Harvey comics had a long history of reprinting stories. According to Joe Simon, any comic that included previously published material was supposed to be labeled as such but that Harvey generally ignored that restriction. At the time comic book readers typically lasted on a few years before giving up comics. Use older material and it was unlikely that many would notice. However when the Comic Code arrived, Harvey Comics had a problem. There was nothing in the code against reprints, but the Code was stringent enough that older stories were unlikely to pass unless edited. I have previously provided an example of such editing (Rewrite!) although at the time I did not fully understand why it was done. I have not found a copy of it yet, I am sure the story that I had posted about, Gangster’s Girl, was originally published before the Comic Code.

The editing used to produce “Remember, I’m Your Girl” from “Gangster’s Girl” was relatively seamless. Despite the extensive editing involved, nothing obvious in the final story betrayed its reworked status. The handwriting was found on the margins of the original art looks like Joe Simon’s and so it likely Joe retrofitted “Remember, I’m Your Girl” for post-Comic Code publication. I have recently come across another example of editing done to reprint an older story for Comic Code approval. But in this case the final result was anything but seamless.

“I Went Too Far” from Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) was not that unusual for Harvey Comics. Harvey romances at that time were a little bit more risque then those produced Simon and Kirby for Prize Comics. By today’s standards they were still pretty tame stuff. Even then a youngster could see similar “adult” themes in the movies. When the Comic Code was introduced (the stamp started to appear on comics with cover dates about February 1955) what was suitable for a comic book reader underwent severe limitations. So when Harvey decided to reprint “I Went Too Far” changes had to be made. That changes had to be made is not at all surprising, but how they were made certainly was. The final results must have been the most poorly reworked story in the history of comics. If not I shudder to think what the worst one looked like.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) splash

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) splash

The problem faced by “I Went Too Far” under the Comic Code started with its title and theme. The whole suggestion underlying going too far was strictly taboo. Not that “I Went Too Far” truly went too far. There was nothing truly explicit presented but the protagonist Jennie was involved with men whose ulterior motives clearly extended beyond just aiding her career. Removing traces of the theme throughout the story would require significant editing, but the changing of “Gangster’s Girl” into “Remember, I’m Your Girl” showed it could be done. To start with a new title had to be used and “Broadway Lights” was a good beginning. However the caption that accompanied the title and the script in the speech balloons of the splash would never get Comic Code approval. Right away it can be seen why “Broadway Lights” would be such a disaster. Rather then come up with some new, more innocuous text, the editor simply discarded all the offending writings. That was bad enough but when combined a decision to keep the original color plates it would only highlight that something had been done. Areas could be removed from the color plates, but colors could not added. So the top of the splash page became emptied of all color.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) page 4, panels 4 and 5

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) page 4, panels 4 and 5

Just about any pre-Code romance story had art that needed to be changed in order to get approval. For instance any prominent display of the female figure, even when clothed, had to be adjusted. Normally this was done by judicious application of ink to shadow the offending art. This was also done in “Broadway Lights” and was the most successful of the editing changes done on that story. The Comic Code would never approve of Jennie showing her leg during an audition in “I Went Too Far”, so the leg was just shadowed in panel 4 above. Yes it left her in an inexplicable pose, but only the more observant reader would have noticed. Similar, relatively minor, additions of ink can be found throughout “Broadway Lights”.

But changes to the art were not all that needed to be done in panel 4 as the manager request for Jennie to show he leg had to be removed. Also the description of Mr. Tindal’s importance in panel 5 was obviously considered too explicit. These panels highlight another shortcoming of the editing done. It was bad enough that a shorter text was to be substituted for the manager’s speech in panel 4; no effort was made to center it in the balloon. The editing to the speech balloon in panel 5 required just the removal of previous text, but since no attempt was made to center the remaining speech the balloon looks ridiculously spacious.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) page 3, panels 1 and 2

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) page 3, panels 1 and 2

As bad as the examples were of poorly edited speech balloons that I provided above, take a gander at panel 2 from page 3. Could the editor have made it any clearer to the original readers that they were getting damaged goods? In panel one Jennie’s remark was completely eliminated but the color plates left behind a trace of the original balloon like some sort of ghost. The primary reason of all this editing was the need to remove any reference to the agent offering Jennie a check for a train ticket! The editor felt that it would be okay under the Comic Code to offer a business card but not any money! Unfortunately in all likelihood the editor was probably right. Note also the editor felt that agent’s running his fingers through Jennie’s hair was also objectionable and so his fingers get the shadow inking treatment.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) page 6, panels 1 and 2

