Keskustelujen arkisto

|>I'm still at the stage where I don't like "Don's
|> 'cluttered' art style"
|> ------------
|> Rik in Carlisle, MA
|
"Don Rosa" <(Email removed)> wrote:

|
|Same here.
|

Really??! Does this mean you are trying to make your artwork simpler
and less "cluttered?" I guess it's true about the easier it looks, the
better the artist. I just recently put a big crimp in my credit card
and bought the Barks DD adventure series. I'm savoring my time going
through these reading carefully and spending time with each panel.
Another thing I've noticed about Barks creations is not only the art
and his stories, but his *script* The words he gives the ducks are
spare and clean and simple. Not to say, Don, that yours aren't. But
the artwork is what I first notice and what most effects my enjoyment
of the book. Maybe I need to see some stories that Barks wrote but
didn't do the art, and some that he illustrated but didn't write. That
would be interesting.
----------------
Rik in Nantucket
(Email removed)

On Oct 4, 7:44pm, Rik Pierce wrote:
> Subject: Re: Disney comics Digest V97 #212

> Another thing I've noticed about Barks creations is not only the art
> and his stories, but his *script* The words he gives the ducks are
> spare and clean and simple. Not to say, Don, that yours aren't. But
> the artwork is what I first notice and what most effects my enjoyment
> of the book. Maybe I need to see some stories that Barks wrote but
> didn't do the art, and some that he illustrated but didn't write. That
> would be interesting.

I'm probably going to regret trying to comment on this without my
collection at hand and not citing specific examples, but... There
are times when Barks's script (i.e., the Ducks' dialogue) is
wonderfully clever and inventive, with almost musical wordplay.
There are other times when the dialogue is strange and stilted,
with inconsistent use of contractions or just an unnatural choice
of words (such as HD&L sounding too formal) -- without even getting
into Barks's early 60s period, when he invented a whole new language
that was supposedly "hip talk" but was like nothing anyone ever really
spoke. If I sat down and tracked this, perhaps I could match the
dialogue to different points in Barks's career (like the later
years when he started to burn out), and if the old Duck Man
himself were available to answer such questions, I might also
be able to map the varying degrees of editorial direction he
was getting and from whom.

My take on stories Barks drew but didn't write...as I remember, they
seem a little sillier than those Barks wrote himself (like Daisy Duck's
Diary), but the art is such a joy that it makes up for the sins of the
script. Stories Barks wrote but didn't draw...well, those would include
the Woodchuck stories he did after he retired, so he was pretty well
burned out by then. I remember them as fairly weak, with a lot of
tendentious ecological preaching -- without the Barks art, the stories
fell flat for me. The ones that Daan Jippes has redrawn have seemed
somehow better than I remembered, so maybe the art again is salvaging
a weak script. The recent "Horsing Around With History" that Barks
wrote and van Horn drew might be a better example of a Barks-written
script rendered by other hands.

These are, of course, my opinions, subject to change if confronted
by superior arguments, and your mileage may differ.

--Dwight Decker

--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V97 Issue #215
******************************************

Brix:

> (BTW, in the german edition there always was a written preface
> explaining the drug as an experiment by Gyro Gearloose/Daniel
> D=FCsentrieb)

Gyro Gearloose with Mickey Mouse? Strange. But I know: that's because
the German have an "important" Barks culture; they are more Barksists
than the Barksists...

> Thanks for the immediate response.

Hmm, I'm sure Didier wanted to respond to your message too. Too bad I
saw your questions first...

Francois

(Email removed) (Rik Pierce):

> I'm awfully new here and probably shouldn't be posting critical stuff
> before I know what I'm talking about, but that seldom has stopped me
> in the past ...

Speaking for myself (and no one else), I like finding out what folks
like and don't like. I think there's merit in discussing what the
creator intended versus what the reader apprehended. That's the crux of
storytelling to me: that my intent is received by the reader, even if
unconsciously.

For me, the use of labels such as "good" or "bad" alone, without
amplification, carry only subjective meaning. I learn that someone liked
or disliked something, but I never know why. There's nothing inherently
wrong with this. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But not all opinion
is equally valid.

