I apologize, it sounded like you did. I may have misunderstood. To me, when you say nobody wanted to read his work anymore, that sounds like the very definition of irrelevancy.

It's true Kirby mostly had fallen from favor with comics fans by the 1970s and 1980s. It's a fickle industry. Still, Kirby more than nearly anyone was morally entitled to a lifetime of support from his very profitable creations. Stan Lee turned a few productive years into a millionaire's gig in Hollywood as editor and publisher emeritus. Kirby ... got squat.

It's true; nothing is successful unless the creative talent has a shitty work for hire contract. This is why George Lucas recently died penniless on the streets of Calcutta, and JK Rowling is coughing up blood in a Victorian madhouse.

It's funny and sad -- DC and Marvel fought so hard to not compensate its original creators beyond the bare minimums of their shitty contracts. I mean, of course DC didn't want to hand over the rights to Superman, and especially not in the 1970s, when it realized movies were coming. But DC had to have its arm twisted nearly to the verge of breaking just to throw a modest living stipend to Superman's creators.

The sum of money that DC and Marvel willingly could have provided Siegel, Shuster, Kirby and a few others -- it didn't have to be a lot. $50,000 a year? $75,000 a year? Health insurance? Enough to keep them comfortable and provide for their widows. That's all. It wouldn't have made a dent in their bottom lines.

But fuck 'em, they signed the contracts.

And why did it turn out like that? At least partly it was because of the decisions each man made with his career.

Mike

Did you miss the definition of "trolling" over in the "Allen hates The Avengers" thread?

Mike

I tuned that thread out when it turned into the blind screaming at the blind about painting techniques.

I don't disagree with you on that.

Stan Lee cut better deals for himself than Kirby did. Kirby, like many artists, wasn't much of a businessman. Of course, Lee was related to Marvel's publisher, giving him some advantage there as well.

But morally -- Marvel should have looked after Kirby. The man helped build a company later valued at $4 billion. Someone should have been honorable and made sure he never worried about having enough money to live comfortably.

Kirby also, like many artists, had to contend with business practices that are illegal now, like the rubber stamping of a contract on the endorsement line of a paycheck.

But, y'know. He did draw such short skirts. So you gotta admit, he was kinda asking for it. He's partly to blame here.

Lucas only works non-union. Rowling sold the rights to Harry Potter outright to AOL/TW, inexplicably at the height of the character's populaity.

If so, I'll reiterate it for him: A "troll" is someone who disagrees with Joe.