On Jan 13, 5:15pm, Soeren Krarup Olesen wrote:
> Okay about Brigitta McBridge - it was just more or less
> to provoke an alternative to the very much discussed
> Goldie. Brigitta is just one of my favourites, and when she
> operates in the areas of Scrooge (business) she uses a
> completely different set of means that usually softens or
> twists the goldmetal-hearted Scrooge - my thumb up for Brigitta!
From a writer's point of view, Goldie is _so_ special to Scrooge that
she can't be used very often. Don's recent 50th Anniversary
story is an example -- the story wouldn't have worked if Goldie
made frequent appearances and had become too familiar to the
readers. But Brigitta is a character who can be used often without
danger of ruining the chemistry. If I were a Duck writer, I'd
probably submit ideas for stories involving Brigitta without a
second thought, but I'd definitely think long and hard before
ever doing anything with Goldie.
--Dwight Decker
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Author
Topic: 199801
(513 messages)
D Decker
History is unpredictable II
Message 196 -
1998-01-14 at 00:14:10
D Decker
I commit a bloomer (Blumer?)
Message 197 -
1998-01-14 at 00:24:58
Uh oh...it just dawned on me that my previous remarks
in the "unpredictable history" thread could be considered
a SPOILER for Don's 50th Anniversary Scrooge story if
some of you haven't read it yet, since I referred to
a character whose appearance is supposed to be a
surprise. Gleep. What was I _thinking_?! Sorry about that...
--Dwight (very apologetically) Decker
in the "unpredictable history" thread could be considered
a SPOILER for Don's 50th Anniversary Scrooge story if
some of you haven't read it yet, since I referred to
a character whose appearance is supposed to be a
surprise. Gleep. What was I _thinking_?! Sorry about that...
--Dwight (very apologetically) Decker
D Decker
History is unpredictable
Message 198 -
1998-01-14 at 01:10:44
> > I am fully aware of that the number of Rosa fans is rather big on this
> > mailing list. However, it seems that Rosa has sort of "defined" the
> > unquestionable truth about what happened to Uncle Scrooge in the old
> > days.
>
I look at it this way. What made Barks's work so special was that for
about a quarter of a century, he had full control of the characters
(subject, as is well known, to the editors' whims). He wrote most of
the stories, he drew all the pictures (well, not counting the Woodchucks
scripts after he retired). We know Barks from his interviews as being
a bit cynical, even curmudgeonly, and that he regarded the Duck work as
a job and not much more than that. He didn't own the characters, after
all -- Disney did. Yet there was some combination of
talent, humor, life experience, story skill learned at Disney, and
personal vision that made his work distinctive and wonderful. Nobody
else was in the right place at the right time with the same combination
of ingredients. So we have a body of work that is little short of
fantastic.
Only thing is, Barks retired over thirty years ago. He's done a few
things in the comic-book story line since then (like the Woodchuck
scripts and "Horsing Around With History"), but it's pretty scant.
Barks is still alive today, thank God, but only due to statistically
rare longevity. In any case, he has long ceased to be a significant
factor in new Duck stories. So...comic-book companies can continually
recycle Barks's stories and not commission new stories by other people,
except that the number of Barks stories, while large, is finite,
and some of the older ones are looking a little dated (like the one
involving American military testing of captured German V-2 rockets).
Or...new stories by new writers and artists can be commissioned. After
all, Carl Barks didn't own the characters. Disney did and does. Barks
could play with the characters and define them his own way and create
new ones because he had free rein, but mainly because the comic books
were considered relatively unimportant by the Disney office. There's
no reason why Barks had to be the only one to ever have a vision of
what the characters could be. Isn't it about time someone new came
along who could do the same thing Barks did, but in his own way? Barks
was the first and so he could establish a lot of things that those who
come after can only build on -- but Barks had been pretty much out of
the picture for twenty years when Rosa came along.
Someone might not personally care for what Rosa's been doing -- but
Rosa's been doing _something_. These are new stories done from his
personal and unique viewpoint, done just a few months ago, not aging
reprints from forty years ago we've seen fifteen times. Rosa has the
drive, the creativity, the energy to produce one remarkable story after
another without seeming to burn out. I just wish there were five people
like Don Rosa -- not Rosa clones but artist-writers in the Barks tradition,
each one just as talented, each one with a unique and personal vision,
each building on Barks's legacy in a different way. But maybe you only
get one of those per generation, and Don's ours.
--Dwight Decker
> > mailing list. However, it seems that Rosa has sort of "defined" the
> > unquestionable truth about what happened to Uncle Scrooge in the old
> > days.
>
I look at it this way. What made Barks's work so special was that for
about a quarter of a century, he had full control of the characters
(subject, as is well known, to the editors' whims). He wrote most of
the stories, he drew all the pictures (well, not counting the Woodchucks
scripts after he retired). We know Barks from his interviews as being
a bit cynical, even curmudgeonly, and that he regarded the Duck work as
a job and not much more than that. He didn't own the characters, after
all -- Disney did. Yet there was some combination of
talent, humor, life experience, story skill learned at Disney, and
personal vision that made his work distinctive and wonderful. Nobody
else was in the right place at the right time with the same combination
of ingredients. So we have a body of work that is little short of
fantastic.
Only thing is, Barks retired over thirty years ago. He's done a few
things in the comic-book story line since then (like the Woodchuck
scripts and "Horsing Around With History"), but it's pretty scant.
Barks is still alive today, thank God, but only due to statistically
rare longevity. In any case, he has long ceased to be a significant
factor in new Duck stories. So...comic-book companies can continually
recycle Barks's stories and not commission new stories by other people,
except that the number of Barks stories, while large, is finite,
and some of the older ones are looking a little dated (like the one
involving American military testing of captured German V-2 rockets).
Or...new stories by new writers and artists can be commissioned. After
all, Carl Barks didn't own the characters. Disney did and does. Barks
could play with the characters and define them his own way and create
new ones because he had free rein, but mainly because the comic books
were considered relatively unimportant by the Disney office. There's
no reason why Barks had to be the only one to ever have a vision of
what the characters could be. Isn't it about time someone new came
along who could do the same thing Barks did, but in his own way? Barks
was the first and so he could establish a lot of things that those who
come after can only build on -- but Barks had been pretty much out of
the picture for twenty years when Rosa came along.
Someone might not personally care for what Rosa's been doing -- but
Rosa's been doing _something_. These are new stories done from his
personal and unique viewpoint, done just a few months ago, not aging
reprints from forty years ago we've seen fifteen times. Rosa has the
drive, the creativity, the energy to produce one remarkable story after
another without seeming to burn out. I just wish there were five people
like Don Rosa -- not Rosa clones but artist-writers in the Barks tradition,
each one just as talented, each one with a unique and personal vision,
each building on Barks's legacy in a different way. But maybe you only
get one of those per generation, and Don's ours.