Sometimes, when I've probed a bit, I've found the reader was careless
and missed something, and that something was at the heart of their
discontent. Sometimes I've found I made an error in story logic.
Sometimes I've found the reader dislikes the art, and dismisses the
story even though the storytelling is fine.

Put another way. Opinion is properly weighted by how it was formed, or
how informed it is. Often, folks employ factual semantics when clearly
they're opining. ("The world is flat" is not as well informed as "the
world is rounded".)

I certainly have visceral reactions to things and declare them "bad".
But I usually can explain or at least try to explain why I think that
way. I must say I'm often lonely in trying to operate at this level.
Many folks simply pronounce their likes and dislikes as if they are
factual insights. (Not that you did this. It's clear you're trying to
come to terms with your intuitive reasoning.)

> for me there seem to be more lines in the drawings than need to be.

There is a school of thought, and it's very common at the editorial
level, that a minimalist approach to storytelling is de riguer. I
contend that the extraneous elements flavor the story to more resemble
the creator's world view, and make the storytelling unique.

Simply put, things which are unnecessary can still be useful.

That's the *poetry* that a creator tries to bring to a creation. The
ceiling of the Sistine Chapel would certainly be just as sturdy and
serviceable without all that "unnecessary" detail which ads nothing to
its *function*. But how the functional is adorned is the hallmark of a
civilization, or individual creator.

Which is not to say you are wrong in your personal assessment, but it's
a rare reader who has spent as much labor apprehending a creation as the
creator. Sometimes a dialog between the two enriches both.

When I was eighteen, I liked very little classical music or jazz. But by
willful exposure to both, I learned to embrace both, and the musical
landscape I now wander is enormous and constantly rewarding. The
universe is always larger than my apprehension of it. Nowadays, I've
joined Socrates in realizing just how much I don't know.

In the meantime, for me, there are more good books to read than I'll
ever be able to read; more delightful music than I'll ever be able to
hear; more fantastic cuisine than I'll ever be able to consume; more
destinations to seek out than I'll ever be able to visit; and so on. The
universe rewards the seeker. At virtually any level that has depth.

> It's not just the detail. Barks had LOTS of detail. I think it's the
> selection of detail. Also, Rosa puts more of those little "movement"
> lines around an object or character to indicate a sort of blurring in
> the camera. Maybe when I get home I should try and be more specific
> ... or am I likely to be flamed off the list ??

I doubt it. There's a healthy mixture of opinion here as to who likes
what, and an enormous range of why. Reasoned opinions are welcome, I'd
hope.

--
riverrun past Eve's and Adam's from swerve of shore to bend of bay
(Email removed) -=*=- http://users.aol.com/dcrawson/home.htm

Let's get the off-topic stuff out of the way first.

DAVID B. FENSKE, VIDAR SVENDSEN, etc. --
I was thinking, after sending off my last contribution, that
possibly I shouldn't have said or responded to anything at all about
religious fundamentalists, because the fact is, I have no quarrel
with anyone's faith, nor do I feel condescending toward those who
believe differently than myself.
That said -- I DO quarrel with SOME Christian fundamentalists,
not for what they believe but for what they do. Among the aspects of
their behavior that I find distressing is their relentless campaign
(in the U.S., at least) to cause school curricula to conform to
their beliefs. I have children in school. I want my children
educated according to the best available modern knowledge of the
natural world, whether this appears to conflict with religious dogma
or not.
I have little doubt there are many fundamentalists who are
content to keep religious training in the home, and don't try to
force it into public institutions. Those worthy people have my full
blessing and approval -- as if they needed it! I regret that my
response to the other kind is sometimes poorly expressed, making it
appear that I condemn all who share their faith -- especially
considering the fact that, in this case at least, there really
wasn't any need for me to say anything at all.

Whew! Now, as we were saying...

