Keskustelujen arkisto

>From: Gary Leach <73633.152 at compuserve.com>
>
>By the by, in case anyone thinks Gladstone does little more than play
>fall guy to the Disney powers-that-be, I should mention that we are
>also hardened veterans of this roadshow and have developed a few
>little tricks of our own.
>Getting the license BACK, for example...

Hmmm - I'd certainly be interested in hearing anything you can tell us
about this one!

Mattias:
> Someone -- was it Torsten? -- asked why there are two "W" in the Woodchucks
> logo -- JWW. I seem to recall that the full name of the organisation is
> actually "Junior Woodchucks of the World". Or am I wrong?

Don already mentioned this full name. In Dutch, it could be translated to
"Jonge Woudlopers van de Wereld" (= JWW).

Don:

I (finally) phoned Jos Beekman, the Dutch editor of DD Extra. He said that GP
(formerly Oberon) orders foreign stories in bulk orders, which means one big
box of stories every 2 months or so. They already ordered the Danish version
of "Guardians of the Lost Library", so they won't use a corrected Gladstone
version.

Jos also said it was not a goal for them to publish ALL Rosa stories. They
would only publish the good ones. But nowadays, most Rosa stories are good
ones, said Jos.

The 60th birthday story will probably not be published in Holland this year.
They simply don't have the manpower or time to order and colour foreign
stories other than in the usual way (that's what Jos said).

And they are thinking about publishing your family tree somewhere in 1994,
but they don't know how yet. Grandma's position in the tree will be a problem
in Holland... I warned Jos again about Hortense _not_ being Grandma in
your Lo$ stories. He hasn't seen part 10 yet (where Hortense meets Grandma),
but he'll keep it in mind. We'll see what they make of it...

--Harry.

Per wrote:
> I know that I have had some book, probably in maths but I'm not sure,
> with an emblem of the publishing house somewhat resembling the JWW
> emblem. I can't find such a book in my bookcase right now, and I
> don't remember what publisher it was. Does this ring a bell to
> anyone? Ultimately I'd like to know if the resemblance is just by
> chance or if there were some Barks fans who did this on purpose.

I think I know what you're talking about. In MY book case, the book
"The Art of Problem Solving" by Russel L. Ackoff (which I warmly
recommend to all, by the way) can be found. It is published by John
Wiley and Sons, inc. The emblem does indeed resemble that of JWW,
but with the "J" through only one "W". However, they differ a lot in
the details. So much that I think it must only be chance, and not on
purpose.

Or are there even more JWW-like emblems?

/F

GARY:
As for "revisionism", it's a fact of life if we intend to do
anything with Disney comics as long as Disney is mixed up in it. I knew
I was going to use Bombie the Zombie in my Lo$, and I knew Disney would
never allow the original version, so I don't think it was a mistake to
revise him to a supposedly acceptable form. Of course, I expect BIG
trouble when we get to that chapter as I think Disney will now not allow
even a revised Bombie. And then there's those death scenes of $crooge's
parents! What fun lies ahead!

ANDY:
Why will Disney allow "collector's editions" of their uneditted
MM cartoons, but not extend the same respect for the comic books? Easy.
Disney HAS no respect for the comic books! Disney never had anything to
do with the comic books! And they make no substantial profit from the
comic books. All they want out of the comic book licensee is as little
trouble as possible; they don't care about "art" or "history" or
anything else -- they just don't want to get one single letter from a
schoolma'rm in Boise about something she saw in a Gladstone comic. Why
should they care about something that they had no hand in creating and
make neglible money from?

MARK:
There are two "W"s in the Woodchuck emblem because the full name
is the Junior Woodchucks of the World. Also, did you know the full name
of their guidebook? The Junior Woodchuck Guidebook and Resevoir of
Inexhaustable Knowledge.

TORSTEN:
How can I explain the impossibility of placing comic books at
check-out lines any more clearly for you??? TIME and LIFE and TV GUIDE
and all those other magazines sell HUGE numbers to the adults standing
in the checkout line. Look at how much space one TIME magazine takes up
and how well it sells and who is buying it. Now look at how much space
six Gladstone comics would take up, how few people are buying them, and
who those people are. Think about what you're saying! The idea is
ludicrous!!! I would bet it might cost Gladstone a cool MILLION DOLLARS
to buy check-out rack space for their comic line -- and where will they
GET that extra space? Out of the 4th dimension? Why would TIME and LIFE
and TV GUIDE relinquish their contracts to make room for Gladstone
comics??? You aren't really thinking about how much space and how much
money that idea would require. It is I M P O S S I B L E.
Why can't I put the JWW emblem in the art and let the foreign
publishers blot it out? The Americans are the foreign publishers! Why
should I put something in every panel of art that would require all that
useless effort for dozens of publishers around the world, when the
publisher who is the least significant (though dear to my heart) can
place the emblem IN the empty circles??? I must leave MANY MANY
background gags out of my art which require lil' signs because I am not
doing comics for Americans any longer. That's the way it is.

ALL:
Yes, I don't know why the color was off-register in my
Lillehammer story, but the art was "muddy" as well. Apparently the
photostats which came from Europe weren't too good and they had to shoot
them "dark" and even, I think, shoot some pages off common xeroxes I
once sent to John just for him to see what I was working on. I sure hope
the Lo$ comes out better!!!!!!!

PER:
Two more people on COMPUSERVE who would like to try out the
digests:
W.B. SIMPSON 73542,3363
RICHARD MATTHEWS 73043,1505

unsubscribe

------------------------------------------------------------------------
|"If a man loves you then you must love him back, if he ignores you, |
| you must turn the other cheek, however, if a man shows you racism, |
| then he must die" - Martin Luther King |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road |
|Manchester M13 9PL. tel : (+44) 61 445 5513 |
|ARPA: shantanu at cs.man.ac.uk |
|UUCP: ..!mcsun!uknet!mucs!shantanu | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+

Hi, Folks!

