Text item: Text_1
Hi Everybody.
On the matter of Mickey, his lack of comics success is still, in my
>opinion, due fundamentally to the character never having had his own
Carl
>Barks. Sure, Gottfredson and Murry did some great Mickey stuff, but no
>one ever came forward to give the Mouse the focused creative vision
in
>comics that Barks gave the ducks.
Sorry if I'm interfering with a private discussion, but I must say I
disagree.
All though it's true, that Murry, Moores and others also did other
stories like Little Bad Wolf, DD and Scamp I consider Murry to be one
of the greatest Mickey Mouse writers ever. Together with the story
writer (Sorry no names, I don't have the Disney Comics Database handy)
Murry created some of the best and most memorable storeys that sure
got me caught right in the Mickey.
In Denmark - Yes I'm fortunate enough to live in part of the Egmont
Paradise - The Mickey Mouse stories allways had a big fan crowd.
Our minister of social affairs was quoted, when giving a speech to
Barks at Donalds 60 years aniversary in Denmark, that she had allways
been a fan of Mickey over Donald.
As I mentioned earlier I grew up with the Murry mouse, so that's maby
therefore I prefer him to Gottfredsons. I find his drawing style odd,
and maby his storys are a bit too long. On the other hand I loved
Murrys version of the "Bar None Ranch" - one of the few I also read in
the original version.
Maby the problem in the US of A is that there are no young Disney fans
- The reason why Gladstone went into business was that a lot of the
old fans from the fifties and sixties wanted to reread Barks, so it's
more a (Barks)fanzine than a "Walt Disney Comics and Stories". - or am
I completely wrong ;^)
TO DAVID GERSTEIN:
I find the few Idgit and Dan stories from the sixties good. I don't
think the original Gotfredson stories ever got published here, so
there is no nostalgia about beeing used to see Pete in the story. Just
like Barks invented several bad guys to threaten Uncle Scrooge, I find
it refreshing to have different bad guys around Mickey.
But you're absolute right - If you want to do something with Dan and
Idgit you need a good story; and there *is* nothing political correct
about a cigar smoking midget.
TO PER STARBAECK:
How many members are there on this list? - and how many from each
country?
Could you give us Just the rough numbers.
And Finally:
I *must* give big a applaud to Arthur de Wolf and -Rich (xephyr)
My WWW conection just went up again after a long down perion - and
behold!
the first thing I see is that Per Starbaeck added links to:
http://www.pi.net/~wolfman and
http://www.jps.net/xephyr/rich/disney.html
Tons of great stuff there! I didn't know there was a Yen Sid. (It's
the name of the Sorcerer in Fantasia "The Sorcerer's Apprentice". Try
spelling it backwards.)
Don't you guys do anything but writing HTML ??
"Science has proved it: You *can* be a DUCK fan without taking the
Mickey out of it!"
/Ivar Cavanagh
Author
Topic: 199708
(305 messages)
Ivar Cavanagh
(No subject)
Message 271 -
1997-08-28 at 12:52:30
Eirik Krogh Visted
Barks covers
Message 272 -
1997-08-28 at 16:58:04
Gladstone claims that the CBLiC Comics & Stories is supposed to contain "a
large percentage" of Barks' covers. So far, I've read over half the albums,
and I haven't seen a single cover. Where are they ?
Eirik Krogh Visted
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V97 Issue #182
******************************************
large percentage" of Barks' covers. So far, I've read over half the albums,
and I haven't seen a single cover. Where are they ?
Eirik Krogh Visted
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V97 Issue #182
******************************************
Rob Gibson
Cubic acre
Message 273 -
1997-08-28 at 17:12:34
A dictionary is a wonderful reference document for useful information,
in some ways not unlike the Junior Woodchucks' Guidebook.
"Cubic:1.a.having the shape of a cube. b.having a shape approximating a
cube. 2.a. having three dimensions. b. having a volume equal to a cube
whose edge is of a stated length: a cubic foot 3.math. of the third
order, power or degree 4.Isometric -noun. math. a cubic expression,
curve or equation. ..."
-American Heritage Dictionary
Applying these definitions to the phrase "cubic acre", we have...
1.a. An acre having the shape of a cube.
example: a cube shaped asteroid(possibly inhabited by
savages) having a surface area of one acre.
1.b. See 1.a.
2.a. An acre in three dimensions.
Example: a cube whose sides each contain one acre.
2.b. An acre as a unit of length/edge of a cube.
3. An acre to the third power.
4. An acre as an isometric equation.
Imnsho, if Uncle Carl used the term "cubic acre" to refer to a unit of
measure in three dimensions then he was within the bounds of correct
english usage (by definition 2a above).
in some ways not unlike the Junior Woodchucks' Guidebook.
"Cubic:1.a.having the shape of a cube. b.having a shape approximating a
cube. 2.a. having three dimensions. b. having a volume equal to a cube
whose edge is of a stated length: a cubic foot 3.math. of the third
order, power or degree 4.Isometric -noun. math. a cubic expression,
curve or equation. ..."
-American Heritage Dictionary
Applying these definitions to the phrase "cubic acre", we have...
1.a. An acre having the shape of a cube.
example: a cube shaped asteroid(possibly inhabited by
savages) having a surface area of one acre.
1.b. See 1.a.
2.a. An acre in three dimensions.
Example: a cube whose sides each contain one acre.
2.b. An acre as a unit of length/edge of a cube.
3. An acre to the third power.
4. An acre as an isometric equation.
Imnsho, if Uncle Carl used the term "cubic acre" to refer to a unit of
measure in three dimensions then he was within the bounds of correct
english usage (by definition 2a above).
Shaun Craill
Introducktion
Message 274 -
1997-08-28 at 18:51:54
In V97 #181 Francois writes:
>And no stories in
>the DcD are credited to Shaun Craill...
I got a message from Harry today to say that the details should now be
entered.
>There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
>but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
>I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
>more in the future...time and editors willing.
>--Dwight Decker
Ditto!
A few people have suggested that I should write an introducktion so here it
is.
Name: Shaun Craill
Where: 26 Pickwick Parade, Howick, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND.
