Keskustelujen arkisto

Well, I guess I won't go back lurking after all...

FRANCOIS wrote:

>Reading at 3? Maybe some stories with very few text. I think a 3
>years-old can hardly understand stories like "Paperino e i gamberi in
>salmi'".

Actually I was... 3 and a half. Really!
I remember going to the newsagent's and buying Topolino #1220 or something
'round there; it was the beginning of '79, and since I was born in '75...
I'm sure of it because at that time, and for some months, on Topolino covers
there was a strange code that then I couldn't understand what it was for, but
later found out that it merely was some kind of a lottery.
And I really remember reading it too.
Of course that's how I learned to read, but I guess I wasn't so weird;

But reading is one thing, understanding's another! :-)

I laid hands on Paperino e i gamberi in salmi' only recently on "I Maestri
Disney" #7, unfortunately (one of the few great things I missed when I was a
kid), but I remember for example, what I got out of "Zio Paperone e e la
leggenda dello Scozzese Volante" (US and the Flying Scot), always by Scarpa.
Well, I actually believed that the sardine rain was a real thing (as the name
Tegucigalpa was; I had checked it out, and if that name, so strange, was true,
then it all had to be). I even managed in convincing friends of mine it was
true! :-) Mind you, I was three!

Later on I found out the truth, but the story is one of my favourite, if not
_the_ favourite.

PAOLO wrote:
>
>Topolino 1523

Does that mean you stopped buying them in '84, or you don't have the first
hundreds 8-) No, really, I'm up to 1232 issues and counting, for each month I
buy about ten-fifteen old ones.

>Topolino Estate 2
Got'em too, nice times!

>Paperino & C. 99 (does someone has #99 for sale?)

Well, I would. But it's from a "collection"; you know, when they used to put
three or four issues toghether. So, since I torn the collection, it's not in
perfect conditions.
BTW, what's so great in that comic? I've already seen somewhere somebody looking
for it, was that you? I mean I've only got one copy, but if you want it so bad,
I can give it to you (how to?) since Paperino & C. and Paperino (that's what you
want isn't it?) have become quite easy to find cheaply lately in Milan.
And how come you have 99 issues and need #99? Is there a #0 that I know not of?

>Pippo e... 1

"... il tempo", that's the title, isn't it? I've always wondered whether this
was a one-shot, or if they actually released number two and three.
BTW was the art by Diaz or not?

My Topolino "collection"(I don't like the word either) is only ten meters high.
All the other stuff reaches another 6 meters and a half.

I really feel a beginner compared to you guys... :-)

Sorry for taking it so long, but it's really great to finally be able to ta. .
er, write ;-) about these things with somebody!!

I always make a point to review the newest Gladstone comics as they come
out, and it just so happens that today when I received WDC&S 628, my lovely
competitor Katie Sullivan was just one jump ahead of me! So, at the risk of
revisiting previously explored territory, here's my $.002.

**SPOILERS**

First off, the cover was excellent. Barks himself drew a cover for "Officer
For a Day" showing Donald ticketing Louie for misparking his bicycle,
ignorant of a Beagle exiting a bank with a large sack of loot. A clever gag,
but the new cover, with its wild, action-packed, character-filled fight
scene, is Jippes' best! It is even better because WDC&S has a cover based on
the inside story! Those simple gag covers having nothing to do with the
story were what I thought to be an example of Gladstone shooting itself in
the foot--I know that I, and likely most of the general public, look for
robust, eye-catching covers that intrigue me as to what is inside, rather
than simple gags. My favorite Barks cover, in that respect, is "Queen of the
Wild Dog Pack".

Moving onto the story, "Officer For a Day," all I can say is it's not one of
Barks' best plots, but the chaotic, madcap situations into which Officer
Duck gets himself make it certainly one of the most action-packed! Daan
Jippes' distorted-Barksian art added to the "world gone mad" atmosphere much
better than Tony Strobl. The bikers are much fiercer, and Donald's
expressions are more outrageous. However, I had one complaint about the art
itself--in the original, the two Venusians (drawn as one fat guy and one
skinny guy) were cute, little things, following on the Barksian tradition of
making the "savages" seem more sympathetic than the giant Ducks. Here they
are large and balloonish enough that HDL's reference to them as "our mortal
enemies" seems real. I can't help but notice that Jippes' backgrounds differ
from Strobl, but these do not help or hurt the story. For example, at the
bottom of page 3, he has added a power plant and a soda billboard saying
"Uippie Jippes". (This is phonetic Dutch--and Gladstone even left the "f"
symbol on the money bags!) My other complaint, although not Jippes' fault,
is that computer lettering makes the sound effects fall flat.

