Jo/rgen, about a Barks story:
> Oh, well. The Norwegian title is 'Den smarte Onkel Skrue.'
> That is 'Uncle Scrooge, the clever' or something like that.
You're talking about the (famous) story from the first Uncle Scrooge
comic, Four Colour #386: "Only a Poor Old Man". And the dam break panel
was so favourite that Barks made an oil painting out of it.
BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 1942.
> In a very early posting Harry mentions a series of German
> Uncle Scrooge comics ("Abenteuer aus Onkel Dagoberts Schatztruhe").
Well, that _is_ very early: it was the very first subject I came with
on this list!
These stories are written by Adolf Kabatek (a German, I think). The art
is by some studio artist I don't know the name of.
> In Norway these (seven of them) where published [...]
I think there are not more than 7 stories in this series.
> Harry also mentioned another album series, about cars. One of
> these were published in Norway sometime in the late 80s. Lots
> of Mercedes...
I think it's Jan Gulbransson's 47-page story you're talking about.
It's about "100 years of cars", and since Mercedes was the first car, this
may explain why there are so many of them in that story...
> I am working on a WWW catalog of my collection, and I plan to put
> into it information about writers/artists. To do that with more
> than 2000 magazines is quiet a job, so I think I will start with
> the albums. There are fewer of them :-)
Please make sure you're not doing the same work that has been done before.
A lot of Swedish and Danish Disney publications have been indexed (not in
WWW, but in ASCII). Norwegian issues should be much the same.
--Harry.
Author
Topic: 199410
(172 messages)
H.W. Fluks
Some stories and credits
Message 46 -
1994-10-10 at 15:27:21
Bjorn-are.Davidsen
Ghastly spelling
Message 47 -
1994-10-10 at 16:21:18
Due to some problems with our mail system my last message was sent
without proper proof reading. The result being among others the following
passage:
>How sad! He wil be missing a lot if not being able to enjoy Sandman, Lord
>of The Rings, Silmarillion, the Narnia series, the Dive Comedy, Arabian
>Knights or Norwegian Fairy Tales (highly recommended!) to mention but a
>few
It should of course have been:
How sad! He will be missing a lot if not being able to enjoy Sandman, Lord
of The Rings, Silmarillion, the Narnia series, the Divine Comedy, Arabian
Nights or Norwegian Fairy Tales (highly recommended!) to mention but a
few
Then again, perhaps Don or David could write a story on the Dive
Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and demons?
Bjo/rn Are
Bjorn-Are.Davidsen at s.televerket.tele.no
without proper proof reading. The result being among others the following
passage:
>How sad! He wil be missing a lot if not being able to enjoy Sandman, Lord
>of The Rings, Silmarillion, the Narnia series, the Dive Comedy, Arabian
>Knights or Norwegian Fairy Tales (highly recommended!) to mention but a
>few
It should of course have been:
How sad! He will be missing a lot if not being able to enjoy Sandman, Lord
of The Rings, Silmarillion, the Narnia series, the Divine Comedy, Arabian
Nights or Norwegian Fairy Tales (highly recommended!) to mention but a
few
Then again, perhaps Don or David could write a story on the Dive
Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and demons?
Bjo/rn Are
Bjorn-Are.Davidsen at s.televerket.tele.no
Jørgen Andreas Bangor
The Trojan Horse++
Message 48 -
1994-10-10 at 23:55:27
First of all. Thanks to everyone who have answered my questions.
Don:
> Why was your message titled "Trojan Horse"? You didn't mention
>any Trojan Horse.
I meant to put a 'Re:' on the subject line, but it disappeared somewhere.
Per, when are the digests put together/sent out?
Mattias:
> I'm sure someone told you already (I'm on the digests, you know); but
>the U$ story you outlined is of course "Only A Poor Old Man".
Ah! I knew there were something special about that title.
Me:
> It's years since I read that story, but yes, you're right. I think they
> claim to be Minnies relatives though. She gets quite insulted when
> Mickey is trying to tell her that there is something strange going on.
> In Norway this story is published in one of the big 'Jeg' books.
> 'Vi Mikke & Minni', I think.
David:
> Jorgen: This story is Gottfredson's "The Gleam" (1941). One
>of my all-time favorites.
Harry:
>BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
>is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
>running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 19
?
David:
>> - I'm Mickey Mouse, and this is Goofy.
>> - Yes, isn't it?
>
> That's from "Island in the Sky," right? (Can't resist a
>challenge like that! ;-)
Indeed! 8:)
The Trojan Horse...
I didn't really mean to say anything about it, at least not until I've
read all of it (Part II will be published tomorrow). But since I've
made the expections that I was going to say something about it...
I wasn't too impressed. I've never liked van Horns style very much.
I do not think it's bad, but it's some kind of unfamiliar, even though I've
read every single story by him which have been published here.
I don't mind as long as it's his own stories he's drawing, but when this
new story is advertised as a 'New Story by Barks' (and we've been waiting
for it for months...), I was expecting something else.
What was I expecting? In my opinion a 'Barks Story' is not only a manus
written by Barks, and drawn by anybody (a good example are those JW stories).
It has to be drawn by him too. The story in Barks stories (this apply to
anyone, I guess) isn't just in the balloons, but also in the expressions
of the ducks. The expressions in van Horn's ducks are, IMHO, to, eh...,
exaggerated (is that the word...?). I don't see the fine tune in his
art, as I see in Barks', and then it's a bit difficult to see that there
is anything special about the story.
