BOB:
> This is getting interesting. What "censored" version are you
> comparing the original with?
My censored version is from the CBL (Carl Barks Library).
> I'd guess there might be more "changes", for instance, were native
> faces redrawn to eliminate "oriental" eye shape or a "buck-
> toothed" look in the mouth?
As far as I know: No. You can see the "oriental" look easily,
although the public on one of the last pages don't seem to have a
oriental look. In my version only the soldiers seem to have those
teeth. The prince doesn't have teeth for instance.
> I dug out my copy of US 134 and had another look. Talk about
> irony! Take a look at the panel where a soldier says to Wahn
> Beeg Rat, "Eraser squad A is waiting, Sir!" The structure behind
> the squad is labeled "THE WALL". If you have some knowledge of
> 'Nam vets lingo, many of them refer to the Vietnam Veterans'
> Memorial in Wash, DC as "THE WALL".
Sorry, but I don't know very much about the Vietnam-war, but I
understand what you mean.
--- Daniel
Author
Topic: 199507
(198 messages)
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Marco Polo continued
Message 166 -
1995-07-24 at 01:25:04
Mark Semich
Donald Duck Adventures 34
Message 167 -
1995-07-24 at 05:51:11
So did anyone else out there read Donald Duck Advs. 34? I picked this one
up last week, myself.
Pat Block's art is wonderful - something about it just clicks with me, and
I find it to be a lot of fun and very well done. I hope we see a lot more
of his work. I liked the story as well. It wasn't deep or meaningful,
but it was a fun yarn. It did take me a little work to accept the concept
of living beings being frozen for hundreds of years and just thawing out
into the present day, however... :-) But something about Fernandez and
Block's work is reminiscent of very old funny-book stories, and I like it!
up last week, myself.
Pat Block's art is wonderful - something about it just clicks with me, and
I find it to be a lot of fun and very well done. I hope we see a lot more
of his work. I liked the story as well. It wasn't deep or meaningful,
but it was a fun yarn. It did take me a little work to accept the concept
of living beings being frozen for hundreds of years and just thawing out
into the present day, however... :-) But something about Fernandez and
Block's work is reminiscent of very old funny-book stories, and I like it!
Bob Wright
Disney-comics digest #730.
Message 168 -
1995-07-24 at 06:42:35
>Are you referring to panel 7 on page 9? That would mean this line is
>also censored, in the CBl the line is "Shows you can't trust these
>cheap watches made by McDuck enterprises!"
>Humourous or not, I still think this story is a very political one
>for a Disney publication. (But that sure *doesn't* mean I that I don't
>like it!)
DANIEL: This is getting interesting. What "censored" version are you
comparing the original with? Yes, in the original the soldier says, "Shows
you can't trust these watches from the workers' paradise!" I'd guess there
might be more "changes", for instance, were native faces redrawn to
eliminate "oriental" eye shape or a "buck-toothed" look in the mouth?
I dug out my copy of US 134 and had another look. Talk about
irony! Take a look at the panel where a soldier says to Wahn Beeg Rat,
"Eraser squad A is waiting, Sir!" The structure behind the squad is labeled
"THE WALL". If you have some knowledge of 'Nam vets lingo, many of them
refer to the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Wash, DC as "THE WALL".
>also censored, in the CBl the line is "Shows you can't trust these
>cheap watches made by McDuck enterprises!"
>Humourous or not, I still think this story is a very political one
>for a Disney publication. (But that sure *doesn't* mean I that I don't
>like it!)
DANIEL: This is getting interesting. What "censored" version are you
comparing the original with? Yes, in the original the soldier says, "Shows
you can't trust these watches from the workers' paradise!" I'd guess there
might be more "changes", for instance, were native faces redrawn to
eliminate "oriental" eye shape or a "buck-toothed" look in the mouth?
I dug out my copy of US 134 and had another look. Talk about
irony! Take a look at the panel where a soldier says to Wahn Beeg Rat,
"Eraser squad A is waiting, Sir!" The structure behind the squad is labeled
"THE WALL". If you have some knowledge of 'Nam vets lingo, many of them
refer to the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Wash, DC as "THE WALL".
H.W. Fluks
Barks' last U$ (Daniel in digest #730)
Message 169 -
1995-07-24 at 16:38:52
(I'm only here today. Next time I read my mail it will be August.)
DANIEL:
> The last Scrooge-
> story was "Doom Diamond" and the last WDC-story was "The Not-so-
> ancient Mariner".
"Doom Diamond" was the last PUBLISHED Barks Scrooge story (in U$ 70). But
he made it before U$ 68 and U$ 69. The editor apparently wanted a reprint
in U$ 67 ("The Fabulous Philosopher's Stone" from U$ 10). So they saved
the story that was meant for U$ 67 and published it in U$ 70.