--Dwight Decker
Eta Beta
Rosa: the Disney Extremist ? & vv
Message 199 -
1998-01-14 at 02:25:17
Wow! three issues of the list in a single day! And what a discussion!
SOEREN
to TARJEI
>...almost everyone
>refers to "the order" as historical facts, or rather facts
>on which new stories should be based.
Yes, but nobody seems to agree on what, exactly, "the order" should be,
and that is, I guess, the fun part. Everybody is trying to build a duck
universe of their own :-)
to DWIGHT (& KATIE)
>Brigitta is just one of my favourites, and when she
>operates in the areas of Scrooge (business) she uses a
>completely different set of means that usually softens or
>twists the goldmetal-hearted Scrooge - my thumb up for Brigitta!
Mark another one for Romano Scarpa, mate, and yes, she's got balls ;-)
to DANIEL v E.
>I thought that I was supposed to read pats-on-the-back-
>to-Rosa only, on this list.
I quote a friend: No Sacred Cows Allowed ;-)
to DON ROSA
>It's just that the wave of the maillist feeling goes towards
>an unquestionable adaption of your timeline; I wonder which
>American would dare to write a different "history" about young
>Scrooge, and you see, then we have a severe problem,
>don't we?
Well, there's quite a few "Barksian" authors around, and we have more
Cavazzano's clones in Italy than you can shake a tailfeather at, too, but
I still have to see a "Rosan" author, and he's been around for some 10
years... fact is, his approach to the matter is so personal, both
graphically and... philosophically, that I doubt he could be ever
imitated, lest set a "company style". He's still rather unknown, in
Italy, to the majority of readers, the ones that buy "Topolino", for
instance, and I don't think Italian authors would feel a sudden urge to
follow Don's path in the near future... and there will be no American
authors at all, pretty soon, I'm afraid...
to MARCO B.
>By the way, do you
>have any info on a Celoni? His art is most awkward and
>almost as if his work has been put through some kind of a
>...um... psychedelic transformer.
Here's one of the Cavazzano's clones...
ARCHONTIS
to DANIEL
>So, now Don is an iconoclast?
Yes, IMHO. And a good one, too! And we need people who dare, and try new
ways for the old ducks, even if we don't like the results, every now and
then.
But I can understand DANIEL's bitterness and SOEREN's criticism, to a
certain point; I like Donald, too, and I see his character as being
slowly but inexorably dismissed or relegated to complimentary roles, not
just by Don, but a lot of Italian authors too, and they begun well before
Don's work was even started, or the already mentioned Duck Tales...
There's quite a few things I don't like in Don's work, too, and they all
regard his interpretation of the characters:
Donald's too "dumb" and lazy
HDL are obnoxious
Scrooge is... just too much.
All these "faults", however, happen only in the Lo$ saga chapters and
addendums, while "A Matter Of Some Gravity", for one, is the best Disney
story I've read in the last ten years or so, and it substituted "The Duck
That Never Was" in my personal "hit parade", so I really appreciate Don's
stories that are not self-restricted to the Scrooge Saga.
The term "childish" was often mentioned in this list, recently, with
reference to the most various material, and I should point out that Don's
stories are among the very few that are currently far from that rubble.
They are enjoyable at various levels, and the humorous parts and the
witty movies quotes are really good.
I will never forget "Lydia the Tattooed Lady", from "Treasury of
Croesus", and I'm still disappointed about the Italian translators giving
it a total miss, since they apparently believed that a local pop singer
called Lucio Battisti was more easily recognizable to Italian readers
than Groucho Marx... or perhaps they just never saw "At the Circus"...
My conclusion is that, while I don't truly enjoy every single ink blot
that dropped from Don's brush, I'm ready to fight for his right of
dropping them as he sees fit, even if it will cost me some more
disappointments in the future.
DWIGHT
>I have to admit, though, that I get
>a slight sinking feeling when I start a story and I notice that McDuck's
>money bin has a dome on it...
Wak! I had a Scrooge's money bin piggy-bank thing, as a child, and it
surely was domed.
You mean that's not an ULTIMATE TRUTH ? ;-) JKOC, but the bin looks a bit
better with a dome on top, IMHO :-)
Cheers
Eta Beta
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #14
*****************************************
SOEREN
to TARJEI
>...almost everyone
>refers to "the order" as historical facts, or rather facts
>on which new stories should be based.
Yes, but nobody seems to agree on what, exactly, "the order" should be,
and that is, I guess, the fun part. Everybody is trying to build a duck
universe of their own :-)
to DWIGHT (& KATIE)
>Brigitta is just one of my favourites, and when she
>operates in the areas of Scrooge (business) she uses a
>completely different set of means that usually softens or
>twists the goldmetal-hearted Scrooge - my thumb up for Brigitta!
Mark another one for Romano Scarpa, mate, and yes, she's got balls ;-)
to DANIEL v E.
>I thought that I was supposed to read pats-on-the-back-
>to-Rosa only, on this list.
I quote a friend: No Sacred Cows Allowed ;-)
to DON ROSA
>It's just that the wave of the maillist feeling goes towards
>an unquestionable adaption of your timeline; I wonder which
>American would dare to write a different "history" about young
>Scrooge, and you see, then we have a severe problem,
>don't we?
Well, there's quite a few "Barksian" authors around, and we have more
Cavazzano's clones in Italy than you can shake a tailfeather at, too, but
I still have to see a "Rosan" author, and he's been around for some 10
years... fact is, his approach to the matter is so personal, both
graphically and... philosophically, that I doubt he could be ever
imitated, lest set a "company style". He's still rather unknown, in
Italy, to the majority of readers, the ones that buy "Topolino", for
instance, and I don't think Italian authors would feel a sudden urge to
follow Don's path in the near future... and there will be no American
authors at all, pretty soon, I'm afraid...
to MARCO B.
>By the way, do you
>have any info on a Celoni? His art is most awkward and
>almost as if his work has been put through some kind of a
>...um... psychedelic transformer.
Here's one of the Cavazzano's clones...
ARCHONTIS
to DANIEL
>So, now Don is an iconoclast?
Yes, IMHO. And a good one, too! And we need people who dare, and try new
ways for the old ducks, even if we don't like the results, every now and
then.
But I can understand DANIEL's bitterness and SOEREN's criticism, to a
certain point; I like Donald, too, and I see his character as being
slowly but inexorably dismissed or relegated to complimentary roles, not
just by Don, but a lot of Italian authors too, and they begun well before
Don's work was even started, or the already mentioned Duck Tales...
There's quite a few things I don't like in Don's work, too, and they all
regard his interpretation of the characters:
Donald's too "dumb" and lazy
HDL are obnoxious
Scrooge is... just too much.
