Keskustelujen arkisto

Hello Luca (and all)-

LUCA
I appologize for continuing this thread, but I still need more
clarification. Perhaps it is merely coincidence that Donald
had a cat named Tabby before, but I still think we should
consider the importance of presedence, especially when a
character possesses predefined name [Tabby] and a predefined
role [Donald's Cat]. The evolution of the character's *look*
and *personality* came later (as evolution naturally does)...

RICH BELLACERA wrote:
>> I don't understand why it would matter what
>> coloring or markings the cat has as interpretted by different
>> artists as long as the comic itself acknowledges that this is
>> suppose to be the cat named Tabby (owned by Donald Duck)?

> Well, the main differences are in the personalities of the two
> cats. This circumstance, and their different looks, are more
> important than other discussion about IF the Barks' Tabby be
> the same cat drawn by Hubbard.

I can understand the reasoning you gave for the the new *look*
and *personality* that Kinney/Hubbard gave to Tabby which is
indeed important... I would even grant that for all intents and
purposes Tabby is Al Hubbard's creation... He essentially breathed
life into that character and made Tabby a recognizable personality
in the Disney universe. I can also follow your logic that because
of this the character of Tabby as defined by Hubbard bares little
if any resemblance to Barks' Tabby, however, I would still think
the mere fact that Tabby did already exist as Donald's cat in
a real story written before Hubbard would have some presedence
over the existence of a cat named Tabby in Donald's possession.

I think it is a matter akin to what David Gerstein mentioned,
where a different artist/writer to a plot thread:

> Donald also has a cat named Tabby in the Taliaferro strip circa
> 1939-1941, although it's inconsistent in appearance (sometimes a
> black cat with white face and belly, other times all white).
<snip>
> I think it's a case of Barks being inspired by what went before,
> but going on to invent real *characters* (especially with Mr.
> Jones, of course) rather than just carrying on someone else's
> inconsistencies. [David Gerstein]

Like Jones, I would think Tabby has origins which preceed Hubbard,
only Hubbard took a pre-existing idea and made it consistent and
more utilitarian for future writers and artists. Though I am not familiar
with the specific 1939 - 1941 strips that David is talking about, it
might be that even Barks' didn't begin the concept of Donald owning
a cat named Tabby (maybe the true originator would be Taliaferro?).

Like in the case of Grandma Duck, in her first appearance she was
just a painting mounted on the wall, but later Taliaferro (?) took
that idea and created an actual character. Many characters in the
Disney Universe have humble or "one-shot" origins, some of which
were never intended by the *originator* to ever be used again, but
a future writer decided that the character deserved more exposure
(i.e. Rosa and "Goldie") and hence we see more of that character and
that character's persona and appearance slowy becomes established.

However, even appearances change (look at Donald who once had
wings for hands, long feet with individual toes and a long neck and
bill... I prefer the contemporary Donald to the original one... Mickey,
Daisy (Donna), Clarabelle, Horace, Goofy and even Pluto have all
evolved over time (primarily because of the differing artists who
took over the task of drawing them or animating them for film).

> We must not think that Donald is a real breathing and living
> person, who avoids to call a new cat with his old one's name
> because normally it doesn't happen.

I really do have a grasp on what is and is not the real world, but
I understand your point, however, to me, the mere fact that Donald
indeed owned a cat named Tabby (no matter what his appearance
was during the inconsistant period) is what sets the presedence.

>There is no continuity between the two Tabbys;

But there is... That is my point... Donald apparently has ALWAYS
had a cat named Tabby, it just wasn't as well defined as the
Kinney/Hubbard version is... Donald and the fact that he had a cat
named Tabby since, apparently, 1939, *is* the continuity.

Thank you for explaining how the Tabby's *look* was designed based
on "Sgt. Tibbs" from 101 Dalmatians, that was indeed insightful. ;-)

>> It is also true that a "Tabby Cat" is a particular *type*
>> of cat, but those cats usually have stripes, something none of the
>> versions of Tabby I've seen have.

> ALT! I don't know it exactly, but a friend of mine told me that the
> female cats are more frequently striped, not so the male ones. This
> can also explain the fact that Donald's Tabby IS a male cate.

O.K., like I said before, Tabby seems to be a more masculine cat,
despite his name. It's odd though, since Tabby Cats are indeed
stripped or spotted and usually *female*. And now that I think
about it, even the name "Tabby" is really a nickname for the
girl's name of "Tabitha." However, it has always seemed acceptable
to give a pet any name one wants, no matter what gender it is.

