Dear Folks,
I just read the most recent digest. Here is my own
commentary:
Scrooge cursing his kilt(s)
======= ======= === =======
I actually think this is a fine thing for Scrooge to say. I
look at it as a Scottish alternative to "I'll be damned!" When
someone raised in this country says the latter, he is expressing shock
by condemning himself to horrible tortures in hell -- at least, that's
the true meaning of that phrase via the Puritan minds in which it
originated. It's a *self-deprecating expression*, and for a Scot
"curse my kilts" seems like another phrase in that very tradition. Of
course no Scot would *really* condemn his kilt and the tartan within,
a major source of Scottish identity. But no Christian (or Jew for
that matter... I am one) would *really* condemn himself to postmortem
suffering.
Gladstone's awareness of foreign releases
=========== ========= == ======= ========
Mark expressed concern about this, and Don gave some info I
didn't know... but Don was replying to a letter I sent to him *only*
so, for Mark and everybody else, I reproduce some of that letter:
> "John Clark told me he had been UNINFORMED by ANYONE about
>"Guardians" until LAST WEEK, when Byron Erickson told him about the
>story, which he ordered. He didn't know if this was a Donald story or
>a Scrooge story, or what it was about....
> Every month (or week... I'm not sure) Egmont sends Gladstone a
>"dummy" (loose pages) of all its Danish publications for the next
>month (or week). Gladstone looks over the stories and decides what it
>wants. Gladstone's earliest chance to order the stories is usually
>right before their publication in Denmark. The stories take about a
>month to arrive at Gladstone in proof form. Gladstone puts together
>their comics *5-6 MONTHS* in advance of publication because of all the
>time it takes to solicit them to advance comic catalogs and to have
>their contents cleared by Disney in Burbank.
> Since "Lost Library" was only printed in Norway, it didn't
>come to Gladstone as part of the monthly Egmont bundle. They knew
>nothing about it until Byron told them, or so John told me....
> So how do they publish Van Horn stories right after their
>publication in Denmark? Simple, if they're doing things the way David
>Seidman did in 1991. Van Horn sends them codes and synopses and page
>counts of the stories LONG before that dummy arrives from Egmont. So
>they order the story earlier than they otherwise would, and schedule
>it earlier, too (so that it comes out pretty close to Egmont's
>printing). My guess is that they probably have proofs on Van
>Horn's stories in Prescott even before Egmont sends a dummy...."
To this Don Rosa said:
> "John Clark was aware of the "Lost Library" story while I was
>DOING it, and he received copies of it immediately upon its completion
>about a year ago. What you may have misunderstood him explaining is
>that he didn't know it was used in Norway last month..."
This must be it! Don: It is clear now that Byron probably
ONLY gave John a code number for the story, saying virtually nothing
about it except "You know, John, we just had a Don Rosa story
published only in Holland, code of D-----, are you going to order it?"
(Or some such comments) It sounded to me as if John may not know that
the story Byron told him of is the same one that you already sent him
copies of. If you get in touch with John Clark right away and see
what his misunderstanding is, you'll satisfy yourself and all of us by
getting that story in print much sooner! (Six months from now is
April, not August!)
I believe that John is *still* waiting for "that story Don
sent me a copy of a year ago to be published so I can order it". On
the other hand, I don't know what the quality was like of the copies
you sent John; perhaps he feels they aren't of the quality to print
from (and I haven't seen them, remember...) and he must order new ones
from Denmark -- and by the time they come he'll be planning August's
issues. On the other hand, perhaps he's compelled to order from
Egmont anything he plans to use of theirs, simply so that they get
their commission for making the story available. But in that case,
why can't he order it now, but go to press with your version which he
already has?
It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps when John said August he
meant the issue with the cover date of August, which appears in April.
That would explain a lotta things... but it sounded to *me* like he
meant the issue *published* in August. I'm really confused. Don --
maybe you should talk to John Clark. My mind is spinning!
And I hope my information about the timing and production of
that DD birthday story was coherent enough for you, Don. You didn't
mention it, so I didn't know. (I mean in the letter I sent
specifically to you)
Mark also referred to
==== ==== ======== ==
"...reading the Al Taliaferro strips currently running in
WDC&S (where Donald is referred to by the adult Mickey and Clarabelle
as a "bad boy")..."
Mark, don't you mean in DD, not WDC&S? Also: I have seen
Taliaferro "Silly Symphony" DD strips with Clarabelle and Mickey's
nephews in Donald Duck Large Feature Comic #?? from 1941, which I once
borrowed in xerox form from a collector I knew. Has Gladstone got
into reprinting those now? I haven't seen DD 282 yet.
If these are the ones they're now printing, you'll note that
Clarabelle begins urging Donald to "reform," and over a period of
about eight weeks Donald actually changes from prankster into the
"classic" Taliaferro Donald. The substitution of Donald's own nephews
for Mickey's (which happened a little later) completed this change.
I'm only a little worried that some of this won't be evident
because Gladstone told me that Disney was unable to supply them with 4
of the strips (not banned ones, but those to which negatives no longer
exist). I hope these aren't part of the "Donald-reforms" sequence,
because partly gutted this transformation would be confusing indeed.
It's not noted in DD 281's article, but the transformation
also parallels the difference between Donald as he existed in the
Mickey cartoon series from 1934-1936 and his behavior in later MM
shorts (and then his own series). In the earliest appearances he
causes it all by playing obnoxious tricks (and even sings, "Hi-Lee,
Hi-Lo!" in 1935's ON ICE), but he is much more the victim from the
outset in post-1936 cartoons.
And Mark... do I take it that *MICKEY* appears in some of
those Taliaferro DD strips, presumably in DD 282? I'm excited to see
DD strips in which Mickey appears! This is what was implied by your
comments.
* * * * *
That's all for now, folks. Tomorrow I will be talking to John
Clark (or at least trying to) -- I have worked with Fabio and found
the answers to many questions about Italian stories that John wanted
to know (which will result in some very early, very good stories
appearing perhaps not long from now).
Your friend,
David Gerstein
"Ya know, I wonder if it really pays!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Author
Topic: 199310
(214 messages)
David A Gerstein
Disney-comics digest #136.
Message 181 -
1993-10-24 at 21:35:43
Per Starback
Missing Donald strips
Message 182 -
1993-10-24 at 21:54:22
David wrote:
> I'm only a little worried that some of this won't be evident
> because Gladstone told me that Disney was unable to supply them with 4
> of the strips (not banned ones, but those to which negatives no longer
> exist). I hope these aren't part of the "Donald-reforms" sequence,
> because partly gutted this transformation would be confusing indeed.
Do you happen to know the dates of those missing strips?
--
Per
> I'm only a little worried that some of this won't be evident
> because Gladstone told me that Disney was unable to supply them with 4
> of the strips (not banned ones, but those to which negatives no longer
> exist). I hope these aren't part of the "Donald-reforms" sequence,
> because partly gutted this transformation would be confusing indeed.
Do you happen to know the dates of those missing strips?
--
Per
Fredrik Ekman
Comments on Per's comments on my comments...
