Just today I saw what Gladstone is going to offer in August of 1998.
In Uncle Scrooge #313 there is a Barks reprint of "The Fantastic River
Race" from Uncle Scrooge Goes to Disneyland. However since there are
two "new" European stories I will still probably buy this issue. Once
again though a third of this issue will be a "waste" for me as I (and
many others of us I believe) have this story in both comics and album
format.
This brings us though to WDC&S #628. BOTH Duck stories in this issue
are Barks re-re-reprints! Since I really am not into Mickey stories
(sorry, David) I see no reason for me to buy this issue.
I am TOTALLY baffled by what Gladstone is trying to do. It would be
bad enough if Gladstone for any reason would go out of the Disney comics
business. What is worse though is that they actually seem to be
shooting themselves in the foot! Do they have some sort of
"death-wish"?!? We are told that Europe produces THOUSANDS of new pages
of Disney comics a year. Yet what do we keep getting from Gladstone?
MORE Barks re-re-reprints! Why on earth not print some of these
European stories?!?
Archontis said that he was "irritated" with Gladstone. That would be
saying my feelings mildly! Duck comics are one of my few passions in
life. I guess since I care about them SO much, that is the reason I get
SO upset with how Gladstone seems to be digging their own grave. How
can they think that reprinting the same stories over and over again will
allow them to stay in the Disney comics publishing business?
I basically have two requests. The first is for the readers of this
list. I would like for as many people as possible to express on the
list what THEIR preferences are. Is there an audience out there for the
endless reprinting of Barks stories? Or do most of you wish Gladstone
would print more original (at least in the US) stories but just haven't
raised your voice. Perhaps if Gladstone would hear from many of us on
the mailing list they would get the idea that if they want to succeed
they need to quit all of this reprinting. Of course, perhaps I am
wrong. Perhaps most of the readers on this list like the many
reprintings. If that is the case, I think it would be interesting to
hear too. If most of you like Gladstone's choice of stories as they are
doing it, I would gladly admit I was in the wrong and "take my lumps".
My second request is for Gary to explain the situation from Gladstone's
point of view. Gary has ALWAYS been very nice and answered my e-mail
and questions when I send them to him, and I truly thank him for this.
However, often his "answers" leave me more confused than I started
with. It often seems Gladstone is quite vague in answer to questions
posed to them. Perhaps Gary could very clearly and in depth explain why
they keep re-re-reprinting Barks stories instead of new stories.
Perhaps Gary could show all the points I am missing and why printing
more new stories isn't possible. At least then I and many others of us
would at least know what is going on. I would rather get some egg on my
face then to keep simmering in anger and disbelief.
Thanks for allowing me to get on my soapbox. I hope to see many list
members' ideas on this and hopefully Gary's in upcoming digests.
Dean Rekich
Author
Topic: 199805
(261 messages)
DeanMary
Yet more Barks re-re-reprints
Message 16 -
1998-05-03 at 06:44:38
Don Rosa
Disney comics Digest V98 #112
Message 17 -
1998-05-03 at 08:35:52
>From: (Email removed)
>Re: Scrooge's "granddaughter":
>The letterer did not make a mistake. The letterer's job is to take the
>words in a script and put them into balloons, not to examine the scripts
>for possible inaccuracies before doing so.
And I think that's exactly what I said in my post, in an attempt to divert
the blame for this goof from the letterer. I said he lettered it without
reading it, which I know is true, because I've talked with Todd Klein on the
phone while he said he was still lettering... so I know that letterers can
letter without reading... they copy. There were many of us who read that
script and no one spotted that error... perhaps because it was so
unthinkably wrong. And the last person who made the mistake *was* the
letterer.
>In spite of the impression Don
>Rosa may have left in his posting, letterers are not the final arbiters of
>Disney comics continuity.
Well, since you're taking me to task for an impression that I was NOT
leaving... I'll disagree with you altogether. The letterer is the last
person to see the script, and he proofreads his own work... and when he is
thoroughly aware of the continuity of the material (as was true in this
case), then he *is*, quite literally, the final arbiter. That seems pretty
obvious -- he is the final person who can catch an error. And he missed it.
I was giving him an excuse. Let's stop putting a spotlight on how valid an
excuse that is.
From: Rich Pegasus <(Email removed)>
>>>>>and I would at
least think this Mailng List was a SAFE HAVEN for asking such
controversial questions? I didn't think the List was published for
non-lister's eyes?
Oh, buh-ruther! Are *you* naive! The stories I could tell you about how
traitors-in-the-woodwork will use what you post here in any sneaky way they
can to ingratiate themselves!!!
(No, I don't mean David! In fact, he's one of the ones who harm has
attempted to be done to by toadies.) There IS no safe haven here, boy. Be
warned.
>Re: Scrooge's "granddaughter":
>The letterer did not make a mistake. The letterer's job is to take the
>words in a script and put them into balloons, not to examine the scripts
>for possible inaccuracies before doing so.
And I think that's exactly what I said in my post, in an attempt to divert
the blame for this goof from the letterer. I said he lettered it without
reading it, which I know is true, because I've talked with Todd Klein on the
phone while he said he was still lettering... so I know that letterers can
letter without reading... they copy. There were many of us who read that
script and no one spotted that error... perhaps because it was so
unthinkably wrong. And the last person who made the mistake *was* the
letterer.
>In spite of the impression Don
>Rosa may have left in his posting, letterers are not the final arbiters of
>Disney comics continuity.
Well, since you're taking me to task for an impression that I was NOT
leaving... I'll disagree with you altogether. The letterer is the last
person to see the script, and he proofreads his own work... and when he is
thoroughly aware of the continuity of the material (as was true in this
case), then he *is*, quite literally, the final arbiter. That seems pretty
obvious -- he is the final person who can catch an error. And he missed it.
I was giving him an excuse. Let's stop putting a spotlight on how valid an
excuse that is.
From: Rich Pegasus <(Email removed)>
>>>>>and I would at
least think this Mailng List was a SAFE HAVEN for asking such
controversial questions? I didn't think the List was published for
non-lister's eyes?
Oh, buh-ruther! Are *you* naive! The stories I could tell you about how
traitors-in-the-woodwork will use what you post here in any sneaky way they
can to ingratiate themselves!!!
(No, I don't mean David! In fact, he's one of the ones who harm has
attempted to be done to by toadies.) There IS no safe haven here, boy. Be
warned.