I would still say it's well above the average new Disney story.
In addition (some addition...) there are so few details. And almost no
bacground details at all.
My conclusion is _not_ that Barks should stop writing new stories (if he
should want to write another one), but I would like to see it drawn by
someone who is more fond of details and who makes the ducks look real,
f.ex. Don Rosa (I know that unfortunately won't happen), Daan Jippes,
Freddy Milton or Marco Rota.
Stories drawn by the ones I mentioned above (and a lot of others) looks
real. I mean, the ducks look like they really exist, and you can easy tell
by their look what mood they are in at any time. And any character in one
panel, is exactly the same character when it appears next time in the same
story. I don't get that feeling when I read a story drawn by van Horn.
Hope you understand what I mean. It's not easy to explain in a foreign
language.
Well, I still want to read part II :-)
Jorgen A. Bangor (jorgenb at ifi.uio.no)
Since David got my first, I'm trying a new one :)
- Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
Don:
> Why was your message titled "Trojan Horse"? You didn't mention
>any Trojan Horse.
I meant to put a 'Re:' on the subject line, but it disappeared somewhere.
Per, when are the digests put together/sent out?
Mattias:
> I'm sure someone told you already (I'm on the digests, you know); but
>the U$ story you outlined is of course "Only A Poor Old Man".
Ah! I knew there were something special about that title.
Me:
> It's years since I read that story, but yes, you're right. I think they
> claim to be Minnies relatives though. She gets quite insulted when
> Mickey is trying to tell her that there is something strange going on.
> In Norway this story is published in one of the big 'Jeg' books.
> 'Vi Mikke & Minni', I think.
David:
> Jorgen: This story is Gottfredson's "The Gleam" (1941). One
>of my all-time favorites.
Harry:
>BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
>is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
>running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 19
?
David:
>> - I'm Mickey Mouse, and this is Goofy.
>> - Yes, isn't it?
>
> That's from "Island in the Sky," right? (Can't resist a
>challenge like that! ;-)
Indeed! 8:)
The Trojan Horse...
I didn't really mean to say anything about it, at least not until I've
read all of it (Part II will be published tomorrow). But since I've
made the expections that I was going to say something about it...
I wasn't too impressed. I've never liked van Horns style very much.
I do not think it's bad, but it's some kind of unfamiliar, even though I've
read every single story by him which have been published here.
I don't mind as long as it's his own stories he's drawing, but when this
new story is advertised as a 'New Story by Barks' (and we've been waiting
for it for months...), I was expecting something else.
What was I expecting? In my opinion a 'Barks Story' is not only a manus
written by Barks, and drawn by anybody (a good example are those JW stories).
It has to be drawn by him too. The story in Barks stories (this apply to
anyone, I guess) isn't just in the balloons, but also in the expressions
of the ducks. The expressions in van Horn's ducks are, IMHO, to, eh...,
exaggerated (is that the word...?). I don't see the fine tune in his
art, as I see in Barks', and then it's a bit difficult to see that there
is anything special about the story.
I would still say it's well above the average new Disney story.
In addition (some addition...) there are so few details. And almost no
bacground details at all.
My conclusion is _not_ that Barks should stop writing new stories (if he
should want to write another one), but I would like to see it drawn by
someone who is more fond of details and who makes the ducks look real,
f.ex. Don Rosa (I know that unfortunately won't happen), Daan Jippes,
Freddy Milton or Marco Rota.
Stories drawn by the ones I mentioned above (and a lot of others) looks
real. I mean, the ducks look like they really exist, and you can easy tell
by their look what mood they are in at any time. And any character in one
panel, is exactly the same character when it appears next time in the same
story. I don't get that feeling when I read a story drawn by van Horn.
Hope you understand what I mean. It's not easy to explain in a foreign
language.
Well, I still want to read part II :-)
Jorgen A. Bangor (jorgenb at ifi.uio.no)
Since David got my first, I'm trying a new one :)
- Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #458.
Message 49 -
1994-10-11 at 05:47:57
MATTIAS:
It won't be long now before I may or may not see you on my tour
of Sweden and Norway later this month.
BJORN:
The "death scene" that Geir was referring to one time was NOT
that "Lo$" part V -- in part V you just see a scene which may or may not
have been in $crooge's mind, and even if it wasn't, it was not that he
was actually DEAD, but "between two worlds" (to allude to another old
"ghost" movie). Geir was referring to chapter IX in which a main
character actually does die. But you've seen that already, being in
Europe, eh?
RON:
No, there is precious little time for "belly laughs" in "Lo$".
Each chapter is quite short and must cover so much ground and so many
facts that it's all I can do to tell the story rather than be funny.
You'll notice one difference between the two funniest chapters in the
whole series, V and X -- unlike the other chapters, they do not cover
spans of years but specific days in $crooge's life. Therefore, there is
far more time to develop a plot and add humor.
But a general lack of action and humor is something I'm
currently wrestling with in even my post-Lo$ stories. It seems that I
became so hung up on basing my stories on historic fact that I've become
bogged down in it. And what's worse, the one story that I felt was
surely too bogged down in fact and lacking in action ("Guardians of the
Lost Library") seemed to have been so popular that even my editor said
it was the best story I'd ever done. That didn't compel me to change my
ways very much. But I need to try harder.
KNUT:
I try to be fairly careful that LUCK never plays a part in
$crooge's success... nor does direct help from others, short of some
advice which is only natural in the learning process. Where did you see
luck playing a part in that Lo$ V? As you were saying, $crooge would
have beat the Whiskerville on his own if the ghosts hadn't interfered,
and even in putting him back on earth, they still only gave him the
CHANCE to save himself, which he then did without their help and without
luck.
