John Romita made clear Stan Lee was deeply involved in plotting Spider-man, as ge would have a 3 or 2 hour reunion wirh Romita were he would tell Romita what personal life threads wanted Peter to face and what would be the villain of the story.

Yeah, Ditko would say that about most things, including the adult content he worked on with Eric Stanton, that Stanton confirmed Ditko worked on.

​@@ericjohnson9623he did some comic porn and denied it

The Spiderman suit has also been compared to the one used by The Spider in the 30s movie serials.

But really, would an adult who did not have kids, and lived in NY really know about that Halloween costume? Ditko seemed like an honest guy, if he said he designed the costume, I believe him, he had no reason to lie. I think maybe someone at Ben Cooper's saw the Spider-Man comic, and Ben went over and made a good deal for both companies, probably for free, so not to sue.

While I agree with you, it is worthwhile to note that Kirby was notorious for drawing characters off-model, even ones that he was indisputably the creator of. It's really prevalent in his X-Men where he constantly forgets that the Beast isn't supposed to have gloves.

The elaborate romantic woes were already a part of Lee/Ditko. Gwen starts out basically the same as Liz Allen (popular girl who's curious about this mysterious loner Peter Parker) and then becomes more of a Betty Brant (dramatic, poor communicator, hates Spider-Man but loves Peter). Mary Jane was a tremendous addition that Romita brought, but Lee/Ditko did have a long running love triangle as well with Liz and Betty

Kirby became arrogant over time, so it's not weird that he took credit for Stan and Steve. Kirby also said during an interview that Stan had no involvement in plotting the stories but thanks to John Romita Sr. We know this to be false: "We used to go out to lunch at the Playboy Club; sometimes four or five of us. We used to have wonderful conversations; I treasure them. You may have heard I used to drive home with them; whenever he was in for a story conference, Stan would drive Jack home. My house was on the way, so they'd drive me home, and then take Jack home. Sitting in the back seat of Stan's convertible with the top down, going up Queens Boulevard, listening to them plot stories, I felt like I was sitting behind Cecil B. DeMille's director's chair. It was the most wonderful thing; I felt like a kid back there".

@@magdavillafuerte damn how many times are you gonna copy paste that wall of text

@@donoso1312 I don't see anything wrong with using said wall.

Weird you say Ditko had Peter as an angry misfit when plenty of times in the book during his run is pretty happy and polite.

Valid

The artwork from Spider-Man’s first story in Amazing Fantasy #15 is at the Smithsonian Museum. Here the curator discusses it with David Currie, the author of Ditko Shrugged: "Sara Duke said to the author, "When you see the art, you see the dialogue. And in this case, there is real dialogue between Stan Lee and Steve Ditko that show they were both very creative forces in the creation of Spider-Man. There are marginalia notations in Stan Lee's hand writing, some of which Steve Ditko honored and ones where he didn't. You don't get a sense of that from the published version of the comic book, but in the original art it really shines through." The notes would have been added by Lee while the art was still in pencil stage as instructions to Ditko before the artist inked it, and they were less employed to alter plot narrative but mostly cosmetic in nature or designed to appease the edicts of the Comics Code. As in one example from a panel on the third page, where a car narrowly avoids Peter Parker, sending him crawling up a wall in avoidance and instantly aware of his new super powers, Lee writes underneath the panel, "Steve, make this a sedan, no arms hanging, don't imply wild, reckless driving." which Ditko observes and makes the required change. Or, more tellingly, in another from a panel from the eighth page, which shows the villain's face as he flees from the scene of his crime, "Steve, omit crook! Show door slamming!," Lee writes, but Ditko ignores the directive, aware of the story's final revelation and the necessity to reveal the identity now in order to set the later scene and enable Lee to script his famous "With great power there must also come, great responsibility" line".

I don't know, giving someone creator status after 41 issues have already been produced seems pretty generous.