"Bats in the Belfry" is my favorite David Gerstein MM story yet! The macabre
vampire theme made me think "Byron Erickson", but when Profs. Ecks, Doublex,
and Triplex showed up I knew this could be the work of only one man. Great
story, and a great kick in my theory that his stories are "chained gags"!

The Gyro story wasn't that bad, although he and Goofy don't seem IMHO to
make a good team. I had forgotten that there were (if sparingly) good
stories in UNCLE SCROOGE after Barks and before Rosa. Among these Gyro
stories, I'd love to see the ones with Emil Eagle!

The Grandma Duck two-pager was well-drawn, and nice for its small package.

"Good Deed Daze". A good reason for NOT having Duck/Wolf crossovers.

"The Chase." I just don't think movie spinoffs have any strength to them.
Especially when they all hinge on ONE scene from the movie, seemingly BEFORE
it has ended.

"Fishing For Trouble" was a fun Mickey story, but like most of Gerstein's,
it could be redrawn as a Donald tale. Noel Van Horn's art is distinctive and
bouncy, although his characters seem a bit Bambi-eyed.

"Salesman Donald." Yay for early Barks! The slapstick was fast, furiois, and
funny! And quite a neat ironic ending. The hermit gag was recycled in "Land
of the Totem Poles" 7 years later--could this be considered a Barksian
self-reference? (Or just a "remake"?)

As for the letter column, it looks like a list member marathon!

And best of all, NONE of the stories in the ENTIRE issue were serialized!

**END SPOILERS**

I still lack UNCLE SCROOGE 313, so I neglected to read the lady's spoilers.

--Jonathan Markoff

"See? The latest court ruling says you can't QUESTION us without our lawyer!"
--Carl Barks, "Officer For a Day"

I finally found them in the Database:
W US 23-03 4 CB CB GY D:Gyro Goes for a Dip
W CP 8-06 8 CB CB GY T:Grandma's Present [app:GD,GU]

For CP 8-06 german Barks Library says "8/1". For 23-03 it was my fault. I=
skipped a line while reading.)

- Claudio=

Hello. In series Best of DD, in Finland, they published a story numbered
as "WDC 54" and claimed it is by Carl Barks. The story is listed in Finnish
section of Dcomics database: AAP 18, "Kiipeliä kerrakseen".

However, I'm sure the number "WDC 54" is incorrect because I have the
true "WDC 54" elsewhere (in both DD magazines 1976/51 and 1991/3).
Also, the wrong story has Gladstone even he appeared first time in
"WDC 88" (source: DComics database).

The reason why I want this to be clarified is that they are reprinting
the Best of DD series and my wish is that the wrong story will be removed
if not by CB. The story should be replaced by better even it is by CB, IMHO.

You may take a look at the first page at "http://www.funet.fi/~kouhia/
wdc54.jpg".

Thanks,

Juhana

PS. I have compiled info about Finnish Carl Barks stories with respect
to CB listings found from DComics webpages. But I'm quite helpless in
adding them to DComics database.

PPS. When I started to make my listing of the CB stories, I would
have needed images of the first couple of panels. How about adding
images of the first panels (or couple of first panels) to DComics
database?

FRANCESCO SPREAFICO --
You're reading through the entire archive before
contributing regularly? Hey, this isn't an American
superhero comic -- you don't have to memorize all the
back issues to know what's going on.

ETA BETA --
"Springboard" is the initial step in writing a
comics story. It's basically a short paragraph giving the
basic idea of the story. When I said I was thinking of
sending a few springboards to ELVIRA editor David
Seidman, what I meant was I thought I might make a bid to
write a few stories for the comic.

DON ROSA --
Oops! I misread your original "pre-'87" remark. I
thought you meant there had never been ANY mention of the
Little Booneheads before that, which is why I couldn't
make sense of it since of course you would have to know
there was. Now that I realize where I made my error in
reading it, it makes perfect sense.
I was never under an impression anybody except
Barks had mentioned them in that period -- but since they
form such a palpable part of the Duck back-story in my
mind, I was sure Barks had used the term more than once.
But if he did, I would expect you to know about it. Since
you're so sure he didn't, it's not worth my while to look
for a second mention that probably isn't there. I did go
so far as to check out the one where they compete with
the Little Chickadees to build a bridge, but came up
blank. So -- I give up. Apparently, there is only one
mention of the Little Booneheads in the Barks Canon.

