Hi, folks. LAST message for the day. I've read all the Digests,
now, that came while I was away.
JORGEN:
> Donald Duck (D93133, two pages). Art by Xavi.
This story was swiped directly from Daan Jippes' first story -- I
know because I just translated that. In the original, it's HDL who tell
Donald about the difference between greed and luck, and DD goes to a
fancy restaurant to spend the money (where, of course, the waiter turns
out to be the wallet's owner).
> Super Goof (D91310, 6 pages). The art looks like Ferioli.
This is actually by Esteban, one of the last "good" stories he did
before the art editors laid down the law that he had to begin drawing
like Paul Murry c. 1971. (That is no joke -- it's actually what
happened.)
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
Author
Topic: 199504
(154 messages)
9475609
Disney-comics digest #623.
Message 91 -
1995-04-18 at 23:42:30
Deckerd
Disney-comics digest #623.
Message 92 -
1995-04-19 at 00:21:59
> This story was swiped directly from Daan Jippes' first story -- I
> know because I just translated that. In the original, it's HDL who tell
> Donald about the difference between greed and luck, and DD goes to a
> fancy restaurant to spend the money (where, of course, the waiter turns
> out to be the wallet's owner).
This sounds like a Dutch story Gladstone sent me to translate last year.
It was a Milton/Jippes collaboration, three pages long, and had to
do with HD&L wanting French fries and Donald wanting expensive snails.
There was a pun waiting to happen that couldn't exist in the original
Dutch version but did in English, so I took advantage of it: Donald
saying, "If you kids want French food, how about snails?" Donald tried
to pay for his expensive meal with a wallet he had found, and of course
it turned out to be the wallet the waiter had lost. My proposed title
for the story was "I Only Have Fries for You"; the original title literally
translated from Dutch was something on the order of "Potatoes a la Pokey"
(since the last scene is Donald in jail). I dunno when it will appear,
but at only three pages it won't be squoze out by Hamilton's new page
count restrictions, at least.
--Dwight
> know because I just translated that. In the original, it's HDL who tell
> Donald about the difference between greed and luck, and DD goes to a
> fancy restaurant to spend the money (where, of course, the waiter turns
> out to be the wallet's owner).
This sounds like a Dutch story Gladstone sent me to translate last year.
It was a Milton/Jippes collaboration, three pages long, and had to
do with HD&L wanting French fries and Donald wanting expensive snails.
There was a pun waiting to happen that couldn't exist in the original
Dutch version but did in English, so I took advantage of it: Donald
saying, "If you kids want French food, how about snails?" Donald tried
to pay for his expensive meal with a wallet he had found, and of course
it turned out to be the wallet the waiter had lost. My proposed title
for the story was "I Only Have Fries for You"; the original title literally
translated from Dutch was something on the order of "Potatoes a la Pokey"
(since the last scene is Donald in jail). I dunno when it will appear,
but at only three pages it won't be squoze out by Hamilton's new page
count restrictions, at least.
--Dwight
Bob Wright
Disney-comics digest #640.
Message 93 -
1995-04-19 at 05:07:57
> You never said a truer word! It occurs to me at this very moment
> that my interpretation of Mickey is remarkably similar to Scrooge in
>the LO$ before (in chapter six) he acquires his meanness and before
>greed becomes a strong influence.
> And who said that this Mickey was restricted to the early Mouse
> tales? I'm having a high old time writing stories like that by the
> bushel these days.
DAVID: I must be missing something. Have any of these stories been in the
US Disneys of late?
> that my interpretation of Mickey is remarkably similar to Scrooge in
>the LO$ before (in chapter six) he acquires his meanness and before
>greed becomes a strong influence.
> And who said that this Mickey was restricted to the early Mouse
> tales? I'm having a high old time writing stories like that by the
> bushel these days.
DAVID: I must be missing something. Have any of these stories been in the
US Disneys of late?
Peter Coenen
Disney Comics Digests 632 & 635
Message 94 -
1995-04-19 at 10:42:48
Subject: Re Disney-Comics Digests 632 & 635
DON:
Once again, please excuse my late answer. The computer which is connected with
the
Internet is at the place my father works. So he has to copy all the e-mail for
me to
a disk and take it home, what he doesn't do every day, BTW, where I get to read
the hole stuff.
Then I write my mails, save them on a disk, my father takes it with him the next
morning
and so on. All that can sometimes last a few days... From tomorrow on I even
have to do the
hole stuff with my old amiga computer, because my PC has only been loaned. In
late August I will
go to America for ten months via a student exchange. I hope that my host parents
will have an
internet access, then the hole stuff will become easier.
Another thing: It was my father who subscribed me to this list, but under his
name (Peter),
but it is me (Danny), who writes all the mails under that address. OK?
The text I translated for you is out of the "Comic Speedline"-magazine, which
appears bi-
monthly in Germany. It is rather hard to get it, normally you can only buy it in
special
comic stores. The article was written by a guy called Martin Budde, and of
course Comic
Speedline and the Walt Disney Company have the copyright. There was also a
non-coloured
story of you (AR 109) in the December edition. During the next days I will
continue my work
on the translation, I think. The (great) message of your trip to Germany I
received by a note
in the "Tock Tock" magazine, which is a FREE information mag about the comic
books of Feest
Comics and the Ehapa Comic Collection of the German Disney publisher Ehapa. It
is mailed
to me twice a year, but is also available in book stores. By the way, in this
mag I first
heared about you and your Life of Scrooge stories.
