Jack Kirby vs Alex Toth: Who's the Real King of Comic Books?

[Mego Superboy Prime]

Comic Books are a true American art form that have been produced by some of the greatest creators ever to hold a pencil or paintbrush. While many can be considered geniuses for the sheer amount of brilliance they have created, two names rise above all the others due to the unparalleled influence they possess. Those two titans of the medium are none other than Jack Kirby and Alex Toth. Their work has stretched decades throughout many genres and continue to inspire creators and fans alike. But which one has the right to be called the one true “KING” of comic books? For the first time ever, Jack Kirby and Alex Toth will be analytically broken down and compared head-to-head as we try to discover the truth. Enjoy a comprehensive and fresh look at these two legends in a way that is reminiscent of the superhero excitement that they are so famous for. Hero Envy presents: Jack Kirby vs Alex Toth: The Definitive Write Up on Proving Who's the Real King of Comics!

http://hero-envy.blogspot.com/2013/06/jack-kirby-vs-alex-toth.html

[johnmiic]

I think it's kind of an unfair question but Kirby is the king of comics; if there is a King of Comics. Toth went on to animation and had a very successful career in it. Kirby dabbled into animation a bit but never got as deep into that career as Toth did. Kirby kept coming back to comics and worked for Marvel, DC and the Independents.

Kirby's output was always higher than his peers in his field. This isn't a dig on Toth but you can't throw a rock without hitting an issue pencilled by Jack Kirby. His presence is widespread in comic books. I think someone said it is physically impossible for the artists today to put out as much material as Kirby did. Even John Byrne tried doing 3 titles at a time in the `80's but he took short-cuts to do it, (because he was also inking his own work).

The level of quality also never went too low in Kirby's work. The amount of detail he put in was always consistent. Never sloppy or lacking.

This also ignores the fact that you had Ditko, Romita, the Buscema bros. and George Perez out there, (I was more of a MARVEL guy as a kid so I don't completely know all of the popular DC artists of that time), doing very fine work and they also are every bit as important.

[ctc]

Hmmmm....

Neat article! Good points all around. I think I'd give it to Kirby. Overall. His stuff in the 40's was remarkably influential on later comics; he established a lot of the theories for layout and pacing that became absolutely ubiquitous. In that regard he was instrumental in taking comic books away from their strip roots and toward their own thing. (I'd include Eisner here as well.... but ol' Will fluctuated between the two; often within the same work, and for that was always his own thing. Not a strip, not a novel, not a comic.)

Toth is someone I came to know more through his work in animation. It's a shame he was around when he was.... in a way.... 'cos he worked on some of the most primitive, cheapass cartoons ever. And it did his work a HUGE disservice. For example, I've always considered "Josie and the Pussycats" one of the (if not THE) worst cartoons ever. However, I got a chance to see some of Toth's character design sheets for the show and they were absolute perfection. Simple lines, but almost mechanically precise form. It would have translated perfectly to CGI. Hell; it LOOKED like well done cgi.

Don C.

[The Toyroom]

Toth isn't even in the same league as Kirby as far as comic book output. It's an unfair comparison. It's apples and oranges.

[madmarva]

Kirby innovated so many of the conventions of comic book storytelling and created so many great characters. Toth did a lot of beautiful work and is a master in his own right, but like every other creator his output and impact pales in comparison to Kirby.

[Mego Superboy Prime]

Hmmmm....

Neat article! Good points all around. I think I'd give it to Kirby. Overall. His stuff in the 40's was remarkably influential on later comics; he established a lot of the theories for layout and pacing that became absolutely ubiquitous. In that regard he was instrumental in taking comic books away from their strip roots and toward their own thing. (I'd include Eisner here as well.... but ol' Will fluctuated between the two; often within the same work, and for that was always his own thing. Not a strip, not a novel, not a comic.)

Toth is someone I came to know more through his work in animation. It's a shame he was around when he was.... in a way.... 'cos he worked on some of the most primitive, cheapass cartoons ever. And it did his work a HUGE disservice. For example, I've always considered "Josie and the Pussycats" one of the (if not THE) worst cartoons ever. However, I got a chance to see some of Toth's character design sheets for the show and they were absolute perfection. Simple lines, but almost mechanically precise form. It would have translated perfectly to CGI. Hell; it LOOKED like well done cgi.

