It seems Spider-Man’s co-creator is talking a bit about his role in the Spider-Man’s origin. Since 1999 he has been producing essays with art. One of the most popular was one that questioned how much he contributed to Spider-Man vs Stan Lee’s contribution. 

His most recent essay asks a few questions see the above image.

 In doing research for this post I thought I stumbled across a couple of panels of Ditko doing Spidey one more time. It’s from Rom # 61-64 where Spidey appears in a black suit. How cool would it be see to Ditko’s interpretation of the suit. It was later address in a letter column that the inker took liberties with the art and added Spidey after the fact. Which is sort of a slap in the face to Ditko if you ask me. Especially if he refuses to draw Spider-Man after all these years. 

 Steve Ditko is 85 years old. Do you think he’s trying to get a  few things off  his chest before he passes away? I don’t have the actual print essays, but it seems he’s just asking questions and he wants his to decide on his role on Spider-Man. What are your thoughts? 

10 Responses to “Ditko Discussion”

  1. #1 Enigma_2099 says:

    ” Steve Ditko is 85 years old. Do you think he’s trying to get a few things off his chest before he passes away?”

    Seems possible.

  2. #2 Blazeatron says:

    I’ve always respected Steve Ditko as an artist and I accept that he CO-CREATED Spider-Man with Stan Lee. I think Steve Ditko is very bitter over how he wasn’t involved in the Golden Age of Marvel for long and he’d never admit it. He made the choice to leave Marvel so I have no sympathy if he’s bitter over that. Stan Lee and Marvel have always accepted him as one of the creaters and made sure every new generation of fans know it.

  3. #3 Wheatcakes says:

    I think a lot of Ditko’s problems were brought on by himself. He sounds like a very difficult person to work with or even have a conversation with. After reading the book “Tales to Astonish” which documents the relationship between Kirby and Lee, it would totally make sense that Ditko at some point and on some level got frustrated with Marvel and blew them off and he’s just never gotten over it. I don’t know what else he expects Stan to do at this point, even though it is apparent to everyone that Stan did paint himself as the main driving force at Marvel, either intentionally or unintentionally.
    I don’t think that Lee was the one everyone should be angry with, it sounds like many times he was caught in the middle between Martin Goodman and the artists, and if you were in his position, who’s line would you tow?

  4. #4 moral_deficiency says:

    The way I see it out of all the people back then who got screwed Ditko got the least of it. He’s not Bill Finger. He made his choices and really he’s only upset because of how well things went eventually. His work is recognized, he gets credit for what he did. He just didn’t get everything because he left. It’s a shame but hindsight is 20/20. I’m not saying on some level he didn’t get screwed but on the long list of people that deserve SOMETHING for what they created or helped create Ditko’s got a long long long list of people he needs to wait behind first.

  5. #5 the_Jack-O-Lantern says:

    the truth of the matter is that Ditko gets way too much credit. Stan Lee goes well above the call of duty to provide credit for Ditko. His art sucked. Romita elevated Spider-Man to the icon he is today. I find it nauseating every time I see Ditko’s name along with Lee. Hoe about giving Romita more credit?

  6. #6 Blazeatron says:

    @ Wheatcake. I agree that I think Ditko was probably very difficult to work with. He had a very bitter view of the world. So much so that he wanted Peter Parker to be quite a harsh person, but Stan Lee wanted him to be upbeat with everyday problems. If Dtko had he why then we probably would’ve had the Peter Parker from “Back in Black” all the time.

  7. #7 Blazeatron says:

    @ Wheatcakes. I agree that I think Ditko was probably very difficult to work with. He had a very bitter view of the world. So much so that he wanted Peter Parker to be quite a harsh person, but Stan Lee wanted him to be upbeat with everyday problems. If Ditko had his why then we probably would’ve had the Peter Parker from “Back in Black” all the time.

    Sorry made a few spelling errors in my previous post so I wanted to correct them and post this again.

  8. #8 DocWyoming says:

    Steve Dikto’s problems are due to Steve Ditko. Ditko never put himself out there for his audience. It’s true that he doesn’t need to or have to do so, but if that’s his choice, he can’t turn around and complain that he doesn’t share the spotlight. Stan Lee is an outgoing person, a salesman… he puts himself out in front of the audience. He’s there to tell his story (or his side of the story.) It’s not Lee’s fault that Steve Ditko has a personality disorder that turned him into introverted, obsessive Randite. If Ditko really wants to change things he should consider attending a few conventions actually meet with his fans.

  9. #9 GhostofBenReilly says:

    #8 Kirby was beloved for precisely this reason; he was warm and engaging to fans who took up his cause en masse. As for Ditko, eccentricity is tolerated in notable artists, but crazed bitterness rarely is.

    I imagine I’ll get pilloried for this, but one simple fact remains: later, without Lee’s contributions, Ditko produced nothing of note and Kirby produced little of note, or certainly nothing that stands up to his work with Simon on Captain America in the 1940s or his 1960s Marvel greatness. It seems clear that while Lee may get TOO much credit for the creation of these iconic characters, to minimize his contributions is farcical. Amazing Spider-Man truly exploded after Romita joined the book and followed Lee’s inclination to lighten the tone.

    While Ditko had moments of true greatness, I’ll take the Romita run any day.

  10. #10 Jack Brooks says:

    Lee blew his own horn a bit too much, but he was also, as an editor, an absolutely essential influence on Kirby and Ditko. Kirby could become too fascinated with bizarre quasi-mythological scenarios, and whenever he was the writer his characterizations were all one-dimensionally flat. Ditko just seems to be an angry misanthrope, and though his own stories had some interesting philosophical touches none of them hit the big times, either. Lee understood marketing, AND he had a gut sense for human psychology.

Leave a Reply