Keskustelujen arkisto

There are also stories written by Kathleen Webb (I think) who always
features Betty in the Archie series comics in a most favorable way. Great
stories, too.

Melanie: There are others, you just have to take the time to read the
credits, not look to support certain biases you might have. Perhaps you
took some women as victims college courses, you know, "woman's history
classes" or learn how to resent men and boil everything down to gender
whatever that is. It is important always to look for hidden agendas in
classes like that, or even in the constant barrage of typical news media
stories on the subject. This is where a number really is done on society in
general.

Unfortunately many women became victims when they bought the idea that they
MUST have a career to be "fullfilled". They went ahead and had a family and
a career and tried to become superwomen that did it all. All of the
domestic stuff you seem to scorn as well as a job. It didn't have to be that
way because many smart career women raised their kids to participate in the
domestic chores that need to be accomplished and happen to have married men
that think more of them than that and are capable of cooking and cleaning as
well.

Kathy

--------------------------------
End of dcomics-d Digest V95 Issue #12
*************************************

HENRI:

I agree with your comment on the Duck statues. As Barks himself
commented in the book I told about earlier, when he figured out
the composition of his comic book panels and couldn't make the
Ducks looking like themselves when looked from whatever
perspective, he could simple change the postures so they looked
like they should. But with the statues the viewers can look them
wherever they want and they still would have to look perfect.
Barks said that when making these preliminary sketches he for
example found out that he didn't know how Gladstone's hair should
look like when viewed from the back - he hadn't ever drawn him in
such position! I don't know whether you saw the statue based on
Barks's painting "Always another rainbow" when it was exhibited
in the "Good fellows" comics store. I thought that at least

Scrooge's beak didn't look like it should. Well, it's not my
problem since I don't have to look that statue on my shelf - it
costs something like 2000 bucks... Besides, I'm happy enough to
have a signed lithograph of the same painting :-)

--- Jyrki Vainio ---

DON:

> HOWEVER, I did NOT draw the MM you'll be seeing! The original cover
> was to accompany a Gottfredson reprint, and this WD GIANT naturally does not
> contain such.

The preview in Advance Comics showed the cover with *your* MM, but
without the signatures.

Your "Treasure of Croesus" is great! Especially since
I visited Ephesus and Istanbul only a few weeks ago!
Minor remarks: The Greek letters on the first column
spell Croesus as "KROESOS", but I think the spelling
should be KR<OO>ISOS, <OO> standing for an Omega. The
"OE" is a Latin transcription of the Greek "OOI" sound.
Well, maybe the Lydians spelled their king differently, but
that seems unlikely.

And I think "Hagia Sophia" is with one g. Besides, they gave
it the wrong colour. (The Turks, I mean. They painted the
walls red, but I prefer the colours in your story! 8-)

> I also just went out and bought a copy of Gladstone's 12th chapter
> of the "Lo$". And the self-cover style comic bothered me for the first time.
> The paper of the entire comic seemed ... "krinkly". As if the comic had been
> damp and then dried out. Maybe that's just my issue...?

I bought two copies today (one's for Daniel) and *both*
copies are "krinkly", or whatever to call it. So I'm afraid
it's not just your issue...

The extra art in Lo$ 12 really improves the story a lot! It
gives the crucial moments in the story the extra space they
deserve. Also, the thing on the wall on page 6 was really
funny!
One thing about the colouring: in both the European and the
Gladstone version, the door on page 17, panel 2 (Gladstone
version), was left white. I guess both colourists missed it
because it is a perfect vertical line from top to bottom...
And the colour of Scrooge's money was only slightly better
than in the European version. I grew up with Duckburg money
being yellow (gold colour), and I think that's what it should
be!

The backup story in Uncle $crooge 296 is another example
of commerce taking over: it's an old story from U$ 180,
written by Vic Lockman. Next to it: the "Cartooning books"
advertisement by Vic Lockman. It looks like Lockman is
paying Gladstone to (re)print his stories. And this one
(drawn by Jack Manning) looks even more awful than the ones
VL draws himself!

--Harry.
((Email removed))

HENRI:
>>Attachment converted: Kovalevy:Re- dcomics-d Digest V95 #11 (????/----)
> Was there something important in the attachment?

No, it wasn't an attachment with something important in it. Sorry everyone,
for the bunch of rubbish, that was sent with my message yesterday. I don't
know how it got there. I'm using a new mail-program called MS Exchange for
Windows 95. I'm trying to solve the problem. (I sent THIS message with my
OLD mail-program. Just in case!)

