Sorry, but can someone send me directly Digest 336?
Thanks,
Mike
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
Author
Topic: 200011
(215 messages)
Michael Rhode
Need Digest 336
Message 211 -
2000-11-30 at 17:10:13
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Uncle Scrooge in the Junior Woodchucks
Message 212 -
2000-11-30 at 19:03:55
DON ROSA, 27-11-2000:
> The reason I would ignore the stories that he only wrote (the "Junior
> Woodchuck" stories) is that Barks seemed to be doing stories about
> the JW's, and using $crooge as only a background character, and
> I don't really like the $crooge character that appears in some of
> those stories. He seems like a new character compared to the older
> stories.
In a December 11, 1969 letter to Michael Barrier, Barks commented on
Uncle Scrooge's role in the Junior Woodchuck story:
"In the story I did in Sept.(?) ["Peril of the Black Forest", JW 6]
I used Uncle Scrooge as the villain. I'm doing the same in the
current story. Analyzing all the things you fans have written and
said I've included that you all liked him best when he was the menace
in the duck stories. When he became the hero, with his own book,
I had to be careful how bad I made him."
Maybe Carl Barks used Uncle Scrooge as he appeared in stories like
"Voodoo Hoodoo" (OS 238) and "A Christmas For Shacktown" (OS 367),
which were published before he became the main character in his
own comic?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel
> The reason I would ignore the stories that he only wrote (the "Junior
> Woodchuck" stories) is that Barks seemed to be doing stories about
> the JW's, and using $crooge as only a background character, and
> I don't really like the $crooge character that appears in some of
> those stories. He seems like a new character compared to the older
> stories.
In a December 11, 1969 letter to Michael Barrier, Barks commented on
Uncle Scrooge's role in the Junior Woodchuck story:
"In the story I did in Sept.(?) ["Peril of the Black Forest", JW 6]
I used Uncle Scrooge as the villain. I'm doing the same in the
current story. Analyzing all the things you fans have written and
said I've included that you all liked him best when he was the menace
in the duck stories. When he became the hero, with his own book,
I had to be careful how bad I made him."
Maybe Carl Barks used Uncle Scrooge as he appeared in stories like
"Voodoo Hoodoo" (OS 238) and "A Christmas For Shacktown" (OS 367),
which were published before he became the main character in his
own comic?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel
Fluks, H.W.
Need Digest 336
Message 213 -
2000-11-30 at 19:40:52
> From: Michael Rhode [mailto:mrhode at hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 6:10 PM
> Sorry, but can someone send me directly Digest 336?
I didn't get it either. I think noone did.
Probably Per will have it sent out later.
--Harry.
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 6:10 PM
> Sorry, but can someone send me directly Digest 336?
I didn't get it either. I think noone did.
Probably Per will have it sent out later.
--Harry.
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Terry Gilliam a Barks fan
Message 214 -
2000-11-30 at 23:18:07
ROB KLEIN, Digest Vol 1 #337, 28-11-2000:
> Regarding martin Berglund's idea that Terry Gilliam might have used
> memory of Carl Barks work as inspiration for some Monty Python
> sketches: I believe it is not only very possible, but probable.
Martin Berglund commented on an email in which I brought up the sketch
from memory, not knowing its title. Martin identified it.
> I saw a BBC interview of Terry Gilliam several years ago in which he
> indicated that he was a "big fan of Carl barks' work".
Wow! Terry Gilliam mentioning Carl Barks! Does someone know more
information on this interview?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel
> Regarding martin Berglund's idea that Terry Gilliam might have used
> memory of Carl Barks work as inspiration for some Monty Python
> sketches: I believe it is not only very possible, but probable.
Martin Berglund commented on an email in which I brought up the sketch
from memory, not knowing its title. Martin identified it.
> I saw a BBC interview of Terry Gilliam several years ago in which he
> indicated that he was a "big fan of Carl barks' work".