So: the last Scrooge story Barks both wrote and drew was in fact
"The Cattle King", published in U$ 69.
> After that Barks made script-only "Donald Duck" and "Junior Woodchuck"
> stories. He made two text-only stories in the mid-seventies
Also, the drawing of the Daisy story in WD Digest 5 is done after Barks'
retirement ("The Dainty Daredevil", made in 1968).
--Harry.
DANIEL:
> The last Scrooge-
> story was "Doom Diamond" and the last WDC-story was "The Not-so-
> ancient Mariner".
"Doom Diamond" was the last PUBLISHED Barks Scrooge story (in U$ 70). But
he made it before U$ 68 and U$ 69. The editor apparently wanted a reprint
in U$ 67 ("The Fabulous Philosopher's Stone" from U$ 10). So they saved
the story that was meant for U$ 67 and published it in U$ 70.
So: the last Scrooge story Barks both wrote and drew was in fact
"The Cattle King", published in U$ 69.
> After that Barks made script-only "Donald Duck" and "Junior Woodchuck"
> stories. He made two text-only stories in the mid-seventies
Also, the drawing of the Daisy story in WD Digest 5 is done after Barks'
retirement ("The Dainty Daredevil", made in 1968).
--Harry.
Bjorn-Are.Davidsen
Law-Suit
Message 170 -
1995-07-24 at 17:06:08
I hope it doen't seem too strange that some of us who expressed a clear
support to Don Rosa last year on "Grandey vs. Rosa" repeat some of the
reasons for that.
Speaking for myself I very much feel that even if it may be difficult to asess
who "really started" the controversy (as father of two kids I have longe since
given up deciding who "really" began their last quarrel), there is some
difference between - when untrue! - describing someone as "drunk" and
"stalking Barks" and - even if rather unwise as a reaction to that - nicknaming
the author of the fax as a "weasel". Unfortunately a "funny animal" comics
artist may to easily come up with that kind of description.
I'm sorry if we in supporting Rosa have overplayed our indignation and
made undue comments on Grandey and Barks. It's a bit puzzling to me that
someone has been negative to Barks (apart from some fair criticism of his
later work) as a person. I know that most of us really admire and sometimes
idolise Barks as the Greatest Story Teller in the twentieth century. Last year I
even made some comments on how fitting it was that Barks visited the
Nobel Institute (true!) on his trip to Norway.
However, we have been rather disturbed be strange alleged sayings of
Barks about Don Rosa in various magazines and newspaper during his
European visit last year. To explain these some may have blamed Barks,
while other may have made (based on what few facts we have known)
extrapolations from the Barks-Grandey relation and blamed Grandey.
In any case such controversy is very disturbing, and I really hope we may
put it behind us. Let's really hope that Barks will keep on for years still
painting and Rosa continue going his own excellent way with the Ducks!
Bjorn Are
bjorn-are.davidsen at s.prosjekt98.telenor.no
support to Don Rosa last year on "Grandey vs. Rosa" repeat some of the
reasons for that.
Speaking for myself I very much feel that even if it may be difficult to asess
who "really started" the controversy (as father of two kids I have longe since
given up deciding who "really" began their last quarrel), there is some
difference between - when untrue! - describing someone as "drunk" and
"stalking Barks" and - even if rather unwise as a reaction to that - nicknaming
the author of the fax as a "weasel". Unfortunately a "funny animal" comics
artist may to easily come up with that kind of description.
I'm sorry if we in supporting Rosa have overplayed our indignation and
made undue comments on Grandey and Barks. It's a bit puzzling to me that
someone has been negative to Barks (apart from some fair criticism of his
later work) as a person. I know that most of us really admire and sometimes
idolise Barks as the Greatest Story Teller in the twentieth century. Last year I
even made some comments on how fitting it was that Barks visited the
Nobel Institute (true!) on his trip to Norway.
However, we have been rather disturbed be strange alleged sayings of
Barks about Don Rosa in various magazines and newspaper during his
European visit last year. To explain these some may have blamed Barks,
while other may have made (based on what few facts we have known)
extrapolations from the Barks-Grandey relation and blamed Grandey.
In any case such controversy is very disturbing, and I really hope we may
put it behind us. Let's really hope that Barks will keep on for years still
painting and Rosa continue going his own excellent way with the Ducks!
Bjorn Are
bjorn-are.davidsen at s.prosjekt98.telenor.no
Carey Furlong - Tdoc
Donald Duck Adventures 34
Message 171 -
1995-07-24 at 19:50:08
> So did anyone else out there read Donald Duck Advs. 34? I picked this one
> up last week, myself.
