Talk:Jack Kirby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Kurtzberg or Kurtzburg?

Sorry! Is his real name Kurtzberg or Kurtzburg ? Britannica says Kurtzberg.80.184.128.98 17:24, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC) I'm a German

Men of Tomorrow concurs with "Kurtzberg".

[edit] Fixed link

Fixed the Jack FAQ link. --Kross 21:22, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Citation needed

Mark Evanier is indeed a fine and important historian and witness whom I cite often myself. But we can't just say "Mark Evanier revealed..." WHERE did he reveal it? Can you link to a column? Can you say where you read it? This needs to be cited -- that's just the way Wikipedia or any encyclopedia is; sources have to be given. Someone outside comics using this an an encyclopedia has no idea who Mark is. --Tenebrae 15:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


Mark revealed this fact to the comic book community after learning about it from contacts at Marvel. An open letter containing this fact was distributed during the 1985 San Diego Comicon. Roz Kirby showed me a copy. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 23:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kirbyesque?

well... so what is anything that is "kirbyesque"? --euyyn 16:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I mean, what defines its style? --euyyn 16:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There needs to be a section on what makes is style unique. For me, it's the classic foreshortened outstretched hand with sqaure fingertips. He also drew incredibly complex hi-tech weapons and gadgets. --68.103.154.140 04:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah, yes, the trademark "Kirby machines" that practically covered the interior of Kirby's Baxter Building layouts, and went to greater heights in his New Gods works. Does anyone know of a citeable source for the catchphrase "Kirby machine"? I wanted to add it to the article, perhaps under Legacy or in the same paragraph that mentions Kirby dots--I've heard many comics fans use that term for Kirby's stylized technology--but I can't find any site online that uses the term. -- Pennyforth 18:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Historians and observers of the art have been using this phrase for decades to describe everything from the dots to the foreshortened action frames. But the focus has always been on the machines and certain character designs. This is the way I described it in my book "The Art of Jack Kirby" (Blue Rose Press, 1992): "In the later half of his tenure at Marvel, Kirby's art shifted into what is considered his "pseudo-techno" period. He started the trend by simplifying gadgets invented by Mr. Fantastic. The visual complexities of dials, gauges and switches were imitated in a way that maintained the feeling of complexity without inventing believable function. Eventually, the act of simplification generated new shapes and designs that complemented both the story line and the overall visual effect of the art. Later, as Kirby became more comfortable with the style, machines and even characters took on odd shapes and forms while the backgrounds and props became increasingly more complex. "My machines, no matter how unimportant they were, had to be so unusual that you couldn't figure out what you were looking at. I didn't want anybody looking at my machines thinking that they'd seen it someplace before." The new style was so unusual that artists had difficulty designating a name for it, so they called it Kirbyesque." Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of his characters

There should be a list of all the characters Jack Kirby created

Please indent and sign your comments, User:71.126.164.208. -- Tenebrae 15:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I would be happy to provide a complete list from "The Art of Jack Kirby" Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 02:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Since no-one else has replied: Please do, yes. Perhaps at List of characters (co-)created by Jack Kirby..? Or is that a little clumsy? ntnon (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Discrepancy

I pose to you a conundrum. If Jack Kirby died in 1994, how did he address the 1998 San Diego ComicCon? One of those dates is incorrect, howver, i'm not sure which, if somone could verify and edit it would make us all a little happier. CodyM 09:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


Nevermind, I figured it out, misread on my part. CM


[edit] query

Kirby is popularly acknowledged by comics creators and fans as one of the greatest and most influential artists in the history of comics.

Surely that should be "english speaking comics" - I don't see much evidence of his influence in BDs and the like?