All these "faults", however, happen only in the Lo$ saga chapters and
addendums, while "A Matter Of Some Gravity", for one, is the best Disney
story I've read in the last ten years or so, and it substituted "The Duck
That Never Was" in my personal "hit parade", so I really appreciate Don's
stories that are not self-restricted to the Scrooge Saga.
The term "childish" was often mentioned in this list, recently, with
reference to the most various material, and I should point out that Don's
stories are among the very few that are currently far from that rubble.
They are enjoyable at various levels, and the humorous parts and the
witty movies quotes are really good.
I will never forget "Lydia the Tattooed Lady", from "Treasury of
Croesus", and I'm still disappointed about the Italian translators giving
it a total miss, since they apparently believed that a local pop singer
called Lucio Battisti was more easily recognizable to Italian readers
than Groucho Marx... or perhaps they just never saw "At the Circus"...
My conclusion is that, while I don't truly enjoy every single ink blot
that dropped from Don's brush, I'm ready to fight for his right of
dropping them as he sees fit, even if it will cost me some more
disappointments in the future.
DWIGHT
>I have to admit, though, that I get
>a slight sinking feeling when I start a story and I notice that McDuck's
>money bin has a dome on it...
Wak! I had a Scrooge's money bin piggy-bank thing, as a child, and it
surely was domed.
You mean that's not an ULTIMATE TRUTH ? ;-) JKOC, but the bin looks a bit
better with a dome on top, IMHO :-)
Cheers
Eta Beta
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #14
*****************************************
Katie Sullivan
Feathered Fracas!!
Message 200 -
1998-01-14 at 02:52:13
Gosh, what a lot can happen in just a few little digests. I'll add my
own $0.02 to the pile.
> >As far as I am concerned the early days of Scrooge is, and should
> remain, a complete mystery.
As far as YOU'RE concerned, fine. But not in my book.
> Well, IMHO Don Rosa has done just about the coolest thing I can
> imagine a
> Disney artist doing.... [...] it was like a dream come true.
My sentiments exactly.
> And KATIE, I think you should check out Brigitta McBridge - she has
> balls!!!
Regarding this and other comments about Brigitta: I really can't judge
fairly, since I have only read one story (the Inca one) containing
Brigitta. I must say my first instincts rebel against her, but then I'm
biased by over a decade of loving the Goldie storyline. But does it
bother anyone else that $crooge is old enough to be Brigitta's father?
At least apparently. I mean, he walks with a cane (well, some of the
time...) and she's hopping around with her perky blonde hair. Again,
I'm not a fair judge, with my limited exposure to the character, but it
just seems...I don't know...not right (to me).
> However, it seems that Rosa has sort of
> >> "defined" the unquestionable truth about what happened
> >> to Uncle Scrooge in the old days.
Rosa's word is not gospel unless one decides it is so in one's personal
world. I for one am a huge enthusiast of his work, but I understand
that not everyone shares this view. You're free to your own opinion.
Rosa has no more authority over your beliefs than the European artists
who (I am told) have given Scrooge a brother. Believe what seems right
to you.
> >As I've said before, I like the "Life of Scrooge" series, but only as
> a
> >one-time project showing what could have been *if*. And in this way
> it's
> >IMO a masterpiece. However, as it appears now it certainly isn't a
> one-
> >time project and I'm getting pretty tired of the new additional
> chapters.
> >Am I really (almost?) the only one?
Not the only one, I suppose, but I can't say I agree with you. "Them's
the breaks."
> >Don's Ducks are really no Barks-ducks at all and not even
> Disney-Ducks
Then why does Rosa put (C) the Walt Disney Co. at the bottom of all the
fan drawings I see on the D.U.C.K. Hunt page? They're still Disney.
Mickey has changed a lot since "Steamboat Willie", but you don't see
people screaming "sacrilege", do you?
>>Scrooge is becoming more and more a superhero with crooks running away
when theysee him coming from a distance,
NO, NO, NO! Scrooge is adventurer. Always has been, always will be.
That's a big part of his charm. He is not a superhero, going around
saving the downtrodden, rescuing kittens from burning buildings, etc.
He has no superpowers. He does not display the impossibly huge muscles
of some other alleged "superheroes". Indeed, he's physically smaller
than most of the other anthropomorphized critters he interacts with.
> Huey, Dewey and Louie are more and more becoming irritating bright
> little kids,
I don't agree with this, either. They are absolutely no more
"irritating" in, say, "Guardians of the Lost Library" than in the story
wherein they explore King Solomon's Mines. (Rosa and Barks,
respectively.) They still rely on their wits, look to their uncles as
mentors, etc. I don't find them "irritating" at all. "Irritating" to
me, is inventing a cloyingly sweet character like Webby (in DuckTales)
for the obvious purpose of marketing.
> So there it is...It's not that Rosa leans heavily on Barks. It's that
> his
> Ducks are really non-Barks! SO WHAT??? Why are you assuming that Duck
> creators out there should not forge a "new", refreshing, Duck
> characterization?
Might I remind you that Barks did not create Donald. If he hadn't taken
a great deal of creative lisence with Donald, he would have remained a
slap-stick cartoon character with a stupid voice, and we wouldn't be
having this conversation at all!!!
> >Why not? Of course this will make him an faithless person, because
> poor
> >Goldie is still waiting for him in/around his old shack.
Well, yeah, I suppose so. Not that Goldie didn't encourage a few heads
to turn after Scrooge left the Klondike, I imagine. They never were
very open with their affection, anyway. (See my other note below...)
> DAVID G.:
> I don't see how Rosa possibly could leave *less* to
> the imagination, since the LO$-project apparently is going
> to reveil *everything* about Scrooge' past.
Again, I disagree. Not *everything* is revealed. In Lo$, we don't meet
Scrooge until he's 10 years old. There are other gaps, many of which
are all right as they are: mysterious. (Not that I personally wouldn't
welcome more Lo$, Don. You know that!) All I'm saying here is that we
don't know what kind of shampoo $crooge uses (whatever is on sale, I
suppose!) or what's in his medicine cabinet, but we don't *need* to
know!
One omission I've been wondering about...
[Relying on Rosa's universe, here, 'cause I choose to]
At the end of Lo$, Scrooge says he's going to sell his big, gloomy old
mansion. So where does he live now?
> [ROSA...]
> You take my meaning to be that I don't pay attention to criticism.
> That
> wasn't my point at all!
True, an artist requires criticism to improve. I find the same with my
own work. All in all, well said.
>In the past Don Rosa has said not to like Ducktales, but IMO there's
not
>much difference anymore in the Scrooge-nephews relation in Don's
stories
>and in Ducktales. Only, in Ducktales Donald can't say anything sensible
>because of his cartoonish voice.