>
> Pat Block's art is wonderful - something about it just clicks with me, and
> I find it to be a lot of fun and very well done. I hope we see a lot more
> of his work. I liked the story as well. It wasn't deep or meaningful,
> but it was a fun yarn. It did take me a little work to accept the concept
> of living beings being frozen for hundreds of years and just thawing out
> into the present day, however... :-) But something about Fernandez and
> Block's work is reminiscent of very old funny-book stories, and I like it!
I read DDA 34 and thought the art was beautiful. I especially liked
the separate panels showing the two islands. As a person who
appreciates landscapes, the scenic composition of these appealed to
me. Also of interest was the heroic style in which the revived frozen
people were drawn. Even though they were drawn as animals, they
appeared to be quite human (humans with animal heads, perhaps).
The problem I had with this book was with the dialog. It seemed
stilted at times, and I found myself searching for references I thought
I had missed. (I can't think of any off-hand.) I suppose the original
text was better, and the problems I had were with the translation.
On another note, last night I re-read US 17, "A Cold Bargain." I was
curious about seeing the differences noted in this mailing-list between
the original and the CBL version. I don't have a copy of the CBL, but
I do have a copy of Gladstone's Giant Comic Album 24, which has the
story, and also a copy of US 215, the Gladstone reprint of the story
done some years ago.
At any rate, the censored and changed panels were all quite evident in
both US 215 and GCA 24. I laid US 17 (the original), US 215 and GCA 24
all down on a table side-by-side and compared them page-by-page. The
differences were astounding, not just with the lack of raised
cheekbones on the Brutopians, which was plain enough and quite damaging
in places, but also with the dismaying loss of fine line detail in US
215. In places the details were totally washed out! Loss of detail
such as with the sea surface, the ice cliffs of Antarctica, and even
the texture lines on the frozen ball of Bombastium were astonishing.
US 215 looked blurred in many places.
In GCA 24, with its physically larger panels, the fine line details
were all present, but even here, they were not as apparent as in the
original, US 17 (by this I mean that the line details were visible, but
were not as pronounced - they seemed to fall into the background; some
folks today would say this is not a failing, but instead an improvement).
US 17, although the oldest of the three, and in many places suffering
from what some would call rather thick lines, seemed to me at any
rate, to be the best of the lot. Although GCA 24 had successfuly
reproduced all of the line details, the coloring was not as balanced or
realistic as the original (IMHO). For example, the sea surfaces of US
17 seemed to have deeper and richer shades of green and dark than in
the reprints. The shadows of the Brutopian submarine were pitch-black
in US 17, making it seem more three dimensional and sinister than the
greys of the reprints. Did they use more ink in the old days? Also,
the rails of Scrooge's ship seemed to work much better for me as red
(which is surprising) than the white used in the reprints.
This is generally how it went for the entire comparison.
Now, what's going on here? And why are these conclusions nearly always
the same when comparing Barks originals with today's reprints, even the
best of today's reprints. Do any other old-timers out there feel this
way? Do you like the coloring, line quality and thickness better in
the originals? Or is it just me? Am I guilty of being a nostalgic old
bum?
Sorry to go on so long about this. I do, however, enjoy comparing the
originals with today's versions, but I am wondering if I am being
objective enough in my observations.
-
"This fabulous twenty-four carat moon, for
a handful of dirt!... Man! That's the biggest
bargain I ever heard of in all history!"
------------ Scrooge McDuck (US 24) -------
---- Carey ----
Carey Furlong, Huntington Beach, CA; Compu$erve 70531,2753;
cfurlon1 at ix.netcom.com; Prodigy TXST34A; furlong at vxd.ug.eds.com;
Opinions expressed here are mine and do not represent those of EDS.
> up last week, myself.
>
> Pat Block's art is wonderful - something about it just clicks with me, and
> I find it to be a lot of fun and very well done. I hope we see a lot more
> of his work. I liked the story as well. It wasn't deep or meaningful,
> but it was a fun yarn. It did take me a little work to accept the concept
> of living beings being frozen for hundreds of years and just thawing out
> into the present day, however... :-) But something about Fernandez and
> Block's work is reminiscent of very old funny-book stories, and I like it!
I read DDA 34 and thought the art was beautiful. I especially liked
the separate panels showing the two islands. As a person who
appreciates landscapes, the scenic composition of these appealed to
me. Also of interest was the heroic style in which the revived frozen
people were drawn. Even though they were drawn as animals, they
appeared to be quite human (humans with animal heads, perhaps).
The problem I had with this book was with the dialog. It seemed
stilted at times, and I found myself searching for references I thought
I had missed. (I can't think of any off-hand.) I suppose the original
text was better, and the problems I had were with the translation.
