Joe Simon has a large collection of original art, proofs and published work. Among it are a number of unusual pieces of work. Perhaps the most unusual, and certainly for me the most unexpected, is a screen play called “Fish In A Barrel”. When I asked Joe about it he said it was done about 1955. He added that it had already been included in his book. I was a bit puzzled because I did not remember any screen play in the book. Well I looked at a copy of “The Comic Book Makers” and with his help found what he was talking about. It was a write up on the Simon and Kirby legal conflict with Feature Publications. Now the book version is a historical account, not a screen play. I will discuss the relationship between the play and the book later.

“Fish In A Barrel” is a script for a three act screen play. It is 77 single sided pages long with the text in a column on the left half of the page. I presume the right hand side of the page was left empty to allow for hand writing of notes and alterations. I call this a screen play because camera directions are often provided. Although a screen play it was meant to be performed in front of spectators since at one point there is a note about spontaneous laughter from the audience. There are three sets all of which are in offices or in the hallway entrance to the offices.

It has a small casts of characters, six main ones. There is the comic book publisher, powerful and used to getting his way. The publisher’s assistant, eager to please his boss. The publisher’s lawyer, trying to keep conflicts to a minimum while still negotiating an agreement favorable for his client. On the other side are the comic book artist, trying to regain his financial security. The artist’s accountant, shrewd and manipulating. The artist’s lawyer, at turns succumbing to the allure provided by the publisher’s big time lawyer, and at other times following the accountant’s directions. The artist’s wife, afraid for her family’s future, plays a smaller part. A receptionist also makes a short appearance.

The plot concerns an out of court negotiation attempting to resolve questions about royalty fees. The artist had formerly worked for the publisher for whom he had created the popular comic, “Bulls-eye, the Sharpshooter”. While working for the publisher the artist received royalties but these stopped when he left to start his own publishing company. the new company has failed and now he was attempting to get the unpaid royalty payments, and if possible to get his old job back. The dominant force on the one side is of course the publisher. The equivalent power on the other side is not the artist, but the accountant.

Now this all my sound rather dry but actually it is a fascinating story. Each character is given their own personality and part to play in the story’s development. Well maybe the part provided by the receptionist is not that important, but although the wife plays a small part it is a significant one nonetheless. The plot is not all so straight forward either, as the accountant uses a rather interesting ploy. I am really not that knowledgeable about drama, particularly when just the script is available. But it does seem to me that this really was well done and thoroughly enjoyable.

I had no idea what to expect when I started to read “Fish In A Barrel”. As my reading progressed I came to realize that it seemed written for a type of television programming that no longer exists. When I was very young there were TV shows that provided what were essentially plays filmed live for TV with but also before a small audience. Although I was too young to fully appreciate them, these shows were truly exceptional. There was some writing on the first page of the script. I did not make it out at first, but when I finished reading the play I realized that what it said: Alcoa, Kraft, Studio One. There were the names of the better of the shows I am talking about.

As I said in the beginning, “The Comic Book Makers” included a description about a legal disagreement between Simon and Kirby and Feature Publications. The chapter was actually entitled “Fish In A Barrel”. It is easy to see the parallelisms between the play and the actual events described in the book.

1. A conflict about fees owed.
2. The artist(s) had started their own publishing company which in the end had failed.
3. A comic named Bulls-eye about a sharpshooter.
4. A similar cast of characters (with the exception that the real Simon and Kirby are replaced by a single artist in the screen play). There is a publisher, business manager, a lawyer for each side, an accountant and the artist(s).
5. The accountant played a leading role in reaching a settlement.

However there are differences between the book versions of events and the screen play.

1. Simon and Kirby had not stopped working for the Features (the publisher) while they started and ran Mainline, their own publishing company.
2. In the book the conflict started about reusing of art by Simon and Kirby and concluded with the revenues that Features received that had not been shared with Simon and Kirby.
3. Simon and Kirby’s accountant discovered the money owed by close examination of Feature’s books. In the play the accountant employed a trick to disclose the publisher’s improper dealings.
4. The real life publisher could not pay the complete money owed to Simon and Kirby. In the play the publisher had no problem absorbing a substantial payment.

