Keskustelujen arkisto

--- Received from VD.POL1 031-669152 95-11-26 14:27

-> IN=disney-comics(a)minsk.docs.uu.se

Hello everybody!!!

I just wondered if anyone know where Adam Wieherd is?
The last time I heard of him was for about 2 or 3 months ago.
So if anyone know something about it, just send me a message...

---
Erik

PEKKA & CHRISTINA:

The Helsinki convention was organized by the Comics Society of
FINLAND - not just Helsinki!
--- Jyrki Vainio

Hello All:

I've found myself using the phrase "odd bodkins" from time to time and
was asked by someone where it came from.

I remember it as something I read in a comic book as a child. It was a
story set in medieval time and was uttered by a character when startled
by some unusual situation. I think it was a Mickey Mouse story, but am
not sure. (It could be something as obscure as Walt Scot's Little
People.) The phrase struck me as unusual and has stuck with me through
the years though I don't know its origin or even its original
meaning.

I was reminded of the phrase again today on a public radio program, "To
the Best of Our Knowledge"; they were talking to a man who teaches kids
lessons on human values through story telling. He goes by the name of
Odds Bodkin!

He didn't explain where his name came from, but I am starting to wonder
if that term has been in use for a while? My dictionary defines
"bodkin" as "a pointed instrument for making holes in cloth" along with
a couple other similar definitions.

Does anyone know of a comic book story that used this phrase? Any
ideas on an origin of the phrase?

Thanks,

Tryg

Internet tryg.helseth at tstation.com
or trygve at maroon.tc.umn.edu
---
* QMPro 1.51 * "I Found my thrill on Killmotor hill..." $crooge McDuck

Did some snooping on the net via Deja News. Found a few recipes for Nutmeg
Tea, but they seemed to be designed for the sole purpose of getting high.
(Most were posted in alt.drug usenet groups.) Couldn't find just an
ordinary (non-toxic) tea recipe. I was actually surprised at the number of
hits I got on a search for Nutmeg & Tea--it was 89.

I posted a question here asking about a comic book source to Odd Bodkins
which I thought was used in a Mickey Mouse comic. Just for laughs, I
searched for Odd Bodkins on Deja News and got several hits. They all
referred to a '60s comic strip of that name done by Dan O'Neil. I had never
heard of that before; it is not the comic I was thinking of.

Tryg

Tryg Helseth <trygve at maroon.tc.umn.edu> or <Tryg.Helseth at tstation.mn.org>
Minneapolis, Minnesota

I'm back. But not from Cleveland. Did I say I was going to Cleveland? I was
in COLUMBUS at Roger Price's MID-OHIO CON. That used to be held near
Cleveland, so I got mixed up.
Another Lost Weekend given to the attention of Duck fans. I sat at
my convention table all day Saturday and Sunday...and I do mean all day --
when I start doing illustrations for Duck fans, I start before the
convention opens (having gotten requests from the comics dealers) and I stop
when the convention closes, without a break for lunch. That was 8 hours
straight, both days). ANd I also get up before dawn both mornings to do
drawings for friends who I've long promised to do drawings for, but who
arrived too late to get on the list. Then I get home late Sunday, get up
early Monday, and start back on drawing Ducks and Avatars again. Whew!
I always get lots of requests for drawings from comics dealers --
more than from the convention attendees, it seems. And I think the reason
for this is simple -- comics dealers are almost always the comics fans of
the 50s and 60s... so, obviously, they are ALL Barks/Duck fans as were
virtually ALL comic readers in America in those days. I have to use a system
to prevent dealers taking up my entire "dance card" before they open the
doors to the public.
As I've said, in America I can take time to do full-color drawings
for the fans, since there aren't as many of them. And as I've also said, if
I could weed out the TRUE Duck comics fans from the people who just happen
to see someone drawing a Disney character, I could have cut the number in
half, at least.
I did seem to sign a lot more comics, and STACKS of comics, this
trip than I had for a few years. But I guess that's natural -- none of my
stories were reprinted in America from around 1992 until early 1994 when the
"Lo$" started coming from Gladstone. And it's nice to see people still
bringing me copies of the old RBCC or DON ROSA'S COMICS AND STORIES to sign
-- I would have thought the people who bought that stuff would be in nursing
homes by now.
People seemed mighty happy with this "Lo$" stuff. Lots of them say
things like they never thought of reading a Disney comic until some dealer
or magazine suggested they try the "Lo$" -- that's naturally very nice! Now
the door has been opened for them to discover Barks and all the other Disney
comics. And that might happen more and more -- there was talk among all the
professionals at the show about the collapse of the American comic
collecting hobby. Comics in America has been more of a hobby than a mass
medium for about 15 years now, and it looks like it's run its course,
according to what people are saying. Sales are off by 2/3 of a year or two
ago, I think someone told me. And dropping. They say Marvel will stop
publishing comics and simply become a licensing company for a few of their
characters. The Direct Sales distribution system, which made it possible for
comic books to survive in America, seems to have collapsed. Or something.
I'm only getting little sound-bytes of this national problem in talking to
the worried professionals. Todd Klein might know more about what's going on
with all this...?
I wonder if Gladstone can survive this crunch? Or perhaps
Gladstone's sales are not connected to the super-hero-hobby that has fueled
American comics for so long?

