CONTEST OF CHAMPIONS :
Ditko's 1950s CHARLTON vs. ATLAS
by Blake Bell - September 14th, 1999


Did Ditko produce consistently better work for Stan Lee and Atlas, than he did for Charlton, and why?



The pipeline of Ditko's '50s career is as such...

Ditko worked for the odd company in 1953 before cover dates had him at Charlton in 1954. He "disappeared" from New York until 1956, which brought him almost exclusively to Atlas for his first run at the company that would be Marvel Comics.

1957 saw a return to Charlton, which held his interest until Lee called Kirby, Heck, Ayers, Reinman and Ditko back to the fold in late '58. Ditko worked simultaneously for the two companies in 1959 and 1960, before Marvel took over the bulk of Ditko's load until mid-'66.

Ditko has stated there was no other company he would want to work for but Marvel (at the time), but he has also later stated he truly admired Joe Gill's storytelling. He no doubt had VERY little editorial interference at Charlton at any point in his history. With this, however, went a much smaller paycheck.

Could this be the reason a decent-sized amount of Ditko's 1958 and 1959 Charlton work, when his Atlas work shared the spotlight, is so inferior?

Assuming you buy this premise, there could be three reasons for this...

1) A smaller paycheck meant rushing to finish jobs he could have spent more time on. Perhaps Ditko spent more time on stories he liked better, but had to really move quickly on those he didn't.

2) Superior storytelling. Too many of the Charlton stories are what I call "flat-liners". They don't have that ironic twist at the end that makes the reader go "Ha!". With many of the Charlton stories, you expect a punchline, and are usually disappointed. Again, the speed at which the writers at Charlton had to produce the stories may have been a factor. But Stan Lee had to punch out quite a few stories, and run the company from the editorial side, so this isn't a great excuse. Eventually, Lee and company began repeating themselves, but the first two years are pretty original in content.

3) I suspect, although he loved the lack of interference at Charlton, Ditko knew he was a part of something "bigger" at Marvel.

I say this because most, if not all, of the Atlas stories Ditko rendered (that I have read) are FAR tighter, and FAR more inventive in their layout design than the counterparts at Charlton for the same time period.

What primarily symbolizes Ditko's Charlton work is the long, undetailed faces of his figures. The weaker stories also lack a GREAT deal of background detail.

The same can't be said for his Atlas stories. They always seem to have inventive panel designs; the features on most of the figures are mostly very tight, and there is a GREAT deal of background framing.

One of the pages worth such raves is PAGE 2 from STRANGE WORLDS #1 (Dec '58).

The bottom third set of panels are my favourite; far less static than PAGE 3 from OUTLAWS OF THE WEST #18, released but a month later (Jan '59).

Notice the difference in background detail, as well. This page from OUTLAWS has something in common with the following Charlton page, and that is the loose rendering of the faces on the figures. In fact, this next page, PAGE 5 from OUTER SPACE #19 (Oct '58) is amongst the loosest I have seen from Ditko.

Granted, these are alien figures, but those bottom two panels contain virtual scratch marks for facial features. Notice how "flat" the images look, compared to the above Atlas page. The attention to detail brings the Atlas page to life. The same can be said for this Atlas page - PAGE 3, from STRANGE TALES #72 (Dec '59).

The faces are far tighter and much more attention is paid to the overall layout design of each panel, especially the final one.

What makes the Atlas stories SEEM so superior? It is the attention to detail, which allows for a greater believability in the worlds Ditko conjures visually. Once the reader has suspended his disbelief (as the saying goes), the reader is far more willing to engage in the narrative's far-reaching possibilities.

This is only two examples of Atlas work vs. Charlton work from this 1958/59 time period. Tighter Charlton work can be found (sometimes in the same issue), and I'm sure slightly looser work can be found in some Atlas stories. It is safe to say, however, these examples represent the bulk of the work I have come into contact with concerning both companies from this time period.

In conclusion, whatever the reason, Ditko constantly rendered tighter tales for Stan Lee and Atlas, than he did for Pat Masulli at Charlton during this period.

(Ed. note : as for the two other Ditko stories in OUTER SPACE #19 [the page above is from the final one, TEN BILLION B.C.], the first story "What Are The Flying Saucers" is an oddity for Ditko, as it falls into that "factual" type Charlton story, where there is little to no dialogue, but simply descriptions based on the title of the story. It is only during the fourth page of the five that any kind of narrative even approaches the work. The 2nd Ditko story, "The Strange Asteroid", is rendered almost as loose as the third [the first is no 'shaker', either], making this one of the weaker Charlton Ditko efforts I have read yet. Paul Reinman does a two-pager for this issue and, coincidentally, it is his weakest work I have seen. Another rush job?)



If you have any stories or articles concerning
Ditko's '50s work, please E-MAIL me. You will
receive full credit for your contributions.


Fabulous '50s Main Page
DITKO LOOKED UP

1