Hi Don M.,
> As of this past Monday, the CompuServe Comics and
> Animation Forum has closed its "Disney/Gladstone" section.
I did not even notice. Quite honestly, I had to leave CompuServe for a few months
earlier this year when time and finances were tight. I've just gotten back on in this
past month or so, but my regularity in the forums has been, er, quite irregular.
(One should really think out a sentence before committing it to an e-mail, you
know? But I digress...) I haven't checked in since the weekend at this point, I
don't think.
Plus, last year there was plenty of things to discuss, like the hardcover Life of
Times collection, and Gladstone's fate, and the big format changes. . .
Nowadays, all I ever hear is everyone's suggestions for what would make a
successful package in WDC&S. Nothing personal to anyone on this list, but I;m
sick of hearing those by now.
Which leaves us to discuss actual stories. Most of the publications are Barks
reprints, which have been half talked to death. And on this list, it's not nearly as
much fun discussing Don's new stories when they've already been discussed to
death after their first printing in Europe.
That might help explain why I don't much post here regularly anymore.
> Used to be, if anybody posted an interesting
> question or comment there, the ensuing discussion would
> draw in Don Rosa, Augie DeBlieck, Nat Gertler (who I
Ah, yes, the good old days. ;-) I still have a few messages from those days saved
in TapCIS (a CompuServe message reader).
> It's not that there aren't any Disney comics fans
> in America. But we're getting old...
I'm working on a Pipeline column for this weekend (see URL below my name)
which will discuss this, in part. I think you might find it interesting. Check it out
by Sunday or maybe Monday night. It has some definite relevance.
-Augie
-------------------------------------------------
Augie De Blieck Jr. * (Email removed) <*>
Pipeline Commentary and Review: New Every Sunday:
http://www.nic.com/~augie/pipeline
Author
Topic: 199810
(197 messages)
Augie De Blieck Jr.
Junkville Journal
Message 61 -
1998-10-08 at 05:46:50
Arthur Faria Jr.
Paperina E La Gara Nel Deserto
Message 62 -
1998-10-08 at 10:58:25
Hi!
- Paolo and Marco:
Thanks for the info on "Paperina E La Gara Nel Deserto".
- And Marco also questioned:
> Please send us the details! (Who is the artist? Are you
saying this never appeared in Brazil?)
This story did appear in Brazil; I've just never seen the issue
where it was published (probably it was in "Margarida" --
Brazilian Daisy mag). When I worked for Editora Abril,
my editor sent me every month all Disney magazines they had
published, but occasionally with the inevitable absence of
one or another issue, which I haven't found yet. That's the
case of this story... Thus I don't know who's the artist.
If you really are interested to know (I am! ;-) ), perhaps you
could put a scan of its first panel or page in the Web, and then
maybe I can recognize the artist.
-- Arthur F.
"A dime? Shake! You win the iron oscar for the most
outrageous alibi ever offered by a foreign agent!"
(Martian Boss)
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #1
****************************************
- Paolo and Marco:
Thanks for the info on "Paperina E La Gara Nel Deserto".
- And Marco also questioned:
> Please send us the details! (Who is the artist? Are you
saying this never appeared in Brazil?)
This story did appear in Brazil; I've just never seen the issue
where it was published (probably it was in "Margarida" --
Brazilian Daisy mag). When I worked for Editora Abril,
my editor sent me every month all Disney magazines they had
published, but occasionally with the inevitable absence of
one or another issue, which I haven't found yet. That's the
case of this story... Thus I don't know who's the artist.
If you really are interested to know (I am! ;-) ), perhaps you
could put a scan of its first panel or page in the Web, and then
maybe I can recognize the artist.
-- Arthur F.
"A dime? Shake! You win the iron oscar for the most
outrageous alibi ever offered by a foreign agent!"
(Martian Boss)
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #1
****************************************
Frank Fabian
New address?
Message 63 -
1998-10-08 at 14:33:27
Hi Per,
I noticed the digests are sent out from a new address ("numerus" instead
of "strindberg"), the stated reply address has changed too and the
numbering of digests has also changed. Are these permanent changes? If so,
please announce it on the list.
Thanks,
Frank
I noticed the digests are sent out from a new address ("numerus" instead
of "strindberg"), the stated reply address has changed too and the
numbering of digests has also changed. Are these permanent changes? If so,
please announce it on the list.
Thanks,
Frank
Fluks, H.W.
Poppy Patch
Message 64 -
1998-10-08 at 16:26:38
Rob Gibson:
There was an end-of-message quote a while back:
> "Unca Donald had been smoking those Poppies again."
> <Lions in the Poppy Patch> -Carl Barks
>=20
> I have never heard of this story, and suspect this is an apocryphal
> reference. If not, I would like to know.
>=20
This quote must have been in a letter from Daniel van Eijmeren, who =
isn't on
this list anymore. The quote is from a 1/2-page gag sequence that Barks
sketched out for Harry Gladstone (something familiar with that =
name...).
