Here's that German article I referred to. The translator of the
German comics (Klaus Strzyz) sent me a copy with the translation. This
appeared last week in the German news magazine FOCUS which they say is
like their version of NEWSWEEK or something. The article was a full
page and reprinted panels from the first page of my "The Duck who Fell
to Earth", including the first panel where DD & U$ are walking through
an area of junk yards to get to $crooge's salvage yard... and they
compare the panel of DD enetering the salvage yard to an old Barks
panel of DD entering his own backyard. The captions explain that this
is how I draw all of Duckberg and even Donald Duck's home. The text:
DUCKBURG UNDER GARBAGE
A DISNEY ARTIST LAYS HANDS ON THE DUCK FAMILY
EVERYTHING IS GETTING POISONED
Duckburg, clean middle class home of Donald Duck, is totally
rotten; the once so cared for streets have ugly potholes; in the once so
nice gardens you find car wrecks, and rats chase stray cats through the
streets.
Such conditions irritate the American Disney fans because they
remind them more of the dirty world of "Fritz the Cat" than of Duckburg
where, according to Disney, everything should be clean forever and its
inhabitants should always stay the same.
Responsible for these rotten conditions is the American Don
Rosa, 42. The former construction engineer sold his wealthy company to
concentrate on Duckburg, and he placed the ducks from their suburban
idyll into a real existing big city American punkworld. This brought him
among fans a lot of worship and some consider him already as the only
legitimate heir to the legendary Disney artist Carl Barks who once
invented the Duck family.
Those near to life stories have come to the attention of the
European Disney licensee Egmont in Copenhagen and their German daughter
Ehapa in Leifelden-Echterdingen. For the first time for years American
stories are ordered for the German books; in the years before it was
mainly the other way around. "Their livliness is so special, and as a
result the unusual way of drawing is accepted", says Ehapa publisher
Cornelia Stahl. Next Spring the publisher will bring the collected
stories of Don Rosa in bookform onto the market".
This is a rather rare honor because until now the artists'
identities were always kept secret.
"He is going to become a cult artist", says the literature
expert and Disney specialist Matthias Kringe.
On the other hand, the anti-Rosa group cannot be ignored. It is
not only Rosa's fun on details until the last trash can that they don't
like. The artist from Louisville, Kentucky, has commited a sacrilege:
"The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck" which is appearing in German now.
For decades it was in the dark what transgressor Rosa will
uncover soon: Uncle Scrooge's father was a nice but penniless craftsman,
his mother a housewife. His first dime was earned in Glasgow. ANd his
notorious thrifty career he started on a soft evening in May in - no
wonder - Louisville, Kentucky.
Author
Topic: 199311
(180 messages)
Don Rosa
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #156.
Message 61 -
1993-11-14 at 07:27:41
Torsten Wesley Adair
Top Publishers for November 1993 (fwd)
Message 62 -
1993-11-14 at 21:13:22
F.Y.E. (24th this month)
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1993 19:44:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: ANTARCTIC at delphi.com
To: comix at world.std.com
Subject: Top Publishers for November 1993
Here's a quick list of the top publishers for November 1993,
by dollar share of the direct market, as reported by Capital City.
Publisher Year 92 6/93 7/93 8/93 9/93 10/93 11/93
[...]
Gladstone .26% .17% .24% .24% .28% .22% .32%
[...]
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1993 19:44:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: ANTARCTIC at delphi.com
To: comix at world.std.com
Subject: Top Publishers for November 1993
Here's a quick list of the top publishers for November 1993,
by dollar share of the direct market, as reported by Capital City.
Publisher Year 92 6/93 7/93 8/93 9/93 10/93 11/93
[...]
Gladstone .26% .17% .24% .24% .28% .22% .32%
[...]
Torsten Wesley Adair
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #156.
Message 63 -
1993-11-14 at 22:13:19
On 14 Nov 1993, Don Rosa wrote:
> Here's that German article I referred with the translation. This appeared
> last week in the German news magazine FOCUS which they say is like their
> version of NEWSWEEK or something.
It looks more like Time. I prefer Der Spiegel.
> The article was a full page and reprinted panels from the first page of my
> "The Duck who Fell to Earth", including the first panel where DD & U$ are
> walking through an area of junk yards to get to $crooge's salvage yard...
> DUCKBURG UNDER GARBAGE
> A DISNEY ARTIST LAYS HANDS ON THE DUCK FAMILY
> EVERYTHING IS GETTING POISONED
> Duckburg, clean middle class home of Donald Duck, is totally rotten; the
> once so cared for streets have ugly potholes; in the once so nice gardens
> you find car wrecks, and rats chase stray cats through the streets. Such
> conditions irritate the American Disney fans because they remind them more
> of the dirty world of "Fritz the Cat" than of Duckburg where, according to
> Disney, everything should be clean forever and its
> inhabitants should always stay the same.
So, Don, when will Scrooge and Company visit Rio de Janiero for
Carnivale? And what does the Junior Woodchucks Guidebook have to say
about it?
I was a bit shocked when I saw that scene, but I like a bit of
realism in my comic books. What? You expect a garbage dump to look
spotless? Maybe at DisneyWorld.
Two positives:
1) They spelled your name right.
2) As a librarian who followed last year's brouhaha over Madonna's
_Sex_, I will guarantee that you will probably sell more copies, because
more people will be wanting to read this "pornographic" Disney. I don't
think you need to be worried about public opinion making it's way to
Disney. Unless, of course, the American media blows it out of proportion.
In which case, you will sell even more copies. Personally, I think the
media reaction will be more like the Death of Superman instead of the
Death of Frankenstein.
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
> Here's that German article I referred with the translation. This appeared
> last week in the German news magazine FOCUS which they say is like their
> version of NEWSWEEK or something.
It looks more like Time. I prefer Der Spiegel.
> The article was a full page and reprinted panels from the first page of my
> "The Duck who Fell to Earth", including the first panel where DD & U$ are
> walking through an area of junk yards to get to $crooge's salvage yard...
> DUCKBURG UNDER GARBAGE
> A DISNEY ARTIST LAYS HANDS ON THE DUCK FAMILY
> EVERYTHING IS GETTING POISONED
> Duckburg, clean middle class home of Donald Duck, is totally rotten; the
> once so cared for streets have ugly potholes; in the once so nice gardens
> you find car wrecks, and rats chase stray cats through the streets. Such
> conditions irritate the American Disney fans because they remind them more
> of the dirty world of "Fritz the Cat" than of Duckburg where, according to
> Disney, everything should be clean forever and its
> inhabitants should always stay the same.
So, Don, when will Scrooge and Company visit Rio de Janiero for
Carnivale? And what does the Junior Woodchucks Guidebook have to say
about it?
I was a bit shocked when I saw that scene, but I like a bit of
realism in my comic books. What? You expect a garbage dump to look
spotless? Maybe at DisneyWorld.