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) page 6, panels 1 and 2

Most of the art changes made were done with covering over areas with black. One exception was the first panel of the last page. The original version showed Jennie’s man, Roy Tindal, packing a suitcase. This was probably the most explicit indication of the extent of the relationship between Jennnie and Roy. It was probably too subtle for most of the story’s readers to understand, but not subtle enough for the Comic Code. The suitcase was redrawn as a set of drawers or a filing cabinet. It is hard to be sure which, but that was enough. Since the color plates were not altered, this art modification left an inexplicable red patch on the side of the bureau.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) page 4, panels 1 to 3

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) page 4, panels 1 to 3

In order to remove the “went too far” theme anything remotely suggesting the trading of sexual favors by Jennie in order to advance her career had to be eliminated. Actually there was little to suggest that in the original “I Went Too Far” but there were two stolen kisses. Jennie’s reaction to the first showed it clearly was unwelcome but that did not matter it still had to go. A little shadow to a kiss scene would not hide the kiss, so more drastic measures had to be done. The logical approach would have been to have some artist provide a new panel, but obviously little in the way of artist’s fees were going to be added to the costs of updating “Broadway Lights” to the Comic Code. Instead the editor toke a copy of the line art from panel 2 enlarged it slightly and used it to replace the kiss in the first panel. Naturally the color for panel 1 was no longer appropriate so all color was removed. The results are glaringly unnatural.

Hi-School Romance #19 (February 1953) page 5, panels 3 to 5

Hi-School Romance #43 (September 1955) page 5, panel 3 to 4

While inking in a little shadow would not hide a kiss, inking in a lot would. Completely filling in the panel was the editor’s solution for the other stolen kiss. This drastic solution for modifying art was used in another panel as well. I do not know what I find most egregious; duplicating art or completely removing it.

I have by no means pointed out all the changes made to this story in order to get it approved by the Comic Code Authority. Every single page had multiple examples of glaring obvious changes of very heavy handed editing. I am sure even the most unsophisticated original comic book owner must have known that they were reading reworked material. That reader must have been confused by the ending because while Jennie’s former small town boyfriend comes to the rescue, the scenes where he punches out Roy Tindle and the one where the cops lead Tindle away have been inked out. While in the original ending Jennie’s attempt to renew her relationship with her rescuer fails as he reveals he is to be married the next day, for the rework version the relationship is repaired. Frankly the “I Went Too Far” version really did not go too far. Nothing was explicit or beyond what might been seen in the movies of that day. None of Jennie’s actions were at all glamorized. The story was a true morality tale with Jennie’s ill made choices resulting in her loosing everything she previously had while gaining her preciously little. The Comic Code “Broadway Lights” version completely looses the moral message because despite some of her errors Jennie looses nothing of significance.

Ironically the Simon & Kirby studio regular, Bill Draut, was the artist for both the more kindly editing of “Gangster’s Girl” to “Remember, I’m Your Girl” and well as the horrendous job of transforming “I Went Too Far” into “Broadway Lights”. In neither case would the reprinting of the stories have been of any concern of Draut as he almost certainly did not get any reprint fees. Joe Simon once remarked to me that Harvey had used the left over material from Stuntman and Boy Explorers without any permission from Simon and Kirby. As Joe put it, in the comic book business even a friend would take advantage you.

Kid Colt Outlaw #86 (September 1959) “Meeting at Midnight”, art by Jack Kirby

“Meeting at Midnight” is the last Kirby Black Rider story to be published, and the last one that I have occasion to post about as well. The job number (M-556) indicates that the story was likely to have been done prior to the Atlas Implosion. The existence of two other Kirby Black Rider stories (”Trouble in Leadville” and “The Raiders Strike“) that also have ‘M’ job numbers suggest that all were originally intended for an unpublished Black Rider Rides Again #2, a casualty of the Implosion.

