Keskustelujen arkisto

Per writes:
> The Internet Movie Database <http://www.imdb.com> mentions that
> ("our") Jack Hannah was chosen by the magazine as one of the 50 most
> beautiful people in the world in 1996. Is that really true, or has
> someone confused him with some other Jack Hannah?

What magazine is this: "People"? They have some such list every
year, and the overwhelming majority of winners are actors and
actresses on television soap operas. So it's quite likely some Jack
Hannah who acts in daytime TV instead. Just my guess...

Wilmer Rivers

On Jan 10, 4:54pm, Marco Barlotti wrote:

> >Did other-language-than-English editions use the local version
> >of "harpy," by the way?
> >
> Yes, in Italy it was always <arpie> since the first appearance
> of the story in "Topolino" 136 (April 10th, 1956)
>
Thank you for answering my question! That's one more argument
for restoring "harpy" to the English version (i.e., that not
even foreigners were fooled by "Larkie"). It's not much of an
argument, though: Disney has different standards for the home,
English-speaking market and will refuse to allow stories to
be reprinted in the US that are routinely reprinted elsewhere.

Anyway, I checked Gladstone's recent album reprint of U$ #12,
and the "Larkies" were still Larkies. However...there was an
essay along with the story in which Geoffrey Blum explained
the whole Larkie/harpy background. Plus, a couple of Barks's
original panels, redrawn for the original published version
(because somebody apparently objected to the Larkies acting
"insanely") were restored to the story, with the redrawn
panels printed separately with Blum's essay.

Several thoughts come to mind...

1. Barks originally wrote "harpies," so that was his intent as
creator, author, and artist.

2. A harpy is a genuine creature from Greek mythology, and Barks
was following the myth reasonably closely. If comics have any
educational value at all, the change to "Larkie" was diseducational.

3. The change was pretty stupid. Nobody would think of a
streetwalker in connection with a harpy from Greek mythology,
certainly not by the intended audience in the 1950s and
certainly not now by anyone.

4. Thanks to printing Blum's essay with the story, everybody
who reads it will know that the word was originally harpy but
was changed to larkie at the behest of some editor who thought
it might be construed as slang for a prostitute. The story has
become famous for that reason. Instead of making sure that some
microscopic percentage of the readers would not think of a
prostitute when reading that story, the change to "larkie"
has guaranteed that 100% of them will.

5. Restoring the original panels that Barks drew (also changed
way back when for stupid reasons) shows that the initial U$ #12
version of the story is not considered off-limits to tinkering
in order to restore Barks's creative intent. If the original
panels of insane "larkies" can be put back in, so can the
original name of "harpies."

Gladstone! Forty-plus years of stupidity are enough! Next
time around, change it to harpies! Puh-lease!

--Dwight Decker

SHAUN:

>GLADSTONE:
>In the story listings for the WDC&S albums that you print in various
>comics and other albums, you claim that in the story "Donald Tames His
>Temper" was Barks' first use of Daisy...but...she was used in an even
>earlier story, called "The Mighty Trapper".

"Oops" on us. But Michael Barrier - whose book, Carl Barks and the Art of
the Comic Book, is one of our main references - must share that "oops". Our
story listing is based on the information in that book, and in this case
that information was in error, and we carried it along.

Gary

****************************
"Frogs? I don't get it."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladstone on the Web: http://www.hamlco.com/bhc/
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Didier Ghez Said

>>That might include in the future the sign on $crooge's money bin
>>that might become a $ sign instead of the current F sign.
>>And here is my question to you all: Do you think this is a good
>>idea ? Don't you think this would spoil the feeling that
>>readers have that the characters are part of their country ?
>>What would you have felt as a kid ? What would you feel now ?

Well as a UK reader , I get the Gladstone versions and we get the $ symbol
everywhere . IMO Scrooge is American and having him with pound signs would
change who he is

Best Wishes

Colin

Hi! (I am alive!).

DON ROSA:
Last issue of Almanaque do Pato Donald (DD Almanac), there is a
story drawn by Don Rosa: * O Verdadeiro Super-Heroi * (The Real Superhero)-
code D91076; actually the original title in English is Super Snooper Strikes
Again.
Unfortunately, no credits are printed.
(DON: if you wanted a issue, just send me your snail mail).