Two positives:
1) They spelled your name right.
2) As a librarian who followed last year's brouhaha over Madonna's
_Sex_, I will guarantee that you will probably sell more copies, because
more people will be wanting to read this "pornographic" Disney. I don't
think you need to be worried about public opinion making it's way to
Disney. Unless, of course, the American media blows it out of proportion.
In which case, you will sell even more copies. Personally, I think the
media reaction will be more like the Death of Superman instead of the
Death of Frankenstein.
Torsten Adair torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE, USA
David A Gerstein
SUCCESS!
Message 64 -
1993-11-15 at 01:17:29
Dear Folks,
Nothing to do today but spread some news!
Last night I talked with Anina Bennett from Egmont, and it
turns out that they have now accepted and purchased my SECOND Duck
story, "Pork-Barrel Politics" (a sequel to "The Think Box Bollix")!!!
HALLELUJAH!!!
It'll be eons till it's drawn -- let alone printed -- given
how Egmont sits on stories... but I can at least promise you a good
story when it's eventually printed.
And my third story, "Rolling in Dough" featuring Donald and
Bornworthy against the Beagle Boys, is almost finished.
(I'm talking original stories, as opposed to the dialogs of
foreign stories, done for Gladstone)
Whoopee! Hotcha! Hot Diggety Dog! Yowie!
Your friend,
David Gerstein
"What a peculiar language these natives speak!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
P. S. Don, why have we never seen Bornworthy in one of your
stories? (Okay, he *might* be in "Fir-Tree Fracas"... I can't
remember right now. But I mean a major role...)
Nothing to do today but spread some news!
Last night I talked with Anina Bennett from Egmont, and it
turns out that they have now accepted and purchased my SECOND Duck
story, "Pork-Barrel Politics" (a sequel to "The Think Box Bollix")!!!
HALLELUJAH!!!
It'll be eons till it's drawn -- let alone printed -- given
how Egmont sits on stories... but I can at least promise you a good
story when it's eventually printed.
And my third story, "Rolling in Dough" featuring Donald and
Bornworthy against the Beagle Boys, is almost finished.
(I'm talking original stories, as opposed to the dialogs of
foreign stories, done for Gladstone)
Whoopee! Hotcha! Hot Diggety Dog! Yowie!
Your friend,
David Gerstein
"What a peculiar language these natives speak!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
P. S. Don, why have we never seen Bornworthy in one of your
stories? (Okay, he *might* be in "Fir-Tree Fracas"... I can't
remember right now. But I mean a major role...)
David A Gerstein
Rosa rebuked in Germany... by whom?
Message 65 -
1993-11-15 at 02:48:59
Dear Folks,
The German article making gross generalizations and
out-and-out misrepresentations of Don Rosa's work came as a real
shock. What's more, Don mentioned that he thought he knew who was
behind it. The now-infamous Grandeys? *Who*?
To be 100% fair, I noticed a bit of resemblance to R. Crumb's
stuff in the very earliest Rosa stories, but then, I always viewed
Crumb as a combination of Barks and Ub Iwerks (take a look at Ub's old
MM strips if you want further backing -- they're reprinted in the
Disney ADVENTURES magazine on sale in a few days, due to MM's 65th
birthday), but of course with a very different sensibility, which in
my case isn't the kind of thing I like to read.
Actually, I'd say that the Duck stories with the greatest
resemblance to underground comix have to be those that Bill Van Horn
did for about the first four months of his Gladstone tenure. I was
actually uncomfortable with his style at the very beginning, though it
soon improved vastly.
The complaints about Rosa in this article are virtually
identical to the few anti-Rosa letters I saw in the old Gladstone
comics. (I saw no anti-Rosa letters in Disney's comics, although
there were a great deal of anti-Van-Horn letters.) Nothing new under
the sun.
But when Don's style has matured so greatly from its original
feel (I'd say that perhaps the Crumb-like feeling is strongest in
"Nobody's Business"), it doesn't surprise me that these letters are
fewer now. Undoubtedly this very one-sided article is a last stand
from those who *don't* like Rosa. I'm not one of this party.
I don't think that the authors of that article would have
liked the version of Scrooge's biography that Disney might have done
had Don not taken up the project. If they don't like the LO$, they
don't know how much worse it could be.
For those of us who enjoy the LO$, things are subtly
different, no?
* * * * *
On a slightly divergent Kenoan track:
The closest approximation of Rosa's style I've seen anywhere
else is Will Elder's MICKEY RODENT in MAD, ca. 1953. Elder tries very
hard to draw Donald (or "Darnold" as he's called here) in a very
Barksish style, but cannot prevent his own more realistic feeling from
coming in, and eventually acknowledges that, when the characters in
the story notice his signature appearing on the panels and speculate
on it! The lettering in the story looks remarkably like that which
John Clark would use for "The Son of the Sun" 35 years later.
Cooincidence? Don, you've noted the similarity to Elder in your
style.
For those of you who haven't seen the MAD story... it's about
Mickey (who's drawn in an approximation of Bill Wright's style)
realizing that Donald's popularity is now greater than his and
deciding to put a stop to it!
What I'm wondering is...is *this story* perhaps your prime
influence in depicting the Duck universe, Don?
BTW: Things came full circle when CRACKED magazine parodied
"DuckTales" in 1988. Their story -- "Yuck Tales" -- had panels based
on those in "Cash Flow" and "The Son of the Sun" with a clear attempt
at imitating John Clark's lettering. How'd'ye like that?
Your concerned friend,
David.
The German article making gross generalizations and
out-and-out misrepresentations of Don Rosa's work came as a real
shock. What's more, Don mentioned that he thought he knew who was
behind it. The now-infamous Grandeys? *Who*?
To be 100% fair, I noticed a bit of resemblance to R. Crumb's
stuff in the very earliest Rosa stories, but then, I always viewed
Crumb as a combination of Barks and Ub Iwerks (take a look at Ub's old
MM strips if you want further backing -- they're reprinted in the
Disney ADVENTURES magazine on sale in a few days, due to MM's 65th
birthday), but of course with a very different sensibility, which in
my case isn't the kind of thing I like to read.
Actually, I'd say that the Duck stories with the greatest
resemblance to underground comix have to be those that Bill Van Horn
did for about the first four months of his Gladstone tenure. I was
actually uncomfortable with his style at the very beginning, though it
soon improved vastly.
The complaints about Rosa in this article are virtually
identical to the few anti-Rosa letters I saw in the old Gladstone
comics. (I saw no anti-Rosa letters in Disney's comics, although
there were a great deal of anti-Van-Horn letters.) Nothing new under
the sun.
But when Don's style has matured so greatly from its original
feel (I'd say that perhaps the Crumb-like feeling is strongest in
"Nobody's Business"), it doesn't surprise me that these letters are
fewer now. Undoubtedly this very one-sided article is a last stand
from those who *don't* like Rosa. I'm not one of this party.
