HARALD:
>Yep, that's him, I looked it up in the German version, and the boy
>was indeed called Klaas. (The German translators did an incredible
>job on LO$ - tracing all the right Fuchs-names of minor characters...)
>
>Now, is Rockerduck the one with the South-African connection as
>discussed recently here? If so, "Klaas", a tipical Dutch name (to
>German ears), is a very clever (sic!) translation.
>I dimly remember a Rockerduck-nephew and three grand-nephews
>in one (Italian?) story. They were not obnoxious, but quite normal and
>friendly, if I'm not mistaken...
>Is Rockerduck a Barks invention BTW? (I *really* have to catch up with
>my Library-reading, or I'll loose my ML-licence...)
The info on Glomgold and Rockerduck is on the web at:
http://www.update.uu.se/~starback/disney-comics/chars/flintheart.html
http://www.update.uu.se/~starback/disney-comics/chars/rockerduck.html
Among the info there is that both characters were inventions of Barks.
Rockerduck first appeared in "Boat Buster" (WDC 255). Glomgold appeared in
"The Second-Richest Duck" (US 15--the ball-of-string story), "The Money
Champ" (US 27), and So Far and No Safari" (US 61). Barks never used them
except for the above-mentioned stories, but Rockerduck has been used in many
Italian stories and Glomgold in many D-coded stories, "and translators have
often confused the two."
Glomgold lives in South Africa in the Barks (and Rosa) stories, and in his
first appearance (1956) has a Money Bin which looks like Scrooge's except it
has a pound sign rather than a dollar sign (South Africa used British
currency at that time). In the 1980s, perhaps because of political turmoil
in South Africa, many stories showed Glomgold living in Duckburg. But
Rockerduck, I think, has always lived in Duckburg. (I myself have never seen
a Rockerduck story except for Lo$ 4.)
--Jonathan Markoff
Author
Topic: 199611
(342 messages)
Markoff
Gllomgold and Rockerduck
Message 181 -
1996-11-16 at 17:22:50
Byron Erickson
Old bizness
Message 182 -
1996-11-16 at 18:02:16
Two or three weeks ago, there were a few comments on the list about the
correct code number and credits for an EPS story, "The Moving Bin",
published in Gladstone's Uncle Scrooge 301. At that time, the title
sounded familiar, but since I hadn't yet received my copy of US 301, I
couldn't comment.
Well, I just got the comic, and yes, the printed code number is wrong.
The correct code number for "The Moving Money Bin" should be D 92027,
and the actual writer is Bob Langhans. Oh, yeah... I edited the story,
which is why the title sounded familiar.
correct code number and credits for an EPS story, "The Moving Bin",
published in Gladstone's Uncle Scrooge 301. At that time, the title
sounded familiar, but since I hadn't yet received my copy of US 301, I
couldn't comment.
Well, I just got the comic, and yes, the printed code number is wrong.
The correct code number for "The Moving Money Bin" should be D 92027,
and the actual writer is Bob Langhans. Oh, yeah... I edited the story,
which is why the title sounded familiar.
Christer Hanssen
Character changes
Message 183 -
1996-11-16 at 19:00:53
Harald:
"Animation, US-Ducks - all good and well. But what do you all think of
the countless "incarnations" the Duck family had througout time and
myths in Italian stories: there are medeaval Donalds, Fantasy
Donalds, Ducks living in Bagdad etc. Are those also roled played by
"actor" Donald or what?"
Aside from the fact that some of them actually are theater or something like
that, I don't have a problem with that kind of use of the characters. The
Duck-universe is in my mind a combination between not being historical and
being historical, it all depends on the use of them. If the story is in
Bagdad lots of centuries ago then the Ducks are the same, but with a
different enviroment. If the story is set in a historical reference to other
stories that's the way it must behave. The story is the main point and the
characters serves the story. So the hole question depends on the premisses
of the story. But I must add that personaly I think that most of the
stories, where the original persons are substituted with Dusks, is very
boring and without any good plot since the Duck's personality often don't
accord to the original person and the hole thing is just yet another story
that serves the mass production.
~Christer
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #253
******************************************
"Animation, US-Ducks - all good and well. But what do you all think of
the countless "incarnations" the Duck family had througout time and
myths in Italian stories: there are medeaval Donalds, Fantasy
Donalds, Ducks living in Bagdad etc. Are those also roled played by
"actor" Donald or what?"
Aside from the fact that some of them actually are theater or something like
that, I don't have a problem with that kind of use of the characters. The
Duck-universe is in my mind a combination between not being historical and
being historical, it all depends on the use of them. If the story is in
Bagdad lots of centuries ago then the Ducks are the same, but with a
different enviroment. If the story is set in a historical reference to other
stories that's the way it must behave. The story is the main point and the
characters serves the story. So the hole question depends on the premisses
of the story. But I must add that personaly I think that most of the
stories, where the original persons are substituted with Dusks, is very
boring and without any good plot since the Duck's personality often don't
accord to the original person and the hole thing is just yet another story
that serves the mass production.
~Christer
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #253
******************************************
Dave Rawson
Further explanations and answers
Message 184 -
1996-11-17 at 04:14:19
(Email removed) (Don Rosa):
DonR> What on earth is this about sparing me embarrassment?
I thought you might be upset to learn you were wrong when you claimed
official policy forbid the use characters I had used, and when you
insisted that only editors unfamiliar with such things would allow it. I
admit I was projecting onto you -- had I made such strong and
unequivocal statements to someone else proporting to speak for official
policy, I would have been very embarrassed to find out I was wrong. I
was trying to protect you from what I assumed you might find
embarrassing.
DonR> I don't recall commenting on any specific story you've done since
DonR> I don't recall seeing any Duck story using a weasel.
Here's my post (to which you responded): "I just received the
cracker-jack art by Rodriquez for "One of a Kind" [D92281] a children's
primer on corporate junk-bond dealers featuring full-on weasels as the
antagonists thwarting Scrooge's desire for another jar of Mother
Mallard's Marmalade, his favorite. [...] Later, a bantam rooster is
featured as a sidekick to the matronly mallard, and a stork, a bulldog,
a cat, and a wonderful ostrich are visible in crowd scenes, while
regular and dog-eared humans provide a supporting cast. I guess I'm too
much of an iconoclast to draw firm boundaries around character usage.
Again, my guiding thought is: 'Whatever serves the story.' I love using
buzzards or weasels or rats as particularly despicable rougues."
In response you offered: "It's rare, but I hafta disagree with you on
two things here." The first thing was my comments about the woodchuck
tounge-twister, the other was that my use of the above described
characters wasn't official (it was), and that only editors unfamiliar
with what they were editing would allow it (not true).