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Apparently this letter got lost
Message 18 -
1998-05-03 at 12:53:18
From: Daniel van Eijmeren
To: (Email removed)
Subject: Banning is a banned subject??? :-)
Date sent: Sat, 2 May 1998 16:30:37
DAVID GERSTEIN to RICH:
>> but - please don't come up with lists of stories you assume are banned
>> when you don't know for sure.
> Well, I must say, I did preface my list by saying I wasn't certain
> these *stories* were indeed banned, only that I assumed it, and I would
> at least think this Mailng List was a SAFE HAVEN for asking such
> controversial questions?
The list should at least be the most *appropriate* place to talk about it,
but the 'problem' is that this list does not have a limited membership or
a controlled membership (the latter may not even be possible, even if one
may want to choose for it). The positive thing on this is that anybody
interested in Disney comics can join, but a bad thing is that people can
subscribe (or have subscribed) who are in charge to censor stories and/or
to make descisions we fans will not be happy with.
What I think that David means is that making up lists of possible banned
stories can give such people the *idea* to look up those stories and ban
them, even if they were no problem at all before. (Once Don Rosa even
suggested the possibility that people might be eager to find censorable
things so that they can give their boss the impression they're doing a
good job!)
However it may be, Disney's censorers do make weird descisions. Sometimes
a story that was censored gets permission to be published in its original
form a second time, while other stories seem to be banned forever now
because they were submitted to the wrong person on the wrong moment.
So, in short, the subject "banning" is certainly not banned here, but only
look out for those one or two people who might get the wrong ideas and/or
make the wrong descisions on what is discussed here. As far as I know this
has never happened since the founding of the list in 1992 and these "people
in charge" may not even be present, but as I explained the list is publicly
available and so it *can* be possible one day.
My suggestion on this matter is: Just look out with neat lists of possible
banned stories. *If* someone in charge would see the mailing lists'
content, such lists are the most attractive ones to begin with.
Another suggestion is making an anti-censoring webpage with examples,
trying to get people behind you. (Maybe the guestbook could be sent to
Disney one day, then?) In the future, I for myself will attempt one on
Barks on my Guidebook Barks-pages.
PER-ERIK MALMSTROM to DAVID GERSTEIN:
>> The Nazi story - heck, *all* the Nazi stories are controversial just
>> in that they feature Nazis. That doesn't mean they're necessarily
>> banned. I don't think Gladstone could get permission to use them, but
>> who knows?
> Hm, would we want them to be published? Sure, I would like to se them,
> but I certainly wouldn't want them to be published. After all, there are
> young readers who might not understand that what nazism stands for is
> wrong.
I would want such items to be published. Not because of any racial thoughts
behind them, but just because they fall in the category that interests me:
Disney comics and cartoons! (Other people may want to have them because
they have historical interest in WOII, for example.)
I fully agree that a publisher should be aware of young readers, but should
this rule out an availability for collectors? Sometimes Disney seems to
have a different policy for regular and collector publications, but so far
this has been very unclear. Very unfortunately, because I think this is
the policy to go for.
BTW. Besides care for the children, another reason for a company to ban
publications is of course the bad name they might get *themselves*. Disney
may not want to know they once drew black people so stereotypical and so
*that* may be why they don't allow it, despite any interest from the
public. I have even heard that a boss of some company **destroyed** an
entire series of b/w cartoons (featuring a frog?) simply because the one
he coincidentally saw contained stereotypical images!
Greetings,
--- Daniel
"A flire! A frire! I must shave the women and children!"
(WDC 86, 1948)
To: (Email removed)
Subject: Banning is a banned subject??? :-)
Date sent: Sat, 2 May 1998 16:30:37
DAVID GERSTEIN to RICH:
>> but - please don't come up with lists of stories you assume are banned
>> when you don't know for sure.
> Well, I must say, I did preface my list by saying I wasn't certain
> these *stories* were indeed banned, only that I assumed it, and I would
> at least think this Mailng List was a SAFE HAVEN for asking such
> controversial questions?
The list should at least be the most *appropriate* place to talk about it,
but the 'problem' is that this list does not have a limited membership or
a controlled membership (the latter may not even be possible, even if one
may want to choose for it). The positive thing on this is that anybody
interested in Disney comics can join, but a bad thing is that people can
subscribe (or have subscribed) who are in charge to censor stories and/or
to make descisions we fans will not be happy with.
What I think that David means is that making up lists of possible banned
stories can give such people the *idea* to look up those stories and ban
them, even if they were no problem at all before. (Once Don Rosa even
suggested the possibility that people might be eager to find censorable
things so that they can give their boss the impression they're doing a
good job!)
However it may be, Disney's censorers do make weird descisions. Sometimes
a story that was censored gets permission to be published in its original
form a second time, while other stories seem to be banned forever now
because they were submitted to the wrong person on the wrong moment.
So, in short, the subject "banning" is certainly not banned here, but only
look out for those one or two people who might get the wrong ideas and/or
make the wrong descisions on what is discussed here. As far as I know this
has never happened since the founding of the list in 1992 and these "people
in charge" may not even be present, but as I explained the list is publicly
available and so it *can* be possible one day.
My suggestion on this matter is: Just look out with neat lists of possible
banned stories. *If* someone in charge would see the mailing lists'
content, such lists are the most attractive ones to begin with.
Another suggestion is making an anti-censoring webpage with examples,
trying to get people behind you. (Maybe the guestbook could be sent to
Disney one day, then?) In the future, I for myself will attempt one on
Barks on my Guidebook Barks-pages.
PER-ERIK MALMSTROM to DAVID GERSTEIN:
>> The Nazi story - heck, *all* the Nazi stories are controversial just
>> in that they feature Nazis. That doesn't mean they're necessarily
>> banned. I don't think Gladstone could get permission to use them, but
>> who knows?
> Hm, would we want them to be published? Sure, I would like to se them,
> but I certainly wouldn't want them to be published. After all, there are
> young readers who might not understand that what nazism stands for is
> wrong.
I would want such items to be published. Not because of any racial thoughts
behind them, but just because they fall in the category that interests me:
Disney comics and cartoons! (Other people may want to have them because
they have historical interest in WOII, for example.)
I fully agree that a publisher should be aware of young readers, but should
this rule out an availability for collectors? Sometimes Disney seems to
have a different policy for regular and collector publications, but so far
this has been very unclear. Very unfortunately, because I think this is
the policy to go for.