I don't think that the authors of that article would have
liked the version of Scrooge's biography that Disney might have done
had Don not taken up the project. If they don't like the LO$, they
don't know how much worse it could be.
For those of us who enjoy the LO$, things are subtly
different, no?
* * * * *
On a slightly divergent Kenoan track:
The closest approximation of Rosa's style I've seen anywhere
else is Will Elder's MICKEY RODENT in MAD, ca. 1953. Elder tries very
hard to draw Donald (or "Darnold" as he's called here) in a very
Barksish style, but cannot prevent his own more realistic feeling from
coming in, and eventually acknowledges that, when the characters in
the story notice his signature appearing on the panels and speculate
on it! The lettering in the story looks remarkably like that which
John Clark would use for "The Son of the Sun" 35 years later.
Cooincidence? Don, you've noted the similarity to Elder in your
style.
For those of you who haven't seen the MAD story... it's about
Mickey (who's drawn in an approximation of Bill Wright's style)
realizing that Donald's popularity is now greater than his and
deciding to put a stop to it!
What I'm wondering is...is *this story* perhaps your prime
influence in depicting the Duck universe, Don?
BTW: Things came full circle when CRACKED magazine parodied
"DuckTales" in 1988. Their story -- "Yuck Tales" -- had panels based
on those in "Cash Flow" and "The Son of the Sun" with a clear attempt
at imitating John Clark's lettering. How'd'ye like that?
Your concerned friend,
David.
David A Gerstein
DUCK DAZE -- VERY IMPORTANT!!!!
Message 66 -
1993-11-15 at 04:32:20
This is a matter that concerns me greatly, folks.
In 1995 Disney TV is to have a half-hour series about Donald,
the Nephews, and other ducks including (I believe someone on the
network said this) Uncle Scrooge and Ludwig Von Drake. As I have
discovered from monitoring the ranger-list (something that doesn't
interest me much of the time, but that I feel I should keep informed
with), the show's management appreciates Barks, but has no
understanding of the comic book Ducks as the REAL Ducks. This is
due to this country's underexposure to any consistent non-animated
version of the Duck characters. Tad Stones, one
of the folks in charge of the series, had this to say recently:
"David A. Gerstein had questions on DUCK DAZE. I'm fascinated
that there is a very large contingent of fans who think that the only
way to treat the ducks is to rigidly follow the lore laid down by Carl
Barks. Now I'm the first to say that I would've liked DuckTales more
if it stayed closer to Barks...but Donald and the nephews existed long
before the comics. DUCK DAZE will be a new show, not a remake of
DuckTales or an adaptation of the universe of Carl Barks. This isn't
a "terrible failing" on the part of Disney, just recasting. For that
matter, it's literally impossible for Donald to say the dialogue in a
typical Barks adventure."
To which I responded (please, read the whole thing):
I respect your opinion -- that DD and the kids were around
long before the comics -- but if you're going to use Uncle Scrooge,
the very *real* creation of *Carl Barks* in the series, you need to
have some respect for Barks. For every fan outside of the United
States -- where Disney promotes its characters as animated characters
for people under ten -- the characters are largely promoted as Barks'
comic book characters, which were based on the Ducks as they appeared
in cartoons from the late 1930s through the early 1940s. When Barks
left the Studio the consistency of the cartoons disappeared, and DD
became a character who in many cartoons merely played a role. In one
later cartoon ("Donald's Diary", 1954) the nephews actually played the
roles of Daisy's little brothers!
The later animated world of the Ducks made no sense, but
that's no reason to discard the earlier one or particularly the comic
books. In the comic books, the characters have more personality than
anywhere else -- but because Disney in the US -- unlike in Europe --
does not appreciate this, the comic fans have to sit through shows
that misinterpret the REAL versions of the characters.
I don't mean that the show must REPLICATE the comics. Of course
Donald doesn't have to do as much talking in DUCK DAZE as he does in
the comics (tho' *I* have always understood his speech perfectly).
But that doesn't mean that the comics must be ignored. If people at
Disney were conscious of the fact that their characters actually
appear in comic books -- which are not popular in this country simply
because of the violence infatuation that is U. S. comic culture,
whereas one of Don Rosa's Scrooge stories was voted the best comic
strip in the world in Norway in 1992 -- they would look at DUCK DAZE
as contrary to not just one interpretation of the characters that
doesn't matter more or less, but to the characters themselves.
Donald's nephews *began* as comic characters. They were
developed by Al Taliaferro in early 1937 for use in the Donald Duck
Sunday strip, which was then a subsidiary of the "Silly Symphonies"
syndicated feature. Shortly after this, Carl Barks and others in the
studio story crew adapted them to animation. The only real change
made in them at this point was that they became a little shorter and
their eyes -- formerly just like Donald's -- became smaller. For the
origin of the Nephews in more detail, see the article about Al
Taliaferro's life published a few years ago in WALT DISNEY'S COMICS
AND STORIES 523. Please, Mr. Stones, before you decide on a
"recasting," look at why the Nephews were originally developed.
* * * * *
PLEASE HELP ME, FOLKS. BRIEFLY JOIN THE RANGER LIST
(ranger-list.request at taronga.com) AND WRITE LETTERS EN MASSE TO MR.
STONES. NOT OPENLY HOSTILE LETTERS (THE RANGER LIST IS MODERATED),
BUT CONSTRUCTIVE, HELPFUL LETTERS THAT CAN TURN DUCK DAZE AROUND
BEFORE IT BURIES BARKS' DUCKS FOREVER IN THE PAST.
(Please note: I would offer Tad Stones' E-Mail address if I
had it, but it is deleted from all of his letters that appear in the
ranger list, obviously on purpose, by Stephanie Da Silva, the
administrator. We will not be able to get it from her.)
IF THIS SHOW IS PRODUCED AND GIVEN USUAL DISNEY-STYLE
PUBLICITY, THE CLASSIC COMIC-BOOK DUCKS -- WITH THEIR LITTLE EXPOSURE
IN THIS COUNTRY -- WILL BE REGARDED AS INCORRECT VERSIONS OF THE
CHARACTERS. I KNOW, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE LOOKED ON AS UNIMPORTANT -- FEW
PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY KNOW OF THE COMICS -- BUT AT LEAST THE COMIC
VERSIONS ARE ACCEPTED AS THE REAL ONES. HELP. PLEASE.