ALL:
Portuguese is the oficial language in Brazil. There are about
200,000,000 people in the World who speaks Portuguese; 160,000,000 lives in
Brazil. On 1989-1990, EDITORA ABRIL try to stimulate people learn English,
and printed a few Disney Comics in English.

The first set of DC (5 issues)are published from Feb/89 to
August/89; most stories foreingners:
1)Feb/89= O Pato Donald # 1 (DD #1): D9034, D8430,KFS, D7228,
S791359F, S85263, *B860166* (This story - *Crowed Contest* , with Daisy,
Donald and Gladstone, is the only one with a B code. Is it from Brazil?).
2) March/89= Mickey #1: W MM 157, W MM 148, W MM 182, S75162, WR-SW 42
3) June/89= Tio Patinhas # 1 (U$ #1):D4616, S82004,D4236,D6984
4) July/89= Margarida # 1 (Daisy #1): W/WDC 139, W/WDCD 25, W/DD 92,
W/WDCD 15, W/WDD 28, W/DD 226, WR/WDCD
5) August/89= Pato Donald # 2 (DD #2): D 8294, D 5258, D 6886, D 3624,
D 7916.

The second set are published monthly, in 1990, from january to
december, 12 issues, with the following titles:
#1- Pato Donald (DD); #2- ? (I couldn't find this issue, I think it
is Mickey); #3- Margarida (Daisy); #4- Tio Patinhas (U$); #5- Professor
Pardal (Gyro Gearloose); #6- Duck Tales (DT); #7- Pateta (Goofy); #8-
Escoteiros Mirins (Junior Woodchucks); #9- Os Metralhas (Beagle Boys); #10-
Donald e Margarida (Donald and Daisy); #11- Mickey e Pateta (Mickey and
Goofy); # 12- Tio Patinhas (U$).
No more issues are published since then; although the main Disney
character in Brazil is Joe Carioca (Ze' Carioca), there is not a single
issue (or story) with him.
[Arthur: I am sending one issue of each to you. And now that you are
famous, I hope you will send me a signed photograph, a baseball cap and
stickers ;-) ].
Alipio ((Email removed))

OLE:
I'm glad you sorta liked "Vigilante of Pizen Bluff". I think my intention
with that particular story was not so much to tell a story with a clever
twist-ending like I might on another occasion, but to tell a rip-snortin'
$crooge western tale. I had just returned from Italy where many readers had
told me how much they loved seeing $crooge as a cowboy -- you know how much
Italians (and lots of other Europeans) love the cowboys -- so much more than
modern American audiences. And I felt inspired to put $crooge back into his
buckskins. But, coincidentally, it was also time to do another "Lo$"
addition, AND it was this portion of his life that I had knowingly skipped
during those original 12 chapters for the very reason that at THAT time I
already had had too much cowboy-$crooge and it was time to move on to
another look.
As to $crooge being in North Platte (on the cattle trails of the old west)
in 1888, you're absolutely right! He was not. That was NOT in my script! The
"Not-evil-but-very-careless-translator" strikes again! My script had it as
1882 which is exactly the years when I already had said $crooge was on the
cattle trails, and it is exactly the year and place that someone suggested
the idea of a Wild West Show to Bill Cody and where the very first one in
history took place. Actually, you're lucky there were things in your
Euro-issue like the "Arizona 1890" caption in that scrap book. I wrote all
such labels onto the original art, and even had Todd Klein letter GORGEOUS
gay-90s western style posters and handbills, but this stuff is all
whited-out when the art gets to Denmark. Sometimes the labels are added back
correctly by the translators, sometimes they are redone with poor lettering
(as in the posters in your edition), and sometimes they are left out
altogether resulting in blank signs and word-balloons. Why do they white out
something that they intend the translators to simply add back exactly as I
had them originally, such as ALL the trunk stickers and scrapbook labels in
that splash panel in that story? Because Egmont thinks these stories might
be ordered by some publisher in a place like Greece or Arabia where the
language is so different that changes MUST be made. Why doesn't Egmont leave
all these nicely done signs and posters so that the 95% of the publishers
who could use them CAN use them, and let the other 5% do their own deleting?
This is one of those corporate matters that I really have no answer to. It
makes no sense to me, but it's not something that is any of my affair.
However, nowadays I see that Gladstone gets copies of my original pages
BEFORE any deletions are made by Egmont, so we in America WILL see all of my
labels and Todd Klein's loverly western posters. That is, unless Disney bans
the whole story, but I don't recall showing the Indian scratching himself
with a flea-infested prune, so I think we're okay.
In fact, the historical references in that story are the MOST accurate of
any I have ever done! Everybody in that story was out west in 1890. I made
sure P.T.Barnum was on a western tour and that Buffalo Bill was back from
Europe, and that the "mysterious Indian" was making Wild West show
appearances, and that "Old Jacob" was, indeed, making his last trip to his
mine for gold. I don't know where the Daltons really were in 1890, but at
least they were still alive, and I even went to some trouble to use the
correct names and looks and even clothing preferences for each. It's ALL
100% accurate! Now, why do I go to such pains when all the readers assume
it's all made-up? I dunno -- just cause it's fun to do it that way.
And I want to make sure that you knew that Annie Oakley was a real person
who looked and acted just as I showed her (minus the black nose). Another
European reader told me he had always been sure she was a fictional
character from the musical you mention.
And why make a reference to "The Magnificent Seven" when the parallels were
not precisely the same? Why do the parallels need to be *precisely* the
same? I don't understand your point. It was just that I had seven (well,
only six, but this was the gag) bigger-than-life western heroes riding off
to deal mercilessly with the outlaws. Seemed like an obvious reference to me.