<NAME>
Arthur de Wolf
</NAME>

HENRI:
For me, the mice look much worse than the Ducks in 3-D,
basically because (it has to be said) Mickey's ears weren't designed
for real-life models. In cartoons, when MM turns his head, the ears
are almost always seen as if from the front; they're also placed
farther back on his head when seen from the side, and they don't
overlap as they should when seen from the side, either...
In "The Little Whirlwind" (1941) and a few other cartoons of
the period, Disney tried having the artists draw MM's ears in three
real dimensions. But they gave it up after a while, because to
effectively handle three dimensions they had to make one side of the
ear lighter, and it was felt that that was off-putting.

HARRY:
Other important female writers of Disney comics are Eleanor
Packer (who wrote Dell stories in the early 40s and was also first
editor of WDC&S) and Shelly Block (Pat Block's wife, who has written a
whole slew of Duck stories which are to commence shortly). Notice
Shelly's name on a book on the new WDC&S letter-column heading?

David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>
"Have a chestnut, boys! ... OW!"

--------------------------------
End of dcomics-d Digest V95 Issue #13
*************************************

HARRY:
Vic Lockman's ad has ALWAYS tended to appear in issues that
have had his stories in them. I think he simply requests that he'd
only like it to appear when his stories do, but that's just a guess.
The use of a Whitman-reprint rather than some other story
wasn't an economy move so much as a last-minute switch that took place
when Don decided to lengthen LO$-12. As of last spring, there was to
have been one of my Egmont rewrites (Daniel Branca's "His Master's
Voice") in that space. Now we'll probably see it next summer.
In fact, as of last spring, US 296 was to have been a
double-thick issue (remember the old subscription ad saying that US
was to have some double-issues, before it was decided that WDC&S
should be double-thick instead?). My guess is that the Lockman story
was to have been some filler after my rewrite.
And why pick a Lockman story from US 180? Simply because
issues from that period are the RAREST Whitman issues EVER published.
(And US 180 -- or is it 182? -- is the rarest of the lot.)

I'm not a Vic Lockman fan either, but I know a handful of
readers who LOVE his material, and cooincidentally, they're among the
readers who write to Gladstone more than anyone else.

David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>

HARRY:
Gladstone found that it had too much inventory to use up
before the current licensing period ended, so they decided they'd
coast on what they had until next April (when it ends). I've been
informed that my translation of the egg story, which I called "Musical
Eggs," will be purchased promptly if and when the license is renewed.
WDC&S 602 will have 4 Gil Turner BBW one-pagers, and WDC&S 603
will have (A) a Scamp story and (B) a Little Hiawatha storyboard
sequence by WALT KELLY in the non-Duck, non-Mickey spaces. So even if
the Wolf story won't appear for a while, we're getting good stuff.

David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>
"Have a chestnut, boys! ... OW!"

In the wake of our discussion of feminism and Disney comics,
I'll just point out that Shelly Block's first DD story is the Pat
Block-drawn "Three Little Cupids" coming up in DDA 37, next month. I
spent a lot of time with the Blocks at last summer's Comic-Con, where
I read the story (then in pencils); as I recall, Daisy is a perfectly
human character in it. Really, IMHO Daisy can be revised as well
while keeping her the same character. Outside of the stereotypical
elements of the '50s (cliched notions that since she's female, she has
to be both a gossip and generally impractical... aaagh!) she's
basically smart, a little more high-strung than Donald, artistically
inclined, and with a terrible temper (sounds like another duck I
know). Why not just mix these, forget the cliches, and expand in some
other directions too?
In recent days the notion that Daisy has been portrayed so
stereotypically that she's past the point of no return, has come up.
Who says she is? Same goes for Mickey. Just because numerous writers
have portrayed a character in the way that someone doesn't like
doesn't make it impossible to go back to writers we DO like and take
THEM as the ONLY influence. (FUNNY, I can't stop CAPITALIZING random
WORDS. ;-)

My final comment on the arguments between Melanie and others:
Europeans saying that Duck comics "don't give much exposure to women,"
or other such things, is not a statement of some law that must be
obeyed, or even a statement which I thought the letter writer
supported. When someone says that Duck comics don't give much
exposure to women, they're making a comment that things right now are
an unfortunate way, not making a statement that that's how things are
now and that that's how they should stay...

Melanie, what do you thnk of the MM story "Sheriff of Nugget
Gulch" (1937, reprinted in Gladstone Comic Album 22)? While the plot
itself is one of Gottfredson's weakest, I like how Minnie's Aunt
Matilda helps Mickey learn to shoot better. Toward the end of the
story, Minnie points out that Mickey has been taught so well that he
can shoot a hole in a coin from thirty feet away (or some other
difficult feat like that), and she's right.
I intend to use Aunt Matilda in a story eventually.

David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>