David Gerstein
In 1995 Disney TV is to have a half-hour series about Donald,
the Nephews, and other ducks including (I believe someone on the
network said this) Uncle Scrooge and Ludwig Von Drake. As I have
discovered from monitoring the ranger-list (something that doesn't
interest me much of the time, but that I feel I should keep informed
with), the show's management appreciates Barks, but has no
understanding of the comic book Ducks as the REAL Ducks. This is
due to this country's underexposure to any consistent non-animated
version of the Duck characters. Tad Stones, one
of the folks in charge of the series, had this to say recently:
"David A. Gerstein had questions on DUCK DAZE. I'm fascinated
that there is a very large contingent of fans who think that the only
way to treat the ducks is to rigidly follow the lore laid down by Carl
Barks. Now I'm the first to say that I would've liked DuckTales more
if it stayed closer to Barks...but Donald and the nephews existed long
before the comics. DUCK DAZE will be a new show, not a remake of
DuckTales or an adaptation of the universe of Carl Barks. This isn't
a "terrible failing" on the part of Disney, just recasting. For that
matter, it's literally impossible for Donald to say the dialogue in a
typical Barks adventure."
To which I responded (please, read the whole thing):
I respect your opinion -- that DD and the kids were around
long before the comics -- but if you're going to use Uncle Scrooge,
the very *real* creation of *Carl Barks* in the series, you need to
have some respect for Barks. For every fan outside of the United
States -- where Disney promotes its characters as animated characters
for people under ten -- the characters are largely promoted as Barks'
comic book characters, which were based on the Ducks as they appeared
in cartoons from the late 1930s through the early 1940s. When Barks
left the Studio the consistency of the cartoons disappeared, and DD
became a character who in many cartoons merely played a role. In one
later cartoon ("Donald's Diary", 1954) the nephews actually played the
roles of Daisy's little brothers!
The later animated world of the Ducks made no sense, but
that's no reason to discard the earlier one or particularly the comic
books. In the comic books, the characters have more personality than
anywhere else -- but because Disney in the US -- unlike in Europe --
does not appreciate this, the comic fans have to sit through shows
that misinterpret the REAL versions of the characters.
I don't mean that the show must REPLICATE the comics. Of course
Donald doesn't have to do as much talking in DUCK DAZE as he does in
the comics (tho' *I* have always understood his speech perfectly).
But that doesn't mean that the comics must be ignored. If people at
Disney were conscious of the fact that their characters actually
appear in comic books -- which are not popular in this country simply
because of the violence infatuation that is U. S. comic culture,
whereas one of Don Rosa's Scrooge stories was voted the best comic
strip in the world in Norway in 1992 -- they would look at DUCK DAZE
as contrary to not just one interpretation of the characters that
doesn't matter more or less, but to the characters themselves.
Donald's nephews *began* as comic characters. They were
developed by Al Taliaferro in early 1937 for use in the Donald Duck
Sunday strip, which was then a subsidiary of the "Silly Symphonies"
syndicated feature. Shortly after this, Carl Barks and others in the
studio story crew adapted them to animation. The only real change
made in them at this point was that they became a little shorter and
their eyes -- formerly just like Donald's -- became smaller. For the
origin of the Nephews in more detail, see the article about Al
Taliaferro's life published a few years ago in WALT DISNEY'S COMICS
AND STORIES 523. Please, Mr. Stones, before you decide on a
"recasting," look at why the Nephews were originally developed.
* * * * *
PLEASE HELP ME, FOLKS. BRIEFLY JOIN THE RANGER LIST
(ranger-list.request at taronga.com) AND WRITE LETTERS EN MASSE TO MR.
STONES. NOT OPENLY HOSTILE LETTERS (THE RANGER LIST IS MODERATED),
BUT CONSTRUCTIVE, HELPFUL LETTERS THAT CAN TURN DUCK DAZE AROUND
BEFORE IT BURIES BARKS' DUCKS FOREVER IN THE PAST.
(Please note: I would offer Tad Stones' E-Mail address if I
had it, but it is deleted from all of his letters that appear in the
ranger list, obviously on purpose, by Stephanie Da Silva, the
administrator. We will not be able to get it from her.)
IF THIS SHOW IS PRODUCED AND GIVEN USUAL DISNEY-STYLE
PUBLICITY, THE CLASSIC COMIC-BOOK DUCKS -- WITH THEIR LITTLE EXPOSURE
IN THIS COUNTRY -- WILL BE REGARDED AS INCORRECT VERSIONS OF THE
CHARACTERS. I KNOW, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE LOOKED ON AS UNIMPORTANT -- FEW
PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY KNOW OF THE COMICS -- BUT AT LEAST THE COMIC
VERSIONS ARE ACCEPTED AS THE REAL ONES. HELP. PLEASE.
David Gerstein
Tom Johnston
Please add
Message 67 -
1993-11-15 at 08:12:08
I would like to be added to the Disney mailing list, taught the
secret handshake, forced to swallow goldfish, and otherwise be
initiated into things. Thanks.
Tom Johnston
secret handshake, forced to swallow goldfish, and otherwise be
initiated into things. Thanks.
Tom Johnston
Horace G. Mitchell
Disney mailing list
Message 68 -
1993-11-15 at 15:24:26
Hi,
Please add me to your mailing list.
Thanks,
Horace Mitchell
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Horace Mitchell voice: (301) 286-4030
Scientific Applications and Visualization Branch secretary: (301) 286-8542
Code 932, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center fax: (301) 286-1634
Greenbelt, MD 20771 hmitchel at vlasov.gsfc.nasa.gov
Please add me to your mailing list.
Thanks,
Horace Mitchell
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Horace Mitchell voice: (301) 286-4030
Scientific Applications and Visualization Branch secretary: (301) 286-8542
Code 932, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center fax: (301) 286-1634
Greenbelt, MD 20771 hmitchel at vlasov.gsfc.nasa.gov
Travis L Searls
Disney mailings
Message 69 -
1993-11-16 at 01:22:10
Could you add me to the mailing list for Disney.
Thanks!
--
Travis Searls
searls at csn.org
Thanks!
--
Travis Searls
searls at csn.org
Don Rosa
+Postage Due+Disney-comics digest #158.
Message 70 -
1993-11-16 at 05:47:44
David:
Yes... you are correct when you guess WHO I think is behind the
instigation of the German article. Same force as was behind Lustig's
letter in CBG. That force is also objecting to Egmont for how much
publicity I get in Europe.
Oh, I don't mind for an instant when a reviewer objects to my
art style or to the whole idea of this Lo$ or my sequels in general!
That's a legitimate expression of opinion, and an opinion I agree with
more than not! I HATE my artstyle! However, what I DO object to is the
malicious twisting of facts and outright lies which this article deals
in for no conceivable reason. Why would anyone do this? I can only guess
based on other things I see going on that I'm not completely at liberty
to discuss.
As for DUCK DAZE, Jymn Magon called me about helping with that
show over a year ago, but I politely told him that TV just wasn't my
cuppa tea. But I think you're going overboard in your reaction. I
thought DUCKTALES was also a very corrupted version of the "true"
$crooge McDuck, but I never cared. It's not really $crooge McDuck...
it's just Disney's adaptation of a property that they own but never
contributed toward the creation or development of. I thought it was
better than most TV cartoons even though it had little to do with
$crooge McDuck, but I knew that it would soon fade away, which it now
has done. Same goes for DUCK DAZE. No matter what it's like, it will
soon fade away and leave no impression on the comic books.