Tel: +64 9 5353 707
Fax: +64 9 5353 708
e-mail: (Email removed)
The script writing work I do for Egmont is more of a hobby than an income
earner. My 'real' job is as an industrial designer, which makes my drawing
style too detailed and precise. My characters tend to look static and frozen
and there's nothing I can do about it. In industrial design I have a
particular interest in ergonomics and transport design. I worked for several
years for John Britten in Christchurch, New Zealand, on the Britten V-1000
superbike project (fastest superbike in the world, holder of 4 world land
speed records, top speed clocked on the Daytona banking 305km/h). While
there also worked on prototype designs for Indian motorcycles who were
planning to relaunch the marque in the USA. Please note that this was not
the Baughman bike! Unfortunately after 18 months work this contract
foundered (nobodies fault, act of God) and none of the work will probably
ever see the light of day :-(.
I usually spend too much time on the scribbles I do for Egmont, but that's
because I don't have any control over the final artwork and I want to
influence the way the artist assigned to the story actually 'sees' the story.
I get a real kick out of seeing my rough and ready sketches actually used by
artists as the basis for their work. Usually any changes made are for the
better.
At the moment I'm slotted into doing 6 pager stories for Egmont. 6 pagers
are hard! It's too short to have any new characters developed properly or to
have more than one major geographic movement for the characters, and it's far
too long to stretch out something suitable for a one page gag. You have to
have the conflict situation fully defined by the end of page 2, a crisis or
two by the end of page 4, and the conflict situation fully resolved by the
end of page 6. Any major action usually has to wind down and stop by the end
of page 5. Sometimes the last page gets a little crammed to fit in the
conflict resolution in the space available.
I'm a real Don Rosa fan. His first story for Gladstone "The Son of the Sun"
inspired me to give Disney Comics a go. I thought if he can do it, why not
give it a try myself? I was privileged enough to meet Don and Anne at their
lovely country home in 1993 and I got quite an insight into the way he works
and some of the influences that pervade his stories. I want a studio like
his one! I count myself extremely privileged to have read the synopsis for
Lo$ part 10 during my visit, even before Byron Erikson! If I remember
correctly Don said that I was the third person to have read it after himself
and Anne.
As a youngster I learnt to read on Carl Barks stories and as a result when I
first went to school I could already read. The first early reader 'Janet and
John' books they gave us were SO boring by comparison! Where were the Beagle
Boys and Scrooge's money bin? I spent the first year at school staring out
the window day dreaming about Duckburg and consequently was placed in a
remedial reading class! I can still remember the day at Kindergarten when I
was pasting a cut out picture of Scrooge from a Barks story into a scrap book
when I came to the realisation that somebody somewhere was actually thinking
up and drawing these stories for a living! Definetly a turning point in my
life. I don't know which story the pic came from, but it was a squarish pic
with Scrooge looking very worried hurrying along a darkened street. He was
running around a street corner with a street lamp providing stark shadowing.
I seem to remember he was either running into or out of danger. If anyone
can provide a clue about the story I would be grateful. It was a Malaysian
reprint, pre 1970, and I seem to remember that Scrooge's coat was blue or
green (not unusual for the Malaysian reprints). Someone else had already cut
up most of the comic and I was trying to reassemble the story. The ending
had vanished and I remember worrying for several days about how Scrooge was
going to get out of danger. I tried thinking up story endings of my own and
I'm sure this was when I started on my present path.
No doubt the other kid with the scissors is now working in Burbank in the
editorial dept;-)
>And no stories in
>the DcD are credited to Shaun Craill...
I got a message from Harry today to say that the details should now be
entered.
>There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
>but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
>I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
>more in the future...time and editors willing.
>--Dwight Decker
Ditto!
A few people have suggested that I should write an introducktion so here it
is.
Name: Shaun Craill
Where: 26 Pickwick Parade, Howick, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND.
Tel: +64 9 5353 707
Fax: +64 9 5353 708
e-mail: (Email removed)
The script writing work I do for Egmont is more of a hobby than an income
earner. My 'real' job is as an industrial designer, which makes my drawing
style too detailed and precise. My characters tend to look static and frozen
and there's nothing I can do about it. In industrial design I have a
particular interest in ergonomics and transport design. I worked for several
years for John Britten in Christchurch, New Zealand, on the Britten V-1000
superbike project (fastest superbike in the world, holder of 4 world land
speed records, top speed clocked on the Daytona banking 305km/h). While
there also worked on prototype designs for Indian motorcycles who were
planning to relaunch the marque in the USA. Please note that this was not
the Baughman bike! Unfortunately after 18 months work this contract
foundered (nobodies fault, act of God) and none of the work will probably
ever see the light of day :-(.
I usually spend too much time on the scribbles I do for Egmont, but that's
because I don't have any control over the final artwork and I want to
influence the way the artist assigned to the story actually 'sees' the story.
I get a real kick out of seeing my rough and ready sketches actually used by
artists as the basis for their work. Usually any changes made are for the
better.
At the moment I'm slotted into doing 6 pager stories for Egmont. 6 pagers
are hard! It's too short to have any new characters developed properly or to
have more than one major geographic movement for the characters, and it's far
too long to stretch out something suitable for a one page gag. You have to
have the conflict situation fully defined by the end of page 2, a crisis or
two by the end of page 4, and the conflict situation fully resolved by the
end of page 6. Any major action usually has to wind down and stop by the end
of page 5. Sometimes the last page gets a little crammed to fit in the
conflict resolution in the space available.
I'm a real Don Rosa fan. His first story for Gladstone "The Son of the Sun"
inspired me to give Disney Comics a go. I thought if he can do it, why not
give it a try myself? I was privileged enough to meet Don and Anne at their
lovely country home in 1993 and I got quite an insight into the way he works
and some of the influences that pervade his stories. I want a studio like
his one! I count myself extremely privileged to have read the synopsis for
Lo$ part 10 during my visit, even before Byron Erikson! If I remember
correctly Don said that I was the third person to have read it after himself
and Anne.
As a youngster I learnt to read on Carl Barks stories and as a result when I
first went to school I could already read. The first early reader 'Janet and
John' books they gave us were SO boring by comparison! Where were the Beagle
Boys and Scrooge's money bin? I spent the first year at school staring out
the window day dreaming about Duckburg and consequently was placed in a
remedial reading class! I can still remember the day at Kindergarten when I
was pasting a cut out picture of Scrooge from a Barks story into a scrap book
when I came to the realisation that somebody somewhere was actually thinking
up and drawing these stories for a living! Definetly a turning point in my
life. I don't know which story the pic came from, but it was a squarish pic
with Scrooge looking very worried hurrying along a darkened street. He was
running around a street corner with a street lamp providing stark shadowing.