Message 183 -
1993-10-25 at 00:10:14
Per wrote:
> After some of Fredrik's old messages suddenly found their way here he
> wrote in a more recent message:
>
> > For example, since Grandma is called that by everyone (even
> > non-relatives), whose grandma IS she really? It is true that
> > Taliaferro clearly states in her first appearance that she is Donald's
> > grandma, but [...]
>
> He did? I've always gotten the impression that Taliaferro intended
> Grandma to be grandma of the boys and Donald's *mother*. Then that area
> got muddled until it much later was made clear that Grandma is
> Donald's Grandma.
Well, it's been quite some time since I read that strip (well, Sunday-page
actually), but I'm sure that that is how I interpreted it then anyway. Of
course, I've been wrong before and there is nothing to say that I won't be
again. :-)
> > In one Italian "flashback" the first meeting between Scrooge and
> > Grandma is depicted and there it is actually clearly stated that they
> > are sister and brother and also that they were not brought up together
> > nor, indeed, knew of each other's existence.
>
> Where is that flashback?
In a long Italian story. The Swedish title would translate to something
like "The Mystery of the Beheaded Totem Pole" and it included several
references to $crooge's past life. In Sweden it was split up over several
titles and published completely in the wrong order. The first part was the
last to see print several years after the other parts. The abovementioned
first meeting of Grandma and $crooge *could* have been in KAP 89, but don't
take my word for it.
> > Of course, if the above-mentioned Rota story was to be used today,
> > it would have to go through some serious re-dialoguing.
>
> Only if we insist on everything fitting nicely together.
> (Or only if we insist on every story taking place in the same
> universe, to put it another way.)
True enough. What I meant was more like that now that Don has written his
version of the history making it all fit so nicely together, it would be
sort of a shame to publish something that is so obviously contradictory
only a short time later.
> Then I'd also like a Disney Index server to which you could
> send (directly if you're on internet, via email otherwise) queries
> like "List the contents of WDC 150" or "List stories with Uncle
> Scrooge from before 1960 not written by Barks in chronological order"
> or whatever.
Something like that is exactly what I meant with my proposition 1) in a
previous post. I am still wondering, however; would it be worth the effort
to set up such a service? How many would use it? Half the members of this
list and five others? I know I should probably just shut up since I won't
be doing any of the work anyway...
/F
> After some of Fredrik's old messages suddenly found their way here he
> wrote in a more recent message:
>
> > For example, since Grandma is called that by everyone (even
> > non-relatives), whose grandma IS she really? It is true that
> > Taliaferro clearly states in her first appearance that she is Donald's
> > grandma, but [...]
>
> He did? I've always gotten the impression that Taliaferro intended
> Grandma to be grandma of the boys and Donald's *mother*. Then that area
> got muddled until it much later was made clear that Grandma is
> Donald's Grandma.
Well, it's been quite some time since I read that strip (well, Sunday-page
actually), but I'm sure that that is how I interpreted it then anyway. Of
course, I've been wrong before and there is nothing to say that I won't be
again. :-)
> > In one Italian "flashback" the first meeting between Scrooge and
> > Grandma is depicted and there it is actually clearly stated that they
> > are sister and brother and also that they were not brought up together
> > nor, indeed, knew of each other's existence.
>
> Where is that flashback?
In a long Italian story. The Swedish title would translate to something
like "The Mystery of the Beheaded Totem Pole" and it included several
references to $crooge's past life. In Sweden it was split up over several
titles and published completely in the wrong order. The first part was the
last to see print several years after the other parts. The abovementioned
first meeting of Grandma and $crooge *could* have been in KAP 89, but don't
take my word for it.
> > Of course, if the above-mentioned Rota story was to be used today,
> > it would have to go through some serious re-dialoguing.
>
> Only if we insist on everything fitting nicely together.
> (Or only if we insist on every story taking place in the same
> universe, to put it another way.)
True enough. What I meant was more like that now that Don has written his
version of the history making it all fit so nicely together, it would be
sort of a shame to publish something that is so obviously contradictory
only a short time later.
> Then I'd also like a Disney Index server to which you could
> send (directly if you're on internet, via email otherwise) queries
> like "List the contents of WDC 150" or "List stories with Uncle
> Scrooge from before 1960 not written by Barks in chronological order"
> or whatever.
Something like that is exactly what I meant with my proposition 1) in a
previous post. I am still wondering, however; would it be worth the effort
to set up such a service? How many would use it? Half the members of this
list and five others? I know I should probably just shut up since I won't
be doing any of the work anyway...
/F
Don Rosa
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #136.
Message 184 -
1993-10-25 at 00:28:00
Mark:
To your questions and comments: yes, Gladstone has ALWAYS known
about "Lost Library" and ALL the stories as I'm working on them. They
know all about "Of Ducks and Dimes and Destinies", but that won't do
them any good since it won't be used in Europe for some time yet; they
don't want simple-minded readers (and/or simple-minded editors, like the
ones who use part 3 before part 1) to get it confused with the "Life of
$crooge" stories.
I'll have no trouble dealing with how to draw a young Donald as
I've already shown him at the end of part 11. As I did with $crooge, I
decided that all Ducks look like HD&L until their teen years, at which
time, among other things, their EYES grow to join their beaks.
Fredrik:
Still, the problem with that Rota story where $crooge and
Grandma are siblings arises from the complexities which come up in
trying to figure out how $crooge & GD could be siblings though they
never knew of each other. The writer first tries to simplify the whole
thing by ignoring the OBVIOUS fact that everyone's family has TWO sides,
mother's and father's. Having ignored this elementary notion, then they
got all twisted around trying to explain the problem they caused
themselves. It makes a lot more sense and is a lot easier to handle when
Grandma and $crooge are in no way related, just as are the two sides of
everyone's families (except lotsa families here in Kentucky, but that's
another story).
To your questions and comments: yes, Gladstone has ALWAYS known
about "Lost Library" and ALL the stories as I'm working on them. They
know all about "Of Ducks and Dimes and Destinies", but that won't do
them any good since it won't be used in Europe for some time yet; they
don't want simple-minded readers (and/or simple-minded editors, like the
ones who use part 3 before part 1) to get it confused with the "Life of
$crooge" stories.
I'll have no trouble dealing with how to draw a young Donald as
I've already shown him at the end of part 11. As I did with $crooge, I
decided that all Ducks look like HD&L until their teen years, at which
time, among other things, their EYES grow to join their beaks.
Fredrik:
Still, the problem with that Rota story where $crooge and
Grandma are siblings arises from the complexities which come up in
trying to figure out how $crooge & GD could be siblings though they
never knew of each other. The writer first tries to simplify the whole
thing by ignoring the OBVIOUS fact that everyone's family has TWO sides,
mother's and father's. Having ignored this elementary notion, then they
got all twisted around trying to explain the problem they caused
themselves. It makes a lot more sense and is a lot easier to handle when
Grandma and $crooge are in no way related, just as are the two sides of
everyone's families (except lotsa families here in Kentucky, but that's
another story).
Don Rosa
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #137.
Message 185 -
1993-10-25 at 07:49:55
Not much to say here, except someone caught my slight goof when
I asked whether my use of a single panel page at the end of "Life and
Times of $crooge McDuck" might be the first in a Disney comic... what I
meant was the first single panel page in the interior of a story. There
WERE some single panel splash pages, such as the CHRISTMAS PARADE story
someone mentioned, and the more famous splash from VACATION PARADE #1.