Wdym? His “Stan Lee Media” characters like 7th Portal, The Grifter and The Accused are quite the hit these days 🤣

Kirby was like, ok dc heres your entire cosmic myghology lol

@@jayguero2123 I think that's not a fair comparison. Stan seemed to have no problem doing good stories without Kirby or Ditko. Silver Surfer with John Buscema and later the story with Moebius are clearly well made. Although they didn't sell that much in the US at the time, they were really popular in europe and nowadays those stories are subject to a lot of comic book analysis. There's also the work he made with John Romita Sr, Jim Steranko and Gene Colan, which did had a good quality and it's clear he was involved in those stories. The easiest argument that can be made is that the marvel universe was made by Stan, Jack and Steve and as such trying to chose one over the others seems childish to me.

@@magdavillafuerte That’s exactly the point though. This video presented Stan as unwilling to acknowledge the artists as a main creative force (ie by labeling himself and said artists as co creators) by stating the guy who “came up the idea” should be considered the (implied but never outright said sole) creator of a comic. All I mentioned were the characters Stan created without the input of comic book artists doing the heavy work, not just strictly Ditko and Kirby, but in your case, Steranko, Romita Sr and Buscema. The result without the input of any of his old pals is his “Stan Lee Media” characters.

@@jayguero2123 if you analyze said work is clear there was little interes on his part there and that it was mostly for fun. Also we know that in silver surfer: parable he had full creative control and it ended up being great.

Exactly! Stan constantly praised Jack and Steve in books like "Origins of Marvel Comics." While Jack in his later years wanted to claim credit for creating every character he drew as well as claim writing credits, there are not only Bullpen members who knew differently, but even some of Jack's biographers gave conflicting reports of the developments of some of his characters.

This is interesting. I too feel that while the comic was cancelled, it was not cancelled before they went to press with issue 15. Also the work job number, or whatever it is called on Amazing Spider-Man #1's first story would date it around the time of Amazing Fantasy, and the name Spiderman without the hyphen runs rampant in the story, except for the three chapter titles, and the first caption about Amazing Fantasy and Spider-Man.

It was me piss off

Are you bob kane or something?

How dare you not give me the credit I deserve as co-creator?

Captain Stacy, before he died, even called Spider-Man "Peter" and asked him to look after Gwen.

Ditko's change to make Uncle Ben into a warm working-class caregiver rather than a gruff police captain who was "down on a teenager" is a very interesting change. In screenwriting terms that would count as a major alteration.

@@ElvingsMusings Although It could also have been a Lee idea to make Uncle Ben a warm person. I say this because a warm old couple going by the same names of "Ben and May" had already appeared in Strange Tales #97 and Stan was known to recycle plots from stories he had made before, for example some Journey into Mystery stories had elements from some Strange Tales stories. Also i think the policeman version of uncle ben might have inspired Judge Irwin Hall, the Father of Hank and Don Hall (Hawk and Dove), crrated by Ditko while working at DC.

Given that Lee had worked on Marvel Method a while back it's likely the Strange Tales Ben and May were also by Ditko, considered that he indeed is the artist on that story. @@magdavillafuerte

@@ElvingsMusings But Ditko didn't recycle old things that much and there are examples of other recyclings in some other stories. For example in Amazing Fantasy the concept of mutants was introduced before Lee decided on doing a title. And before Ditko Replaced Kirby on the Spiderman development, it seems Lee had already chosen the names of the old relatives, then when he told Ditko, Ditko decided to draw Uncle Ben with the same appearance of that other character.

Lee said one of the major inspiration for Spider-Man was Richard Wentworth AKA "The Spider" from the pulp fiction magazine.

My feeling is that Kirby brought the idea to Lee. Lee looked at Kirby's drawing and thought it wasn't creepy enough, and assigned the idea to Ditko with the addition of the radioactive spider and Ben's death. Ditko created the costume we know which may be similar to Kirby's.

Jim Shooter said that he had seen the original Kirby pages in the 1980s. So it was still there at Marvel HQ around that time. Shooter said that Kirby's Spider-Man resembled Captain America's costume.