This is what Daniel writes on his web page
(http://members.xoom.com/dve/unpub05.htm):
<<
Harry Gladstone, head of the Character Merchandising Division at Walt
Disney's New York office, decided in 1975 to try his hand at writing a =
comic
book. He approached Carl Barks for advice, and Barks responded with a =
sample
layout and suggestions for submitting a sketch script to the editors at
Western Publishing. [...]
Western accepted Harry Gladstone's story script. He drew the final ink =
art
himself, and "Birthday Bugaboo" was published in December in "Donald =
Duck"
No.=A0169. [...]
The sketched half page is published in the "The Carl Barks Library" and =
can
be seen here as illustration.=20
Information and illustration taken from the Carl Barks Library
(page=A010A-228).
>>
(If you want to *see* that illustration, along with many other =
interesting
Barks stuff, you'll have to visit Daniel's webpages!)
--Harry.
There was an end-of-message quote a while back:
> "Unca Donald had been smoking those Poppies again."
> <Lions in the Poppy Patch> -Carl Barks
>=20
> I have never heard of this story, and suspect this is an apocryphal
> reference. If not, I would like to know.
>=20
This quote must have been in a letter from Daniel van Eijmeren, who =
isn't on
this list anymore. The quote is from a 1/2-page gag sequence that Barks
sketched out for Harry Gladstone (something familiar with that =
name...).
This is what Daniel writes on his web page
(http://members.xoom.com/dve/unpub05.htm):
<<
Harry Gladstone, head of the Character Merchandising Division at Walt
Disney's New York office, decided in 1975 to try his hand at writing a =
comic
book. He approached Carl Barks for advice, and Barks responded with a =
sample
layout and suggestions for submitting a sketch script to the editors at
Western Publishing. [...]
Western accepted Harry Gladstone's story script. He drew the final ink =
art
himself, and "Birthday Bugaboo" was published in December in "Donald =
Duck"
No.=A0169. [...]
The sketched half page is published in the "The Carl Barks Library" and =
can
be seen here as illustration.=20
Information and illustration taken from the Carl Barks Library
(page=A010A-228).
>>
(If you want to *see* that illustration, along with many other =
interesting
Barks stuff, you'll have to visit Daniel's webpages!)
--Harry.
Vidar Svendsen
Religion in Duckburg
Message 65 -
1998-10-08 at 23:07:40
I have finished the Norwegian version of most of my
pages about religion in Duckburg. The only page left is
the page about witches. I'll write it soon, I hope, and then
start translating the pages to English.
You can find it at my disney-comics pages:
http://home.sol.no/~vidasven/disney-comics/comics.htm
The direct adress is:
http://home.sol.no/~vidasven/disney-comics/innledning.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vidar Svendsen http://home.sol.no/~vidasven
And he said all those numbers
made him numb,
which (he thinks) is why
they're called numbers
pages about religion in Duckburg. The only page left is
the page about witches. I'll write it soon, I hope, and then
start translating the pages to English.
You can find it at my disney-comics pages:
http://home.sol.no/~vidasven/disney-comics/comics.htm
The direct adress is:
http://home.sol.no/~vidasven/disney-comics/innledning.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vidar Svendsen http://home.sol.no/~vidasven
And he said all those numbers
made him numb,
which (he thinks) is why
they're called numbers
HoyMurphy
Disney comics Digest V98 #1
Message 66 -
1998-10-09 at 05:54:14
Don Markstein wrote:
<< Every time I see a complaint about Gladstone --
especially when it's accompanied by an expressed desire
that they let someone else try it for awhile -- I heave a
heavy sigh. >>
Well, I wasn't complaining about Gladstone, just observing that they can't
stay in business much longer without creating a newsstand presence. They have
none at all now, and posts on this list indicate they have very little in the
comics specialty shops. As for someone else taking over, I was trying to list
possible alternatives for American Disney comics if Gladstone folds or loses
the license. Gladstone certainly deserves every chance to be successful, but
I fear there are fewer of us every day who is willing/can afford to support
them.
A couple of other possibilities: Since DC Comics just purchased Wildstorm as
a separate imprint, perhaps they would be interested in the license? They
have a fairly successful kids line with the Hanna-Barbera/Cartoon
Network/Warner Brothers books, but maybe they wouldn't want to work out a deal
with Disney. Dark Horse Comics has a lot of licensed properties, but they're
mostly movie and television licenses, and they print next to no kids comics.
Tod McFarlane? He bought the rights to the old Eclipse Comics characters.
Disney doesn't seem like his style, though. That pretty much leaves Gladstone
and Archie of the established publishers. Maybe Steve Geppi, who owns Diamond
Distribution? Doesn't he own the company that reprints the old EC comics?
There's gotta be a way to keep Disney comics in the U.S.
--your pal, Hoy
<< Every time I see a complaint about Gladstone --
especially when it's accompanied by an expressed desire
that they let someone else try it for awhile -- I heave a
heavy sigh. >>
Well, I wasn't complaining about Gladstone, just observing that they can't
stay in business much longer without creating a newsstand presence. They have
none at all now, and posts on this list indicate they have very little in the
comics specialty shops. As for someone else taking over, I was trying to list
possible alternatives for American Disney comics if Gladstone folds or loses
the license. Gladstone certainly deserves every chance to be successful, but
I fear there are fewer of us every day who is willing/can afford to support
them.