HARRY:
The German translation for FREE LUNCH is somethin like "Essen kostenlos". In
the German
version of Lo$ 8 they just used "Kostenlos" (FREE), and so it fitted perfectly
on the l'il sign.
Danny Coenen (!) via f.coenen at kfa-juelich.de
DON:
Once again, please excuse my late answer. The computer which is connected with
the
Internet is at the place my father works. So he has to copy all the e-mail for
me to
a disk and take it home, what he doesn't do every day, BTW, where I get to read
the hole stuff.
Then I write my mails, save them on a disk, my father takes it with him the next
morning
and so on. All that can sometimes last a few days... From tomorrow on I even
have to do the
hole stuff with my old amiga computer, because my PC has only been loaned. In
late August I will
go to America for ten months via a student exchange. I hope that my host parents
will have an
internet access, then the hole stuff will become easier.
Another thing: It was my father who subscribed me to this list, but under his
name (Peter),
but it is me (Danny), who writes all the mails under that address. OK?
The text I translated for you is out of the "Comic Speedline"-magazine, which
appears bi-
monthly in Germany. It is rather hard to get it, normally you can only buy it in
special
comic stores. The article was written by a guy called Martin Budde, and of
course Comic
Speedline and the Walt Disney Company have the copyright. There was also a
non-coloured
story of you (AR 109) in the December edition. During the next days I will
continue my work
on the translation, I think. The (great) message of your trip to Germany I
received by a note
in the "Tock Tock" magazine, which is a FREE information mag about the comic
books of Feest
Comics and the Ehapa Comic Collection of the German Disney publisher Ehapa. It
is mailed
to me twice a year, but is also available in book stores. By the way, in this
mag I first
heared about you and your Life of Scrooge stories.
HARRY:
The German translation for FREE LUNCH is somethin like "Essen kostenlos". In
the German
version of Lo$ 8 they just used "Kostenlos" (FREE), and so it fitted perfectly
on the l'il sign.
Danny Coenen (!) via f.coenen at kfa-juelich.de
DAVID.A.GERSTEIN
Disney-comics digest #640.
Message 95 -
1995-04-19 at 14:44:47
DWIGHT: Oh, no! We've done it AGAIN! Late last year that
Jippes three-pager, with its Dutch title, code, and synopsis, was
included on a list I sent John of "stories I plan to translate and
rescript in 1995." John OKAYED the list early this year, so I went
ahead and translated the three-pager. I called it "Banquet Behind
Bars" and even went as far as to call up Daan Jippes and have him
approve my new title for the story. And I turned in what I thought
was a real doozy of a translation, too.
I'm not sore at YOU, Dwight -- and I don't want to give John a
hard time! But how can I deal with this mess, particularly here in
Scotland where it's almost impossible to call Gladstone (and costs
$3 per minute when I DO get through)? It looks like I went through a
lot of wasted effort, which is really disappointing.
I sent John the story a few days before leaving for Scotland,
so I haven't talked to him about it. Now I probably can't bring up
the issue until June. What to do?
JOHN AND EVERY OTHER EGMONT WRITER: If Gladstone is going to
publish no more 64-pagers (and allocate only reprints for the new 48-
page series, which I imagine will probably be the case), our chances
of seeing any of our stories in the States is probably doomed unless
Gladstone changes the format of DONALD DUCK (which Hamilton himself
dictates). Would anyone like to co-write a letter asking for
Gladstone to make this change? Letters to the letter column do NOT
help. Only a letter to Bruce himself will do the trick.
My idea of a better format for DD would be to use 16 pages of
new-to-America material in every issue. The remainder of the issues
could be filled by a Barks 10-pager half the time and ten pages of
Taliaferro the other half of the time. (Rosa's upcoming 10-pager "An
Eye For Detail" could also go in this slot.)
DD has reportedly kept its format because it sells perfectly
well this way. Most readers I have spoken to would like the format
to change, but don't want to boycott the comic for Gladstone's sake
(exactly my own opinion). How can we solve this crisis?
WHAT'S HAPPENING TO WDC&S 600 what with this format change?
Is it at least going to be 48 pages long? John had told me that, at
64 pages, it was to have included six "classic" DD ten-pagers by
various creators. Now what?
Geez, what a screwloose mess.
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
Jippes three-pager, with its Dutch title, code, and synopsis, was
included on a list I sent John of "stories I plan to translate and
rescript in 1995." John OKAYED the list early this year, so I went
ahead and translated the three-pager. I called it "Banquet Behind
Bars" and even went as far as to call up Daan Jippes and have him
approve my new title for the story. And I turned in what I thought
was a real doozy of a translation, too.
I'm not sore at YOU, Dwight -- and I don't want to give John a
hard time! But how can I deal with this mess, particularly here in
Scotland where it's almost impossible to call Gladstone (and costs
$3 per minute when I DO get through)? It looks like I went through a
lot of wasted effort, which is really disappointing.
I sent John the story a few days before leaving for Scotland,
so I haven't talked to him about it. Now I probably can't bring up
the issue until June. What to do?
JOHN AND EVERY OTHER EGMONT WRITER: If Gladstone is going to
publish no more 64-pagers (and allocate only reprints for the new 48-
page series, which I imagine will probably be the case), our chances
of seeing any of our stories in the States is probably doomed unless
Gladstone changes the format of DONALD DUCK (which Hamilton himself
dictates). Would anyone like to co-write a letter asking for
Gladstone to make this change? Letters to the letter column do NOT
help. Only a letter to Bruce himself will do the trick.