On another note, last night I re-read US 17, "A Cold Bargain." I was
curious about seeing the differences noted in this mailing-list between
the original and the CBL version. I don't have a copy of the CBL, but
I do have a copy of Gladstone's Giant Comic Album 24, which has the
story, and also a copy of US 215, the Gladstone reprint of the story
done some years ago.
At any rate, the censored and changed panels were all quite evident in
both US 215 and GCA 24. I laid US 17 (the original), US 215 and GCA 24
all down on a table side-by-side and compared them page-by-page. The
differences were astounding, not just with the lack of raised
cheekbones on the Brutopians, which was plain enough and quite damaging
in places, but also with the dismaying loss of fine line detail in US
215. In places the details were totally washed out! Loss of detail
such as with the sea surface, the ice cliffs of Antarctica, and even
the texture lines on the frozen ball of Bombastium were astonishing.
US 215 looked blurred in many places.
In GCA 24, with its physically larger panels, the fine line details
were all present, but even here, they were not as apparent as in the
original, US 17 (by this I mean that the line details were visible, but
were not as pronounced - they seemed to fall into the background; some
folks today would say this is not a failing, but instead an improvement).
US 17, although the oldest of the three, and in many places suffering
from what some would call rather thick lines, seemed to me at any
rate, to be the best of the lot. Although GCA 24 had successfuly
reproduced all of the line details, the coloring was not as balanced or
realistic as the original (IMHO). For example, the sea surfaces of US
17 seemed to have deeper and richer shades of green and dark than in
the reprints. The shadows of the Brutopian submarine were pitch-black
in US 17, making it seem more three dimensional and sinister than the
greys of the reprints. Did they use more ink in the old days? Also,
the rails of Scrooge's ship seemed to work much better for me as red
(which is surprising) than the white used in the reprints.
This is generally how it went for the entire comparison.
Now, what's going on here? And why are these conclusions nearly always
the same when comparing Barks originals with today's reprints, even the
best of today's reprints. Do any other old-timers out there feel this
way? Do you like the coloring, line quality and thickness better in
the originals? Or is it just me? Am I guilty of being a nostalgic old
bum?
Sorry to go on so long about this. I do, however, enjoy comparing the
originals with today's versions, but I am wondering if I am being
objective enough in my observations.
-
"This fabulous twenty-four carat moon, for
a handful of dirt!... Man! That's the biggest
bargain I ever heard of in all history!"
------------ Scrooge McDuck (US 24) -------
---- Carey ----
Carey Furlong, Huntington Beach, CA; Compu$erve 70531,2753;
cfurlon1 at ix.netcom.com; Prodigy TXST34A; furlong at vxd.ug.eds.com;
Opinions expressed here are mine and do not represent those of EDS.
Gammel, Ing. A.M. GST
42 years ago...
Message 172 -
1995-07-25 at 00:30:53
Last week I have been offered the almost complete (except nr.1,52,53) year 1953 of the Dutch Donald Duck weekly comic. '53 was the first complete year that DD was published in Holland. The state of the comics is reasonably well (covers are complete and mostly unripped).
I bought it off him for a fair price, I think. I wonder if any of you out there can tell me what YOU think a fair price would be, and wether anyone would be interested?
Or is it just something any serious collector already owns ?
Qqqauckkk,
Andreas
/------------------------------------------------\
| Andreas Gammel Philips Research Laboratories |
| Building: WB 3.32 Prof. Holstlaan 4 |
| Phone: +31 40 742774 5656 AA Eindhoven |
| Fax: +31 40 744315 The Netherlands |
| Mail: gammel at prl.philips.nl |
|------------------------------------------------|
| PUZZLE: what is the NUMBER OF ROUTES |
| (non-selfintersecting) a castle on a chessboard|
| can travel by to get from field [A1] to [H8] |
\------------------------------------------------/
I bought it off him for a fair price, I think. I wonder if any of you out there can tell me what YOU think a fair price would be, and wether anyone would be interested?
Or is it just something any serious collector already owns ?
Qqqauckkk,
Andreas
/------------------------------------------------\
| Andreas Gammel Philips Research Laboratories |
| Building: WB 3.32 Prof. Holstlaan 4 |
| Phone: +31 40 742774 5656 AA Eindhoven |
| Fax: +31 40 744315 The Netherlands |
| Mail: gammel at prl.philips.nl |
|------------------------------------------------|
| PUZZLE: what is the NUMBER OF ROUTES |
| (non-selfintersecting) a castle on a chessboard|
| can travel by to get from field [A1] to [H8] |
\------------------------------------------------/
Larry Gerstein
Disney-comics digest #726.
Message 173 -
1995-07-25 at 01:45:28
ANDY:
>Is Walt Disney Giant the new name for Uncle Walt's Collectory?