BTW. Besides care for the children, another reason for a company to ban
publications is of course the bad name they might get *themselves*. Disney
may not want to know they once drew black people so stereotypical and so
*that* may be why they don't allow it, despite any interest from the
public. I have even heard that a boss of some company **destroyed** an
entire series of b/w cartoons (featuring a frog?) simply because the one
he coincidentally saw contained stereotypical images!
Greetings,
--- Daniel
"A flire! A frire! I must shave the women and children!"
(WDC 86, 1948)
Francois Willot
Re:Disney comics Digest V98#112
Message 19 -
1998-05-03 at 13:12:16
I've apparently lost a mail that I wrote yesterday. I'm going to rewrite
it from memory (which is *not* very funny).
Rich asked what was the date of the first appearance of the British
series "The Def(t)ective Agency!" (that's the regular expression, with
the "F" crossed, and a "t" added above). Here I'm paraphrasing the book
"Disney Comics":
The first story was "The Disappearing Kids", MM Weekly 12/12/36 to ?.
Mickey's three (sic) nephews are kidnapped and Goofy+Toby Tortoise try
to find them.
The second one was "Spooky Farm", 20/2/37 to 15/5/37: Toby and Goofy in
a factory invaded by ghosts.
Then "A Tropical Trek" involving cannibals.
The last one was "Our Det(f)ectives Meet Rivals", with Horace, ? to
22/1/38.
All these tales were drawn by Wilfred Haughton. Personally, I think the
art is quite good for a non-American country in the late 30s.
RICH about double codes:
>Perhaps that is the answer? I rechecked my issue of MA #350 and the
>tale "Paperino e il Carneval del Movimento" is definitely listed as
>B 810236...but you wanna know something funny? I didn't even realize
>when I wrote my note for the Mailing List that I wrote the exact same
>StoryCode Francois did for the D&D Marriage or I would surely have
>mentioned it then. I was merely focusing, at the time, on how many
>Disney characters were appearing in the tale. How strange. What story
>is really assigned the code: B 810236, or could both have the same
>code?
Funny, indeed. But now, the "Carnival del movimento" was published in
Picsou # 200 as "Un anniversaire d'enfer !", and its code is B 810236.
I'm quite sure the editors made a mistake for the D&D marriage story
(that would not be the first time, for instance, there are two stories
with the code B 790197, a 22 pages Mickey "in the space" story, and a 21
pages tale with Scrooge and Donald).
>Speaking of duplicate codes, I have been in an off-line conversation
>concerning the Bonifacio tale that Gilbert first quoted: B 860064
>featuring Bonifacio in the luggage rack at the end of the tale...well,
>since no one, even in subsequent related posting mentioned the Book
>and date of this published tale I took it upon myself to research it in
>the on-line database, and here again we have duplicate story codes:
>B 860064 comes up as being Goofy: "Pippo e il giorno del tremore"
>from TL #1636, which is apparently NOT the Bonifacio tale which
>doesn't appear until TL #1702 in "Pippo e Minni... per un giorno di
>sole" (Goofy and Minnie... for a sunny day).
"Il giorno del tremore" is indeed B 860064. But I can't find "Per un
giorno di sole" in the title of a DcD entry, and not in the Topolino
index. Currently, TL 1702 is as follow:
TL 1702 [inx:BMi,ORN]
TL 1702a @
TL 1702b @ FMc MDV MM Topolino e il tempio di
Babu Simbel
TL 1702c B 860159 @ Due paperi in gonnella
TL 1702d B 860163 @ DA Paperina e un intervista
alla dinamite
TL 1702e S 83013 @ DD Paperino e le fatture in
scadenza
TL 1702f @ -> POn US Zio Paperone il torneo
di Papermibledon [writ:Pier Francesco Prosperi]
(Maybe Paolo, our official "maintainer" of the Topolino index has more
recent data).
>RE: D&D's MARRIAGE:
>>*****************SPOILER********************
>>*********************************************
>>
>>
>>The act was completed enough, and D+D got SIX children (three males
>>and three females) with Daisy's FIRST pregnancy...
>>There is of course a final surprise which all of you can imagine!
>>Anyway, the story is nice enough and well-drawn (with an excellent
>>drawing of the Notre-Duck cathedral), featuring a few pleasant gags
>>(like Minnie
>>hinting to Mickey: good examples SHOULD be followed!).
>
>
>Ahhh, well that figures then... so it was like the cartoon "Donald's
>Diary" where Donald leaves to join the Foreign Legion at the end to
>avoid marrying Daisy. In that cartoon Daisy has Triplet brothers. And
>if, like Don suggests, Daisy's Brother married Donald's Sister, Della,
>and had HD&L, and Daisy's Sister had AM&J, the idea of Donald & Daisy
>have two sets of triplets is hardly a surprise :-) It's genetically
>hardwired in their genes... :-)
I found another Brazilian story, which I think is from the same series.
It's "Dingo ébranle Hollywood", B 870025, inspired from Walsh's "Dry
Gulch Goofy". It's a quite good story, I guess it was drawn by the same
artist, where Goofy becomes a movie star (but it's only a dream). Just
like the "D&D marriage" story, this one is divised into chapters (with
titles) and has the same "dream balloons" around each page.
>This is why my interest in Italian and Brazilian comics has grown
>exponentially.
>I want fresh stories... It seems that mostly what Gladstone is offering
>are re-re-re-reprints in multiple formats, with a few trickles of
>foreign imports sandwiched inbetween...
I agree with you. I'd love to see "rare" and "exotic" stories, such as
"Paolino Paperino e il mistero di Marte", rather than those Barks
classics. For instance, why not publish "Donald & Donna in Trouble
Already", if they could find it? This British story by William Ward,
published in 1937, May 15th, may be the first Donald Adventure, and is
nearly impossible to find. It features interesting characters such as
Sylvester Shyster and "Donna" (from the old cartoon).
>About the "Nazi" and "Cannibal" stories, I also understand the your
>point, and have really no problem with what I assume are Disney's
>reasons for not wanting to see those tales reprinted (probably for the
>same reasons many of the older Disney animated shorts are editted or no
>longer aired on the Disney Channel).
Is that possible that some stories are or could be censored in the US
and not in Europe? For instance, "MM's War Orphans" was recently
published in Italy.