Still, my one-panel-page is sorta cheating since it's made up of lots of
little thought balloons coming from $crooge laying in the Bin, thinking
of his past life... sort of a remake of the last panel of "Last Sled to
Dawson". I couldn't allow myself to do a single panel page with as
little content in it as the ones in the super-hero comics. So mine is a
single panel page that has 11 little panels floating in it. (?!)
I asked whether my use of a single panel page at the end of "Life and
Times of $crooge McDuck" might be the first in a Disney comic... what I
meant was the first single panel page in the interior of a story. There
WERE some single panel splash pages, such as the CHRISTMAS PARADE story
someone mentioned, and the more famous splash from VACATION PARADE #1.
Still, my one-panel-page is sorta cheating since it's made up of lots of
little thought balloons coming from $crooge laying in the Bin, thinking
of his past life... sort of a remake of the last panel of "Last Sled to
Dawson". I couldn't allow myself to do a single panel page with as
little content in it as the ones in the super-hero comics. So mine is a
single panel page that has 11 little panels floating in it. (?!)
Even Flood
Donald and sex (!!!!)
Message 186 -
1993-10-25 at 09:52:24
In August there was an interview in the Norwegian newspaper
"Dagbladet" with Geir Hasnes about the sex life of Donald. The
story was in the Sunday edition with a center double page spread.
"Dagbladet" is the third largest newspaper in Norway and the piece
with Geir is quite a large coverage. As we felt the subject was of
general interest to a larger audience, Geir asked me to
translate the story and make it available for this list - here it is.
Disclaimer: The language and opinions expressed here is neither
mine nor my employers - all blame to Geir! I am a nice
Catholic bachelor and never imagined these interpretations.
In fact I believe am not supposed to know about these things.
Geir on the other hand has five children and is still young...
The interview has four parts. The main part is the direct interview
with Geir and the other is comment to examples from stories.
Also Geir and I would like to point out that the Dagbladet
Norwegian is not too good and that some parts are diffcult
to understand due to local events and cuts made by Dagbladet.
For example the very first paragraph is a reference to a somwhat
silly spot on the Norwegian "Dagsrevyen" (TV news at 7.00 PM)
Dont give us all the blame if it is difficult to make sense
of some of the story!
===================================================================
Main interview:
A short time ago the people on the "Dagsrevyen" teased the
viewers that they would reveal the sex life of Donald. But this did
not happen. However "Dagbladet" can today reveal a sex fixated
Donald.
SURE I HAVE A SEX LIFE!
(The title is in the form of a speaking bubble coming from Donald
in a painting from 1973 by Barks where he is reading "Playduck".)
Donald Duck is not so sexless as many thinks. On the contrary he is
quite similar to us also in this area. The Donald-expert Geir
Hasnes, known from the quiz "Double or Nothing" here reveals
Donalds secret sex life.
In connection with the ongoing Donald Duck week in the "Tusenfryd"
amusement park it has again been claimed that Donald has no sex
life. That the Duck family only has uncles and aunts, no parents.
- This is nonsense and very superficial. If we go back to the
earliest Donald series in the thirties we find find the parents
both to Huey, Dewey and Louie and to Mickey Mouse's nephews says
Geir Hasnes (36). And he adds
- There are many examples that Donald is interested in sex.
He claims this is suppressed for puritan reasons, or because
one feels a need to protect the children who reads the series. We
also has a tendency to read the series as if they were for children
and they are not seen through adult eyes.
Cartoon writer.
It is not surprising that Donald has a secret sex life says Hasnes.
He draws attention to that Barks drew rude cartoons for mens
magazines before he started drawing Donald.
Also the comics were originally intended for adults and treated
adult themes.
As Donald became a comics for children, Barks had to restrict
himself. But he continued to draw mainly adult situations says Geir
Hasnes.
Lectures
He is known for his participation in the quiz "Double or Nothing"
on NRK TV in 1989. (Translators note: NRK is the government owned
Norwegian broadcasting company - NRK stands for Norsk
Rikskringkasting. It is always fun listening to foreigners trying
to pronounce that! E.F.) He often lectures about Donald and
measures his comics in meters, not in numbers.
- Now I have about ten meters of Donald magazines and a couple of
meters with scholarly literature says Hasnes, who means Carl Barks
is the same for comics as Shakespeare for the drama and Dickens for
the novel.
- Over the last years it has been published a lot of cliche tainted
nonsense, but Donald has recovered very much lately. I am
especially fond of one of todays Donald artists, Don Rosa, who
tries to do more than just reproduce cliches, says Geir Hasnes.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtext one:
Illustrated by frames from an unnamed story where the action takes
place at "The Merry Loafers'club Picknic"
In the pants of a lady
In this series from 1946 are the sexual hints very evident through
the text and symbols in the drawings.
Donald is on a picknic where words like "nuts" (for balls) and
"cowslip" (hinting to randy calves who are let loose in the spring)
are used in an obvious flirt with miss Swansdown-Swoonsudden. He
takes her to a phallos-shaped mountain where his intention is to
seduce her. At the finish he ends up in the pants of miss
Swansdown-Swoonsudden, allthough not in the way he planned.
Geir Hasnes means that Barks actually shows Donald getting an
erection when he says "Look what is happening below" and the next
frame shows the long penis shaped mounitain.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtext 2
Uncle Scrooge censored
(no picture)
Uncle Scrooge also desires women. In the series "Back to the
Klondike" from 1952 Scrooge is in the desert together with a woman
a whole month. (Translators note: It *does* say oerken = desert in
the original. Don't blame me! E.F.(Not me either. G.H.))
Throughout the story he is torn
between his warm feelings for her and love for the money she owes
him.
Incredibly, love is so strong the Scrooge actually parts with the
money in the end.
The relationship is so intensely described that the Disney consern
censored the four pages.
(Translator's note: This part became difficult to understand because
Dagbladet made severe cuts. E.F. & G.H.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subtext 3
Illustrations from "The mailman" from 1953. Top: Ears freezing of
brass monkey, bottom: Donald with posterior in Dollys stove.
Dolly thaws Donalds balls.
In the story "The mailman" from 1953 a jealous Donald brings a love
letter from Gladstone Gander to Dolly. It is a strenuous trip, where
he passes a statue with the caption "Brass Monkey". It is a
reference to the American expression "It is so cold it could freeze
the balls of a brass monkey". Ths statue symbolizes Donalds
castration when he realizes he has been running the errand of his
rival.
Further on in the story Donald is sitting thawing his frozen balls
in Dolly's stove. Barks lets it happen the moment Donald has to
admit he threw away Gladstone's letter.
One has to blush that this passed the censor, says Geir Hasnes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Other figures:
1) Carl Barks' selfportrait after retirement where a duck is on the
model stand, and a picture of a naked lady on the canavas, the
artist saying: "Retirement - how sweet it is!"
2) Panel from "Dangerous Disguise" where Donald is walking along
the beach looking at the beautiful scenery (lots of girls).
