Keskustelujen arkisto

Don Rosa:
> But, hey, Harry -- I was thinking about you today while working
> on this special "Donald's 60th Birthday story" I'm doing.
> (...) maybe I should ask YOU to perhaps give a call to
> your contact at Oberon (the one who LIKES my stuff) and mention the
> existance of this tale, and tell him that I would imagine Egmont would
> allow simultaneous usage of the story this summer if Oberon would so
> desire. Can you do that? (It's 16 pages.)

I called Jos Beekman (the one who likes your stuff) and told him about it.
He thanked me (and you) for the tip. He couldn't tell what he did with it
yet; I guess he's not the only one to decide. Normally, Egmont stories
appear in Holland at least 1/2 year after their original publication.

But: what is so special about the story that it could not be reprinted
as a "65 years DD" story 5 years later?

BTW: DD Extra #12 is now on sale: it contains Life Of Scrooge part 2. They
end the story with a note, something like: "But that's another story, and
you can re-read it in DD Extra 6". (6 should be 7 of course, but who cares...)

The next DD Extra issue is #13 (in Holland, there are 13 months in a year 8-).
It doesn't contain a Rosa story. Jos told me they'll publish parts 4, 5 and 6
in DD Extra 1994-2, 3 and 4, respectively. And he told me the TITLES, so I
could check that the episodes were in the right order.

After Lo$ part 6, they will have a non-Rosa break for one or two months,
and then publish some other episodes.

They translate the Lo$ episodes from both German and English scripts. Jos
said the English scripts were not the original scripts.
This matches with David's story, though I don't know why Egmont wouldn't send
Don's original scripts...

And a last message from Jos Beekman: they have a copy of Don's family tree,
but they haven't decided yet what to do with it. In Holland, Grandma Duck
is DEFINITELY the sister of Scrooge. They stated that explicitely in several
issues of DD weekly in the last few years.

Don again:
> ADDITION: I went back and was glancing at the last digest before
> deleting it... I see the comments about "Ghast Cow" (???) and "The Money
> Whirlpool" (???) were credited to Geoff Blum from an interview. I can
> only credit this to misquotes or mistranslations.
> (...) I'd be curious to read that interview, now that you
> mention it -- is it printed in English anywhere?

I don't know. Per posted the original message. Maybe you know more, Per?

--Harry.

A reply to Ole
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Speaking of colors; Harry once said, that DDD relied on Egmont's staff
> to do the colors.

That only applied to the monthly "Donald Duck Extra" (and some album specials).
In the weekly "Donald Duck", they (almost) always colour the stories them-
selves, and the re-lettering also involves reshaping text balloons, and
sometimes insert art to fill in the space.

I'm glad they publish the Rosa stories in DD Extra, because the balloons
are not reshaped and no Rosa artwork is lost.

> Now, what is a "stavenuiter?"

Jaap Stavenuiter is a young Disney artist working for GP ("Oberon"). He
specializes in Wolf stories. I haven't put his name in the 'creators' file
yet, because I can't recognize all of his work (yet).

And I'm sure you're gonna tell us what a badalamenti is...

A non-Disney (but Barks) subject
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Dutch "Tom & Jerry" #205, available in every super market, reprints a
Barks story from Our Gang 33, 1946. The rest of the comic is filled with
stories by Oscar Martin, and the colophon says "produced in cooperation
with Semic, Sweden". I hope this means we will see reprints of other
Barks "Barney & Benny" stories. A lot of good things come from Sweden...

--Harry.

PER:
Yes, Barks' trip plans are changing. Those original plans were
never supposed to have been made public by Grandey. I think Egmont
quickly became a bit upset that the trip that they were paying for so
Barks could help them promote the comics was obviously being taken
control of by Grandey to make any plans he wished. It also looked like
Grandey's only intent was to promote Barks' current "collectibles"
projects, something that's naturally of no interest whatsoever to
Egmont. I think Egmont may have retaken control of the trip -- we'll see
what develops.