I seem to remember he was either running into or out of danger. If anyone
can provide a clue about the story I would be grateful. It was a Malaysian
reprint, pre 1970, and I seem to remember that Scrooge's coat was blue or
green (not unusual for the Malaysian reprints). Someone else had already cut
up most of the comic and I was trying to reassemble the story. The ending
had vanished and I remember worrying for several days about how Scrooge was
going to get out of danger. I tried thinking up story endings of my own and
I'm sure this was when I started on my present path.
No doubt the other kid with the scissors is now working in Burbank in the
editorial dept;-)
Dave Rawson
Disney comics Digest V97 #182
Message 275 -
1997-08-28 at 19:54:52
"Donald D. Markstein" <(Email removed)>:
> DAVE --
> "I think folks mostly want to hear from Don."
> You're too kind.
> Oh, wait! You mean the OTHER Don, don't you?
Yeah. Sorry, Don. I forgotten you'd just rejoined us!
Good luck on the formatting battle...
(Email removed) (Shaun Craill):
> 6 pagers are hard!
I agree. They are quite a challenge. They have all the inescapable
overhead that any story has and, thus, one must be really focused to
tell a real story (as opposed to linking gags around a theme). 22-24
pages seems like all the room in the world after meeting such
requirements.
> No doubt the other kid with the scissors is now working in Burbank in
> the editorial dept;-)
Quite funny, though the portion about being penalized for being too far
ahead of your peers is sobering. Society is often quite procrustean in
its normative values. Correctness, political or otherwise, has been
around as long as history has has a status quo to conserve.
--
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 --
> "I think folks mostly want to hear from Don."
> You're too kind.
> Oh, wait! You mean the OTHER Don, don't you?
Yeah. Sorry, Don. I forgotten you'd just rejoined us!
Good luck on the formatting battle...
(Email removed) (Shaun Craill):
> 6 pagers are hard!
I agree. They are quite a challenge. They have all the inescapable
overhead that any story has and, thus, one must be really focused to
tell a real story (as opposed to linking gags around a theme). 22-24
pages seems like all the room in the world after meeting such
requirements.
> No doubt the other kid with the scissors is now working in Burbank in
> the editorial dept;-)
Quite funny, though the portion about being penalized for being too far
ahead of your peers is sobering. Society is often quite procrustean in
its normative values. Correctness, political or otherwise, has been
around as long as history has has a status quo to conserve.
--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm
Eirik Krogh Visted
Disney comics Digest V97 #182
Message 276 -
1997-08-28 at 20:22:24
GARY LEACH:
>>A television cartoon series featuring Mickey & Co. wouldn't hurt, and
>>would probably attract a whole new audience to Mickey comics as well.
>
>Probably would. But after the turmoil created within Disney by the
>production of "The Runaway Brain," I'd hate to think of the havoc that
>would be unleashed by a whole series of new Mickey cartoons! Doesn't mean
>they shouldn't try, of course...
What kind of "turmoil" are you referring to ?
Eirik Krogh Visted
>>A television cartoon series featuring Mickey & Co. wouldn't hurt, and
>>would probably attract a whole new audience to Mickey comics as well.
>
>Probably would. But after the turmoil created within Disney by the
>production of "The Runaway Brain," I'd hate to think of the havoc that
>would be unleashed by a whole series of new Mickey cartoons! Doesn't mean
>they shouldn't try, of course...
What kind of "turmoil" are you referring to ?
Eirik Krogh Visted
Rich Bellacera
Disney comics Digest V97 #182
Message 277 -
1997-08-28 at 21:37:48
GARY:
>>A television cartoon series featuring Mickey & Co. wouldn't hurt, and
>>would probably attract a whole new audience to Mickey comics as well.
>
>Probably would. But after the turmoil created within Disney by the
>production of "The Runaway Brain," I'd hate to think of the havoc that
>would be unleashed by a whole series of new Mickey cartoons! Doesn't mean
>they shouldn't try, of course...
I still haven't seen "Runaway Brain" since it was first showing with "A Kid
in King Arthur's Court" (which I didn't want to pay $7.50 just to watch a
7 minute cartoon... I had no desire to see the main feature), but I recently
heard it is showing with "George of the Jungle" (another movie I wasn't too
anxious to see), and now that tickets are $8.00 I think I'll wait a little
longer
and see it in the $4.00 cinema (you know the ones where older movies go
to die and be reincarnated in video... but I digress). Anyhow, from what I
understand this Mickey short was a bit gorey by cartoon standards, and was
probably considered frightening to children. If it was anything like "The
Worm Turns" (1937) I find it STRANGE that Disney would choose such an
vehicle for Mickey given their stringent attitude to his use in the public
arena
(at leaset here in the USA). "The Prince and the Pauper" was a much more
inoccuous avenue for Mickey, and when Disney DOES produce new flicks
featuring Mickey (and I hear they are working on TWO) they should go this
route if they don't want to blemish his (and by default, Disney's) public
image.
>One would hope that this "Barks equivalent" would have found a way.
>However, from what you and Rich have brought up, I'm not sure a "Barks
>equivalent" would have been enough. Someone (or several someones) with
>vision and talent greater than Barks may have been required to bring Mickey
>up to snuff!
You're probably right. It would take someone with a very creative touch to
abide by Disney's USA standards for Mickey's usage. It seems, from what
I seen coming from Egmont in David G's writing, that he has that ability.
JURGEN:
>You have raised some interesting points, Rich. But I don't think
>that the lack of relatives is a reason for Mickey's diminishing
>popularity as a comic book hero. Take for example the adventures of
>Tintin which are very popular in Europe. They were first published
>in serialized form in a Belgian newspaper starting in 1929, around
>the same time that the Mickey Mouse daily strip began.
>The family life of Tintin was never mentioned. His personality
>is very similar to Mickey's (or even blander, he hasn't even a girl
>friend). But his supporting cast is one of the funniest in the
>medium. But you maybe right, I can't imagine someone like the
>constantly cursing, alcoholic Captain Haddock or the gags about
>the almost deaf Prof. Tournesol in a Disney or in any American comic
>book aimed at children.