A couple of other possibilities: Since DC Comics just purchased Wildstorm as
a separate imprint, perhaps they would be interested in the license? They
have a fairly successful kids line with the Hanna-Barbera/Cartoon
Network/Warner Brothers books, but maybe they wouldn't want to work out a deal
with Disney. Dark Horse Comics has a lot of licensed properties, but they're
mostly movie and television licenses, and they print next to no kids comics.
Tod McFarlane? He bought the rights to the old Eclipse Comics characters.
Disney doesn't seem like his style, though. That pretty much leaves Gladstone
and Archie of the established publishers. Maybe Steve Geppi, who owns Diamond
Distribution? Doesn't he own the company that reprints the old EC comics?
There's gotta be a way to keep Disney comics in the U.S.
--your pal, Hoy
Fluks, H.W.
Markstein's overview
Message 67 -
1998-10-09 at 20:58:34
Don M. wrote:
> As of this past Monday, the CompuServe Comics and
> Animation Forum has closed its "Disney/Gladstone" section.
> The files in its library have been dispersed to other
> libraries. (For instance, my overview of the first 500
> issues of WALT DISNEY'S COMICS AND STORIES is now in the
> general "Comic Books" section.)
>
In case anyone outside the Compuserve world is interested, I've put a copy
of that overview on my "Bolderbast" site. Follow the link from:
http://members.xoom.com/bolderbast/
(Don gave his permission for this, of course. Thanks, Don!)
--Harry.
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #2
****************************************
> As of this past Monday, the CompuServe Comics and
> Animation Forum has closed its "Disney/Gladstone" section.
> The files in its library have been dispersed to other
> libraries. (For instance, my overview of the first 500
> issues of WALT DISNEY'S COMICS AND STORIES is now in the
> general "Comic Books" section.)
>
In case anyone outside the Compuserve world is interested, I've put a copy
of that overview on my "Bolderbast" site. Follow the link from:
http://members.xoom.com/bolderbast/
(Don gave his permission for this, of course. Thanks, Don!)
--Harry.
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #2
****************************************
Bhc
Disney comics Digest V98 #245
Message 68 -
1998-10-09 at 21:27:20
Some of you've been around long enough to remember that US Disney comics
disappeared once before, when Western Publishing shut down their comics
operation after over half a century in the business. Then came Gladstone,
founded on the modest but not unambitious premise of reviving Disney comics
and restoring them to a respectable position in the US marketplace.
The market welcomed us warmly enough, in spirit at least, but sales
suggested that the name "Disney" could not in itself work sufficient magic
to overcome some of the problems that were affecting the bottom line of the
market in general. Still, as time went on and we gained experience, we
managed to fulfill our founding goals, and even take a step or two beyond
them. Gladstone (I) was, all things being equal, a success, and seemed
settled in for the long haul.
Then Disney stepped in, and Gladstone Disney comics vanished, seemingly for
good.
That was a peculiar time. Our original reason for being was gone, but we
were up and running as a comics publisher. We reprinted the classic EC
horror material, and that actually started rolling along nicely
when...well, that's a story for another mailing list. Then there was
Hamilton Horror, a great experience in spite of being a market bust, Dick
Tracy, and...Disney comics.
A dark irony, that: Disney, the owners of the Disney comics properties,
with vastly more capital and marketing resources than Gladstone can ever
hope to imagine (although we can imagine quite a bit), couldn't make their
comics happen in a market that was healthier than it is today. Of course,
when Disney Comics got going the US comics market was well down a one-way
track to disaster, and soon proved it could not support the business plan
for Disney Comics (or the never-launched Touchmark imprint).
After Disney Comics folded, Marvel, the Number One comics company in North
America, took a shot at doing Disney. The comics license had been divided
into "classic" and "modern" characters, with Marvel handling the "modern"
themselves while Gladstone took back the "classic." Marvel and Gladstone
even partnered up in some advertising and in a nice distribution deal,
which saw Marvel's imprint on all "classic" books produced by Gladstone
that went into the newsstand distribution pipeline. (Gladstone's imprint
appeared on direct market editions only.) It was a fine setup, and strictly
by the numbers our sales were terrific, by far the best we ever enjoyed
with our Disneys. But then Marvel dropped doing Disney, and we were back to
fending entirely for ourselves. Not so great, but doable.
Meanwhile, Acclaim came along and picked up the "modern" license...but I
know too little about that to have any worthwhile remarks.
In short, those of you who place hope in having the license picked up by
someone else need to keep in mind you've had your wish fulfilled more than
once already. Archie, DC, and Egmont haven't taken a shot yet, but they'd
be pretty darn foolish not to take a good hard look at the story so far if
they consider such a move.
Listen, I know most of you are just plain upset about how things have been
going for US Disney comics, and, hard as it may be for some of you to
believe, it's nothing we're dancing in the streets about, either. The least
pleasant by far was when, due to some tough breaks, we had to drop
newsstand comics a little while back. (Greed? Feh! If that's what we were
about, we'd have jumped this ship years ago!) Perhaps some of my remarks
have sounded fatalistic of late, but I've been caught between trying to be
honest and informative while having very little to honest or informative
about. All we know here, and all we've known for a while (and may know for
a while yet), is that everything's in the hands of our publisher, Bruce
Hamilton, and the folks he's dealing with at Disney. Anything else would be
news to us as much as to you.