Or do you mean that it would have been luck that would have
helped $crooge beat the Whiskerville if the lightning had only
distracted the bad guy. But the idea was that the lightning would not
have made $crooge flinch because of his stealy nerves -- so it was
$crooge's superiority that would have won for him.
It won't be long now before I may or may not see you on my tour
of Sweden and Norway later this month.
BJORN:
The "death scene" that Geir was referring to one time was NOT
that "Lo$" part V -- in part V you just see a scene which may or may not
have been in $crooge's mind, and even if it wasn't, it was not that he
was actually DEAD, but "between two worlds" (to allude to another old
"ghost" movie). Geir was referring to chapter IX in which a main
character actually does die. But you've seen that already, being in
Europe, eh?
RON:
No, there is precious little time for "belly laughs" in "Lo$".
Each chapter is quite short and must cover so much ground and so many
facts that it's all I can do to tell the story rather than be funny.
You'll notice one difference between the two funniest chapters in the
whole series, V and X -- unlike the other chapters, they do not cover
spans of years but specific days in $crooge's life. Therefore, there is
far more time to develop a plot and add humor.
But a general lack of action and humor is something I'm
currently wrestling with in even my post-Lo$ stories. It seems that I
became so hung up on basing my stories on historic fact that I've become
bogged down in it. And what's worse, the one story that I felt was
surely too bogged down in fact and lacking in action ("Guardians of the
Lost Library") seemed to have been so popular that even my editor said
it was the best story I'd ever done. That didn't compel me to change my
ways very much. But I need to try harder.
KNUT:
I try to be fairly careful that LUCK never plays a part in
$crooge's success... nor does direct help from others, short of some
advice which is only natural in the learning process. Where did you see
luck playing a part in that Lo$ V? As you were saying, $crooge would
have beat the Whiskerville on his own if the ghosts hadn't interfered,
and even in putting him back on earth, they still only gave him the
CHANCE to save himself, which he then did without their help and without
luck.
Or do you mean that it would have been luck that would have
helped $crooge beat the Whiskerville if the lightning had only
distracted the bad guy. But the idea was that the lightning would not
have made $crooge flinch because of his stealy nerves -- so it was
$crooge's superiority that would have won for him.
H.W. Fluks
The Gleam Robbery
Message 50 -
1994-10-11 at 10:46:07
Mattias:
> I'm sure someone told you already (I'm on the digests, you know);
Well, this time you beat _me_, because I'm on the digests as well...
And about that hypnotism story (there's a chance David beat me in
answering this...):
David said:
> Jorgen: This story is Gottfredson's "The Gleam" (1941). One
> of my all-time favorites.
and I said:
> BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
> is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
> running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 1942
on which Jo/rgen replied:
> ?
Actually, the story had no title in the newspapers. Is has been reprinted
several times, and had several titles then. "The Gleam" is a title the
Gladstone people chose in their MM Newspaper index (in the book "MM in Color"),
I don't know from which reprint this was. My title ("The Jewel Robbery") was
from the early WDC reprint (WDC 81 - 84).
And I don't know where David got the 1941 date; I think my dates are
correct.
> - Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
I think I know this one, but I'll leave it to David.. 8-)
--Harry.
"Are you in danger?"
"No, you dummy! I'm in a barrel!"
> I'm sure someone told you already (I'm on the digests, you know);
Well, this time you beat _me_, because I'm on the digests as well...
And about that hypnotism story (there's a chance David beat me in
answering this...):
David said:
> Jorgen: This story is Gottfredson's "The Gleam" (1941). One
> of my all-time favorites.
and I said:
> BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
> is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
> running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 1942
on which Jo/rgen replied:
> ?
Actually, the story had no title in the newspapers. Is has been reprinted
several times, and had several titles then. "The Gleam" is a title the
Gladstone people chose in their MM Newspaper index (in the book "MM in Color"),
I don't know from which reprint this was. My title ("The Jewel Robbery") was
from the early WDC reprint (WDC 81 - 84).
And I don't know where David got the 1941 date; I think my dates are
correct.
> - Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
I think I know this one, but I'll leave it to David.. 8-)
--Harry.
"Are you in danger?"
"No, you dummy! I'm in a barrel!"
Bjorn-are.Davidsen
Grave error
Message 51 -
1994-10-11 at 10:53:39
Don!
You are right! I got the two stories (Lo$V and IX) mixed up , not having any of them before
me! Yes, the golf scene was earlier, I remember it now! Still good, though...
Bjo/rn Are
Bjorn-Are.Davidsen at s.televerket.tele.no
You are right! I got the two stories (Lo$V and IX) mixed up , not having any of them before
me! Yes, the golf scene was earlier, I remember it now! Still good, though...
Bjo/rn Are
Bjorn-Are.Davidsen at s.televerket.tele.no
DAVID.A.GERSTEIN
Disney-comics digest #458.
Message 52 -
1994-10-11 at 11:55:42
Dear Folks,
A few comments on the recent stuff.