DonR> I was saying that there are guidelines as to what sorts of animals
DonR> can be shown as "intelligent" in a Duck comic.
Certainly, but you were wrong about what those guidelines were,
especially when you said "you cannot use weasel-people, vulture-people"
both of which I had used with "official" approval.
DonR> Byron came on here as well, and stated the exact same thing...
No, Don, he said exactly the opposite of what you claimed about specific
characters being disallowed. Further, he said the guidelines are not
that simple and that, in short, ultimately there is an irreducible
subjective component to story-telling that is wonderfully indefinable
and ineffable.
DonR> why didn't you disagree with him?
"Why didn't I disagree with him?" <scratching head> For the same reason
I don't disagree with you. The only disagreement here is =yours= (DonR>
"It's rare, but I hafta disagree with you on two things here.")
Everything in this thread is based on your disagreement, not mine. I've
offered no criticism of anyone. I'm doing my best to answer your
questions and respond politely. I repeat, I have no disagreement with
how you handle your characters. In fact, I openly and consistently
praise your work.
DonR> Personally, I wouldn't allow a weasel-man in a Duck comic, but the
DonR> use of such would go along with what Byron stated as the
DonR> guideline.
Exactly, and that's why I was able to use one, despite your insistence
that only editors unfamiliar with such things would allow it. Note that
originally you disagreed with this when you said "if you are to go by
what has been established since the 40s as the accepted, standardized,
"official" view of what's proper and improper in these stories, you
cannot use weasel-people, vulture-people, cat-people, or anything else
but the normal tiny selection of types of 99.99% humanized animals".
DonR> You like to go by what Barks says?
Not necessarily. He's an influence, but not the only one. As I've
pointed out repeatedly, I like to have an intuitive, rather than
logically based aesthetic. In fact, as I said in the above mentioned
post originally attracting your comments: "I guess I'm too much of an
iconoclast to draw firm boundaries around character usage. Again, my
guiding thought is: 'Whatever serves the story.' I love using buzzards
or weasels or rats as particularly despicable rougues."
DonR> Barks says his were stories of people drawn as animals
And I think that's the key. Whatever the character design is, it has to
be convincing to the reader that it fits the story being told. As long
as we all treat these characters as people, and the art supprots that
feel, the readers get some good yarns tossed their way.
DonR> You cannot treat Duck comics like mainstream funny-animal comics
DonR> since they aren't.
To my knowlege I've never done that. Could you give an example of where
you believe I have?
DonR> If you're saying it's okay to put a weasel-guy in a Duck comic,
DonR> I'll grant you that possibility.
Okay, well I'm glad you no longer disagree as strongly as you first
declared you did.
DonR> But if you're saying that it's completely fine to stick a
DonR> frog-person or a rabbit-man or a bear-guy, or any sort of
DonR> humanized raccoon or skunk or squirrel or cow or tiger or (I could
DonR> go on all night), you're wrong.
Well, none of those ideas appeal to me off hand, so I'm not likely to
try and do such a thing. Further, I've no more said any of the above
than I've stopped beating my wife (not having one).
DonR> Give it a try and you'll be stopped. Ask Byron if you won't.
->sigh<- Gee, Don, none of this is all that important to me. A month ago
I was rear-ended by a tow truck towing a car in the midst of very heavy
traffic at the four-level freeway interchange smack dab in downtown Los
Angeles and I consider myself lucky to be alive. Since then, my friend
Mike Nagel wasn't so lucky. He was murdered, shot to death and his
employees pistol-whipped because they couldn't open the safe to their
book store. Life is a gift, and each day and each moment is precious.
I'm being as patient and polite as I can here. I rather spend my time on
other things, though.
Whatever serves the story is fine with me. The editor is the arbiter of
such things. I work for them and they make those decisions, not me. I
offer what I think is appropriate, and then incorporate their feedback.
DonR> Just as I said before, you can't suddenly insert something like a
DonR> penguin-man into a Duck comic anymore than you could do so into a
DonR> Batman comic.
I haven't. I'm not sure why you're repeatedly sharing this with me,
since it doesn't seem you disagree with me on this.
DonR> Go back and read Byron's description of the guidelines, and
DonR> disagree with him.
Why on earth would I do that? I don't disagree with your handling of
characters. Why would I disagree with Byron's?
Don, please don't misunderstand the following and think I'm trying to
tell you what to do, I'm not, but in my meager and humble opinion, I
don't think this thread is serving you well. Your the biggest reason
folks come here. They hold you in high regard. Perhaps, and again I'm
not in the least telling you what to do, I'm just offering an
alternative you might want to consider, you'd be better served to focus
on their questions and many statements of deserved praise.
Regardless, I'll be happy to continue answering your questions as long
as you like, if that's what you prefer. I admire your work, think your
analysis of character usage is exceptional, and that I can learn (and
have learned) a great deal from you sharing such thinking. In the end,
we're two different people, with different aesthetics, and the world of
story-telling is the richer for the dichotomy.
--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm
DonR> What on earth is this about sparing me embarrassment?
I thought you might be upset to learn you were wrong when you claimed
official policy forbid the use characters I had used, and when you
insisted that only editors unfamiliar with such things would allow it. I
admit I was projecting onto you -- had I made such strong and
unequivocal statements to someone else proporting to speak for official
policy, I would have been very embarrassed to find out I was wrong. I
was trying to protect you from what I assumed you might find
embarrassing.
DonR> I don't recall commenting on any specific story you've done since
DonR> I don't recall seeing any Duck story using a weasel.
Here's my post (to which you responded): "I just received the
cracker-jack art by Rodriquez for "One of a Kind" [D92281] a children's
primer on corporate junk-bond dealers featuring full-on weasels as the
antagonists thwarting Scrooge's desire for another jar of Mother
Mallard's Marmalade, his favorite. [...] Later, a bantam rooster is
featured as a sidekick to the matronly mallard, and a stork, a bulldog,
a cat, and a wonderful ostrich are visible in crowd scenes, while
regular and dog-eared humans provide a supporting cast. I guess I'm too
much of an iconoclast to draw firm boundaries around character usage.
Again, my guiding thought is: 'Whatever serves the story.' I love using
buzzards or weasels or rats as particularly despicable rougues."
In response you offered: "It's rare, but I hafta disagree with you on
two things here." The first thing was my comments about the woodchuck
tounge-twister, the other was that my use of the above described
characters wasn't official (it was), and that only editors unfamiliar
with what they were editing would allow it (not true).
DonR> I was saying that there are guidelines as to what sorts of animals
DonR> can be shown as "intelligent" in a Duck comic.
Certainly, but you were wrong about what those guidelines were,
especially when you said "you cannot use weasel-people, vulture-people"
both of which I had used with "official" approval.