--Charlesknight 09:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

No idea what you mean by "BD" but international appreciation of Jack's work is well-documented. Ask any European or Asian comic book collector and they'll cite Jack Kirby as a key influencer who helped popularize the art form. Citations: FUCHS and REITBERGER in Comics - Anatomie eines Massenmediums (1973); DRECHSEL, FUNHOFF and HOFFMANN in Massenzeichenware: Die gesellschaftliche und ideologische Funktion der Comics (1975); and RAINER CLODIUS in Comixene #17 (1978). Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 01:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
"BD" means bande dessinée", the uniquely French brand of comics, such as the Asterix, Lucky Luke, Tintin, Spirou et Fantasio series and the likes. I concur with Charlesknight: while Kirby may have been very influential in Anglo-Saxon comic culture, I doubt that his specific art form has influenced the French and German scene. Vargher (talk) 19:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] found a pic

ok i found a pic off the website, http://www.born-today.com/Today/pix/kirby_jack.jpg, just not sure what i put for licensing, if any one couldgo in there and add something that would be great, thanks.Phoenix741 03:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


That photo belongs to "The Art of Jack Kirby" - published by Blue Rose Press in 1992. I'm the author, researcher, and publisher of the book. BTW... there are many errors and I noticed bad citations. I can make many of these corrections AND provide you a verified list of characters. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ben 10

I have added a link to both the Kirby and the Kirby dots entries from the article on Ben 10, a superhero cartoon which seems highly derivitive of his style. This has been removed, and while I'm prepared to let the general style comparison find its own level there I think adding the reference to Kirby dots adds to the article. I'd like to see this link from all such heavy uses of his style but don't think mentioning it in the Kirby biography itself is appropriate, what do others think? MartinSFSA 21:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The Kirby article states: "Kirby continued to expand the medium's boundaries, devising photo-collage covers and interiors, developing new drawing techniques such as the method for depicting energy fields now known as 'Kirby Dots', and other experiments." I'm not sure I see anything inaccurate there, or any reason not to mention Kirby Dots, a.k.a. Kirby Krackles.
I don't know anything about the Ben 10 article, but I can tell you that whoever removed the references to Kirby and Kirby Dots did so because saying that the cartoon "seems highly derivative" is an opinion. --Tenebrae 03:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, but that's not the statement I'm talking about. It ran "The style is reminiscent of Jack Kirby, particularly the alien and technology designs and use of Kirby dots." and was placed next to an image of the show title which uses the dots. I don't mind the first part being removed, but do wish to see Kirby credited with the invention of the dots in any such piece which uses them so heavily. Is what I'm asking for advice on. MartinSFSA 05:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, anything regarding the Ben 10 article should go on the Ben 10 talk page. I did check out the logo there, and while it may look to you or to me like Kirby dots, and while the alien and technology designs (which I haven't seen) might look to some people as reminiscent of Kirby, we really can't say that in the article since it's just our opinion. If an authoritative comics-art critic or animation expert were to say this, we could cite it; likewise if the series' producer or head animator said so. Otherwise, it's against Wikipedia guidelines. --Tenebrae 06:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I have been asking there, and one editor was good enough to point out they didn't know much about Kriby. Until such time as we get such a statement from a co-creator or expert I'm going to continue to seek someone who knows both Kriby and Ben 10. MartinSFSA 07:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
It is no secret to anybody who has studied this subject that Jack Kirby's work has tremendous influence on nearly all forms of visual entertainment (whether the artist is aware of the influence or not). Even filmmakers like George Lucas and Steven Spielberg have admitted as much in past interviews. This fact is well-documented in a great many books on the subject. I wish I had the time to cite all of them for you. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 02:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homages/Trivia

The "Homages" section was actually titled "Trivia until this edit. Changing the section name doesn't change the content. This is still a trivia section: It has the same sort of items that other articles' trivia sections contain. And changing the section name really does seem like an end-run around policy. --Tenebrae 06:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want, but trivia is derogatory as it is an excuse for including unrelated and often irrelevant items while a homage list is not the same thing. In other words naming that list of homages as Trivia was a lazy and inaccurate title. --Leocomix 14:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a crack in a little while at writing an homage section in prose. Wikipedia generally prefers prose treatment to lists where we can. --Tenebrae 14:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kirby vs. Marvel