My idea of a better format for DD would be to use 16 pages of
new-to-America material in every issue. The remainder of the issues
could be filled by a Barks 10-pager half the time and ten pages of
Taliaferro the other half of the time. (Rosa's upcoming 10-pager "An
Eye For Detail" could also go in this slot.)
DD has reportedly kept its format because it sells perfectly
well this way. Most readers I have spoken to would like the format
to change, but don't want to boycott the comic for Gladstone's sake
(exactly my own opinion). How can we solve this crisis?
WHAT'S HAPPENING TO WDC&S 600 what with this format change?
Is it at least going to be 48 pages long? John had told me that, at
64 pages, it was to have included six "classic" DD ten-pagers by
various creators. Now what?
Geez, what a screwloose mess.
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
DAVID.A.GERSTEIN
Disney-comics digest #640.
Message 96 -
1995-04-19 at 15:01:32
DWIGHT AGAIN: What happened to the 39-page "which-way" story?
It's been jettisoned... You may recall you'd said it was scheduled
for DM 32 (and John confirmed that last year sometime). Now DM "1"
(#31) in the new series begins a new three-part Diaz story, "Mickey
Aladdin." The more things change...
>Sigh<
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
It's been jettisoned... You may recall you'd said it was scheduled
for DM 32 (and John confirmed that last year sometime). Now DM "1"
(#31) in the new series begins a new three-part Diaz story, "Mickey
Aladdin." The more things change...
>Sigh<
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #640.
Message 97 -
1995-04-19 at 16:28:00
>WILMER:
How could they use that line from the WYATT EARP theme in my "Lo$"
#8? Perhaps since it was spoken rather than sang? More likely it was
because, as I said, the copyright infringement is established only when (so
I'm told) a complete line from a song is used. "Wyatt Earp -- brave,
courageous and bold" lacks another "Wyatt Earp" to be a complete line. The
name is repeated in the actual theme.
DAVID:
Welcome back from home. (?) And you were asking what I was referring
to with that corny reference to being "the antithesis of greed" and thereby
"bad for business for the Weasel Group". I love to deal in hyperbole but I
have always refused to use "smiley faces" or such icons to denote when I'm
speaking tongue-in-cheek. "My strength is as the strength of ten because my
heart is pure!" That's another good one. Somebody was asking about whether
my Another Rainbow lithograph would be costly and I was explaining why not,
with a flourish. My attitudes about such things are the only possible grudge
that could have caused them to have tried to defame me before my employers
and agents, and since I know that all that I say on here is being sent to
the Group, I like to give them things to read now and then.
SOME NEWS FROM GLADSTONE:
I was asking John Clark more about the new Gladstone comics, some
with no "covers" and being 4 pages shorter than others since the first
wrap-around interior would now serve as a cover... and I found out one more
detail. I was asking why they chose UNCLE $CROOGE as one of the comics to
have "no cover" -- I said that of all their comics, U$ is the best seller
and more often bought by the older collectors who would certainly pay the
extra money that the paper costs have necessitated, and that naturally I was
sorry to see that the last few issues with the "Lo$" deal would be different
than the rest. (You all know that we receive no royalties, so only the
presentation, rather than a drop in sales, could matter to us of the Disney
comics.) He said that this was originally the plan for that very reason, but
that they then decided that, since this two-type-comic thing is an
experiment to see how to survive in the future American comic market mess,
the best way to test it is to take their BEST selling comic (U$) and see if
the sales would drop when they had it go "no cover". If the sales on already
low-selling titles dropped further, that wouldn't have been any proof of
anything. With Gladstone's future in mind above the idea of the nicest
possible presentation of a particular series, I couldn't argue with that
logic. Moreover, another detail that their ads naturally sorta sidestep, or
at least make it unclear enough so that dense people like me don't catch on,
is this: though U$ and the other no-cover titles will have 4 fewer pages,
those remaining pages will STILL be printed on the high-quality paper stock,
allowing better reproduction and color. The titles that stay the same with a
price increase will now have the interior printed on lower quality paper.
So, after the lack of a cover on heavy stock, my "Lo$" stories will still be
presented on top quality paper, so perhaps that's better. Actually, neither
system will be as good as the current style, obviously, but that's the way
it goes.
There's more news about the "LoS". Chapter 11 with Bombie the Zombie
and $crooge having a native village destroyed and all that other wild,
politically incorrect stuff, WILL SEE PRINT IN AMERICA and with very few
changes, none of which even I would probably notice. I think a voodoo mask
that I copied from the Barks original was removed, I'm guessing because it
had big lips. A reference to "fuzzhead" is gone for some reason. Where
$crooge is called a "white duck" is changed to "pale duck", I assume to
remove the possibility that a reader will even begin to think of the ideas
of "black" and "white" races (though who could be whiter than a Duck?). John
Jacob Astor is referred to as just "J.J." These are all negligible changes.
We'll still see a story of $crooge commiting a crime as "Voodoo Hoodoo" said
he did, but now we see him pay a penalty for it, that being Bombie chasing
him around the globe for 30 years. And Bombie will be on the cover, bigger
than Death.