Smoley hokes. If anything , H, D & L have more spunk in the comics (not
just Rosa's) than in DuckTales. The cartoon nephews, (especially when
paired with Webby) were more childish and cutesy, IMHO. And as for
Donald in DuckTales, don't even get me started. The only conceivable
reason I don't burn Launchpad in effigy for replacing him is because I'm
also a fan of Darkwing Duck.
>Admittedly, we "know" more about the McDuck and Duck families now,
>but we have years of Scrooge's travels that are still undiscussed, and
>Don *didn't* try to show what happened during Scrooge and Goldie's
month
>alone on Scrooge's claim, so that can remain enigmatic too.
Some of us have rather specific ideas about that period of time, and I
don't think the Grand High Mouse would approve of my particular
theories...if you catch my meaning. ;-)
To sum it all up, I guess, I'll quote yet again...
>Hey, IT'S ALL ABOUT COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS!!! JUST ENJOY THE >D***ED
THINGS!!!
Amen.
Katie Sullivan
(Email removed)
a.k.a. Miss Quackfaster
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for
your right to say it" ~~~ attributed to Voltaire
own $0.02 to the pile.
> >As far as I am concerned the early days of Scrooge is, and should
> remain, a complete mystery.
As far as YOU'RE concerned, fine. But not in my book.
> Well, IMHO Don Rosa has done just about the coolest thing I can
> imagine a
> Disney artist doing.... [...] it was like a dream come true.
My sentiments exactly.
> And KATIE, I think you should check out Brigitta McBridge - she has
> balls!!!
Regarding this and other comments about Brigitta: I really can't judge
fairly, since I have only read one story (the Inca one) containing
Brigitta. I must say my first instincts rebel against her, but then I'm
biased by over a decade of loving the Goldie storyline. But does it
bother anyone else that $crooge is old enough to be Brigitta's father?
At least apparently. I mean, he walks with a cane (well, some of the
time...) and she's hopping around with her perky blonde hair. Again,
I'm not a fair judge, with my limited exposure to the character, but it
just seems...I don't know...not right (to me).
> However, it seems that Rosa has sort of
> >> "defined" the unquestionable truth about what happened
> >> to Uncle Scrooge in the old days.
Rosa's word is not gospel unless one decides it is so in one's personal
world. I for one am a huge enthusiast of his work, but I understand
that not everyone shares this view. You're free to your own opinion.
Rosa has no more authority over your beliefs than the European artists
who (I am told) have given Scrooge a brother. Believe what seems right
to you.
> >As I've said before, I like the "Life of Scrooge" series, but only as
> a
> >one-time project showing what could have been *if*. And in this way
> it's
> >IMO a masterpiece. However, as it appears now it certainly isn't a
> one-
> >time project and I'm getting pretty tired of the new additional
> chapters.
> >Am I really (almost?) the only one?
Not the only one, I suppose, but I can't say I agree with you. "Them's
the breaks."
> >Don's Ducks are really no Barks-ducks at all and not even
> Disney-Ducks
Then why does Rosa put (C) the Walt Disney Co. at the bottom of all the
fan drawings I see on the D.U.C.K. Hunt page? They're still Disney.
Mickey has changed a lot since "Steamboat Willie", but you don't see
people screaming "sacrilege", do you?
>>Scrooge is becoming more and more a superhero with crooks running away
when theysee him coming from a distance,
NO, NO, NO! Scrooge is adventurer. Always has been, always will be.
That's a big part of his charm. He is not a superhero, going around
saving the downtrodden, rescuing kittens from burning buildings, etc.
He has no superpowers. He does not display the impossibly huge muscles
of some other alleged "superheroes". Indeed, he's physically smaller
than most of the other anthropomorphized critters he interacts with.
> Huey, Dewey and Louie are more and more becoming irritating bright
> little kids,
I don't agree with this, either. They are absolutely no more
"irritating" in, say, "Guardians of the Lost Library" than in the story
wherein they explore King Solomon's Mines. (Rosa and Barks,
respectively.) They still rely on their wits, look to their uncles as
mentors, etc. I don't find them "irritating" at all. "Irritating" to
me, is inventing a cloyingly sweet character like Webby (in DuckTales)
for the obvious purpose of marketing.
> So there it is...It's not that Rosa leans heavily on Barks. It's that
> his
> Ducks are really non-Barks! SO WHAT??? Why are you assuming that Duck
> creators out there should not forge a "new", refreshing, Duck
> characterization?
Might I remind you that Barks did not create Donald. If he hadn't taken
a great deal of creative lisence with Donald, he would have remained a
slap-stick cartoon character with a stupid voice, and we wouldn't be
having this conversation at all!!!
> >Why not? Of course this will make him an faithless person, because
> poor
> >Goldie is still waiting for him in/around his old shack.
Well, yeah, I suppose so. Not that Goldie didn't encourage a few heads
to turn after Scrooge left the Klondike, I imagine. They never were
very open with their affection, anyway. (See my other note below...)
> DAVID G.:
> I don't see how Rosa possibly could leave *less* to
> the imagination, since the LO$-project apparently is going
> to reveil *everything* about Scrooge' past.
Again, I disagree. Not *everything* is revealed. In Lo$, we don't meet
Scrooge until he's 10 years old. There are other gaps, many of which
are all right as they are: mysterious. (Not that I personally wouldn't
welcome more Lo$, Don. You know that!) All I'm saying here is that we
don't know what kind of shampoo $crooge uses (whatever is on sale, I
suppose!) or what's in his medicine cabinet, but we don't *need* to
know!
One omission I've been wondering about...
[Relying on Rosa's universe, here, 'cause I choose to]
At the end of Lo$, Scrooge says he's going to sell his big, gloomy old
mansion. So where does he live now?
> [ROSA...]
> You take my meaning to be that I don't pay attention to criticism.
> That
> wasn't my point at all!
True, an artist requires criticism to improve. I find the same with my
own work. All in all, well said.
>In the past Don Rosa has said not to like Ducktales, but IMO there's
not
>much difference anymore in the Scrooge-nephews relation in Don's
stories
>and in Ducktales. Only, in Ducktales Donald can't say anything sensible
>because of his cartoonish voice.
Smoley hokes. If anything , H, D & L have more spunk in the comics (not
just Rosa's) than in DuckTales. The cartoon nephews, (especially when
paired with Webby) were more childish and cutesy, IMHO. And as for
Donald in DuckTales, don't even get me started. The only conceivable
reason I don't burn Launchpad in effigy for replacing him is because I'm
also a fan of Darkwing Duck.
>Admittedly, we "know" more about the McDuck and Duck families now,
>but we have years of Scrooge's travels that are still undiscussed, and
>Don *didn't* try to show what happened during Scrooge and Goldie's
month
>alone on Scrooge's claim, so that can remain enigmatic too.