BTW: WDC #633 is "all Donald" only by reason of various factors converging
on that particular issue. Mickey has not been dropped from WDC, nor has he
been banished from US.
BTW Also: To certain someones who continue to make the idea of us trying to
generate revenue sound like we're out to murder baby seals - out of season,
no less - here's my advice to you: buy low, sell high, take a long,
leisurely, expensive vacation, and please, forget to write.
Gary
****************************
"It's either very new cheese or very old meat." - Oscar Madison
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladstone on the Web: http://www.brucehamilton.com
disappeared once before, when Western Publishing shut down their comics
operation after over half a century in the business. Then came Gladstone,
founded on the modest but not unambitious premise of reviving Disney comics
and restoring them to a respectable position in the US marketplace.
The market welcomed us warmly enough, in spirit at least, but sales
suggested that the name "Disney" could not in itself work sufficient magic
to overcome some of the problems that were affecting the bottom line of the
market in general. Still, as time went on and we gained experience, we
managed to fulfill our founding goals, and even take a step or two beyond
them. Gladstone (I) was, all things being equal, a success, and seemed
settled in for the long haul.
Then Disney stepped in, and Gladstone Disney comics vanished, seemingly for
good.
That was a peculiar time. Our original reason for being was gone, but we
were up and running as a comics publisher. We reprinted the classic EC
horror material, and that actually started rolling along nicely
when...well, that's a story for another mailing list. Then there was
Hamilton Horror, a great experience in spite of being a market bust, Dick
Tracy, and...Disney comics.
A dark irony, that: Disney, the owners of the Disney comics properties,
with vastly more capital and marketing resources than Gladstone can ever
hope to imagine (although we can imagine quite a bit), couldn't make their
comics happen in a market that was healthier than it is today. Of course,
when Disney Comics got going the US comics market was well down a one-way
track to disaster, and soon proved it could not support the business plan
for Disney Comics (or the never-launched Touchmark imprint).
After Disney Comics folded, Marvel, the Number One comics company in North
America, took a shot at doing Disney. The comics license had been divided
into "classic" and "modern" characters, with Marvel handling the "modern"
themselves while Gladstone took back the "classic." Marvel and Gladstone
even partnered up in some advertising and in a nice distribution deal,
which saw Marvel's imprint on all "classic" books produced by Gladstone
that went into the newsstand distribution pipeline. (Gladstone's imprint
appeared on direct market editions only.) It was a fine setup, and strictly
by the numbers our sales were terrific, by far the best we ever enjoyed
with our Disneys. But then Marvel dropped doing Disney, and we were back to
fending entirely for ourselves. Not so great, but doable.
Meanwhile, Acclaim came along and picked up the "modern" license...but I
know too little about that to have any worthwhile remarks.
In short, those of you who place hope in having the license picked up by
someone else need to keep in mind you've had your wish fulfilled more than
once already. Archie, DC, and Egmont haven't taken a shot yet, but they'd
be pretty darn foolish not to take a good hard look at the story so far if
they consider such a move.
Listen, I know most of you are just plain upset about how things have been
going for US Disney comics, and, hard as it may be for some of you to
believe, it's nothing we're dancing in the streets about, either. The least
pleasant by far was when, due to some tough breaks, we had to drop
newsstand comics a little while back. (Greed? Feh! If that's what we were
about, we'd have jumped this ship years ago!) Perhaps some of my remarks
have sounded fatalistic of late, but I've been caught between trying to be
honest and informative while having very little to honest or informative
about. All we know here, and all we've known for a while (and may know for
a while yet), is that everything's in the hands of our publisher, Bruce
Hamilton, and the folks he's dealing with at Disney. Anything else would be
news to us as much as to you.
BTW: WDC #633 is "all Donald" only by reason of various factors converging
on that particular issue. Mickey has not been dropped from WDC, nor has he
been banished from US.
BTW Also: To certain someones who continue to make the idea of us trying to
generate revenue sound like we're out to murder baby seals - out of season,
no less - here's my advice to you: buy low, sell high, take a long,
leisurely, expensive vacation, and please, forget to write.
Gary
****************************
"It's either very new cheese or very old meat." - Oscar Madison
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladstone on the Web: http://www.brucehamilton.com
Francesco Spreafico
Topolino
Message 69 -
1998-10-10 at 00:29:01
Hello.
This week's Topolino includes Cavazzano's "Paperon Bisbeticus Domato" a new
Great Parody (very fine); then there's also another Super Goof story by Massimo
De Vita... GC and MDV together on the same issue... it had been years since I'd
seen such thing...
This means that lately Topolino has improved a lot... if this goes on maybe it
could go back to the old high quality levels...
I hope so!!
Ciao!
--
Francesco
"You're all clear, kid. Now let's blow this thing and go home!"
