Customer Reviews

Tales to Astonish: Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, and the American Comic Book Revolution

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

While Ronin Ro's book also provides a history of Stan Lee and Timely/Marvel Comics (among others), its main thrust and chief attribute is a biography of comics legend Jack "King" Kirby. This is certainly not the worst volume I've ever read, but I have to place myself in the camp of the (so far) two Amazon.com members who have posted negative reviews regarding this book.

From a personal taste standpoint, I really don't appreciate Ro's writing style. As other reviewers noted, it is overly simplistic at times in addition to being awkward. Another already mentioned critique is the lack of ANY illustrations or photos save for the Kirby cover drawing. Granted, there's a lot of Jack Kirby art reproduced within many other resources, but some key art reproductions would have been a nice touch. Even more appreciated would have been photographs of Kirby, his family, and other celebrities from the Golden/Silver Age of Comics that are mentioned in the chapters. Such photographs might not have been easily attainable, but a modicum of effort would have dug up some pictorial history.

I don't think I'm imagining this, but it appears that many of Ro's quotations by comics celibrities (including Kirby, Stan Lee and Joe Simon) are simply taken from already published interviews and biographies (e.g., "Excelsior! : The Amazing Life of Stan Lee" by Stan Lee and George Mair, and "The Comic Book Makers" by Joe Simon and Jim Simon). Not exactly the coolest thing to pay money for a book that regurgitates information I've already read.

What's even worse is that the book does contain some inaccuracies, and these could have been prevented by simple fact-checking and basic editing. Some of Ro's subjective observations also go against the generally accepted opinions of comics historians. For example, Ro refers to Timely/Marvel artist Bill Everett as an "old hack," the first time in over 40 years that I have ever heard of Everett described in that vein. Although he may have had a tremendous alcohol problem, Everett has generally been widely respected as a comics artist, and especially so as an inker in his later years. But since I'd hardly consider Ro an expert regarding comics art, I consider the source concerning that and other opinions he's promulgated.

There is information contained in the book of which I was (perhaps surprisingly) unaware. However, considering the other definite inaccuracies in the book, this information is certainly somewhat suspect. Considering the suggested list price of this volume, its overall packaging should have been improved with more material, greater accuracy and more revelations for comics historians. This book is worth a read (although not necessarily a buy), but more for casual or new comics fans.

This book is written like this. This is how Ronin Ro writes. "This guy reads like an eighth-grade book report," I quipped to my wife. She laughed. The whole damn book. Written exactly like this. Don't buy it.

As a 9 year old comic fanatic, I immediately latched on to the Fantastic Four and the progression of other Marvel heroes as they were invented -- and maintained my interest for several decades after. I still occasionally pick up a comic.

I found Ro's book to be pretty poorly written and edited, and I think there are many errors in it. For one thing, it is impossible to keep the chronology straight. Dozens of pages go by without mention of the year. There are flashbacks, but it is not clear when they end. Dozens of repetitions of the same phrases, and people who appear out of nowhere, indicate minimal editing.

Despite the fact that Kirby was King, Ro seems to spend most of the center of the book talking about how Kirby's work was criticized and rejected, how Kirby couldn't write, and when he did, it was unreadable.

How strange is it, though, that a book about the comics industry as it centered around Jack Kirby doesn't as much as have a single photo of the guy, or any examples of his work aside from the dust cover art?

Save your money and give this one a pass.

From some of the reviews I had high expectations of "Tales to Astonish" by Ronin Ro. Those hopes were also bolstered by Ro's writing credits on the back flap of the dust jacket. According to it, Ro has written for Rolling Stone, Harpers, and other high-end publications.

Essentially, the book is a biography of comic-book artist Jack Kirby with excursions into some of the other major characters in comic book production from the '30s to the '80s, with the focus on the Golden and Silver Age artists, writers, and editors. Stan Lee is one of major players Ro includes.

The writing is less than mundane. Ro backs into quotes that seem to make no sense since the person you think he is quoting turns out to be someone else entirely when the attribution takes place as the end of the quote. It's a most annoying writing quirk that takes place throughout the book.