Some of us have rather specific ideas about that period of time, and I
don't think the Grand High Mouse would approve of my particular
theories...if you catch my meaning. ;-)
To sum it all up, I guess, I'll quote yet again...
>Hey, IT'S ALL ABOUT COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS!!! JUST ENJOY THE >D***ED
THINGS!!!
Amen.
Katie Sullivan
(Email removed)
a.k.a. Miss Quackfaster
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for
your right to say it" ~~~ attributed to Voltaire
SRoweCanoe
Money and Scrooge
Message 201 -
1998-01-14 at 03:24:08
In a message dated 98-01-13 08:52:01 EST, Don Rosa
<< $crooge would not will
his money to ANYONE. He would puzzle as to why anyone should desire to gain
one red cent that they did not earn with their own two hands. I don't think
the idea to leave his $ to someone who did not earn that money would even
occur to him. But then, what would he do with it? He might not see any
reason to make any plans for it at all... it would not enter his mind.>>
While I don't think he would drop his collection in the ocean for future
treasure hunters, I do agree that he wouldn't simply will his money out to
others.
I think he's will it to Huey, Dewey, and Louie with enough conditions on it,
that after a 24pp story (heck a 48pp story), they would agree not to touch it,
but to make their own money fair and square; just like Scrooge would have
wanted. And at the end of such story, we would agree with them.
Steven R
<< $crooge would not will
his money to ANYONE. He would puzzle as to why anyone should desire to gain
one red cent that they did not earn with their own two hands. I don't think
the idea to leave his $ to someone who did not earn that money would even
occur to him. But then, what would he do with it? He might not see any
reason to make any plans for it at all... it would not enter his mind.>>
While I don't think he would drop his collection in the ocean for future
treasure hunters, I do agree that he wouldn't simply will his money out to
others.
I think he's will it to Huey, Dewey, and Louie with enough conditions on it,
that after a 24pp story (heck a 48pp story), they would agree not to touch it,
but to make their own money fair and square; just like Scrooge would have
wanted. And at the end of such story, we would agree with them.
Steven R
Jonathan Markoff
WDC&S 620-621
Message 202 -
1998-01-14 at 03:58:39
Whaaaat?! Why is "The Pied Piper of Duckburg" in WDC&S 621 instead of "An
Eye for Detail"? And speaking of WDC&S...
25 pages of "The Reluctant Dragon" in one issue?! 14 pages of "Morris the
Midget Moose" the next?! And this is what is Gladstone is charging $6.95
for???? The mind reels.
--Jonathan Markoff
"I can't cash bad luck stories at the bank! Pay up or get out!"
--Carl Barks, "Back to Long Ago"
Eye for Detail"? And speaking of WDC&S...
25 pages of "The Reluctant Dragon" in one issue?! 14 pages of "Morris the
Midget Moose" the next?! And this is what is Gladstone is charging $6.95
for???? The mind reels.
--Jonathan Markoff
"I can't cash bad luck stories at the bank! Pay up or get out!"
--Carl Barks, "Back to Long Ago"
Cebarat
Disney Comics Digest V98 #11-13
Message 203 -
1998-01-14 at 05:37:45
D. VAN EIJMEREN:
<<In Barks' rainbow-tenpager (WDC 155) it's Huey, Dewey and Louie who'll
inherit Scrooge's fortune. In "Bongo on the Congo" however, Scrooge is
running after Donald "determined to make [him] the next tycoon of the
vast McDuck empire.">>
The latter doesn't necessarily mean that Donald would be inheriting Scrooge's
money. Perhaps Scrooge is concerned about Donald being left in charge of
his fortune until the nephews are of legal age to take control of it
themselves. In that case, Scrooge would want to make sure that Donald is
up to the job, at least in the short term.
In my opinion, of all the conflicting stories, Scrooge willing his money to
HD&L in WDC 155 is probably the way things "actually" happened. Donald
would not be left out in the cold, of course, but HD&L seem like the most
reliable caretakers -- by which I mean the characters most likely to preserve
what Scrooge earned AND recognize chances to build on it. (The DUCKTALES
episode "Yuppy Ducks" aside... :-( )
DWIGHT DECKER:
<<I have to admit, though, that I get
a slight sinking feeling when I start a story and I notice that McDuck's
money bin has a dome on it...>>
Speaking of DUCKTALES... I dunno, seeing that dome gives ME kind of a warm
feeling inside. :-)
-- Christopher E. Barat
(Email removed)
http://members.aol.com/cebarat/home.htm
<<In Barks' rainbow-tenpager (WDC 155) it's Huey, Dewey and Louie who'll
inherit Scrooge's fortune. In "Bongo on the Congo" however, Scrooge is
running after Donald "determined to make [him] the next tycoon of the
vast McDuck empire.">>
The latter doesn't necessarily mean that Donald would be inheriting Scrooge's
money. Perhaps Scrooge is concerned about Donald being left in charge of
his fortune until the nephews are of legal age to take control of it
themselves. In that case, Scrooge would want to make sure that Donald is
up to the job, at least in the short term.
In my opinion, of all the conflicting stories, Scrooge willing his money to
HD&L in WDC 155 is probably the way things "actually" happened. Donald
would not be left out in the cold, of course, but HD&L seem like the most
reliable caretakers -- by which I mean the characters most likely to preserve
what Scrooge earned AND recognize chances to build on it. (The DUCKTALES
episode "Yuppy Ducks" aside... :-( )
DWIGHT DECKER:
<<I have to admit, though, that I get
a slight sinking feeling when I start a story and I notice that McDuck's
money bin has a dome on it...>>
Speaking of DUCKTALES... I dunno, seeing that dome gives ME kind of a warm
feeling inside. :-)
-- Christopher E. Barat
(Email removed)
http://members.aol.com/cebarat/home.htm
Katie Sullivan
Goldie McDuck?
Message 204 -
1998-01-14 at 06:41:09
> It is possible that Dickie's presence will never be translated into
> stories
> in the USA as it seems her mere existence is some what contentionable.
Sigh. Is a hint of illegitimacy really all THAT bad, in a country that
embraces X-Men and Spawn! Some of those so-called "superhero" comics
are practically pornography!
> It is probably easier for some to imagine Goldie as some sort of chase
> Gilded Lady, pining for
> her one true love, thriving only on the single thought that one day
> her Prince $crooge
> would return to seek her hand in marriage.
Geez, I wish I could read that letter that was in the box of chocolates
in "Last Sled to Dawson"!!!
> However, if we are to believe Romano Scarpa's introduction of Dickie,
> then we are forced to accept that some time after $crooge rejected
> Goldie's love (in the Barks classic "Back to the
> Klondike") one might suppose she waited a while, then finally began to
> live her life again.