Caption: Too strong. There is no doubt that Donald likes what he
sees on the beach. This story that made in 1951 was to strong
for the Disney concern. After this Barks was not allowed to draw
humans in the Donald series. He could only draw animals.
3) Picture of Geir. Caption: The Donald expert. Geir Hasnes reveals
the secret sex life of Donald.
=================================================================
That was the "Dagbladet" story. Written by Kjell-Ivar Myhr, very
unofficial translation by Even Flood and some comments by Geir.
Even
"Dagbladet" with Geir Hasnes about the sex life of Donald. The
story was in the Sunday edition with a center double page spread.
"Dagbladet" is the third largest newspaper in Norway and the piece
with Geir is quite a large coverage. As we felt the subject was of
general interest to a larger audience, Geir asked me to
translate the story and make it available for this list - here it is.
Disclaimer: The language and opinions expressed here is neither
mine nor my employers - all blame to Geir! I am a nice
Catholic bachelor and never imagined these interpretations.
In fact I believe am not supposed to know about these things.
Geir on the other hand has five children and is still young...
The interview has four parts. The main part is the direct interview
with Geir and the other is comment to examples from stories.
Also Geir and I would like to point out that the Dagbladet
Norwegian is not too good and that some parts are diffcult
to understand due to local events and cuts made by Dagbladet.
For example the very first paragraph is a reference to a somwhat
silly spot on the Norwegian "Dagsrevyen" (TV news at 7.00 PM)
Dont give us all the blame if it is difficult to make sense
of some of the story!
===================================================================
Main interview:
A short time ago the people on the "Dagsrevyen" teased the
viewers that they would reveal the sex life of Donald. But this did
not happen. However "Dagbladet" can today reveal a sex fixated
Donald.
SURE I HAVE A SEX LIFE!
(The title is in the form of a speaking bubble coming from Donald
in a painting from 1973 by Barks where he is reading "Playduck".)
Donald Duck is not so sexless as many thinks. On the contrary he is
quite similar to us also in this area. The Donald-expert Geir
Hasnes, known from the quiz "Double or Nothing" here reveals
Donalds secret sex life.
In connection with the ongoing Donald Duck week in the "Tusenfryd"
amusement park it has again been claimed that Donald has no sex
life. That the Duck family only has uncles and aunts, no parents.
- This is nonsense and very superficial. If we go back to the
earliest Donald series in the thirties we find find the parents
both to Huey, Dewey and Louie and to Mickey Mouse's nephews says
Geir Hasnes (36). And he adds
- There are many examples that Donald is interested in sex.
He claims this is suppressed for puritan reasons, or because
one feels a need to protect the children who reads the series. We
also has a tendency to read the series as if they were for children
and they are not seen through adult eyes.
Cartoon writer.
It is not surprising that Donald has a secret sex life says Hasnes.
He draws attention to that Barks drew rude cartoons for mens
magazines before he started drawing Donald.
Also the comics were originally intended for adults and treated
adult themes.
As Donald became a comics for children, Barks had to restrict
himself. But he continued to draw mainly adult situations says Geir
Hasnes.
Lectures
He is known for his participation in the quiz "Double or Nothing"
on NRK TV in 1989. (Translators note: NRK is the government owned
Norwegian broadcasting company - NRK stands for Norsk
Rikskringkasting. It is always fun listening to foreigners trying
to pronounce that! E.F.) He often lectures about Donald and
measures his comics in meters, not in numbers.
- Now I have about ten meters of Donald magazines and a couple of
meters with scholarly literature says Hasnes, who means Carl Barks
is the same for comics as Shakespeare for the drama and Dickens for
the novel.
- Over the last years it has been published a lot of cliche tainted
nonsense, but Donald has recovered very much lately. I am
especially fond of one of todays Donald artists, Don Rosa, who
tries to do more than just reproduce cliches, says Geir Hasnes.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtext one:
Illustrated by frames from an unnamed story where the action takes
place at "The Merry Loafers'club Picknic"
In the pants of a lady
In this series from 1946 are the sexual hints very evident through
the text and symbols in the drawings.
Donald is on a picknic where words like "nuts" (for balls) and
"cowslip" (hinting to randy calves who are let loose in the spring)
are used in an obvious flirt with miss Swansdown-Swoonsudden. He
takes her to a phallos-shaped mountain where his intention is to
seduce her. At the finish he ends up in the pants of miss
Swansdown-Swoonsudden, allthough not in the way he planned.
Geir Hasnes means that Barks actually shows Donald getting an
erection when he says "Look what is happening below" and the next
frame shows the long penis shaped mounitain.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtext 2
Uncle Scrooge censored
(no picture)
Uncle Scrooge also desires women. In the series "Back to the
Klondike" from 1952 Scrooge is in the desert together with a woman
a whole month. (Translators note: It *does* say oerken = desert in
the original. Don't blame me! E.F.(Not me either. G.H.))
Throughout the story he is torn
between his warm feelings for her and love for the money she owes
him.
Incredibly, love is so strong the Scrooge actually parts with the
money in the end.
The relationship is so intensely described that the Disney consern
censored the four pages.
(Translator's note: This part became difficult to understand because
Dagbladet made severe cuts. E.F. & G.H.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subtext 3
Illustrations from "The mailman" from 1953. Top: Ears freezing of
brass monkey, bottom: Donald with posterior in Dollys stove.
Dolly thaws Donalds balls.
In the story "The mailman" from 1953 a jealous Donald brings a love
letter from Gladstone Gander to Dolly. It is a strenuous trip, where
he passes a statue with the caption "Brass Monkey". It is a
reference to the American expression "It is so cold it could freeze
the balls of a brass monkey". Ths statue symbolizes Donalds
castration when he realizes he has been running the errand of his
rival.
Further on in the story Donald is sitting thawing his frozen balls
in Dolly's stove. Barks lets it happen the moment Donald has to
admit he threw away Gladstone's letter.
One has to blush that this passed the censor, says Geir Hasnes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Other figures:
1) Carl Barks' selfportrait after retirement where a duck is on the
model stand, and a picture of a naked lady on the canavas, the
artist saying: "Retirement - how sweet it is!"
2) Panel from "Dangerous Disguise" where Donald is walking along
the beach looking at the beautiful scenery (lots of girls).
Caption: Too strong. There is no doubt that Donald likes what he
sees on the beach. This story that made in 1951 was to strong
for the Disney concern. After this Barks was not allowed to draw
humans in the Donald series. He could only draw animals.
3) Picture of Geir. Caption: The Donald expert. Geir Hasnes reveals
the secret sex life of Donald.
=================================================================
That was the "Dagbladet" story. Written by Kjell-Ivar Myhr, very
unofficial translation by Even Flood and some comments by Geir.
Even
Mattias Hallin
Don and the young Donald
Message 187 -
1993-10-25 at 15:16:18
"I'll have no trouble dealing with how to draw a young Donald as
I've already shown him at the end of part 11. As I did with $crooge, I
decided that all Ducks look like HD&L until their teen years, at which
time, among other things, their EYES grow to join their beaks." ...said Don;
and I don't argue with that, of course. However, I have a few comments to the
main subject - Donald's youth, and a Don Rosa story about it...