What I DID jump all over Tad Stones about when I learned of it
was DARKWING DUCK! When I first learned of that show about a year before
it was released, I assumed it was Disney turning Donald into typical
American super-hero parody crap; this would have been more than a
misinterpretation which would soon fade from view -- I saw it as a
supreme insult to a character that was light years above what it was
being reduced to. Of course, as it turned out, DARKWING DUCK was not
Donald, and it was more influenced by the Shadow than the X-Men. And it,
too, shall pass into oblivion is another year or two, while Barks'
Donald & $crooge will endure in perpetuity.
Yes... you are correct when you guess WHO I think is behind the
instigation of the German article. Same force as was behind Lustig's
letter in CBG. That force is also objecting to Egmont for how much
publicity I get in Europe.
Oh, I don't mind for an instant when a reviewer objects to my
art style or to the whole idea of this Lo$ or my sequels in general!
That's a legitimate expression of opinion, and an opinion I agree with
more than not! I HATE my artstyle! However, what I DO object to is the
malicious twisting of facts and outright lies which this article deals
in for no conceivable reason. Why would anyone do this? I can only guess
based on other things I see going on that I'm not completely at liberty
to discuss.
As for DUCK DAZE, Jymn Magon called me about helping with that
show over a year ago, but I politely told him that TV just wasn't my
cuppa tea. But I think you're going overboard in your reaction. I
thought DUCKTALES was also a very corrupted version of the "true"
$crooge McDuck, but I never cared. It's not really $crooge McDuck...
it's just Disney's adaptation of a property that they own but never
contributed toward the creation or development of. I thought it was
better than most TV cartoons even though it had little to do with
$crooge McDuck, but I knew that it would soon fade away, which it now
has done. Same goes for DUCK DAZE. No matter what it's like, it will
soon fade away and leave no impression on the comic books.
What I DID jump all over Tad Stones about when I learned of it
was DARKWING DUCK! When I first learned of that show about a year before
it was released, I assumed it was Disney turning Donald into typical
American super-hero parody crap; this would have been more than a
misinterpretation which would soon fade from view -- I saw it as a
supreme insult to a character that was light years above what it was
being reduced to. Of course, as it turned out, DARKWING DUCK was not
Donald, and it was more influenced by the Shadow than the X-Men. And it,
too, shall pass into oblivion is another year or two, while Barks'
Donald & $crooge will endure in perpetuity.
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
From RoC
Message 71 -
1993-11-16 at 11:00:50
Lucky me! I answered an ad on 79 jumbo books; 20,000 pages of Italian
stories. The 'victim' wanted 200 Danish kr. (30 $) but I drive a hard
bargain and gave him 300! If $crooge gets an alergy again, call me :)
SORRY, DON (Huey, Dewey and June)
An apology is in place: I scorned (scorched?) Don for drawing April,
May and June with pointed beaks, like chickens, or kind of like Freddy
Milton's woodpecker kids. My excuse is that I don't have the actual
poster, just pictures of *two* nieces. And I simply didn't recognize
them or their Norwegian names at first; I first assumed they were some
obscure pair of twins, unknown to me, or maybe invented for Lo$. Later I
caught on, but I still couldn't figure out why they looked so *weird*.
That they should be so rare in Barks' production surprises me. I also
thought of the 'Flipism' story, but assumed that they had popped up
now and then. But the DDDiary story 'A Sticky Situation' is maybe
the only time they appear for more than a panel or two. In another DDD
story by Barks (The Double Date, last panel) they look 'normal' to me.
In my Duckburg dimension, they are identical to HD&L except for the
eyelashes. They live with Daisy, but are out a lot of the time.
Maybe they are baby-sitting or do you have any lewd suggestions, Geir?
Hmm, I just leafed through 1500+ pages of the 1990 Danish edition, and
I couldn't spot a single appearance of those elusive nieces!?
*Then* I got the bright idea of checking my own index and found 1 (one)
reference to them as title characters. A quick look confirmed their
similarity to HDL. This was a D coded story.
SORRY, VICAR (Something rotten in Denmark)
I also made some derogatory remarks about Vicar and other 'Danish'
artists. Thank you, David, for hearing what I meant, not what I said.
The criticism should have been leveled at Paul Halas and the handful
of hacks who turn out those tedious plots, hallmark and mainstay of
Scandinavian issues. The art isn't really that bad.
I have also come to the point, where I had to change an ingrown opinion
that I didn't like Italian stories. The plots are usually interesting,
drawing from litterature and history to a degree unknown elsewhere.
I have come across adaptions of Mark Twain, Franz Kafka, Victor Hugo and
numerous Italian authors. Not to mention a lot of action in medieval
Italy, and a story where Mickey and Goofy meets their 30es counterparts.
BTW, Cavazzano always draws ducks standing on their toes? He *is* good.
SORRY, HARRY (Guardians of the List Library)
Oops, I could have *sworn* that I sent you that Guardians code. Anyway,
when you put this, the Lillehammer, and the Dime stories into the index,
higher numbers will change if you keep the consecutive numbering of
D codes. OK, the numbers are not *supposed* to be numberING, but...
I would have suggested a single character in the margin to separate
entries, though your method is better with regard to different versions
of a story/cover. And if we start incorporating data on publication in
more countries like Germany, the one-line-per-entry concept will have to
go anyway, even if it breaks my heart.
I'm sorry that I opposed your reforms so rudely, I can see that you have
made many necessary adjustments and additions. Here is another one:
Lo$9, D 93121, 15 pages KA93-45 (all Scandinavian issues)
Oh yes, I'm also sorry that I mailed some updates to you while you were
away. Your reply only reached me as a summary from my brother. You are
not seriously suggesting to decrypt my notes in Danish and type them?!
NEWS IN BRIEF (Film at 11)
Just got my first Finnish issue! Looks like Scandinavian can be replaced
with Nordic in our indexes, as it's contents are similar to the other
three versions I recieve. Only it's 32 pages pulp type paper, cover too.
That gives me a fair chance to figure the language out, in case anything
special should come up. Right now even the saddest scripts make me laugh
when they're in Finnish ;)
DAVID WROTE (A duck a day keeps the blues away)
> A few other things in Geir's letter, which I didn't get to
>comment on before.
>
> First... The Taliaferro softback book series was thrown off
>the press here because Disney refused to let some strips involving
>Indians be reprinted... sound familiar? They still stand firm... see
>my letter in DD 282. The cover that had been drawn for the aborted
>1938 collection was just used on DD 281.
>
> I would be interested in forking over that ten bucks for a
>copy of the 1938 volume you mention... can you give an address?
You are confusing Geir's and my letter: I only have the three volumes
published so far here, but they are indeed complete, indians and all.
I think they are all still available and will gladly send them to you.