Ditko said that he considers his Spider-Man design to be a separate creation from Kirby's Spider-Man design.

​@@ElvingsMusings Joe Simon also described it as "Captain America with cobwebs."

The artwork from Spider-Man’s first story in Amazing Fantasy #15 is at the Smithsonian Museum. Here the curator discusses it with David Currie, the author of Ditko Shrugged: "Sara Duke said to the author, "When you see the art, you see the dialogue. And in this case, there is real dialogue between Stan Lee and Steve Ditko that show they were both very creative forces in the creation of Spider-Man. There are marginalia notations in Stan Lee's hand writing, some of which Steve Ditko honored and ones where he didn't. You don't get a sense of that from the published version of the comic book, but in the original art it really shines through." The notes would have been added by Lee while the art was still in pencil stage as instructions to Ditko before the artist inked it, and they were less employed to alter plot narrative but mostly cosmetic in nature or designed to appease the edicts of the Comics Code. As in one example from a panel on the third page, where a car narrowly avoids Peter Parker, sending him crawling up a wall in avoidance and instantly aware of his new super powers, Lee writes underneath the panel, "Steve, make this a sedan, no arms hanging, don't imply wild, reckless driving." which Ditko observes and makes the required change. Or, more tellingly, in another from a panel from the eighth page, which shows the villain's face as he flees from the scene of his crime, "Steve, omit crook! Show door slamming!," Lee writes, but Ditko ignores the directive, aware of the story's final revelation and the necessity to reveal the identity now in order to set the later scene and enable Lee to script his famous "With great power there must also come, great responsibility" line".

Yeah but then since the idea came from Joe Simon, you would have to credit him as well as a creator, and perhaps C.C. Beck as well, with that little kid becomes an adult super hero idea. I think while the lee/Kirby Spiderman obviously started the ball rolling, I think the Lee/Ditko Spider-Man though inspired by the Kirby, is their own separate creation. There is really nothing to point to that goes back to the Kirby version. (luckily) Just read Antman if you want to know what a Lee/Kirby Spiderman would have been like.

There was also not talking to Ditko for a year and not paying him for plotting credit

@@dakotah7683 Marvel paid Ditko for plotting from issue #25 on, I think that is why there was no conversation between Lee and Ditko, or at least one of the reasons.

@@timsmythfilmsandanimations Indeed

Conceptually and visually, it was Ditko though. That's the Marvel Method

@@ElvingsMusings the way it worked was Stan said I've got an idea for a new character, he's a kid , he's in high school and he has spider powers. This and this has to happen in the story.Make it work. Stan's concept, Ditko's work. That was the Marvel method. Writer's concept, but the artist doing most of the work.

@@carloscrecelius9597 Except here we have documented evidence that the name Spiderman and the concept of him being a teenager all pre-existed him. LEE LIED ABOUT THAT.

@@ElvingsMusings Wrong, according to Ditko Stan came up with the name because he liked Hawkman as a name.

Joe Simon has produced evidence, including a pre-1960s logo of Spiderman. That's case closed there. @@magdavillafuerte

Because there's money at stake...

And Spider-Boy in turn was a large inspiration for Ricochet, when Peter adopted several alternate identities.

Ironically, there seems to be alot of black and white cut and dry mentality over who created Spider-Man instead of acknowledging the grayness that it’s always been.

Without Ditko setting the foundation first, there’d be no Spider-Man period.

@@jayguero2123 I’m fully aware of that. I still prefer the way Romita drew Spidey.