RESEARCH NEEDED --
Well, this is kinda off-topic too, but it does concern Disney,
and it does concern comics, so...
Right now, I'm one of several writers working on a proposed
comics series that covers several different time frames. I'm toying
with an idea for a story in which Walt Disney would appear as a
character. It would take place in 1927, during Disney's famous train
ride from New York to Los Angeles. It's widely known that when he
got on the train, his most prominent character (Oswald the Rabbit)
had just been stolen by his distributor, as had key members of his
animation staff; but when he got off, a few days later, he was ready
to begin production on Mickey Mouse.
What I DON'T know is the route the train took. It would be
very convenient for my purposes if I could place him in either
Albuquerque, NM, or Flagstaff, AZ. Failing that, any of several
locations in Southern California -- or maybe even Illinois or
Missouri -- would do. If I can't find the right one, I'm not above
making small alterations in the facts to meet the needs of the story
(quite appropriate, considering who the story is about), but it
would still be best if I could establish that the train passed
through Albuquerque or Flagstaff.
Does anybody happen to know the route of the train, or know
of a source that would give it?

RIK PIERCE --
"Another thing I've noticed about Barks creations is not only the art
and his stories, but his *script* The words he gives the ducks are
spare and clean and simple."
I've long admired Barks for exactly that quality, as well as
the sheer inventiveness of his use of language. I've said many
times, over a span of decades, that his is the greatest influence on
my own prose style (which may, of course, be only wishful thinking).
This sometimes gets funny looks from non-Disney comics fans, who
think of him primarily as an artist -- but they just don't know.
Too bad for them.

DWIGHT DECKER --
I thought "Horsing Around with History" was kind of sad -- a
Great Event, the grand unveiling of a brand-new Barks spectacular --
that unfortunately fell flat as a story. One thing that I found
annoying -- and I admit it's trivial -- was that in that one story,
ALL the Beagles liked prunes. I remember back in my teens (when
comics used to be produced with chisels on stone slabs), what a kick
I got out of his surprise use as a plot device, a decade or so after
its first appearance, of what had originally been a simple throwaway
gag -- one of the Beagles liking prunes and the rest picking on him
for it. Seeing that odd variation on it trotted out, THREE decades
later, might have had at least an echo of that effect -- IF he'd
gotten it right. Since he didn't, the only effect it had was to make
me shake my head sadly, at the observation that he just doesn't seem
to care anymore about what used to be his greatest strength -- the
cohesiveness of the story he's telling.

CHRISTOPHER E. BARAT --
"Sadly, I've found the same lack of knowledge to be the case when
dealing with other people involved in the retailing of studio
products,"
While it's true that the norm is for such people to know
very little about the product (especially as compared to the
erudition of folks like you and me), I ran into a surprisingly
knowledgeable person a few years ago. I was at a mall with my older
daughter, Rachel, now 15 (and then about 12, I think), and the
Disney Store had arranged for a Disney artist to set up a stand near
their front door, to entertain kids.
We arrived too late to catch the lady's name, which is
unfortunate because she DID impress me. When she offered to draw
characters suggested by audience members, Rachel's hand shot up. Her
request was a character that would probably not have been named by
any other kid of her generation (with the possible exception of her
sister, Karen) -- Bucky Bug.
And not only did this woman proceed immediately to draw a
perfect likeness of Bucky Bug -- she accompanied it with several
minutes of patter about his setting, supporting characters, and
publishing history! She got the name of the town slightly wrong
(Junktown instead of Junkville), but hey -- I thought she did pretty
good!
She looked to be in her early-to-mid 30s or so, which made
the feat all the more impressive -- Bucky must have disappeared from
American comics before she was born! Possibly, she went through
special training for unusual requests, and might have been unfazed
even by Tillie Tiger, Pablo Penguin or Toby Tortoise... Anywho,
unfazed, she certainly was.