To me, I think that Tabby holds a relatively important place in the
Disney Universe since very few of the MANY *pets* we've seen
our heroes own ever hung around very long. The only ones
among the Fab Five (and Daisy & Pete) that have ever had any
*STAYING POWER* in either film or comics have been:

Mickey = Pluto & Bruto (to a lesser exent, in cartoons, Milton & Bianca,
and Tanglefoot in comics)
Donald = Bolivar & Tabby
Goofy = Ellsworth (and in cartoons Bowser & Waffles)
Minnie = Fifi & Figaro (to a lesser extent, Frankie, but I can only recall
two stories with Frankie in comics and only one film, though
Minnie does have one, sometimes two, unnamed canaries in
several cartoons and comics).
Daisy = none (in cartoons Knuckles)
Pete = none (though in cartoons perhaps Chainsaw, but it's always
been my impression that he should have owned "Butch").

Thanks for hearing me out on this. ;-)

-Rich (xephyr)
http://www.jps.net/xephyr/rich/disney.html

OK ML people...it is time to give Carl our support.
March 27th will soon be here and Carl will celebrate his 97th birthday.
Here is what I propose.

Let's write letters of support, encouragement, and of course, birthday
greetings to Carl...I have made arrangements to get Carl these postings
without having to go through his "handlers".

I must have these cards and letters in my hands NO LATER than March 10th
and please.....NO REQUESTS FOR DRAWINGS OR PERSONAL REPLIES.
Remember..air mail takes about 7 days from Europe .....

Let's all understand that now is an extremely difficult time for
Carl..these cards and letters will show him that we are thinking of him and
that he is not alone and isolated.

If you want, put your card or letter in a sealed envelope THEN put that
envelope into another and mail it to me...this way he gets a kick out of
opening your original envelope and seeing what far-flung countries these
letters have come from.

Mail to:

Michael Naiman
PO Box 151029
San Diego,CA
92175-1029
USA

Now is the time to act!

Michael Naiman wrote:

>Carl has sued his "managers" for the *abuse of the elderly*, conversion of
>funds and breach of fiduciary duty, and has called for a full accounting of
>where all of the money has gone! Along with that he has asked for the
>severing of all business activity with these people.
>
>Does *anyone* on the Digest have an opinion about this??

I do. Actually I think that quite a lot of us here have at least suspected
what now seems to be out in the open: that these "Carl Barks Studio"
people were just taking advantage of someone they could exploit (namely,
Barks) in order to personally enrich themselves, using some very nasty
methods along the way - the slandering campaign against Don Rosa and the
ballot box fraud in the CBG awards come to mind immediately. It's a very
sad state of affairs, but I'd rather see it end now with a bang rather than
having it drag on endlessly. Im also very glad that Carl Barks has
seemingly NOT lost his good judgement, as this legal response shows.

Best regards, Frank
****************************************************************************
*******
Wuerttembergische Landesbibliothek Frank Fabian
Abt. Katalogisierung Periodika (KaP) Tel.: +49 711/212- 4383
Konrad-Adenauer-Str. 8 / PF 10 54 41 Fax.: +49 711/212-4437
70173 Stuttgart / 70047 Stuttgart (Email removed)
****************************************************************************
*******

Issue #101 of "Zio Paperone" carries (at last!) Don Rosa's "Return to
Xanadu". Don will not be happy to know that the story is introduced by a
nice 3-page essay of Luca Boschi which highlights the fact that "Return to
Xanadu" is a sequel to Barks' "********" (I am omitting the title here
because I don't want to be responsible of further spoilings...). But I hope
Don will be happy that the story is paramount in the issue, with beautiful
dedicated front and back covers by Marco Rota and a deserved emphasis in
Luca Boschi's piece.
And, last but not least, a smooth translation as far as I can judge.
I suspect the translation is the joint work of Lidia Cannatella and Alberto
Becattini; but there is also a little help from yours truly here... When
Lidia called me on the phone about one year ago, she was already working on
this story, and was having trouble with the translation of Coleridge's
"Xanadu" poem; so I suggested her to use a quite rare translation by
almost-Nobel Italian poet Mario Luzi. I happened to have a book with this
translation and I faxed it to her. Now I see it has been used almost
everywhere (except on page 5 panel 4 where a poorer translation is used). It
was not credited to Luzi (probably for copyright reasons) and has been
butchered on page 8, panel 2 (where a verse is omitted, thus making the
remaining sentence **wrong** according to grammar...). But on the whole,
reading it I certainly was able to agree with Donald: what beautiful verses!
I wonder whether Luzi will ever know that a work of his has been used for a
Donald Duck comic... and what he would think of it if he ever knew... ;-)

By the way, this is IMHO one of Don Rosa's best stories; I also liked the
role Donald plays here, not just drinking sodas but being for once the HERO...!
. Marco

--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #55
*****************************************

Hi everyone

**(And that's it for the non-SPOILER parts of this message)**

Mikko wrote:
>I wasn't too fond of this story. It had some great bits, but the main
>story line didn't provide too much excitement. What danger and action
>there was felt more like glued-on than a vital part of the story.