Wrong. The artwork from Spider-Man’s first story in Amazing Fantasy #15 is at the Smithsonian Museum. Here the curator discusses it with David Currie, the author of Ditko Shrugged: "Sara Duke said to the author, "When you see the art, you see the dialogue. And in this case, there is real dialogue between Stan Lee and Steve Ditko that show they were both very creative forces in the creation of Spider-Man. There are marginalia notations in Stan Lee's hand writing, some of which Steve Ditko honored and ones where he didn't. You don't get a sense of that from the published version of the comic book, but in the original art it really shines through." The notes would have been added by Lee while the art was still in pencil stage as instructions to Ditko before the artist inked it, and they were less employed to alter plot narrative but mostly cosmetic in nature or designed to appease the edicts of the Comics Code. As in one example from a panel on the third page, where a car narrowly avoids Peter Parker, sending him crawling up a wall in avoidance and instantly aware of his new super powers, Lee writes underneath the panel, "Steve, make this a sedan, no arms hanging, don't imply wild, reckless driving." which Ditko observes and makes the required change. Or, more tellingly, in another from a panel from the eighth page, which shows the villain's face as he flees from the scene of his crime, "Steve, omit crook! Show door slamming!," Lee writes, but Ditko ignores the directive, aware of the story's final revelation and the necessity to reveal the identity now in order to set the later scene and enable Lee to script his famous "With great power there must also come, great responsibility" line".

Yep opinions vary.@@magdavillafuerte

But Ditko doesn't, he has said many times that it was a co-creation.

The artwork from Spider-Man’s first story in Amazing Fantasy #15 is at the Smithsonian Museum. Here the curator discusses it with David Currie, the author of Ditko Shrugged: "Sara Duke said to the author, "When you see the art, you see the dialogue. And in this case, there is real dialogue between Stan Lee and Steve Ditko that show they were both very creative forces in the creation of Spider-Man. There are marginalia notations in Stan Lee's hand writing, some of which Steve Ditko honored and ones where he didn't. You don't get a sense of that from the published version of the comic book, but in the original art it really shines through." The notes would have been added by Lee while the art was still in pencil stage as instructions to Ditko before the artist inked it, and they were less employed to alter plot narrative but mostly cosmetic in nature or designed to appease the edicts of the Comics Code. As in one example from a panel on the third page, where a car narrowly avoids Peter Parker, sending him crawling up a wall in avoidance and instantly aware of his new super powers, Lee writes underneath the panel, "Steve, make this a sedan, no arms hanging, don't imply wild, reckless driving." which Ditko observes and makes the required change. Or, more tellingly, in another from a panel from the eighth page, which shows the villain's face as he flees from the scene of his crime, "Steve, omit crook! Show door slamming!," Lee writes, but Ditko ignores the directive, aware of the story's final revelation and the necessity to reveal the identity now in order to set the later scene and enable Lee to script his famous "With great power there must also come, great responsibility" line".

@@magdavillafuerte Yes, and unlike the museum willing to acknowledge the collaborative process of writing comics, Stan for the longest time raked in all the glory of a character’s creation by not acknowledging the artist (or the artist plus as far as the Marvel method is concerned) as equal creators in the process. Good on the museum to spread the word though, the world should really know it.

@@jayguero2123 The problem is that we shouldn't downplay the acomplishments of Stan like many other people do. You can't deny there's also a cult of kirby just like there's one from stan and one from ditko and the main issue is that people keep insisting on seeing this as a black and white situation when it was clearly more complex.

@@magdavillafuerte Yes, I made that comment in this section before. However, notice how you just shifted points. There isn’t a dispute as to Stan had any involvement or not. There is evidence to prove that he was was involved, we all agree with that. The issue lies with Stan himself unwilling to acknowledge his collaborators (namely Jack and Steve) and himself as co creators. All three of them were co creators and Stan’s implication of himself being a “creator” diminishes the creative input of said artists. Just like there are so called “cults of Jack and Steve” there is also a cult of Stan who vehemently defend the man who had everything, Vs the men who received nothing. I’m starting to think you may fall in that category I’m afraid.