AND SPEAKING OF OBSCURE CHARACTERS --
The other day, while looking for something else, I happened
to run across a story about Bubbles the Water Baby, which is set in
Peter Pan's Mermaid Lagoon. (Original appearance: PETER PAN'S
TREASURE CHEST, 1952. Where I ran across it was in WDC&S #571.) I
have the Silly Symphony "Water Babies" somewhere in my 400 or so
hours of miscellaneous animated shorts, but finding it at this time
would be impractical. From memory, this "water baby" looks
compatible with the ones in that toon. I assume the Silly Symphony
"Merbabies" (which I don't have) also has a compatible setting. And
I believe it was already noted that the old Silly Symphony mermaids
appeared in the backgrounds of THE LITTLE MERMAID, so -- I wonder
where Neverland's Mermaid Lagoon is in relation to Ariel's kingdom...
Something for the universe-mongers among us to ponder...
Unfortunately, the universe-mongers will have to live with
the fact that the "King Neptune" character in that story looks very
different from the one in the eponymous Silly Symphony -- and the
Silly Symphony King Neptune did appear in other cartoons, including
a crossover with no less a star than Pablo Penguin!
More to ponder! Ponder on, universe-mongers! Ponder on! (Are
you pondering what I'm pondering?)

Quack, Don =

About the ONLY-ROSA-GLADSTONE-ISSUES-THAT-IS-IMPOSSIBLE-TO-MAKE:

What about an only Carl Barks comic featuring Don Rosa ?
It would be **really* popular.

>The "ironic twopager" in German Tock Tock magazine (and probably
>elsewhere):
>Has anyone noticed the appearence of the odd fourth nephew "Phooey"
>in one panel?

Who is Phooey and when did he appear ???

>In other words, I think it's fine to disagree strongly with another
persons
>views, and state clearly why you do, but I think we should avoid negative
>labelling of the people who hold them.

I completely agree.

Does anybody know if the drawings Don Rosa made for the Norwegian fanzine
(or what ever I should call it) Donaldisten has any story-code (cover-code)
?
I didn't find them in the database.

And does anybody know anything about what Don Rosa are going to do when he
comes to Oslo, or where he is going to be ?

BTW, I just love "Don's 'cluttered' art style"

Jo,
the crazy guy who **likes** Quack Pack...

---------------------------------
Mail-adress:
(Email removed)
---------------------------------

VIDAR SVENDSEN responded to my comment that a Disney Store manager had never
heard of QUACK PACK:

<<This isn't to bad is it? I'd wish I'd never heard of
Quack Pack>>

On an aesthetic level, you're undoubtedly right. But it's also unusual for
Disney to ignore a current animated project in a strict economic sense.

Has anyone gone to a D-Store lately, and if so, has s/he seen any merchandise
related to the TV series based on "101 Dalmatians"? I'd be shocked if none
existed...

DWIGHT DECKER commented, regarding Barks' writing style:
<<...There
are times when Barks's script (i.e., the Ducks' dialogue) is
wonderfully clever and inventive, with almost musical wordplay.
There are other times when the dialogue is strange and stilted,
with inconsistent use of contractions or just an unnatural choice
of words (such as HD&L sounding too formal) -- without even getting
into Barks's early 60s period, when he invented a whole new language
that was supposedly "hip talk" but was like nothing anyone ever really
spoke.>>

Barks' "stilted" dialogue isn't nearly as forced and unnatural as Vic
Lockman's dialogue was during his loopier periods (specifically, the late
60's), but I understand what you're getting at. It was most noticeable when
he was trying to be hip but not really pulling it off.

Actually, I think that Van Horn uses vocabulary more effectively than Barks
did, as a whole. He has a gift for putting an unexpected word or phrase into
his scripts and drawing a laugh. Barks was at his best when his dialogue was
"to the point" (though I must confess to guiltily enjoying some of those 60's
Scrooge adventures in which the dialogue borders on the arch at times). Don
Rosa is more in the "classic" Barksian tradition than the "off the wall" Van
Horn tradition when it comes to dialogue; he seems to be most effective when
he can marry dialogue and image together in a verbal or sight gag.

-- Christopher E. Barat
(Email removed)
http://members.aol.com/cebarat/home.htm
"NO TELEVISION SHOW IS GOING TO SHOW SCROOGE McDUCK ANYTHING NEW!" --
Scrooge, "DuckTales" episode "The Money Vanishes"

--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V97 Issue #216
******************************************

From Rik Pierce:
> Another caveat - I'm not at home right at the moment and I don't have
> any illustrations I can scrutinize. But for me there seem to be more
> lines in the drawings than need to be.

