Rejected Covers

Since this Blog IS called Marvel Mysteries and Comics Minutiae, I thought it would be a good idea to probe into an area of particular interest to me, and hopefully of interest to a few of you as well. I've always been interested in the process of comics; growing up I was fascinated when my brother John bought a reprint comic such as Marvel Tales or Marvel Collector's Item Classics. When  he also had the original publication around, I would compare the two side by side, often noticing new coloring on the reprints. Occasionally there were alterations in art; editing of footnotes and new copy at the end of the stories. Reprinted covers were ofter recolored, figures sometimes repositioned and copy added or changed (and one day soon I'll do a post on reprint covers that used the original stats before they were changed for publication). But this post will focus on rejected covers, showcasing a few comparisons with my observations.

To get a better understanding on what the criteria was for rejecting a cover, I went to two sources that were closely involved. Stan Lee had this to say:

"I hardly ever rejected a cover because of the quality of the artwork.  Our artists were the best!  It was only subject matter and interpretation that I changed. 

I might have said: "Put the hero more in the foreground" or "Make the villain bigger"" or "Don't show the new villain's face. Let the reader guess." or "Make the scene more of a long shot."  etc.   Stuff like that.

Don't really recall any specific covers I turned down. My taste in covers was pretty much the same as Martin Goodman's.  After the first few years he left me on my own in that regard."

I also queried Roy Thomas, who kindly answered:

"I remember more about Martin Goodman's rejection of covers than Stan's... after all, if he rejected a penciled cover, it was more likely to be in the privacy of his own office, and I might never hear of it.  I see rejected covers that clearly were done during my early days at Marvel, and I usually don't recall anything about them, because Stan didn't generally discuss them with me. 

If Stan wanted to reject a cover, I doubt if I could have talked him out of it.  I do recall him being unhappy at seeing the bottom of Captain America's boot (the sole) on the cover of GIANT-SIZE INVADERS, and he wanted to get the foot redrawn so we'd see the top of it.  That would've made him look like he was putting his best toe forward, so I managed to talk him out of that... but he never liked seeing the bottoms of hero's shoes on covers.  I've mentioned I think that's why he rejected one CAPTAIN AMERICA cover by either Kirby or Romita that's floating around... although I don't specifically remember that cover otherwise.

As editor-in-chief, I had pretty much control over the covers, although Stan as publisher could overrule me as Goodman had him... and perhaps he did, once or twice, but nothing I particularly recall."

And now, on to a few covers:

The rejected cover to Amazing Spider-Man # 35, as published in Italy

The published cover to Amazing Spider-Man # 35

A side by side comparison clearly shows that Ditko's Spider-Man figure was redrawn by Jack Kirby, with inking likely by Sol Brodsky. This cover came up in a phone conversation I had with John Romita some years ago. He recalled he was in the office when Kirby was fixing the cover, and Kirby was joking that he always had to fix Ditko's butts. It's obvious that either Stan or Martin Goodman did not think Spidey's rear facing the viewer was attractive, and Stan had Jack make the change, likely because he was in the office. While the original does have a charm, as S-M is descending from above,  the replacement figure is also dramatic, as he races towards a confrontation.

Kirby's covers were also rejected from time to time, and here is an interesting example:

Rejected cover to Thor # 167; Jack Kirby pencils; Vince Colletta inks

Published cover to Thor # 167 by John Romita

The changes here are interesting and clearly illustrate Lee's points. Kirby's version is busier, although the main idea of Thor's ghostly figure looking on helplessly as his alter ego is threatened by Loki appears in both versions. That scene is much smaller in Kirby's version, as we also witness the inside of a hospital where doctors are administrating to one of Thor's comrades. I like the look of urgency on Thor's face on Kirby's unpublished cover, but realize Romita's figures taking center stage is more dramatic in the published version and a perfect example of Lee's intentions for a successful cover:

"Put the hero more in the foreground..Make the villain bigger!" 

As a matter of expediency Lee often had John Romita redo covers since he worked in the office and deadlines loomed.

I intend to compare a few more examples soon, so stay tuned.