There are also points within the book where Ro seems bored by the content and the writing devolves down to vapid reportage.

Ro exhibits stylizations in his construction that seem like those of an 8th grader, ending paraphrasing of people with "quiped" and "opined" that are wrong for the subject.

His writing also lacks a sense of context. Within the first 10 pages, he introduces, by name, more than 20 people, most of whom are unimportant to the sense of story. You'll need to keep a scorecard.

Ro also makes some serious mistakes in who people are and what they do. In one paragraph he writes at length about Kenner wanting to license comic book characters and for some out-of-context reason mistakenly writes "Mattel" in the middle of the piece. Either he or his editor should have caught that. There are similar errors throughout the book.

As for the content, Kirby is the heroic, but put-upon artist who was always getting the dirty end of the stick while Stan Lee is a shameless self-promoter who shrugs at the evils visited upon Kirby and other artists with a "what can *I* do" attitude.

Having read Lee's autobiography and Carmine Infantino's book, I suspect the only real villain in the history of comics has been Martin Goodman, the owner of Marvel and it's convoluted parent companies in the early days. Lee, as distant relation to Goodman, who rose to prominence, if not power in the publishing company, was pretty much a yes-man to Goodman.

Some of the legal ploys used by Marvel against Kirby after Lee had ascended to sainthood were filthy business maneuvers that the management at that time -- Jim Shooter -- should have been ashaimed to have been associated with, if we can trust Ro's reporting.

It seems Kirby's legacy is now more apparent in homage to his characters and work in the animated DC characters than at Marvel.

Save your money and get "Tales to Astonish" from the library.

"Tales to Astonish" by Ro provides an account of the creation of the modern comic book. Jack Kirby, Joe Simon, Stan Lee, John Romita, Steve Ditko and other great comicbook writers/artists all contributed to this unique American artform. Ro's book provides a pretty comprehensive look at the forces that drove the industry and drove the men that changed the industry to shape the comicbook world we have today.

Ro's book, though, lacks an important part of the story--illustrations of the art form itself and pictures of those who played key roles in this ongoing story. Kirby's cover art gives a sense of his work but it doesn't provide context; we don't really know (except by Ro's description)what the early comicbooks looked like prior to Kirby's arrival. Some examples to contrast the change in storytelling over time might have been helpful as well. There are enough of these "classic" comic books that must be in the public domain by now so that he could have included them as examples for readers not as familiar with the changes these giants of the industry created.

Ro's book comes across as pretty accurate although there are a few minor errors and omissions that crop up. Still, with as large a canvas as he's working with, he's done a very good job of summing up what made the comic book world tick from the 30's through today. Comic books were America's attempt at creating a cultural context, in a sense its own mythology and legends that so many older cultures have. Their enduring popularity has as much to do with the snapshot they provide of life or what they reflect from the real world as their value as escapist entertainment.

This book on Kirby, Lee, Ditko and others really is much broader than a cultural history; it focuses on many of the movers and shakers that changed the industry. While it's Kirby's story, it's also, in a sense, about the rise of the American culture that has come to dominate much of the world. Although it might not be called definitive, it does give a sense of Kirby's (and others as well)contribution to an emerging American art form that was once derided for corrupting the morals of society.

If one follows Ronin Ro (yeesh! what a pen name!)'s line of reasoning, on the seventh day Jack Kirby would have rested. The hero worship is sophomoric, as is the writing. A more critical enquiry would have saved this book, because despite the teenage adoration of the abysmal and often redundant narrative, it is a fun read and captures a lot of the zeal behind the "glory days" of Mighty Marvel. The critical eye that would have been helpful has been cited by another reviewer, who suggests the need for more balance. This account is as heavy handed as Kirby's figures. Stan Lee is depicted as a weaseley charlatan who appeared to shmooze his way to the top. Could it be that Kirby needed to be reigned in, as seen by his lack of success in solo ventures and frankly incomprehensible storylines (albeit beautiful futuristic panoramas). Kirby's writing does suck, as it lacks imagination. He was always more of an embellisher, but what an embellisher. Not to say that Kirby didn't get screwed as a comic book artist (they all were, except maybe Bob Kane who had moxie and foresight, not to mention marketing mindedness), but to be fair to Stan, I've seen many issues of Iron Man, Daredevil and other titles that share the storyline credit and even use the word "collaboration". Bottom line: a fun read for the die-hard fan, but you have to look the other way more than once to get through this 300 page fan letter.