DonR> Byron came on here as well, and stated the exact same thing...
No, Don, he said exactly the opposite of what you claimed about specific
characters being disallowed. Further, he said the guidelines are not
that simple and that, in short, ultimately there is an irreducible
subjective component to story-telling that is wonderfully indefinable
and ineffable.
DonR> why didn't you disagree with him?
"Why didn't I disagree with him?" <scratching head> For the same reason
I don't disagree with you. The only disagreement here is =yours= (DonR>
"It's rare, but I hafta disagree with you on two things here.")
Everything in this thread is based on your disagreement, not mine. I've
offered no criticism of anyone. I'm doing my best to answer your
questions and respond politely. I repeat, I have no disagreement with
how you handle your characters. In fact, I openly and consistently
praise your work.
DonR> Personally, I wouldn't allow a weasel-man in a Duck comic, but the
DonR> use of such would go along with what Byron stated as the
DonR> guideline.
Exactly, and that's why I was able to use one, despite your insistence
that only editors unfamiliar with such things would allow it. Note that
originally you disagreed with this when you said "if you are to go by
what has been established since the 40s as the accepted, standardized,
"official" view of what's proper and improper in these stories, you
cannot use weasel-people, vulture-people, cat-people, or anything else
but the normal tiny selection of types of 99.99% humanized animals".
DonR> You like to go by what Barks says?
Not necessarily. He's an influence, but not the only one. As I've
pointed out repeatedly, I like to have an intuitive, rather than
logically based aesthetic. In fact, as I said in the above mentioned
post originally attracting your comments: "I guess I'm too much of an
iconoclast to draw firm boundaries around character usage. Again, my
guiding thought is: 'Whatever serves the story.' I love using buzzards
or weasels or rats as particularly despicable rougues."
DonR> Barks says his were stories of people drawn as animals
And I think that's the key. Whatever the character design is, it has to
be convincing to the reader that it fits the story being told. As long
as we all treat these characters as people, and the art supprots that
feel, the readers get some good yarns tossed their way.
DonR> You cannot treat Duck comics like mainstream funny-animal comics
DonR> since they aren't.
To my knowlege I've never done that. Could you give an example of where
you believe I have?
DonR> If you're saying it's okay to put a weasel-guy in a Duck comic,
DonR> I'll grant you that possibility.
Okay, well I'm glad you no longer disagree as strongly as you first
declared you did.
DonR> But if you're saying that it's completely fine to stick a
DonR> frog-person or a rabbit-man or a bear-guy, or any sort of
DonR> humanized raccoon or skunk or squirrel or cow or tiger or (I could
DonR> go on all night), you're wrong.
Well, none of those ideas appeal to me off hand, so I'm not likely to
try and do such a thing. Further, I've no more said any of the above
than I've stopped beating my wife (not having one).
DonR> Give it a try and you'll be stopped. Ask Byron if you won't.
->sigh<- Gee, Don, none of this is all that important to me. A month ago
I was rear-ended by a tow truck towing a car in the midst of very heavy
traffic at the four-level freeway interchange smack dab in downtown Los
Angeles and I consider myself lucky to be alive. Since then, my friend
Mike Nagel wasn't so lucky. He was murdered, shot to death and his
employees pistol-whipped because they couldn't open the safe to their
book store. Life is a gift, and each day and each moment is precious.
I'm being as patient and polite as I can here. I rather spend my time on
other things, though.
Whatever serves the story is fine with me. The editor is the arbiter of
such things. I work for them and they make those decisions, not me. I
offer what I think is appropriate, and then incorporate their feedback.
DonR> Just as I said before, you can't suddenly insert something like a
DonR> penguin-man into a Duck comic anymore than you could do so into a
DonR> Batman comic.
I haven't. I'm not sure why you're repeatedly sharing this with me,
since it doesn't seem you disagree with me on this.
DonR> Go back and read Byron's description of the guidelines, and
DonR> disagree with him.
Why on earth would I do that? I don't disagree with your handling of
characters. Why would I disagree with Byron's?
Don, please don't misunderstand the following and think I'm trying to
tell you what to do, I'm not, but in my meager and humble opinion, I
don't think this thread is serving you well. Your the biggest reason
folks come here. They hold you in high regard. Perhaps, and again I'm
not in the least telling you what to do, I'm just offering an
alternative you might want to consider, you'd be better served to focus
on their questions and many statements of deserved praise.
Regardless, I'll be happy to continue answering your questions as long
as you like, if that's what you prefer. I admire your work, think your
analysis of character usage is exceptional, and that I can learn (and
have learned) a great deal from you sharing such thinking. In the end,
we're two different people, with different aesthetics, and the world of
story-telling is the richer for the dichotomy.
--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm
Dave Rawson
Preposterous prepositions
Message 185 -
1996-11-17 at 04:28:30
"Dan Shane" <(Email removed)> AND Kriton Kyrimis
<(Email removed)>:
DS> The retort that Winston Churchill was said to have made when someone
DS> fussed at him about ending sentences with prepositions was akin to
DS> the following:
DS>
DS> "That is the sort of unimportant nonsense up with which we will not
DS> put."
Ah-hah! I knew the cheeky devil had a snarky thing to say about the
lowly preposition. Thanks for setting me straight, guys.
--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm
<(Email removed)>:
DS> The retort that Winston Churchill was said to have made when someone
DS> fussed at him about ending sentences with prepositions was akin to
DS> the following:
DS>
DS> "That is the sort of unimportant nonsense up with which we will not
DS> put."
Ah-hah! I knew the cheeky devil had a snarky thing to say about the
lowly preposition. Thanks for setting me straight, guys.
--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm
Daniel C. Kenny
Digest
Message 186 -
1996-11-17 at 04:51:23
GARY
You're right. I do think that Disney's mismanagement of Mickey did him in.
Even Walt once said that Mickey had become so much of an institution that they
were limited in what they could do with him. If enough people were aware of
the gutsy Gottfredson mouse, then interest would develop. I know Disney tried
to reinvent Mickey a few years back in a new cartoon (which I haven't seen),
but it didn't do so well. Probably because short subjects DO NOT work in
today's market. Look how quickly those great Roger Rabbit short cartoons
dropped out of sight.
The problem is, even DISNEY doesn't evenrealize how great the Gottfredson mouse
is!!! I know this sounds crazy to some of you, but I think a major way to
bring back the old Mickey is to give him a TV show on the Disney afternoon.
I'm not a real fan of those shows, but DUCKTALES *did* do encourage new
readership of the Duck comics ( I got hooked that way, even though once I read
some Barks and Rosa, I could never go back to Ducktales). The show could be
based on the Gottfredson tales, in a similar way as Ducktales was based on
Barks' tales. Kids would then see Mickey comics, buy them, and readership
would grow. Perhaps it would even allow you to go ahead with a FG library.