What I failed to say, but was trying to imply in my commentary about "family"
was the old axiom, "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your
family." In Donald and $crooge's illustrious comic and cartoon career we've
seen them *forced* into situations they might not otherwise have had to deal
with if it wasn't for their many wonderful *relatives.* Gladstone, Gus, the
Nephews, and others have been a wounderful source of entertainment for
us with respect to D&$. What would their lives have been like had we only
seen their friends and enemies in their careers? What family Mickey DOES
have is essentially just as bland as he is. When Morty & Ferdie wore their
old nightshirts they were far more entertaining then they were later presented,
and by no means could be compared to HD&L. I never understood this
aspect. Why did the Twins have to mellow so much? It seems the only
trouble they get into these days doesn't directly annoy Mickey as much as it
is just regular "kid stuff." Even Pluto gets to be more colorful. I'd like to
see Pluto's character developed more. He has a great supporting cast which
is far underutilized (Fifi, Figaro, Ronnie, Dinah, Butch, etc.). It would be
great to see him in stories up against the Beagle's quite intelligent cat
Ratty,
or with Eega's thnuckle-booh, Pflip, or more adventurous "Lassie-esque"
tales. However, you made my point with respect to Mickey, in that you
mentioned Tintin's great SUPPORTING cast who, despite their inherent
faults, helped to make Tintin's career. Sure Mickey could probably thrive
without family per se, but he would still have to have a STRONG
supporting cast, again due to Disney's imposed restrictions on Mickey's
personality (which makes for a very dull boy at times). Even if Mickey's
personality is at an evolutionary dead-end, his supporting characters could
still flourish. I get the feeling that there was a fear of his supporting
cast
out-shining him in the past (like Goofy did), so they were intentionally
kept low in their intensity. I hope this is not an issue today. The more
lively and colorful Mickey's supporting cast can be the more Mickey will
have to work with. Donald is a wildcard, a firecracker waiting to blow
given the right set of actions, Mickey, on the other hand, must always
remain calm and maintain that "All-American" good-guy persona or he
gets in trouble by the censors and tarnishes the image of Disney as a
Company. I hate this no-win situation, but I really believe it can be done...
yes, even here in the USA, if a good comic book team is given the license
to do it. How about a new focus book called Mickey and his Pal, Pluto" or
better yet, "Mickey and Company" which features stories not just about
Mickey, but seperate tales about Pluto, Figaro (as Minnie's cat), Morty &
Ferdie and Minnie. If Minnie was given a more liberated attitude (like
Daisy's in the cartoon series "Quack Pack") she'd soon have a following of
both boys and girls (I know I really like this new Daisy). And if Morty &
Ferdie could be updated and creative, they too could build in poularity. I
know lots of cat and dog lovers who might be attacted to a book which
regularly features tales about them. Perhaps none of these characters could
carry the book all by themselves, but I think there is enough of a foundation
on all of them to create a really great book which features short stories, one-
page gags, and continuing serials. I fear though that there just isn't enough
of a company latitude to allow it to happen.
>But the biggest advantage that Tintin has over Gottfredson's Mickey Mouse
>is that all his adventures since the 1930s were collected in albums
>and are still available to new generations of readers. Some of the older
>episodes were deemed too crude or too racist and were redrawn.
>But you can still buy the older versions in more expensive collector's
>editions.
I wish we had that advantage WRT Mickey :-(
IVAR:
> In Denmark - Yes I'm fortunate enough to live in part of the Egmont
> Paradise - The Mickey Mouse stories allways had a big fan crowd.
Yes, you are fortunate ;-)
-Rich (xephyr)
http://www.jps.net/xephyr/rich/disney.html
>>A television cartoon series featuring Mickey & Co. wouldn't hurt, and
>>would probably attract a whole new audience to Mickey comics as well.
>
>Probably would. But after the turmoil created within Disney by the
>production of "The Runaway Brain," I'd hate to think of the havoc that
>would be unleashed by a whole series of new Mickey cartoons! Doesn't mean
>they shouldn't try, of course...
I still haven't seen "Runaway Brain" since it was first showing with "A Kid
in King Arthur's Court" (which I didn't want to pay $7.50 just to watch a
7 minute cartoon... I had no desire to see the main feature), but I recently
heard it is showing with "George of the Jungle" (another movie I wasn't too
anxious to see), and now that tickets are $8.00 I think I'll wait a little
longer
and see it in the $4.00 cinema (you know the ones where older movies go
to die and be reincarnated in video... but I digress). Anyhow, from what I
understand this Mickey short was a bit gorey by cartoon standards, and was
probably considered frightening to children. If it was anything like "The
Worm Turns" (1937) I find it STRANGE that Disney would choose such an
vehicle for Mickey given their stringent attitude to his use in the public
arena
(at leaset here in the USA). "The Prince and the Pauper" was a much more
inoccuous avenue for Mickey, and when Disney DOES produce new flicks
featuring Mickey (and I hear they are working on TWO) they should go this
route if they don't want to blemish his (and by default, Disney's) public
image.
>One would hope that this "Barks equivalent" would have found a way.
>However, from what you and Rich have brought up, I'm not sure a "Barks
>equivalent" would have been enough. Someone (or several someones) with
>vision and talent greater than Barks may have been required to bring Mickey
>up to snuff!
You're probably right. It would take someone with a very creative touch to
abide by Disney's USA standards for Mickey's usage. It seems, from what
I seen coming from Egmont in David G's writing, that he has that ability.
JURGEN:
>You have raised some interesting points, Rich. But I don't think
>that the lack of relatives is a reason for Mickey's diminishing
>popularity as a comic book hero. Take for example the adventures of
>Tintin which are very popular in Europe. They were first published
>in serialized form in a Belgian newspaper starting in 1929, around
>the same time that the Mickey Mouse daily strip began.
>The family life of Tintin was never mentioned. His personality
>is very similar to Mickey's (or even blander, he hasn't even a girl
>friend). But his supporting cast is one of the funniest in the
>medium. But you maybe right, I can't imagine someone like the
>constantly cursing, alcoholic Captain Haddock or the gags about
>the almost deaf Prof. Tournesol in a Disney or in any American comic
>book aimed at children.