PER:
No, of course "our" Jack Hannah would not be one of the 50 people named in a
PEOPLE magazine poll. No one in America knows his name but Disney animation
buffs and a few comic collectors. The Jack Hannah in that poll is a buffoon
who makes videos about animals. He poses as a director of the Columbus Zoo,
though that seems doubtful since he seems to be a comedian, sorta like Pat
Paulsen, who knows very little about his subject. He's made many appearances
on the David Letterman show over the years, and is pretty funny... but not
very "beautiful".

Don: So we get no more prune jokes? Since prunes are consided a well known
bathroom type humor? You know, maybe we should send the Disney censors a
copy of Dark Horse and Sumpco's Comic Book #1, so they can see really
offensive bathroom humor. I don't get it...

Dwight: I don't see why the big hubub about Harpies and Larkies. It seems
to me that <if> Harpies is a slang word for prostitutes, then either Cobb or
Craig should have blue penciled it out. If they hadn't, then that issue
would fetch more in the back market bins, because it would have been in
Seductiuon of the Innocent. And if Disney went wild over prunes, they'd
certainly go wild over Scrooge and the boys being captured by prostitues.
Anyone know if the word was slang back then?
Also (to me), there's vast difference in a regular newstand comic for regular
and casual readers and $9 + books for collectors.

Acclaim: Over in the usenet group Rec.arts.comics.misc; Heidi McDonald
(Disney Adventures comics editor) confirmed that Acclaim has the liscence
for contemporary Disney comics. No hint as to format, or stars, or even if
it's to be distributed via newstand. Marvel has not yet released their last
two Disney Comics Hits (16 & 17). #15 contained Toy Story stories.

Mickey's comic strip is celebrating it's birthday Monday. It will be 67
years old. I haven't seen it in years. Is Jim Engel still doing some of it?

Steven Rowe

GUARDIANS OF THE LOST LIBRARY:

Marco, et all: The added thought ballon is in the 3rd panel of the 16th story
page, in Venice.
After years of reading Lucky Luke, I wasn't surprised to see a dog having
more elaborate thoughts than "Let go!" or "Food!". But, as I stated earlier
and as Didier bears out, these thoughts don't make much sense. My best guess
is that Snoozy is reluctant because the monk speaks of "the evil nose"?

GOLDEN FLEECE:

In France too, the larkies have always been called harpies. At least one
thing we got right from the start ! :-)

TRANSLATION :

About the translation of the characters' names: I'd say we should remain in
continuity with what already exists, i.e. find *good* french names for new
characters whose name is obviously a pun in english. If Gladstone was
introduced nowadays, I still think "Gontran Bonheur" would be a fitting name;
a french equivalence is needed for such english names.
OTHO, names like Cornelius Coot shouldn't be translated: The name sounds
right for an heroic pionner, even to young french readers.

Laurent