@@jayguero2123 I don't think i do. I simoly believe that the three of them deserve equal recognition with creating the marvel universe. Although i don't deny the cult of stan exists, my main issue is that people should be more critical of the cult of jack too, specially considering that they seem to have a really closed minded view of the issue. Abraham Riesman for example is part of the cult of Kirby and he was criticized by many who analyzed his work as having problems analyzing his sources, for example he claimed the the blogger Barry Pearl was shocked after having a conversation with Dick Ayers but Pearl denied this and they were both actually laughing in the conversation and there's also the fact that he claimed that Stan said "racist stuff" in his last years, but he not only has not shown any evidence, but it makes no sense considering Stan is known to have criticized racism even before the 60s in stories from Strange Tales and Gunsmoke western and during the 60s he insisted to his artists that they should put more black peoplenin the background and he helped create many of the first black superheroes, so Reisman claims clearly hold no ground and he should be received with strong skepticism.

while power rangers does usually fall short in comparison to any given season's sentai counterpart there are a few gems in pr, see rpm vs go-onger and some even to similar if not the same level of enjoyment or quality (In Space, Lost Galaxy, S.P.D)

I would credit all three as creators since they all brought something that contributed to the success of Spider-Man. Kirby brought the name, Ditko brought the costume and origin, and Lee brought the character.

For the average piece of literature, sure the author gets full credit. But comics are a *visual* medium and require an artist (or in the case of the Marvel method, an artist plus) to tell the story. Otherwise, a few paragraphs on paper wouldn’t be as exciting nor be anywhere near as successful.

Only a fool would say Haim created the Power Rangers. He adapted and produced the show, much like any adaptation of foreign works in Hollywood today.

@mindandbody9427 Legally, as per the rules governing this kind of thing in movie and TV productions, Haim Saban created Power Rangers and is credited as such.

There, not their. Thanks auto-correct.

Kirby became arrogant over time, so it's not weird that he took credit for Stan and Steve. Kirby also said during an interview that Stan had no involvement in plotting the stories but thanks to John Romita Sr. We know this to be false: "We used to go out to lunch at the Playboy Club; sometimes four or five of us. We used to have wonderful conversations; I treasure them. You may have heard I used to drive home with them; whenever he was in for a story conference, Stan would drive Jack home. My house was on the way, so they'd drive me home, and then take Jack home. Sitting in the back seat of Stan's convertible with the top down, going up Queens Boulevard, listening to them plot stories, I felt like I was sitting behind Cecil B. DeMille's director's chair. It was the most wonderful thing; I felt like a kid back there". Kirby also claimed he came up with the idea of the Hulk after watching a case of hysterical strenght, but this is false as the Hulk could only transform at night at first and the first time the Hulk transformed out of anger was in a story made by Stan Lee and Dick Ayers.

@@magdavillafuerte sorry but i dont buy it, a conversation about plot in a car being enough. Stan can tell jack all he wants but at end of the day he did the page, he can follow or not on whatever stan said. And stan lee has proven to ba an unreliable narrator, I think stan lee is a better writer when it comes to rewrite history.

@@donoso1312 "a conversation is not enough" is a conversation where they are plotting together the story and the convesations were constant ¿didn't you pay attention to the quote mentioned? Also you didn't answer to the Hulk accusation, which is far more damaging. Flo Steinberg also mentioned Stan having conversations with their artists, so i don't understand why you can't accept it's a far more complicated issue.

@@magdavillafuerte maybe relax a little

@@donoso1312 I'm relaxed, i'm simply criticizing your logic.

He should get credit for his contributions though

@@genericyoutubechannel3790 i can agree with that

Yes, everyone's talking about the Creeper to this day.

Mr A, The Question, and Blue Beetle have also gotten renewed attention

It's inked by Steve Ditko

Kirby did not add the more interesting parts for this one.

The fuck you talking about. Ditko drew a bunch of horror. He made Dr Strange!