This week's Topolino includes Cavazzano's "Paperon Bisbeticus Domato" a new
Great Parody (very fine); then there's also another Super Goof story by Massimo
De Vita... GC and MDV together on the same issue... it had been years since I'd
seen such thing...
This means that lately Topolino has improved a lot... if this goes on maybe it
could go back to the old high quality levels...
I hope so!!
Ciao!
--
Francesco
"You're all clear, kid. Now let's blow this thing and go home!"
Mike Schneiderath
D.U.C.K.hunt´s Don Rosa Contest opened!
Message 70 -
1998-10-10 at 02:37:43
You like a challenge? Maybe even want to win a little price?
Well...here is your "once in a lifetime" opportunity ! (attention: possible
slight exagguration! :-)....
Just visit our Webpage at
http://come.to/duckhunt
and see for yourself.
Bye!
Mike
Well...here is your "once in a lifetime" opportunity ! (attention: possible
slight exagguration! :-)....
Just visit our Webpage at
http://come.to/duckhunt
and see for yourself.
Bye!
Mike
Mike Schneiderath
DUCKhunt Rosa Contest Link correction!
Message 71 -
1998-10-10 at 12:27:34
SORRY.....there was a wrong URL given for the ROSA CONTEST in my previous
mail....
here is the working adress!
You like a challenge? Maybe even want to win a little price?
Well...here is your "once in a lifetime" opportunity ! (attention: possible
slight exagguration! :-)....
Just visit our Webpage at
http://beam.to/duckhunt
or
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/8024/index.html
and see for yourself.
Bye!
Mike
mail....
here is the working adress!
You like a challenge? Maybe even want to win a little price?
Well...here is your "once in a lifetime" opportunity ! (attention: possible
slight exagguration! :-)....
Just visit our Webpage at
http://beam.to/duckhunt
or
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/8024/index.html
and see for yourself.
Bye!
Mike
Marco Barlotti
B 870069 on the net!
Message 72 -
1998-10-10 at 23:47:09
ARTHUR FARIA:
You wrote about "Paperina e la gara nel deserto" (B 870069):
>If you really are interested to know (I am! ;-) ), perhaps you
>could put a scan of its first panel or page in the Web, and then
>maybe I can recognize the artist.
>
I **am** interested. So please look at:
http://marcobar.cce.unifi.it/Comics/Scans/B870069a.jpg
http://marcobar.cce.unifi.it/Comics/scans/B870069b.jpg
and let us know... ;-)
Marco
You wrote about "Paperina e la gara nel deserto" (B 870069):
>If you really are interested to know (I am! ;-) ), perhaps you
>could put a scan of its first panel or page in the Web, and then
>maybe I can recognize the artist.
>
I **am** interested. So please look at:
http://marcobar.cce.unifi.it/Comics/Scans/B870069a.jpg
http://marcobar.cce.unifi.it/Comics/scans/B870069b.jpg
and let us know... ;-)
Marco
Kriton Kyrimis
Picsou
Message 73 -
1998-10-10 at 23:50:43
Thanks to a tip from Dionysis, I found a place in Athens where they
sell Picsou magazine, and I finally got a chance to see what many list
members have been raving about.
Oddly enough, Picsou appears to be cheaper here than in France, as
it only costs 500 drs (cheaper than Komix!) while at current exchange
rates it would cost about 750-800 drs (15 F) in France! Perhaps it has
something to do with the magazine being sold several months after its
publication date; today I bought the June issue.
I was extremely impressed by the magazine. I don't know if it was because
of their snazzy translations (my French is too poor to be able to judge
this) or if it has something to do with the sense of accompishment I
got from managing to read the stories in a language I believed I had all
but forgotten (I felt exactly like I'd felt when reading Asterix in the
original French or in ancient Greek), but it's the first time I read a
comic book laughing from cover to cover.
A question for long time Picsou readers: Is this a Barks & Rosa only
title, or do they print other stories as well? Much as I liked the
magazine, the only new material for me was the famous "Unpublished Don
Rosa" page on the inside front cover. (I loved the full-page tribute to
"Dangerous Disguise", with Don himself making a guest appearance among
the mayhem. Are there D.U.C.K.s in these pictures?)
I know Gary has explained the economics of publishing in the US, but I
still can't help wondering why they can publish such wonderful magazines
in Europe at much more affordable prices: whether it's 500 drs or 15 F,
this is *cheap* compared to $6.95, especially if you consider that you
get 100 pages of comics rather than 64. Since many people have offered
their suggestions on what Gladstone should be doing, let me add to this
in the form of a comparison between the one issue of Picsou that I've
seen, and Gladstone's current offerings:
* First of all, Picsou is *affordable*. Gladstone's prestige format comic
books are only affordable by people with steady jobs, not by kids with
a small allowance.
* Picsou's size is slightly larger, making it qualify as a magazine
(it says so on the cover) rather than a comic book. This makes it
possible for it to not appear out of place on a magazine rack.