Bjorn Are stated that "perhaps Don or David could write a story on
the Dive Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and
demons?" Actually, the definitive Disney Divine Comedy has already
been done. Made in Italy in 1949, "Mickey's Inferno" is undoubtedly
the most bizarre Mouse story I have ever read. After being
hypnotized by the Gleam, Mickey and Goofy dream that Hell has
conquered the Disney Universe. We see characters attempting to live
their normal lives among devils and demons who spend their spare time
attacking and blowing people up. Mickey battles Pete briefly, for no
good reason. Eventually Mickey and Goofy discover their destiny,
which is to rescue Donald from this mess. Donald needs this because
the forces of Hades have split him into his "good" and "evil" selves,
and there is a danger that the two halves will never come back
together. Or something like that. Beautiful artwork, but the most
convoluted story I've ever seen, complete with verses from Dante
across the bottom of each panel! And of course, Disney's banned it
from use in the United States. (Or so David Seidman told me.)
Then, Barks in Holland:
"Bill Grandy [sic] says that Jippes was Barks' first choice for drawing
the story "Horsin' Around with History". He says Egmont told Barks
that Jippes didn't have time, without even asking Jippes. Then they
proposed their "own" artist Bill Van Horn..."
I have a hunch Grandey contacted Egmont KNOWING they wouldn't
really know about Jippes' current state of affairs, and had it in his
mind from the start that Van Horn should draw the story, then
maneuvered things to get his way. We should all note that this was
long before Jippes knew or sold work through that Weasel. Anyone
knowledgeable would have contacted Oberon about exactly what Jippes
was doing.
"BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 1942."
Harry, this story is now known as "The Gleam" (remember, Mickey
has solved many jewel robberies) and will be titled as such when
Gladstone eventually uses it. Isn't it called that in our database?
- Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
Let's see -- Mickey is trying to straighten a pipe. Gives
Goofy a wrench, then holds up the pipe and says, "When I nod my head,
you hit it with the hammer." BONK! Methinks one Mouse should have
defined "it" a little more carefully. ;-)
I'll be back, tomorrow.
Best,
David Gerstein
Bjo/rn Are
A few comments on the recent stuff.
Bjorn Are stated that "perhaps Don or David could write a story on
the Dive Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and
demons?" Actually, the definitive Disney Divine Comedy has already
been done. Made in Italy in 1949, "Mickey's Inferno" is undoubtedly
the most bizarre Mouse story I have ever read. After being
hypnotized by the Gleam, Mickey and Goofy dream that Hell has
conquered the Disney Universe. We see characters attempting to live
their normal lives among devils and demons who spend their spare time
attacking and blowing people up. Mickey battles Pete briefly, for no
good reason. Eventually Mickey and Goofy discover their destiny,
which is to rescue Donald from this mess. Donald needs this because
the forces of Hades have split him into his "good" and "evil" selves,
and there is a danger that the two halves will never come back
together. Or something like that. Beautiful artwork, but the most
convoluted story I've ever seen, complete with verses from Dante
across the bottom of each panel! And of course, Disney's banned it
from use in the United States. (Or so David Seidman told me.)
Then, Barks in Holland:
"Bill Grandy [sic] says that Jippes was Barks' first choice for drawing
the story "Horsin' Around with History". He says Egmont told Barks
that Jippes didn't have time, without even asking Jippes. Then they
proposed their "own" artist Bill Van Horn..."
I have a hunch Grandey contacted Egmont KNOWING they wouldn't
really know about Jippes' current state of affairs, and had it in his
mind from the start that Van Horn should draw the story, then
maneuvered things to get his way. We should all note that this was
long before Jippes knew or sold work through that Weasel. Anyone
knowledgeable would have contacted Oberon about exactly what Jippes
was doing.
"BTW: the Mickey story about hypnotism that has been discussed here
is Gottfredson's "The Jewel Robbery", coded in the Database as YM 048,
running in the newspapers from Jan 19 to May 2, 1942."
Harry, this story is now known as "The Gleam" (remember, Mickey
has solved many jewel robberies) and will be titled as such when
Gladstone eventually uses it. Isn't it called that in our database?
- Fur gawsh sakes Mickey! I did just what you _told_ me to!
Let's see -- Mickey is trying to straighten a pipe. Gives
Goofy a wrench, then holds up the pipe and says, "When I nod my head,
you hit it with the hammer." BONK! Methinks one Mouse should have
defined "it" a little more carefully. ;-)
I'll be back, tomorrow.
Best,
David Gerstein
Bjo/rn Are
Per Starback
Horsing around with history
Message 53 -
1994-10-11 at 13:44:01
Don Rosa asked Jorgen Bangor (which doesn't stop me from answering :-)
> Why was your message titled "Trojan Horse"? You didn't mention
> any Trojan Horse.
Probably because he replied to a message by Knut Hunstad with the same
subject line. Usually mail programs keep the subject--sometimes prefixed
by "Re: "--when you reply to another message. Haven't you (Don)
noticed that your own replies to the digests keep the same subject as
the digests had?
As for The Trojan Horse, or "Horsing Around With History" as we now
know its title is, I met Swedish duck translator Stefan Di"os the
other day, and asked him if he had translated it yet, and why it
hasn't appeared in the Swedish book, even though it recently was
published in Norway. Evidently the Swedish editors didn't want to
have it in two parts, so they'll put it on hold for some special size
book where they will run the whole of it in one issue at the very end
of this year.
Then Jorgen asked:
> Per, when are the digests put together/sent out?
Currently each night starting at 1.13 my local time, i.e., 13 minutes
past midnight GMT.
Don wrote (to Mattias):
> It won't be long now before I may or may not see you on my tour
> of Sweden and Norway later this month.
At least I will be in Gotenburg too. And then at the "Alvsj"o comics
fair too, which I guess more Swedish Donaldists will attend.