Therefore although the play was inspired by real events, it was still fiction. Wherever the screen play deviates from actual history it did so to make a better story.

Marvel has killed off Captain America. So what is this the third time Cap has died in the Marvel Universe? For me the death is not as surprising as how well Marvel has spinned it this time. To be honest when I first heard about this my reaction was they can’t be serious. Did Marvel really think that killing off a character would increase sales? It has been done before, remember the death of Superman? Surely no one will care this time, by now everyone should know that no one stays dead in comic books?

But boy was I wrong. Newspaper articles and television interviews. The buzz if all over the internet. The comic itself sold out within hours of hitting the shelf. There someone selling the two variant covers for $90 on eBay. Marvel was prepared for that because they will be shipping more copies of the first printing next week. Hey Marvel does not care how much a comic’s resale value is. They care about how many comics they can sell. If that kills the value of the comic to collectors, too bad.

I have heard all sorts of theories about this. One of which is Marvel killed off Cap so they would not have to share royalties with Joe Simon. Now I cannot say what arrangement Joe reached with Marvel over the copyrights. Nondisclosure was part of the settlement. But I can say that I have been talking to Joe during all of this. Not once has Joe expressed any annoyance about what Marvel has done. Quite the contrary Joe seems to be having a blast. He is been giving interviews to all sorts of newspapers and even TV.

What about any concerns Joe might have about the character he helped create with Jack Kirby? Well just because the newspapers and TV has bought Marvel’s spin, that does not mean Joe has. He knows this is not the true end of Captain America. Once during another confrontation about Captain America copyrights, Marvel threatened to kill him off. Joe’s response was to make a painting based on the Leonardo’s Last Supper with Cap playing the leading role.

Many have observed, as I did above, that Cap has died before. They suggest Captain America will return real soon. I think they have missed the point. Marvel did not set up all this spin just to throw it away. That was the mistake they made the last two times. No I suggest that Marvel will play this out for some time to come. We will not be seeing the return of Steve Rogers anytime soon. But Steve was not the only person to wear the Captain America uniform in the past. I see no reason why that could not happen again. Many have suggested that the Punisher will take on that role. At the end of the Civil War he was shown picking up Cap’s mask. I suggest this was a red herring. I doubt Marvel would sacrifice any of the characters that play a significant part in the Marvel Universe. Nor are they going to take some minor hero to be Cap. It must be someone with a special connection with Captain America. I can think of only one person who fits that bill. If you have been reading Captain America lately you know who I mean.

Panel from Usagi Yojimbo #100

I have found that many Kirby fans do not read current comic books. It is an attitude that I frankly neither understand nor share. Granted the days are long gone when you could pick up any Marvel comic and be pretty sure of a good read. When I was young my brother and I would buy Marvel’s entire superhero line and Sgt. Fury. Today I suspect anyone on a allowance would not be able to afford to do the same thing. Heck even though adult readers might be able to afford to buy the entire Marvel line would they really want to?

Nonetheless there are still good comics being made (some of them even by Marvel). Often you have to go out of the standard superhero genre. One of my favorites is Usagi Yojimbo written and drawn by Stan Sakai. One might think a comic about a samurai rabbit is as far from Kirby as one could get. One might think that but one would be wrong. Every so often Stan does a pose that reminds me of Jack. I think Jack would approve. I have read comments by Jack that artist can learn things from his work but that they should express them in their own style.