Yes, that's right. Someone else asked if this comic had a variety
of stories or just stories about one character in each issue. It has a
variety of stories, with the less-famous Disney characters in the back
(there's a Three Pigs story in the first issue -- quite good). Those
less-famous characters used to be in the middle of WDC&S until a few years
ago, and by all reports they'll be returning there this fall... so maybe WD
GIANT will change a bit then.
MIKE:
> Thank you for the information you gave me. Are the personalities [for
>>the three leading Beagle Boys] used by you also used by some others (as in
>>'Perilous Portrait')?
Well, the smart-dumb-hungry trio concept is as much as Egmont gives
writers, and if anyone wants to broaden their individual personas further,
it seems to be fine by them. As I've noted, the better Egmont stories
published by Gladstone and Disney tend to move in that direction (yes,
including "Perilous Portrait").
> The other ones like the prunes too, then?
Yes, but 761 is the one who'll... well (see below)
> Doesn't he ever get fat by eating them?
I don't think prunes are high in fat. As for what happens to 761
when he eats too many of them, that... that... that isn't usually discussed
in Disney comics, for obvious reasons.
> Is he greedy towards food only?
Well, that's how I interpret him. In fact, I have leader 176-167
be the one who's the most motivated by money, loot, etc. although of course
the others are... they're bandits, after all!
> When [176-761] is hungry, and he sees a shop selling bananas ten feet away
>and >a shop selling prunes a thousand feet away, which one would he steal
>from?
The International House of Prunes, or whatever it was called. ;-)
At least in my opinion.
>> 176-671 is the dumb one.
> Not the strong one as well?
Well, maybe... I've never really dwelt on that one. (Although in
my "Rolling in Dough," the Beagles accidentally get locked in a room with
thick walls and fortified doors, and they CAN'T get out -- well, through
their own physical strength, that is.)
> Will they be out from Egmont? And if, then when?
"Rolling in Dough" is being drawn by Vicar, even as we speak, so
maybe in eight months or so? On the other hand, I just turned in the
script for "Fouled-Up Fairy Tale" so we won't see it for a year and a half,
or so.
DANIEL:
"Peaceful hills: Does the CBL use the original art?"
Yes, it's the original.
JAKOB:
I got your package today! I'll have some things to say soon, but
I'm not through looking yet...
EVERYONE:
Back next week after the Convention! I'll be visiting with Fabio
Gadducci there, as well as hosting that panel discussion.
David Gerstein
<gerstein at math.ucsb.edu>
"Have a chestnut, boys! . . . OW!"
gerstein at math.ucsb.edu
>Is Walt Disney Giant the new name for Uncle Walt's Collectory?
Yes, that's right. Someone else asked if this comic had a variety
of stories or just stories about one character in each issue. It has a
variety of stories, with the less-famous Disney characters in the back
(there's a Three Pigs story in the first issue -- quite good). Those
less-famous characters used to be in the middle of WDC&S until a few years
ago, and by all reports they'll be returning there this fall... so maybe WD
GIANT will change a bit then.
MIKE:
> Thank you for the information you gave me. Are the personalities [for
>>the three leading Beagle Boys] used by you also used by some others (as in
>>'Perilous Portrait')?
Well, the smart-dumb-hungry trio concept is as much as Egmont gives
writers, and if anyone wants to broaden their individual personas further,
it seems to be fine by them. As I've noted, the better Egmont stories
published by Gladstone and Disney tend to move in that direction (yes,
including "Perilous Portrait").
> The other ones like the prunes too, then?
Yes, but 761 is the one who'll... well (see below)
> Doesn't he ever get fat by eating them?
I don't think prunes are high in fat. As for what happens to 761
when he eats too many of them, that... that... that isn't usually discussed
in Disney comics, for obvious reasons.
> Is he greedy towards food only?
Well, that's how I interpret him. In fact, I have leader 176-167
be the one who's the most motivated by money, loot, etc. although of course
the others are... they're bandits, after all!
> When [176-761] is hungry, and he sees a shop selling bananas ten feet away
>and >a shop selling prunes a thousand feet away, which one would he steal
>from?
The International House of Prunes, or whatever it was called. ;-)
At least in my opinion.
>> 176-671 is the dumb one.
> Not the strong one as well?
Well, maybe... I've never really dwelt on that one. (Although in
my "Rolling in Dough," the Beagles accidentally get locked in a room with
thick walls and fortified doors, and they CAN'T get out -- well, through
their own physical strength, that is.)
> Will they be out from Egmont? And if, then when?
"Rolling in Dough" is being drawn by Vicar, even as we speak, so
maybe in eight months or so? On the other hand, I just turned in the
script for "Fouled-Up Fairy Tale" so we won't see it for a year and a half,
or so.