> For Dickie to have been born, Goldie must have given birth to her own
> child.
Since everyone else seems to be dancing around this, I'll just come
right out and say it. Isn't it at least *slightly* possible that Goldie
and Scrooge *might* *theoretically* have had a child together?
THAT would throw a wrench into all these inheritance discussions,
wouldn't it?
[To quote Humperdink Duck in Part 10 of Lo$: "I shudder to imagine the
kid that would come from *that* unholy union!" Sure, he was talking
about Quackmore and Hortense...but...]
> From a writer's point of view, Goldie is _so_ special to Scrooge that
> she can't be used very often.
Good point. I think her rarity is part of her allure.
> As for keeping coming up with new "young Scrooge" stories, why
> not? Consider him as just another character, *in addition* to Scrooge.
Maybe young Scrooge should have his own title, so the people who don't
like him can completely avoid him. No, wait, Gladstone is down the bare
bones. Never mind. :-P
> > I've tried that "what-if" in my text "Blood in Duckburg" (maybe
> David
> > Gerstein remembers about my comments some years ago). U$ secretly
> > makes a will leaving all his assets to Goldie. Rockerduck manages
> to
> > destroy the will, thus leaving DD as U$'s sole heir by default. U$
>
> > dies and Rockerduck tries to have DD killed in order to jeopardize
> the
> > Duck family business (H, D, L, Fethry and Gladstone would be left
> > fighting for the best share of U$'s fortune) and take over Duckburg
> in
> > association with Flintheart Glomgold... that's a long story. :-)
Gosh, would I like to read that. Except I'd hate to see Scrooge really
go off to that great money bin the sky. I swear I tear up just thinking
of it.
> > Besides that, Goldie is no relative
>
> This may not be entirely correct: We know, from "Back to the
> Klondike",
> that Goldie stayed with Scrooge for a month, working at his claim.
> [...]
> they might be considered to have been married under "common law",
> which
> is recognized in many states in the US [how about Alaska?] and which
> basically states that if a couple live together for a certain amount
> of time [how long?], they are considered to be married.
Gosh, but that's creative. Someone should do some research on that!
Wouldn't that be a shocker for Donald and the nephews?
--
*******************************************
Planet Sullivan http://www.execpc.com/~sulliva1/
With Redwall, Disney Ducks, llamas, humor and more!
:-)
"I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy I every minute of it."
"Being crazy is what keeps me from going insane."
********************************************
> stories
> in the USA as it seems her mere existence is some what contentionable.
Sigh. Is a hint of illegitimacy really all THAT bad, in a country that
embraces X-Men and Spawn! Some of those so-called "superhero" comics
are practically pornography!
> It is probably easier for some to imagine Goldie as some sort of chase
> Gilded Lady, pining for
> her one true love, thriving only on the single thought that one day
> her Prince $crooge
> would return to seek her hand in marriage.
Geez, I wish I could read that letter that was in the box of chocolates
in "Last Sled to Dawson"!!!
> However, if we are to believe Romano Scarpa's introduction of Dickie,
> then we are forced to accept that some time after $crooge rejected
> Goldie's love (in the Barks classic "Back to the
> Klondike") one might suppose she waited a while, then finally began to
> live her life again.
> For Dickie to have been born, Goldie must have given birth to her own
> child.
Since everyone else seems to be dancing around this, I'll just come
right out and say it. Isn't it at least *slightly* possible that Goldie
and Scrooge *might* *theoretically* have had a child together?
THAT would throw a wrench into all these inheritance discussions,
wouldn't it?
[To quote Humperdink Duck in Part 10 of Lo$: "I shudder to imagine the
kid that would come from *that* unholy union!" Sure, he was talking
about Quackmore and Hortense...but...]
> From a writer's point of view, Goldie is _so_ special to Scrooge that
> she can't be used very often.
Good point. I think her rarity is part of her allure.
> As for keeping coming up with new "young Scrooge" stories, why
> not? Consider him as just another character, *in addition* to Scrooge.
Maybe young Scrooge should have his own title, so the people who don't
like him can completely avoid him. No, wait, Gladstone is down the bare
bones. Never mind. :-P
> > I've tried that "what-if" in my text "Blood in Duckburg" (maybe
> David
> > Gerstein remembers about my comments some years ago). U$ secretly
> > makes a will leaving all his assets to Goldie. Rockerduck manages
> to
> > destroy the will, thus leaving DD as U$'s sole heir by default. U$
>
> > dies and Rockerduck tries to have DD killed in order to jeopardize
> the
> > Duck family business (H, D, L, Fethry and Gladstone would be left
> > fighting for the best share of U$'s fortune) and take over Duckburg
> in
> > association with Flintheart Glomgold... that's a long story. :-)
Gosh, would I like to read that. Except I'd hate to see Scrooge really
go off to that great money bin the sky. I swear I tear up just thinking
of it.
> > Besides that, Goldie is no relative
>
> This may not be entirely correct: We know, from "Back to the
> Klondike",
> that Goldie stayed with Scrooge for a month, working at his claim.
> [...]
> they might be considered to have been married under "common law",
> which
> is recognized in many states in the US [how about Alaska?] and which
> basically states that if a couple live together for a certain amount
> of time [how long?], they are considered to be married.
Gosh, but that's creative. Someone should do some research on that!
Wouldn't that be a shocker for Donald and the nephews?
--
*******************************************
Planet Sullivan http://www.execpc.com/~sulliva1/
With Redwall, Disney Ducks, llamas, humor and more!
:-)
"I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy I every minute of it."
"Being crazy is what keeps me from going insane."
********************************************
Gerstein, David DK - ECN
Disney comics Digest V98 #14
Message 205 -
1998-01-14 at 11:04:50
RICH:
>O.K, time for the big question which appears to be of some concern, =
not
>only to me, but to some others, especially Scarpa fans. Exactly what
are
>the circumstances surrounding Filo Sganga's (a.k.a. Jubal Cock)
apparent
>transformation into the usually brown colored "Owl Judge" from earlier
>U$ & DD comics ... from what I have heard, the two characters are
>nothing alike, both visually and professionally.
Eh? The character in Van Horn's WDC #596 "Terror of Duckburg"
*is*, visually, a lot like Scarpa's character (with the simple addition
of pince-nez).
I had this Filo Sganga story to translate for Gladstone last
year and was asked not to use the name Cock. I chose the name Pomp with
the following logic -=A0"I need to change this character's name, I want =
to
choose something that rolls off the tongue the same way, and the =
obvious
choice is already linked in the USA to a Duck antagonist who looks like
this."