* Picsou's cover says "buy me", not "for collectors only": Half the
cover is taken by the notice about the "free gift" given along with
the issue. (June's issue offers a small card with 40 non-permanent
tattoos. I don't think this bit adds much to the cost of the magazine,
but it is a big incentive for kids to buy it, especially if other kids
already have it.) The other half of June's cover is taken by a full
height picture of Donald in a heroic pose, to go with that issue's
Super Snooper theme. However, although the pose is similar to those
found in the covers of Donald Duck Adventures and Walt Disney Giant,
it is also completely different: there is no background clutter, just a
plain red background, and Donald is the 90s, computer-shaded, version
with which kids are more familiar from Disney's merchandising. When I
first saw the cover, I hated it. However, as I was already determined
to buy the thing, the cover was not addressed to me. I'm fairly
certain that many kids who saw this cover on a magazine rack have
pestered their parents to buy it for them. Fine as Don's and Barks'
covers are, after seeing Picsou's cover I feel that publishing them
is like preaching to the converted.
* Instead of "the Year That Was" type of articles, there was a long
article on how to have fun with the free tattoos, and articles on music,
films, sports, and video games. While I like the former, and didn't
bother with the latter, I'm sure that young readers are more interested
in the latter. If children told their friends that Liz Hurley will be
playing the role of Lara Croft in a film based on the "Tomb Raider"
video game, and that they read about this in Picsou, I'm sure that at
least one of them would check the magazine out, and get hooked on the
stories. How many kids would bother to check out WDC&S when told that
it recently reprinted the first Mickey Mouse strips from the 30s?
* Picsou is staple-bound, not square bound. I've talked on this subject
before. This cheaper form of binding is ideal for reading, as the
magazine can lay flat on the table or your lap, and you can even
fold it backwards, as some people like to do. Square binding is for
looking nice on the shelf, and for collectors to determine the value
of the comic book depending on whether the spine is broken or not;
it is not for easy reading.
* Picsou is printed on regular matte paper (albeit with nice computer
color) not on glossy paper. Again, glossy paper is nice to look at,
and is fine for Playboy and Penthouse, where reading is optional,
but it is not ideal for prolonged reading, as the light it reflects
tires the eyes. Matte paper is better for reading, and I bet it's a
lot cheaper than glossy paper. Collectors, of course, who wouldn't
dream of actually reading the comics, lest they break the spines,
would prefer the glossy paper.
I guess what I'm saying is that perhaps it is only the old comic
book format that is actually dying in the US, and that switching to
a European magazine format might actually help revive interest in the
comics themselves. In the US, such a move might also have the advantage
of being something of a novelty, which might help in establishing a new
reader base.
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it still exists."
-----
sell Picsou magazine, and I finally got a chance to see what many list
members have been raving about.
Oddly enough, Picsou appears to be cheaper here than in France, as
it only costs 500 drs (cheaper than Komix!) while at current exchange
rates it would cost about 750-800 drs (15 F) in France! Perhaps it has
something to do with the magazine being sold several months after its
publication date; today I bought the June issue.
I was extremely impressed by the magazine. I don't know if it was because
of their snazzy translations (my French is too poor to be able to judge
this) or if it has something to do with the sense of accompishment I
got from managing to read the stories in a language I believed I had all
but forgotten (I felt exactly like I'd felt when reading Asterix in the
original French or in ancient Greek), but it's the first time I read a
comic book laughing from cover to cover.
A question for long time Picsou readers: Is this a Barks & Rosa only
title, or do they print other stories as well? Much as I liked the
magazine, the only new material for me was the famous "Unpublished Don
Rosa" page on the inside front cover. (I loved the full-page tribute to
"Dangerous Disguise", with Don himself making a guest appearance among
the mayhem. Are there D.U.C.K.s in these pictures?)
I know Gary has explained the economics of publishing in the US, but I
still can't help wondering why they can publish such wonderful magazines
in Europe at much more affordable prices: whether it's 500 drs or 15 F,
this is *cheap* compared to $6.95, especially if you consider that you
get 100 pages of comics rather than 64. Since many people have offered
their suggestions on what Gladstone should be doing, let me add to this
in the form of a comparison between the one issue of Picsou that I've
seen, and Gladstone's current offerings:
* First of all, Picsou is *affordable*. Gladstone's prestige format comic
books are only affordable by people with steady jobs, not by kids with
a small allowance.
* Picsou's size is slightly larger, making it qualify as a magazine
(it says so on the cover) rather than a comic book. This makes it
possible for it to not appear out of place on a magazine rack.
* Picsou's cover says "buy me", not "for collectors only": Half the
cover is taken by the notice about the "free gift" given along with
the issue. (June's issue offers a small card with 40 non-permanent
tattoos. I don't think this bit adds much to the cost of the magazine,
but it is a big incentive for kids to buy it, especially if other kids
already have it.) The other half of June's cover is taken by a full
height picture of Donald in a heroic pose, to go with that issue's
Super Snooper theme. However, although the pose is similar to those
found in the covers of Donald Duck Adventures and Walt Disney Giant,
it is also completely different: there is no background clutter, just a
plain red background, and Donald is the 90s, computer-shaded, version
with which kids are more familiar from Disney's merchandising. When I
first saw the cover, I hated it. However, as I was already determined
to buy the thing, the cover was not addressed to me. I'm fairly
certain that many kids who saw this cover on a magazine rack have
pestered their parents to buy it for them. Fine as Don's and Barks'
covers are, after seeing Picsou's cover I feel that publishing them
is like preaching to the converted.