In France, I think this would not happen, though, for the editors would
not like to publish a story with Nazis. They have no problem with
cannibals, however: they published "MM's treasure Island". But they
didn't want to publish a story like "Voodoo Hoodoo" until recently. It
was only published in a hardcover book in the 70s. Now things have
changed, fortunately, and "Voodoo Hoodoo" was recently printed in
Picsou.
Francois
it from memory (which is *not* very funny).
Rich asked what was the date of the first appearance of the British
series "The Def(t)ective Agency!" (that's the regular expression, with
the "F" crossed, and a "t" added above). Here I'm paraphrasing the book
"Disney Comics":
The first story was "The Disappearing Kids", MM Weekly 12/12/36 to ?.
Mickey's three (sic) nephews are kidnapped and Goofy+Toby Tortoise try
to find them.
The second one was "Spooky Farm", 20/2/37 to 15/5/37: Toby and Goofy in
a factory invaded by ghosts.
Then "A Tropical Trek" involving cannibals.
The last one was "Our Det(f)ectives Meet Rivals", with Horace, ? to
22/1/38.
All these tales were drawn by Wilfred Haughton. Personally, I think the
art is quite good for a non-American country in the late 30s.
RICH about double codes:
>Perhaps that is the answer? I rechecked my issue of MA #350 and the
>tale "Paperino e il Carneval del Movimento" is definitely listed as
>B 810236...but you wanna know something funny? I didn't even realize
>when I wrote my note for the Mailing List that I wrote the exact same
>StoryCode Francois did for the D&D Marriage or I would surely have
>mentioned it then. I was merely focusing, at the time, on how many
>Disney characters were appearing in the tale. How strange. What story
>is really assigned the code: B 810236, or could both have the same
>code?
Funny, indeed. But now, the "Carnival del movimento" was published in
Picsou # 200 as "Un anniversaire d'enfer !", and its code is B 810236.
I'm quite sure the editors made a mistake for the D&D marriage story
(that would not be the first time, for instance, there are two stories
with the code B 790197, a 22 pages Mickey "in the space" story, and a 21
pages tale with Scrooge and Donald).
>Speaking of duplicate codes, I have been in an off-line conversation
>concerning the Bonifacio tale that Gilbert first quoted: B 860064
>featuring Bonifacio in the luggage rack at the end of the tale...well,
>since no one, even in subsequent related posting mentioned the Book
>and date of this published tale I took it upon myself to research it in
>the on-line database, and here again we have duplicate story codes:
>B 860064 comes up as being Goofy: "Pippo e il giorno del tremore"
>from TL #1636, which is apparently NOT the Bonifacio tale which
>doesn't appear until TL #1702 in "Pippo e Minni... per un giorno di
>sole" (Goofy and Minnie... for a sunny day).
"Il giorno del tremore" is indeed B 860064. But I can't find "Per un
giorno di sole" in the title of a DcD entry, and not in the Topolino
index. Currently, TL 1702 is as follow:
TL 1702 [inx:BMi,ORN]
TL 1702a @
TL 1702b @ FMc MDV MM Topolino e il tempio di
Babu Simbel
TL 1702c B 860159 @ Due paperi in gonnella
TL 1702d B 860163 @ DA Paperina e un intervista
alla dinamite
TL 1702e S 83013 @ DD Paperino e le fatture in
scadenza
TL 1702f @ -> POn US Zio Paperone il torneo
di Papermibledon [writ:Pier Francesco Prosperi]
(Maybe Paolo, our official "maintainer" of the Topolino index has more
recent data).
>RE: D&D's MARRIAGE:
>>*****************SPOILER********************
>>*********************************************
>>
>>
>>The act was completed enough, and D+D got SIX children (three males
>>and three females) with Daisy's FIRST pregnancy...
>>There is of course a final surprise which all of you can imagine!
>>Anyway, the story is nice enough and well-drawn (with an excellent
>>drawing of the Notre-Duck cathedral), featuring a few pleasant gags
>>(like Minnie
>>hinting to Mickey: good examples SHOULD be followed!).
>
>
>Ahhh, well that figures then... so it was like the cartoon "Donald's
>Diary" where Donald leaves to join the Foreign Legion at the end to
>avoid marrying Daisy. In that cartoon Daisy has Triplet brothers. And
>if, like Don suggests, Daisy's Brother married Donald's Sister, Della,
>and had HD&L, and Daisy's Sister had AM&J, the idea of Donald & Daisy
>have two sets of triplets is hardly a surprise :-) It's genetically
>hardwired in their genes... :-)
I found another Brazilian story, which I think is from the same series.
It's "Dingo ébranle Hollywood", B 870025, inspired from Walsh's "Dry
Gulch Goofy". It's a quite good story, I guess it was drawn by the same
artist, where Goofy becomes a movie star (but it's only a dream). Just
like the "D&D marriage" story, this one is divised into chapters (with
titles) and has the same "dream balloons" around each page.
>This is why my interest in Italian and Brazilian comics has grown
>exponentially.
>I want fresh stories... It seems that mostly what Gladstone is offering
>are re-re-re-reprints in multiple formats, with a few trickles of
>foreign imports sandwiched inbetween...
I agree with you. I'd love to see "rare" and "exotic" stories, such as
"Paolino Paperino e il mistero di Marte", rather than those Barks
classics. For instance, why not publish "Donald & Donna in Trouble
Already", if they could find it? This British story by William Ward,
published in 1937, May 15th, may be the first Donald Adventure, and is
nearly impossible to find. It features interesting characters such as
Sylvester Shyster and "Donna" (from the old cartoon).
>About the "Nazi" and "Cannibal" stories, I also understand the your
>point, and have really no problem with what I assume are Disney's
>reasons for not wanting to see those tales reprinted (probably for the
>same reasons many of the older Disney animated shorts are editted or no
>longer aired on the Disney Channel).
Is that possible that some stories are or could be censored in the US
and not in Europe? For instance, "MM's War Orphans" was recently
published in Italy.
In France, I think this would not happen, though, for the editors would
not like to publish a story with Nazis. They have no problem with
cannibals, however: they published "MM's treasure Island". But they
didn't want to publish a story like "Voodoo Hoodoo" until recently. It
was only published in a hardcover book in the 70s. Now things have
changed, fortunately, and "Voodoo Hoodoo" was recently printed in
Picsou.
Francois
Bjoern Staerk
Story summaries
Message 20 -
1998-05-03 at 16:52:14
Hi. I'm new to this list and I'd like to introduce myself.
