COMICS’ GREATEST ENIGMA, BY MIKE GOLD
If you’re interested in comics creators, it’s been a good couple months for biographies. First, we had Mark Evanier’sKirby: King Of Comics (Abrams, $40.00); now we’ve got Blake Bell’s Strange and Stranger: The World of Steve Ditko(Fantagraphics, $39.99). We’ve covered Mark’s book extensively, and our very own Rick Marshall did a swell interview last March.
My column today is not really a review of Blake’s book; it’s a blather about comics’ greatest enigma. Blake is the ultimate Ditko historian, and his book (and website, Ditko Looked Up) reflects his passion. It’s well-written, well-researched, and wonderously designed by Adam Grano. If you’re into Ditko or comics history, it’s a must-have. Kudos to Blake; that’s my review.
Steve Ditko is another matter. I can’t say he’s been denied his rightful place in history – his is always the third name in the phrase “Marvel Comics as we know them was created by Jack Kirby, Stan Lee and Steve Ditko and together they brought comic books kicking and screaming to an adult audience.” If he gets short-shrift, it’s because Steve refuses all interview requests, convention appearances, and celebrity signings. He says he prefers to let his work speak for itself, and I’m sure that’s true. He’s also very shy and has no problem with one-on-one (or two-on-one) conversations in his studio, at the publishing houses, or in restaurants. That’s his prerogative.
On the other hand, he’s a public figure – even inadvertently. This makes him subject of many an article, long-winded editorial (like this), and Blake’s book. I’m told he’s not happy with the attention focused on him from Strange and Stranger; having known Ditko. I’m not surprised. Maybe a little disappointed, but again, that’s his prerogative.
I think from the commercial perspective Steve Ditko’s role in the success of Marvel Comics and its transcendence to the college-student market has been severely underrated. It was The Amazing Spider-Man that put Marvel on the map and in the college bookstores. It was Spider-Man that became the first comic book character to achieve icon status since Superman, Batman and arguably Wonder Woman. That’s the first in a generation. And, maybe, the last to date.
As the 1960s progressed Steve became more and more political, embracing the values of a form of Objectivism so fundamentalist that it even scared its founder, Ayn Rand, who asked Ditko to print a note saying his work reflected his values and not necessarily hers. Objectivism, for the Google-challenged, is the philosophy that holds “there is no greater moral goal than achieving happiness. But one cannot achieve happiness by wish or whim. Happiness requires that one live by objective principles, including moral integrity and respect for the rights of others. Politically, Objectivists advocate laissez-faire capitalism. Under capitalism, a strictly limited government protects each person’s rights to life, liberty, and property and forbids that anyone initiate force against anyone else.” (Excerpted from The Atlas Society).
Steve Ditko has employed this philosophy in every aspect of his life, often resigning from projects because they did not reflect those beliefs. That’s his prerogative. He always put his money where his mouth is, eschewing potential windfalls such as creating signed prints when the movie Spider-Manwas released, even though the income he could have derived from that effort would have been both quite substantial and, according to those who had seen him around that time, well-needed.
I may disagree with him, at least in part, but I respect his stand. As Alan Moore told Blake Bell in Strange and Stranger, “I felt that, though Steve Ditko’s political agenda was very different than mine, Steve Ditko had a political agenda, and that in some ways set him above most of his contemporaries… I would basically disagree with all of Ditko’s ideas, but he has to be given credit for expressing those political ideas.”
I couldn’t agree more. If this is a medium that is supposed to be taken seriously, then we have to go beyond the simple heroic fantasy and reflect upon the concerns of the society that reads these stories. That’s hardly commonplace today; it was virtually unheard of when Steve Ditko created The Question and Mr. A. If you are old enough to drink and you find something intellectually satisfying in an American comic book, you’ve got Steve Ditko to thank for opening that door.
Not that he wants your thanks.
Mike Gold is editor-in-chief of ComicMix.
- If you can find a copy (it's…accessible, if you know what I mean), Jonathan Ross' "In Search of Steve Ditko" from a few months back was a phenomenal piece of work. Lots of interviews about him from folks like Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman, and a very good history of the man's work.
- But don't bother searching for that office building at the end. That's not where Ditko's studio is.
- Yes, it is. He moved it there about 10 years ago. I've been there twice to visit him.
- Blake Bell's interpretation of Ditko in "Strange and Stranger" works because it makes no attempt to over-explain the artist — some crucial insights, entirely at the service of an understanding of the artistry. Some mysteries are more to be appreciated than solved.If Chester Gould's "Dick Tracy" feature had defined the philosophy of “shoot first — investigate later,” then Ditko distilled such a policy to a deadpan essence with "Mr. A." Less a matter of proselytizing than of taking a provocative stand. Plenty of gumption in Ditko's work.
- A great article Mr. Gold, for sure. My feelings as a contemporary creator (and a fan) is to acknowledge the fact that the average age of comic book readers matters. The fact that the best stories out there (for kids or teens, tweens, or adults, geriatrics or otherwise…) tell themselves without dumbing themselves down for the sake of their audience. While comics are often left as "kitch" in the lexicon of "artistic pursuits", I find characters especially like the Question exist as a big middle finger to that thinking. Yes, a man in tights leaping tall buildings and firing lasers from his eyes is silly when looked at from the outside… but reading into the character and finding out that he's lonely, adds a layer of depth that usually stops someone long enough to say "hey, this IS more than kids' stuff." As it stands now, I feel like comics could have more of an edge politically… but not in the ham fisted "See How This Is Just Like Iraq!" way Marvel is currently working in, nor "See How Epic It Is When Evil Wins" way in which DC is presenting it's big summer blockbuster. Some great titles like Vaughn's "Ex Machina" deal with politics in an intelligent way, that should be celebrated (as in appropriated) in comics today. I'd like to think Mr. Ditko might enjoy "Ex Machina" in that respect. The fact is as an older (as in NOT a Johnny DC) reader, I do from time to time, want to see a more political or socialogical bend on books. The X-Men were invented out of the civil rights isssues… While we aren't in a segregated world now persay… It's not utopia yet, and I can't wait to see (or maybe I'll just do it myself) creators in comics today use our world to create new books like Ditko and Lee did back in their prime.
