Fantastic Four: True Story (spoiler accepted)

[Brian B]

On that issue, as Saladin Ahmed said on twitter:

"the Thing's working class Jewish radicalism > Mister Fantastic's bourgeois WASP liberalism send tweet"
https://twitter.com/saladinahmed/sta...594752/photo/1



So yeah, the Fantastic Four and especially Reed and Sue are constantly framed as patronizing white rubes who have a sheltered and protected view of the world.

I interesting Tweet.

I had no idea that the Fantastic Four were witnesses at the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, VA.

Or is that the Jan. 6th mob on the US Capitol steps?

The fascists really are hard to tell apart.

Only in today’s screwed up politics would opposition to outright blind hatred of foreigners be considered “liberal,” instead of respectful and fundamentally good and decent, which it also is.

[Iron Maiden]

When did anything in FF in Lee-Kirby's run approach even the Star Trek moment in daring?

I still would have to agree with CaptCleghorn's example with the debut of the Black Panther. For one thing, one has a different perspective if you were alive at that time and I think it is safe to say you weren't. Today it might not seem enough but sometimes progress happens in small steps before you get to a full gallop. But I would also add the Sgt Fury and his Howling Commandos comic as progress in the right direction since they had Gabriel Jones as a member of the squad. Later we would see Gabe as an agent of SHIELD attending Sue and Reed's wedding as part of the security. Another thing: You can see in the early versions of the cover from Fantastic Four #52 that Kirby's original mask for BP resembles Daredevil's so obviously an edit was made there. There are also early versions of Kirby's idea to call him the Coal Tiger with the face unmasked. I haven't found a reference yet as to whether they both agreed to the change or Stan requested it of Kirby. The Coal Tiger was a rejected design, perhaps even Kirby himself wasn't satisfied with it. I've some issues of the Jack Kirby Collector magazine from TwoMorrows and would have to dig a few of those up. I mostly bought the ones that had significant Fantastic Four content. The Kirby family runs a web site called the Jack Kirby Museum & Research Center and they have a small entry about the Coal Tiger design



BTW, there is a hilarious account by Nichelle Nichols of the hand wringing and concern by "the suits" behind the scenes during the production of that episode with the kiss between Uhura and Kirk. I agree with one of the comments under that video. The unsung hero is the camera man who saw what Shatner's plan was and kept quiet about it.

I actually agree. My point is again that the Fantastic Four comics weren't especially progressive nor were the Four icons of progressive politics in the 1960s, and a FF:LS which shows Susan Storm as a civil rights activist misrepresents and distorts the nature of the content of the actual stories back then, when she (and Reed) came off as the least woke of the Four. You have rephrased my point but I don't see anything that contradicts or refutes it.

Aesthetically, some parts of the Fantastic Four did catch the zeitgeist as somewhat rebellious and refreshing against DC's stuff and being high powered odd adventures but ultimately when it came to counter-cultural hipness it was The Hulk (who unleashed his rage on the military-industrial complex) who they latched on to, and of course Doctor Strange (rather ironically) became a hero for hippies who saw his comics as acid-trips on page, and then above all Spider-Man who was always popular with African-American audiences who saw his persecution by police and media as a mirror for their own experiences. (The X-Men in the 1960s not so much being that they were a bunch of narcs until Claremont came along).

I don't think being progressive was the theme Stan and Jack used for Fantastic Four either. This was the cosmic side of Marvel, especially with the Galactus Trilogy, Silver Surfer or even the Skrulls going back to the very beginnings. Spider-Man is where one would expect to find more of the social issues. JJJ had his rock steady editor Joe "Robbie" Robertson. Here we have a black man who was in a high position in JJJ's staff...a professional and not a butler. And he's just put there in a matter of fact way without much fanfare. But even with the Marvel's shortcomings back then we see the benefit. The BP debut in FF #52 as a superhero type was a big step for those days IMO, even if they got a little cautious with the cover.

[Iron Maiden]

I can't argue that Life Story isn't vastly different in tone than the original Lee/Kirby stories. It's Mark Russell who has done some very politically and socially motivated work for DC. Were the characters written differently given the times and even the Comics Code? Sure. I agree with you on the personalities of the Four not being liberal or progressive. They are probably one of the most conservative bunches of Marvel casts. But their fame and notoriety came from not what they were, but how they were handled. They were far less unrealistic than other hero stories (Lois thinks Clark is Superman, take 548). Russell's take is one other writers have done which is to write the sixties with a current view point. The characters, especially Sue, have changed with society's maturing of attitudes. We're more on the same page than we think, and I enjoy finding and discussing differences of opinion.