I'm 19, I study IT in Halden, Norway, and I've just revived my old
interest in Donald Duck. My first DD-period lasted from 1983 to 1993,
from which I have almost all Donald Duck & Co published in Norway.
Unfortunately, I stopped reading DD in 1993, which appears to have been
right in the middle of a great period of DD, with lots of Barks reprints,
the Life and Times of $crooge, and so on.
I like to think I qualify as a Donaldist, and I plan to update my
collection to the present when I get the money for it.
Anyway, I looked at the Disney Comics database associated with this
list, and I was very impressed. The only thing I missed was some
summaries of stories, (and what about images from the more famous
ones?) The name and writer on its own is rarely enough to identify a
story I might have read a long time ago. Are there any plans to add
that? (If there is, I'd be happy to contribute.)
- Bjoern Staerk, (Email removed)
I'm 19, I study IT in Halden, Norway, and I've just revived my old
interest in Donald Duck. My first DD-period lasted from 1983 to 1993,
from which I have almost all Donald Duck & Co published in Norway.
Unfortunately, I stopped reading DD in 1993, which appears to have been
right in the middle of a great period of DD, with lots of Barks reprints,
the Life and Times of $crooge, and so on.
I like to think I qualify as a Donaldist, and I plan to update my
collection to the present when I get the money for it.
Anyway, I looked at the Disney Comics database associated with this
list, and I was very impressed. The only thing I missed was some
summaries of stories, (and what about images from the more famous
ones?) The name and writer on its own is rarely enough to identify a
story I might have read a long time ago. Are there any plans to add
that? (If there is, I'd be happy to contribute.)
- Bjoern Staerk, (Email removed)
Donald D. Markstein
Junkville Journal
Message 21 -
1998-05-03 at 17:08:20
KRITON KYRIMIS --
>> "For better or worse, this misprint now makes it an established
>> fact that Scrooge does have children"
If all it takes to make something an "established fact" is
printing it in a story, then Donald Duck has four nephews.
ETA BETA --
>> "if those stories did *us* no harm, why would we want to
>> *protect* a younger generation from them ?"
Forgive me if I've already said this here, but whenever
someone brings up the notion that we weren't harmed by all the
gory stuff we read as kids, I'm reminded of a time, about 25
years ago, I was eating fried chicken with a friend, Justin
Winston. Justin remarked that Fredric Wertham (noted 1950s
American comics censorship advocate) was right -- here we were,
a couple of guys who had read the comics Wertham objected to,
and look at us today -- tearing birds apart with our teeth.
The notion that all censorship is wrong is a fine one, and
so is the notion that anyone who prevents a story from being
printed is a censor -- until you put the two together. If
someone who OWNS a story feels that it would embarrass him to
have it in print, is it really wrong for him to disallow the
printing of it?
I'd like to see those old Gottfredson stories made
available as much as the next guy -- but Disney DOES own them,
and I can't think of any argument that they MUST allow the
stories to be printed, which doesn't also interfere with MY
rights over my own intellectual property.
>> "there's no such thing as *good reasons* for censorship..."
Maybe, maybe not. Unfortunately, they don't NEED good
reasons. They own the stories. Sometimes, "Because I said so"
really and truly IS the reason.
Quack, Don
>> "For better or worse, this misprint now makes it an established
>> fact that Scrooge does have children"
If all it takes to make something an "established fact" is
printing it in a story, then Donald Duck has four nephews.
ETA BETA --
>> "if those stories did *us* no harm, why would we want to
>> *protect* a younger generation from them ?"
Forgive me if I've already said this here, but whenever
someone brings up the notion that we weren't harmed by all the
gory stuff we read as kids, I'm reminded of a time, about 25
years ago, I was eating fried chicken with a friend, Justin
Winston. Justin remarked that Fredric Wertham (noted 1950s
American comics censorship advocate) was right -- here we were,
a couple of guys who had read the comics Wertham objected to,
and look at us today -- tearing birds apart with our teeth.
The notion that all censorship is wrong is a fine one, and
so is the notion that anyone who prevents a story from being
printed is a censor -- until you put the two together. If
someone who OWNS a story feels that it would embarrass him to
have it in print, is it really wrong for him to disallow the
printing of it?
I'd like to see those old Gottfredson stories made
available as much as the next guy -- but Disney DOES own them,
and I can't think of any argument that they MUST allow the
stories to be printed, which doesn't also interfere with MY
rights over my own intellectual property.
>> "there's no such thing as *good reasons* for censorship..."
Maybe, maybe not. Unfortunately, they don't NEED good
reasons. They own the stories. Sometimes, "Because I said so"
really and truly IS the reason.
Quack, Don
SRoweCanoe
Foreign legion - no disney
Message 22 -
1998-05-03 at 19:25:18
Sorry, not a history here about the French Foreign Legion (as it was known to
some); but just a general mention of it's useage in entainment history. It
was a staple of books, comic strips, and movies from at least the 1920s to
the 1950s. Indeed there is still a comic strip, Crock, set as a French
Foreign Legion-type outfit.
Beau Gest, was filmed three times; the first in 1926; and probably started the
cliches about the foreign legion - tough commandant; guys who joined "to
forget'. et al.
I think the Foreign Legion ended during the French involvement in
IndoChina...
Steven Rowe
some); but just a general mention of it's useage in entainment history. It
was a staple of books, comic strips, and movies from at least the 1920s to
the 1950s. Indeed there is still a comic strip, Crock, set as a French
Foreign Legion-type outfit.
Beau Gest, was filmed three times; the first in 1926; and probably started the
cliches about the foreign legion - tough commandant; guys who joined "to
forget'. et al.
I think the Foreign Legion ended during the French involvement in
IndoChina...
Steven Rowe
Per-Erik Malmström
Starting to get of-topic...
Message 23 -
1998-05-03 at 22:20:27
ETA:
> Actually, I always believed that most of the II world war related
> comics and cartoons were supposed to be *educative*, if not plain
> propaganda, *against* the Nazis...
So what does a kid learn when he reads the story with Thursday? That nazism
is wrong?...hardly!
> I did read those stories as a kid, and they surely didn't affect
> my own "vision" of the world as, I'm sure, is the case with most
> fellow contributors, here. So, if those stories did *us* no harm,
> why would we want to *protect* a younger generation from them ?
Because some of them are rasistic! The stories featuring nazis doesn't
bother me, but those in which Mickey's behaving like a rasist, do. Why
should they
publish stories were the HERO act like a rasist and in fact does something
illegal?