I don't know how much creative input Lee had on any of the Marvel characters, seems that his Marvel Method is letting the artists do the panel work and he supposedly adds the words, although Jack Kirby may not think so as he said that he gave Stan the outline of his panels, but I don't know what to believe. What do you think of John Romita Sr stories about Stan Lee, as he said Lee sat with his artists and made the outlines, yet I still don't know how the editor would have time to do this. I still feel that Stan Lee let the artists do the stories and he took the credit. But I'm getting arguements as someone keeps quoting John Romita Sr to back up Stan Lees stories. What do you think? Is John Romita Sr someone you can trust?

@@wiseguymaybe Romita Sr. wasn't there when Lee interacted with Kirby or Ditko, so he's not a witness to their dynamic at all. A lot of Lee's work is essentially on the level of editorial prompts, which in most other cases do not amount at all to having writing credit. So for instance it was the editor of F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel who chose the title "The Great Gatsby" among a list of potential titles the author came up, Likewise it was Batman editor, Whitney Ellsworth who made the decision to keep Joker alive at the end of the first Batman comic but his name is nowhere on the credits. Lee was a genuinely good editor and publicist. If he had been open and honest, we'd talk of him like he was William Gaines or Brian Epstein, manager of The Beatles. Instead he conflated editing/facilitating with the actual writing and so we see that evidenced in the recollections of Romita Sr. and others.

@@ElvingsMusings That;s exactly the info I needed. I appreciate you commenting back, as for being polite when it comes to Stan The Conman, well I guess I should be polite. You see I got this guy I've been communicating with on another comment section on another video who is trying to defend Stan The Conman by using Romita Sr's heart warming words and witness accounts about him and Kirby and Ditko. You know Romita Sr is a great artist, who I have respected, but I'm beginning to wonder about his legitamacy when he reflects on his days with Marvel and what a great writer Stan Lee was.

@@wiseguymaybe Romita Sr. enjoyed working with Stan, and he found steady stable work at Marvel. He eventually he got a job as art director and he wanted to settle down in one place rather than work freelance. So out of deference to that reality, he probably made concessions. That said if you read other stuff Romita Sr. said, then it becomes clear that there was Marvel Method involved there too.

@@ElvingsMusings I am so glad I came across your comments, I actually have watched other videos with Romita Sr interviews, and I would like to take back what I said about his legitamacy, he seemed like an honest person, not a showman like Stan Lee or shady looking like Bob Kane. Just an earnest artist. It just sounds like he was just fooled. Can't blame him, I give credit to Stan for helping him out, but I think Stan Lee would do that for people who are on his side. The great thing about John is he seems like someone who would never put anyone down. He really admired Jack Kirby, and as an artist myself who has been influenced by Kirby, Ditko and old Disney art, Jack definately deserved the title king. Just the same I would like to read more about John Romita and the Marvel Method you mentioned. Also I now adays have a hard time with Stan Lee's story about how the Fantastic Four came about. That he almost left Marvel to write stories he wanted to write about when Martin Goodman asked him to do a superhero team like DC's Justice League. And Lee's wife talked him out of quititng by saying why don't you just write about what you would like to and put it in the comics, you are going to quite anyway. I don't believe this story, basically what publishing company was going to publish these stories he wanted to write? The publishing game is not that easy. Quiting a job at Marvel and try to write on your own????? That would be dumb, and Stan is not dumb. I don't believe he had any intention to quite Marvel. an editing job, as you pointed out, that he could do well. One that Martin Goodman, the publisher and cousin inlaw had gotten fot Lee. But I think that Stan really thought he was some great writer.

But Ditko disputes almost all of that as lies by Lee, particularly the Green Goblin anecdote that Stan liked to push. One, Ditko fully plotted the last almost 20 issues of their run alone, because according to Steve, Stan stopped talking to him once Ditko demanded plotting credit. At that point, Lee only dialogued Ditko's finished pages with story/díalogue guides provided by Steve. In other words, Stan had no input on the plotting at all ahead of time, and Stan chose this once he stopped collecting the writing check in its entirety. Two, if you've read the last few Ditko issues, it's OBVIOUS Norman Osborn is secretly a supervillain. Aside from being revealed as a business criminal, he knocks out Spider-Man from behind in one story with a single punch (during an era Spidey's super durability was emphasized), and then it's revealed he took a sniper shot a few stories high in open air (i.e. he was hovering), which Spidey remarks would be impossible for a normal man. Ditko rightfully points out that he set up the Goblin reveal before he left, and specifically introduced Norman for the reveal (because he liked the dramatic possibilities of Goblin being tied to his personal life).