Don C.

Thanks and very nice post.

Both these guys were gods in the industry, especially to other creators.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Toth was an artistic genius, and influenced a lot of future artists in both comics AND animation. But Kirby created the very language of comics, and co-created more characters, concepts and worlds than any creator before or since. Both are legends, but Kirby is a comics GOD.

Chris

[Figuremod73]

Both have 1 thing in common: fantastic artist! There styles couldnt be more different BUT I really couldnt say one is better than the other.

Kirby DID do some work in animation (I know most of you guys know this). He started out in the Fleisher studio. I believe some of his earliest work appeared on Popeye. Later he came back working on the '70s Fantastic four cartoon (pre-production) He was heavily involved with Thundaar and he did minor work (?) on Superfriends and Turbo Teen.

[B-Lister]

Kirby, no question.

Toth is great, but still a rung below.

[Brown Bear]

I'm sure I'll get a lot of flack for saying this....but I never cared for Kirby's art.

I liked Toth's simple style. That said, if we're talking majority vote, it's no contest - I'm the minority.

[B-Lister]

We are not discussing style.

We're discussing their brilliance. And In that discussion, even though Toth is a giant in the field we aren't discussing apples and oranges, we're discussing apples and the very fabric of the universe.

Toth created characters. Kirby created a universe.


Nobody was in the same league as Kirby. Nobody was even in the same sport. That's not an opinion. That is verifiable fact. Kirby is, and was the best. And judging the current crop of talent, that doesn't appear to be under any threat of changing any time soon.

Say what you will about the style, but the output, and body of work speaks for itself.

[thunderbolt]

^^ Agreed, his output is amazing. And the sheer number of characters he had a hand in creating is staggering. No one comes close to that list.

[Mego Superboy Prime]

We are not discussing style.

We're discussing their brilliance. And In that discussion, even though Toth is a giant in the field we aren't discussing apples and oranges, we're discussing apples and the very fabric of the universe.

Toth created characters. Kirby created a universe.


Nobody was in the same league as Kirby. Nobody was even in the same sport. That's not an opinion. That is verifiable fact. Kirby is, and was the best. And judging the current crop of talent, that doesn't appear to be under any threat of changing any time soon.

Say what you will about the style, but the output, and body of work speaks for itself.

Great post! And full of passion...I love it!

[ctc]

>Toth isn't even in the same league as Kirby as far as comic book output

I don't think that disqualifies a comparasin, but yeah; Kirby was a machine. Not only did he have an insane AMOUNT of output, he put out an insane diversity of work too. (Kirby romance comics are a trip....) I think on those counts the only other person EVER on that level would be Tezuka.

Toth I think made more of a mark on animation than comics.... at least that folks would notice. Weird thing: there's one page of his in the article that looks a LOT like Colan.... I don't remember a lot of cross polination there. Was this a phase?

Don C.

[johnmiic]

I'm sure I'll get a lot of flack for saying this....but I never cared for Kirby's art.

I liked Toth's simple style. That said, if we're talking majority vote, it's no contest - I'm the minority.

Nah. Sometimes Kirby's style is an aquired taste. I loved Kamandi and FF as a kid but never really noted who drew it. When I started getting older and started noticing different artistic styles I realized who Kirby was but kind'a shunned him. Tho I still loved FF & Kamandi. His Kamandi art haunted me. I learned to appreciate him more when John Byrne took over FF and Walter Simonson took over THOR. They were trying to bring that Kirby sense back to those titles. Then I learned Michael Golden was told to "do it like Kirby" on The Micronauts and I always loved Golden's art on there. What solidified it for me was when Captain Victory and Silver Star came out. Then I started seeking out new Kirby titles and even found he had adapted, in abbrevriated form, an adaption of 2001 for Marvel in a giant-size edition. Then I became hungry to see what else he had done. I'm not saying you'll be a big fan one day but you might acquire a taste for some of his work depending on what you se he did as time goes by.