Of course, I'm just rambling. It's not that simple. It's unrealistic to think
that Disney would do this just so the comic industry would grow. But if only
they realized what a valuable commodity they're overlooking.
You're right. I do think that Disney's mismanagement of Mickey did him in.
Even Walt once said that Mickey had become so much of an institution that they
were limited in what they could do with him. If enough people were aware of
the gutsy Gottfredson mouse, then interest would develop. I know Disney tried
to reinvent Mickey a few years back in a new cartoon (which I haven't seen),
but it didn't do so well. Probably because short subjects DO NOT work in
today's market. Look how quickly those great Roger Rabbit short cartoons
dropped out of sight.
The problem is, even DISNEY doesn't evenrealize how great the Gottfredson mouse
is!!! I know this sounds crazy to some of you, but I think a major way to
bring back the old Mickey is to give him a TV show on the Disney afternoon.
I'm not a real fan of those shows, but DUCKTALES *did* do encourage new
readership of the Duck comics ( I got hooked that way, even though once I read
some Barks and Rosa, I could never go back to Ducktales). The show could be
based on the Gottfredson tales, in a similar way as Ducktales was based on
Barks' tales. Kids would then see Mickey comics, buy them, and readership
would grow. Perhaps it would even allow you to go ahead with a FG library.
Of course, I'm just rambling. It's not that simple. It's unrealistic to think
that Disney would do this just so the comic industry would grow. But if only
they realized what a valuable commodity they're overlooking.
Kriton Kyrimis
Disney comics Digest V96 #253
Message 187 -
1996-11-17 at 16:44:26
DAVE:
> Since no one else mentioned it, I'll slip in here with the word "magma"
> which I'm guessing you were confusing with mantle. Magma is the molten
This is exactly what happened. Although I find this particular branch of
geology exciting, it's been some time since I last read anything in this area.
(Not counting Don's story, of course!)
> rock material under the earth's crust, from which igneous rock is formed
> by cooling. For what it's worth, I have no idea what either term is in
> Greek, so you are far ahead of me in your understanding.
Mantle = "mandyas"
Magma is actually a Greek word, indicating a soft material, like dough or wax,
that can be kneaded. It is derived from the verb "masso", which is probably
the root of the word "massage"!
> So in the spirit of Don's great story, here's a quandry my high school
> physics teacher once put to us and which some of you might answer: Did
> you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
> it is quite common?
Sounds like good old hydrogen oxide (i.e., water). Although it doesn't quite
have the properties of Don's Omnisolve(TM), it will dissolve almost anything,
even if it is in minute quantities.
GARY:
> ... that doesn't really address the
> appalling lack of interest the Disney comics market exhibits toward Mickey
> without apparently even giving him a chance.
I think that the answer is quite simple: Ducks had Carl Barks, while Mickey
didn't. Not that Gottfredson and the other Mickey artists were not brilliant,
but Barks hit on the right formula: most people can identify with Donald
(he has a family life, ambitions we can share with him, and works to make his
employer richer for 30 cents an hour). On the other hand, few people can
identify with someone like Mickey, who has an exotic adventure on every
alternate Tuesday, and excels in most human activities. (How many people do
you know that have travelled the world, can pilot an airplane, are former
members of the US secret service, have published their own newspaper, are
regularly consulted by the police, and have saved the world on more than one
occasion?)
BTW, when Barks came with the 30c/hour figure, was it as ludicrously low as it
sounds today? I suspect that back in the fifties, 30c/hour was either minumum
wages or pretty good money!
LAURA:
> Color comics leave less to the imagination. I truly believe
> that comic books done in black and white are much more valuable and
> enthralling than those done in color!
If removing the color from comics would leave more to the imagination, I
wonder what removing the pictures completely might accomplish. (Actually, I
believe that something like this has already been invented!)
SHAUN:
> First of all...$crooge's (original) top hat was not bought at a scottish
> rummage sale, his broadcloth coat was. Second, in my point of view, he
> left that hat underground with the Terries and Fermies in "Land Beneath
> the Ground". But that's just my opinion.
Not only have I forgotten my physics/geology, now I'm starting to forget my
Barks facts. :-( I wonder if the pills that Scrooge took in "Back to the
Klondike" are really available...
STEVEN:
> Is Donald Duck black? could be.
Once upon a time, in a childhood far, far away, I read a Greek comic book that
was probably a Disney Duck rip-off, and where all the ducks were black. The
name of the comic book and of the characters, all of which I've long since
forgotten, sounded Italian. Does anyne know what that might have been?
--
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Logic, my dear Zoe, merely enables one to be wrong with authority."
-----
> Since no one else mentioned it, I'll slip in here with the word "magma"
> which I'm guessing you were confusing with mantle. Magma is the molten
This is exactly what happened. Although I find this particular branch of
geology exciting, it's been some time since I last read anything in this area.
(Not counting Don's story, of course!)
> rock material under the earth's crust, from which igneous rock is formed
> by cooling. For what it's worth, I have no idea what either term is in
> Greek, so you are far ahead of me in your understanding.
Mantle = "mandyas"
Magma is actually a Greek word, indicating a soft material, like dough or wax,
that can be kneaded. It is derived from the verb "masso", which is probably
the root of the word "massage"!
> So in the spirit of Don's great story, here's a quandry my high school
> physics teacher once put to us and which some of you might answer: Did
> you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
> it is quite common?
Sounds like good old hydrogen oxide (i.e., water). Although it doesn't quite
have the properties of Don's Omnisolve(TM), it will dissolve almost anything,
even if it is in minute quantities.
GARY:
> ... that doesn't really address the
> appalling lack of interest the Disney comics market exhibits toward Mickey
> without apparently even giving him a chance.
I think that the answer is quite simple: Ducks had Carl Barks, while Mickey
didn't. Not that Gottfredson and the other Mickey artists were not brilliant,
but Barks hit on the right formula: most people can identify with Donald
(he has a family life, ambitions we can share with him, and works to make his
employer richer for 30 cents an hour). On the other hand, few people can
identify with someone like Mickey, who has an exotic adventure on every
alternate Tuesday, and excels in most human activities. (How many people do
you know that have travelled the world, can pilot an airplane, are former
members of the US secret service, have published their own newspaper, are
regularly consulted by the police, and have saved the world on more than one
occasion?)
BTW, when Barks came with the 30c/hour figure, was it as ludicrously low as it
sounds today? I suspect that back in the fifties, 30c/hour was either minumum
wages or pretty good money!
LAURA:
> Color comics leave less to the imagination. I truly believe
> that comic books done in black and white are much more valuable and
> enthralling than those done in color!