- Ditko is fascinating. His drawing style is unique and expressive. He's created some of comics most enduring characters, most notably Spider-man, but also, Doctor Strange, The Creeper, Hawk and Dove, The Question, Mr. A, Static (not the snarky, black kid, but the overly dry, talking and talking and talking white adult). There is no question that Ditko has some kind of tap into Society's Collective Unconscious. But I think that most of Ditko's creations have seen their best days in the hands of other creators.I would like to be a fly on the wall, listening to a conversation between Ditko and Denny O'Neil about morality, philosophy and "The Question." "The Question" has always been about exploring and illustrating philosophical ideas. I just have a feeling that Ditko must get very frustrated seeing his work reinterpreted again and again, to greater success, while seeing his original philosophies, ideals and objectives for the characters seemingly twisted and perverted.I don't understand Objectivism. I've never read Ayn Rand. I've read Ditko books that were supposed to be graphic illustrations of Objectivism and came away more confused than before. There is no questioning Ditko's genius. But his obsessive need to inject his philosophy in his work, at times, mars it. There is an obsessive/compulsive/insane quality to Ditko's art and Ditko's work. His lines are SO clean and yet the sum of them can be SO … disturbing. Steve Ditko reminds me of Dave Sim. Sim is another creator who got it into his head that his philosophy was more important than engaging the reader. Maybe that's the part about Ditko and Sim that irks me, the pedantic and pressured nature of writing. I can't deny the genius there. I can't deny the talent. I have a grudging admiration for artists who are willing to push everything aside (especially their own monetary success) to make a point. But I feel like both Ditko and Sim's work suffered. Philosophy didn't color their work, it made it obtuse. It seems self centered, like, "I'm going to tell you how it is and I don't CARE if you enjoy what you buy." Philosophy subjugated the entertainment value and made it their bi-otch.I went to "The Atlas Society" and did a search for Steve Ditko. They briefly mention him in an article about Celebrities influenced by Objectivism and Ayn Rand. I wanted to SCREAM at the page when I read this phrase, "Moving from the lowly comic book, we find admirers of Rand’s ideas and fiction in the highest echelons of the mainstream media." The writer, Robert James Bidinotto, then goes on to describe how Ayn Rand influenced Hugh Hefner and Rush Limbaugh. I had trouble reading this and without thinking that Bidnotto must have been joking. But he wasn't. The comic is LOWLY, while the HIGHEST ECHELONS of the mainstream media are embodied by Hugh Hefner and Rush Limbaugh! Please, spare me. If that's Objective thought, I don't want to be subjected to it.Here's a nice bit: Alan Moore reciting the lyrics to a song inspired by Steve Ditko.
- Is there a source for Rand asking for statement distancing her views from Ditko's? I'm not sure why Ditko would have to, as he rarely mentions Rand by name or refers directly to her work (interestingly, one anecdote in Bell's book has Rand's estate signing off on an adaptation of ATLAS SHRUGGED as long as Ditko drew it). I'm still processing my reaction to the text of Bell's book, but one of my major criticism's is that he goes to the Rand well a bit too often in an attempt to explain Ditko's actions, in the absence of any statements from Ditko about them.
- If I'm not mistaken — and, today, that might be a first — a notice was published in one of those underground comix format publications that featured Mr. A. Or maybe The Avenging World.
- Wow, that was quick. Thanks, Mike. If anyone can identify that more exactly, and provide the exact wording, I'd appreciate it.
- For those curious, I've been informed at least one such notice appears on the first page of "Violence: The Phoney Issue" in GUTS #5 [1969], but is absent from reprints of that page. I still need the exact wording, as I'm curious if there's any evidence that Rand herself requested it.
- ATLAS SHRUGGED IS CRAP
- Quick request for clarification, Mike. The following disclaimer was tracked down:"While accepting Objectivism as my philosophical base: I am not a spokesman for Objectivism and I alone am responsible for the views expressed here! S. Ditko" GUTS #5 [1969]However, someone has pointed out that this is consistent with a general request that Rand made in both published and possibly spoken statements circa 1968. So are you sure that Ditko's work actually scared Rand (or that she was even aware of it), and you didn't misinterpret an "Ayn Rand requested a disclaimer" comment meaning the universal request as a personal request?Note that if answering this would in any way violate what you consider to be something Ditko told you in confidence, please disregard.
- This is the first I've heard of Rand wanting to distance herself from Ditko. The "standard disclaimer" theory makes more sense, since there is nothing in Ditko's work that spefically names Rand or Objectivism. It was the ideas that were important to Ditko, not the labels.
COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.
Steve ditko,like jack kirby was spoiled his post marvel success.DC COMICS SO WANTED TO CAPTURE THAT MARVEL LIGHTNING IN A BOTTLE,THAT THEY ALLOWED ANYTHING BY EITHER MEN..........................................................................