What I failed to say, but was trying to imply in my commentary about "family"
was the old axiom, "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your
family." In Donald and $crooge's illustrious comic and cartoon career we've
seen them *forced* into situations they might not otherwise have had to deal
with if it wasn't for their many wonderful *relatives.* Gladstone, Gus, the
Nephews, and others have been a wounderful source of entertainment for
us with respect to D&$. What would their lives have been like had we only
seen their friends and enemies in their careers? What family Mickey DOES
have is essentially just as bland as he is. When Morty & Ferdie wore their
old nightshirts they were far more entertaining then they were later presented,
and by no means could be compared to HD&L. I never understood this
aspect. Why did the Twins have to mellow so much? It seems the only
trouble they get into these days doesn't directly annoy Mickey as much as it
is just regular "kid stuff." Even Pluto gets to be more colorful. I'd like to
see Pluto's character developed more. He has a great supporting cast which
is far underutilized (Fifi, Figaro, Ronnie, Dinah, Butch, etc.). It would be
great to see him in stories up against the Beagle's quite intelligent cat
Ratty,
or with Eega's thnuckle-booh, Pflip, or more adventurous "Lassie-esque"
tales. However, you made my point with respect to Mickey, in that you
mentioned Tintin's great SUPPORTING cast who, despite their inherent
faults, helped to make Tintin's career. Sure Mickey could probably thrive
without family per se, but he would still have to have a STRONG
supporting cast, again due to Disney's imposed restrictions on Mickey's
personality (which makes for a very dull boy at times). Even if Mickey's
personality is at an evolutionary dead-end, his supporting characters could
still flourish. I get the feeling that there was a fear of his supporting
cast
out-shining him in the past (like Goofy did), so they were intentionally
kept low in their intensity. I hope this is not an issue today. The more
lively and colorful Mickey's supporting cast can be the more Mickey will
have to work with. Donald is a wildcard, a firecracker waiting to blow
given the right set of actions, Mickey, on the other hand, must always
remain calm and maintain that "All-American" good-guy persona or he
gets in trouble by the censors and tarnishes the image of Disney as a
Company. I hate this no-win situation, but I really believe it can be done...
yes, even here in the USA, if a good comic book team is given the license
to do it. How about a new focus book called Mickey and his Pal, Pluto" or
better yet, "Mickey and Company" which features stories not just about
Mickey, but seperate tales about Pluto, Figaro (as Minnie's cat), Morty &
Ferdie and Minnie. If Minnie was given a more liberated attitude (like
Daisy's in the cartoon series "Quack Pack") she'd soon have a following of
both boys and girls (I know I really like this new Daisy). And if Morty &
Ferdie could be updated and creative, they too could build in poularity. I
know lots of cat and dog lovers who might be attacted to a book which
regularly features tales about them. Perhaps none of these characters could
carry the book all by themselves, but I think there is enough of a foundation
on all of them to create a really great book which features short stories, one-
page gags, and continuing serials. I fear though that there just isn't enough
of a company latitude to allow it to happen.
>But the biggest advantage that Tintin has over Gottfredson's Mickey Mouse
>is that all his adventures since the 1930s were collected in albums
>and are still available to new generations of readers. Some of the older
>episodes were deemed too crude or too racist and were redrawn.
>But you can still buy the older versions in more expensive collector's
>editions.
I wish we had that advantage WRT Mickey :-(
IVAR:
> In Denmark - Yes I'm fortunate enough to live in part of the Egmont
> Paradise - The Mickey Mouse stories allways had a big fan crowd.
Yes, you are fortunate ;-)
-Rich (xephyr)
http://www.jps.net/xephyr/rich/disney.html
Deckerd
Introducktion
Message 278 -
1997-08-28 at 21:59:08
On Aug 28, 3:51pm, Shaun Craill wrote:
> >There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
> >but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
> >I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
> >more in the future...time and editors willing.
>
> >--Dwight Decker
>
> Ditto!
>
Thanks, but I think I was trying to say that I'm about as close to
nothing as you can get and still be anything (with regard to writing
Dizzy stories, that is).
> As a youngster I learnt to read on Carl Barks stories and as a result when I
> first went to school I could already read. The first early reader 'Janet and
> John' books they gave us were SO boring by comparison! Where were the Beagle
> Boys and Scrooge's money bin? I spent the first year at school staring out
> the window day dreaming about Duckburg and consequently was placed in a
> remedial reading class!
I learned to read from Carl Barks and other Disney comics, too. In
fact, I taught myself to read while I was in kindergarten by picking
out words in comic books. For our foreign friends -- "kindergarten"
in the US is a kind of pre-school year, or grade zero, which kids
generally go to at age 5. At least when I was a lad, it was to some
extent optional, and not all schools had it even then. Its main
purpose seems to have been to get kids used to the routine of going
to school. Serious education in reading and math and so didn't
really begin until the next year, in First Grade. The fact that
I could already read was considered a minor phenomenon and my moment
of glory came when I was allowed to read a Little Golden Book
("Donald Duck Goes to Disneyland," wouldn't you know it) out loud
to the rest of the class. My glory was somewhat dimmed, however,
when the other kids complained that I couldn't hold the book up
and show the pictures to everybody while I read from it the way
the teacher could (well, gee -- I only had widdle hands!). As a
result of being able to read, I was allowed to skip First Grade
and go straight into Second Grade (so for the rest of my school
career, I was a year younger than everybody else in my classes).
Unfortunately, I never lived up to everyone's expectations of being
a boy genius after that. Just because I had taught myself to read
by piecing out words in Disney comics didn't mean I was going to
be good at long division.
So...you got sent to the remedial reading class for learning to
read from comic books, while I skipped a grade and ended up
having to lie about my age to get a summer job after I graduated
from high school because I was still only 17 and the minimum age
was 18 -- when people were supposed to gradate from high school.
Boy, those Duck comics can sure get you into a lot of trouble!
--Dwight Decker
> >There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
> >but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
> >I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
> >more in the future...time and editors willing.
>
> >--Dwight Decker
>
> Ditto!
>
Thanks, but I think I was trying to say that I'm about as close to
nothing as you can get and still be anything (with regard to writing
Dizzy stories, that is).
> As a youngster I learnt to read on Carl Barks stories and as a result when I
> first went to school I could already read. The first early reader 'Janet and
> John' books they gave us were SO boring by comparison! Where were the Beagle
> Boys and Scrooge's money bin? I spent the first year at school staring out
> the window day dreaming about Duckburg and consequently was placed in a
> remedial reading class!
