RICHARD: Neil Gaiman once said that everyone was writing like fifth generation Stan Lee clones - including Stan Lee. Is that valid?

TOM: Sort of. I think it's hard to overestimate what Stan did in the 1960s as far as changing the way people looked at comics writing. Gil Kane once said something to the effect that Jack Kirby was a better artist than Stan Lee was a writer, but Lee's writing stood out just as much if not more because almost all writing in comics was so perfunctory and lifeless right into the 1960s.

X-MEN #80 - SIGNED BY STAN LEE

Plus the Marvel superhero comics were really, really successful, which almost automatically made Stan an important influence. I think it's probably smarter to think of Stan's influence in terms of a commercial innovation rather than as art. He greatly helped make room for idiosyncratic voices in mainstream comics scripting, even if the voices that followed weren't all that close to his own.

I wish there were writers out there who wrote like Stan did originally -- that kind of tongue-in-cheek distance from the material. It would be really interesting to see someone build on that because Neil's right - Stan didn't, either.

JORDAN: As a figurehead, though, Stan is still well loved and (mostly) respected, so he still has some value in that regard - as the representative of comic books to mainstream America. At the same time, perhaps the industry would be better off if younger, hipper creators got some camera time. Like, maybe, Grant Morrison, Adrian Tomine or Chris Ware.

RICHARD: I've seen Grant Morrison on the telly. Not sure if he'd be the best spokesman for comics. Not for my mum anyway. Chris Ware is a timid fascist. Stan Lee does seem to be the most polished all rounder we've got.

TOM: That's so sad, but you might be right. No one on that History Channel documentary really stood out. Well, not in a good way. Chris Ware, to his credit, would probably rather die. Stan's like our Bob Uecker, and nobody replaces Uecker.

RICHARD: People, generally, seem to love Stan Lee. Did you find many who felt differently?

JORDAN: A few people. But, yeah, you're right. Most people love him. He's a very likeable guy, really charismatic and charming. Back when I wrote the magazine article, I went to interview him feeling rather negatively toward him, owing mostly to my reading of old Journals. When I left, I was in love -- in a strictly platonic way -- and wanted him to be my grandfather. If anything, meeting him in person biased me to an unreasonable degree from a journalistic perspective, in the sense that I lost all my critical faculties. I had to re-center myself in order to approach him and the story objectively.

RICHARD: What is it about him that makes him so special?

JORDAN: In person?

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 Continued Here...