It seemed like a good solution at the time. More seriously, no
Scarpa fan on this list seemed to object before our Eta Beta recently,
but if others agree with him, I'll just have John Clark remove the
"Frostfeathers" references from that upcoming story - and then "Jubal
Pomp" and "J. Frostfeathers Pomp" will just be two very =
similar-looking,
but officially different, characters.
David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>
>O.K, time for the big question which appears to be of some concern, =
not
>only to me, but to some others, especially Scarpa fans. Exactly what
are
>the circumstances surrounding Filo Sganga's (a.k.a. Jubal Cock)
apparent
>transformation into the usually brown colored "Owl Judge" from earlier
>U$ & DD comics ... from what I have heard, the two characters are
>nothing alike, both visually and professionally.
Eh? The character in Van Horn's WDC #596 "Terror of Duckburg"
*is*, visually, a lot like Scarpa's character (with the simple addition
of pince-nez).
I had this Filo Sganga story to translate for Gladstone last
year and was asked not to use the name Cock. I chose the name Pomp with
the following logic -=A0"I need to change this character's name, I want =
to
choose something that rolls off the tongue the same way, and the =
obvious
choice is already linked in the USA to a Duck antagonist who looks like
this."
It seemed like a good solution at the time. More seriously, no
Scarpa fan on this list seemed to object before our Eta Beta recently,
but if others agree with him, I'll just have John Clark remove the
"Frostfeathers" references from that upcoming story - and then "Jubal
Pomp" and "J. Frostfeathers Pomp" will just be two very =
similar-looking,
but officially different, characters.
David Gerstein
<(Email removed)>
Fluks, H.W.
Joakim
Message 206 -
1998-01-14 at 13:19:41
Joakim asked Daniel:
>*Why* are you writing this?
Probably because some people on this list can't stand
any criticism directed to Rosa. You wrote:
>DON Rosa:
>Simply ignore Daniel's text.
>You are doing a *great* job doing the duck stories *your* way.
This attitude is exactly what annoyed me (and probably
Daniel too).
It would be very sad if people would not write any critics to
this mailing list, or if writers/artists would "simply ignore" them.
Why should everyone have the same opinion as Joakim
Gunnarsson?
--Harry.
><><><><
>*Why* are you writing this?
Probably because some people on this list can't stand
any criticism directed to Rosa. You wrote:
>DON Rosa:
>Simply ignore Daniel's text.
>You are doing a *great* job doing the duck stories *your* way.
This attitude is exactly what annoyed me (and probably
Daniel too).
It would be very sad if people would not write any critics to
this mailing list, or if writers/artists would "simply ignore" them.
Why should everyone have the same opinion as Joakim
Gunnarsson?
--Harry.
><><><><
Awiles
Disney comics Digest V98 #13
Message 207 -
1998-01-14 at 15:47:03
TO: (Email removed)
"As far as I am concerned the early days of Scrooge is, and should remain, a
complete mystery."
I don't even bother with Gladstone material because of this. I treasure my
childhood scrooge memories too much ...
Andrew Wiles
"As far as I am concerned the early days of Scrooge is, and should remain, a
complete mystery."
I don't even bother with Gladstone material because of this. I treasure my
childhood scrooge memories too much ...
Andrew Wiles
Dominik Altevogt
Don Rosa
Message 208 -
1998-01-14 at 16:18:34
IMHO Don is one of the most talented artist currently working for Disney
Comics. His stories fit into the Duck universe, which I imagened when I
read Carl Bark's stories! I always disliked the idea of a 'modern' Donald
or $crooge living in our time. Of course that doesn't mean that other
stories aren't good and I am not enjoying those stories! But definitly I
don not enjoy them as much as I do Don's.
>However, a quick look will
>show that Don's Ducks have become very different of Barks' Ducks and it
>only seems to get worser.
I actually like it that Don has it's one stylle.
>Donald has become a
>very dull person who's always in for the stupid comments - which is nice,
>because then Scrooge comes out better.
Ok, I would like to see Donald not always that dull! But Don not always
makes Donald a fool (i hope this is the right word?)
Donald has his very own moments in Don's work like in A little something
Special
All in all I admire Don's work, also his drawing's ( which he doesn't like
that much !). In every story, not only in Don's there is a little which I
would prefer to have done in another way but Don Rosa's are the ones which
I can accept the most
Dominik Altevogt ,,,,,
(Email removed) (o o)
----------------oOO--(_)--OOo-----------------
Comics. His stories fit into the Duck universe, which I imagened when I
read Carl Bark's stories! I always disliked the idea of a 'modern' Donald
or $crooge living in our time. Of course that doesn't mean that other
stories aren't good and I am not enjoying those stories! But definitly I
don not enjoy them as much as I do Don's.
>However, a quick look will
>show that Don's Ducks have become very different of Barks' Ducks and it
>only seems to get worser.
I actually like it that Don has it's one stylle.
>Donald has become a
>very dull person who's always in for the stupid comments - which is nice,
>because then Scrooge comes out better.
Ok, I would like to see Donald not always that dull! But Don not always
makes Donald a fool (i hope this is the right word?)
Donald has his very own moments in Don's work like in A little something
Special
All in all I admire Don's work, also his drawing's ( which he doesn't like
that much !). In every story, not only in Don's there is a little which I
would prefer to have done in another way but Don Rosa's are the ones which
I can accept the most
Dominik Altevogt ,,,,,
(Email removed) (o o)
----------------oOO--(_)--OOo-----------------
Tarjei Kidd Olsen
Entertaining flame war on disney list ;-)
Message 209 -
1998-01-14 at 17:13:38
ETA BETA:
>SOEREN
>
>to TARJEI
>>...almost everyone
>>refers to "the order" as historical facts, or rather facts
>>on which new stories should be based.
>
>Yes, but nobody seems to agree on what, exactly, "the order" should be,
>and that is, I guess, the fun part. Everybody is trying to build a duck
>universe of their own :-)
>
Exactly! :-)
I'm "guilty" of quite a bit of "universe building" based on Don's stories,
but I'm doing it because it's *fun*, not because I want to restrict the
universe. I still enjoy non-Rosa stories with references to the Ducks' past
just as much. And I don't think Don's view of the duck universe will become
prevalent among lots of other authors, as a matter of fact I can't remember
seeing a SINGLE story here in Europe influenced by Don's writings (even
though IMHO that would be great! But of course that's just my opinion......)
As for Donald being inadequate or whatever in Rosa
stories...the particular brand of humor which is used in depicting Donald
strikes a chord with me. I just find the way he is really comical. He
*does* have some more heroic roles too, and anyway I don't want to see
Donald as the "braveheart" of disney comics. I have plenty of other disney
comics to choose from if I want a more capable and/or serious Donald.