Also, John tells me that the "Lo$" has been nominated for an Eisner
award, and perhaps there are other nominations involved... all he said he
knows is that he was called and asked to provide some art samples from the
"Lo$" episodes. Hopefully, Gladstone will get other nominations for other
stuff they've presented as well. It would be too much to hope for that any
Disney material could ever win in American voter awards, but as they say,
just being nominated is good for the material to get it more attention.
How could they use that line from the WYATT EARP theme in my "Lo$"
#8? Perhaps since it was spoken rather than sang? More likely it was
because, as I said, the copyright infringement is established only when (so
I'm told) a complete line from a song is used. "Wyatt Earp -- brave,
courageous and bold" lacks another "Wyatt Earp" to be a complete line. The
name is repeated in the actual theme.
DAVID:
Welcome back from home. (?) And you were asking what I was referring
to with that corny reference to being "the antithesis of greed" and thereby
"bad for business for the Weasel Group". I love to deal in hyperbole but I
have always refused to use "smiley faces" or such icons to denote when I'm
speaking tongue-in-cheek. "My strength is as the strength of ten because my
heart is pure!" That's another good one. Somebody was asking about whether
my Another Rainbow lithograph would be costly and I was explaining why not,
with a flourish. My attitudes about such things are the only possible grudge
that could have caused them to have tried to defame me before my employers
and agents, and since I know that all that I say on here is being sent to
the Group, I like to give them things to read now and then.
SOME NEWS FROM GLADSTONE:
I was asking John Clark more about the new Gladstone comics, some
with no "covers" and being 4 pages shorter than others since the first
wrap-around interior would now serve as a cover... and I found out one more
detail. I was asking why they chose UNCLE $CROOGE as one of the comics to
have "no cover" -- I said that of all their comics, U$ is the best seller
and more often bought by the older collectors who would certainly pay the
extra money that the paper costs have necessitated, and that naturally I was
sorry to see that the last few issues with the "Lo$" deal would be different
than the rest. (You all know that we receive no royalties, so only the
presentation, rather than a drop in sales, could matter to us of the Disney
comics.) He said that this was originally the plan for that very reason, but
that they then decided that, since this two-type-comic thing is an
experiment to see how to survive in the future American comic market mess,
the best way to test it is to take their BEST selling comic (U$) and see if
the sales would drop when they had it go "no cover". If the sales on already
low-selling titles dropped further, that wouldn't have been any proof of
anything. With Gladstone's future in mind above the idea of the nicest
possible presentation of a particular series, I couldn't argue with that
logic. Moreover, another detail that their ads naturally sorta sidestep, or
at least make it unclear enough so that dense people like me don't catch on,
is this: though U$ and the other no-cover titles will have 4 fewer pages,
those remaining pages will STILL be printed on the high-quality paper stock,
allowing better reproduction and color. The titles that stay the same with a
price increase will now have the interior printed on lower quality paper.
So, after the lack of a cover on heavy stock, my "Lo$" stories will still be
presented on top quality paper, so perhaps that's better. Actually, neither
system will be as good as the current style, obviously, but that's the way
it goes.
There's more news about the "LoS". Chapter 11 with Bombie the Zombie
and $crooge having a native village destroyed and all that other wild,
politically incorrect stuff, WILL SEE PRINT IN AMERICA and with very few
changes, none of which even I would probably notice. I think a voodoo mask
that I copied from the Barks original was removed, I'm guessing because it
had big lips. A reference to "fuzzhead" is gone for some reason. Where
$crooge is called a "white duck" is changed to "pale duck", I assume to
remove the possibility that a reader will even begin to think of the ideas
of "black" and "white" races (though who could be whiter than a Duck?). John
Jacob Astor is referred to as just "J.J." These are all negligible changes.
We'll still see a story of $crooge commiting a crime as "Voodoo Hoodoo" said
he did, but now we see him pay a penalty for it, that being Bombie chasing
him around the globe for 30 years. And Bombie will be on the cover, bigger
than Death.
Also, John tells me that the "Lo$" has been nominated for an Eisner
award, and perhaps there are other nominations involved... all he said he
knows is that he was called and asked to provide some art samples from the
"Lo$" episodes. Hopefully, Gladstone will get other nominations for other
stuff they've presented as well. It would be too much to hope for that any
Disney material could ever win in American voter awards, but as they say,
just being nominated is good for the material to get it more attention.
Debbie L Doll
No subject
Message 98 -
1995-04-19 at 19:55:31
unsubscribe
Per Starback
San Diego and other cons
Message 99 -
1995-04-20 at 05:17:22
Thanks David, I've added that Disney comics panel on San Diego
Comic-Con to the list of upcoming events now
(http://www.update.uu.se/~starback/disney-comics/upcoming.html).
Don, I'm still waiting for you to find your calendar!
(You didn't have it in front of you when you tried to remember when
you were going to attend which cons earlier.)
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
Comic-Con to the list of upcoming events now
(http://www.update.uu.se/~starback/disney-comics/upcoming.html).
Don, I'm still waiting for you to find your calendar!
(You didn't have it in front of you when you tried to remember when
you were going to attend which cons earlier.)
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
Per Starback
Luck of the North litho
Message 100 -
1995-04-20 at 05:29:12
Daca'rt publishes Barks lithos for the Swedish market, and I recently
got an ad for them that their latest litho is from Barks's 1973 oil
version of the cover of "Luck of the North". It's a run of fifty
lithos at 3600 SEK and they say it's a "world premiere". (So this
litho isn't available in the U.S.? Are there many other "foreign"
litho sources like this? I know there are (have been?) special Barks
lithos for the Japanese market, as the Japanese version of "The
Makings of a Fish Story" had another title.)