ALL COLLECTORS --
One of the drawbacks to freelancing is that no
matter how well you plan, there occasionally appear
annoying little gaps in your income. One such is
happening to me right now -- it appears some money I've
been expecting will not be here in time for me to pay
some rather urgent bills. So I'm forced to sell off a few
choice items from my collection.
The sale is being held on eBay, the on-line
auction house, which you can check out at
http://www.ebay.com
Look up the following item numbers: 24548591,
24548117, and 24547424.
I regret that all three, together, are less than
an inch thick, and therefore will do little to enhance
your standing in the great face-off we've been having
here recently. But -- here's your chance to add a few
nice little Disney collectibles to your own hoard -- and
at the same time, ease my mind by ensuring that they'll
go to a good home.
The auction will end about Thursday or Friday,
depending, I guess, on your time zone.

Quack, Don

I have just recently subscribed to both this "digest" and the great
internet. Being completely green about the people on this list,
discussions, and the internet experience in general I hope that I do not
sound too obtuse when writing my piece.
I am 16 yrs. old and have been quite lucky as a teenager in the
literary realm of comic books because not only have I had a subscription
to Gladstone comics since their inception but my father also collected
comic books as a boy giving me a library of comics that graced virtually
all of Carl Barks' work.
Many people have drawn the ducks, but the most pleasing well
balanced drawing always seemed to be from Carl Barks. I suppose this is
nothing new to be totally gaga over Barks' great works, but I believe
firmly that the reason why Barks is so notably famous is not for the
art-work in itself but because of the intertwining of the interesting
plot into the drawing.

Perhaps this is not the place, for this appears to be mainly an all
duck discussion, but I would like to know if there is a possibility to
acquire Gottfriedson mickey stories, any foreign publications, dusty
vaults of old comics, etc.?

I have finally stopped my subscription to Gladstone comics, but I
would very much like to buy back issues with stories in them that I do
not have, particularly the new Don Rosa stories. Does anyone have a list
of Rosa stories with issue numbers from last year to the present?

Also a small complaint, to see if anyone agrees with me. Being a
Ludite at heart and born fully equipped to handle the eighteenth century
only to find I'm way too late, I object to the computer drawn lettering
in the new issues. The lettering seems to violently clash with soft
curves of the hand drawn figures. Does it take too much time to add in
hand lettering? I see it as spending the time to create a statue but
leave off the nose. I have grown up in my own little artist's world
being the son of a sign painter and my eye for the way art should be has
been thusly formed. So what is the reason if any and why don't they want
to do it my way?

A final question. Do we know if $crooge still takes his memory
medicine from Back to the Klondike? In fact what medicine does $crooge
take? Let's face it he's an old duck!

----Jeff Bingham
Blackfoot, Idaho USA

From: Claudio Eckert
>>>>>>>>>"On stolen Time":
Why don't the Beagle Boys use the time-clock again, when Donald and the
kids are running towards them over the "frozed" Water and just let them
fall into it? While writing this, I think, perhaps they are just a litte =
to dumb? Or discovered the Ducks a bit to late?

Yes, I don't know if it was made clear in whatever translation you read, but
the *whole point* of the Ducks taking a short cut across the water was to
keep them within the zone in which they would not be affected by the watch.
As I recall that story, the Beagles had stopped and were about to click the
Ducks into frozen time, but they then saw that the Ducks had taken that
short cut and they were still too close. Yes, maybe they still could have
clicked and made the Ducks fall into the un-frozen water, then maybe gotten
some distance on them while they were in the drink before clicking the watch
again and freezing the Ducks with everything else -- but the Ducks were
close enough to the shore to be able to leap the remaining distance even if
the water liquified. If that wasn't sufficiently explained even in my
original script, you can attribute it to my limited page count and *very*
tiny 1/8-page panel size.

From David King:
>>>>>Subject: More Notre Duck
My recent post to the mailing list made me want to re-read "The Phantom of
Notre Duck", so I did so. It struck me what a pagan cathedral it is! All
those sinister gargoyles of birds of prey, and a fresco showing a dragon
being slaughtered.... Putting that together with my earlier observation that
the words "Notre Duck" lampoon the Virgin Mary, it's really strange that the
story wasn't censored! Incidentally, does anyone know of any other instances
where religion is alluded to? To my knowledge, this is the only one.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. As you just saw when you reread
the story, there is absolutely NO reference to religion in there. There are
no crosses evident in this "Notre Duck" building... no religious symbols or
references whatsoever... and it seems to be simply a museum of some sort.
The name is translated as "Our Duck", which may not make sense, but still
does not specify the building as a Catholic church even if we know what the
gag-reference is to. It is called a "cathedral", but a cathedral is defined
as a large building housing the seat of a regional organization... *usually*
a term referring to a Church where a catholic bishop is stationed... but not
absolutely necessarilly. So there was nothing in this story to censor since
there was (as you yourself note) no mention of any religion. My guess is
that Barks simply wanted a story with a catchy title... one that combined
two of the snappiest movie titles of his younger days... "The Phantom of the
Opera" and "The Hunchback of Notre Dame".