I learned to read from Carl Barks and other Disney comics, too. In
fact, I taught myself to read while I was in kindergarten by picking
out words in comic books. For our foreign friends -- "kindergarten"
in the US is a kind of pre-school year, or grade zero, which kids
generally go to at age 5. At least when I was a lad, it was to some
extent optional, and not all schools had it even then. Its main
purpose seems to have been to get kids used to the routine of going
to school. Serious education in reading and math and so didn't
really begin until the next year, in First Grade. The fact that
I could already read was considered a minor phenomenon and my moment
of glory came when I was allowed to read a Little Golden Book
("Donald Duck Goes to Disneyland," wouldn't you know it) out loud
to the rest of the class. My glory was somewhat dimmed, however,
when the other kids complained that I couldn't hold the book up
and show the pictures to everybody while I read from it the way
the teacher could (well, gee -- I only had widdle hands!). As a
result of being able to read, I was allowed to skip First Grade
and go straight into Second Grade (so for the rest of my school
career, I was a year younger than everybody else in my classes).
Unfortunately, I never lived up to everyone's expectations of being
a boy genius after that. Just because I had taught myself to read
by piecing out words in Disney comics didn't mean I was going to
be good at long division.
So...you got sent to the remedial reading class for learning to
read from comic books, while I skipped a grade and ended up
having to lie about my age to get a summer job after I graduated
from high school because I was still only 17 and the minimum age
was 18 -- when people were supposed to gradate from high school.
Boy, those Duck comics can sure get you into a lot of trouble!
--Dwight Decker
Michael Mankus
Mickey Mouse comic strips question
Message 279 -
1997-08-28 at 22:34:12
I'm new to the digest, so here's an intro and then my question to everyone
out there.
My absolute, favorite Disney comics to read are FG Mickey Mouse comic
strips from the 30s and 40s. However, Gladstone, in a recent letter page
in WDC&S, said that they pretty much have reprinted all the allowable MM
comic strip material. To get my dose of MM strips, I've turned to trying
to find them on newspaper microfilm at my college library. The search for
a newspaper that carried the Mickey strip back then was on. I did discover
that the San Francisco Examiner, in 1937 at least, had only the MM Sunday
strips. My library, however, probably won't like the idea of having them
send away for every newspaper in the US from the 30s, just to find one
comic strip. Thus, can anyone out there, help in my search. Does anyone
know of a newspaper from the 30s or 40s that carried the daily MM comic strip?
Any help would be appriciated.
Michael
out there.
My absolute, favorite Disney comics to read are FG Mickey Mouse comic
strips from the 30s and 40s. However, Gladstone, in a recent letter page
in WDC&S, said that they pretty much have reprinted all the allowable MM
comic strip material. To get my dose of MM strips, I've turned to trying
to find them on newspaper microfilm at my college library. The search for
a newspaper that carried the Mickey strip back then was on. I did discover
that the San Francisco Examiner, in 1937 at least, had only the MM Sunday
strips. My library, however, probably won't like the idea of having them
send away for every newspaper in the US from the 30s, just to find one
comic strip. Thus, can anyone out there, help in my search. Does anyone
know of a newspaper from the 30s or 40s that carried the daily MM comic strip?
Any help would be appriciated.
Michael
Nils Helge Karstad
Gladstone ++
Message 280 -
1997-08-28 at 22:58:16
Gary:
Can I subscribe to some Gladstone-albums by sending an e-mail to anyone ?
Do I have to write a *letter* ?
BTW, I'm interested in Barks stories and Don Rosa stories.
Is it most of that in the DD/US adventures or in the just DD or US ?
And what about the new "The Adventurous Uncle Scrooge McDuck" and "Uncle
Scrooge & Donald Duck" ?
Can I buy some of the "Uncle Scrooge Adventures in Color " by back order ?
Daniel:
Thanks for the letter.
I did like the
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/5038
barks-page, and I just loved the "Donald Duck's Atom Bomb" story.
Does anyone know when Don Rosa is back on the list again ?
Jo
"Half a drop will make a big enough explosion !
A *whole* drop would wreck all the houses in the block !"
- Donald Duck (In "Donald Duck's Atom Bomb")
--------------------------------------------
Mail-adress:
(Email removed)
--------------------------------------------
Can I subscribe to some Gladstone-albums by sending an e-mail to anyone ?
Do I have to write a *letter* ?
BTW, I'm interested in Barks stories and Don Rosa stories.
Is it most of that in the DD/US adventures or in the just DD or US ?
And what about the new "The Adventurous Uncle Scrooge McDuck" and "Uncle
Scrooge & Donald Duck" ?
Can I buy some of the "Uncle Scrooge Adventures in Color " by back order ?
Daniel:
Thanks for the letter.
I did like the
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/5038
barks-page, and I just loved the "Donald Duck's Atom Bomb" story.
Does anyone know when Don Rosa is back on the list again ?
Jo
"Half a drop will make a big enough explosion !
A *whole* drop would wreck all the houses in the block !"
- Donald Duck (In "Donald Duck's Atom Bomb")
--------------------------------------------
Mail-adress:
(Email removed)
--------------------------------------------
Deckerd
cubic acre
Message 281 -
1997-08-28 at 23:55:22
On Aug 28, 7:12am, rob gibson wrote:
> Imnsho, if Uncle Carl used the term "cubic acre" to refer to a unit of
> measure in three dimensions then he was within the bounds of correct
> english usage (by definition 2a above).
>
Yes, but is "cubic acre" in any kind of general use as a measure
of volume? According to Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
(Merriam-Webster), an acre is "any of various units of area,
esp. a unit in the U.S. and England equal to 160 square rods,"
and derives from an older form meaning "field" (our German
friends will recognize the word "Acker" as a related term). In
every way, shape, and form, "acre" is a measurement of surface
area, not volume. "Cubic acre" is a humorous Barksian absurdity.
There is, however, a measurement called the "acre-foot": "the
volume (as of irrigation water) that would cover one acre to
a depth of one foot." It doesn't seem to apply to the present
case.
Anyway, an acre does not have a fixed shape. I assumed a square
that would have a surface area of three acres, then derived the
measurements by figuring the square root of the area (over three
hundred feet per side, if I remember right). Three cubic acres
would be a cube with each of those squares as a face, which would
be a building over thirty stories high and just as long, filled
nearly to the top with money. The structural engineering problems
are left as an exercise for the student.
--Dwight Decker
> Imnsho, if Uncle Carl used the term "cubic acre" to refer to a unit of
> measure in three dimensions then he was within the bounds of correct
> english usage (by definition 2a above).