* Instead of "the Year That Was" type of articles, there was a long
article on how to have fun with the free tattoos, and articles on music,
films, sports, and video games. While I like the former, and didn't
bother with the latter, I'm sure that young readers are more interested
in the latter. If children told their friends that Liz Hurley will be
playing the role of Lara Croft in a film based on the "Tomb Raider"
video game, and that they read about this in Picsou, I'm sure that at
least one of them would check the magazine out, and get hooked on the
stories. How many kids would bother to check out WDC&S when told that
it recently reprinted the first Mickey Mouse strips from the 30s?
* Picsou is staple-bound, not square bound. I've talked on this subject
before. This cheaper form of binding is ideal for reading, as the
magazine can lay flat on the table or your lap, and you can even
fold it backwards, as some people like to do. Square binding is for
looking nice on the shelf, and for collectors to determine the value
of the comic book depending on whether the spine is broken or not;
it is not for easy reading.
* Picsou is printed on regular matte paper (albeit with nice computer
color) not on glossy paper. Again, glossy paper is nice to look at,
and is fine for Playboy and Penthouse, where reading is optional,
but it is not ideal for prolonged reading, as the light it reflects
tires the eyes. Matte paper is better for reading, and I bet it's a
lot cheaper than glossy paper. Collectors, of course, who wouldn't
dream of actually reading the comics, lest they break the spines,
would prefer the glossy paper.
I guess what I'm saying is that perhaps it is only the old comic
book format that is actually dying in the US, and that switching to
a European magazine format might actually help revive interest in the
comics themselves. In the US, such a move might also have the advantage
of being something of a novelty, which might help in establishing a new
reader base.
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it still exists."
-----
Kriton Kyrimis
Dangerous Disguise
Message 74 -
1998-10-10 at 23:50:49
Reading "Dangerous Disguise" again, I couldn't help noticing how
*violent* this story is: right at the beginning, we have all those
counter-counter-etc. spies shooting at each other. This may have happened
off-stage, with Donald thinking it had only been firecrackers, but
there was little doubt left that any of them survived this. Even worse,
while travelling to Chiliburgeria, the ducks throw agent Minus-X off a
train travelling at 80 mph while crossing a deep gorge, and this time
we can see the unfortunate agent plummeting to his death.
I wonder how Barks' editors allowed this story to be published, only
complaining about his not using dog faces for the supporting characters.
In addition, with Disney's current attitude, I'm surprised that this
story has been reprinted several times, even by Disney themselves.
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it still exists."
-----
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #3
****************************************
*violent* this story is: right at the beginning, we have all those
counter-counter-etc. spies shooting at each other. This may have happened
off-stage, with Donald thinking it had only been firecrackers, but
there was little doubt left that any of them survived this. Even worse,
while travelling to Chiliburgeria, the ducks throw agent Minus-X off a
train travelling at 80 mph while crossing a deep gorge, and this time
we can see the unfortunate agent plummeting to his death.
I wonder how Barks' editors allowed this story to be published, only
complaining about his not using dog faces for the supporting characters.
In addition, with Disney's current attitude, I'm surprised that this
story has been reprinted several times, even by Disney themselves.
Kriton (e-mail: (Email removed))
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis
-----
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it still exists."
-----
--------------------------------
End of Disney comics Digest V98 Issue #3
****************************************
Jeff Conner
Gary's Rant
Message 75 -
1998-10-11 at 01:18:12
Gary from Gladstone had this to say:
>Some of you've been around long enough to remember that
US Disney comics
>disappeared once before, when Western Publishing shut
down their comics
>operation after over half a century in the business.<
I do, and it was a pain, hoping to find those Whitman
3-packs for any Disney fix.
>The market welcomed us warmly enough, in spirit at
least, but sales
>suggested that the name "Disney" could not in itself
work sufficient magic
>to overcome some of the problems that were affecting
the bottom line of the
>market in general.<
Part of this could be blamed on the rise of the direct
sales system. Most of the comic shop owners are/were
superhero fans, who ignored the "funny animal" stuff.
The fall of the newstand market, too, was poison for
non-superhero comics. Comic shops are lousy places for
impulse buying which, I assume, would help sales of
Disney comics.
>That was a peculiar time. Our original reason for being
was gone, but we
>were up and running as a comics publisher. We reprinted
the classic EC
>horror material, and that actually started rolling
along nicely
>when...well, that's a story for another mailing list.
Then there was
>Hamilton Horror, a great experience in spite of being a
market bust, Dick
>Tracy, and...Disney comics.<
An aside: Dell/Western published all sorts of comics:
funny animals, westerns, horror, sci-fi, TV & movie
adaptations, even an occasional superhero. They were a
well-rounded company, and the public knew that "Dell
Comics are good comics." They had name recognition, and
parents were comfortable buying them for their kids.