You betcha! I have a very low page-rate-pay per ink-line-drawn ratio.

>Maybe when I
> get home I should try and be more specific ... or am I likely to be
> flamed off the list ??

No need to explain why you don't like my art... I can understand anyone who
has that feeling since I'm not keen on it myself... but if you feel
compelled to publicly humiliate me...er... I mean explain your dislikes,
you need never fear being "flamed" on here. This is the most polite and
civil newsgroup on the Internet.

DON M.:
You seem at odds as to what name to use on here. You don't want to use
"Donald" to differentiate yourself from the other "Don", and you want to
gain the right to "Don" on the basis of prior usage? But you don't HAVE
prior usage. Your name is "Donald"... my name is "Don". Just "Don". It was
a name like "Keno", a nickname that was given me rather than the original
Italian names of my grandfather and father, to make it easy on Americans.
My "Don" is not an abbreviation of "Donald"... it's a short version of my
father's middle name of "Dante". Why didn't he name me "Dan"? Because "Don"
duplicates the sound of the first syllable of "Dante".
But seriously... why can't you be "Don M."? That's how I address you so
people don't think I'm talking to myself... which is what being on the
Internet is supposed to be our therapy against.

ANTTI:
.........wants to know when I'll be in Helsinki. Well, okay, here's what I
currently know of my schedule for the rest of 1997. Per can take this and
stick it into some appropriate corner of the Disney Comics Homepage, if he
likes...
Oct. 26-31 -- tour through Germany (the schedule for this has been posted
by others... I don't know what it is, myself).
Nov. 1 - 4 -- Italy. 1 & 2 in Lucca. 3 - visiting friends. 4 - in
Genova/Genoa... but probably not "in public".
Nov. 5 - 9 -- Finland. At the Helsinki Comic Convention and at bookstores.
Nov. 18 - 21 -- Denmark. I'll be at some bookfair someplace, helping
promote that new hardback "Lo$" book for Egmont. I don't know if this is
open to the public, but I assume it is. Maybe Byron will tell us more about
this.
Nov. 22 - 26 -- Oslo and thereabouts. No schedule for this yet. (Does it
seem odd that I have NO idea what I'll be doing on these trips? Well, I
figure my hosts will tell me where to go and what to do when I get there,
so I don't worry about it until then.)

ARCHONTIS' "Rosa Survey":
This was VERY interesting! I plan to look this over carefully and see what
might be learned from this. I might even post new choices of my own based
on how the voters jogged my memory about certain things.
But prior to that, I need to make two comments and hope that the people who
sent some comments that Archontis quoted will see them. I NEVER object to
someone disliking my stories or art or whatever... as long as they do it
for "informed" reasons.
One guy said he disliked my "Super Snooper Strikes Again" story because it
was a "rip-off" of Barks' original. This is not the first time I've heard
that -- I'm guessing this voter is in Europe where that story appeared with
a different script than I had written. That story was designed as a sequel
to Barks' original 1949 story, with many, many instances throughout of the
characters making references to "the other time this happened" or "like
before" and so forth. But ALL these bits of dialogue were removed by the
pre-Erickson editors, unbeknownst to me. I felt that I was taking that
original idea in all new directions, making stabs at super-hero comics
which had mutated into something wholly undreamt of in 1949! Now... knowing
that...if the voter STILL thinks that story sucked... fair enough.
Similarly, another voter disliked "On Stolen Time" because he said it was
stolen from a "DuckTales" episode. I never saw more than a few episodes of
that show, and that was not one of them, if there indeed was such an
episode. The plot of "On Stolen Time" was one that I'd used decades earlier
in my homemade comics when I was a tot... and I combined it with what I
later read in a John D.MacDonald story called "The Girl, the Gold Watch and
Everything". And again... knowing that... if the voter STILL thinks my
story sucks... fair enough... as long as he knows the facts.

PORTUGAL:
I still need to tell some interesting things about my trip to the Oporto
Comics Festival... but it's 2:15 AM, so that will have to wait until next
time.......