>
Yes, but is "cubic acre" in any kind of general use as a measure
of volume? According to Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
(Merriam-Webster), an acre is "any of various units of area,
esp. a unit in the U.S. and England equal to 160 square rods,"
and derives from an older form meaning "field" (our German
friends will recognize the word "Acker" as a related term). In
every way, shape, and form, "acre" is a measurement of surface
area, not volume. "Cubic acre" is a humorous Barksian absurdity.
There is, however, a measurement called the "acre-foot": "the
volume (as of irrigation water) that would cover one acre to
a depth of one foot." It doesn't seem to apply to the present
case.
Anyway, an acre does not have a fixed shape. I assumed a square
that would have a surface area of three acres, then derived the
measurements by figuring the square root of the area (over three
hundred feet per side, if I remember right). Three cubic acres
would be a cube with each of those squares as a face, which would
be a building over thirty stories high and just as long, filled
nearly to the top with money. The structural engineering problems
are left as an exercise for the student.
--Dwight Decker
Bhc
Disney comics Digest V97 #182
Message 282 -
1997-08-29 at 03:10:28
Don M.:
Donald, too, has suffered from unfortunate inconsistencies in his
characterization. Even Barks, in later days, reduced him to a hapless
sidekick to Scrooge, with little real juice and no temper to speak of. But
overall he has maintained his essential personality, of an often
passionate, always reactive malcontent.
Mickey, as you say, has no such foundation. When a writer sits down and has
to ponder the question, "Which Mickey should I use?", you know there's a
problem.
Ivar:
This mailing list is, within its bounds, a public forum, so disagree away!
I will somewhat disagree with your disagreement. I grew up reading Paul
Murry's Mickey stories, and I loved them, but I can't credit him with
achieving what Barks achieved. He established a notable way of doing
Mickey, but it is only one coherent extrusion from the miasma that is
Mickey; Carl Barks brought coherence to the duck miasma itself, and most of
what has been established by subsequent creators can be seen, in one way or
another, as extrusions from Barks.
I am, to be sure, speaking from the perspective of a member of the US
Disney comics audience. Murry's impact and influence outside our borders is
considerable, from what I've seen, and I, personally, would be pleased if
he was regarded as Mickey's Barks elsewhere on the globe.
> Maby the problem in the US of A is that there are no young Disney fans
> - The reason why Gladstone went into business was that a lot of the
> old fans from the fifties and sixties wanted to reread Barks, so it's
> more a (Barks)fanzine than a "Walt Disney Comics and Stories". - or am
> I completely wrong ;^)
You've certainly hit on a major aspect of why Gladstone came to be. But
Gladstone has had to do much more than repackage the past, if I may offer
the role we played in the careers of Don Rosa and William Van Horn as
examples.
Eirik:
Check volumes 26, 36, and 47 of The Carl Barks Library of Walt Disney's
Comics and Stories in Color for the cover galleries we promised.
Gary
****************************
"It's Bindy Gonzer's birthday!" - Churchy La Femme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladstone on the Web: http://www.hamlco.com/bhc/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald, too, has suffered from unfortunate inconsistencies in his
characterization. Even Barks, in later days, reduced him to a hapless
sidekick to Scrooge, with little real juice and no temper to speak of. But
overall he has maintained his essential personality, of an often
passionate, always reactive malcontent.
Mickey, as you say, has no such foundation. When a writer sits down and has
to ponder the question, "Which Mickey should I use?", you know there's a
problem.
Ivar:
This mailing list is, within its bounds, a public forum, so disagree away!
I will somewhat disagree with your disagreement. I grew up reading Paul
Murry's Mickey stories, and I loved them, but I can't credit him with
achieving what Barks achieved. He established a notable way of doing
Mickey, but it is only one coherent extrusion from the miasma that is
Mickey; Carl Barks brought coherence to the duck miasma itself, and most of
what has been established by subsequent creators can be seen, in one way or
another, as extrusions from Barks.
I am, to be sure, speaking from the perspective of a member of the US
Disney comics audience. Murry's impact and influence outside our borders is
considerable, from what I've seen, and I, personally, would be pleased if
he was regarded as Mickey's Barks elsewhere on the globe.
> Maby the problem in the US of A is that there are no young Disney fans
> - The reason why Gladstone went into business was that a lot of the
> old fans from the fifties and sixties wanted to reread Barks, so it's
> more a (Barks)fanzine than a "Walt Disney Comics and Stories". - or am
> I completely wrong ;^)
You've certainly hit on a major aspect of why Gladstone came to be. But
Gladstone has had to do much more than repackage the past, if I may offer
the role we played in the careers of Don Rosa and William Van Horn as
examples.
Eirik:
Check volumes 26, 36, and 47 of The Carl Barks Library of Walt Disney's
Comics and Stories in Color for the cover galleries we promised.
Gary
****************************
"It's Bindy Gonzer's birthday!" - Churchy La Femme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladstone on the Web: http://www.hamlco.com/bhc/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ota
Disney comics Digest V97 #183 (Banned Stories)
Message 283 -
1997-08-29 at 14:03:48
David Gerstein said last list that most of the 30's Mickey stories are banned. I'm aware that
some of the duck stories are also banned and other ones like that one of the atom bomb had parts
of some panels changed. I would like to know if someone has a list of the banned Disney
stories...
I would also know if the Donald short Der Fuehrer's face is banned too. I think I've seen that
cartoon in an old Disneyland show in the fifties. But today that cartoon is not available on
video, nor even in that Oscar-winning Disney toons tape.
Well I'm collecting such info, so if someone has some info...
Ota
(Email removed)
some of the duck stories are also banned and other ones like that one of the atom bomb had parts
of some panels changed. I would like to know if someone has a list of the banned Disney
stories...
I would also know if the Donald short Der Fuehrer's face is banned too. I think I've seen that
cartoon in an old Disneyland show in the fifties. But today that cartoon is not available on
video, nor even in that Oscar-winning Disney toons tape.
Well I'm collecting such info, so if someone has some info...
Ota
(Email removed)
Didier Ghez
Various things
Message 284 -
1997-08-29 at 18:40:03
Hi,
Would a Finish member be able to tell us when the limited edition of the
book that Don described will be available? I would be very interested in
having details about it and might even be willing to buy it.
GLADSTONE:
Frederik's suggestion of adding a page about available back issues in my
opinion is a great one. I never know how to look for the back issues with=
Don's stories that I sometimes miss.