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
> Why was your message titled "Trojan Horse"? You didn't mention
> any Trojan Horse.
Probably because he replied to a message by Knut Hunstad with the same
subject line. Usually mail programs keep the subject--sometimes prefixed
by "Re: "--when you reply to another message. Haven't you (Don)
noticed that your own replies to the digests keep the same subject as
the digests had?
As for The Trojan Horse, or "Horsing Around With History" as we now
know its title is, I met Swedish duck translator Stefan Di"os the
other day, and asked him if he had translated it yet, and why it
hasn't appeared in the Swedish book, even though it recently was
published in Norway. Evidently the Swedish editors didn't want to
have it in two parts, so they'll put it on hold for some special size
book where they will run the whole of it in one issue at the very end
of this year.
Then Jorgen asked:
> Per, when are the digests put together/sent out?
Currently each night starting at 1.13 my local time, i.e., 13 minutes
past midnight GMT.
Don wrote (to Mattias):
> It won't be long now before I may or may not see you on my tour
> of Sweden and Norway later this month.
At least I will be in Gotenburg too. And then at the "Alvsj"o comics
fair too, which I guess more Swedish Donaldists will attend.
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
James Williams
Disney-comics digest #456.
Message 54 -
1994-10-11 at 17:48:54
Don,
Though I've not seen LOS Part V yet, I've a lot of comments on
this thread.
>Anyway, I'm just wondering if these people are adverse to seeing
>ghosts in comics because Barks never used them, or are there radical
>religious fundamentalists in the woodwork?
I'm a borderline "Christian Fundamentalist", so I'm probably qualified
to answer this question. I'm pretty sure that the people objecting to
the use of ghosts in your comics are objecting because they think that
ghosts and such are inappropriate material for children stories.
The problem is that people assume that children will believe or act
like what they see and read. Most children I know are smarter than
that. I wish the same could be said about their parents.
>one reader said they liked Lo$ II better than I (one)
I've only read chapters 2-4 and #2 was by far my least favorite.
This list keeps calling it one the best chapter and I cannot
figure out why.
>Now, is this because this reader knew that Barks never seemed to
>deal with ghosts?
So? You're Don Rosa, not Carl Barks. And, I like Don Rosa, just fine!
In fact, I'd prefer having one Don Rosa and one Carl Barks, then having
two Carl Barks.
I'm one of those people who thinks Jack Kirby was the best comic book
artist ever. Rick Buckler and Greg Theakson do amazing imitations of
Jack Kirby. Logically, you'd think that I would love their artwork.
In truth, I hate it. Why? Because they aren't being true to
themselves. "To thine own self be true".
>I personally love to mess with ghosts in stories, as some of my very
>favorite movies deal with ghosts and such... like WONDERFUL LIFE, GHOST
>& MRS. MUIR, BISHOP'S WIFE...
Here is the irony in all this. Sure these three movies involve the
supernatural. But, they use the supernatural to reflect upon real
life. If a religous person stops watching these movies because they
contain ghosts, they never realize that each of these movies has an
important message - the importance of each and every person, that love
is more powerful than death, and that faith and deeds go hand-in-hand.
Very "Christian" messages, which the religous person missed because
they stop watching the movie when they discovered it involved ghosts.
>I mean, I'm well aware of the fact that there are people who think if you
>watch BEWITCHED or I DREAM OF JEANNIE or read LIL' HOT STUFF and
>CASPER you're gonna burn in hellfire for all eternity since these are
>occult TV shows and comics designed by covens of witches to corrupt the
>souls of humanity.
It's funny that this thread should come up this weekend. On Friday,
I started on my newest duck story which deals with this exact subject.
James Williams
Though I've not seen LOS Part V yet, I've a lot of comments on
this thread.
>Anyway, I'm just wondering if these people are adverse to seeing
>ghosts in comics because Barks never used them, or are there radical
>religious fundamentalists in the woodwork?
I'm a borderline "Christian Fundamentalist", so I'm probably qualified
to answer this question. I'm pretty sure that the people objecting to
the use of ghosts in your comics are objecting because they think that
ghosts and such are inappropriate material for children stories.
The problem is that people assume that children will believe or act
like what they see and read. Most children I know are smarter than
that. I wish the same could be said about their parents.
>one reader said they liked Lo$ II better than I (one)
I've only read chapters 2-4 and #2 was by far my least favorite.
This list keeps calling it one the best chapter and I cannot
figure out why.
>Now, is this because this reader knew that Barks never seemed to
>deal with ghosts?
So? You're Don Rosa, not Carl Barks. And, I like Don Rosa, just fine!
In fact, I'd prefer having one Don Rosa and one Carl Barks, then having
two Carl Barks.
I'm one of those people who thinks Jack Kirby was the best comic book
artist ever. Rick Buckler and Greg Theakson do amazing imitations of
Jack Kirby. Logically, you'd think that I would love their artwork.
In truth, I hate it. Why? Because they aren't being true to
themselves. "To thine own self be true".
>I personally love to mess with ghosts in stories, as some of my very
>favorite movies deal with ghosts and such... like WONDERFUL LIFE, GHOST
>& MRS. MUIR, BISHOP'S WIFE...
Here is the irony in all this. Sure these three movies involve the
supernatural. But, they use the supernatural to reflect upon real
life. If a religous person stops watching these movies because they
contain ghosts, they never realize that each of these movies has an
important message - the importance of each and every person, that love
is more powerful than death, and that faith and deeds go hand-in-hand.
