Stephen John Ditko was a comic book artist and key figure in the early years of Marvel, being a co-creator alongside Stan Lee (ESE) of both Spider-Man and Dr. Strange. However in 1966, he would completely leave Marvel for Charleston comics where he created the Question as a backup to the Blue Beetle stories he was doing art for. Charleston’s IPs would later be acquired by DC hence why both these characters are now under the DC umbrella. However during his time at Marvel, Ditko would become increasingly enamored with the work of Ayn Rand (LIE), becoming a self-described objectivist. The Question would be created to explore Ditko’s idea of what an objectivist superhero would be. This archetype would be further refined into Mr. A, an independently published character through which Ditko could more fully explore his ideas. Despite runs at DC and even a return to marvel during the Eighties, none of Ditko’s later work would acquire anywhere near the level of fame of his work with Stan Lee.In examining Ditko’s personality, a sensible place to start is with his approach to logic. For this, I will use two examples. The first is something that was revealed in an interview with Ditko’s brother and nephew. The reveal of interest consists of a folder full of diagrams he had written on topics such as psychology or political theory. The fact that there were apparently four boxes of these disproves the notation that this was some one time thing which was quickly discarded. For this reason, it is safe to assume that it reflects Ditko’s typical way of thinking. The fact that they reflect objectivist theory is worth noting, but it is still significant that the part that resonated with him seemed to be that it provided a highly structured way to see the world through which almost anything could be filtered. Similar tendencies are present in an essay written by Ditko in order to criticize Stan Lee's approach to how credit for various roles in the production of his comics was given out. The essay is called Creative Crediting and was published in a book called The Avenging Mind. A reading of the essay is available as of the video entitled “Ditko In His Own Words: Stan Lee And Spider-Man” from the channel Strange Brain Parts. The contention of the essay is that Stan Lee through words used in crediting both himself and his various artists including Ditko, implied that he had taken lead in parts of the process which the artist had done. In essence, Ditko argues that phrases like “scripted by” implies that Lee had written out a full script laying out exactly what happens on every page with the artist's only job simply being to draw the art. In truth the process was that Lee would write a brief synopsis. Ditko or the other artist would then figure out the story and its pacing. Lee would then come back and write the dialogue. Lee was fully open about the fact that this was how the comics had been done. The idea of this proving Lee to be some Machiavellian figure for that reason is debatable yet Ditko is fully willing to use it to criticize strongly enough to end the essay with the following passage: “If what has been done or is being done wrong is not explored, not exposed, not openly and publicly examined, never to be acknowledged or corrected, then no proper principle of right and wrong can be known or be possible. Then everyone can become an ignored victim of the seekers of the unearned, the undeserved of injustice.” Every bit of this essay points to its author being fully able to ignore practical concerns in favor of concerns relating to principal. One can contrast this with how Alan Moore (ILI) criticized Stan Lee’s treatment of Ditko at a Q&A posted on youtube as “ALAN MOORE - talks about Stan Lee, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko”. He references how Ditko had lived in reduced circumstances at the time of Spider-Man’s 30th anniversary, which is a practical criticism which Ditko would have been far more of than Moore thus showing how Ditko could have made a much more practical argument about Marvel’s behavior towards him. (there is no evidence that Moore ever met Lee or Ditko.) All of this points to Ditko having had a mindset that was principals first, practicality never or in other words valued and stubborn L. This tendency can also be seen in how he fell into ideology through objectivism. From that point, he allowed himself to become dislikable to the point that it harmed his career. in the name of that ideology. This implied that L is valued and stubborn without enough E to restrain it. This would suggest L1.
Ditko was a man who did not like his status as a celebrity. Aside from the 1964 New York comicon, he never attended conventions. After 1968, he never gave interviews. The 1964 interview in question was seemingly done through writing instead of being done in person. All of this points to someone who did not like publicity. His attitudes towards fandom are exhibited in an independently published comic called The Ditko Public Service Package. The Ditko Public Service Package is a comic where Ditko satirizes the whole mainstream comics industry through hyperbolic caricatures and strawmen. These characters often have arguments that are either self-defeating or so absurd that no one could ever take their arguments seriously. For this reason, it is safe to assume that the comic reflects Ditko’s genuine views even if they are somewhat unfair to the parties satirized. The negative portrayal of fans has two components: they have bad taste, and yet the industry takes their opinions seriously. A similar dynamic is present in his portrayal of critics except the bad taste is replaced with a sense of entitlement. The press is criticized for thinking that they are entitled to know every aspect of someone’s life. This all points to someone who was hyperconcerned about how he came off to others. However, his approach to it was almost binary in the sense that he could not dynamically control it in the moment. However he was able to simply sidestep the issue entirely by simply avoiding all interviews. This is consistent with E5.