Don, isn't there a possibility that your perspective on Donald's youth would be
in conflict with that of Disney? I mean - they are celebrating his 60th
birthday, based on the June 6th 1934 date - at which time you'd have him be
fourteen or thereabouts (I certainly, as you well know, agree with your idea
that Donald is born around 1920). I mean, as a FICTIONAL CHARACTER, from as
lit. hist. point of view, Donald Duck the media phenomenon is about 60 years
old, and June 6th being the day he was first presented to the public that day
serves as well as any as a focal point for this kind of celebration; but do you
think Disney is able to appreciate or even allow what to them must seem a
"conflicting message"? I don't know, but they're not exactly reputable for
supporting subtle, nuanced or (shudder) COMPLEX ideas about "their" characters.
Another thing: you said in a reply to me a few weeks ago, that to you Donald
and Mickey don't even exist in the same UNIVERSE, not to mention township. And
of course you are as entitled to your opinions and feelings on this matter, but
mightn't you make things harder on yourself than necessary this way? I DON'T
mean that you ever have to even mention Mickey Mouse (well, at least not USE
him) in anything you do, but perhaps you might acknowledge that they do exist
on the same continent at the same time? I mean, not only are they both classic
Disney-created characters, and not only does Gottfredson regularly use them
together, but even Barks mentions Mickey, at LEAST once: in the "What is Mickey
Mouse's social security number" question - but I've already said that before. I
don't know - myself I don't particularly care for Mickey as a character, but
find him a bit dull (Blasphemy! Blasphemy! Stone him!!!), so I don't argue on
his behalf for this reason, but rather because I think that even though I cede
to Barks every priority as a source to the Duck Universe, I also think that
when a conflict between Barks and the other great Disney Artists isn't
necessary, then there is no reason why one shouldn't accept facts from the
strips of' f'rinstance, Taliaferro and Gottfredson. That's how i feel, anyway.
If you can't agree - don't! but I'd like to know what you think on the subject
in a little more detail...
All my Quackiest!
Mattias
I've already shown him at the end of part 11. As I did with $crooge, I
decided that all Ducks look like HD&L until their teen years, at which
time, among other things, their EYES grow to join their beaks." ...said Don;
and I don't argue with that, of course. However, I have a few comments to the
main subject - Donald's youth, and a Don Rosa story about it...
Don, isn't there a possibility that your perspective on Donald's youth would be
in conflict with that of Disney? I mean - they are celebrating his 60th
birthday, based on the June 6th 1934 date - at which time you'd have him be
fourteen or thereabouts (I certainly, as you well know, agree with your idea
that Donald is born around 1920). I mean, as a FICTIONAL CHARACTER, from as
lit. hist. point of view, Donald Duck the media phenomenon is about 60 years
old, and June 6th being the day he was first presented to the public that day
serves as well as any as a focal point for this kind of celebration; but do you
think Disney is able to appreciate or even allow what to them must seem a
"conflicting message"? I don't know, but they're not exactly reputable for
supporting subtle, nuanced or (shudder) COMPLEX ideas about "their" characters.
Another thing: you said in a reply to me a few weeks ago, that to you Donald
and Mickey don't even exist in the same UNIVERSE, not to mention township. And
of course you are as entitled to your opinions and feelings on this matter, but
mightn't you make things harder on yourself than necessary this way? I DON'T
mean that you ever have to even mention Mickey Mouse (well, at least not USE
him) in anything you do, but perhaps you might acknowledge that they do exist
on the same continent at the same time? I mean, not only are they both classic
Disney-created characters, and not only does Gottfredson regularly use them
together, but even Barks mentions Mickey, at LEAST once: in the "What is Mickey
Mouse's social security number" question - but I've already said that before. I
don't know - myself I don't particularly care for Mickey as a character, but
find him a bit dull (Blasphemy! Blasphemy! Stone him!!!), so I don't argue on
his behalf for this reason, but rather because I think that even though I cede
to Barks every priority as a source to the Duck Universe, I also think that
when a conflict between Barks and the other great Disney Artists isn't
necessary, then there is no reason why one shouldn't accept facts from the
strips of' f'rinstance, Taliaferro and Gottfredson. That's how i feel, anyway.
If you can't agree - don't! but I'd like to know what you think on the subject
in a little more detail...
All my Quackiest!
Mattias
Robert Reeves
Am I still on the list?
Message 188 -
1993-10-26 at 02:39:34
I know I was being a bad lurker, but is this the reason I have not been getting any
of the DCD's? I was getting them as individual letters (not digests) if you have
to set me up again. I promise to be more vocal from now on! Really!
Thanks! Robert (rreeves at bu.edu)
PS: My girlfriend's name spelled backwards is Ye Cats! Coincidence? I
of the DCD's? I was getting them as individual letters (not digests) if you have
to set me up again. I promise to be more vocal from now on! Really!
Thanks! Robert (rreeves at bu.edu)
PS: My girlfriend's name spelled backwards is Ye Cats! Coincidence? I
David A Gerstein
Disney-comics digest #138.
Message 189 -
1993-10-26 at 02:54:38
Dear Folks,
Only one comment today.
Mattias Hallin was discussing uses of MM in Barks stories and
noted the one where a quiz-show host asks Donald for MM's social
security number. This story was not written by Barks, who actually
noted that "I wouldn't have thought it reasonable [or some such] to
use the 'Mickey's social security number' gag" (in THE BARKS LIBRARY,
set VII).
Actually, I wouldn't have used it either, mainly because it
doesn't treat Mickey as a peer of Donald but as a CELEBRITY... the
quiz show's question is plainly supposed to be like someone in "our"
universe asking, "What's Bing Crosby's social security number?"
The overt reference to Mickey in a DD story is in WDC&S 85
when Donald refuses to answer the doorbell thinking it's a salesman,
then begrudgingly stomps over to get it because "it might be Daisy, or
-- or Mickey, or *somebody* I know!"
Don has said that this story (October 1947) is too early for
him to take into account, but in that same letter, which I can't
dredge up right now, he mentioned that "Lost in the Andes" was also
too early for some of the plot's elements (i. e. Donald saying he's
from "south Burbank") to make sense in his stories, too.
Of course these were *early* stories. So why not show that as
a young boy -- in the *early* days of his life, Donald associated with
Mickey? There are lots of great conflicts between MM and DD in the
Sunday Gottfredson strip, but right at the point when Donald matures
from bratty kid to pessimistic twentysomething (c. 1937) in his own
strip, he suddenly drops from Mickey's. While he may have been dropped
at the time simply under orders from the Disney studio, it happens at
*just* the right time to give the impression that when Donald matured
and passed adolescence, he left Mickey's town (whatever it's called --
we've got four names now!).
I *know* you don't like Mickey much, Don, but you can think
privately to yourself that no matter how the past was, that the
*mature* DD has left Mickey completely, just as you feel is true.
If Barks catches Donald in his early twenties (his nephews are *very*
young in the first stories), then Gottfredson and the early Taliaferro
can be viewed as chronicling some of Donald's younger years, when ...
yes, Mickey was part of Donald's community. Why not respect the
Gottfredson and Taliaferro versions of DD's youth when Barks gives you
nothing to go by?