Very "Christian" messages, which the religous person missed because
they stop watching the movie when they discovered it involved ghosts.
>I mean, I'm well aware of the fact that there are people who think if you
>watch BEWITCHED or I DREAM OF JEANNIE or read LIL' HOT STUFF and
>CASPER you're gonna burn in hellfire for all eternity since these are
>occult TV shows and comics designed by covens of witches to corrupt the
>souls of humanity.
It's funny that this thread should come up this weekend. On Friday,
I started on my newest duck story which deals with this exact subject.
James Williams
James Williams
Ghastly spelling
Message 55 -
1994-10-11 at 18:01:48
>Then again, perhaps Don or David could write a story on the
>Diven Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and
>demons?
As David has already said, the Diven Comedy wouldn't fly. Disney is
too conservative to approve of something like this. Its too bad,
I really enjoyed Little Hot Stuff as a child.
The Arabian Knights is a real possibility. Disney is pushing Aladdin -
the movie, the direct to video, the weekly animated series, the
Saturday morning animated series, the comic book, and all the
merchandising. The Arabian Knights have never been more popular
in the US.
James Williams
>Diven Comedy or on the Arabian Knights, and put in a lot of ducks and
>demons?
As David has already said, the Diven Comedy wouldn't fly. Disney is
too conservative to approve of something like this. Its too bad,
I really enjoyed Little Hot Stuff as a child.
The Arabian Knights is a real possibility. Disney is pushing Aladdin -
the movie, the direct to video, the weekly animated series, the
Saturday morning animated series, the comic book, and all the
merchandising. The Arabian Knights have never been more popular
in the US.
James Williams
James Williams
Disney-comics digest #457.
Message 56 -
1994-10-11 at 18:16:23
David,
Welcome back. Its great to have you here again.
>Actually I was inspired by the very first Branca-drawn story I ever
>saw: "The Robot Raiders of Magica De Spell" (US 210, 1986). In that
>one, Magica invented robots that looked like her.
Thankfully, I don't remember this story. It sounds exactly like the
type of stuff which makes me despise most Magica stories. How and why
would a witch build robots? She wouldn't have the knoweldge necessary.
She's probably not comfortable with technology. And, using magic would
be simpler and more effective.
James Williams
Welcome back. Its great to have you here again.
>Actually I was inspired by the very first Branca-drawn story I ever
>saw: "The Robot Raiders of Magica De Spell" (US 210, 1986). In that
>one, Magica invented robots that looked like her.
Thankfully, I don't remember this story. It sounds exactly like the
type of stuff which makes me despise most Magica stories. How and why
would a witch build robots? She wouldn't have the knoweldge necessary.
She's probably not comfortable with technology. And, using magic would
be simpler and more effective.
James Williams
James Williams
Disney-comics digest #435.
Message 57 -
1994-10-11 at 18:22:29
David,
We'll have to agree to disagree on "Danger Island". I still think
it is the worst Disney story I've ever read.
>Gawrsh! So Scrooge was too weak at first, but too tough-minded
>later?
Exactly. And notice what causes this transition. Scrooge gets
a gun!
>the villain in fact was pleasantly reminiscent of the Phantom Blot
How so? I really like the Phantom Blot, but I cannot see any
similarities.
James Williams
We'll have to agree to disagree on "Danger Island". I still think
it is the worst Disney story I've ever read.
>Gawrsh! So Scrooge was too weak at first, but too tough-minded
>later?
Exactly. And notice what causes this transition. Scrooge gets
a gun!
>the villain in fact was pleasantly reminiscent of the Phantom Blot
How so? I really like the Phantom Blot, but I cannot see any
similarities.
James Williams
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
From RoC
Message 58 -
1994-10-11 at 22:30:29
I just got terribly busy, and I won't be seeing my messenger, Lasse, too
often from now on, so my response time will increase significantly.
As if it wasn't bad till now.
Last week... on "DizniList!":
James Williams about Egmont's 1996 CB edition:
> I assume it's Egmonts answer to Another Rainbow's The Carl Barks' Library.
Yes and no, it's the German publisher Ehapa's reworked and updated version
of Cochran's and Hamilton's 1981 catalogue of Barks oils, if that is the one
you mean. It was titled "The Fine Art of Walt Disney", I believe, and was
alledgedly the reason that Disney Corp gave the comics licence to AR.
This sold out a long time ago, and prices have sky-rocketed in the meantime,
so this is probably a good investment. And a great collection of Barks oils
for those who like them - I remember Per saying he was missing that.
...and James again:
> The lack of [a creator hoozoo] is my fault. I volunteered [...] and I never
> had the time to complete this task. I'd be happy to contribute to such a
> task, but there is now way I'll have the time to write one myself.
No need for excuses. The difference between what we would like to do
and what we are actually capable of doing is often obscured by enthusiasm.
I've made similar promises myself, regardless of common sense.
Jon:
> It seems like the only artists they find it worth mentioning over here is
> Barks and Rosa.
Danish DD for a short while credited the artists, but only their own
- D coded - stories, and Barks and Murry. Not even (Danish) Freddy Milton
was named. The only time I saw van Horn's name (in tiny letters) it was,
incorrectly, attributed to a Verhagen story.
I don't think they *know* who's who! But van Horn *was* credited in the
Norwegian version of HAwH, and presumably in the Danish too, as it has
recently evolved into a very close copy of the Norwegian.