If removing the color from comics would leave more to the imagination, I
wonder what removing the pictures completely might accomplish. (Actually, I
believe that something like this has already been invented!)
SHAUN:
> First of all...$crooge's (original) top hat was not bought at a scottish
> rummage sale, his broadcloth coat was. Second, in my point of view, he
> left that hat underground with the Terries and Fermies in "Land Beneath
> the Ground". But that's just my opinion.
Not only have I forgotten my physics/geology, now I'm starting to forget my
Barks facts. :-( I wonder if the pills that Scrooge took in "Back to the
Klondike" are really available...
STEVEN:
> Is Donald Duck black? could be.
Once upon a time, in a childhood far, far away, I read a Greek comic book that
was probably a Disney Duck rip-off, and where all the ducks were black. The
name of the comic book and of the characters, all of which I've long since
forgotten, sounded Italian. Does anyne know what that might have been?
--
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Logic, my dear Zoe, merely enables one to be wrong with authority."
-----
Harry Fluks
Appearing characters in the Database
Message 188 -
1996-11-17 at 22:26:12
Last September, I raised the issue of including appearing characters
of a story in the Database. I made a list of characters that are "usual"
in a story, e.g. HDL (Donald's nephews) are usually in a Donald story,
hence they are not listed as appearing characters in every DD story in the
Database.
Per's reaction was:
> But what is the reason for not listing some appearances? To save our
> fingers from typing it in? To save disk storage? To save our eyes
> from reading long lists of appearing characters?
> I think it's easier to have no special rules like that.
And Jonathan's reaction:
> Please keep those rules, Harry! It would be insane to list EVERY Donald
> story where HDL appeared.
After consulting other indexers about this, I (in my role of database
administrator) decided to leave it to the indexer. If someone lists HDL
in a DD story, I won't remove that data. But I myself will keep using my
"rules".
--Harry.
of a story in the Database. I made a list of characters that are "usual"
in a story, e.g. HDL (Donald's nephews) are usually in a Donald story,
hence they are not listed as appearing characters in every DD story in the
Database.
Per's reaction was:
> But what is the reason for not listing some appearances? To save our
> fingers from typing it in? To save disk storage? To save our eyes
> from reading long lists of appearing characters?
> I think it's easier to have no special rules like that.
And Jonathan's reaction:
> Please keep those rules, Harry! It would be insane to list EVERY Donald
> story where HDL appeared.
After consulting other indexers about this, I (in my role of database
administrator) decided to leave it to the indexer. If someone lists HDL
in a DD story, I won't remove that data. But I myself will keep using my
"rules".
--Harry.
Harry Fluks
Comics in Brazil and Italy
Message 189 -
1996-11-17 at 22:42:35
ALIPIO (and Jonathan):
> The last PATO DONALD (Donald Duck) published:(# 2098)
> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
It's funny how people assume the *worst* stories are from their
own country. I've seen other people say that (Norwegian and Dutch).
A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
so I can't help determining its origin. But maybe a description in English
would help.
> Donald & Daisy A Joia H 9387
> Story by Frank Jonker, art by Bas Heymans. Dutch title: "Nepjuwelen."
I'm sure Frank Jonker would *love* to have a story of his in Brazilian!
Could you send him one (through me, or directly - I can give you his address
in private mail)?
MARCO:
> H 7418 by Jippes and Verhagen (who is he?)
Ben Verhagen is a Dutch Disney artist (he also does some non-Disney
comics). He learned to draw the Ducks by inking Jippes/Milton stories
in the 70s. In the 80s, he is the usual artist for the longer adventure stories
in Holland. Recently, he also *wrote* some of the stories he drew.
The story you mention, H 7418, is the most famous Jippes story. Gladstone
reprinted it in their first WDC (and again in #600). Jippes did the script and
the drawings, Verhagen only did the final inking. The story (text) was made in 1974,
but Jippes took 3 years to draw it: it was published near the end of 1977.
(And I only realised in 1979 that the story was NOT Barks...)
--Harry.
> The last PATO DONALD (Donald Duck) published:(# 2098)
> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
It's funny how people assume the *worst* stories are from their
own country. I've seen other people say that (Norwegian and Dutch).
A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
so I can't help determining its origin. But maybe a description in English
would help.
> Donald & Daisy A Joia H 9387
> Story by Frank Jonker, art by Bas Heymans. Dutch title: "Nepjuwelen."
I'm sure Frank Jonker would *love* to have a story of his in Brazilian!
Could you send him one (through me, or directly - I can give you his address
in private mail)?
MARCO:
> H 7418 by Jippes and Verhagen (who is he?)
Ben Verhagen is a Dutch Disney artist (he also does some non-Disney
comics). He learned to draw the Ducks by inking Jippes/Milton stories
in the 70s. In the 80s, he is the usual artist for the longer adventure stories
in Holland. Recently, he also *wrote* some of the stories he drew.
The story you mention, H 7418, is the most famous Jippes story. Gladstone
reprinted it in their first WDC (and again in #600). Jippes did the script and
the drawings, Verhagen only did the final inking. The story (text) was made in 1974,
but Jippes took 3 years to draw it: it was published near the end of 1977.
(And I only realised in 1979 that the story was NOT Barks...)
--Harry.
Christer Hanssen
(Nearly) universal solvent
Message 190 -
1996-11-18 at 01:38:51
Dave Rawson:
"So in the spirit of Don's great story, here's a quandry my high school
physics teacher once put to us and which some of you might answer: Did
you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
it is quite common? "
My physics are not very good, but one of the best solvent and according to
the perspective I think you pointed out my answer would be water, which is,
I think, the best solvent on earth. Wrong?
~Christer
"So in the spirit of Don's great story, here's a quandry my high school
physics teacher once put to us and which some of you might answer: Did
you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
it is quite common? "
My physics are not very good, but one of the best solvent and according to
the perspective I think you pointed out my answer would be water, which is,
I think, the best solvent on earth. Wrong?
~Christer
RMorris306
Recent Disney Digests
Message 191 -
1996-11-18 at 02:51:33
Hi again!
Wilmer Rivers wrote:
<< <Don Rosa writes: <<you can't suddenly insert something like a penguin-man
into a Duck comic anymore than you could do so into a Batman comic.>>
Er, **isn't** there "something like a penguin-man" in the Batman comics
already? :)>>
Yes...in fact, David seems to be paying tribute to some of these
species-blurring characters. DC's Penguin traditionally kept his name
concealed, but it was revealed in an obscure 1946 BATMAN newspaper strip as
being Oswald Chesterfield Cobblepot...DC's generally used that name since, as
did BATMAN RETURNS (a movie in which he was more like a penguin, physically,
than he'd ever been in the comics). One of David's Duck stories had a villain
named Colonel Cobblepot, affiliated (like the movie character) with a
circus...but at least he wasn't a talking penguin!