Wow! Terry Gilliam mentioning Carl Barks! Does someone know more
information on this interview?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Parrot Gag vs. Barks
Message 215 -
2000-11-30 at 23:55:33
ROB KLEIN, Digest Vol 1 #337, 28-11-2000:
> Regarding Daniel van Eijmeren's theory that Barks MAY have written
> the 1951 Parrot gag drawn by Frank McSavage: When the information
> in the Western Pub. payroll documents refers to "one page Donald
> Duck gag", that indicates that barks submitted a rough sketch layout
> of a one-page gag. He got payed for the "writing" of that gag. It
> was accepted for use, but not assigned to a particular magazine.
In Michael Barrier, the intended issue is mentioned as being OS 356.
Maybe you're referring to some other lost/unidentified gags, which
are described as being "for future use" and "to be used as needed"?
> The gag itself has the flavour of a Barks gag, but the intensity
> of Donalds changes in emotion are weak.
A reason for this could be that Carl Barks didn't draw the gag
himself, so he didn't have much control on how his expressions
would look in the published result. This, for example, happened
in the Junior Woodchuck stories, which are known to be by Barks.
> Also, I am SURE Barks would not have used the EXACT same dialogue
> in each of Donald's balloons.
Even though Donald keeps on repeating the same line, the emotion
differs because of the bold lettering which underscores Donald
getting more and more frustrated in making the parrot talk.
So, at least for me, the lines are *not* exactly the same.
The US 61 parrot also uses a repetition of exactly the same line,
but then *without* bold lettering. Even though this gag is art
only, this does not mean that Barks could have decided using a
different dialogue if he objected to this repetition. Apparently,
he didn't. (This is guessing, of course.)
Apart from this, a parrot has to *learn* a line before it can
imitate it. So, it's even nescessary to keep on repeating the
same line (as in OS 356), otherwise the parrot will never learn it.
And when one wants to make a parrot say a certain line it already
knows (as in US 61), then one has to say the line exactly the
same way as the parrot learnt it.
> If McSavage indeed, received the originals, he did a masterful
> job of butchery ("McSavagery") as did Tony Strobl and Kay Wright
> to Barks' later story sketches. My instinct tells me this is
> NOT a Barks script, or it is a well-changed version.
What's the difference between an "instict" and an "opinion"?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel
> Regarding Daniel van Eijmeren's theory that Barks MAY have written
> the 1951 Parrot gag drawn by Frank McSavage: When the information
> in the Western Pub. payroll documents refers to "one page Donald
> Duck gag", that indicates that barks submitted a rough sketch layout
> of a one-page gag. He got payed for the "writing" of that gag. It
> was accepted for use, but not assigned to a particular magazine.
In Michael Barrier, the intended issue is mentioned as being OS 356.
Maybe you're referring to some other lost/unidentified gags, which
are described as being "for future use" and "to be used as needed"?
> The gag itself has the flavour of a Barks gag, but the intensity
> of Donalds changes in emotion are weak.
A reason for this could be that Carl Barks didn't draw the gag
himself, so he didn't have much control on how his expressions
would look in the published result. This, for example, happened
in the Junior Woodchuck stories, which are known to be by Barks.
> Also, I am SURE Barks would not have used the EXACT same dialogue
> in each of Donald's balloons.
Even though Donald keeps on repeating the same line, the emotion
differs because of the bold lettering which underscores Donald
getting more and more frustrated in making the parrot talk.
So, at least for me, the lines are *not* exactly the same.
The US 61 parrot also uses a repetition of exactly the same line,
but then *without* bold lettering. Even though this gag is art
only, this does not mean that Barks could have decided using a
different dialogue if he objected to this repetition. Apparently,
he didn't. (This is guessing, of course.)
Apart from this, a parrot has to *learn* a line before it can
imitate it. So, it's even nescessary to keep on repeating the
same line (as in OS 356), otherwise the parrot will never learn it.
And when one wants to make a parrot say a certain line it already
knows (as in US 61), then one has to say the line exactly the
same way as the parrot learnt it.
> If McSavage indeed, received the originals, he did a masterful
> job of butchery ("McSavagery") as did Tony Strobl and Kay Wright
> to Barks' later story sketches. My instinct tells me this is
> NOT a Barks script, or it is a well-changed version.
What's the difference between an "instict" and an "opinion"?
Best wishes,
--- Daniel