I believe that creative types, like Kirby, should be held to a higher standard by corporations.

According to the "Jack the Hack" stories, Kirby wasn't even held in high regard by some of his peers during his second tenure at Marvel so asking the corporation to hold him in high regard would be almost impossible. I don't think anyone commenting on this thread doesn't wish that things could have been a little better for Jack Kirby but I don't believe that Disney/Marvel cares enough about it's comic books to care about giving anyone credit or monetary compensation for what they did. They care about what kind of money the comics bring in and that's about it.

Think of the great talents that have worked at Marvel over the years and how they've been treated by the company. The disrespect shown to JB by Joe Q and Jemas (throw in Tom Brevoort as well) is something we all know about, Chris Claremont was run off the X-Men, Jim Starlin and others have been disrespected by the company. Asking them to acknowledge that someone besides Quesada, Bendis, or any of the current "big name" creators at Marvel had something to do with Marvel's success will ultimately fall on deaf ears.

••

To bring that closer to home, think about sales of original art. How many times have we seen, say, a Dave Cockrum X-MEN page sell for tens of thousands of dollars, when Dave himself sold it decades ago for hundreds at best. Whenever the suggestion is raised that it would be "nice" if artists continues to reap some benefits from resale of their work, there is an instant backlash. "They got what they deserved in the first place!" And, of course, there are those who will tell you that if they bought a piece of art for $100 and later sold it for $1000, and were "forced" to give 10% to the original artist, they, the seller, would have "lost" $100 in the deal.

Often the people who make these complaints are the same ones who think Marvel and DC should pony up the money they "owe" people like Kirby and Ditko, etc. Very generous with corporate money, those people, but keep your sticky fingers out of THEIR wallets!!

That being said, I don't think it would have exactly taken a visionary of transcendent brilliance to grasp Kirby's worth. 

I don't disagree but isn't that kind of what DC did? They hyped Kirby is Coming!, gave him his own little corner of the universe to create, and it didn't translate into sales. We all look back and realize that it was great stuff but there was no appreciation at the time. When Jack returned to Marvel, the creativity was still there but the sales weren't. To some, it probably looked like Kirby needed Lee to sell comics. 

••

"No sense of history" lies at the very core of this whole debate. The Past being judged by the standards of the Present.

Hard as it is to accept, Kirby's star was on the wane when he went to DC to do the Fourth World books. (He also entered a very hostile work environment, which didn't help.) By the time he returned to Marvel, there was a substantial body of fandom who were actively dismissive not only of his current work, but of his whole cannon. Many was the time, at conventions, when someone would ask me who my favorite artists were, and mentioning Kirby (and Ditko) elicited much pantomiming of gagging and puking. Really.

Often I've said one of the GOOD things the Image boys did was adopting Kirby as their "mascot" (so they could pretend they had been "mistreated" as he had been), and thus forcing their fans to acknowledge his position in the pantheon. (As with almost all things, the pendulum effect kicked in, and Kirby was actually lofted ABOVE his station -- something I would not have thought possible -- but a degree of sanity seems to have been restored.)

••

Huh?

+++

The audience at the time was kids who weren't alive during the Silver Age. Kids aren't particularly known for their sense of history. At that age, they're barely aware there are creators.

••

I have no idea what this means. Kirby's return to DC followed his departure from Marvel as close to instantly as was possible. His last issue of FANTASTIC FOUR (not counting the recycled artwork in 108) was cover dated Sept. 1970. His first issue of JIMMY OLSEN had a cover date of October of the same year! (Obviously, Kirby must have been well ahead of schedule on FF!)

It's not as if a "generation" had changed during the switch. And many would argue the Fourth World books are PART of the "Silver Age".

••

It was Marvel staffers who called him "Jack the Hack". Hardly "kids".

+++

Corporations are people, my friend.

••

Did you quote what you intended? Or respond as you intended? Cuz I can't connect A with B here.