Keskustelujen arkisto

>
> DWIGHT: I always find the Blum and Ault articles interesting
> and enjoyable. I just simply don't find the stories quite as
> disturbing as they do -- but the elements are there if you want to
> interpret them that way. I FILL my scripts with "dark" elements,
> hoping to give something suitably grim to fans of that kind of thing.
> In my "Animal Farm" parody (the Pig story) Vicar went along with it a
> bit. And after I was finished with the script, I sat around trying
> to analyze my subconscious from what I had written. ;-)

I think the essay that annoyed me the most was the one looking for
allegories of atomic doom in Barks's immediate post-War stories. The
essay quoted Barks right up front as saying he had no such thing in mind,
then proceeded to ignore what Barks said and spent hundreds of words
analyzing the allegories of atomic doom that Barks didn't intend. It
just seemed like insufferable academic arrogance on the essayist's
part to presume to interpret the stories better than the actual author.
A case could be made that atomic doom was on everybody's mind right
after Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- heck, the world had just been through
a devastating war that had drastically changed everything -- and Barks
had unconsciously absorbed and reflected the overall fears and
uncertainties of the period, but the writer wasn't even that common-
sensical. He had a monomania to take out for a walk, and he did it at
Barks's expense.

> Many of your translations in the first period of Gladstone were
> simply "intermediate" steps -- you'd translate a Dutch or Italian
> story, and then someone else would do the final "dialogue" on it.
> But now, you both translate and dialogue. In the case of "The Money
> Ocean," which of the two systems took place? Did you do a dialogue
> which was adhered to, save that one explanation of Scrooge's
> business enterprises? Or was your work an intermediate step?
>
With "The Money Ocean," I translated the original Italian story and
provided what I thought was a finished script. Somebody else (who
got the official credit) went over it and gagged it up a bit --
though not, in my biased opinion, to the story's benefit. I forget
now quite how the Italian original explained things, but my version
of Scrooge's problem at the end of that story was that with all of
his money stored in the one gigantic money bin, and with all the
money inaccessible during Magica de Spell's hurricane, the regular
bills of McDuck enterprises weren't being paid and now Scrooge was
being hit with late charges and lawsuits for non-payment. As I
recall, even that got slightly scrambled in the rewrite.

--Dwight Decker

DAVID:
I also got aholt of an U$ #290 yesterday, and, yes, the printing
and coloring was beautiful, finally! I've already sent a FAX to John
Clark to have him thank Sue for doing such a nice job coloring it... but
I do that just about EVERY time they print one of my stories since it's
so nice to see some effort put into the proper presentation of one of my
stories, after seeing them used across Europe. Well, I didn't thank them
for their use of "Guardians of the Lost Library" -- the coloring and
lettering on that'n pretty much sucked, but "Terror of the Transvaal"
was great. Such a difference comparing it with "New Laird of Castle
McDuck" -- the black ink in that issue was gray!
I'd sent John my original story-board script to fill in space
since I had very little to write about in that "making of" text as far
as Barks references went. But, like you, I could sense the reasons they
picked those two pages. They might have wanted to show how I describe to
Byron what I'm going to do in one of my half-page spectaculars ("as you
can imagine, half the animals in Africa will be in this scene"), and
also John obviously wanted to have the satisfaction of getting my
mention of "Zulus" back into the story in spite of Disney's taboo on
mentioning (much less showing) any sort of primitive native cultures. I
was sorta upset when I noticed "Zulu" missing from my dialogue, but that
use of the script made it okay.
My original title for that chapter was "The Prey of the
Transvaal Viper"... that's why you see Flintheart referred to as "viper"
so often and with such feeling. But Byron nixed that title, and unlike
other instances with Gladstone's use of the Lo$ series (where I switch
the titles back to my original version) I left Byron's change alone
after I think I tried both titles out on a few others.
$crooge on the cover... I don't know about his beak being too
narrow -- but I purposely made his outline extra thick just so he
WOULDN'T blend into all that background clutter! That's exactly what one
should do to prevent that from occurring! Disney made two changes on the
cover art before I inked it... one was that originally $crooge's was
giving that finger gesture with his other hand, and Disney said that
looked like maybe somebody somewhere might possibly perhaps maybe think
it was an obscene gesture forming maybe. After all, with only 4 fingers
and viewed from that angle, it seems to be that finger. I wouldn't omit
the hand gesture because it was my favorite part; not only is $crooge
not afraid, but he's INVITING the melee. So I switched hands. The other
change they wanted was to remove the dinosaur as "no dinosaur appears in
the story". To that I said "oh, please, give-me-a-break!" and left the
dino in. (Did you see Mickey in the corner?)
I also received that new weekly in the mail with the Rota story.
How do you figure Rota is imitating MY style? Wht would he imitate
someone who can't hold a candle to himself? But then, there's the main
character named "Rosa", so I wonder. Of course, I can't read the Danish
issue I have, so I don't know what the story is like. But I know I love
the art and style just from the middle panel at the bottom of page 7
(page 4 of the story). That's just the sort of great panel you wouldn't
see in something like...uh... like that Strobl story in the back of U$
#290.
What about that Strobl story? I don't say much good about my own
stories, but you've never heard me get started on stuff like this Strobl
story. I can't imagine someone liking BOTH the stories in that issue.
But it's my idea that it's good to have variety in these comics rather
than one style for the lowest common denominator, as they like to do in
places like Sweden. Maybe the adult fans read my story, and read the
strobl story to their children at bedtime?