Recently the Usagi Yojimbo #100 issue came out. Not a bad run for an artist especially when you consider that this is the hundredth Dark Horse issue. Usagi had a pretty good history before Dark Horse, they say totally it amounts to 160 issues. Stan and Dark Horse decided to celebrate the event anyway and put together a special celebration. This particular issue is the type of comic only a fan would enjoy, but if you are a fan it is a lot of fun. I particularly got a kick out of a panel that I show at the start of this post. Was this a sort of composite portrait of the standard Kirby fan drawn as a rabbit? I purposely left out the credits with the image. This panel is from a few pages drawn by Scott Shaw! and written by Mark Evanier. Yes that Evanier, former Kirby assistant and renown comic scholar. Stan Sakai (lettering) and Mark Evanier (writing) have a long history together with Sergio Aragones (art) working on a comic called Groo. I guess comics must be a small world since you do not need six degrees to connect Stan Sakai to Jack Kirby. You just need Mark Evanier.

Jack Kirby from “Comic Book Creators, Jack Kirby” by Sue Hamilton

I finally got my copy of Sue Hamilton’s “Comic Book Creators, Jack Kirby”. The delay was my fault I had both taken my time in ordering it and tied the order with another book that had not been released yet. Anyway I previously posted on this book. It was written for young adults but I knew it had some nice photos in it so I wanted a copy. I have not read it yet but I did notice one inaccuracy. This comes after a description of Jack meeting Joe at Fox Comics and asking Joe for freelance work to supplement his income from Fox:

Together Jacob and Joe rented a one-room office. They began working nights and weekends on such comics as The Blue Beetle”.

Well both Jack and Joe did work on the Blue Beetle but not at the freelance office. The Blue Beetle belonged to Fox Comics. At Fox Jack was drawing the syndication strip while Joe was editor and cover artist for the comic book version. Yes it is a small detail but it shows that the book was not written by someone not familiar with comic book history.

Still the book has some very nice photographs of a younger Jack and actually that was why I bought it. While looking through them I stopped at the one I show above and had to laugh. The caption was:

Jack Kirby proofing comic book covers in his office in 1949.

The reason I found this funny was that recently I had scan a photograph of Joe Simon at a desk (see below). Joe commented that they never had their own office and he had used Teddy Epstein’s office for the photo. Teddy was one of the owners of Prize Comics. So without a doubt Jack had done the same thing. I cannot blame Hamilton for this small mistake. After all I would have made the same error had not Joe not made his comment. Because seeing is believing we mistakenly judge photographs as objective evidence. As shown by these photos, and especially today with Photoshop, care most always be taken when using a photograph.

The two photographs were taken at either different locations or different times. The two photos have dissimilar desk arrangements and the items being examined are not the same. Jack is looking at some cover proofs. I cannot made out two of them but ones I can read are Young Love and Young Romance. The YL one is issue #5 (October 1949). The YR is a bit of a mystery as I have not been able to identify the issue. I wonder if it ever actually got published? Joe is looking at Headline, Young Romance and Justice Traps the Guilty comic books. Two of these I cannot make out but the YR is issue #2 (November 1947).

Joe Simon

The National Crumb (August 1975)

Let me introduce my post with something that the Simons have released:

SIMON SEZ: ROBERT STOLE MY CRUMB

R. Crumb’s autobiography, authored by Mr. Crumb and Peter Poplaski, includes the unauthorized use of the cover of a Simon Studio publication from 1975 entitled The National Crumb.

“The National Crumb had nothing to do with R. Crumb,” Joe Simon states.”The publication was produced by my studio and edited by Jim Simon. The team of cover and design artists is prominently displayed on the contents page of The National Crumb but conveniently ignored more than 30 years later and attributed to Mr. Crumb.”

“The cover art of The National Crumb is not by Mr. Crumb and it has no resemblance to Mr. Crumb’s work,” Simon adds. “I do not understand why he is taking credit for it.”

The full page reproduction of The National Crumb in Mr. Crumb’s biography offers no authorship notice, implying it is the work of R. Crumb. The work in also listed in Mr. Crumb’s art index as Crumb’s creation, clearly but falsely indicating the art is by R. Crumb.