DANNY:
> It's like they are scared that children might copy a violent Disney
> comic character, but it's okay that they play Mortal Kombat and go
> hunting with daddy hardly after they start walking.
But why is the Walt Disney Company so popular? Because of the comics/movies
they did during WW II? No...
I think WD is a popular company because they're characters do not shot
each other with machine-guns. Parents trust Disney, they know their
material is good and the violence is kept on a "funny-level".
I don't know what it's like in other countries but if the early comic with
Thursday was published in Sweden, a lot of parents would stop buying
Disney
comics for their children. And, the publisher would probably be sued.
Best,
Per-Erik
------------------------------------------------------------------
(Email removed)
------------------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, I always believed that most of the II world war related
> comics and cartoons were supposed to be *educative*, if not plain
> propaganda, *against* the Nazis...
So what does a kid learn when he reads the story with Thursday? That nazism
is wrong?...hardly!
> I did read those stories as a kid, and they surely didn't affect
> my own "vision" of the world as, I'm sure, is the case with most
> fellow contributors, here. So, if those stories did *us* no harm,
> why would we want to *protect* a younger generation from them ?
Because some of them are rasistic! The stories featuring nazis doesn't
bother me, but those in which Mickey's behaving like a rasist, do. Why
should they
publish stories were the HERO act like a rasist and in fact does something
illegal?
DANNY:
> It's like they are scared that children might copy a violent Disney
> comic character, but it's okay that they play Mortal Kombat and go
> hunting with daddy hardly after they start walking.
But why is the Walt Disney Company so popular? Because of the comics/movies
they did during WW II? No...
I think WD is a popular company because they're characters do not shot
each other with machine-guns. Parents trust Disney, they know their
material is good and the violence is kept on a "funny-level".
I don't know what it's like in other countries but if the early comic with
Thursday was published in Sweden, a lot of parents would stop buying
Disney
comics for their children. And, the publisher would probably be sued.
Best,
Per-Erik
------------------------------------------------------------------
(Email removed)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Aderack
Re-enbarking
Message 24 -
1998-05-04 at 09:55:09
DEANMARY:
> I would like for as many people as possible to express on the
> list what THEIR preferences are. Is there an audience out there for the
> endless reprinting of Barks stories? Or do most of you wish Gladstone
> would print more original (at least in the US) stories but just haven't
> raised your voice.
</lurk>
Well, for one, I've had the B&W CBL sitting around for years, have a number of
the CBL in color albums from a few years ago, and have every gladstone/disney
comic since the first issues in 1996 (excepting some nauseating material
during the disney era which seemed more than skippable), so. . .sure, why not
have ANOTHER copy!
Ahem. Seriously, I agree with you entirely. The Rosa and Van Horn stories are
about all that's new in Gladstone these days (and they've even begun
reprinting some of their stories, too). It's a shame, as in theory I do like
Gladstone quite a bit. It's kinda' as if my favorite musician began releasing
nothing but endless "best-of" compilations, with the occasional new track
tacked on, obliging me to buy the things anyway.
Oh, well.
<lurk>
> I would like for as many people as possible to express on the
> list what THEIR preferences are. Is there an audience out there for the
> endless reprinting of Barks stories? Or do most of you wish Gladstone
> would print more original (at least in the US) stories but just haven't
> raised your voice.
</lurk>
Well, for one, I've had the B&W CBL sitting around for years, have a number of
the CBL in color albums from a few years ago, and have every gladstone/disney
comic since the first issues in 1996 (excepting some nauseating material
during the disney era which seemed more than skippable), so. . .sure, why not
have ANOTHER copy!
Ahem. Seriously, I agree with you entirely. The Rosa and Van Horn stories are
about all that's new in Gladstone these days (and they've even begun
reprinting some of their stories, too). It's a shame, as in theory I do like
Gladstone quite a bit. It's kinda' as if my favorite musician began releasing
nothing but endless "best-of" compilations, with the occasional new track
tacked on, obliging me to buy the things anyway.
Oh, well.
<lurk>
Danny Coenen
Disney comics Digest V98 #114
Message 25 -
1998-05-04 at 09:59:01
Bjoern:
Welcome! Hope you like it here!!!
Per-Erik:
I am very happy that Disney is not another company to publish
unnecessarily violent children's entertainment. They just are TOO
careful. Remember the Lo$, I believe part 3 (where he is talking to
the Square Egg Professor). While the European versions (at least the
German one did) had the villains pointing guns at Scrooge, that were
replaced by their INDEX FINGERS in the American prints. How believable
is that? Not very...
==
Danny Coenen
Visit me on the World Wide Web!
The Foreign Exchange Student Homepage at
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Breakers/5042 or
http://surf.to/saturnpage
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Welcome! Hope you like it here!!!
Per-Erik:
I am very happy that Disney is not another company to publish
unnecessarily violent children's entertainment. They just are TOO
careful. Remember the Lo$, I believe part 3 (where he is talking to
the Square Egg Professor). While the European versions (at least the
German one did) had the villains pointing guns at Scrooge, that were
replaced by their INDEX FINGERS in the American prints. How believable
is that? Not very...
==
Danny Coenen
Visit me on the World Wide Web!
The Foreign Exchange Student Homepage at
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Breakers/5042 or
http://surf.to/saturnpage
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Per Nilsson
Disney comics Digest V98 #114
Message 26 -
1998-05-04 at 10:41:23
>Beau Gest, was filmed three times; the first in 1926; and probably started the
>cliches about the foreign legion - tough commandant; guys who joined "to
>forget'. et al.
> I think the Foreign Legion ended during the French involvement in
>IndoChina...
>Steven Rowe
Isn't there anyone in france who can enlighten us all on this topic?. My own info is that
the french foreign legion STILL exists, and are can be compared to the english SAS or
american SEAL'S. A friend of mine joined the legion in the eighties, but ran away when he
was supposed to begin his five year period from scratch again, when he took a extended
holliday ;-)
If you make a search on Altavista you get the result.
...
4. French Foreign Legion the Balkans [Bosnia]
The French Foreign Legion. in Bosnia. NATO divided Bosnia into three main sectors,
each dominated by one of the major allies. There's also an area of...
http://www.hackintosh.com/~bgeste/legion35.html - size 4K - 13-Feb-98 - English -
Translate
...