DANIEL:
"Peaceful hills: Does the CBL use the original art?"
Yes, it's the original.
JAKOB:
I got your package today! I'll have some things to say soon, but
I'm not through looking yet...
EVERYONE:
Back next week after the Convention! I'll be visiting with Fabio
Gadducci there, as well as hosting that panel discussion.
David Gerstein
<gerstein at math.ucsb.edu>
"Have a chestnut, boys! . . . OW!"
gerstein at math.ucsb.edu
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #731.
Message 174 -
1995-07-25 at 08:45:00
>Ah! Dan Shane came by on Sunday and healed my computer. The previous Sunday
he had installed a WINDOWS 95 Test Release on my system, and suddenly I
couldn't access COMPUSERVE or INTERNET or anything else through my modem.
Yesterday Dan (my computer guru) came back and physically disassembled the
computer and switched around some com-port doodads and veeblefetzers... he
says the new WINDOWS has a bug in it that caused a "hardware conflict"and
disabled my modem. But between him and another guest I had over here Sunday
(for the gala party celebrating the 25th anniversary of Mala Shaw Day), they
got me back on-line. I wouldn't know what to do, computer-wise, without Mr.
Shane.
So... I didn't miss anything, did I?
he had installed a WINDOWS 95 Test Release on my system, and suddenly I
couldn't access COMPUSERVE or INTERNET or anything else through my modem.
Yesterday Dan (my computer guru) came back and physically disassembled the
computer and switched around some com-port doodads and veeblefetzers... he
says the new WINDOWS has a bug in it that caused a "hardware conflict"and
disabled my modem. But between him and another guest I had over here Sunday
(for the gala party celebrating the 25th anniversary of Mala Shaw Day), they
got me back on-line. I wouldn't know what to do, computer-wise, without Mr.
Shane.
So... I didn't miss anything, did I?
Mikko Henri Juhani Aittola
Disney-comics digest #732.
Message 175 -
1995-07-25 at 12:55:26
First, thanks to Barry Branvold for his reply to my 'article'
about Lustig and Grandey. These Grandey's faxes reached also
Finland's Disney publishers and I can tell that they were VERY
MUCH concerned about what was going on.
It is obvious that John Lustig can't know what was going on
on the other side of Atlantic but I think he should at least try.
I consider scandinavia and Germany as the primary market for Disney-comics
made by Rosa, Van-Horn and Barks. I think it's very much unfair that
certain manager starts to 'hit' Rosa here while Rosa lives on the
other side of Atlantic. What do the fans who are not on this mailing-
list think about Rosa when they read Grandey's statements about
Rosa's comics? I can't see any reason they should attack Rosa's comics.
Lustig wrote:
> When I mentioned that negative things were said about Barks, Van Horn, myself
> and others you didn't seem to believe me. In particular you refused to
> believe than anything negative was said on the list about Barks. You insisted
> that Rosa certainly hadn't said anything bad about Barks. And you demanded
> that I repeat all those awful things--if they really existed--and tell
> everyone exactly who said them.
>
> Well, here's my answer: No!
So why you even mentioned that those 'negative things' exists.
I repeat that Don Rosa has been very polite on this mailing-list
towards you, Van-Horn and Barks'. I don't recall anything negative
written about them.
So you think *I* should go through the archives, while *you*
are the person who writes about those archives. Hah!
> 2) Issue a plea that we put this nastiness behind us. (Based on your letter,
> Mikko, I've apparently failed on this one.)
No, no, no. I didn't bring the subject up again.
You did. Had you only send the settlement without your own
attack towards this mailing-list, without telling who are
the people on this mailing-list and what have they done,
I wouldn't have replied to you.
> 5) Lastly, I tried to make a case that the attacks on the mailing list
> against Barks in particular were unfair.
Now, I wanna really know what these attacks are?
> There were other things said about Barks by Rosa and other people on this
> list, but why go into all that?
So you accuse other people on this list without mentioning:
Who did What? When did What?
You make me feel guilty and I don't even know what I have done.
Is that your point, make us all feel guilty?
> After I read this I went back through the archives and tried to track down
> exactly what Grandey supposedly said in print when he and Barks were in
> Finland. Perhaps I missed something, but the only instance I could find was a
> brief report by you. Excuse me if, at this point, I doubt your objectivity.
So do you really think that disney-comics mailing-list is the
right place to track down what Bill Grandey said in Finland?
You can doubt my objectivity but I have the darned article right
here, right now. I can send a copy of that with a translation
if you want.
> Grandey himself, on the other hand, has been attacked repeatedly and in very
> personal ways on this mailing list. A great many assumptions have been made
> about him--with very few facts to base them on.