You’re mostly incorrect. Also, being the “idea guy” in comic book creation isn’t as significant as you’d like to think when most superheroes are fundamentally similar: exceptional costumed people who fight crime. Ditko deserves his credit as co-creator.

@@TylerStrangelove respectfully, this isn’t creation. The creation happened at the concept phase. Your definition means that Chris Claremont created the x-men, I mean why not? He wrote most of the issues and defined them as we see them today. Even that statement would be debatable because then it ignores John Bryne’s contribution, plot wise, to the early part of that run. Incidentally, they too separated due, in part, to differences in opinion on the evolution of the characters, but no one ever credits them as the creators of the x-men. Regardless, you’re countering my largely anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence of your own. No one will ever know for sure who contributed what, when and under who’s orders. My position is based on Steve’s own words. He came in too late, imo, to justify the credit of creator (Kirby thinks he deserves that title alone). He was hired after the fact, after the genesis of the character. He did a tremendous redesign and added some supporting cast but the words (at least for the first 15 issues) were written by Stan. The redesigns were approved by Stan, the project manager is Stan. If the redesigns didn’t satisfy Stan’s brief then Ditko gets replaced by another artist. This is artist for hire work. I understand why people get confused by this, and there’s also a little bit of ‘judging the past by the standards of today’ going on. He got artists credit in a time when that was rare, Bill Finger didn’t even get that. I sympathise with his take on being the creator, but he’s incorrect, from the evidence provided so far he’s at best, artist (which by its nature contains an element of co-plotting and design work) and sole plotter of the last 20 issues of his run, I’ve seen no claims for the creation of the personality of Spider-Man. If Stan didn’t sufficiently, credit him for his sole plotting efforts (although, according to you, he was at least remunerated for it), Ditko can either come into the office and demand plots, which he didn’t do; or he can leave, which he did and Spider-Man survived without him. This is a working relationship issue, and there are ways to work this out. Steve chose the path he chose; was he treated unfairly, probably but I see no concrete evidence of creation only a semantics game tailored to put him in the best light possible.

@@derekr.8590 whilst I find your point compelling, please reference my post to TylerStrangeLove for my response.

Ditko plotted the book and designed the characters in it. He left because Lee refused to give him plotting credits until #18 but wouldn't pay him the plotting money. Combined with Lee not talking to Ditko for a whole year.

Do you think certain stories featuring Spider-Man could be works of art, or certain pages or panels?

If it had been up to Marvel’s publisher Martin Goodman; Spider-Man would never have gotten off the ground in the first place, being he was convinced that people hated spiders and that nobody would ever buy a comic book about them and he had no idea why Amazing Fantasy #15 sold as well as it did and why The Amazing Spider-Man went on to become a best selling comic. Marvel back then more often than not succeeded in spite of it’s publisher, not because of him.

Stan filled in balloons. Steve was the life force of the comic.

Watch the interview from Ditko’s family. Ditko was apparently some amateur scientist in his childhood days, and alongside resembling him on a physical level as a teenager, this aspect of Ditko was obviously a major influence of Peter Parker. Ditko was also a huge fan of Batman growing up which is seemingly what inspired him to give Peter a whole assortment of gadgets (web shooters, web fluid, spider signal, spider tracers, utility belt, magnetic Vulture disrupter) Don’t you get it? Contrary to all the Stan Lee documentaries, Ditko was just as, if not more instrumental in refining the character. Otherwise, the Lee-Kirby version of the character would have been approved.