Of course they are in Danish, but most of them could be in Chinese and
still make you laugh! Danish isn't that different from Dutch either.
NEW RELEASES (Wish you were here)
Issue #20 of Carl Barks & Co.
A poster magazine with two Barks oils: a family portrait and a treasure
island with a pirate ship in the background.
Donald Duck Daily Strips 1941
Gold Book #10 w. uncensored Africa story from 1966. (So Far No Safari
*was* uncut when published in Scandinavia, wasn't it?)
EGMONT RULES (A dork's eye-view of Europe)
I happened to catch an interview on TV with the chief of Danish Egmont
(didn't catch his name though.) The case in question was the declared
anti-racist stance of the German Micky Maus. Apparently editorials has
spoken against discrimination of refugees and other foreigners.
When asked why Mickey has gone political, mr. Egmont explained that
surveys show that this topic interests the readers (children.)
(Surveys must have pointed to Beverly Hills 90210 and Jurassic Park as
especially hot in Denmark... wanna buy some posters in mint condition?)
The interviewer asked: "[...] Who decides what goes in the various
Donald Duck magazines around the world... you?"
Mr. Egmont:"[short pause] In the end, yes. But to a large extent the
local/national editors [...]"
The actual phrasing eludes me, but I distinctly remember *never* hearing
the word 'Disney' in a context that could refer to a company, if at all.
Americans can hardly appreciate the huge popularity of Disney in Europe.
A small country like Denmark with 5 million people publishes about 700
pages of ducks'n'mice *a month*. The weekly Anders And & Co. sells maybe
a quarter of a million copies, as much as the biggest newspapers.
It's mainstream culture, and just about every kid reads a Donald story
now and then. Not to mention adults.
In the US, kids read about turbo-z-mutants and the typical Disney comics
buyer is old enough to have a university degree, and often has.
Those, who actually read their magazines, are hard-core fundamentalists
and want 'the right stuff' reprinted over and over again.
Those, who don't, want "50 of those #1's with gold staples and author's
thumbprint on a numbered certificate... oh, and give me a lead box too."
(The above characterizations are fictive and any similarity to actual
persons, living, dead, or on this list is entirely coincidental.)
The way the American market is based on the investor value of 'items',
you can probably thank Don Rosa alone that Disney has survived as comics
at all. But as his first printings no longer appear in the US, commercial
interest may wane, making Disney publishing economically unsound (again.)
With this in mind, it can hardly surprise that Egmont chooses to expand
in Eastern Europe, Russia and China instead of Farbackistan, America.
I know they were mentioned as possible successors of Disney Comics,
does anybody know why they let Gladstone have it?
I mean, if they really *had* wanted it...
Argento.
Ole Reichstein * "I should go jump in a lake and sink."
stories. The 'victim' wanted 200 Danish kr. (30 $) but I drive a hard
bargain and gave him 300! If $crooge gets an alergy again, call me :)
SORRY, DON (Huey, Dewey and June)
An apology is in place: I scorned (scorched?) Don for drawing April,
May and June with pointed beaks, like chickens, or kind of like Freddy
Milton's woodpecker kids. My excuse is that I don't have the actual
poster, just pictures of *two* nieces. And I simply didn't recognize
them or their Norwegian names at first; I first assumed they were some
obscure pair of twins, unknown to me, or maybe invented for Lo$. Later I
caught on, but I still couldn't figure out why they looked so *weird*.
That they should be so rare in Barks' production surprises me. I also
thought of the 'Flipism' story, but assumed that they had popped up
now and then. But the DDDiary story 'A Sticky Situation' is maybe
the only time they appear for more than a panel or two. In another DDD
story by Barks (The Double Date, last panel) they look 'normal' to me.
In my Duckburg dimension, they are identical to HD&L except for the
eyelashes. They live with Daisy, but are out a lot of the time.
Maybe they are baby-sitting or do you have any lewd suggestions, Geir?
Hmm, I just leafed through 1500+ pages of the 1990 Danish edition, and
I couldn't spot a single appearance of those elusive nieces!?
*Then* I got the bright idea of checking my own index and found 1 (one)
reference to them as title characters. A quick look confirmed their
similarity to HDL. This was a D coded story.
SORRY, VICAR (Something rotten in Denmark)
I also made some derogatory remarks about Vicar and other 'Danish'
artists. Thank you, David, for hearing what I meant, not what I said.
The criticism should have been leveled at Paul Halas and the handful
of hacks who turn out those tedious plots, hallmark and mainstay of
Scandinavian issues. The art isn't really that bad.
I have also come to the point, where I had to change an ingrown opinion
that I didn't like Italian stories. The plots are usually interesting,
drawing from litterature and history to a degree unknown elsewhere.
I have come across adaptions of Mark Twain, Franz Kafka, Victor Hugo and
numerous Italian authors. Not to mention a lot of action in medieval
Italy, and a story where Mickey and Goofy meets their 30es counterparts.
BTW, Cavazzano always draws ducks standing on their toes? He *is* good.
SORRY, HARRY (Guardians of the List Library)
Oops, I could have *sworn* that I sent you that Guardians code. Anyway,
when you put this, the Lillehammer, and the Dime stories into the index,
higher numbers will change if you keep the consecutive numbering of
D codes. OK, the numbers are not *supposed* to be numberING, but...
I would have suggested a single character in the margin to separate
entries, though your method is better with regard to different versions
of a story/cover. And if we start incorporating data on publication in
more countries like Germany, the one-line-per-entry concept will have to
go anyway, even if it breaks my heart.
I'm sorry that I opposed your reforms so rudely, I can see that you have
made many necessary adjustments and additions. Here is another one:
Lo$9, D 93121, 15 pages KA93-45 (all Scandinavian issues)
Oh yes, I'm also sorry that I mailed some updates to you while you were
away. Your reply only reached me as a summary from my brother. You are
not seriously suggesting to decrypt my notes in Danish and type them?!
NEWS IN BRIEF (Film at 11)
Just got my first Finnish issue! Looks like Scandinavian can be replaced
with Nordic in our indexes, as it's contents are similar to the other
three versions I recieve. Only it's 32 pages pulp type paper, cover too.
That gives me a fair chance to figure the language out, in case anything
special should come up. Right now even the saddest scripts make me laugh
when they're in Finnish ;)
DAVID WROTE (A duck a day keeps the blues away)
> A few other things in Geir's letter, which I didn't get to
>comment on before.
>
> First... The Taliaferro softback book series was thrown off
>the press here because Disney refused to let some strips involving
>Indians be reprinted... sound familiar? They still stand firm... see
>my letter in DD 282. The cover that had been drawn for the aborted
>1938 collection was just used on DD 281.
>
> I would be interested in forking over that ten bucks for a
>copy of the 1938 volume you mention... can you give an address?
You are confusing Geir's and my letter: I only have the three volumes
published so far here, but they are indeed complete, indians and all.