<<I suppose you mean that you couldn't do that in the Superman comics. Of
course, you **could** (if for some strange reason you wanted to), by blaming
it on Mr. Mxyzptlk. Come to think of it, back in the "Silver Age" when red
Kryptonite could change Superman into a half-ant, or whatever, a story with a
talking penguin would be just
another day in Metropolis. Hey, if a dog can fly in those stories, why can't
a penguin talk? Ah, the suspension of disbelief in the wonderful world of
funnybooks!>>
One series was practically a funny-animal scenario in itself, where Krypto
visited a planet (of Sirius, the Dog Star, of course) where dogs were the
dominant race, and there he joined the SCPA (Space Canine Patrol Agents)
consisting of such members as Tail Terrier, Hot Dog, Paw Pooch, and Chameleon
Collie... This was, not surprisingly, by Otto Binder, the same man who, as
head writer of the original Captain Marvel, had added such characters as Mr.
Mind (the evil mastermind who happened to be a talking alien worm) and Mr.
Tawky Tawny (a talking tiger who worked as a museum guide).
<<Anyway, if Brazil's Disney comics can have a parrot as their major hero,
they ought to be able to make use of a penguin, too. Just introduce him as
their friend from Patagonia. After all, a penguim **is** a type of
waterfowl, so he wouldn't be totally out of place in the Duck universe.>>
As I've noted, even before Jose Carioca, Donald and the boys had teamed
up with Yellow Beak! In a Barks story, yet!
<<However, maybe any penguin character would of necessity look pretty much
like either Chilly Willy or Tennessee Tuxedo and thus would violate copyright
protection.>>
Just point out that Pablo (and the stars of the even earlier Disney
cartoon "Peculiar Penguins") predated Willy and Tennessee...so they don't
infringe on him any more than Mooseface McElk infringed on Bullwinkle!
Daniel Kenny wrote:
<<Even if there's no hopes of seeing a Gottfredson library, could we see some
of the rarer gottfredson stories? So far, all the stories you've published
in WDC&S have appeared in "Mickey Mouse in Color". I don't know which ones
are
acceptable today, but there are af ew I'm dying to see. "MM sails for
treasure Isalnd" or "The great orphanage Robbery" and especially "Mystery of
the Hidden River". The last one should draw fan interest because it has Pete
in his first non-pegleg appearance and Sylvester Shyster's long overdue
return to the strip. Being that Mickey and Pete had changed their appearance
considerably by this time, I wonder what shyster would look like. Really
though, there's so much Gottfredson out there and it would be a shame to
reprint the same things over and over again.>>
What have I been saying for months? Enough with reprinting "Blaggard
Castle" for the third time...let's see some of the other stories for the
FIRST time!
Frank Stajano wrote:
<<What are good addresses to visit in Boston, MA, USA for a European looking
for American Disney comics? I'll be there next week and I'll have most of
Saturday free.>>
The Million-Year Picnic in Cambridge is good for back issues, as is New
England Comics (especially the original store in Quincy...the others aren't
as good. That store also runs a small publishing outfit, doing characters
like THE TICK, now an American cartoon series as well. Give me a call at
508-877-1645 or 617-342-9882 or 617-699- 1740, and I can perhaps show you
around?
Dave Rawson wrote:
<<For some reason which makes no sense even to me, I can't imagine using an
ape/person in a story, and so wouldn't. On the other hand, it just doesn't
bother me it doesn't make sense. And it doesn't bother me that someone else
would, or that someone else wouldn't. Or that some day I might change my
mind.>>
I don't think Barks ever used an ape/person in a story, but Gottfredson
did a number of times: Professors Ecks, Doublex and Triplex, Dr. Vultur, and,
I believe others.
$haun Knowler wrote:
<<First of all...$crooge's (original) top hat was not bought at a scottish
rummage sale, his broadcloth coat was. Second, in my point of view, he left
that hat underground with the Terries and Fermies in "Land Beneath the
Ground". But that's just my opinion.>>
And here *I* thought Flintheart Glomgold had *eaten* that hat after he'd
shrunk it with a mystical juice... (That was the first U$ story I ever read,
so it stuck in my mind.) Beyond a doubt, $crooge must have bought other hats
sometime, somewhere.
Jonathan Markoff wrote:
<<Glomgold lives in South Africa in the Barks (and Rosa) stories, and in his
first appearance (1956) has a Money Bin which looks like Scrooge's except it
has a pound sign rather than a dollar sign (South Africa used British
currency at that time). In the 1980s, perhaps because of political turmoil in
South Africa, many stories showed Glomgold living in Duckburg. >>
Glomgold *is* South African, but I distinctly recall a Gladstone story
in which he bought a house in Duckburg (where an old scientist who had
experimented with mutant plants or some such thing had once lived). No doubt
he still owns the house and uses it as a base to keep an eye on his rival,
Scrooge.
Christer Hanssen wrote:
<<If the story (with Disney animals in other times and places) is set in a
historical reference to other stories that's the way it must behave. The
story is the main point and the characters serves the story. So the hole
question depends on the premisses of the story. But I must add that personaly
I think that most of the stories, where the original persons are substituted
with Dusks, is very boring and without any good plot since the Duck's
personality often don't accord to the original person and the hole thing is
just yet another story that serves the mass production.>>
Well, "Mickey's Christmas Carol" worked, at least with regard to the main
character (despite the title, not Mickey but Scrooge McDuck as Ebenezer
Scrooge), since Barks himself admitted his character was named and partly
based on Dickens'. But Donald was largely wasted (if inevitable) as
Ebenezer's nephew, and Mickey was never as meek as Bob Cratchit. "The Prince
and the Pauper" was probably better adapted with Mickey Mouse, not in the
movie that used the name, but in Gottfredson's "The Monarch of Medioka."
Rich Morrissey
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #254
******************************************
Wilmer Rivers wrote:
<< <Don Rosa writes: <<you can't suddenly insert something like a penguin-man
into a Duck comic anymore than you could do so into a Batman comic.>>
Er, **isn't** there "something like a penguin-man" in the Batman comics
already? :)>>
Yes...in fact, David seems to be paying tribute to some of these
species-blurring characters. DC's Penguin traditionally kept his name
concealed, but it was revealed in an obscure 1946 BATMAN newspaper strip as
being Oswald Chesterfield Cobblepot...DC's generally used that name since, as
did BATMAN RETURNS (a movie in which he was more like a penguin, physically,
than he'd ever been in the comics). One of David's Duck stories had a villain
named Colonel Cobblepot, affiliated (like the movie character) with a
circus...but at least he wasn't a talking penguin!