Joe Simon–co-creator of the iconic superhero Captain America–and head of the Joe Simon Studio has produced many properties over his long career, ranging from comic books to advertising to political campaign materials to covers for publications such as The New York Times Sunday magazines to the United States Olympics. Satire/parody properties from the Joe Simon Studio include the long-running SICK MAGAZINE, SOMETHING ELSE MAGAZINE, the afore-mentioned THE NATIONAL CRUMB, TEEN-MAN, THE CHRONICLES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINK, HECTOR PROTECTOR, and various paperbacks, annuals, and licensing products going back more than 65 years.

Simon properties have been licensed by major entertainment companies, including Time-Warner/DC Comics, DreamWorks, Batfilms, Marvel Entertainment, Archie Comics, Harvey Famous Worldwide, Hearst Entertainment, and HarperCollins Publishers.

“We are required to constantly keep watch over plagiarism and unauthorized use of our intellectual properties,” notes Jim Simon, who also oversees licensing.

The Simons have retained the law firm of Tedd Kessler, P.C., to protect their rights. The Simons comment that it would be a sad event if two members of The Comic Book Hall of Fame, Joe Simon and R. Crumb, who currently share space in a national museum exhibit, face each other in a court of law.

I have got to say I find this whole thing absolutely bizarre. R. Crumb is a significant and talented artist and I can understand someone trying to copy his style. But the cover to The National Crumb is nothing like that style. Normally when writing about misattributions I try to analyze the work itself, or at least provide examples to support my position. But in this case it just seems so unnecessary.

There is a new book out called “The Creation of Captain America” by Thomas Forget. This book is intended for young adults. Hard covered (I think they call it library bound), relatively thin (48 pages including glossary, bibliography and index) with excellent printing. It outlines the creation of Captain America by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby. The cover for Captain America Comics #1 is illustrated but I have to admit I prefer my own restoration. Joe Simon commented on the appearance of Cap #1 was “that cover sure got a lot of traction”. This book provides the history of the Captain America comics story lines from the early days until today. It combines this with some discussion of some social influence on Cap stories, such as the effect of the Vietnam War or Richard Nixon.

Joe Simon had not heard about this book so I brought him a copy. He did have some criticisms. For instance he did not like the use of colored background fields skewed at an angle with the page. He also objected to the use of the word “flopped” when the book talks about some of the early unsuccessful comic book creations. It was not the reporting of these failures that bother Joe, he just felt “flopped” was not a word that he would expect a writer to use. There was one paragraph that Joe particularly liked:

After working with Eisner and Iger, Kurtzberg next worked at Fox Features Syndicate, owned by Victor Fox. While Kurtzberg was working there, a man named Joe Simon came to fill the position of artist and editor. With Simon’s arrival, Captain America’s “parents” were finally joined together.

Joe also commented about the Kirby drawing on the cover feeling that it was a not a good idea to show the back of Cap’s shield. I do not think Joe was really being critical of Jack Kirby’s work. Every time I have heard Joe talk about Jack it was with great admiration of his enormous talent. But when it comes to things like covers Joe always seems to have his own view about how they should be designed. Joe did not dwell on these criticisms, instead he was rather pleased with the book and thought it was a good job.

There was one comment in the book that I asked Joe about. When comparing Joe’s background with Jack’s:

Simon, however, was raised in a middle-class environment.

I have seen similar remarks in other articles and books. Some have even said Joe had gone to college. So I asked Joe if he would describe his early family as middle-class? Joe said absolutely not, in fact during much of his early life their family did not have their own home, living with various relatives instead. Joe said his father (whose name was Harry) was a tailor who did freelanced and sometimes worked as a cutter in factories. His mother’s was a button hole maker by trade. Some considered his father as a troublemaker since he often helped in union organization. On one occasion Harry Simon and Harry’s brother started a factory that made jackets. It was short lived as the brother ran off with the money. Joe said that he never knew the full story but felt there was more to it because his uncle was back in a few months and there was no hard feelings between the two former partners. Once Joe had told me the story that he was a boy scout but his family was too poor to buy the uniform. Instead Harry Simon made one for his son. Joe never went to college, after high school Joe get a job at a newspaper to help support his family. There was one important difference between the Simon’s background compared to that of Kirby. Joe’s parents had immigrated from England and therefore had no problems adjusting to their new homeland’s language. Joe said that it was Jack Kirby that initiated this idea of Joe’s supposedly more affluent early history.