Besides, Don, you could draw Mickey the way Barks did in "The
Riddle of the Red Hat," and you only need use him for a page or so
(recreating some gag between DD and MM early in Donald's life --
perhaps lifted from an old Sunday page). If you do this I'll never
ask you to put MM in another DD story!!
Your friend,
David, who would also like to see the young Donald hanging
around with Peter Pig, who could be explained as Herbert's eventual
father! (You know Peter, right?)
"Look, Mickey... just a minute ago, it was sunny outside, and
now it's raining again!"
"Yeah! But it's swell weather... for ducks!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Only one comment today.
Mattias Hallin was discussing uses of MM in Barks stories and
noted the one where a quiz-show host asks Donald for MM's social
security number. This story was not written by Barks, who actually
noted that "I wouldn't have thought it reasonable [or some such] to
use the 'Mickey's social security number' gag" (in THE BARKS LIBRARY,
set VII).
Actually, I wouldn't have used it either, mainly because it
doesn't treat Mickey as a peer of Donald but as a CELEBRITY... the
quiz show's question is plainly supposed to be like someone in "our"
universe asking, "What's Bing Crosby's social security number?"
The overt reference to Mickey in a DD story is in WDC&S 85
when Donald refuses to answer the doorbell thinking it's a salesman,
then begrudgingly stomps over to get it because "it might be Daisy, or
-- or Mickey, or *somebody* I know!"
Don has said that this story (October 1947) is too early for
him to take into account, but in that same letter, which I can't
dredge up right now, he mentioned that "Lost in the Andes" was also
too early for some of the plot's elements (i. e. Donald saying he's
from "south Burbank") to make sense in his stories, too.
Of course these were *early* stories. So why not show that as
a young boy -- in the *early* days of his life, Donald associated with
Mickey? There are lots of great conflicts between MM and DD in the
Sunday Gottfredson strip, but right at the point when Donald matures
from bratty kid to pessimistic twentysomething (c. 1937) in his own
strip, he suddenly drops from Mickey's. While he may have been dropped
at the time simply under orders from the Disney studio, it happens at
*just* the right time to give the impression that when Donald matured
and passed adolescence, he left Mickey's town (whatever it's called --
we've got four names now!).
I *know* you don't like Mickey much, Don, but you can think
privately to yourself that no matter how the past was, that the
*mature* DD has left Mickey completely, just as you feel is true.
If Barks catches Donald in his early twenties (his nephews are *very*
young in the first stories), then Gottfredson and the early Taliaferro
can be viewed as chronicling some of Donald's younger years, when ...
yes, Mickey was part of Donald's community. Why not respect the
Gottfredson and Taliaferro versions of DD's youth when Barks gives you
nothing to go by?
Besides, Don, you could draw Mickey the way Barks did in "The
Riddle of the Red Hat," and you only need use him for a page or so
(recreating some gag between DD and MM early in Donald's life --
perhaps lifted from an old Sunday page). If you do this I'll never
ask you to put MM in another DD story!!
Your friend,
David, who would also like to see the young Donald hanging
around with Peter Pig, who could be explained as Herbert's eventual
father! (You know Peter, right?)
"Look, Mickey... just a minute ago, it was sunny outside, and
now it's raining again!"
"Yeah! But it's swell weather... for ducks!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Wilmer Rivers
Norwegian quiz show?
Message 190 -
1993-10-26 at 03:12:51
What is one to say about Even Flood and Geir Hasnes's recent posting
from Norway (motto: "Land of the Really Weird Newspapers")? I think
I shall refrain from commenting on the principal subject matter of the
article, at least until I recover from reading it. However, a couple
of incidental points:
> [Geir] is known for his participation in the quiz "Double or Nothing"
> on NRK TV in 1989.
>
What's this all about? Did Geir choose to compete in a category devoted
to Disney comics? If so, what were the questions?
> He often lectures about Donald and
> measures his comics in meters, not in numbers.
> Now I have about ten meters of Donald magazines and a couple of
> meters with scholarly literature says Hasnes.
>
Hey Geir, can we come over to your house and play? :-)
Anyway, thanks to you both for sharing this article with us. Please let
us know as soon as "Dagbladet" follows up on this line of hard-hitting
investigative journalism with articles about the sex lives of Pluto, the
seven dwarves, and (of course) Ariel. Not to mention (** Please!!!! **)
the scandalous live-in relationship between Chip and Dale....
Wilmer Rivers
from Norway (motto: "Land of the Really Weird Newspapers")? I think
I shall refrain from commenting on the principal subject matter of the
article, at least until I recover from reading it. However, a couple
of incidental points:
> [Geir] is known for his participation in the quiz "Double or Nothing"
> on NRK TV in 1989.
>
What's this all about? Did Geir choose to compete in a category devoted
to Disney comics? If so, what were the questions?
> He often lectures about Donald and
> measures his comics in meters, not in numbers.
> Now I have about ten meters of Donald magazines and a couple of
> meters with scholarly literature says Hasnes.
>
Hey Geir, can we come over to your house and play? :-)
Anyway, thanks to you both for sharing this article with us. Please let
us know as soon as "Dagbladet" follows up on this line of hard-hitting
investigative journalism with articles about the sex lives of Pluto, the
seven dwarves, and (of course) Ariel. Not to mention (** Please!!!! **)
the scandalous live-in relationship between Chip and Dale....
Wilmer Rivers
Torsten Wesley Adair
Norwegian quiz show?
Message 191 -
1993-10-26 at 03:51:41
On Mon, 25 Oct 1993, Wilmer Rivers wrote:
> What is one to say about Even Flood and Geir Hasnes's recent posting
> from Norway (motto: "Land of the Really Weird Newspapers")? I think
> I shall refrain from commenting on the principal subject matter of the
> article, at least until I recover from reading it. However, a couple
> of incidental points:
> Anyway, thanks to you both for sharing this article with us. Please let
> us know as soon as "Dagbladet" follows up on this line of hard-hitting
> investigative journalism with articles about the sex lives of Pluto, the
> seven dwarves, and (of course) Ariel. Not to mention (** Please!!!! **)
> the scandalous live-in relationship between Chip and Dale....
Say, this reminds me of some adult jokes about Disney.
If anyone wants to see them, just ask.
Hmmm.... I never thought of Chip and Dale. And just what were they doing
while they were scampering around in Donald's sailor suit? Is Donald
homophobic? Or maybe the opposite?
And I'm certain everyone knows that Bugs Bunny was gay (cross dresser,
kissed Elmer Fudd, fought over Elmer Fudd with Daffy Duck).
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
And I thought Fritz the Cat was something!
> What is one to say about Even Flood and Geir Hasnes's recent posting
> from Norway (motto: "Land of the Really Weird Newspapers")? I think
> I shall refrain from commenting on the principal subject matter of the
> article, at least until I recover from reading it. However, a couple
> of incidental points:
> Anyway, thanks to you both for sharing this article with us. Please let
> us know as soon as "Dagbladet" follows up on this line of hard-hitting
> investigative journalism with articles about the sex lives of Pluto, the
> seven dwarves, and (of course) Ariel. Not to mention (** Please!!!! **)
> the scandalous live-in relationship between Chip and Dale....
Say, this reminds me of some adult jokes about Disney.