Why are the nephews so obnoxious? I think it's kind of cool to have
the "kids" "tidying up the mess" after the adults on their adventures, and
I think a lot of kids like that too. Duck comics *are* after all aimed
primarily at children (though in America it seems nearly only adults are
buying them).
As long as there is (unfortunately ;) no danger of Dons timeline
becoming the "standard" for ALL Disney comics, I don't see the point in
getting so exited about all this. Just enjoy -or DON'T enjoy- the stories
in your own way!
BTW, something I have been wondering about for ages, and which is maybe
private:
What IS this thing I heard about some courtcase regarding Gladstone and the
Carl Barks Studio(?) ?
|| <<<<Tarjei Kidd Olsen>>>> ||
||___________________________||
|| http://home.sol.no/~kidd/ ||
|| (Email removed) ||
>SOEREN
>
>to TARJEI
>>...almost everyone
>>refers to "the order" as historical facts, or rather facts
>>on which new stories should be based.
>
>Yes, but nobody seems to agree on what, exactly, "the order" should be,
>and that is, I guess, the fun part. Everybody is trying to build a duck
>universe of their own :-)
>
Exactly! :-)
I'm "guilty" of quite a bit of "universe building" based on Don's stories,
but I'm doing it because it's *fun*, not because I want to restrict the
universe. I still enjoy non-Rosa stories with references to the Ducks' past
just as much. And I don't think Don's view of the duck universe will become
prevalent among lots of other authors, as a matter of fact I can't remember
seeing a SINGLE story here in Europe influenced by Don's writings (even
though IMHO that would be great! But of course that's just my opinion......)
As for Donald being inadequate or whatever in Rosa
stories...the particular brand of humor which is used in depicting Donald
strikes a chord with me. I just find the way he is really comical. He
*does* have some more heroic roles too, and anyway I don't want to see
Donald as the "braveheart" of disney comics. I have plenty of other disney
comics to choose from if I want a more capable and/or serious Donald.
Why are the nephews so obnoxious? I think it's kind of cool to have
the "kids" "tidying up the mess" after the adults on their adventures, and
I think a lot of kids like that too. Duck comics *are* after all aimed
primarily at children (though in America it seems nearly only adults are
buying them).
As long as there is (unfortunately ;) no danger of Dons timeline
becoming the "standard" for ALL Disney comics, I don't see the point in
getting so exited about all this. Just enjoy -or DON'T enjoy- the stories
in your own way!
BTW, something I have been wondering about for ages, and which is maybe
private:
What IS this thing I heard about some courtcase regarding Gladstone and the
Carl Barks Studio(?) ?
|| <<<<Tarjei Kidd Olsen>>>> ||
||___________________________||
|| http://home.sol.no/~kidd/ ||
|| (Email removed) ||
Rich Pegasus
Pomp v. Sganga
Message 210 -
1998-01-14 at 18:19:52
DAVID GERSTEIN (TO RICH):
> Eh? The character in Van Horn's WDC #596 "Terror of Duckburg" *is*,
> visually, a lot like Scarpa's character (with the simple addition
> of pince-nez).
Well some might disagree, but I *personally* have no problem with his
physical appearance. Artistically, in fact, J.Pomp is drawn with much
more detail than Filo Sganga seems to have ever been. It is just that
in the past the prominent Judge usually seen was a brown colored Owl
whom Pomp seems to have usurped (at least for that one story). As far
as the actual story goes, I think it was a great introduc(k)tion for
Sganga into the U.S. and sets up any future encounters.
> I had this Filo Sganga story to translate for Gladstone last
> year and was asked not to use the name Cock...
This is really not a problem with me, nor, it would seem, anyone else
(especially for those of us who understand the *cultural* reasoning
behind the name change).
> I'll just have John Clark remove the "Frostfeathers" references...
NO! (8-() Please don't. I LOVE that part of his name. And totally
agree with SOEREN who said:
> I think that the name "Jubal Pomp" is excellent.
> "Pomp" associates with richness and exaggeration...
Also "Frostfeathers" adds alliterative color to his *pompous* imagery.
Please don't think I was complaining in the last posting. I was merely
asking for clarification on the reasons that Filo Sganga was introduced
through the vehicle of "Terror of Duckburg", in the characterization of
the Duckburgian *Judge* rather than, perhaps, just introducing him in
a Scarpa story where his role as confidant to Brigitta might seem more
logical?
You are correct when you say that Scarpa fans have not even mentioned
the *contentiousness* surrounding the Pomp v. Sganga issue... at least
not vocally on the List. I'd think this is largely due to the idea
that many Scarpa fans are not aware that Pomp was Sganga's introduction
into the U.S. Disney market. Some fans have e-mailed me asking why I
call "Pomp" the U.S.'s version of Sganga, and have commented why I must
be mistaken. I just thought that the List might be a good place for
clarification.
Thank you, David, for providing insight behind this.
> Eh? The character in Van Horn's WDC #596 "Terror of Duckburg" *is*,
> visually, a lot like Scarpa's character (with the simple addition
> of pince-nez).
Well some might disagree, but I *personally* have no problem with his
physical appearance. Artistically, in fact, J.Pomp is drawn with much
more detail than Filo Sganga seems to have ever been. It is just that
in the past the prominent Judge usually seen was a brown colored Owl
whom Pomp seems to have usurped (at least for that one story). As far
as the actual story goes, I think it was a great introduc(k)tion for
Sganga into the U.S. and sets up any future encounters.
> I had this Filo Sganga story to translate for Gladstone last
> year and was asked not to use the name Cock...
This is really not a problem with me, nor, it would seem, anyone else
(especially for those of us who understand the *cultural* reasoning
behind the name change).
> I'll just have John Clark remove the "Frostfeathers" references...
NO! (8-() Please don't. I LOVE that part of his name. And totally
agree with SOEREN who said:
> I think that the name "Jubal Pomp" is excellent.
> "Pomp" associates with richness and exaggeration...
Also "Frostfeathers" adds alliterative color to his *pompous* imagery.
Please don't think I was complaining in the last posting. I was merely
asking for clarification on the reasons that Filo Sganga was introduced
through the vehicle of "Terror of Duckburg", in the characterization of
the Duckburgian *Judge* rather than, perhaps, just introducing him in
a Scarpa story where his role as confidant to Brigitta might seem more
logical?
You are correct when you say that Scarpa fans have not even mentioned
the *contentiousness* surrounding the Pomp v. Sganga issue... at least
not vocally on the List. I'd think this is largely due to the idea
that many Scarpa fans are not aware that Pomp was Sganga's introduction
into the U.S. Disney market. Some fans have e-mailed me asking why I
call "Pomp" the U.S.'s version of Sganga, and have commented why I must
be mistaken. I just thought that the List might be a good place for
clarification.
Thank you, David, for providing insight behind this.