DAVID:
The way you describe the early Taliaferro use of Grandma with
the reference to her being both the nephews' grandma AND Donald's, would
prove what I said about how the only original intent was to simply
introduce a "granny" type character into the daily strips for use in
gags. They didn't care whose grandmother she was or if she was really
anybody's grandmother. It wasn't until Barks started using her in the
more complex comics that the need arose to more clearly define such
characters. I'm glad you remind me of that first logo of "Donald's
Grandma Duck". That's proof enough for me.

LARS:
Sure, when I started writing & drawing Duck stories in 1987, I
learned by copying Barks poses, as is or with any changes as suited my
needs. As time went on, I relied on them less... and while doing the Lo$
for the past 2 1/2 years, I haven't used my clip-files at all. However,
as a result of a Danish newspaper article about me that, though being
generally very favorable, claimed I draw Donald so poorly as to be
unrecognizeable, I have gone BACK to using my clip-file for the "60th
Birthday" story I'm currently drawing.
I've already learned in my few years that, although I speak of
disliking my own work, some people will still criticize me like I think
I'm Norman Rockwell. I've learned that my only response to that sort of
thing is NOT to disagree with them. If they think I lack any imagination
or talent, fine... maybe they're right, who knows, not me. My only
advice to them is not to waste their time reading my stories. What else
can I say?
But once again, someone here is talking about Duck fans having
negative reactions to my work. As I said before, I can easilly
understand that -- but I never see these remarks. Where are they said or
published? I could perhaps benefit from criticism, but not if I never
see it myself. Where did you see these comments?

I forgot to tell all of you how I got involved with Disney
comics. When Disney Comics in Burbank started publishing, I began to
pester Bob Foster with phone calls and letters. We became friends,
and he invited me to try my hand at dialoguing for him.
When he accepted my first story, then found that I was 16, all
hell broke loose because Disney won't allow the hiring of minors. So
my dialogs -- which I continued to submit -- were stockpiled until I
was 18, at which point three were bought.
Just before Cris Palomino bought those, though, Bob Foster
left for Denmark, saying to me that I should try working for Egmont
sometime. At about that time, I had a long talk with Don Rosa, who
convinced me to stop doing dialogs for Disney and that working for
Egmont was a reasonable idea.
So I submitted no further stories to Disney but the six they
had already, and went to work for Bob in Denmark.
Meanwhile, Disney Comics never bought my other three dialogues,
and Cris never got to print the first three (they would probably have
been in DDAD 39 and 40).
When Gladstone took over I described how I had done work for
Disney which had never been printed. They acquired copies of those
stories -- "Bolivar's Job", "Sea Struck," and "The Clock Watcher" (a
Fred Milton story BTW) -- and will be printing them themselves. I
also talked my way into doing new dialogues for Gladstone. The first
three they bought were the three others that Disney had been sitting
on -- one of which was "Bugged by Humbuggery".

Since then, I have been doing stuff for both Egmont and
Gladstone, as I described yesterday. How well does it pay? I dunno.
Egmont pays well, but it takes forever for me to make stories for
them. Besides, in the next year they can only buy a few stories from
me because they produced far too many comics in 1993 and have to cut
down for 1994. So I'm going to try to get in with Thom Roep at
Oberon... that'll be my third job, if I make it.
(Not that I need it... if I do three stories for Egmont in
1994, I'll be financially set for what Williams College wants of me.
Let alone my Gladstone work. But I have a billion *ideas*, and if I
only do three stories for Egmont I have to let my others out somehow.)
After I'm through with college Egmont will be back in their
usual production schedule, and Gladstone may be publishing more comics
by then (I HOPE!). So who knows... will I go into this full time? I
have not the slightest idea! I may become an archivist or historian,
at least for a while... tho' I'll never stop doing Ducks and Mice at
least part-time.

Say good night, Minnie. Fer gosh sakes!