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
got an ad for them that their latest litho is from Barks's 1973 oil
version of the cover of "Luck of the North". It's a run of fifty
lithos at 3600 SEK and they say it's a "world premiere". (So this
litho isn't available in the U.S.? Are there many other "foreign"
litho sources like this? I know there are (have been?) special Barks
lithos for the Japanese market, as the Japanese version of "The
Makings of a Fish Story" had another title.)
-- "
Per Starback, Uppsala, Sweden. email: starback at minsk.docs.uu.se
"Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!"
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #641.
Message 101 -
1995-04-20 at 08:22:00
EISNER AWARDS:
I should have waited a few hours before posting that previous
incomplete info about the Eisner awards. Here is the text of a letter FAXed
to John Clark today...
April 17, 1995
To: John Clark
Gladstone Comics
From: Jackie Estrada, administrator - Will Eisner Comic Industry Awards
Congratulations! Gladstone is up for 5+ Eisner Awards this year! Here are
the categories:
BEST SERIALIZED STORY
"The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST CONTINUING SERIES
UNCLE $CROOGE
BEST WRITER/ARTIST, HUMOR
Don Rosa, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST COLORING
Susan Daigle-Leach, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST LETTERING
Todd Klein, for "Life and Times" plus projects for Dark Horse and DC
BEST COVER ARTIST
Don Rosa, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
Can you please inform the creators and other people involved in this project
that they've been nominated? Ballots will be going out in a couple of weeks.
Note that this year the Eisner Awards ceremony will be on Friday night (July
28) of the San Diego Comic-Con, replacing the banquet. The awards will begin
at 8:30. I hope to see you there!
Jackie
(end of FAX)
I'm not sure exactly what is meant by the "Best Continuing Series"
nomination, whether that's for UNCLE $CROOGE comics in general, including
all the different stories in U$ and UNCLE $CROOGE ADVENTURES. Or if it is
meant to imply just the "Life and Times", since Jackie makes the reference
that all the listed nominations are going to a certain single "project". If
it's the former, then any award should be given to Carl Barks. If it's the
latter, then the award... should STILL probably be given mostly to Carl Barks.
With that, I leave for WONDERCON and some comic store appearances in
Oakland/San Francisco for 5 days. I'll catch up with this Digest next Tuesday.
I should have waited a few hours before posting that previous
incomplete info about the Eisner awards. Here is the text of a letter FAXed
to John Clark today...
April 17, 1995
To: John Clark
Gladstone Comics
From: Jackie Estrada, administrator - Will Eisner Comic Industry Awards
Congratulations! Gladstone is up for 5+ Eisner Awards this year! Here are
the categories:
BEST SERIALIZED STORY
"The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST CONTINUING SERIES
UNCLE $CROOGE
BEST WRITER/ARTIST, HUMOR
Don Rosa, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST COLORING
Susan Daigle-Leach, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
BEST LETTERING
Todd Klein, for "Life and Times" plus projects for Dark Horse and DC
BEST COVER ARTIST
Don Rosa, "The Life and Times of $crooge McDuck"
Can you please inform the creators and other people involved in this project
that they've been nominated? Ballots will be going out in a couple of weeks.
Note that this year the Eisner Awards ceremony will be on Friday night (July
28) of the San Diego Comic-Con, replacing the banquet. The awards will begin
at 8:30. I hope to see you there!
Jackie
(end of FAX)
I'm not sure exactly what is meant by the "Best Continuing Series"
nomination, whether that's for UNCLE $CROOGE comics in general, including
all the different stories in U$ and UNCLE $CROOGE ADVENTURES. Or if it is
meant to imply just the "Life and Times", since Jackie makes the reference
that all the listed nominations are going to a certain single "project". If
it's the former, then any award should be given to Carl Barks. If it's the
latter, then the award... should STILL probably be given mostly to Carl Barks.
With that, I leave for WONDERCON and some comic store appearances in
Oakland/San Francisco for 5 days. I'll catch up with this Digest next Tuesday.
DucksEtc.
Gladstone changes & Disney panel
Message 102 -
1995-04-20 at 08:55:05
DAVID GERSTEIN:
Thanks for the invite to be on the Disney Comics panel in San Diego this
year. I'll be happy to be on the panel, but it'll depend on what time when it
is. I'll be at the con all day Thursday and Friday and then just the first
part of Saturday. I think I'll be flying out about 2 p.m., but my plans
aren't carved in stone yet. I haven't been to San Diego for two or three
years now and I was hoping to be there for the whole con, but my wife's 40th
birthday is that weekend. And so...well, some things are more important than
comic books. (Not many, but some.)
Anyway--whether I'm on the panel of not--I'd like to meet you and some of the
other "new" Disney people. Sheesh, I guess that makes me one of the "old"
Disney people. I'll be easy to recognize. I'll be the one in the rocking
chair mumbling, "Oh, me! Oh, my! How time flies!"
BTW, David, I'd like to see your version of "Nature Park Ranger." As a writer
I'm always interested to see how two people handle similar--or in this case
identical--material.
On another subject, David, I think your idea of us all writing a joint
petition to Bruce Hamilton is neither necessary nor terribly practical. First
of all, I don't think a letter from us is going to change Bruce's mind.