The story opens with the Black Rider arriving in town as shots are fired. He finds the shooter but looses him in the pursuit. Changing back to his identity as the town doctor he treats a man who claims to have been wounded while cleaning his gun. Suspicious, Doc reverts back to the Black Rider and observes his patient providing money to another; the wounded man is being blackmailed. The two men arrange for another meeting the next night. Back in his public identity, the Doc slips his patient a sedative and goes as the Black Rider to the appointment with the blackmailer. A gun fight ensues and, while trying to escape, the blackmailer falls to his death.

The plots of this and the other Black Rider stories are so repetitive that this feature is not one I care for very much. That repetition is so unlike Jack’s writing style that I seriously doubt whether he made any substantial contribution to the plotting or the writing. One of the reasons for my interest in Kirby’s pre-Implosion art for Atlas is the amount of control Jack seemed to have on some of that work. Unfortunately for “Meeting at Midnight” not only was Jack not the writer, he was not the inker either. I personally cannot say who the inked this story, Atlas inkers are a subject I know next to nothing about. The Jack Kirby Checklist credits Bill Everett as the inker, while Atlas Tales and the GCD attribute it to George Klein.

The drawing of all the Kirby Black Rider stories, excepting “Meeting at Midnight”, is very stylized with elongated figures or limbs. A similar style can be found in another western that Jack both penciled and inked “No Man Can Outdraw Him” (posted on here and here). The stories from Black Rider Rides Again #1 and “No Man Can Outdraw Him” were inked by Kirby in a manner that I think works quite well with the stylized drawing giving the final art an expressionistic look. The inker(s) of “The Raiders Strike” and “Trouble in Leadville” adopted a different, more intricate, inking but otherwise remaining faithful to Kirby’s pencils. I find that this results in figures that look freakish. The figures in “Meeting at Midnight” do not look so stylized and I think this was the result of the inker adjusting Kirby’s pencils. As I said I am no scholar of Atlas comics, but I will hazard an observation that the art for “Meeting at Midnight” looks closer to Kirby’s later Atlas/Marvel westerns. Perhaps the inking was not done at the time of the Implosion but only when it was decided that this story would be published in the Kid Colt Outlaw title.

Alarming Tales #3 (January 1958) restored art, by Joe Simon

A recurring theme in my posts is how well Joe Simon could mimic Jack Kirby. This has resulted in a number of pieces that Joe did becoming attributed to Jack. Do not get me wrong, the overwhelming number of the items in the Jack Kirby Checklist are correctly attributed. Still there are a small number of entrees that are wrong and it is important to try to correct those mistakes. I would like to say that my study of Joe Simon’s art has enabled me to spot all the attribution errors that others have made. I would like to say that but it would not be completely true. A case in point is the cover for Alarming Tales #3. I provide an image of the restored line art to this cover above, a color version can be seen in a previous post.

In the past I have followed the Jack Kirby Checklist in saying Kirby did this cover. Not everyone agreed, for one sharp eyed Nick Caputo demurred. I was not completely satisfied with the Kirby attribution because I knew of the existence of another version of the cover art. It seemed to me that a comparison of the two would probably resolve the credit issue. As I hope to show in this post, that has turned out to be the case.
Unused original art for Alarming Tales #3, by Jack Kirby.

I provide an image of the unused version above. A note of caution when comparing the two versions. The unused one is original art and therefore has not been subjected to the blurring and loss of details that are the results of the printing process, all of which the published version has been subjected to. Also the title on the original art is a recent addition. The presence of penciled text indicates the decision to come up with new cover art was made before title stats would have been applied to the original.The derivation of the final cover from the unpublished version is obvious, both have the same cast of characters in about the same positions. The greatest difference is the backgrounds. Not only has the background been completely changed, it has been pushed much further back in the released cover. A closer examination reveals that the people are not identical. The size of the old man has been increased while the relative size of the boy and, even more so, the men in the boat has been reduced. The old man’s head has been enlarged and the position of his left arm has been shifted. The details of all figures have been changed. Curiously the boy’s pants have been given a stripe like those worn by the USPS mail carriers. My original suspicion that reworked stats of the first cover were used to construct the final state was incorrect.I think most readers will agree with me that the original art is more beautiful then the final cover. So why spend the time and effort to replace it? The answer to this riddle is that the purpose of a comic book cover is to entice a viewer to purchase it. To do so it must stand out from the rest of the comics on the rack. The problem with the original version is that the old man is overwhelmed by the background. By simplifying and pushing the other elements back, the old man and his feat of walking on water becomes more obvious and dramatic. It is a question of design taking priority over artistry.