Don about 'DD - My Life in an Eggshell':
> I've never seen much of Rota's art, but are all his stories that
> beautiful?! Or did he try extra hard on that one?
Read for instance Norwegian suppl.issue #6/94 for the first part of
the time machine story, and you'll find he's consistently good.
His best, IMHO, is however "Night of the Saracen", code unknown, another
Viking story, except it's more like Arabian Nights. Beautiful and moody.
He even had his name on the *cover*, way back in 1987.
It was upside down and disguised as Arabian gibberish.
Harry: thank you for the 'Diznirep' files and data. Lasse could tell
that you are a real programmer! If you'd like another improved, but
still hopelessly incomplete version of Danish.index you are welcome.
Knut: if you want me to send the F0K-DD, I'll need your address!
<oLe 'RoC' Reichstein Nielsen, c/o Lasse 'Spot' R.N. (lrn at daimi.aau.dk)>
often from now on, so my response time will increase significantly.
As if it wasn't bad till now.
Last week... on "DizniList!":
James Williams about Egmont's 1996 CB edition:
> I assume it's Egmonts answer to Another Rainbow's The Carl Barks' Library.
Yes and no, it's the German publisher Ehapa's reworked and updated version
of Cochran's and Hamilton's 1981 catalogue of Barks oils, if that is the one
you mean. It was titled "The Fine Art of Walt Disney", I believe, and was
alledgedly the reason that Disney Corp gave the comics licence to AR.
This sold out a long time ago, and prices have sky-rocketed in the meantime,
so this is probably a good investment. And a great collection of Barks oils
for those who like them - I remember Per saying he was missing that.
...and James again:
> The lack of [a creator hoozoo] is my fault. I volunteered [...] and I never
> had the time to complete this task. I'd be happy to contribute to such a
> task, but there is now way I'll have the time to write one myself.
No need for excuses. The difference between what we would like to do
and what we are actually capable of doing is often obscured by enthusiasm.
I've made similar promises myself, regardless of common sense.
Jon:
> It seems like the only artists they find it worth mentioning over here is
> Barks and Rosa.
Danish DD for a short while credited the artists, but only their own
- D coded - stories, and Barks and Murry. Not even (Danish) Freddy Milton
was named. The only time I saw van Horn's name (in tiny letters) it was,
incorrectly, attributed to a Verhagen story.
I don't think they *know* who's who! But van Horn *was* credited in the
Norwegian version of HAwH, and presumably in the Danish too, as it has
recently evolved into a very close copy of the Norwegian.
Don about 'DD - My Life in an Eggshell':
> I've never seen much of Rota's art, but are all his stories that
> beautiful?! Or did he try extra hard on that one?
Read for instance Norwegian suppl.issue #6/94 for the first part of
the time machine story, and you'll find he's consistently good.
His best, IMHO, is however "Night of the Saracen", code unknown, another
Viking story, except it's more like Arabian Nights. Beautiful and moody.
He even had his name on the *cover*, way back in 1987.
It was upside down and disguised as Arabian gibberish.
Harry: thank you for the 'Diznirep' files and data. Lasse could tell
that you are a real programmer! If you'd like another improved, but
still hopelessly incomplete version of Danish.index you are welcome.
Knut: if you want me to send the F0K-DD, I'll need your address!
<oLe 'RoC' Reichstein Nielsen, c/o Lasse 'Spot' R.N. (lrn at daimi.aau.dk)>
Fredrik Ekman
Rosa, Database, Barks in Holland, a French issue
Message 59 -
1994-10-12 at 00:27:04
On Mon, 10 Oct 1994, H.W. Fluks wrote:
> (I wish Jippes had drawn that story! I haven't seen it yet, but I'm
> sure Jippes would have done a better job than Van Horn. Sorry Fredrik!)
No need to be sorry. I haven't seen it either, but I feel that I will
agree with everyone else that Van Horn shouldn't have been the one doing
this. He is the king of slapstick comics and this seems to be more like a
normal adventure tale.
> - 1964. Tony Strobl finally shows us the youth of Donald. As a little child,
> he helped his grandparents on the farm. [Which story can this be?]
That sounds like the previously discussed "This is Your Life, Donald
Duck" to me. Although I don't remember seeing any Grandpa, Donald spent
his childhood years on Grandma's farm in that story.
And thanks for all the French names. Pity I didn't have them a week ago.
Now you'll have to wait for them to show up in the Names list.
I've also got some comments on the database, but I'll gather some more
ammunition before I dump them onto you. I'd just like to take the
opportunity to THANK you for all the marvellous work you have put into
this project!
/Fredrik
> (I wish Jippes had drawn that story! I haven't seen it yet, but I'm
> sure Jippes would have done a better job than Van Horn. Sorry Fredrik!)
No need to be sorry. I haven't seen it either, but I feel that I will
agree with everyone else that Van Horn shouldn't have been the one doing
this. He is the king of slapstick comics and this seems to be more like a
normal adventure tale.
> - 1964. Tony Strobl finally shows us the youth of Donald. As a little child,
> he helped his grandparents on the farm. [Which story can this be?]
That sounds like the previously discussed "This is Your Life, Donald
Duck" to me. Although I don't remember seeing any Grandpa, Donald spent
his childhood years on Grandma's farm in that story.
And thanks for all the French names. Pity I didn't have them a week ago.
Now you'll have to wait for them to show up in the Names list.
I've also got some comments on the database, but I'll gather some more
ammunition before I dump them onto you. I'd just like to take the
opportunity to THANK you for all the marvellous work you have put into
this project!
