Keskustelujen arkisto

RICH BELLACERA:

<<As for Scamp, I can't really think of any memorable tales. The
character himself is very endearing, though. I wish there was
more substance to him... Also, the
artwork for the early Scamp strips (by Al Hubbard, right?) is
actually some of the best comic art I've seen, especially from
that time period.>>

I couldn't have said it better myself. I always thought Scamp was positively
adorable, but the stories weren't much. And Hubbard's art definitely made a
difference in how attractive Scamp was. The Hubbard Scamp trumped both the
Murry version and the version in the newspaper strip.

Scamp has always seemed to be to be well-suited for a Disney TV series.
Unfortunately, 101 DALMATIANS beat him to it (and may have killed the idea
permanently, considering as how it's been yanked from US syndication after
only one season).

-- Christopher E. Barat
(Email removed)
http://members.aol.com/cebarat/home.htm

hello
Are there anyone here, maybe italians, who have been in Venice/Venezia?
I justv read a Comic, where The ducks visit Gondolia (Venice) and I would
like to know if the buildings shown, do exist in the city.
Please help, I can provide a scan of the first page.
Anders Christian

Hello Everybody
In DK we have a TV-programme about movies, computer-games and comics.
The host is Jakob Stegelmann, a danish freelance journalist, who has
written
books about both Walt Disney and Carl Barks. Unfortunately he also wrote a
rather unfriendly article about Lo$ so I do not like him that much...
And he also.. (OOPS, I must wait til Xmas)

Well, the programme, called the Magic Miror (approx.), has shown an
interview
with Barks, and the other day there was a feature on the danish pocketbook
-
Jumbo, and it's 30 year jubilee.
A summary:
When the book started in 1968 it was predicted a short lifetime,
people would not want to read comics in books! Today, 30 years
later, it is not Denmarks, but Europes best-selling book.
The three line format was new and the drawing stile was
more exaggerated than in the Weekly.
The books were made and printed at Mondadori, which had
an old press, which was only able to put colour on every
second page, so thats the reason there are colour on only
half of the pages
Some new charecters showed up: Andy Anderbilt (John D.
Rockerduck), who BTW had been discarded by Gutenberghus;
Feodora (now Mary - Brigitta MacBridge) and Felix Ferm
(now Naebhoej - Jubal Cock/Filo Sganga); Tusnelda (the witch
from Barks' Trick or Treat). Later Arizona Goof, Goofys Jungle
cousin joined them (in I-1724 DK jumbo 106).
In Italy Donald had become a real looser, and that is maybe the
reason that Steel-Duck (Super-Duck/Paperinik) was invented [
under the whole feature covers and panels from the books were
shown, here of course with Super-Duck]. Super-Duck is now so
popular that he has his own magazine [maybe I'll get some
unfriends now, but I do not like the drawing style in that new mag.,
It's too different from the duck in the pocket books, too super hero-
like].
Many classics has been rewrote into Disney-comic-stories, e.g.
Les Miserables by Victor Hugo where Scrooge is Jean Val-Jean
(I-1743 in Jumbo 105) and Mickey as Scaramousj (which book
was this?). [After this some panels from Once upon a time in America
was shown, THAT's a great story IMHO]. 100.000 issues of the Jumbo
book are sold every month, so Jakob Stegelmann thinks that there will
be Jumbo books in the next 30 years too! Hooray!!! [but that was not what
he said about the weekly in 1994: The weekly will not be published after
the
turn of the century; well I say, let's hope not...]

Hello
Could any of the french members (are there others than Francois?) please
inform
me about the french names of the Duck family (as on Rosas family tree,
published
around PM 292?)?
I would be very pleased, maybe even more if you could scan it and send it
to me...
Anders Chr.

--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #232
******************************************

Anders wrote:

>Could any of the french members (are there others than Francois?)=20
>please
>inform
>me about the french names of the Duck family (as on Rosas family >tree=
,
>published
>around PM 292?)?