A few things to put in my two cents about today:

Torsten on selling comics in supermarkets
======================================================

"Time/Warner places People and Life by checkouts. If DC
Comics (owned by Warner) had the rights to Disney, they'd probably
be there by now. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Looney Tunes
comic book is place near checkouts."

HUH? NEW LOONEY TUNES COMIC BOOK???! I didn't know about
this! Have you actually seen such an item, or do you just mean that
activity magazine with about 4 pages of subpar comics that's been sold
for years?

If there's a new LT comic line finally appearing in this
country, it's time to start pressuring DC to reprint Carl Barks'
"Porky Pig of the Mounties" -- that Barks Bear Book is a pretty muddy
reprint, and it ain't in color either, Doc.

Re-reprinting Gottfredson
=========================

"After paying $7-$10 per story for your previous albums,
I am not at all interested in paying *another* $5-$8 per story to
collect them in installments again, so I don't."

(That's Andrew Krieg BTW)

I am willing to buy the re-reprints because I like the new
color and I want to support ANY Gottfredson publications. But this
doesn't mean I'm as happy as I'd be if Gladstone reprinted a few of the
stories I most want to see: "MM Boxing Champion," "MM and
Tanglefoot," and "MM vs. Kat Nipp." In sideways format, there
WOULDN'T be the massive production costs that hampered Gladstone's old
MM series...

I'd also like to see "MM in Death Valley." Unfortunately it's
basically too long to be serialized in WDC&S (as, BTW, is "Monarch of
Medioka" unless it's stretched over six issues! I hope this is not
the plan...). If Gladstone EVER has the guts to try a few MM issues
to "test the waters" anew, this is the one I'd like to see the most.
BTW it's legit with Disney, as they were actually planning to reprint
it for a while in a softback book (but had to cancel that when their
cutdown occurred; I actually saw some proofs for the book at the
Disney Publishing office one of the two times I was there).

BTW one of the two 1935 Carl Barks MM publicity drawings,
which he submitted to Disney to get his job, is a fine Western drawing
(MM and Minnie on a runaway stagecoach or something I think). That
could be the cover of the first of this Death Valley series. That
Barks cover would sell a heck of a lot of issues for MM.

Original "South Seas" and "Darkest Africa"
==========================================

Harry said, "Maybe Gladstone can publish more original
versions of "Darkest Africa" and "Race to the South Seas" in the
colour albums CBL? GARY: What are Gladstone's plans?"

Just so you know, Gary, the French printings of "Darkest
Africa" indeed use the original art. And Mondadori's version of "Race
to the South Seas" uses the original art. Unfortunately both have
been extensively reformatted as these publishers are wont to do... but
perhaps they could be restored for use here. I know we're talking
about a lot of work, but this would be a major publishing event if
these two stories were at last reprinted in their original forms (with
the changes in "Darkest Africa" reinserted if necessary).

The banned HDL 1st app
======================

Gary said, "I suppose, given our past and even current
inclination to modify the past to make it possible to reprint it in
the present, we could change that note in Taliaferro's HD&L
introductory strip, but Disney simply won't pass it now."

Do you mean by this that Disney won't allow the strip to be
reprinted WITH the change? Or by "now" do you mean, NOW while the
strip is still in its original form?

If they'll allow the thing to be reprinted with the change, no
need to order it fresh from Disney's archive. You can just dig up your
old proofs to WDC&S 522, retouch the letter, and jam it into an issue
at the earliest opportunity!

Maybe, on the other hand, I'm making this sound easier than
the process actually is...

Don critiques my knowledge... and rightly so!
=============================================

"Though you seem to know an extraordinary amount of stuff
about things Disney, you do sometimes ask questions I would think you
could see the obvious answer to."

You better believe it. When it comes to the marketing angles
of things, I know next to nothing! So please forgive my dumb
questions now and then.

Gary on censorship
==================

"Is trying to improve the past, for whatever reason, any more
justifiable than suppressing it?"

I, for one, say yes. For example, in Disney Adventures'
recent truncated reprint of "Lost on a Desert Island," I would have
rather seen the natives reinked from black to white and renamed
"cavemen" from "cannibals" if necessary, if it meant that the story
could have been published more complete. As it was, about 2/3 of the
story was cut out (and not all of that just the offensive stuff; they
also removed the post-cannibal stuff too, leaving the plot itself
incomplete. Huh?).

I talked to Byron way back in 1989 and he told me that Disney
had requested he do this when the story was printed in 1988's MM 60th
Anniversary special... and that that's why he decided to not print the
whole thing, only the first week. Then, as now, I'd rather have seen
the whole thing even if it had to be retouched.

Don Rosa writes:
> As for "revisionism", it's a fact of life if we intend to do
> anything with Disney comics as long as Disney is mixed up in it. I knew
> I was going to use Bombie the Zombie in my Lo$, and I knew Disney would
> never allow the original version, so I don't think it was a mistake to
> revise him to a supposedly acceptable form. Of course, I expect BIG
> trouble when we get to that chapter as I think Disney will now not allow
> even a revised Bombie. And then there's those death scenes of $crooge's
> parents! What fun lies ahead!
>
I don't understand how the licensing from Disney works. Hasn't at
least that last-named episode, with the death of Scrooge's parents,
already been printed in Europe? So why can't it be printed in the
USA in the same form? Does Disney hold Gladstone to a tighter
standard than they do publishers in the rest of the world?

Wilmer Rivers