Close-up of the old man by Jack Kirby and the Joe Simon rendition.

Because the compositions of the two versions are so similar, we must look at the details in order to arrive at the correct attributions. Although not a standard part of Kirby’s repertoire, the old man of the first state seems to be not only his pencils but his inking as well. There are subtleties that his copyist is unable or unwilling to capture. Some of the alterations do seem on purpose, in the final state the old man has been made older and more frail. In doing so the published version has lost the quiet dignity and resolve that the original old man possessed.

Close-up of the young boy by Jack Kirby and the Joe Simon version

Personally I do not find much in the final state of the old man to suggest who was responsible. For an answer to that question I turn to a close-up of the young boy. Once again the original version seems to have Kirby’s touch all over it. Some of Jack’s style has been preserved in the published interpretation but purposeful alterations have been made as well. Frankly in Kirby’s hands the boy has been given a somewhat dim witted response to his predicament. The copyist on the other hand has widen the boys eyes, raised his eyebrows and furrowed his forehead. All this gives the boy a more intelligent and surprised reaction to being lead by the old man over water. It is the boy’s eyebrows that convince me that the copyist is Joe Simon. Similar eyebrows crop up often in Joe’s work going back as far as the cover for Champ #19 (June 1942) .

The men in the boat are typical Kirby creations. Unfortunately it is hard to compare the two versions because in the published one they have been reduced in size and their finer features lost by the reproduction process.

I mentioned above that I believe Jack Kirby inked his own pencils for the unused Alarming Tales #1 cover. That is not surprising because AT #1 is a comic where Jack did most of the work, including the inking. When I previously discussed the inking in AT #1 I found some of it similar to the standard Studio style while others were closer to the Austere style. On a whole I felt the material was transitional between those two Kirby inking methods. The inking style exhibited on the unused cover is a bit of an anomaly. It is true that the bow of the boat exhibits what looks like typical picket fence brushwork (see the Inking Glossary). It should be noted that it is unusual for the rails of a picket fence inking to depict literal objects like it does here with the bow edges. A better example of typical Kirby brushwork can be found in the folds of the boy’s shirt. They exhibit the tendency to be flatter then the underlying form that was common for Kirby at this time. The form lines on the tree on the left side of the image also look like Jack’s. But other inking methods used are very unusual for Jack, in particular the form lines on the old man’s pants. I do not recall Kirby ever doing something like that before.

Also unusual about the inking is the abundant use of white-out. Although Kirby was a bold inker his control was so great that he usually had to make few adjustments with white-out. Actually some of the white-out on the unused cover were not mistakes at all. Many of the trees in the background and some of the branches in the water were actually created by white-out. The old man’s hair was done by a combination of standard inking and the use of white-out. But mistakes were corrected, for instance the edges of the drooping fronds left of center on the top were worked over. Some earth lines in the background and a water stain on the upper part of the boat were removed. I am not sure what to make of Jack removing the bottom of the boy’s shoes. Perhaps it was done to indicate that he the lacked the old man’s confidence and so could not tread as lightly over the water surface? A most surprising correction is found in the depiction of the water, much of what now looks white has abundant use of white out. The white-out does not completely hide the underlying inking and judging from their faint markings the water surface was originally much darker.

Despite all the features that are not usually found in Jack Kirby’s inking, I find the combination of boldness and control so characteristic of his work that I am pretty confident to credit him with the inking. The published cover shows Joe Simon equally bold with his use of the brush but without the same nuance of control exhibited by Kirby. It is interesting that Joe made the water surface very dark, just the thing that Jack spent so much effort to remove from his own version.

I love comparing different artists’ versions of the same subject. It is not a question of trying to determine who the better artist is. What I find interesting are the different decisions each artist made and what the reasons for those decisions were.

Quick Trigger Western #16 (February 1957) “The Vengeance Of Growling Bear” page 2 pencils by Jack Kirby

A peace treaty with the Indians threatens the business of gun dealing. To prevent the unwanted peace, the dealers dress up as Indians and raid the community, leaving death and destruction in their path. The Indian leader, Growling Bear, uncovers the truth. His reputation is enough that when the gun dealers realize that he is on to them, their plot unravels before war is resumed.