/Fredrik
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #459.
Message 60 -
1994-10-12 at 05:20:12
PER:
I'm not sure what you mean by saying that my replies to the
Digest have the same title as the Digest I reply to. Do the Digests have
titles? I notice that my comments always say "Comments on Disney-Comics
Digest #umpty-um-something", if that's what you mean. And who writes the
little title list at the beginning of each Digest? I notice everyone's
contributions seem to have titles that they add themselves, while mine
always have the titles as I describe above. (Surely no big deal, only
wondering...)
JAMES:
You liked chapter II the least? The other guy liked it the best?
I think I've mentioned before that one thing I've noticed after doing
this job for 8 years, no matter WHAT I do, some people will think it's
my best story, some people will think it's my worst story, and everyone
else will fall somewhere in between. Some people dislike my stories
because they aren't EXACTLY like a Barks story. Some people like my
stuff because they say it's NOTHING like Barks. Others say they like my
stuff because it's partly Barks and partly lots of other stuff. Some
people like my stories but not my art. Others adore the art. I usually
can tell the people at shows who are only trying to pay me empty
complements so I'll sign their comics or something when they tell me
that, gosh, they can't tell the difference between my art and Barks'
(they'd need to be clinically BLIND for that!). At any rate... you see
how it's impossible to ever gauge when I'm on the right track with what
I'm doing. I think that listening to opinions of Duck fans would give me
an important way to tell what I'm accomplishing... but it's impossible
to do so.
James, did you say you're currently writing a Duck story that
involves a witches' coven that is trying to corrupt the eternal souls of
humanity? I'm sure you were kidding, right? That sort of thing would
never be even remotely allowed. Fo instance, someone... I think it might
have even been ol' Geir... has often suggested that I should do a story
involving $crooge searching for the Holy Grail, but this is, of course,
impossible. How could I explain what the Holy Grail is? I was about to
do such a story 15 years ago in my "Pertwillaby Papers" comics... those
are my old fan-magazine stories where I originally did several stories
I've since turned into $crooge adventures...and where I foreshadowed
many aspects of the Indiana Jones movies which came a few years later...
but I could mention the Holy Grail in those pages, whereas NOT in a Duck
comic -- nor, I think, should I.
SOMEBODY was commenting that the Danish and Norwegian Egmont
Disney weekly seem to have recently become quite similar. This is
because they are now put together by the same office, rather than two
different offices. I think Egmont wants to simplify things and have all
the Egmont weeklies be the same (except ads), and save lots of time and
money. I guess this means some people will lose their jobs, but it sure
seems like an obvious way to be doing business; but, thankfully, that's
not part of the business I need to worry about.
Who's reading the COMPUSERVE Disney-comics-section? It started
very slow, had a surge about a week or two ago, and then dropped stone
daid.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying that my replies to the
Digest have the same title as the Digest I reply to. Do the Digests have
titles? I notice that my comments always say "Comments on Disney-Comics
Digest #umpty-um-something", if that's what you mean. And who writes the
little title list at the beginning of each Digest? I notice everyone's
contributions seem to have titles that they add themselves, while mine
always have the titles as I describe above. (Surely no big deal, only
wondering...)
JAMES:
You liked chapter II the least? The other guy liked it the best?
I think I've mentioned before that one thing I've noticed after doing
this job for 8 years, no matter WHAT I do, some people will think it's
my best story, some people will think it's my worst story, and everyone
else will fall somewhere in between. Some people dislike my stories
because they aren't EXACTLY like a Barks story. Some people like my
stuff because they say it's NOTHING like Barks. Others say they like my
stuff because it's partly Barks and partly lots of other stuff. Some
people like my stories but not my art. Others adore the art. I usually
can tell the people at shows who are only trying to pay me empty
complements so I'll sign their comics or something when they tell me
that, gosh, they can't tell the difference between my art and Barks'
(they'd need to be clinically BLIND for that!). At any rate... you see
how it's impossible to ever gauge when I'm on the right track with what
I'm doing. I think that listening to opinions of Duck fans would give me
an important way to tell what I'm accomplishing... but it's impossible
to do so.
James, did you say you're currently writing a Duck story that
involves a witches' coven that is trying to corrupt the eternal souls of
humanity? I'm sure you were kidding, right? That sort of thing would
never be even remotely allowed. Fo instance, someone... I think it might
have even been ol' Geir... has often suggested that I should do a story
involving $crooge searching for the Holy Grail, but this is, of course,
impossible. How could I explain what the Holy Grail is? I was about to
do such a story 15 years ago in my "Pertwillaby Papers" comics... those
are my old fan-magazine stories where I originally did several stories
I've since turned into $crooge adventures...and where I foreshadowed
many aspects of the Indiana Jones movies which came a few years later...
but I could mention the Holy Grail in those pages, whereas NOT in a Duck
comic -- nor, I think, should I.
SOMEBODY was commenting that the Danish and Norwegian Egmont
Disney weekly seem to have recently become quite similar. This is
because they are now put together by the same office, rather than two
different offices. I think Egmont wants to simplify things and have all
the Egmont weeklies be the same (except ads), and save lots of time and
money. I guess this means some people will lose their jobs, but it sure
seems like an obvious way to be doing business; but, thankfully, that's
not part of the business I need to worry about.
Who's reading the COMPUSERVE Disney-comics-section? It started
very slow, had a surge about a week or two ago, and then dropped stone
daid.