While his dispute over credit is disguised above in terms of the elaborate logical justifications he used in order to justify his contentions, one can also view them through the image he seemed to want to get out of them. The complaints were never about pay, but instead about credit. For this reason, one can conclude that it was as much about the desire to be recognized as it was about any pragmatic concern. One can also see this component of psyche in a more comfortable environment described in the interview with his family discussed above. At family gatherings, he would involve his family in bizarre performance pieces, making sure that everyone was involved and could have fun. Unfortunately there is not a lot of detail about these performances other than the way they are described by members of his family and the photographs stemming therefrom. However, they seem to have involved using optical illusions to do things like making pictures where it looked like people had four arms. While these photos may have been used to inspire imagery in his comics the choice to do it at family gatherings rather than with models would have almost certainly had a social motivation. This is also consistent with E5. It was not completely absent but instead had to be brought out by comfortable environments. This also implies L1 and P7.
Now that the rational elements have been discussed, it is time to look at the irrational elements. An extreme aversion to ambiguity seemed to be the defining aspect of Ditko’s Ideology. He seemed to regard even the slightest bit of moral complexity as some form of compromise with evil incarnate. This theme is very apparent in how he mocks Marvel in the aforementioned Public Service Package.
Lee’s philosophy had been that heroes should be given relatable flaws. When he created his own heroes in the form of Mr. A and The Question, they lacked backstories or even any real motivation beyond some innate objectivist ethical code. A similar dynamic can be seen in the back and forth between Lee and Ditko about which types of villains should show up in Spider-Man stories. The first couple of issues would include a Soviet spy (The Chameleon), a group of aliens as well Spider-Man rescuing J. Jonah Jameson’s astronaut son from a disastrous rocket launch. However Ditko was critical of this direction saying things like “Space aliens do not fit into a teenager’s world.” He would then go on to create the villain who Lee would name Dr. Octopus. In both the case of Spider-Man’s plotlines, and the moral complexity of his later work, Ditko showed a strong preference for minimizing the space for ideation. While in the case of Spider-Man’s plotlines, it created one of the most iconic rogue’s gallery in all of comics, it also led to his self written comics reading like ideological propaganda. For this reason, intuition cannot be regarded as strong because his preference for Telos over Ideas went far beyond any reasonable bound and there was little understanding of what the point of the more ideationally broad approach would be. This would be consistent with I4 and T6.
There is no reason to believe that Ditko’s relation to his sensing functions was anywhere near as unbalanced. One can see an ability to pick out through a habit identified in the aforementioned interview with his brother and nephew. He would cut out pieces of comic art that he presumably considered as worth emulating. An example of this being done successfully was how he introduced cornerboxes which became an iconic part of the covers of Marvel’s comic covers. He had cut out similar designs from old Batman comics. It is safe to assume that he identified them as worthwhile after seeing them in Batman comics and held onto the idea until he added them to Spider-Man comics. This is all consistent with S8. His attention to force was less obvious because he was a figure whose public persona consists almost entirely of writing and art. However a good understanding of it can be seen in how he went about quitting marvel. As described in the article ‘The Ditko Version’ – Exploring Steve Ditko’s Recollections of Marvel in the 1960s, The publisher, Martin Goodman, had been dangling the possibility of royalties for characters in order to incentivise Ditko and fellow artist Jack Kirby to stay with marvel. However, these royalties never came. This would lead to a meeting with Kirby and his wife in which Ditko would try to persuade Kirby to quit with him as a ploy in order to actually get negotiating power in order to actually get the royalties in question. Unfortunately for the plan, Kirby would back out at the last minute. Regardless of the ultimate failure of the plan, Ditko was able to identify that if the two most important artists left at once, Marvel would have to listen. This points to an ability to understand and utilise force. This would be consistent with F2.
With evidence of L1, F2, I4, E5, T6, P7, and T8 in mind it is reasonable to conclude that Steve Ditko was an example of the LSI personality type.
Sources
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjlqHO6ifE0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M82OrBuEHIM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKE1Jn6jv4Q&t=205s
https://www.amazon.com/Ditko-public-service-package/dp/B0006DAW5Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe21fi7wAxw
Comments
Post a Comment