I must confess I am a bit underwhelmed by this story. Jack’s pencils are good in comparison to other Atlas artists, but then again I have a low opinion of much of the art done at the time for Atlas. In comparison to the rest of Kirby’s oeuvre, this story art is one of his lesser efforts. Nothing particularly wrong, just not as exciting as most of what Kirby did. The writing does not help either. Again it is not that the writing is bad, just that not very exciting either.

One of the reasons that I find Jack’s pre-Implosion work for Atlas so fascinating is the level of control that he appeared to have. Even so Jack did not seem to consistently have full creative leeway. That seems to have been the case here. Unlike many pre-Implosion pieces, the inking was not by Jack, but it may have been inked under his direction. Most of the brushwork is fine and lacking Kirby’s style. But look at the second panel of page 2 (image above), the horse’s leg on our far right has a bold use of a row of dashes. This technique does not occur elsewhere in the story but is part of Kirby’s brush vocabulary (see the similar drop string in the inking glossary). It would appear that Kirby reviewed and touched up the primary inker’s efforts. The writing does not seem to be Jack’s either. The plot, where white men masquerade as Indians, was used previously by Simon and Kirby. So Kirby may have had a hand in the plotting. Then again I remember that plot from some old movies (although I cannot recall which ones) so perhaps it was just a common theme. In any case general plots are easily picked up by other writers and therefore are a poor use in determining attributions.

Now with “The Vengeance Of Growling Bear” I have had a chance to review all Kirby’s work that Atlas published before the Implosion. This consists of 20 stories. Jack did the inking for 16 of them, an impressive proportion. Because credits were not provided, determining the writer is a particular risky business. None the less the writing for 15 of the stories suggest to me that Kirby may have been involved. This amount of creative control by Kirby is in stark contrast to post-Implosion. I know some disagree with me, but I find no examples of post-Implosion writing by Kirby, that is until late in his career. As far as I know, Kirby did not do any inking after the Implosion either until the cover for Fantasy Masterpieces #4 in 1966. Nick Caputo has suggested that Kirby inked some other later covers, but I have not seen this evidence yet.

Battleground #14 (November 1956)
     ”Mine Field” Kirby inks
Astonishing #56 (December 1956)
     ”Afraid to Dream” Kirby inks and writing
Strange Tales of the Unusual #7 (December 1956)
     ”Poker Face” Kirby inks
Yellow Claw #2 (December 1956)
     ”Concentratet On Chaos” Kirby inks and writing
     ”The Mystery Of Cabin 361″ Kirby inks and writing
     ”The Yellow Claw” Kirby inks and writing
     ”Temu-jai, The Golden Goliath” Kirby inks and writing
Quick Trigger Western #16 (February 1957)
     ”The Vengeance of Growling Bear” Kirby inks and writing
Yellow Claw #3 (February 1957)
     ”The Microscopic Army” Kirby inks and writing
     ”UFO, The Lighting Man” Kirby inks and writing
     ”The Yellow Claw Captured” Kirby inks and writing
     ”Sleeping City” Kirby inks and writing
Yellow Claw #4 (April 1957)
     ”The Living Shadows” Kirby writing
     ”The Screemies” Kirby writing
     ”Five Million Sleepwalkers” Kirby writing
     ”The Yellow Claw and the Thought Master” Kirby writing
Black Rider Rides Again #1 (September 1957)
     ”Legend Of The Black Rider” Kirby inks
     ”Duel At Dawn” Kirby inks
     ”Treachery At Hangman’s Bridge” Kirby inks
Two-Gun Western #12 (September 1957)
     ”No Man Can Outdraw Him” Kirby inks and writing

Job numbers indicate that there are three works that may have actually been done before the Implosion but not published until afterwards. These appear to have intended for the never released Black Rider Rides Again #2. I have not seen two of them, but the one I have seen was was not inked by Jack, and I doubt if he wrote it either.