<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>

TORSTEN:
What's all this about that Mickey & Goofy oil propaganda comic
book? You don't really think Gladstone would ever reprint this, do you?
And why were you surprised that the only form of energy discussed is
oil? The comic was produced by Exxon! That's the only form of energy
they want you to use!
Which is one reason that, even if Gladstone WANTED to reprint
that comic, they probably would not be allowed to. Disney probably
shares equal control over the contents with Exxon and the oil company
wouldn't allow its use in a form from which they didn't derive profit or
publicity.

HARRY:
Thanks so much for your continued reports.
Your friend at Oberon -- I can't imagine what he means when he
says that the GERMAN scripts he gets are the authentic ones and that the
ENGLISH scripts are not!!! What strange logic would give him that idea?
Next time you talk to him, make sure he knows that ONLY the English
script he gets from Egmont is MY version. He may like the German version
better and it may BE better for all I know -- but it is most definitely
NOT the original version! Why would he think that?
My usage of Grandma Duck as clearly being Donald's paternal
grandmother will cause them some problems. But perhaps all they (or
other publishers) will need to do is mess around with chapter 10 by
changing a bit of dialogue and by altering the art so that Grandma Duck
doesn't look like Grandma Duck. Oh... but then there's part 11 where
Hortense swears that she and Matilda will never see $crooge again --
but if Hortense is Grandma, that's hardly the case. Well, that can't be
helped -- I can't possibly write these stories for all countries at
once, and I must write them for America and let others do with it what
they can. Of course, if those publishers have problems it's only
because at some point they digresses from the way something was in the
original American versions. And though Oberon seems to think otherwise,
there is plenty of irrefutable proof that Barks regarded Grandma to be
Donald's Grandma.

I wrote:
> The Dutch "Tom & Jerry" #205, available in every super
> market, reprints a Barks story from Our Gang 33, 1946. (...)
> A lot of good things come from Sweden...

David replied:
> Not when Harvey publishes their American editions. AHA! So
> now I know where the foreign T&J stories that Harvey printed in 1991
> came from!

You were so positive the first time we discussed this, that the stories
came from France. Does the remark above mean that it was just speculation?
Maybe you could distinguish speculations from facts a bit...
(Why did you think they were from France in the first place?)

--Harry.

P.S. David, why don't YOU compile a Barks quote quiz?

David:
>
> Egmont is *VERY* serious about changing MM in their comics
> now. They are trying to get away from the older Danish stories and
> into Gottfredson-like ones. Right now they're slowly easing Mickey
> from his long pants back to short ones -- they MAY have to stop if
> their publishers in many countries object. My story will be the
> second where he has the shorts... If they can get him into his
> shorts, the next goal is to get rid of his shirt...
>
What about Mickey's eyes? Is there any hope of getting back the
"button-eyes" of the thirties? A Mickey with shorts, whithout shirt,
and with "modern" eyes, seemes to me as a strange mix of styles. But
who knows, maybe it will look ok.

Don:
>
> But once again, someone here is talking about Duck fans having
> negative reactions to my work. As I said before, I can easilly
> understand that -- but I never see these remarks. Where are they said or
> published? I could perhaps benefit from criticism, but not if I never
> see it myself. Where did you see these comments?
>
The opinion was stated orally, three or four years ago, by a friend
of mine, who is himself a skilled drawer (and perfectionist). I can't
recall having seen (or heard) that kind of criticisim in public.

One quality which makes your art stand out from for instance Vicar's,
is a kind of unpolishedness (I can't find a better expression just
now). It's almost like comparing a performance by a blues artist from
the Mississippi delta, with no formal training in singing or guitar
playing, with a James Last muzac-like recording of the same tune. The
former is maybe not technically perfect, the latter lacks a
deeper understanding of what blues is. Perhaps Vicar is the
technically more skilled artist, but his stories don't contain the
right "feeling" (again it's difficult to find the right word).

All for now

Lars

Lars Lundheim, Phone: +47-7-896284
Trondheim College of Engineering, Fax: +47-7-896286
Department of Electrical Engineering e-mail: lars at elektro.tih.no
N-7005 Trondheim
NORWAY