Hi, all.

DWIGHT: You seem shocked that a Rosa story would be combined
with a Strobl story. But this is the THIRD issue in a row when this
has happened! John Clark tells me he originally planned to use only
one Strobl (in US 288), but then Egmont was very late in delivering
some stories I had dialogued for issues starting after that, so
things were pushed ahead. Those Danish stories will (hopefully!)
begin next issue.
Although "Bye-Bye Money Bin" (save its title) was
above-average, your reference to these as "kiddie" stories is
painfully true. It's clear that because some readers have been
vehement in requesting Strobl, John Clark has had to pair the stories
with Rosa just so he could make sure that the issues still sold. I
think it demeans the Rosa stories to have them there, though.
You must have really hated the current story when you told us
to stop reading when a character says "Wak." It appears five times
in the first panel, I believe.

DON: In "Terror of the Transvaal" I've now noticed something
strange. When Flinty, covered in feathers (although, as Dwight
mentioned, there's nothing new about that) races into the horse stall
-- where he's about to meet the lion -- his goal is to find Scrooge's
rifle. A thought balloon expresses this goal. Yet toward the right
of the panel, a very few thought-balloon "pointer" bubbles have been
left in -- revealing that there was a second thought balloon in that
panel, originally (the wooden post where it was is clearly not Rosa
art, either). What did it say? Disney at work, again?

JORGEN: How much do I pay for old issues? Well, it depends on
what kind of condition you buy them in. My rule is, "No condition is
too bad when the comic is from before 1948, as long as no pages are
missing except from a story I have in a reprint." In the last two
years, I've bought WDC&S 15, in Fine condition but with pp. 31-34 out,
for $15; WDC&S 12 in Good with same pages out, $15; WDC&S 9 in
fair (complete), $25; WDC&S 19 in fair, $15; WDC&S 20 in fair with 6
pages missing, $12; WDC&S 16 in poor (complete), $12; WDC&S 38
in poor (complete), $12; WDC&S 23 in fair, $8.
I couldn't believe that last buy. Although these comics aren't
really WORTH more than scrap paper, most people would expect to pay
around $16-$20 for that one. The deal on #19 isn't that bad either.
But what I'm getting to, is that in generally nicer-looking condition
(let's say, what's called "fine") these same comics might be priced
at $125, $150, $200, $110, $125, $125, $90, and $110 respectively. Or
more -- I have no price guide and am going by memory. Why buy things
in fine condition if you're only going to damage them by reading
them, and can't afford such condition most of the time anyway?
In "fine" condition, I believe WDC&S #1 is "worth" around
$2000. My own copy of that is less than "good" in its condition, if
not beaten enough to be called "fair", and it was priced at $300
four years ago (when I got it). But I'd never pay that for it. I
traded an animation cel for it, which an animator I knew once gave me
as refuse. Want to pay MUCH too much for something that looks good?
Try buying animation cels. That's why I DON'T! ;-)
And now my WDC&S #1 would probably be priced at $500. Wak!

Uderzo was interviewed? Okay, it's off topic, but -- how is
the legal battle over Asterix going (and what, exactly, IS going on
there?), and is Uderzo going to make more Asterix stories? I seem to
recall it rested on the outcome of this legal problem. Creators'
rights, again.

ALL: I believe I have figured out a way of sorting out the
problems in "Fotobogo." I'll see about getting John Clark to order
that one, although it probably won't be used until 1996.

Best,

David Gerstein
"Horace sure is a ham! But I haven't the heart to tell him!"
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>

A few comments on U$ # 290, which I just now got around to purchasing
(so flame me for my tardiness, already!):

cover
-----
The things one learns on this list! Had I not read Don's posting, I
never would have noticed the top of Mickey's head among the menagerie
of ferocious beasts surrounding Scrooge.