<<I suppose you mean that you couldn't do that in the Superman comics. Of
course, you **could** (if for some strange reason you wanted to), by blaming
it on Mr. Mxyzptlk. Come to think of it, back in the "Silver Age" when red
Kryptonite could change Superman into a half-ant, or whatever, a story with a
talking penguin would be just
another day in Metropolis. Hey, if a dog can fly in those stories, why can't
a penguin talk? Ah, the suspension of disbelief in the wonderful world of
funnybooks!>>
One series was practically a funny-animal scenario in itself, where Krypto
visited a planet (of Sirius, the Dog Star, of course) where dogs were the
dominant race, and there he joined the SCPA (Space Canine Patrol Agents)
consisting of such members as Tail Terrier, Hot Dog, Paw Pooch, and Chameleon
Collie... This was, not surprisingly, by Otto Binder, the same man who, as
head writer of the original Captain Marvel, had added such characters as Mr.
Mind (the evil mastermind who happened to be a talking alien worm) and Mr.
Tawky Tawny (a talking tiger who worked as a museum guide).
<<Anyway, if Brazil's Disney comics can have a parrot as their major hero,
they ought to be able to make use of a penguin, too. Just introduce him as
their friend from Patagonia. After all, a penguim **is** a type of
waterfowl, so he wouldn't be totally out of place in the Duck universe.>>
As I've noted, even before Jose Carioca, Donald and the boys had teamed
up with Yellow Beak! In a Barks story, yet!
<<However, maybe any penguin character would of necessity look pretty much
like either Chilly Willy or Tennessee Tuxedo and thus would violate copyright
protection.>>
Just point out that Pablo (and the stars of the even earlier Disney
cartoon "Peculiar Penguins") predated Willy and Tennessee...so they don't
infringe on him any more than Mooseface McElk infringed on Bullwinkle!
Daniel Kenny wrote:
<<Even if there's no hopes of seeing a Gottfredson library, could we see some
of the rarer gottfredson stories? So far, all the stories you've published
in WDC&S have appeared in "Mickey Mouse in Color". I don't know which ones
are
acceptable today, but there are af ew I'm dying to see. "MM sails for
treasure Isalnd" or "The great orphanage Robbery" and especially "Mystery of
the Hidden River". The last one should draw fan interest because it has Pete
in his first non-pegleg appearance and Sylvester Shyster's long overdue
return to the strip. Being that Mickey and Pete had changed their appearance
considerably by this time, I wonder what shyster would look like. Really
though, there's so much Gottfredson out there and it would be a shame to
reprint the same things over and over again.>>
What have I been saying for months? Enough with reprinting "Blaggard
Castle" for the third time...let's see some of the other stories for the
FIRST time!
Frank Stajano wrote:
<<What are good addresses to visit in Boston, MA, USA for a European looking
for American Disney comics? I'll be there next week and I'll have most of
Saturday free.>>
The Million-Year Picnic in Cambridge is good for back issues, as is New
England Comics (especially the original store in Quincy...the others aren't
as good. That store also runs a small publishing outfit, doing characters
like THE TICK, now an American cartoon series as well. Give me a call at
508-877-1645 or 617-342-9882 or 617-699- 1740, and I can perhaps show you
around?
Dave Rawson wrote:
<<For some reason which makes no sense even to me, I can't imagine using an
ape/person in a story, and so wouldn't. On the other hand, it just doesn't
bother me it doesn't make sense. And it doesn't bother me that someone else
would, or that someone else wouldn't. Or that some day I might change my
mind.>>
I don't think Barks ever used an ape/person in a story, but Gottfredson
did a number of times: Professors Ecks, Doublex and Triplex, Dr. Vultur, and,
I believe others.
$haun Knowler wrote:
<<First of all...$crooge's (original) top hat was not bought at a scottish
rummage sale, his broadcloth coat was. Second, in my point of view, he left
that hat underground with the Terries and Fermies in "Land Beneath the
Ground". But that's just my opinion.>>
And here *I* thought Flintheart Glomgold had *eaten* that hat after he'd
shrunk it with a mystical juice... (That was the first U$ story I ever read,
so it stuck in my mind.) Beyond a doubt, $crooge must have bought other hats
sometime, somewhere.
Jonathan Markoff wrote:
<<Glomgold lives in South Africa in the Barks (and Rosa) stories, and in his
first appearance (1956) has a Money Bin which looks like Scrooge's except it
has a pound sign rather than a dollar sign (South Africa used British
currency at that time). In the 1980s, perhaps because of political turmoil in
South Africa, many stories showed Glomgold living in Duckburg. >>
Glomgold *is* South African, but I distinctly recall a Gladstone story
in which he bought a house in Duckburg (where an old scientist who had
experimented with mutant plants or some such thing had once lived). No doubt
he still owns the house and uses it as a base to keep an eye on his rival,
Scrooge.
Christer Hanssen wrote:
<<If the story (with Disney animals in other times and places) is set in a
historical reference to other stories that's the way it must behave. The
story is the main point and the characters serves the story. So the hole
question depends on the premisses of the story. But I must add that personaly
I think that most of the stories, where the original persons are substituted
with Dusks, is very boring and without any good plot since the Duck's
personality often don't accord to the original person and the hole thing is
just yet another story that serves the mass production.>>
Well, "Mickey's Christmas Carol" worked, at least with regard to the main
character (despite the title, not Mickey but Scrooge McDuck as Ebenezer
Scrooge), since Barks himself admitted his character was named and partly
based on Dickens'. But Donald was largely wasted (if inevitable) as
Ebenezer's nephew, and Mickey was never as meek as Bob Cratchit. "The Prince
and the Pauper" was probably better adapted with Mickey Mouse, not in the
movie that used the name, but in Gottfredson's "The Monarch of Medioka."
Rich Morrissey
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V96 Issue #254
******************************************
Alipio D'Oliveira Coelho
Disney comics Digest V96 #254
Message 192 -
1996-11-18 at 13:24:59
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 22:42:35 +-200
>From: Harry Fluks <(Email removed)>
>To: "(Email removed)" <(Email removed)>
>Subject: Comics in Brazil and Italy
>
>ALIPIO (and Jonathan):
>> The last PATO DONALD (Donald Duck) published:(# 2098)
>> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
>> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
>> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
>
>It's funny how people assume the *worst* stories are from their
>own country. I've seen other people say that (Norwegian and Dutch).
>A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
>so I can't help determining its origin. But maybe a description in English
>would help.
>
>> Donald & Daisy A Joia H 9387
>> Story by Frank Jonker, art by Bas Heymans. Dutch title: "Nepjuwelen."
>
>I'm sure Frank Jonker would *love* to have a story of his in Brazilian!