I think it's safe that when you talk about the liberal and the conservatives of the early 1960's, the gap was not as wide as it is now. Jackie Kennedy was an icon but she was from old money albeit nearly bankrupt! LBJ was known to use the "n" word yet he became a president who championed civil rights legislation. The Democratic of the 60s and 70s had a lot of turmoil within the party especially in the era a draft protests, the Chicago 7 (I have yet to watch the new movie) etc. We are seeing a little of that today with Biden and the progressive side of the party. Look at all the hatred AOC stirs up with the GOP and so forth.

[Iron Maiden]

I almost forgot about this issue..... discuss. be back later

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I almost forgot about this issue..... discuss. be back later

Huh. Which issue is this?

But anyway the point is, it's still Ben Grimm doing that, and not Reed and Sue.

[Iron Maiden]

Yes, but I still think it's significant. This is FF #119 (1972) , a one shot issue done by Roy Thomas and Stan Lee listed as editor. I would have to think Roy Thomas had to get Stan's OK to do this story. I can't think of any comic book at this time that addressed apartheid even if it takes place in a fictional country in Africa called Rudyarda

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yes, but I still think it's significant. This is FF #119 (1972) , a one shot issue done by Roy Thomas and Stan Lee listed as editor.

Ahh...okay that makes sense. Also 1972, when Marvel was finally getting on the liberal train after it seemed that Civil Rights achievements was here to stay. So it wasn't much of a risk to do such stories as opposed to early-mid '60s.

I would have to think Roy Thomas had to get Stan's OK to do this story.

Not at all. Lee had more or less tuned out of Marvel story stuff at this point, per Riesman and others. So this is Thomas by himself.

I can't think of any comic book at this time that addressed apartheid even if it takes place in a fictional country in Africa called Rudyarda

It's still a brave thing for Thomas to do. And Thomas was a hippy-ish type who espoused progressive sentiments (and from a certain point of view, allowed Lee to reframe himself as one).

It's a cool touch to name a white supremacist country after Rudyard Kipling, author of the poem White Man's Burden.

[Iron Maiden]

Ahh...okay that makes sense. Also 1972, when Marvel was finally getting on the liberal train after it seemed that Civil Rights achievements was here to stay. So it wasn't much of a risk to do such stories as opposed to early-mid '60s.



Not at all. Lee had more or less tuned out of Marvel story stuff at this point, per Riesman and others. So this is Thomas by himself.



It's still a brave thing for Thomas to do. And Thomas was a hippy-ish type who espoused progressive sentiments (and from a certain point of view, allowed Lee to reframe himself as one).

It's a cool touch to name a white supremacist country after Rudyard Kipling, author of the poem White Man's Burden.

Oh wow.....the Kipling reference went over my head.
I know he has his detractors....and Kirby was one of them but you have to say Thomas had a good run as EIC. It became a regular hot seat after all. Gerry Conway, whose time in the role was brief, admitted he was not very good at it.

I almost am tempted to see if Roy Thomas is on Twitter and ask him about this issue. He may have discussed this in one of his issues of "Back Issue", another noteworthy magazine at TwoMorrows

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Oh wow.....the Kipling reference went over my head.

Roy Thomas was a high school teacher before he started writing comics and he had a tendency to put in references to literature and pop culture in his work.

I know he has his detractors....and Kirby was one of them but you have to say Thomas had a good run as EIC.

Thomas was loyal to his employees. When Conway got backlash for killing Gwen Stacy and when Stan Lee was basically tossing him under the bus, Thomas stepped up and defended his employee and wrote a public letter confirming that Lee knew about Gwen's death and shamed him to support his employees. Thomas is a strange guy because he's on record for courageously standing up to Stan Lee on a lot of occasions but on other occasions being quite the booster and hagiographer. So it's a mess.

Thomas like all the post-Stan Lee EICs (and also Stan himself to be honest) was too much into cronyism, and not committed to enforcing a kind of professionalism. So he gave friends and others gigs, and maintained a pally atmosphere which made it hard to ensure people met deadlines, and maintained Marvel style and so on. It took Jim Shooter to ensure that Marvel became a grown up place, as Christopher Priest put it. Still per Archie Goodwin, it was Roy Thomas who suggested that Marvel acquire the license for Star Wars, and get into licensed comics. That saved the company in the 1970s.

As a writer, I think Thomas was solid and he certainly did develop a lot of cool characters which have a shelf-life. But mostly I think he's a writer who writes many good or solid comics but never an actually great story.