Second, I don't see any reason that the format changes which seem to have
upset you so terribly will have any substantial long-term affect on
Gladstone's use of new or reprint material from Egmont.
I talked with John Clark today and he confirmed what I'd already heard from a
member of the production crew the other day. The 64-page books are history.
The only one that they're still planning to print is Uncle Scrooge Adventures
#33 with the Barks-Van Horn "Horsing Around With History" story. I assume
Gladstone feels that there will be enough fan interest in a new Barks story
that people will be willing to put out $2.95 for it.
I'm sorry to see the 64-pagers go, but I suspect they'll be back some day--or
some year--down the road. In any event, Gladstone didn't put out that many
64-page issues anyway. So it's hard for me to get too upset.
In any event, John assured me that Gladstone will still be using new material
from the U.S. as well as reprint material from Egmont and that the format
change won't substantially affect that.
As to my story "Peace in Pieces" which got bumped out of Donald Duck
Adventures #33, it's been rescheduled and should be appearing in Donald Duck
Adventures #38--unless, of course, something else goes wrong.
BTW, John tells me that Gladstone now has all of its stories scheduled
through April of 1996.
I hope this info is of some help to you. I realize how frustrating it can be
to have to wait months or even years for your work to appear. We're all in
the same boat in that regard. All we can do is keep paddling and hope not to
spring a leak.
-----John Lustig
Thanks for the invite to be on the Disney Comics panel in San Diego this
year. I'll be happy to be on the panel, but it'll depend on what time when it
is. I'll be at the con all day Thursday and Friday and then just the first
part of Saturday. I think I'll be flying out about 2 p.m., but my plans
aren't carved in stone yet. I haven't been to San Diego for two or three
years now and I was hoping to be there for the whole con, but my wife's 40th
birthday is that weekend. And so...well, some things are more important than
comic books. (Not many, but some.)
Anyway--whether I'm on the panel of not--I'd like to meet you and some of the
other "new" Disney people. Sheesh, I guess that makes me one of the "old"
Disney people. I'll be easy to recognize. I'll be the one in the rocking
chair mumbling, "Oh, me! Oh, my! How time flies!"
BTW, David, I'd like to see your version of "Nature Park Ranger." As a writer
I'm always interested to see how two people handle similar--or in this case
identical--material.
On another subject, David, I think your idea of us all writing a joint
petition to Bruce Hamilton is neither necessary nor terribly practical. First
of all, I don't think a letter from us is going to change Bruce's mind.
Second, I don't see any reason that the format changes which seem to have
upset you so terribly will have any substantial long-term affect on
Gladstone's use of new or reprint material from Egmont.
I talked with John Clark today and he confirmed what I'd already heard from a
member of the production crew the other day. The 64-page books are history.
The only one that they're still planning to print is Uncle Scrooge Adventures
#33 with the Barks-Van Horn "Horsing Around With History" story. I assume
Gladstone feels that there will be enough fan interest in a new Barks story
that people will be willing to put out $2.95 for it.
I'm sorry to see the 64-pagers go, but I suspect they'll be back some day--or
some year--down the road. In any event, Gladstone didn't put out that many
64-page issues anyway. So it's hard for me to get too upset.
In any event, John assured me that Gladstone will still be using new material
from the U.S. as well as reprint material from Egmont and that the format
change won't substantially affect that.
As to my story "Peace in Pieces" which got bumped out of Donald Duck
Adventures #33, it's been rescheduled and should be appearing in Donald Duck
Adventures #38--unless, of course, something else goes wrong.
BTW, John tells me that Gladstone now has all of its stories scheduled
through April of 1996.
I hope this info is of some help to you. I realize how frustrating it can be
to have to wait months or even years for your work to appear. We're all in
the same boat in that regard. All we can do is keep paddling and hope not to
spring a leak.
-----John Lustig
H.W. Fluks
John and Dave in digest #639.
Message 103 -
1995-04-20 at 14:20:20
JOHN "DucksEtc.":
> A thousand pardons.
Not needed. My statement about me being Dutch was more a general statement
to the list. After all, how could you know I'm from The Netherlands? Most
of the time, I don't use my signature.
And then there's that confusion about The Netherlands, Holland, Dutch,
Deutsch, Germany. In America, a lot of "Dutch" actually means "Deutsch",
i.e. German (like the Pennsylvania Dutch). When I was in the USA, one
American told me he was sure that Holland and Finland were two of the
Netherlands...
DAVE R.:
> HARRY: While the stories I mentioned were indeed for Egmont
> "digests" that's not true of aLL my stories. I work in both formats
> and many lengths. Thanks for asking!
When will we see one of your stories in a Gladstone comic? I read a lot
about your stories on this list, but I have never seen one.
--Harry.
> A thousand pardons.
Not needed. My statement about me being Dutch was more a general statement
to the list. After all, how could you know I'm from The Netherlands? Most
of the time, I don't use my signature.
And then there's that confusion about The Netherlands, Holland, Dutch,
Deutsch, Germany. In America, a lot of "Dutch" actually means "Deutsch",
i.e. German (like the Pennsylvania Dutch). When I was in the USA, one
American told me he was sure that Holland and Finland were two of the
Netherlands...
DAVE R.:
> HARRY: While the stories I mentioned were indeed for Egmont
> "digests" that's not true of aLL my stories. I work in both formats
> and many lengths. Thanks for asking!