The ULR didn't work for me, but you get the general idea..
So I'd say that they still are active
/Per Nilsson (a long time lurker)
>cliches about the foreign legion - tough commandant; guys who joined "to
>forget'. et al.
> I think the Foreign Legion ended during the French involvement in
>IndoChina...
>Steven Rowe
Isn't there anyone in france who can enlighten us all on this topic?. My own info is that
the french foreign legion STILL exists, and are can be compared to the english SAS or
american SEAL'S. A friend of mine joined the legion in the eighties, but ran away when he
was supposed to begin his five year period from scratch again, when he took a extended
holliday ;-)
If you make a search on Altavista you get the result.
...
4. French Foreign Legion the Balkans [Bosnia]
The French Foreign Legion. in Bosnia. NATO divided Bosnia into three main sectors,
each dominated by one of the major allies. There's also an area of...
http://www.hackintosh.com/~bgeste/legion35.html - size 4K - 13-Feb-98 - English -
Translate
...
The ULR didn't work for me, but you get the general idea..
So I'd say that they still are active
/Per Nilsson (a long time lurker)
Kriton Kyrimis
Disney comics Digest V98 #114
Message 27 -
1998-05-04 at 10:54:18
DONALD D. MARKSTEIN
> If all it takes to make something an "established fact" is
> printing it in a story, then Donald Duck has four nephews.
Doesn't he; ;-)
--
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
"Then I think someone's seriously overdue for their eye test."
-----
> If all it takes to make something an "established fact" is
> printing it in a story, then Donald Duck has four nephews.
Doesn't he; ;-)
--
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
"Then I think someone's seriously overdue for their eye test."
-----
Claudia Rege Cambrin
Disney comics Digest V98 #113
Message 28 -
1998-05-04 at 10:58:51
Marco Barlotti:
>nice to see another Italian aboard. First we'll get India, then the DC
>mailing list, then we'll conquer the WORLD.... :-p :-p :-p
Luna Storta:
>Welcome on the list Claudia, it's amazing to find out
>that there are Italian girls interested in Disney
>comics!
Thanks to you all, although I don't think being an Italian girl interested
in Disney comics is particularly amazing...
About the story "Mickey and Donald in Vacationland", I see other people
(Alberto, Carey) can trace it better than I can. I looked for it in my
comic collection this weekend and I found it in "I Grandi Classici" #19,
with a reference to "Topolino" #316 (as Alberto said).
Carey:
>Clarabelle Cow, Horace Horse, April, May & June and Magica De Spell
>were not in this story, but everyone else you mentioned was. The
>Beagle Boys were also there.
Of course you're right. I guess the story was too old for Magica and AM&J
to appear. But I forgot to mention Gladstone Gander and Mortie and Ferdie.
So the list of characters appearing in the story is:
Donald, Mickey, HD&L, Grandma Duck, Daisy, Scrooge, Gladstone, Goofy,
Mortie & Ferdie, Pluto, Minnie, Gyro, the Witch (with Mirror), Captain
Hook, Big Bad Wolf (Little Bad Wolf is named by BBW, but doesn't actually
appear), Peg Leg Pete and the Beagle Boys.
However, on re-reading the story, I found it was not as bad as I
remembered. I especially liked when Mickey says something like (translating
from Italian) "I was an apprentice wizard once, and I know the magic power
is concentrated in the magic hat!". This makes me remember something...
----------------------------------------------------
Claudia Rege Cambrin E-mail: (Email removed)
Piazza dei Facchini 10, 56125 Pisa (PI) - ITALY
----------------------------------------------------
>nice to see another Italian aboard. First we'll get India, then the DC
>mailing list, then we'll conquer the WORLD.... :-p :-p :-p
Luna Storta:
>Welcome on the list Claudia, it's amazing to find out
>that there are Italian girls interested in Disney
>comics!
Thanks to you all, although I don't think being an Italian girl interested
in Disney comics is particularly amazing...
About the story "Mickey and Donald in Vacationland", I see other people
(Alberto, Carey) can trace it better than I can. I looked for it in my
comic collection this weekend and I found it in "I Grandi Classici" #19,
with a reference to "Topolino" #316 (as Alberto said).
Carey:
>Clarabelle Cow, Horace Horse, April, May & June and Magica De Spell
>were not in this story, but everyone else you mentioned was. The
>Beagle Boys were also there.
Of course you're right. I guess the story was too old for Magica and AM&J
to appear. But I forgot to mention Gladstone Gander and Mortie and Ferdie.
So the list of characters appearing in the story is:
Donald, Mickey, HD&L, Grandma Duck, Daisy, Scrooge, Gladstone, Goofy,
Mortie & Ferdie, Pluto, Minnie, Gyro, the Witch (with Mirror), Captain
Hook, Big Bad Wolf (Little Bad Wolf is named by BBW, but doesn't actually
appear), Peg Leg Pete and the Beagle Boys.
However, on re-reading the story, I found it was not as bad as I
remembered. I especially liked when Mickey says something like (translating
from Italian) "I was an apprentice wizard once, and I know the magic power
is concentrated in the magic hat!". This makes me remember something...
----------------------------------------------------
Claudia Rege Cambrin E-mail: (Email removed)
Piazza dei Facchini 10, 56125 Pisa (PI) - ITALY
----------------------------------------------------
Per-Erik Malmström
Don Rosa + Danny & Daniel
Message 29 -
1998-05-04 at 12:04:51
Don:
You once wrote the following about "War of the Wendigo":
"Therefore, simply because I feel very anxious for THIS PARTICULAR story to
see print in English, due to the loads of extra work i put into the
Peeweegah's Longfellowian dialogue, I offered to REDRAW all the Peeweegahs
(except the Chief). I'm not sure how to make them all different... or how
to explain to readers why the Peewegahs don't look like they're supposed
to... but we'll make that offer, and if that was the problem, we'll get
that story into America, if in a censored form. Censored is better than
nothing?"
What happened to that project? Why was it never carried through?
And-- when I read the Chat 'n' Mouse in MM 247(a great issue BTW!) I found
something interesting.
Sam Whiteside, Jr. wrote:
"Do you think you could persuade Don Rosa to do a Mouse story?"
...and Byron answered:
"Oddly enough, just the other day we were discussing the possiblity of Rosa
doing a Mickey and Donald story. Perhaps in the not too distant future?"
What made you change your mind?
