on a regular basis. Out of habit, if nothing else.

I read about the dramas and the rumors and the controversies and I form opinions on them. Occasionally I even form a strong opinion about some comics-related argument, trivial as they usually are, and then feel compelled to express that opinion.

Such is the case with the latest creator/ownership controversy, stemming from the defeated lawsuit pressed against Marvel by the heirs of Jack Kirby. For those lacking the background but willing to read my two cents’ worth of irrelevance anyway, here it is in brief:

Jack Kirby made major, in many cases critical, contributions to most of the iconic Marvel characters which have been featured in all of these usually mediocre but highly-profitable feature films of recent years, e.g. The Fantastic Four, the X-Men, the Hulk, Captain America, etc., etc., etc. As with most of the subsequently-invaluable characters introduced by Marvel, and rival DC, in their early decades, all of these heroes, villains, gods and monsters have been held as the exclusive property of the company with no royalties or other participation for the individual creators, on the basis that they were created as “work for hire.” This has been something of a running controversy for years, but more inflamed recently, probably due to the enormous profits being taken in from movies and tie-in licensing.

I do not know or, to be frank, care all that much about the fine-grain details of the lawsuit brought against Marvel by heirs of the late Mr. Kirby, and realistically I suspect that most of those outraged over Marvel’s successful defense of its legal title to Kirby creations don’t care much about those details, either. Those castigating Marvel, such as Steve Bissette and now Seth, seem to openly express their outrage in moral terms rather than strict legal obligations, anyway.

And that’s fine; the law is obviously not always justice, and certainly not when it comes to intellectual property as I would be one of the first to agree. Still, the argument that it’s a moral outrage for Marvel to withhold profits from Jack Kirby creations from the heirs of Mr. Kirby, and indeed such an outrage that moral people should be obligated to boycott the company in protest, drives me up the goddamn wall. And it’s been doing so for a couple of weeks now, at least. I tried commenting on the matter from something of an oblique angle, and started a nice little side conversation, but I’ve concluded that if I don’t voice my central frustrations with this campaign I’m going to fucking burst. And on balance I would rather not, just now. (more…)

If anyone was reading stickybuffalo back in August, they may recall a post noting a planned November visit by Superman to Des Moines, Iowa, in issue #705 of his eponymous periodical. (And if not, here’s a link to it.)

Well, for various reasons I haven’t really cared enough to look into, the great Superman Walking Tour of America apparently fell behind schedule; he did reach Des Moines but not until last week, in issue #707, which also featured a completely different art team and plot (aside from the brief stop in Des Moines) from the original promotional copy for #705.

But whatever; Superman went to Des Moines, for three pages, and someone did some homework because those few scenes are immediately recognizable as Des Moines. (Ah, my cute little former home.) I’ve gone into detailed assessment of DSM’s cameo elsewhere—if anyone really cares I’m sure they can find it—having decided that the main story itself offers an unexpected matter for comment on stickybuffalo.

In brief: Superman suspends his walking tour to investigate an explosion at at some sort of chemical works in a small town in Kansas. He puts out the fires, then bumps into Lois Lane, who is investigating a former employee’s claims of environmental violations and bribery of the EPA by the company. Factory workers angrily deny these allegations, until Superman uses X-ray vision to discover “elevated levels of chlorine in the groundwater;” the factory workers then change their story and admit breaking the law, but plead that the struggling factory can’t afford environmental compliance, while loss of the town’s largest employer would devastate their community. Superman mulls things over, admonishes the workers to “do a better job cleaning up after yourselves in the future,” and then agrees to hush everything up, even warning Lois Lane that he “won’t allow” her to run a story exposing the company, for good measure. (more…)