When will we see one of your stories in a Gladstone comic? I read a lot
about your stories on this list, but I have never seen one.
--Harry.
Antonella Borrelli G9-ICRA, Dip. Di Fisica ROMATel.49914397
Unsubscribe
Message 104 -
1995-04-20 at 14:29:10
i want to be unsubscribed from this list
DAVID.A.GERSTEIN
Zombies and DUCK DAZE
Message 105 -
1995-04-20 at 14:49:55
DON: In past messages, you seemed to have the opinion that one
of the things Disney would find "incorrect" about LO$ 11 was the mere
fact that Bombie was a zombie. Huh? Since when is spooky-stuff
objected to? The days in which the MM cartoon "The Mad Doctor" (now
available on laserdisc) was banned for being too frightening are
over. And after all, "Voodoo Hoodoo" itself has been reprinted twice
now in album form.
Also, it's not politically incorrect to show white oppression
of blacks, since that certainly happened (still does!) and by
showing it, you're only pointing out historically accurate types of
things. Political correctness seems to have this goal of "setting
the record straight" in mind: the problem is that it's gone too
far and said that ONLY losers can write history books. Political
correctness has thus emerged as a voice of extremism itself, and
damaged the cause of those who want to expose genuine racism. Now
ACTUAL racists can brand their opponents "politically correct," which
is a very bad thing.
Scrooge takes his lumps for wrongly doing an imperialistic
thing. I don't think the politically correct crowd will have a
problem with that. My suspicion was that Disney would simply find
such imperialism and its results to be too "adult" an issue for
"their" comics (which as we all know, are mainly intended for weak-
minded tots in rompers) to tackle.
It's not actually political correctness that motivated the ban
on "War of the Wendigo," I have concluded. It's FEAR of the
politically correct crowd that's done it. There may have been a
voiced objection to "Indians all looking alike," but the final
objection was that Indians appeared in the story at all. The idea
that the mere concept of Indians should not be used is certainly
bizarre, but not very politically correct.
* * * * *
I have tapped into a stored resource of letters from the Disney
Afternoon "Ranger list," which I was kicked off last year after
stating that I didn't think Barks' ducks should be "recast" for the
fall 1996 series DUCK DAZE. Looking at letters that apparently
precipitated my exclusion, I saw that it happened for several reasons:
A) I had invited folks from this disney-comics group to join
the Ranger List so they could express their concerns about DUCK DAZE,
and a member didn't want the Ranger List to be inundated with tons of
angry criticism.
B) My opinion was seen as one-sided, for once HDL are
teenagers -- as they will be depicted on this show -- they are
essentially different characters, since everyone changes as they grow
older. So what right did I have to demand that they act like they
did at the age of 12 or so, in the comics?
C) The disney-comics list was criticized for being too
condemnatory of Disney itself. It was acknowledged that the
criticism of Disney (Don Rosa's comments especially) revealed
essential "kernels of truth," but this was seen as bad: such
criticism would make that type of post particularly "hard to take"
for the Ranger List's resident professionals (from Disney TV
animation and its associates).
From reading the articles I found, as well as seeing a
publicity illustration while back in the States, I find that DUCK
DAZE's version of HDL look very different from one another, will not
speak in their traditional voices, and will be very "hip" (one has a
punk haircut and leather jacket, while another -- the only one to
wear his old cap -- wears it backwards). Donald's voice has been
slightly modified for the new show as well to make it slightly
easier to understand. Characters from GOOF TROOP and DARKWING DUCK
will appear now and then in the series, but Uncle Scrooge may not
appear (I don't have the final word on this). Just as Chip 'n' Dale
toys of all kinds were replaced by Rescue Ranger equivalents in 1989,
I imagine that "classic" DD products will, for the most part, be
replaced by DUCK DAZE products in the United States.
My answer to the above is meant for any Ranger List members who
also read these Digests. I feel that criticism is not only important
for a list -- it is essential. I would not criticize Disney if I
didn't love its characters and want to ensure that they were treated
with the respect due all great fictional creations. Furthermore,
Disney TV animation professionals quite clearly DON'T work in the
restrictive atmosphere that we comic creators do. As seen from DUCK
DAZE, they have unlimited license to alter even the most famous
characters extensively, for good as far as Disney is concerned. So
of course they won't necessarily feel comfortable hearing about how
Disney treats comic creators. But the more that know about it, the
more pressure can be put on Disney to change, which is a Good Thing.
Last, I continue to be disappointed by DUCK DAZE. It has
clearly been developed by folk who, no matter what their talents,
did not realize the importance of Barks' universe in Disney's
international marketing and promotion of the Ducks (America
notwithstanding), not to mention the hearts and minds of the
characters' devoted fans. The attempt to "modernize" the characters
has, for me, taken something timeless and dated it squarely in the
1990s -- and anyway, the modernization was done because Disney felt
its classic versions of the characters were not popular enough. This
has nothing to do with the public. It's because Disney itself only
releases the classic cartoons in a very limited way, and itself
damaged the market for its comics in the States. But Disney cannot
blame itself, so decided that the public must want something new.
My disappointment over this series does not cause me to hate
anyone at Disney TV animation. I have no desire to deluge the Ranger
List with wild, immature flame letters, and I don't think anyone else
who might have joined the Ranger List upon hearing my call to arms
would have done that either. I would have offered CRITICISM, but
that is not the same as an insult or a slap in the face. I wanted to
encourage Disney to alter what I viewed as a big mistake before the
show actually went from concept to production. When I was forced to
leave the Ranger List so that pro-Disney-only letters continued to
appear there, I continue to feel a grave mistake was made.