DON:
I think you forgot my question about what you are currently doing :-)
Didier
Would a Finish member be able to tell us when the limited edition of the
book that Don described will be available? I would be very interested in
having details about it and might even be willing to buy it.
GLADSTONE:
Frederik's suggestion of adding a page about available back issues in my
opinion is a great one. I never know how to look for the back issues with=
Don's stories that I sometimes miss.
DON:
I think you forgot my question about what you are currently doing :-)
Didier
Francois Willot
Various comments about various things
Message 285 -
1997-08-29 at 18:47:40
GARY:
>Susan is a trained illustrator
I'm sure of that.
>Actually, Susan, John Clark, and I are all pretty good at drawing >*parts* of Disney ducks.
It would be intersting to know what you did actually. Are there "parts"
of drawings in the Gladstone publications that you and Susan and John
Clark penciled and/or inked? I believe you did some covers (or at least
re-defined parts of covers from other artists), but was there also
stories?
While I'm talking with a member of the Gladstone staff, could I make one
complaint (actually two)?
The Gottfredson serials in the WDC&S books are - up to now - all
re-reprints of the stories in "Mickey Mouse in Color". That's not a
problem for the people who have not the book, but for all the others? I
don't need to have two English editions of these Gottfredson stories.
There are plenty of Gottfredson stories which was never reprinted (or
only a very few times) in the US, so why don't you choose them, rather
than those you did publish just nine years ago? If this is an economic
reason, however, I understand that.
Second complaint: the WDC&S books, in my opinion, are too
"over-polished". I would prefer more simple books, without all these
"effects", all the special colouring and special page setting. It looks
too much as a comic for "quibbling" collectors.
I hope you understand that except for that, I like all your titles (and
most of all the stories in it) very much.
DAVE:
>Marsal is Spanish I believe. Is that the same with Marcal?
I assume he his as he was part of the Comicup Studio, but I don't know
exactly.
>>All the great artists are "swiped" by Egmont...
>
>Hmm. Kinda like the Pope did to the Medici in the Florentine
>Renaissance?
Yes, and that's why the French now only credit the "Comicup Studio" and
never acknowledge the actual artist. Because they do not want Egmont
(and others) to easily recognize and have the names of all the good
artist (I should say the few good artists).
ARTHUR,
Thank you for your explanation on the "That's Donald program". About the
Donald's birthday book: this is the one I was thinking of, but it does
not contain any EGN material. Only stories from Denmark or Barks
ten-pagers.
DWIGHT:
>There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
>but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
>I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
>more in the future...time and editors willing.
I will certainly look for some of your stories in the future. Just to
see (and I'm sure appreciate) your work!
>For our foreign friends -- "kindergarten" in the US is a kind of >pre-school year
Sounds very German.
SHAUN:
I liked your intoducktion very much. I think we are naturally inclined
to look for every Disney comic work of all the writers and artists on
this list. BTW, it seems that, for some reason, most of them are
writers, and that there are only a few artists.
About the PAUL MURRY discussion:
I think one of the major problem with Paul Murry is that he was only an
artist. It's really better when the authors are "complete authors" or at
least when the writer and the artist work together. Murry was a
fantastic cartoonist and drawer and his inking was superb (he even made
critics on Barks' inking which was too thin in his opinion, and about
the way Gottfredson did put the characters on the panels, with only the
head for example). But I don't think Paul Murry worked together with all
his scribes.
Francois
>Susan is a trained illustrator
I'm sure of that.
>Actually, Susan, John Clark, and I are all pretty good at drawing >*parts* of Disney ducks.
It would be intersting to know what you did actually. Are there "parts"
of drawings in the Gladstone publications that you and Susan and John
Clark penciled and/or inked? I believe you did some covers (or at least
re-defined parts of covers from other artists), but was there also
stories?
While I'm talking with a member of the Gladstone staff, could I make one
complaint (actually two)?
The Gottfredson serials in the WDC&S books are - up to now - all
re-reprints of the stories in "Mickey Mouse in Color". That's not a
problem for the people who have not the book, but for all the others? I
don't need to have two English editions of these Gottfredson stories.
There are plenty of Gottfredson stories which was never reprinted (or
only a very few times) in the US, so why don't you choose them, rather
than those you did publish just nine years ago? If this is an economic
reason, however, I understand that.
Second complaint: the WDC&S books, in my opinion, are too
"over-polished". I would prefer more simple books, without all these
"effects", all the special colouring and special page setting. It looks
too much as a comic for "quibbling" collectors.
I hope you understand that except for that, I like all your titles (and
most of all the stories in it) very much.
DAVE:
>Marsal is Spanish I believe. Is that the same with Marcal?
I assume he his as he was part of the Comicup Studio, but I don't know
exactly.
>>All the great artists are "swiped" by Egmont...
>
>Hmm. Kinda like the Pope did to the Medici in the Florentine
>Renaissance?
Yes, and that's why the French now only credit the "Comicup Studio" and
never acknowledge the actual artist. Because they do not want Egmont
(and others) to easily recognize and have the names of all the good
artist (I should say the few good artists).
ARTHUR,
Thank you for your explanation on the "That's Donald program". About the
Donald's birthday book: this is the one I was thinking of, but it does
not contain any EGN material. Only stories from Denmark or Barks
ten-pagers.
DWIGHT:
>There's a great difference between "nothing" and "something,"
>but I have to admit that while I'm now in the "something" category,
>I'm still not too far above the "nothing" range. I hope to write
>more in the future...time and editors willing.
I will certainly look for some of your stories in the future. Just to
see (and I'm sure appreciate) your work!
>For our foreign friends -- "kindergarten" in the US is a kind of >pre-school year
Sounds very German.
SHAUN:
I liked your intoducktion very much. I think we are naturally inclined
to look for every Disney comic work of all the writers and artists on
this list. BTW, it seems that, for some reason, most of them are
writers, and that there are only a few artists.
About the PAUL MURRY discussion:
I think one of the major problem with Paul Murry is that he was only an
artist. It's really better when the authors are "complete authors" or at
least when the writer and the artist work together. Murry was a
fantastic cartoonist and drawer and his inking was superb (he even made
critics on Barks' inking which was too thin in his opinion, and about
the way Gottfredson did put the characters on the panels, with only the
head for example). But I don't think Paul Murry worked together with all
his scribes.
Francois