TODD:
Speaking of you and the "Lo$". I'm SURE GLAD you always used "The
Life and Times of $crooge McDuck" as the ongoing title of that entire
series, because that was always what I intended. I would often use just "Lif
of $crooge" ("Lo$") in referring to the stories just to save typing -- but I
would have been very distressed if I'd seen your beautifully lettered
stories begun with the title "Life of $crooge". (You know your jobs on the
splash pages were my favorites parts of each Gladstone reprinting!) So,
along with all my other thanks, THANKS for not paying attention to the
scripts that gave you the short version of the title!

TRYG:
This is reckless coming from me who prides himself on accurate
research, but my unabridged dictionary is across the house from this station
and I can't check it. However... "Odds bodkins" is an old-English oath,
short for "Od's Bodykins" or somesuch, which I believe is a reference to the
body of God or Christ. "By the Holy Body of Christ!" might be a literal
translation, perhaps? We're not allowed to use expressions like "Dad gommit"
in A Disney comic, since such things are old-time switches of nastinesses,
regardless of whether Gabby Hayes used to say it or not. I think that "Ods
Bodkins" has origins so lost in antiquity that it might be okay. But then...
you see what those publicity-seeking religious zealots find in puffs of
smoke in Disney cartoons, so you never know. Anyway, I'll check my
dictionary later.

On Mon, 27 Nov 1995 disney-comics at Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE wrote:

> ======================================================================
> Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 14:39:35
> From: Daniel van Eijmeren <daniel at maisie.ow.nl>
> Subject: Re: Pinocchio
>
> JAKOB:

(snips re: Pinocchio)

> Disney-versions of already existing stories are often slightly
> different. They make they're own interpretation out of it. (Which
> is mostly the case with movies adapted from stories). So, you've seen
> the complete movie but not the complete original story.
>
> Did you ever compare the Disney-version of "Alice in Wonderland" with
> the original stories "Alice in Wonderland" and "Alice through the
> Looking-glass" by Lewis Caroll? There were a lot of complaints by
> people that the Disney-version didn't reach the much higher level of the
> original story with all it's wordplays (although it contained some
> very beautiful pictures).

Disney's "Alice" is certainly one of his weaker movies, though it has a
few good moments. I'd like to add that "Ichabod and Mr. Toad" are even
weaker. Disney could have done so much more with Kenneth Grahame's
classic _The Wind in the Willows_ and he made this lame cartoon instead.
I have yet to see an interpretation of WitW that I really like. Of
course, Disney also had the rights to Tolkien's _Lord of the Rings_, but
sold them to Ralph Bakshi (FRITZ THE CAT, WIZARDS) who botched that story.

> Now people are complaining that "Pocahontas" doesn't follow the
> original story very closely. For example, Pocahontas was only 12 years
> old according to the story. Well, you can see clearly she isn't that
> young in the movie. ;-)

Also, Pocahontas later went to England with husband John Rolfe, where she
contracted smallpox and died at a young age. Not the stuff of Disney
flicks, either.

> The only solution with movie-versions seems to be appreciating a movie
> how much it enjoyed you, *not* how accurate it was to the book.

Disney _should_ include disclaimers that their "historical" movies are
highly fictionalized, IMHO.

Regards,

Melanie

TODD:
"Ludwig isn't a Barks-character either, is he? So why
would [Don] include Ludwig but not Fethry [in the Family Tree]?"
Barks did use Ludwig once in a one-page U$ gag, which
validates his existence in the Barks universe.

David Gerstein
<96dag at williams.edu>
"Have a chestnut, boys! ... OW!"