I, personally, have attacked Grandey based on what *I* know.
I can base my attacks on him on that article in major Finnish
magazine.
/Mikko
about Lustig and Grandey. These Grandey's faxes reached also
Finland's Disney publishers and I can tell that they were VERY
MUCH concerned about what was going on.
It is obvious that John Lustig can't know what was going on
on the other side of Atlantic but I think he should at least try.
I consider scandinavia and Germany as the primary market for Disney-comics
made by Rosa, Van-Horn and Barks. I think it's very much unfair that
certain manager starts to 'hit' Rosa here while Rosa lives on the
other side of Atlantic. What do the fans who are not on this mailing-
list think about Rosa when they read Grandey's statements about
Rosa's comics? I can't see any reason they should attack Rosa's comics.
Lustig wrote:
> When I mentioned that negative things were said about Barks, Van Horn, myself
> and others you didn't seem to believe me. In particular you refused to
> believe than anything negative was said on the list about Barks. You insisted
> that Rosa certainly hadn't said anything bad about Barks. And you demanded
> that I repeat all those awful things--if they really existed--and tell
> everyone exactly who said them.
>
> Well, here's my answer: No!
So why you even mentioned that those 'negative things' exists.
I repeat that Don Rosa has been very polite on this mailing-list
towards you, Van-Horn and Barks'. I don't recall anything negative
written about them.
So you think *I* should go through the archives, while *you*
are the person who writes about those archives. Hah!
> 2) Issue a plea that we put this nastiness behind us. (Based on your letter,
> Mikko, I've apparently failed on this one.)
No, no, no. I didn't bring the subject up again.
You did. Had you only send the settlement without your own
attack towards this mailing-list, without telling who are
the people on this mailing-list and what have they done,
I wouldn't have replied to you.
> 5) Lastly, I tried to make a case that the attacks on the mailing list
> against Barks in particular were unfair.
Now, I wanna really know what these attacks are?
> There were other things said about Barks by Rosa and other people on this
> list, but why go into all that?
So you accuse other people on this list without mentioning:
Who did What? When did What?
You make me feel guilty and I don't even know what I have done.
Is that your point, make us all feel guilty?
> After I read this I went back through the archives and tried to track down
> exactly what Grandey supposedly said in print when he and Barks were in
> Finland. Perhaps I missed something, but the only instance I could find was a
> brief report by you. Excuse me if, at this point, I doubt your objectivity.
So do you really think that disney-comics mailing-list is the
right place to track down what Bill Grandey said in Finland?
You can doubt my objectivity but I have the darned article right
here, right now. I can send a copy of that with a translation
if you want.
> Grandey himself, on the other hand, has been attacked repeatedly and in very
> personal ways on this mailing list. A great many assumptions have been made
> about him--with very few facts to base them on.
I, personally, have attacked Grandey based on what *I* know.
I can base my attacks on him on that article in major Finnish
magazine.
/Mikko
Paulo Barreto
Brazilian comics
Message 176 -
1995-07-25 at 17:06:29
HARRY:
<re "DD in Bangkassa" (H 89151)>
Indeed, that story had a big loss in translation...
HF}Dutch version: "U$ can't leave because of the fluctuations of the stocks
}on the oil market."
As I told you, DD just says U$ "can't travel". I'm glad to know U$
remains healthy... :-)
The opening sequence is particularly baffling. HDL discuss over
their vacation destination while DD & U$ talk over the phone. On
page 1, panel 4, DD asks "Isn't it illegal?"
Is it the same text in the original version? As far as I know
Disney comics, there's nothing resembling illegality when someone
(namely U$) trades a TV for a diamond, unless characters are
changing their minds. Is DD becoming "politically correct" about
his uncle's businesses? :)
HF}Dutch version: Sjeik Heballesal (= Sheik Alreadyhaveeverything).
Another translation gap. Of course calling him Xeque Jatenhotudo
would be far from the original intention, but what made Brazilian
Disney think their readers wouldn't recognize an archetipical
Arabic chief when they see one?
Maybe they just had some language trouble. Are Dutch comics
exported in their original version or they are first translated
right in the Netherlands?
ALL:
Now for _Tio Patinhas_ #359, June '95: does somebody know these
stories?
"Sistema de defesa computadorizado" (I 1867): Donald makes out an
"infallible" defense system for the money bin. Good old
traditional Italian style shows DD in an unusual hi-tech genius
role (he even beats Gyro in this story!). The computer design must
improve, I guess.
"Donald e o Bau' da Felicidade" (I 1959): DD in desert island finds
floating chest. Fine airbrush art, dismal gag.