If anyone wants to see them, just ask.
Hmmm.... I never thought of Chip and Dale. And just what were they doing
while they were scampering around in Donald's sailor suit? Is Donald
homophobic? Or maybe the opposite?
And I'm certain everyone knows that Bugs Bunny was gay (cross dresser,
kissed Elmer Fudd, fought over Elmer Fudd with Daffy Duck).
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
And I thought Fritz the Cat was something!
Chris Lawton
WDC&S 588
Message 192 -
1993-10-26 at 03:56:58
Hiya!
Ah, what an issue for Mickey fans! :)
Mickey at his finest! I can't wait til Dec 7! This is what Mickey is all
about! :)
Actually, the whole issue seemed very "Mickeyish". The first Donald story -
just drop Mickey into Donald's place and "TAA-DAA" a new Mickey story.
Seemed quite a change from the usual mischievious Donald we all are used to.
This issue should be enough to make any Duck fan move over to The Mouse.
C'mon people - jump ship! :)
(Well, actually, since the big Gladstone move, and the decreased availability
of Mickey stuff, I've found a new respect for the Ducks. I think I like H, D &
L the best - they, like Mickey, seem to have the most of what I call
"True Fun" out of all the Ducks)
Chris Mickey's #1 Fan!! :) :)
Ah, what an issue for Mickey fans! :)
Mickey at his finest! I can't wait til Dec 7! This is what Mickey is all
about! :)
Actually, the whole issue seemed very "Mickeyish". The first Donald story -
just drop Mickey into Donald's place and "TAA-DAA" a new Mickey story.
Seemed quite a change from the usual mischievious Donald we all are used to.
This issue should be enough to make any Duck fan move over to The Mouse.
C'mon people - jump ship! :)
(Well, actually, since the big Gladstone move, and the decreased availability
of Mickey stuff, I've found a new respect for the Ducks. I think I like H, D &
L the best - they, like Mickey, seem to have the most of what I call
"True Fun" out of all the Ducks)
Chris Mickey's #1 Fan!! :) :)
Mark Semich
Misc. digest stuff
Message 193 -
1993-10-26 at 05:22:28
David A Gerstein <David.A.Gerstein at williams.edu> wrote a while back:
> Mark also referred to
> "...reading the Al Taliaferro strips currently running in
>WDC&S (where Donald is referred to by the adult Mickey and Clarabelle
>as a "bad boy")..."
>
> Mark, don't you mean in DD, not WDC&S?
Yup, my mistake.
>Also: I have seen
>Taliaferro "Silly Symphony" DD strips with Clarabelle and Mickey's
>nephews in Donald Duck Large Feature Comic #?? from 1941, which I once
>borrowed in xerox form from a collector I knew. Has Gladstone got
>into reprinting those now? I haven't seen DD 282 yet.
Well, the strips are dated 1937, but they are as you describe (with
Clarabelle urging reform and the appearance of Mickey's nephews) So
I'd guess that they are the same ones...
> And Mark... do I take it that *MICKEY* appears in some of
>those Taliaferro DD strips, presumably in DD 282? I'm excited to see
>DD strips in which Mickey appears! This is what was implied by your
>comments.
Oops! I seem to be a well-spring of misinformation! Mickey doesn't
actually appear, just Clarabelle and Mick's nephews, as noted above.
My intention was to point out that Donald was peers with Morty and
Ferdie, but "boy" to Clarabelle and others of Mickey's generation.
Sorry about that...
====
Fredrik Ekman <d91fe at hkr01.ide.hk-r.se> wrote:
>And Mark Semich:
>>I just read William Van Horn's "Spotless Don" in WDC&S 588.
>>
>>Although I love the duck stories, I must confess that I'm not
>>extremely well read in them. Has Donald ever been referred to as
>>"Don" in any published stories before? It certainly struck me as
>>different.
Well, to answer my own question :-) the earliest reference that I've
found to Don as "Don" is in WDC&S 62, but as someone else already
noted, there are probably many earlier ones.
====
Don Rosa commented on my article about John Lustig's letter in CBG:
> No, no, to sign contracts then to break your word on the sly
>is NOT the way to make progress with the Disney system. While some of
>us are trying to work in the open to change the system, having one
>person who does not help that cause in the least ALSO be cheating on
>it in a reckless fashion is a selfish and greedy activity, not brave.
You are, of course, entirely correct, and I apologize for my words of
criticism.
====
I was looking through the "creators" file on lysator, and noticed that
there was an entry (JKi) for Jack Kirby, but I looked through all the
crone indices, the gladstone index, and the disney index and couldn't
find JKi. Did Jack Kirby actually do any Disney stories?
====
I finally got my paws on some Jippes stories. The first one that I
read (in WDC&S 513) where HD&L plan to buy cigars for Donald's
birthday (but Donald thinks that they are buying them for themselves)
gave me an extreme sense of deja-vu, and I could swear that I'd
already seen the same plot in an old Donald Duck cartoon. Does anyone
else remember this?
And the one in WDC&S 514 (with the ever-escalating pile of trash that
the police trace to Donald) reminded me of "Alice's Restaurant"...
====
(Please pardon my ignorance, but just when is Donald's 60th? 1994?
Which issue of DD is going to be the *big* one?)
-- Mark Semich, mas at csa.bu.edu
> Mark also referred to
> "...reading the Al Taliaferro strips currently running in
>WDC&S (where Donald is referred to by the adult Mickey and Clarabelle
>as a "bad boy")..."
>
> Mark, don't you mean in DD, not WDC&S?
Yup, my mistake.
>Also: I have seen
>Taliaferro "Silly Symphony" DD strips with Clarabelle and Mickey's
>nephews in Donald Duck Large Feature Comic #?? from 1941, which I once
>borrowed in xerox form from a collector I knew. Has Gladstone got
>into reprinting those now? I haven't seen DD 282 yet.
Well, the strips are dated 1937, but they are as you describe (with
Clarabelle urging reform and the appearance of Mickey's nephews) So
I'd guess that they are the same ones...
> And Mark... do I take it that *MICKEY* appears in some of
>those Taliaferro DD strips, presumably in DD 282? I'm excited to see
>DD strips in which Mickey appears! This is what was implied by your
>comments.
Oops! I seem to be a well-spring of misinformation! Mickey doesn't
actually appear, just Clarabelle and Mick's nephews, as noted above.
My intention was to point out that Donald was peers with Morty and
Ferdie, but "boy" to Clarabelle and others of Mickey's generation.
Sorry about that...
====
Fredrik Ekman <d91fe at hkr01.ide.hk-r.se> wrote:
>And Mark Semich:
>>I just read William Van Horn's "Spotless Don" in WDC&S 588.
>>
>>Although I love the duck stories, I must confess that I'm not
>>extremely well read in them. Has Donald ever been referred to as
>>"Don" in any published stories before? It certainly struck me as
>>different.
Well, to answer my own question :-) the earliest reference that I've
found to Don as "Don" is in WDC&S 62, but as someone else already
noted, there are probably many earlier ones.
====
Don Rosa commented on my article about John Lustig's letter in CBG:
> No, no, to sign contracts then to break your word on the sly
>is NOT the way to make progress with the Disney system. While some of
>us are trying to work in the open to change the system, having one
>person who does not help that cause in the least ALSO be cheating on
>it in a reckless fashion is a selfish and greedy activity, not brave.