...why was it labelled POV, and why was it removed, please? ntnon (talk) 01:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Near as I can tell from the history, it had been flagged for some time with a "neutrality-disputed" tag. I went back to read it, and it did seem a bit much (both in length and in tone), though certainly an NPOV section on Kirby vs. Marvel would seem needed. I guess I can take a crack at it unless someone else what's to give it a start. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure about neutrality (I thought the tag was POV?) but it can't have been flagged for that long - I only put most of the information in on the 16th of March! (There were a couple of lines prior to that intimating at the disagreement, which was unsourced, so I wrote and sourced considerably more.) This was then labeled POV (clearly erroneously) on the 17th of April. Perhaps it was overly harsh, but really... he was ill treated by Marvel who (according to several individuals) then tried to cover it up. I suppose the Comics Journal isn't always noted for being a bastion of politeness and even-handedness, but still...
I'll give it another look over when I'm a little less annoyed that: A) Substantiated and sourced facts were cavalierly labelled "point of view" and B) The whole section was deleted on the strength of that very-recent allegation without discussion... ntnon (talk) 03:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Gotta agree with you -- the article certainly needs a section on "Kirby vs. Marvel" (and try as I may so far, I can't come up with another subhead for it, which I think we need since that phrase suggests a lawsuit). Why don't we (and, obviously, whoever else wants to pitch in) start with something simple, then build it up?
The Comics Journal' is a perfectly fine and respected source. We probably ought to stick to the straight reportage articles rather than the petition and the op-eds, but TCJ is real journalism, as opposed to some press-releasey, rah-rah glossies I could name...!
One other point, now that I think of it — POV can come out of even a well-footnoted section, if the citations are selective and the tone carries any sense of outrage. I certainly lean toward thinking Marvel behaved very, very badly, but we have to keep such feelings out of it and try to give both sides of the issue. Nobody said it was gonna be easy!
Let's do this thing....--Tenebrae (talk) 11:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I favour "Kirby vs. Marvel," but something like "Artwork disagreement," "Marvel disagreement," "Kirby's problems".. maybe something like that would be better? I also prefer to do a fair bit of writing and then pile it in at once, rather than build things up, but...!
I understand your point about potential POV (and outrage), and I think it a great idea to put forward all sides. Now, if only Marvel had a stance/side to put forward...! ntnon (talk) 18:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Reading over what I wrote (and the sources from which I wrote it), I wonder if the POV challenge doesn't come from the (fairly unequivocal) facts that, while this dispute between Kirby and Marvel was on-going, DC was pioneering the return of artwork. Clearly the other companies - including Marvel, who began to return work to other artists, just not Kirby - followed suit soon thereafter (partially shamed into it, but partly awakening to the moral and legal responsibility) returning work, but I wonder if some partisan fans might not view such a description as being Pro-DC and Anti-Marvel...? I'll see what I can do with trying to keep the facts, but excise the Marvel/DC angle. I'll see if I can put something together and then stick it up and link it from here to see what some people think about a revised iteration of this important piece of Kirby history. ntnon (talk) 01:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
It's an exciting project. This is a significant aspect of Kirby's life, and I applaud your first draft at [User:Ntnon/Kirby]]. I'll comment there, and urge other members of WPC to take a look and lend a hand! --Tenebrae (talk) 05:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Jack"

The Comics Journal Library: Jack Kirby prints a copy of a letter from Mr Kirby to his wife, written during WWII. He writes as "Jack Kirby," but signs it "Jackson". Should this be clarified, since it quite clearly seems to demonstrate that he changed his name not simply to "Jack Kirby," but to "Jackson Kirby" - and then used the short-form "Jack." Anyone contest that or object to it being included? ntnon (talk) 13:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe in a footnote, though I'd like to see other editors' take on it since "Jackson" in this context may have been jocular. Men of Tomorrow. p. 197, notes that he'd changed his name legally, so the definitive answer would be in the public record as to whether he'd changed it to Jack Kirby or Jackson Kirby. I imagine the upcoming Evanier bio will specify, so it might be simpler to just for that.
BTW, any movement on the Kirby v. Marvel section? I'd made some editorial comments at your suggestion. --Tenebrae (talk) 13:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. :o)
On the "Kirby vs. Marvel" front, your comments were very helpful, thanks. I counter-commented (broadly speaking, most of your concerns about neutral or unsubstantiated phrases - exposé, hostage, legal opinions - were used in the original articles I referred to) and mentioned it elsewhere for comment, and... that's all so far. I've been away for a few days, so I've not worked it any more yet, either. ntnon (talk) 19:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I like that emoticon. I actually don't think I've seen that particular one before. It's cute.
I've just come back, too, after Memorial Day, and made a suggestion on the work page. Let me know what you think, buddy.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)