Kimberley
---------
Just in case you're wondering, the depiction of the Kimberley diamond
mine as a hole going straight down is geologically accurate. Diamonds
are found in "kimberlite pipes", narrow shafts of rock that have shot
straight up from the earth's mantle (where the great pressures permit
the formation of diamonds). Probably the pipes rose vertically through
the earth's crust like bubbles rising vertically through a liquid, in
response to some crustal fracture that allowed the pressure of the
mantle underneath to vent out. So diamond mines like the great one in
Kimberley do go straight down, and the miners do indeed excavate the
entire kimberlite pipe, leaving a gaping vertical hole behind them. Who
knows, maybe some kid reading this story will be inspired to learn some-
thing about mining and geology from it!

"I'm a Boer!"
-------------
I remember that we discussed this joke when LO$ # 6 was published in
Europe (although I don't remember how the translators handled it). I
suppose it was necessary to have Flintheart say this line, but I still
wish it had been saved for some pig-face to say, thereby making it a
**double** pun (Boer = bore = boar).

campfire scene
--------------
I do like this coloring. It makes the art look almost 3-dimensional.

"I'm not in Kansas any more!"
-----------------------------
Don Thompson once wrote in Comics Buyers Guide that the 2 jokes he was
the most tired of seeing were references to the classic movie lines
"I think we're not in Kansas any more, Toto!" and "Is that a gun in
your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?". [Remember "Who Framed
Roger Rabbit"?] However, the gag works in this context, since it's
uttered in response to sighting a lion (who turns out to be somewhat
cowardly, at that).

"Buck McDuck rides again!"
--------------------------
The scene of Scrooge riding into Johannesburg atop a lion immediately
brings to mind the scene in "Blazing Saddles" where the citizens of the
Western town flee in panic as the wild cowboy Mongo rides into town on
the back of an ox. Was the picture of Scrooge supposed to be a refer-
ence to the Mel Brooks movie, or am I reading more into this than was
intended?

stable scene
------------
It was fun to hear Scrooge refer (unknowingly) to Flintheart as "the
chickenheart". But it seems unlikely to me that the stablehand would
just let Scrooge take the six-guns out of another man's trunk to go
have a shoot-out with him. A pretty lousy property attendant!

"Do not foresake me, oh mah..."
-------------------------------
With all the Kurtzman-esque detail in a Rosa story, are we supposed to
be thinking about how this song was used originally in "High Noon" or
in the famous Mad magazine parody of it?

"a band of warriors with big, nasty spears"
-------------------------------------------
It is interesting that Disney won't even allow a **mention** of the Zulu
tribe. (In the upcoming "Pocahontas" cartoon, will anyone be able to
mention that the characters are Indians?) How, then, was Gladstone able
to reprint the following dialog from "Christmas for Shacktown" in DDA
# 30? Daisy: "My club has got to have fifty dollars!" Donald: "In
pennies, nickels, or Comanche wampum?" For that matter, how were they
able to continue calling the economically depressed part of Duckburg
"Shacktown"? Surely this is an insult to the poor and homeless! And a
pig-face says, "Let's build the track on the corner by crippled Joey's
shack, so he can see the train go by!" Crippled Joey!!!!! Do you
suppose the parking spaces closest to the entrance of Disney World have
a sign saying "Reserved - crippled parking"? I think not. So did Glad-
stone sneak this reprint past the powers-that-be while no one was look-
ing, or what?

Scrooge and guns
----------------
I thought Don once said, in reference to an earlier story, that Disney
would not allow Scrooge to be shown pointing a gun at someone. Do I
remember that correctly? If so, how can Scrooge be shown to shoot at
Flintheart's feet, to make him "dance" in the street?

tarring and feathering
----------------------
I agree with the posts on this list that point out that feathering isn't
a particularly humiliating punishment for a duck. It would be more of
an embarassment to Flintheart to be **plucked** rather than feathered!
However, the line in the stablehand's thought balloon about "a giant
chicken" will bring chuckles to readers of this list, when they recall
all our discussions about whether Gyro is representative of water fowl
or poultry.

Mail Bin
--------
Who's this "David Gerstein" letterhack, anyway? :)

a final thought
---------------
It would have been fun to see Scrooge's old Montana buddy "T.R." make a
cameo appearance in some panel of this story, since Roosevelt spent so
much time hunting big game on the veld. In fact, one of the best known
protraits of the future President shows him standing next to the carcass
of a water buffalo that he had just shot there. (And there's a line in
"Arsenic and Black Lace" that makes a play on words between "Roosevelt"
and "on the veld", since Teddy was so strongly associated with that area
of Africa.) Or was T.R. actually in this story lurking somewhere within
the tall grass there, and I just missed him?