I think they are all still available and will gladly send them to you.
Of course they are in Danish, but most of them could be in Chinese and
still make you laugh! Danish isn't that different from Dutch either.
NEW RELEASES (Wish you were here)
Issue #20 of Carl Barks & Co.
A poster magazine with two Barks oils: a family portrait and a treasure
island with a pirate ship in the background.
Donald Duck Daily Strips 1941
Gold Book #10 w. uncensored Africa story from 1966. (So Far No Safari
*was* uncut when published in Scandinavia, wasn't it?)
EGMONT RULES (A dork's eye-view of Europe)
I happened to catch an interview on TV with the chief of Danish Egmont
(didn't catch his name though.) The case in question was the declared
anti-racist stance of the German Micky Maus. Apparently editorials has
spoken against discrimination of refugees and other foreigners.
When asked why Mickey has gone political, mr. Egmont explained that
surveys show that this topic interests the readers (children.)
(Surveys must have pointed to Beverly Hills 90210 and Jurassic Park as
especially hot in Denmark... wanna buy some posters in mint condition?)
The interviewer asked: "[...] Who decides what goes in the various
Donald Duck magazines around the world... you?"
Mr. Egmont:"[short pause] In the end, yes. But to a large extent the
local/national editors [...]"
The actual phrasing eludes me, but I distinctly remember *never* hearing
the word 'Disney' in a context that could refer to a company, if at all.
Americans can hardly appreciate the huge popularity of Disney in Europe.
A small country like Denmark with 5 million people publishes about 700
pages of ducks'n'mice *a month*. The weekly Anders And & Co. sells maybe
a quarter of a million copies, as much as the biggest newspapers.
It's mainstream culture, and just about every kid reads a Donald story
now and then. Not to mention adults.
In the US, kids read about turbo-z-mutants and the typical Disney comics
buyer is old enough to have a university degree, and often has.
Those, who actually read their magazines, are hard-core fundamentalists
and want 'the right stuff' reprinted over and over again.
Those, who don't, want "50 of those #1's with gold staples and author's
thumbprint on a numbered certificate... oh, and give me a lead box too."
(The above characterizations are fictive and any similarity to actual
persons, living, dead, or on this list is entirely coincidental.)
The way the American market is based on the investor value of 'items',
you can probably thank Don Rosa alone that Disney has survived as comics
at all. But as his first printings no longer appear in the US, commercial
interest may wane, making Disney publishing economically unsound (again.)
With this in mind, it can hardly surprise that Egmont chooses to expand
in Eastern Europe, Russia and China instead of Farbackistan, America.
I know they were mentioned as possible successors of Disney Comics,
does anybody know why they let Gladstone have it?
I mean, if they really *had* wanted it...
Argento.
Ole Reichstein * "I should go jump in a lake and sink."
The GRIPPER
On a unix based system
Message 72 -
1993-11-16 at 14:35:51
incidentally do you know how to broadcast a message to someone without saying who the message is by
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Shanu aka The GRIPPER |"If a man loves you then you must love him|
| World Ranking Mad DMC DJ | back, if he ignores you, you must turn |
|---------------------------| the other cheek, however, if a man shows |
| Shantanu at cs.man.ac.uk | you racism, then he must die" |
| - Martin Luther King |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Shanu aka The GRIPPER |"If a man loves you then you must love him|
| World Ranking Mad DMC DJ | back, if he ignores you, you must turn |
|---------------------------| the other cheek, however, if a man shows |
| Shantanu at cs.man.ac.uk | you racism, then he must die" |
| - Martin Luther King |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Williams
Duck Daze
Message 73 -
1993-11-16 at 16:30:17
David,
I use to be a member of Ranger-List. I left because of the moderator
and cannot find it in myself to recommend that list to anyone. Tad
Stones rarely ever posted to Ranger-List, and I got the distinct
impression that he wasn't a regular reader.
I honestly don't understand your furor over Duck Daze. I first heard
about the show almost a year ago and have been looking forward to it
ever since. I don't expected it to be like Carl Barks' or Don Rosa's
Ducks because Disney Comics and Disney Animation have always been
radically different.
I'll give you an example. I love Floyd Gottfredson's Mickey Mouse.
But, I also like the cartoon Goof Troop. To me FG's and GT's Goofy are
different versions of the same character. In fact, I find that Goof
Troop has actually increased my enjoyment of Floyd Gottfredson because
it has made me re-read a bunch of his work this time focusing my
attention on Goofy.
--------------------------------------------
| James Williams |
| Bitnet: JWW%ESS%NIAID at NIH3PLUS.BITNET |
| Internet: JWW at ESS.NIAID.PC.NIAID.NIH.GOV |
| CompuServ: 70304,2462 |
--------------------------------------------
I use to be a member of Ranger-List. I left because of the moderator
and cannot find it in myself to recommend that list to anyone. Tad
Stones rarely ever posted to Ranger-List, and I got the distinct
impression that he wasn't a regular reader.
I honestly don't understand your furor over Duck Daze. I first heard
about the show almost a year ago and have been looking forward to it
ever since. I don't expected it to be like Carl Barks' or Don Rosa's
Ducks because Disney Comics and Disney Animation have always been
radically different.
I'll give you an example. I love Floyd Gottfredson's Mickey Mouse.
But, I also like the cartoon Goof Troop. To me FG's and GT's Goofy are
different versions of the same character. In fact, I find that Goof
Troop has actually increased my enjoyment of Floyd Gottfredson because
it has made me re-read a bunch of his work this time focusing my
attention on Goofy.
--------------------------------------------
| James Williams |
| Bitnet: JWW%ESS%NIAID at NIH3PLUS.BITNET |
| Internet: JWW at ESS.NIAID.PC.NIAID.NIH.GOV |
| CompuServ: 70304,2462 |
--------------------------------------------
Andrew Krieg 5-5379
DUCK DAZE -- VERY IMPORTANT!!!!
Message 74 -
1993-11-16 at 16:46:48
David,
I think you are blowing this way out of proportion. The comics Duck world
and the TV/movie Duck world have always been, and will always be, two
separate animals. I didn't let my love of Barks and Co. diminsh my enjoy-
ment of the first season of "DuckTales". There were some damn fine episodes
in there, I don't care what anybody else says.
>>When Barks
>>left the Studio the consistency of the cartoons disappeared, and DD
>>became a character who in many cartoons merely played a role. In one
>>later cartoon ("Donald's Diary", 1954) the nephews actually played the
>>roles of Daisy's little brothers!
There has never been any consistency in any of the Disney shorts, ever. All
of the animated characters were playing roles; these were not glimpses into
their private lives. Even in the earliest Donald shorts, he went from
playing an adult with a job ("Donald's Ostrich") to a child who had to go to
school ("Donald's Better Self"). The "Wonderful World of Disney" TV show
emphasized that the 'toons were just playing roles by showing them 'behind
the scenes', etc. One entire episode is about Walt trying to get Donald into
the studio to film a new cartoon.
