Martin Goodman was the publisher of Marvel Comics from before it even was called Marvel Comics, in the1940s, until 1972. Stan Lee, Goodman's Editor-In-Chief, main writer, and co-creator of the Marvel Universe (and cousin of his wife), portrayed him in interviews as a tryannical, cold businessman, clueless to, and often in opposition to, the art that Lee had to fight to create under his roof.
But a recent article on fourcolorsinners.com challenges this characterization of Goodman: "The Narrative Wouldn't Exist Without Him as a Foil" – Thoughts on Martin Goodman."
Fourcolorsinners points out, "Nearly everything we know about Martin Goodman comes entirely from Stan Lee's anecdotes." As my buddy, cartoonist Derf, says in a Bluesky post about the article: "Goodman never gave interviews, unlike Stan, who never stopped talking."
Fourcolorsinners:
"Goodman serves a necessary purpose as a narrative crutch, a MacGuffin- there has never been any interest in who he may have been, what he may have stood for, so pivotal is he, so perfect in casting as the bane of Stan Lee's creative genius. The famous story of Lee "doing it his way" remains so intoxicating to fans and journalists alike, that any wavering from that narrative is testament to treason in the comic book community…."
It's interesting to learn that Goodman had a strong intellectual interest in psychology, and that he and his wife were early advocates for Civil Rights and Gay Rights and promoted them in their diverse social circles.
Did Goodman really resist the idea of Spider-Man, as Lee claimed, telling him, "Stan, I'm surprised at you. A hero can't be a teenager."? Fourcolorsinners casts doubt, noting that Goodman had already published teen-aged heroes, and had to be aware of other publishers' hugely popular comic books featuring teen-aged heroes, like Billy Batson and Captain Marvel Jr.
Fourcolorsinners is highly skeptical of Lee's claim that he risked his job by "sneaking" Spider-Man's first appearance in the last issue of an anthology comic against Goodman's wishes, noting that Spider-Man was on the cover of the issue, with two different covers commissioned and paid for.
Lee claimed that it was his decision to run a 1971 Spider-Man series of issues without the Comics Code Authority seal when the authority rejected the stories dealing with the dangers of drug use. But a colleague of Goodman's said it was actually Goodman who told Lee that they would run the issues without the seal.
And Fourcolorsinners says that Lee's anecdote that the comic book "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos" was the result of a bet between himself and Goodman, doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and is at odds with Lee's own characterization of Goodman as a skinflint.
"Remember the lack of logic in Lee's Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos tale. Goodman, a notorious penny pincher and cheapskate not prone to experimentation or risks whatsoever per Lee and various comic experts, tells Lee that the recent success of the Marvel line must be the titles. Lee responds that it's the writing and, to prove it (!), he'll come up with a series that has the worst title he can think of and prove it can sell. Goodman, a conservative with finances who studies the market and the competition, accepts this bet (!!) for the sole purpose of "finally proving" Lee wrong, since this is apparently an ongoing and verbalized issue of Goodman's that Lee is seemingly aware of. Think about that. Think about how blatantly false and nonsensical that story is and how it cannot hold up in the face of logic and recorded history. And yet people accept this story, even when many of the contradictions about Goodman have been regularly provided by Lee himself."
Lee was certainly prone to self-promotion and hyperbole, and his claimed contributions to the creation of such characters as Spider-Man and The Fantastic Four were bitterly contradicted by his artist partners Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby.
But as with all 50+ year-old subjective artistic controversies in which the actual participants are deceased, the answers are unknown and probably unknowable. But the truth about Goodman is certainly more complicated than Lee's narrative would suggest.