>Could you send him one (through me, or directly - I can give you his address
>in private mail)?
It will be a pleasure send you and to Frank Jonker the comics. So
you can see Gyro *Ugliest* Gearloose. Please, send me your address and
Frank's to my e-mail ((Email removed)). Alipio
>From: Harry Fluks <(Email removed)>
>To: "(Email removed)" <(Email removed)>
>Subject: Comics in Brazil and Italy
>
>ALIPIO (and Jonathan):
>> The last PATO DONALD (Donald Duck) published:(# 2098)
>> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
>> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
>> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
>
>It's funny how people assume the *worst* stories are from their
>own country. I've seen other people say that (Norwegian and Dutch).
>A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
>so I can't help determining its origin. But maybe a description in English
>would help.
>
>> Donald & Daisy A Joia H 9387
>> Story by Frank Jonker, art by Bas Heymans. Dutch title: "Nepjuwelen."
>
>I'm sure Frank Jonker would *love* to have a story of his in Brazilian!
>Could you send him one (through me, or directly - I can give you his address
>in private mail)?
It will be a pleasure send you and to Frank Jonker the comics. So
you can see Gyro *Ugliest* Gearloose. Please, send me your address and
Frank's to my e-mail ((Email removed)). Alipio
Fredrik Ekman
comic book penguins
Message 193 -
1996-11-18 at 15:42:47
Actually, there has been a Disney story with a human penguin, albeit a
Mickey story. Lots of human penguins, even. It was drawn by Scarpa and
published in Sweden in some issue of KAP. It's at my parents' home
unfortunately, and not accessible to me before Christmas. I have a vague
recollection, however, that there was some special reason why these
penguins (who lived near the North Pole) were intelligent. Quite a good
story, but far too long, as are most of the Italian ones.
/F
Mickey story. Lots of human penguins, even. It was drawn by Scarpa and
published in Sweden in some issue of KAP. It's at my parents' home
unfortunately, and not accessible to me before Christmas. I have a vague
recollection, however, that there was some special reason why these
penguins (who lived near the North Pole) were intelligent. Quite a good
story, but far too long, as are most of the Italian ones.
/F
Marco Barlotti
O capacete Intocavel
Message 194 -
1996-11-18 at 16:24:08
ALIPIO, JONATHAN, HARRY:
> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
>
>A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
>so I can't help determining its origin.
The database is not complete bacause Frank (blame on him!) has not
implemented yet for Italian stories the feature which lists the appearing
characters.
The database needs Fossati's data in "Harry format", so it depends on
Frank's work. In my own private version (which is in the original "Fossati
format") I do have the list of appearing characters, so I can give you the
relevant information.
In fact, a story with code "1025" can only be I-1025, which means it comes
from "Topolino" issue #1025 of 20th July 1975. Since Gyro appears in it, it
can only be <Paperino e il casco respingente> ("Donald and the repelling
helmet"; shouldn't we learn to ALWAYS give the English translation?). Script
by Cimino, art by Cavazzano (in his "Techno" period, I guess). It was
reprinted in CWDNS 44 and more recently in CWDNS 226. The Gyro drawn by
Cavazzano is in fact a little peculiar, and somehow resembles the character
as it appears in some Brazilian stories, whence Alipio was not so wrong
after all...
Marco
> Donald O Capacete Intocavel 1025
> (This story have the ugliest Gyro G. I ever saw! I don't
> know from wich country it is, but I think it is from Brazil)
>
>A story with code "1025" and including Gyro is unknown in the database
>so I can't help determining its origin.
The database is not complete bacause Frank (blame on him!) has not
implemented yet for Italian stories the feature which lists the appearing
characters.
The database needs Fossati's data in "Harry format", so it depends on
Frank's work. In my own private version (which is in the original "Fossati
format") I do have the list of appearing characters, so I can give you the
relevant information.
In fact, a story with code "1025" can only be I-1025, which means it comes
from "Topolino" issue #1025 of 20th July 1975. Since Gyro appears in it, it
can only be <Paperino e il casco respingente> ("Donald and the repelling
helmet"; shouldn't we learn to ALWAYS give the English translation?). Script
by Cimino, art by Cavazzano (in his "Techno" period, I guess). It was
reprinted in CWDNS 44 and more recently in CWDNS 226. The Gyro drawn by
Cavazzano is in fact a little peculiar, and somehow resembles the character
as it appears in some Brazilian stories, whence Alipio was not so wrong
after all...
Marco
Marco Barlotti
Casablanca, solvents, translations.
Message 195 -
1996-11-18 at 16:26:39
DAVE, OLE, ...
> A friend of mine claimed [...] it was done in gray tones, which is
> confirmed by a few panels in Topolino #2000.
In fact, the story was drawn in gray tones to give the flavour of an old b/w
movie. It appeared in "Topolino" #1657 (30th August 1987), 52 pages. You
certainly remember that M. Curtiz's original film was in black and white...
DAVE:
> Did
>you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
>it is quite common?
Just to try a guess: is that <time> ?
KRITON:
>
>You're right. The original balloon said: "No! There must be some mistake!
>This can't be happening to *me*!
>
So this somehow overrides my hypothesis on the Evil Translator not looking
into her dictionary. Surely THIS ballon she was able to translate! Thus she
added the pun on Don Rosa thinking to be SMARTER than the author... she
tried to give us readers a BETTER dialogue...
(By the way, all ye Italian friends on this list... are you leaving me
alone in my battle against the Evil Translator? Are you happy with the
"translations" you find in "Zio Paperone"? Do you read "ZP" at all? Please
do say something! Am I being too much hard on this matter? Tell me!)
Marco
> A friend of mine claimed [...] it was done in gray tones, which is
> confirmed by a few panels in Topolino #2000.
In fact, the story was drawn in gray tones to give the flavour of an old b/w
movie. It appeared in "Topolino" #1657 (30th August 1987), 52 pages. You
certainly remember that M. Curtiz's original film was in black and white...
DAVE:
> Did
>you know there really does exist a (nearly) universal solvent and that
>it is quite common?
Just to try a guess: is that <time> ?
KRITON:
>
>You're right. The original balloon said: "No! There must be some mistake!
>This can't be happening to *me*!
>
So this somehow overrides my hypothesis on the Evil Translator not looking
into her dictionary. Surely THIS ballon she was able to translate! Thus she
added the pun on Don Rosa thinking to be SMARTER than the author... she
tried to give us readers a BETTER dialogue...
(By the way, all ye Italian friends on this list... are you leaving me
alone in my battle against the Evil Translator? Are you happy with the
"translations" you find in "Zio Paperone"? Do you read "ZP" at all? Please
do say something! Am I being too much hard on this matter? Tell me!)
Marco