I'm not french, but I DO have the french family tree (published in PM=20
318). Not knowing what excactly you want to know, here's everything :-)
(From top left to bottom right)

Riri Duck =3DHuey
Fifi Duck =3DDewey
Loulou Duck =3DLoui
? Duck =3D?
Della Duck =3DDella
Donald Duck =3DDonald
Gontran Bonheur =3DGladstone
Popop Duck =3DFethry
Abner Duck =3DAbner (Whitewater)
Gus Glouton =3DGus
Matilda Picsou =3DMatilda
Balhtazar Picsou =3DScrooge
Hortense Picsou =3DHortense
Rodolphe Duck =3DQuackmore
Gustave Bonheur =3DGoostave
Daphn=E9e Duck =3DDaphne
Lulubelle Louft =3DLulubelle
Barnab=E9 Duck =3DEider
Fanny Ecoytum =3DFanny
Luc Glouton =3DLuke
Herbert Ecoutum =3DCuthbert
Edith O'drake =3DDowny
Fergus McPicsou =3DFergus
Jack McPicsou =3DJake
John McPicsou =3DPothole
Joseph Duck =3DHumperdink
Elvire Ecoutum =3DGrandma
Jules Ecoutum =3DCasey
Gretchen Gribiche =3DGretchen
Quinquag=E9sim McPicsou =3DQagmire
Willie McPicsou =3DDirty Dingus
Molly Mallard =3DMolly
Gertrude Guilleret =3DGertrude
Clinton Ecoutum =3DClinton
Sir Emeric McPicsou =3DSir Roast
Sir Edward McPicsou =3DSir Swamphole
Kenneth McPicsou =3DSeafoam
Sir Francis McPicsou =3DMatey (Malcolm)
Sir Duncan McPicsou =3DSir Quackly
Mathurin Duck =3DPintail
Cornelius Ecoutum =3DCornelius
Sir Wilfried McPicsou =3DSir Stuft
Sir William McPicsou =3DSir Eider
(Le clan McPicsou, La famille Duck, Les cousins Ecoutum)

/Asger

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

G'day,

I'm really interested in this point that Jonathan Markoff brought up, about Van
Horn signing his latest comic in WDC&S. Has there been a change in policy or
was it a slip up? Personally, I've always been disappointed that Disney
wouldn't allow artists to sign their work, especially now that they're credited
anyway. It's pretty obvious whether a comic's by Barks, Rosa or Van Horn in any
case, and I don't think that anyone believes that Walt's drawing them himself
any more. But, then again, a lot of Disney's policies have always confused me.

Also, someone mentioned making a making a database of Australian Disney comics.
Well, I don't have many - twenty at the most, probably - but if they can help
fill in any gaps I'd be happy to provide what information I can about them.

By the way, I already knew that Egmont was a big company, but it was only
recently that I actually found out that they also produce Phantom comics, which
I occasionally read. Does anybody know if there are any artists, or writers,
who have worked on both?

Cheers,

Owen

Seems like that (some) people in this ML are NOT the only persons to wonder
about cubic acres! I haven't checked the reference, so feel free to blame
me if this is a hoax.
-- forwarded message --
From: (Email removed) (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,rec.arts.comics.misc
Subject: Cubic Acres and Last Month's Most Interesting Footnote
Followup-To: sci.math,sci.physics,rec.arts.comics.misc
Date: 17 Sep 1998 22:42:16 GMT
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <6ts388$780$(Email removed)>
Reply-To: (Email removed) (Matthew P Wiener)
NNTP-Posting-Host: sagi.wistar.upenn.edu

K R Brownstein "Cubic Acres" AM J PHYS 66#8, Aug '98, p739 contains
a proof that given a parallelepiped, the scalar triple product of
the three _area_ vectors is, up to sign, the volume squared. (As
is well-known, the scalar triple product of the edge vectors is,
up to sign, the volume.)

The author concludes by pointing out that Scrooge McDuck often
described the wealth in his vaults in terms of "cubic acres". For
the incredulous reader, he includes a footnoted reference:

[^2] Walt Disney, Uncle Scrooge Four Color #456 (Uncle
Scrooge #2) (Western Publishing, Racine WI, 1953), p2.