"O Druida do Lago Ness" (D 93260): DD & U$ have an accident around
Lock Ness; DD enters time-gate fog and goes back 700 years. Oh,
no, another Nessie theory! And can someone believe Scottish
warriors wore polka-dot shorts under their kilts? :)
"Um dia de Fu'ria" (F/JM 94207 C): DD is watched by flying camera
with flyswatter.
"Com...Patos Imediatos" (D 91417): U$/DD/HDL take a camping trip
and try to photograph a flying saucer.
_____m__(0/\0)__m_____ P.C.Barreto
mad at digi.ax.apc.org
___ Olms 2.01 [Evaluation]
<re "DD in Bangkassa" (H 89151)>
Indeed, that story had a big loss in translation...
HF}Dutch version: "U$ can't leave because of the fluctuations of the stocks
}on the oil market."
As I told you, DD just says U$ "can't travel". I'm glad to know U$
remains healthy... :-)
The opening sequence is particularly baffling. HDL discuss over
their vacation destination while DD & U$ talk over the phone. On
page 1, panel 4, DD asks "Isn't it illegal?"
Is it the same text in the original version? As far as I know
Disney comics, there's nothing resembling illegality when someone
(namely U$) trades a TV for a diamond, unless characters are
changing their minds. Is DD becoming "politically correct" about
his uncle's businesses? :)
HF}Dutch version: Sjeik Heballesal (= Sheik Alreadyhaveeverything).
Another translation gap. Of course calling him Xeque Jatenhotudo
would be far from the original intention, but what made Brazilian
Disney think their readers wouldn't recognize an archetipical
Arabic chief when they see one?
Maybe they just had some language trouble. Are Dutch comics
exported in their original version or they are first translated
right in the Netherlands?
ALL:
Now for _Tio Patinhas_ #359, June '95: does somebody know these
stories?
"Sistema de defesa computadorizado" (I 1867): Donald makes out an
"infallible" defense system for the money bin. Good old
traditional Italian style shows DD in an unusual hi-tech genius
role (he even beats Gyro in this story!). The computer design must
improve, I guess.
"Donald e o Bau' da Felicidade" (I 1959): DD in desert island finds
floating chest. Fine airbrush art, dismal gag.
"O Druida do Lago Ness" (D 93260): DD & U$ have an accident around
Lock Ness; DD enters time-gate fog and goes back 700 years. Oh,
no, another Nessie theory! And can someone believe Scottish
warriors wore polka-dot shorts under their kilts? :)
"Um dia de Fu'ria" (F/JM 94207 C): DD is watched by flying camera
with flyswatter.
"Com...Patos Imediatos" (D 91417): U$/DD/HDL take a camping trip
and try to photograph a flying saucer.
_____m__(0/\0)__m_____ P.C.Barreto
mad at digi.ax.apc.org
___ Olms 2.01 [Evaluation]
Maria
Unsubscribe
Message 177 -
1995-07-25 at 21:55:00
please unsubscribe me.
Cdoberman
Did you miss ANYTHING?
Message 178 -
1995-07-25 at 22:14:33
Dear Don:
You asked if you missed anything! I'll say: I posted a letter about how
WDG#1 came out the same week that NPR broadcast a story that the Canadian
Mounties had sold Disney the liscensing rights to their "image." I thought
it was great that your story portrayed the Mounties exactly as they were
hoping you wouldn't -- well-intentioned goody-goodies. I wondered if Disney
was embarrassed by this little stroke of Great Timing. Not one person
commented on my letter. I guess they had SOMETHING ELSE ON THEIR MINDS,
while I can't imagine what.
Wes
You asked if you missed anything! I'll say: I posted a letter about how
WDG#1 came out the same week that NPR broadcast a story that the Canadian
Mounties had sold Disney the liscensing rights to their "image." I thought
it was great that your story portrayed the Mounties exactly as they were
hoping you wouldn't -- well-intentioned goody-goodies. I wondered if Disney
was embarrassed by this little stroke of Great Timing. Not one person
commented on my letter. I guess they had SOMETHING ELSE ON THEIR MINDS,
while I can't imagine what.
Wes
Striker261
Unsubscribe
Message 179 -
1995-07-26 at 02:48:06
Please unsubscribe Billy Hesterman or Striker261 at aol.com
Armitage.Steve
Unsubscribe
Message 180 -
1995-07-26 at 17:33:19
unsubscribe disney-comics
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: unsubscribe
Author: <Striker261 at aol.com> at Internet
Date: 7/25/95 7:48 PM
Please unsubscribe Billy Hesterman or Striker261 at aol.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: unsubscribe
Author: <Striker261 at aol.com> at Internet
Date: 7/25/95 7:48 PM
Please unsubscribe Billy Hesterman or Striker261 at aol.com