Let me take a momentary diversion to announce a stealth contest. I will not be repeating this announcement. I have a single copy of “The Creation of Captain America” signed by Joe Simon. Anyone interested can email me at hmendryk at yahoo dot com. You know the drill replace the at and dot with the appropriate symbols. In a week I will pick the winner at random.

This book was published by Rosen Publications and is costs $29.95. It is one of six titles for a series called “Action Heroes”. Here are all the titles and links to Amazon:
Captain America
The Fantastic Four
The Incredible Hulk
Iron Man
Spider-Man
X-Men

However the web page for Rosen Publications indicates that the Hulk and X-Men books have not been published yet. I have not seen the other titles but the art on the covers to Fantastic Four and the Hulk look like they were done by Jack Kirby. There is no doubt that the Cap book cover is Kirby art.

I find it interesting that these six titles all belong to Marvel. Also that this series is about comic book creations while ABDO Daughters published a similar series on comic book creators. Both series are for younger readers. I do not think this is a coincidence, I am sure Marvel somehow orchestrated this. I do not know about you but when I go to comic book stores or conventions I do not see many youngsters. Although the big money is in the superhero movies and merchandise they spawn, how long can you make those movies if you do not have a comic reading public? Marvel could have published these books themselves but their distribution would be the wrong places. A much better way to reach a young, and more importantly a new, audience is to use publishers that already specialize in that market.

I recieved a copy of “Comic Book Creators, Joe Simon” by Sue Hamilton. I mentioned this book in an earlier post. It is of six books on different comic book artists. The others are Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, John Buscema, John Romita and Joe Sinnott. I am told that these books are meant for “accelerated readers”. I believe this means that thy are expected to be young but advanced readers for their age (perhaps 10 to 12 years old).

This is a thin book, 32 pages including index and glossary. It outlines Joe’s career from its start until today. Much of this history is covered by “The Comic Book Makers” by Joe Simon and Jim Simon. Actually I am sure Joe’s book was the source of the biography presented by Sue Hamilton. So I do not think there is any historical information that adult reader would get from this book that they would not be found (with a good deal more) in “The Comic Book Makers”. There are a number of excellant photographs. Again most of these photos can be found in Joe’s book. But the printing for Hamilton’s book is really excellant and the resulting quality of the photos is much better then those in “The Comic Book Makers”. There are some that have not appeared in print before. My favorite is one of a 16 year old Joe Simon drawing a portrait.

I did get a chance to examine the other five volumes in this series. Their quality and content matches that of the Simon volume. Fans of the other artists might consider buying their volumes for the photographs alone. I intend to pick up the Jack Kirby and Stan Lee volumes.

Merrill Lynch advertisement from the Wall Street Journal

Above is an ad that appeared in the Wall Street Journal recently. From the left the Black Panther, Nick Fury, Ant Man, Captain America, Hawkeye and Dr. Strange. I have not kept tabs, but it seems to me that Marvel has been allowing their superheroes to appear in a lot of commercials and ads in the last couple of years. Again I cannot provide any statistics, but it seems that generally Captain America takes the prominent place in these ads. This is a little surprising since Spiderman should be more well know among the public due the success of the movies. I would think even someone like Wolverine would be better known to the public. Then again when I talk to non-comic people about Joe Simon I always mention him as one of Captain America’s creators. They always seem to know Cap. But perhaps it is not recognition that these ads are looking for. Perhaps it is trust and with Cap’s costume incorporating the American flag he probably represents trust more then any other superhero, including Superman. One other thing I have noticed is that although I see a lot of Cap in ads, I never see him alone. I wonder why that could be?