Brownstein conjectures Scrooge's wealth is thus actually the square
of what every one has thought it was all along.
--
-Matthew P Wiener ((Email removed))
-- end of forwarded message --
//Pekka Timonen ((Email removed))

Last week, I wrote a Mickey Mouse story that
revived a little-used character from the 1930s --
Detective Casey, who, as far as I know, was first seen
in the "Phantom Blot" story. I had a blast working with
him, and will probably want to use him again.
I looked through the more easily-found parts of
my collection -- the stuff with spines, that I keep on
bookshelves, as opposed to the comic books, which are
packed up a dozen or so to a bag, then boxed, then
stacked haphazardly so most of the time it's hard to
find stuff. And I found only two stories with Casey,
both in the Abbeville Press book about Goofy. One,
obviously, was The Blot; the other was about a jewel
thief called The Gleam.
Does anybody know of other Casey appearances, by
either Gottfredson or his successors? I have my own take
on him (based mostly on his antics in the Blot case), but
I'd like to see how he's been handled in the past.
Interestingly, as I was researching Casey, I found
no Gottfredson stories without him, that featured Chief
O'Hara. As I said, I didn't delve very deeply into the
Archives, but I thought it curious that O'Hara turned up
only twice in all the stories I did check. Apparently,
he was a less prominent character in the Gottfredson era
than I thought.

DON ROSA --
>> "Well, I agreed 100% with "Eta Beta"... and now I
>> agree 100% with Stefan Dios. Can I agree with both and
>> not be wishy-washy?"
There's a scene in FIDDLER ON THE ROOF, where
someone expresses a well-reasoned opinion, and Tevye
says he's right. Then, someone else expresses the exact
opposite opinion, also well-reasoned, and Tevye says he's
right. A third person points out that they can't both be
right, and Tevye says he's right, too.
In this universe of shifting uncertainties that
we live in, that scene makes a lot of sense to me.

>> "I am not as another writer here describes himself,
>> making the reader the boss and doing what ever it is
>> that makes the reader happy."
You may not be referring to me, but that's close
enough to some things I've said to where I think it's
likely you are. What I actually said, tho, was something
to the effect that my first duty is to the reader, to
give him a good story. I can hardly be expected to "make
the reader boss", since I have no idea what the reader
would order me to do, and even if I did, one of the
elements of a good story is a surprise now and then,
something one can't very well do if one is merely taking
orders.
But maybe I'm splitting hairs. It's certainly true
that when I write a Disney story, or a Tiny Toons story,
or a Mighty Morphin Power Rangers story, it would be
more accurate to describe the process as working at a
job, than following my Muse. It's the most fun I've ever
had when working, true. But when I'm using other people's
characters, I'm definitely working at a job, and the job
requires that I render those characters according to the
very reasonable expectations of the people who are paying
me -- who, ultimately, are the readers.
But using other people's characters isn't the only
writing I do. I also write about characters of my own,
and there, I feel perfectly free to follow my Muse.
(Lucky for me, my Muse leads me in the direction of
stories that have a reasonable chance of entertaining at
least a few people.)
I can understand where you might do things
differently. You've stated more than once that Uncle
Scrooge is your very favorite character to work on, and
(I hope I'm not over-stating) that if he were the star
of every story you ever do, you'd be content. You have
your own characteristic take on Scrooge, perfectly
consistent with the way he's perceived by most other
people, and yet, not completely shared by anyone else.
In a very real sense, he IS your character -- and even
if you'd modestly object to my saying so, I'm sure you
wouldn't disagree that in rendering him the way you do,
you are following your own Muse.
I can't do that. I just love working on Disney
stuff, but I DO consider that in doing so, I'm not
entirely free to follow my own inclinations. That's what
I have my own characters for.

Well, that takes me within a week of the current
Digest, so I think I'll cut it off now and get back to
work.
By the way, I recently attended a local science
fiction convention, where (as usual) I sat on several
panels. One of them was titled "Singing Gargoyles, Sexy
Indian Maidens, And Happy Endings: Does Disney read the
book?"
Of course, this refers to animation, and is
therefore (kof kof) OFF TOPIC. But I do want to mention
it in juxtaposition with the recent discussion on
translation. It's rather ironic to see some people argue
vehemently in favor of precise translations of Disney
material, when the Disney organization itself is
notorious for altering everything it touches.

Quack, Don