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>
of the things Disney would find "incorrect" about LO$ 11 was the mere
fact that Bombie was a zombie. Huh? Since when is spooky-stuff
objected to? The days in which the MM cartoon "The Mad Doctor" (now
available on laserdisc) was banned for being too frightening are
over. And after all, "Voodoo Hoodoo" itself has been reprinted twice
now in album form.
Also, it's not politically incorrect to show white oppression
of blacks, since that certainly happened (still does!) and by
showing it, you're only pointing out historically accurate types of
things. Political correctness seems to have this goal of "setting
the record straight" in mind: the problem is that it's gone too
far and said that ONLY losers can write history books. Political
correctness has thus emerged as a voice of extremism itself, and
damaged the cause of those who want to expose genuine racism. Now
ACTUAL racists can brand their opponents "politically correct," which
is a very bad thing.
Scrooge takes his lumps for wrongly doing an imperialistic
thing. I don't think the politically correct crowd will have a
problem with that. My suspicion was that Disney would simply find
such imperialism and its results to be too "adult" an issue for
"their" comics (which as we all know, are mainly intended for weak-
minded tots in rompers) to tackle.
It's not actually political correctness that motivated the ban
on "War of the Wendigo," I have concluded. It's FEAR of the
politically correct crowd that's done it. There may have been a
voiced objection to "Indians all looking alike," but the final
objection was that Indians appeared in the story at all. The idea
that the mere concept of Indians should not be used is certainly
bizarre, but not very politically correct.
* * * * *
I have tapped into a stored resource of letters from the Disney
Afternoon "Ranger list," which I was kicked off last year after
stating that I didn't think Barks' ducks should be "recast" for the
fall 1996 series DUCK DAZE. Looking at letters that apparently
precipitated my exclusion, I saw that it happened for several reasons:
A) I had invited folks from this disney-comics group to join
the Ranger List so they could express their concerns about DUCK DAZE,
and a member didn't want the Ranger List to be inundated with tons of
angry criticism.
B) My opinion was seen as one-sided, for once HDL are
teenagers -- as they will be depicted on this show -- they are
essentially different characters, since everyone changes as they grow
older. So what right did I have to demand that they act like they
did at the age of 12 or so, in the comics?
C) The disney-comics list was criticized for being too
condemnatory of Disney itself. It was acknowledged that the
criticism of Disney (Don Rosa's comments especially) revealed
essential "kernels of truth," but this was seen as bad: such
criticism would make that type of post particularly "hard to take"
for the Ranger List's resident professionals (from Disney TV
animation and its associates).
From reading the articles I found, as well as seeing a
publicity illustration while back in the States, I find that DUCK
DAZE's version of HDL look very different from one another, will not
speak in their traditional voices, and will be very "hip" (one has a
punk haircut and leather jacket, while another -- the only one to
wear his old cap -- wears it backwards). Donald's voice has been
slightly modified for the new show as well to make it slightly
easier to understand. Characters from GOOF TROOP and DARKWING DUCK
will appear now and then in the series, but Uncle Scrooge may not
appear (I don't have the final word on this). Just as Chip 'n' Dale
toys of all kinds were replaced by Rescue Ranger equivalents in 1989,
I imagine that "classic" DD products will, for the most part, be
replaced by DUCK DAZE products in the United States.
My answer to the above is meant for any Ranger List members who
also read these Digests. I feel that criticism is not only important
for a list -- it is essential. I would not criticize Disney if I
didn't love its characters and want to ensure that they were treated
with the respect due all great fictional creations. Furthermore,
Disney TV animation professionals quite clearly DON'T work in the
restrictive atmosphere that we comic creators do. As seen from DUCK
DAZE, they have unlimited license to alter even the most famous
characters extensively, for good as far as Disney is concerned. So
of course they won't necessarily feel comfortable hearing about how
Disney treats comic creators. But the more that know about it, the
more pressure can be put on Disney to change, which is a Good Thing.
Last, I continue to be disappointed by DUCK DAZE. It has
clearly been developed by folk who, no matter what their talents,
did not realize the importance of Barks' universe in Disney's
international marketing and promotion of the Ducks (America
notwithstanding), not to mention the hearts and minds of the
characters' devoted fans. The attempt to "modernize" the characters
has, for me, taken something timeless and dated it squarely in the
1990s -- and anyway, the modernization was done because Disney felt
its classic versions of the characters were not popular enough. This
has nothing to do with the public. It's because Disney itself only
releases the classic cartoons in a very limited way, and itself
damaged the market for its comics in the States. But Disney cannot
blame itself, so decided that the public must want something new.
My disappointment over this series does not cause me to hate
anyone at Disney TV animation. I have no desire to deluge the Ranger
List with wild, immature flame letters, and I don't think anyone else
who might have joined the Ranger List upon hearing my call to arms
would have done that either. I would have offered CRITICISM, but
that is not the same as an insult or a slap in the face. I wanted to
encourage Disney to alter what I viewed as a big mistake before the
show actually went from concept to production. When I was forced to
leave the Ranger List so that pro-Disney-only letters continued to
appear there, I continue to feel a grave mistake was made.
David Gerstein
<9475609 at arran.sms.ed.ac.uk>