We've heard that "Sure, in the hands of another Barks...for 25 years, I
might..." speach several times, but a positive answer!?!
DANNY:
> Remember the Lo$, I believe part 3 (where he is talking to
> the Square Egg Professor). While the European versions (at least the
> German one did) had the villains pointing guns at Scrooge, that were
> replaced by their INDEX FINGERS in the American prints. How believable
> is that? Not very...
I agree! That was a very meaningless and strange thing to do. Why were all
the weapons that touch/almost touch Scrooge removed? It's ok to point a gun
at someone but it not ok if it touch this someone? Strange indeed!
I agree with you-- in this case they were TOO careful...
DANIEL:
> Sometimes Disney seems to
> have a different policy for regular and collector > publications, but so
far
> this has been very unclear. Very unfortunately, because I > think this is
> the policy to go for.
Yeah, it would be great if they had such a policy!
Best,
Per-Erik
------------------------------------------------------------------
(Email removed)
------------------------------------------------------------------
You once wrote the following about "War of the Wendigo":
"Therefore, simply because I feel very anxious for THIS PARTICULAR story to
see print in English, due to the loads of extra work i put into the
Peeweegah's Longfellowian dialogue, I offered to REDRAW all the Peeweegahs
(except the Chief). I'm not sure how to make them all different... or how
to explain to readers why the Peewegahs don't look like they're supposed
to... but we'll make that offer, and if that was the problem, we'll get
that story into America, if in a censored form. Censored is better than
nothing?"
What happened to that project? Why was it never carried through?
And-- when I read the Chat 'n' Mouse in MM 247(a great issue BTW!) I found
something interesting.
Sam Whiteside, Jr. wrote:
"Do you think you could persuade Don Rosa to do a Mouse story?"
...and Byron answered:
"Oddly enough, just the other day we were discussing the possiblity of Rosa
doing a Mickey and Donald story. Perhaps in the not too distant future?"
What made you change your mind?
We've heard that "Sure, in the hands of another Barks...for 25 years, I
might..." speach several times, but a positive answer!?!
DANNY:
> Remember the Lo$, I believe part 3 (where he is talking to
> the Square Egg Professor). While the European versions (at least the
> German one did) had the villains pointing guns at Scrooge, that were
> replaced by their INDEX FINGERS in the American prints. How believable
> is that? Not very...
I agree! That was a very meaningless and strange thing to do. Why were all
the weapons that touch/almost touch Scrooge removed? It's ok to point a gun
at someone but it not ok if it touch this someone? Strange indeed!
I agree with you-- in this case they were TOO careful...
DANIEL:
> Sometimes Disney seems to
> have a different policy for regular and collector > publications, but so
far
> this has been very unclear. Very unfortunately, because I > think this is
> the policy to go for.
Yeah, it would be great if they had such a policy!
Best,
Per-Erik
------------------------------------------------------------------
(Email removed)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Archontis Pantsios
On recent Barks reprints
Message 30 -
1998-05-04 at 12:18:47
DEAN:
> This brings us though to WDC&S #628. BOTH Duck stories in this issue
>are Barks re-re-reprints! Since I really am not into Mickey stories
>(sorry, David) I see no reason for me to buy this issue.
This will go DITTO for me. If this is how Gladstone perceives their "new"
prestige-format era, thanks, but I'll pass. If they don't have something new
to offer their readers, they should probably think about folding altogether.
I never thought I'd say such a (heretic) thing, but as somebody told me very
recently, "we seem to have Barks stories coming out of our ears".
> I am TOTALLY baffled by what Gladstone is trying to do. It would be
>bad enough if Gladstone for any reason would go out of the Disney comics
>business. What is worse though is that they actually seem to be
>shooting themselves in the foot! Do they have some sort of
>"death-wish"?!?
Well, we are still waiting for some kind of an official response from
Gladstone. Isn't the Americans who say that "silence leads to misunderstanding"?
> Archontis said that he was "irritated" with Gladstone. That would be
>saying my feelings mildly!
In all honesty, when I first wrote my posting, the word I had originally
used was not "irritated" but "cheated". I'm uneasy at feeling like this for
a company that had offered me such great moments in the past.
> I basically have two requests. The first is for the readers of this
>list. I would like for as many people as possible to express on the
>list what THEIR preferences are.
I don't think this is just a question of "preferences". No one would deny
that Barks stories are great. But look at what Gladstone has done with Barks
stories in the last 10 years: Barks stories in regular comic books, Barks
stories in B&W in the CBL, Barks stories in color albums. Haven't they
squeezed every single $ out of our consumer surplus as far as Barks is
concerned? They think that Barks stories in their new prestige-format comic
books is a "new" product?!?!?! Give us a break!
In a bewildered mood,
Archontis
> This brings us though to WDC&S #628. BOTH Duck stories in this issue
>are Barks re-re-reprints! Since I really am not into Mickey stories
>(sorry, David) I see no reason for me to buy this issue.
This will go DITTO for me. If this is how Gladstone perceives their "new"
prestige-format era, thanks, but I'll pass. If they don't have something new
to offer their readers, they should probably think about folding altogether.
I never thought I'd say such a (heretic) thing, but as somebody told me very
recently, "we seem to have Barks stories coming out of our ears".
> I am TOTALLY baffled by what Gladstone is trying to do. It would be
>bad enough if Gladstone for any reason would go out of the Disney comics
>business. What is worse though is that they actually seem to be
>shooting themselves in the foot! Do they have some sort of
>"death-wish"?!?
Well, we are still waiting for some kind of an official response from
Gladstone. Isn't the Americans who say that "silence leads to misunderstanding"?
> Archontis said that he was "irritated" with Gladstone. That would be
>saying my feelings mildly!
In all honesty, when I first wrote my posting, the word I had originally
used was not "irritated" but "cheated". I'm uneasy at feeling like this for
a company that had offered me such great moments in the past.
> I basically have two requests. The first is for the readers of this
>list. I would like for as many people as possible to express on the
>list what THEIR preferences are.
I don't think this is just a question of "preferences". No one would deny
that Barks stories are great. But look at what Gladstone has done with Barks
stories in the last 10 years: Barks stories in regular comic books, Barks
stories in B&W in the CBL, Barks stories in color albums. Haven't they
squeezed every single $ out of our consumer surplus as far as Barks is
concerned? They think that Barks stories in their new prestige-format comic
books is a "new" product?!?!?! Give us a break!
In a bewildered mood,
Archontis