I almost am tempted to see if Roy Thomas is on Twitter and ask him about this issue. He may have discussed this in one of his issues of "Back Issue", another noteworthy magazine at TwoMorrows

Perhaps. But again, Thomas especially these days when he's trying to burnish his legacy and sand off rough edges, might not be a totally reliable narrator. It's a fact that Larry Leiber never felt comfortable opening up to Thomas after all.

[bat39]

Just read the first issue...wasn't able to find this thread because of the title

Its an okay-ish read on the whole. Definitely a very different animal from Spider-Man: Life Story. Each issue of that series told one complete story - a specific turning point in Peter Parker's life in that decade. This issue is more like a highlights reel of each decade...not that there are too many 'highlights' as such. We basically have a quick recap of the origin from FF # 1, at the start, and then a loose retelling of FF # 51 I believe at the end (I'm not much of a dedicated FF fan, so I there's a lot I don't know...I learnt that Ricardo Jones was a canon character after reading the issue). Apart from that, there's basically just a bunch of snapshots of what the FF were up to in the 60's, and a throughline of Reed having a premonition of Galactus and being obsessed by it...which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy by the end.

The one significant change they've made here is the Reed-Ben relationship, with Ben not being Reed's college bestie, but instead a relative stranger who Johnny happens to know (we're never told how). This of course makes Ben resent and even hate Reed, and it seems that the Fantastic Four were, as such, never really a united family all through the 60's. Its an interesting change, but also a bit...odd? I mean, isn't the point of a series like this to try to stick as closely as possible to the original comics, while making changes along the way due to the progression of time and characters acting differently as they mature? The Spider-Man LF series for instance kept the Lee/Dikto run intact, and retold the events of ASM # 39 differently - the butterfly effect from that spiralling out over the decades. Here, they've chosen to change one of the fundamental relationships of the Fantastic Four right from Day 1.

There are a lot of interesting potential stories that pretty much get left on the table - like Sue participating in the civil rights movement. Its the kind of thing that could have had serious consequences for both the civil rights movement and the Fantastic Four's reputation, but it doesn't get touched on at all. Contrast this with Spidey's dilemma over enlisting (or not) for the Vietnam War and his conversation with Captain America. The period setting is used more as a garnish here than anything else - though I must admit, stuff like JFK personally hiring Reed to build the spaceship, and coining the term ''Fantastic Four'' was neat! Honestly though, I feel the discussions on this thread about the FF's possible involvement in real-world American politics of the 60's is more interesting than anything Rusell actually put to page.

Ultimately, not a lot happens in this issue, if you think about it. Its like a slow-burn extended prologue to the real story, which I guess is a retelling of the Coming of Galactus. Its a bit weird that the FF didn't really do much but come into existence (that too, they weren't really consistently a team apparently) all through the 60's - the decade that was their heyday in terms of real-world comic-book history.

Next issue seems like it'll have Namor and possible Doctor Doom. It almost feels like they're gonna sprinkle out characters and stories from the original Lee/Kirby run all through the decades, which again, is a very different approach from Spider-Man: LF. But this series has piqued my interest for sure, so let's see how it goes...

[CaptCleghorn]

Just read the first issue...wasn't able to find this thread because of the title

Ooops, my bad. Can Ray or some friendly understanding Mod change the title to LIFE Story to alleviate my carelessness? Thanks in advance.

[Oberon]

Sue was always for the underdog. Dragon Man, others, she felt sympathetic for.

In a way, it is the basis for her attraction to Namor, so that was right back at the beginning.

We can say it is more of a typical female portrayal for the times, but it was there, even if story arcs didn't provide the most relevant examples.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Fantastic Four Life Story #2 is intriguing, and assuages my skepticism about #1. It does something new and interesting.

And while it's takes on some characters (Doom) is radically different, it's definitely doing something interesting with it.

[BAS]

Fantastic Four Life Story #2 is intriguing, and assuages my skepticism about #1. It does something new and interesting.

And while it's takes on some characters (Doom) is radically different, it's definitely doing something interesting with it.

A little too predictable as well. The Reed/Sue dynamic has gone down this path before - multiple times.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

A little too predictable as well. The Reed/Sue dynamic has gone down this path before - multiple times.

Yes but never in a situation where both sides are treated as adults and presented sympathetically for the choices they made. It's either Reed is evil and so on and so forth.

More importantly the story works in the way Zdarsky's Spider-Man Life Story suggested i.e. this woulda been canon if realism entered the continuity. And it provides commentary on the way Susan Storm was written and treated in the classic Fantastic Four comics.