Enough wasting of bandwidth, and I now promise to return to lurking
within the tall grass myself!

Wilmer Rivers

DON: The "Land Beneath the Ground" cover was received well hereabouts
(rural Maine), to the point that the book disappeared from comics shop
shelves quickly, but copies remained in bookstores and supermarkets. Direct
sales editions always seem to do better. You needn't be worried about the
artistic merits, as no one really noticed. So much for the aesthetic taste
of Mainers. BTW, where did the cover originally appear?

DAVID: Having been ten (plus or minus) when the Strobl stories were
originally printed, I'll agree that they weren't as sophisticated as the
Barks tales. The Dell DD book in which many appeared did have a good
circulation, about 1.5 million I think, and were very popular in my New
Jersey neighborhoods back then.

JORGEN: Dell WDCS below 100 do bring hefty prices. $50 will probably get
a book in VG-FN, depending on issue number. I've paid from $.50 to $12.00
for similar condition numbered DD's under 50.

DAVID:
Good eye! I didn't notice that ghost thought balloon tail in
that panel! I checked my original script -- the FULL balloon was "McDuck
had a rifle in here somewhere! I'll give it back to him... one bullet at
a time!" Disney undoubtedly thought this sounded "too dangerous".

WILMER:
Good questions!
McDuck riding a lion was not intended as a "tribute" to BLAZING
SADDLES, and if I'd thought it might be interpretted as such, I probably
would have left it out. I rather detest BLAZING SADDLES. And Mel Brooks
movies in general. They seem like lots of effort and expense to produce
r-rated skits for the Carol Burnett show (since Harvey Korman is usually
there somewhere. Just real tacky borscht-belt humor. And BLAZING SADDLES
was a major disappointment for me after Mel Brooks launched his movie
career with a piece of genius like THE PRODUCERS... something that
seemed genuinely clever to me.
The stable owner. Yes, I realized that he shouldn't allow
someone to snatch stuff out of Flintheart's cart, that's why I tried to
explain it away by having $crooge say that he was going to "discuss" the
ownership of the guns with the guy who brought the cart, suggesting that
he was going to go offer to buy the guns. Still, right, the stable guy
shouldn't have trusted him; but by then $crooge already had the guns ON,
so maybe he thought he'd better keep quiet. By the way, the Dutch stable
owner, in my script, had an OUTRAGEOUS accent which, naturally, Disney
nixed. Granted, I have no idea what a real Dutch accent would
sound/look like in print, but, for instance, his line of "Certainly.
That's my job" was, in my script, "Zertanly! Dot's mine chobe!"
Yes, the "Do not forsake me oh mah" was in memory of the MAD
parody of "Hah Noon!" But did you notice that they left off the
"darlin'"? I'm trying to recall now, but I think Disney would not allow
it because there was some danger of copyright infringement if the entire
line were used, believe it or else.
Correct, Disney will not allow guns to be pointed AT people
("too dangerous"). But $crooge was not trying to hit FG, just scare him.
I guess.
No, I wouldn't have shown T.R. in Africa since he wouldn't be
going there for years, maybe decades yet. This story was set in 1885 or
1886 when T.R., if he wasn't still a rancher in the Dakota Territory,
was just restarting his political career. But don't worry... he'll be
back as a major character in part 10, my favorite chapter. (No, this
chapter did not take place in 1887 as shown on the cover... that's when
the cover portrait was "taken", after $crooge had been in Africa a year
or two, so I could get him into the clothes shown in Barks' flashback
scene in that U$ #49.)

I'm now in the process of writing up a trip
report about my recent jaunt to Europe for
CAPA-Alpha, the comics amateur press association
and I just got to the part where I spent a
day in Sweden. Thanks to disney-comics at minsk,
I hooked up with Mattias Hallin, who was kind
enough to spend the day showing your humble
servant around Lund. I don't remember if I
ever adequately thanked him for his time and
efforts, but I did enjoy it. Disney fans make
good tour guides! I also found an issue of
Musse Pigg with that Danish story I worked on
(the one where Donald goes to a costume party
dressed as a fish, and I picked up a video
tape of Snow White dubbed into Swedish. That
last is notable for its advertising for an
upcoming video release of "The Aristocats"
in early '95. There are rumors Aristocats is
on Disney's schedule for release in the US
later in '95, but so far I haven't seen any
official announcement. Looks like this will be
the first time a major Disney film has been
released on video in Europe before its
release in the States. (The big American
release then will be The Lion King, so perhaps
it's no wonder Aristocats has been pushed back.)
Enough rambling. Thanks again, Mattias, for a
swell day in Sweden!

--Dwight Decker