Gunsmoke Western #47 (July 1958)
     ”Trouble In Leadville”
Gunsmoke Western #51 (March 1959)
     ”The Raiders Strike”
Kid Colt Outlaw #86 (September 1959)
     ”Meeting At Midnight”

Battleground #14 (November, 1956) “Mine Field” page 2 pencils and inks by Jack Kirby

Jack Kirby turned to freelancing when the Simon and Kirby studio failed. Battleground #14 (November 1956) was the first of his freelance jobs to be published. It also marked Kirby’s return to a company that he left almost 15 years before. Jack probably still remembered Goodman’s unfulfilled promise of royalties for Captain America, but Kirby had a family to support and so had to swallow his pride. His reentry job was a short five page war story called “Mine Field”. The job should have been easy for Jack, only a couple of years before Kirby drew, wrote and edited for Foxhole, a war comic for Simon and Kirby’s own publishing company called Mainline. One story for that title, “Hot Box”, was only two pages long and Jack still managed to make it a masterpiece.

“Mine Field” is a simple tale. A somewhat bumbler of a soldier gets separated from his outfit during a night patrol. He becomes lost in the dark and by daybreak finds himself close to the enemy’s position. From his observations he realizes the Germans plans to lure the Americans into a mine field. Upon dark the soldier rearranges the German marker and finds the way back with the outfit. The table has turned and the enemy falls into their own trap. It is a good story, just not one that plays on what would normally be considered Kirby’s strengths. Jack likes his war action up close and personal and that is not what this story is about, although Jack does manage to sneak in some typical Kirby action in the last panel. But it is because the story does not have a lot of action that it provides a showcase for how good an artist Kirby was. I provide an example page above. Note that there really is not a lot happening on this page. We find the hapless soldier fall into a shell hole and his unsuccessful attempt to find his comrades. Yet by altering the view point and careful use of the landscape Jack manages to make it all interesting. Kirby is able to do this throughout the story. This sort of low action story may not have been the best vehicle for Jack, but he still managed to make it look easy.

Jack’s pencils are always at their best when inked by his greatest inker, Kirby himself. For this story Jack’s inked in a manner which I referred to as the S&K Studio style. That style is categorized by bold brushwork and some unusual techniques. In the image I provide above, note the use of the picket fence pattern (see inking glossary) in the second and fifth panels. By itself there is nothing unusual about Jack’s inking in the Studio style, he had often used it in the past. What is surprising is that this style appeared in a work at this late date. At this time Jack had adopted a similar style but with a finer brush for Prize romance covers or a simpler style without techniques like the picket fence brushing for romance story art. However the inking in “Mine Field” does show one important trait agreeing with both the Fine Studio and Austere styles. Spotting has been downplayed giving the entire art a lighter look. Black areas tend to be limited coverage but when used are done by filling the area with ink. The inking for this story was not as masterful as Jack would shortly do for Atlas in Yellow Claw #2 and #3. However in its own understated way it is a beautiful job without any signs of rushing and loss of control found in “Afraid To Dream” that Kirby also did in the next month.

I have already remarked above how the plot for “Mine Field” was not typical for Kirby. I also find that the actual text writing does not have Kirby’s “voice”. Jack’s writing usually includes exclamations that are a little over the top. I find none of that quality in the script for “Mine Field”. Therefore I do not believe that Jack had much to do with the writing for this story and that he was working from a script supplied by Atlas. This sets this story apart from most pre-Implosion Atlas work which either Kirby seemed to have a lot of control over the writing (Yellow Claw, “Afraid to Dream”, “No Man Can Outdraw Him” and “Pokerface”) or at least some input to the plot (Black Rider Rides Again).

Battleground #14 (November, 1956) “Beyond the Call of Duty” art by Joe Maneely

In my posts for this blog I generally avoid comparing other artists to Jack Kirby. It really is not fair and can result in overlooking the special talents these comic book artists possessed. Effectively Atlas made just such a comparison between Jack Kirby and Joe Maneely and judged Maneely as the better artist. Presumably this judgment was made by Stan Lee and it continued as long as Joe Maneely was alive. It was Joe that was the most frequent Atlas cover artist while Jack did not even get to do the covers for comic books titles where he did all the interior story art. In Battleground #14 Joe got the most important first story while Jack’s contribution was delegated towards the back. But this does not seem to reflect the actual merits of the two stories. Maneely is working from a script with much more action then what Kirby had. For a war title this should almost insure a more interesting story, yet Kirby’s piece is a much better read. Maneely just does not seem to know how to make the action exciting. Under Joe’s hands all of the artwork seems dry and unmoving. Even today there are those who say Joe Maneely was a great artist. I just do not understand exactly what they feel Maneely did so well.