I don't know the solution to getting Disney comics more exposure to the mass
public, but this isn't the way to do it. Let the "Disney Afternoon" and
Disney Comics go their separate ways.
Andy
I think you are blowing this way out of proportion. The comics Duck world
and the TV/movie Duck world have always been, and will always be, two
separate animals. I didn't let my love of Barks and Co. diminsh my enjoy-
ment of the first season of "DuckTales". There were some damn fine episodes
in there, I don't care what anybody else says.
>>When Barks
>>left the Studio the consistency of the cartoons disappeared, and DD
>>became a character who in many cartoons merely played a role. In one
>>later cartoon ("Donald's Diary", 1954) the nephews actually played the
>>roles of Daisy's little brothers!
There has never been any consistency in any of the Disney shorts, ever. All
of the animated characters were playing roles; these were not glimpses into
their private lives. Even in the earliest Donald shorts, he went from
playing an adult with a job ("Donald's Ostrich") to a child who had to go to
school ("Donald's Better Self"). The "Wonderful World of Disney" TV show
emphasized that the 'toons were just playing roles by showing them 'behind
the scenes', etc. One entire episode is about Walt trying to get Donald into
the studio to film a new cartoon.
I don't know the solution to getting Disney comics more exposure to the mass
public, but this isn't the way to do it. Let the "Disney Afternoon" and
Disney Comics go their separate ways.
Andy
Mattias Hallin
Don's details...
Message 75 -
1993-11-16 at 17:18:56
Howdy, y'all!!!
I spent this weekend doing many things (I try to use my preciuos freedom
well!); and one thing among others, I re-read Lo$, parts 1-9 a couple of times
straight through, and then some selective browsing of favourite parts. This
time, I got my major kick (as it seems I always do) by the marvelous portrait
of $crooge that is step by step built up throughout the series - a portrait
that I'm very impressed with for many reasons, but mainly because:
a) it makes $crooge a thoroughly likeable, and thorougbly REALISTIC human
being - the developing of his personality, his emotions, his ambitions and his
drive are pictured subtly, convincingly and with great emphaty, I find
b) all of this is so well tied in to Barks and history alike, that someday when
I got the time, I'm gonna go through this thing panel by panel, and compare,
and in particular look up everything I can possibly think of in my
Encyclopedia Brittanica (1964 edition); this weekend, f'rinstance, I was
reading the article on "Dance, modern social", when quite by accident I came
across one on "Daly, Marcus" and the Anaconda Copper Mines...
Oh, Don - you thorough ol' so-and-so...
And, yeah - speaking of thorough... Don: I'm curious if this was intentional on
your part, or if I'm just constructing things out of thin air, but in the South
African episode, in the molasses-and-feathers sequence, it seems to me that
$crooge fires his two revolvers a total of 12 times (once to break the molasses
jar; thrice in the next panel to rip up the feather-bed (I counted the
muzzle-flames); and eight times into the ground (counting the bullet-holes in
the ground); and then in the next panel where Flintheart is running away, and
$crooge is reloading his gun, there is 12 spent cartridges on the ground... Is
all this intentional? I mean, it makes sense, since the usual revolver chambers
six rounds, and 2x6=12... If so, then that is what I call attention to detail!
By the way, and speaking of the South African episode - Don, I laff mahself lak
t' split at your beautiful backgruond running gags, like f'rinstance the
rhino-in-the-tree... And, all through the series, all your animal-gags... Oh
boy! The wolf by Agony Creek, f'rinstance - his expression after $crooge
inspects his teeth, looking for traces of gold is just plain unbeatable!
Otherwise, I think that without thinking too much, the parts I like the best
are the Australian, and the whole Yukon triptych - in particular the last of
those three, i.e. part eight; perhaps because the critical parts of these
evolve so much around $crooge's basic character, around his humanity. There are
parts here that touch me rather deeply; and the final stage of part eight,
where $crooge finds the goose-egg nugget, and his hesitation and introspective
thoughts are some of the finest, most evocative scenes I've seen in a comic...
and beautifully drawn, too - in particular the very last page - a beautiful
composition, and sensitive drawings...
Well...
All my best - and my regards to your wife!
Mattias
I spent this weekend doing many things (I try to use my preciuos freedom
well!); and one thing among others, I re-read Lo$, parts 1-9 a couple of times
straight through, and then some selective browsing of favourite parts. This
time, I got my major kick (as it seems I always do) by the marvelous portrait
of $crooge that is step by step built up throughout the series - a portrait
that I'm very impressed with for many reasons, but mainly because:
a) it makes $crooge a thoroughly likeable, and thorougbly REALISTIC human
being - the developing of his personality, his emotions, his ambitions and his
drive are pictured subtly, convincingly and with great emphaty, I find
b) all of this is so well tied in to Barks and history alike, that someday when
I got the time, I'm gonna go through this thing panel by panel, and compare,
and in particular look up everything I can possibly think of in my
Encyclopedia Brittanica (1964 edition); this weekend, f'rinstance, I was
reading the article on "Dance, modern social", when quite by accident I came
across one on "Daly, Marcus" and the Anaconda Copper Mines...
Oh, Don - you thorough ol' so-and-so...
And, yeah - speaking of thorough... Don: I'm curious if this was intentional on
your part, or if I'm just constructing things out of thin air, but in the South
African episode, in the molasses-and-feathers sequence, it seems to me that
$crooge fires his two revolvers a total of 12 times (once to break the molasses
jar; thrice in the next panel to rip up the feather-bed (I counted the
muzzle-flames); and eight times into the ground (counting the bullet-holes in
the ground); and then in the next panel where Flintheart is running away, and
$crooge is reloading his gun, there is 12 spent cartridges on the ground... Is
all this intentional? I mean, it makes sense, since the usual revolver chambers
six rounds, and 2x6=12... If so, then that is what I call attention to detail!
By the way, and speaking of the South African episode - Don, I laff mahself lak
t' split at your beautiful backgruond running gags, like f'rinstance the
rhino-in-the-tree... And, all through the series, all your animal-gags... Oh
boy! The wolf by Agony Creek, f'rinstance - his expression after $crooge
inspects his teeth, looking for traces of gold is just plain unbeatable!
Otherwise, I think that without thinking too much, the parts I like the best
are the Australian, and the whole Yukon triptych - in particular the last of
those three, i.e. part eight; perhaps because the critical parts of these
evolve so much around $crooge's basic character, around his humanity. There are
parts here that touch me rather deeply; and the final stage of part eight,
where $crooge finds the goose-egg nugget, and his hesitation and introspective
thoughts are some of the finest, most evocative scenes I've seen in a comic...
and beautifully drawn, too - in particular the very last page - a beautiful
composition, and sensitive drawings...
Well...
All my best - and my regards to your wife!
Mattias