Curious to know if you read or checked out this series by Kirby and what your opinion of it is....if any

I enjoyed some elements. I was never what you would call a fan of Erik von Daniken (I fell for the Bermuda Triangle, not the Chariots of the Gods), so much of what Kirby was playing with there was leaving me cold.

Still, even lukewarm Kirby is better than a lot of people when they are sizzling hot!

(Incidentally, when I left JK4W I was offered THE ETERNALS, but I declined. In many respects I felt that Kirby made a mistake doing a book so derivative of his previous work, and I did not want to follow in exactly the same footsteps! Roger and I used the Eternals extensively in LOST GENERATION, tho. Pixie was one, for instance.)

I have mixed feelings about The Eternals, such as I feel that Jack Kirby should have kept those characters as a creator-owned property. I mean, this was not just one character, this was a race of beings. Not to mention, adding The Deviants and The Celestials into the mix. This was another new world Mr. Kirby created and should have been kept separate from Marvel.

This was another new world Mr. Kirby created and should have been kept separate from Marvel.

****************************


You wouldn't happen to be Todd McFarlane writing under an assumed name, would you? (tee hee)

History Lesson: The whole idea of Creator Ownership is barely 15 years old in American comics. I happened before, sure, but rarely, and usually under unique circumstances. (Remember that Seigel and Shuster became Martyrs to the Cause of creator ownership because they did not hang on to all the pertinent rights to Superman, while Bob Kane was traditionally villified as a money-grubbing bastard because he did hang on to Batman.)

Kirby had his own company, Mainline, briefly, and did nothing to advance the concept of creator ownership. The concept was simply too alien to the industry. Asking for it required thinking so far "outside the box" that it meant going to a whole different medium, as Eisner did when he created the Spirit.

As is ever the case, do not judge the past by the standards of the present.

JB: "...Bob Kane was traditionally villified as a money-grubbing bastard because he did hang on to Batman."

I think of Kane that way not because he hanged onto Batman, but because he screwed Bill Finger over in doing so.

JB: "...Bob Kane was traditionally villified as a money-grubbing bastard because he did hang on to Batman."

I think of Kane that way not because he hanged onto Batman, but because he screwed Bill Finger over in doing so.


*******************


True -- but do I really have to list all of his offenses in order to name just one?

In any case, the point is moot. When I was starting to get into the Biz, circa 1974, I was stunned by the amount of vitriol directed against Bob Kane. In those days, Finger's sad story was not so widely know, however, and the bulk of the attacks were based solely on Kane having retained ownership of the Batman character. "He's just in it for the money!" was the mantra, usually from exactly the same people who would, in the next breath, launch into a tirade about how Seigel and Shuster had been "screwed".

As I noted, S&S were canonized for not doing what Kane was villified for doing -- keeping ownership of the characters.

A classic lose/lose situation.

(Just In Case: As I am sure post people here are aware, I support Bob Kane and his ilk in no way whatsoever. He screwed a lot more people than Bill Finger, and at every opportunity I do what I can to enlighten the uninformed about the true story of the man who "created" Batman. What I object to is the hypocrisy of those who invoke in such hallowed terms the names of Seigel and Shuster -- who also used uncredited assistants -- while demonizing Kane. What is sauce for the goose, after all. . . . )

Well, if not a creator-owned property, Then maybe The Eternals, Deviants, and Celestials should have been in their own universe. A parallel universe such as The Squadron Supreme. The first couple of issues of The Eternals seemed to take place in their own world apart from the mainstream Marvel Universe. Until I believe that issue where Sersi used her powers to change the appearance of a man to resemble The Thing. After that, there was that issue where Ikarus fought a Hulk android. Then Mark Gruenwald did a retcon were Mentor, Eros, Thanos, and the rest of The Titans were related to The Eternals of Earth. Where as before, Jim Starlin had it that The Titans were related to Zeus and the gods of Olympus. Maybe, if The Eternals were kept in a parallel universe, it could have been explained that The Celestials created that universe. Well, that's just my little idea.

does anyone have any good links to places where i could read about the whole Bob Kane keeping Batman issue? aside from a vague understanding that he was mostly just signing his name to things, i don't know much about it.

Here's a nice piece on Bill Finger

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8580/billfing.html

Mark Evanier did a series on Kane, starting with this column

http://povonline.com/cols/COL216.htm