You are, of course, entirely correct, and I apologize for my words of
criticism.
====
I was looking through the "creators" file on lysator, and noticed that
there was an entry (JKi) for Jack Kirby, but I looked through all the
crone indices, the gladstone index, and the disney index and couldn't
find JKi. Did Jack Kirby actually do any Disney stories?
====
I finally got my paws on some Jippes stories. The first one that I
read (in WDC&S 513) where HD&L plan to buy cigars for Donald's
birthday (but Donald thinks that they are buying them for themselves)
gave me an extreme sense of deja-vu, and I could swear that I'd
already seen the same plot in an old Donald Duck cartoon. Does anyone
else remember this?
And the one in WDC&S 514 (with the ever-escalating pile of trash that
the police trace to Donald) reminded me of "Alice's Restaurant"...
====
(Please pardon my ignorance, but just when is Donald's 60th? 1994?
Which issue of DD is going to be the *big* one?)
-- Mark Semich, mas at csa.bu.edu
Don Rosa
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #138.
Message 194 -
1993-10-26 at 07:28:39
Mostly to Mattais:
There's no reason why Disney would have any problem with how I
show young Donald. I use him in a story where he's about 5 or 6 years
old, and the story is taking place in 1930. But, y'see, nowhere in the
story does it SAY it's 1930, just as nowhere in any of those "Life of
$crooge" tales is the year ever given -- even though, as in the 1930
tale, if you check obscure comments and do some addition or figuring,
one can come up with the date.
Am I already violating my/our idea that Donald was born in 1920?
Well, that date isn't set in stone... and this tale needed to be set in
1930 and Donald needed to look younger than 10 (which is about how old
HD&L are). Or maybe he is 10 in this story. I can get away with messing
about with a few years one way or t'other since I never actually mention
birthyears.
I had lotsa trouble dealing with when $crooge's sister Hortense
would have had to've been born and when Donald and Della are born.
Hortense is at least 44 years old when DD is born, even if we use 1920.
Oh, well -- I s'pose that happens.
And the business about whether Mickey exists in the Duck
universe... since I'll never use him, what difference does it make
whether I say he doesn't exist or that he exists but will never be seen
or heard of. And as for Barks' mention of Mickey's social security
number -- what if we were at a perty playing Trivia, and someone asked
for Mickey Mouse's social security number? Does that make Mickey become
a living being? Maybe Donald (or whoever it was in the story) was being
sarcastic or kidding. Actually, I dislike scrutinizing infinitesimal
details like this as if I was a Star Trek fanboy or something, but I
just mean to show that it's always possible for me to wiggle out of such
corners. And if that doesn't work, I'll just say I ignore that scene as
I do a number of other Barks stories or scenes as apocryphal.
Even Flood! As long as you're translating more Norwegian... did
you see the two or three news articles that came out during my last trip
over there? If you still have copies, I'd sure like to see translations
of them sometime. Possible?
There's no reason why Disney would have any problem with how I
show young Donald. I use him in a story where he's about 5 or 6 years
old, and the story is taking place in 1930. But, y'see, nowhere in the
story does it SAY it's 1930, just as nowhere in any of those "Life of
$crooge" tales is the year ever given -- even though, as in the 1930
tale, if you check obscure comments and do some addition or figuring,
one can come up with the date.
Am I already violating my/our idea that Donald was born in 1920?
Well, that date isn't set in stone... and this tale needed to be set in
1930 and Donald needed to look younger than 10 (which is about how old
HD&L are). Or maybe he is 10 in this story. I can get away with messing
about with a few years one way or t'other since I never actually mention
birthyears.
I had lotsa trouble dealing with when $crooge's sister Hortense
would have had to've been born and when Donald and Della are born.
Hortense is at least 44 years old when DD is born, even if we use 1920.
Oh, well -- I s'pose that happens.
And the business about whether Mickey exists in the Duck
universe... since I'll never use him, what difference does it make
whether I say he doesn't exist or that he exists but will never be seen
or heard of. And as for Barks' mention of Mickey's social security
number -- what if we were at a perty playing Trivia, and someone asked
for Mickey Mouse's social security number? Does that make Mickey become
a living being? Maybe Donald (or whoever it was in the story) was being
sarcastic or kidding. Actually, I dislike scrutinizing infinitesimal
details like this as if I was a Star Trek fanboy or something, but I
just mean to show that it's always possible for me to wiggle out of such
corners. And if that doesn't work, I'll just say I ignore that scene as
I do a number of other Barks stories or scenes as apocryphal.
Even Flood! As long as you're translating more Norwegian... did
you see the two or three news articles that came out during my last trip
over there? If you still have copies, I'd sure like to see translations
of them sometime. Possible?
Mattias Hallin
Disney-comics digest #138.
Message 195 -
1993-10-26 at 10:30:52
"Mattias Hallin was discussing uses of MM in Barks stories and
noted the one where a quiz-show host asks Donald for MM's social
security number. This story was not written by Barks, who actually
noted that "I wouldn't have thought it reasonable [or some such] to
use the 'Mickey's social security number' gag" (in THE BARKS LIBRARY,
set VII)." ...says David Gerstein... and, Oh, I should have known that, I
guess, but I've only read the Library ARTICLES about once, and that was a few
years ago, so... but still. OK. Point taken; and as for the rest of your letter
- YEAH! I wholeheartedly concur! That was exactly my point, too!
About the South Burbank reference (in Lost in the Andes), I think there are
basically two ways to handle this: either by treating it as a pure joke on
Danald's part, or by simply saying that he at some time may have lived in South
Burbank, which is probably not too far from Duckburg, anyway (since they're
both fairly close to Catalina (Duckburg is, I think, according to the
noodle-swim story 30 miles from Catalina, and thus in the vicinty of Greater
LA), so why can't Donald at some time have taken a house in Burbank, rather
than in Duckburg? I mean, he seems to be moving house all the time anyway, so
it makes sense this way too...
Mattias Hallin
noted the one where a quiz-show host asks Donald for MM's social
security number. This story was not written by Barks, who actually
noted that "I wouldn't have thought it reasonable [or some such] to
use the 'Mickey's social security number' gag" (in THE BARKS LIBRARY,
set VII)." ...says David Gerstein... and, Oh, I should have known that, I
guess, but I've only read the Library ARTICLES about once, and that was a few
years ago, so... but still. OK. Point taken; and as for the rest of your letter
- YEAH! I wholeheartedly concur! That was exactly my point, too!
About the South Burbank reference (in Lost in the Andes), I think there are
basically two ways to handle this: either by treating it as a pure joke on
Danald's part, or by simply saying that he at some time may have lived in South
Burbank, which is probably not too far from Duckburg, anyway (since they're
both fairly close to Catalina (Duckburg is, I think, according to the
noodle-swim story 30 miles from Catalina, and thus in the vicinty of Greater
LA), so why can't Donald at some time have taken a house in Burbank, rather
than in Duckburg? I mean, he seems to be moving house all the time anyway, so
it makes sense this way too...
Mattias Hallin