I agree with you Mikko. When I saw the word Eldorado in the story's
title I really expected something more. In fact, the actual storyline
seemed to be so full of cliches that, instead of re-reading the story
right after finishing it as usual, I just felt kind of let down by it.

>The cliffhanger sequence where the Ducks were driving in the >mountains
was really something I disliked. It was probably just the >awful
coloring, but it was almost difficult to put myself to read it >because
of it's appearance. The green truck and all... Yuck!

The mountain part was actually the part I liked about the story. The
picture of Donald with about a hundred hands really made me laugh, as
well as the thing that happened to the truck when it was hanging from
the cliff. But about the colouring, now that you mentioned it I must
agree that it is a bit bad. Seems to me the dark colours make the panels
look unusually full.

>And the ending gag was based
>on a ten-year-old Scrooge adventure (The Son of the Sun) which has
>probably been read by about five Finns. Luckily I'm one of them, but
>nevertheless it seemed a bit forced.

The ending, I think, was a bit weak. The last page was like from some
other story, like it wouldn't have anything to do with all the preceding
pages. As for the Son of the Sun thing, I for one haven't read the
story, but THAT didn't really bother me. I got the idea anyway.

**END OF SPOILER**

I still think this Eldorado story was the best one in that issue of Aku
Ankka.

Anna-Maija

------------------------------------------------
Anna-Maija Ihander < ^ ^ >
(Email removed) |O O|---------.
(___) ##### ||
"Reality is for people who | ### ||
can't handle Star Trek" | |----| |#
|_| |_|

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

On Feb 16, 8:24am, Frank Fabian wrote:

> Actually I think that quite a lot of us here have at least suspected
> what now seems to be out in the open: that these "Carl Barks Studio"
> people were just taking advantage of someone they could exploit (namely,
> Barks) in order to personally enrich themselves, using some very nasty
> methods along the way - the slandering campaign against Don Rosa and the
> ballot box fraud in the CBG awards come to mind immediately.

I can say that yes, there were private suspicions that have been pretty much
confirmed by the latest turn of events. But suspecting something and knowing
something are two different things. Solid facts were hard to come by and
voicing suspicions ran the risk of winding up in court. What happened to Don
Rosa wasn't something you wanted to have happen to you. I still find myself a
little reluctant to talk about the matter in an open forum even now that it's
wide open, perhaps because it's a nasty legal tangle that's not really my
business and I can't say that I know all the facts. For those not so reluctant,
I say, hey, go for it -- it's relevant to the ML's topic, and I'll be
interested in reading what the assembled multitude have to say about all this.
(What I can't understand is why someone listed the Duck Tales TV show among
topics he didn't consider germane to the ML. A Disney cartoon show based on
comic books written and drawn by Carl Barks, and which in turn spawned new
comic-book stories based on its characters and situations -- that's not
relevant?!)

--Dwight Decker

Hi,

I am looking for original Taliafero and Gottfredson original art to buy f=
or
my collection. Would any of you know some good addresses apart from Howar=
d
Lowery, Sotheby's, Christie's and Galerie Laqua to find such art ?

Many thanks in advance.

Didier

I see my last post didn't appear in the digest...here I try again:

Michael Naiman said:

>Carl has sued his "managers" for the *abuse of the elderly*, conversion of
>funds and breach of fiduciary duty, and has called for a full accounting of
>where all of the money has gone! Along with that he has asked for the
>severing of all business activity with these people.

> This is Carl we're talking about..a human, living breathing real
>person..who has brought us years of pleasure and enjoyment..... not some
>four color character who exists on some cheap pulp paper.

Well, I'm sure *I'd* have an opinion if I knew what was going on!! At least
twice I've asked the list to explain whats going on, but I haven't received
any replies; not even in private mail...
All I know is that there's something going on involving Carl Barks, Don
Rosa, funds, Carl Barks Studios, disinformation and I don't know what else.
Could *SOMEONE* please update me on all this??
*argh* *sigh*

-- |Tarjei - Kidd - Olsen|
-- Home: (Email removed)
-- Work: (Email removed)
-- Website: http://home.sol.no/~kidd/index.html
-- Panacea: http://panacea.norgesnett.no/