Perhaps Gladstone could've acheived that sort of
recognition in time. IMO, Gladstone needs to publish
other things beside Disney comics more often, to become
a well-rounded company. Perhaps then, Gladstone wouldn't
live and die on the Disney license.
>A dark irony, that: Disney, the owners of the Disney
comics properties,
>with vastly more capital and marketing resources than
Gladstone can ever
>hope to imagine (although we can imagine quite a bit),
couldn't make their
>comics happen in a market that was healthier than it is
today.<
I will never understand why the Disney Company couldn't
make a go of it. It befuddles me.
>In short, those of you who place hope in having the
license picked up by
>someone else need to keep in mind you've had your wish
fulfilled more than
>once already. Archie, DC, and Egmont haven't taken a
shot yet, but they'd
>be pretty darn foolish not to take a good hard look at
the story so far if
>they consider such a move.<
And I believe that Archie, DC, and maybe even the
rejuvenated Marvel would be foolish to not consider
publishing Disney. Marvel, Acclaim, and Disney published Disney comics
because they saw the potential of the
license. Who receives the license next should analyze
the mistakes that these companies (and Gladstone) made,
learn from them, and hopefully publish Disney comics for a long, long,
long time.
BTW, I don't fault Gladstone for trying to make money,
although I do think that Gladstone is catering to the
collectors/duck nuts at the expense of kids. For
instance, Penny Pincher should have been a great place
to get kid readers. But the first 3 issues were nothing
but Neighbor Jones stories! Neighbor Jones isn't exactly a Disney icon.
And I doubt that it brought in many new
readers.
Anyway Gary, take a vacation. You sound a little cranky. And I hope you
keep publishing Disney comics.
Sincerely,
Jeff C
---------------------------------
Make Your Own Comics Page--NEAT!!
Comics Cornucopia http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/comics
SJ Mercury Comics http://comics.mercurycenter.com
Phillynews Comics http://interactive.phillynews.com/comics
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>Some of you've been around long enough to remember that
US Disney comics
>disappeared once before, when Western Publishing shut
down their comics
>operation after over half a century in the business.<
I do, and it was a pain, hoping to find those Whitman
3-packs for any Disney fix.
>The market welcomed us warmly enough, in spirit at
least, but sales
>suggested that the name "Disney" could not in itself
work sufficient magic
>to overcome some of the problems that were affecting
the bottom line of the
>market in general.<
Part of this could be blamed on the rise of the direct
sales system. Most of the comic shop owners are/were
superhero fans, who ignored the "funny animal" stuff.
The fall of the newstand market, too, was poison for
non-superhero comics. Comic shops are lousy places for
impulse buying which, I assume, would help sales of
Disney comics.
>That was a peculiar time. Our original reason for being
was gone, but we
>were up and running as a comics publisher. We reprinted
the classic EC
>horror material, and that actually started rolling
along nicely
>when...well, that's a story for another mailing list.
Then there was
>Hamilton Horror, a great experience in spite of being a
market bust, Dick
>Tracy, and...Disney comics.<
An aside: Dell/Western published all sorts of comics:
funny animals, westerns, horror, sci-fi, TV & movie
adaptations, even an occasional superhero. They were a
well-rounded company, and the public knew that "Dell
Comics are good comics." They had name recognition, and
parents were comfortable buying them for their kids.
Perhaps Gladstone could've acheived that sort of
recognition in time. IMO, Gladstone needs to publish
other things beside Disney comics more often, to become
a well-rounded company. Perhaps then, Gladstone wouldn't
live and die on the Disney license.
>A dark irony, that: Disney, the owners of the Disney
comics properties,
>with vastly more capital and marketing resources than
Gladstone can ever
>hope to imagine (although we can imagine quite a bit),
couldn't make their
>comics happen in a market that was healthier than it is
today.<
I will never understand why the Disney Company couldn't
make a go of it. It befuddles me.
>In short, those of you who place hope in having the
license picked up by
>someone else need to keep in mind you've had your wish
fulfilled more than
>once already. Archie, DC, and Egmont haven't taken a
shot yet, but they'd
>be pretty darn foolish not to take a good hard look at
the story so far if
>they consider such a move.<
And I believe that Archie, DC, and maybe even the
rejuvenated Marvel would be foolish to not consider
publishing Disney. Marvel, Acclaim, and Disney published Disney comics
because they saw the potential of the
license. Who receives the license next should analyze
the mistakes that these companies (and Gladstone) made,
learn from them, and hopefully publish Disney comics for a long, long,
long time.
BTW, I don't fault Gladstone for trying to make money,
although I do think that Gladstone is catering to the
collectors/duck nuts at the expense of kids. For
instance, Penny Pincher should have been a great place
to get kid readers. But the first 3 issues were nothing
but Neighbor Jones stories! Neighbor Jones isn't exactly a Disney icon.
And I doubt that it brought in many new
readers.
Anyway Gary, take a vacation. You sound a little cranky. And I hope you
keep publishing Disney comics.
Sincerely,
Jeff C
---------------------------------
Make Your Own Comics Page--NEAT!!
Comics Cornucopia http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/comics
SJ Mercury Comics http://comics.mercurycenter.com
Phillynews Comics http://interactive.phillynews.com/comics
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com