I'm in no position to vouch for or judge the accuracy of the information presented in this book. Not only because I'm not personally knowledgeable, but because there are no annotations and very few attributions. The author acknowledges a list of sources, but there is no way to know which facts came from what sources. Various people are quoted now and then, but never with context or attribution; you never know whether the quote came from a new interview or from some other author's work.

That's just the beginning of the shoddy nature of the book. The information is not organized at all; it's just a straight-ahead narrative, roughly chronological. I say "roughly" because very few actual dates are given, and often the temporal relationships between various events are very unclear.

There is no index. No table of contents. Chapters are simply numbered. If you ever want to refer to anything in this book, you will have to search for it line by line.

The writing is pedestrian, verging on amateurish. Convoluted sentences, odd word choices, and an apparent unfamiliarity with the use of the pronoun all contribute to a general lack of clarity. The tone is monotonous, and the author seems to lack much enthusiasm for the subject.

Worst, as has been mentioned by other reviewers, is that there are no images of any kind. No comics, no photographs, no documents, nothing.

As I said, I have no personal familiarity with the Lee/Kirby story. But I find it hard to trust information found in a book that appears to be the product of a lazy writer who was unable to focus on the topic well enough to clearly tell the tale.

Parts of this fascinating book take me back to the days of my youth. I'd take a couple of dollars and head to my local drugstore to pick up the new Marvel releases of Fantastic Four or Spider-Man. As you read the news from the Mighty Marvel Bullpen it would seem like life in the comics industry was just one big party. Apparently that was not the case. It's terribly depressing to read about Marvel's treatment of the incredible Jack Kirby. The man who helped create the FF and Spidey, Captain America, the Silver Surfer and many others was just another employee to the "suits." It's nice to know that he did get some recognition toward the end of his career (and, unfortunately his life), but the guy couldn't seem to get a break when it came to reaping the profits from his co-creations. I have to say, though, that I really enjoyed this book and would recommend it to anyone who ever bought a Lee/Kirby comic.

I thought it was very thorough and informative. There have been several Stan Lee bios (and an autobio) and "King" Kirby pretty much got short shrift in those. He is painted here as Stan Lee's "be-yatch" because his depression-era upbringing made him fear unemployment, so he took years of financial and professional abuse from Marvel. It is noteworthy though that Kirby had trouble writing coherent dialogue; he was an artist and a story plotter but could not write many decent stories. Oh...the reason there are no illustrations here is because they are copyrighted and the copyright owners chose not to contribute to a book that makes them look pretty bad.

And if you're not into comics, you won't care. What was Ronin Ro on?

Aside from glaring proofreading mistakes (on the same page, we are told that Kirby was stationed at an army base in 1945 and honorably discharged in 1943), this writer decides to take one of the most interesting and argued-about subjects in popular culture and present it as one continuous, here's-what-happened narrative, without ever citing his sources. No pictures, no index, nothing's ever sourced, corroborated or contested. Not only are conflicting versions of events never explored, but neither are the various other books and magazines Ro cribbed from ever cited. Hack-work, through and through.

If I sound angry, it's because this should have been great, at least as absorbing as Gerard Jones's excellent book, Men of Tomorrow. A good version of this book can be done, and I'd gladly shell out hardcover money for it. Instead, it's like standing in a comics store, listening to some fool blather on, thinking to yourself, "you don't know that. How can anybody know that? Who told you that? You made that up," and finally, "just ring me up and let me out of here."