Keskustelujen arkisto

Subject: fanboys argue about the content of scrooge's bin

Hold it, hold it! We seem to be arguing about two totally different matters
here. Well, actually three, and I'm not saying we still don't agree to
disagree. But my entire original point was in answer to someone about how
the Europeans have traditionally colored the Money Bin contents as 100%
golden coins, all the time, close-ups as well. I stated that the original
idea in the American editions is that the Money Bin contains *normal*
currency, which is the joke -- every coin is *not* some precious
treasure -- it's just that $crooge would be putting his money into a giant
"sugar bowl" rather than a bank. Still, I support the idea that I like
seeing a tradition continued in European editions, even though it's
different than what I grew up on. Like, it's none o' my bizniz!
You (john garvin <jgarvin at bendcable.com>), on the other hand, seem to be
inferring that I am saying there is NO golden coins in the Bin, though I
often mention the presence of many types of coins in the Bin (I even
did one entire story about Donald finding a particularly special section of
golden coins at one level of depth), and which I even stated was true in
these messages. But the gold coins would be so few and far between that
they could never result in *all* the money being colored gold, or even a
majority of it.
You hunted down an impressive list of gold coins minted in the late 19th
century, and even some in the early 20th (when $crooge would have been
obtaining them and adding them to his Bin). Regardless of how you make it
sound, they were not *common".... not compared to all the *other* silver
and copper coins in circulation. "Widely" circulated, in that they were
found most anywhere, but not "plentiful" in everyone's pocket. I am certain
that there is a proportional amount of these small golden coins mixed into
the Bin, especially at lower levels, an amount proportional to their
circulation as compared to all the pennies and nickels and dimes, etc. In
views of the coins, they would appear as points of color as would the
pennies, spread throughout the bulk of silver coins.
But the coins should not ALL be colored gold. S'all I was saying.
Still, I can't avoid:

From: john garvin <jgarvin at bendcable.com>
>>>>So you grant me this point, but don't address the implication. Why do
you assume that the pile
of coins on the cover of FC 386 is wrong, but the coins on the interior
splash of FC 386 is
correct?

Because the cover was the cover. It's meant to be an eye-catcher. So the
coins are colored brighter than in the actual story. I almost always change
facts in my cover and pin-up scenes -- I do whatever it takes to make them
eye-catching and dramatic *first*... accurate to the story second.
Then you lost me again here:

>>>>Because Barks added vault doors that were never
shown in the comics, Barks coloration of the coins should be disregarded?
I personally assumed
that the money bin paintings with the arched vaults were actually an inner
sanctum buried deep
within the actual bin.

RIGHT! Talk about logical arguments, this sounds like you're on *my* side
now! I would *agree* with you that these scenes of a vault with an
unfamiliar door, filled with jewels and treasure and *all gold coins*,
being unlike any view we've ever seen of the Bin in an actual story, I
agree that these must obviously be in some other place than the main Bin.
Or... the more obvious assumption... it's just a fantasy-in-a-fantasy scene
like my covers or pin-ups.

>>>>Barks paintings do not show ALL solid gold coins, he has many silver
coins as well.

Then what's the argument???

>>>>You want to believe that Scrooge mostly hordes nickels,
dimes, quarters, and silver dollars, and want to believe that Barks
paintings and European
editions are wrong to show the coins as gold.

They would not be "wrong" to show them as gold, or even ALL gold. They are
simply following different traditions or reasoning than the logic (and try
to refute it) that the Bin's coins, even at the lower levels, being a
conglomeration of American coins based on their proportional circulation as
compared to one another, would be predominantly silver. And that's all I've
ever said. I want to believe that $crooge mostly horded those silver coins
simply because those silver coins were *mostly* what was in circulation in
the 20th century.

But at the base of your fervor, I believe, is the third matter I
mentioned -- your having a fascination with Barks' oil paintings that some
fans don't share with you, me included. I think they are interesting, and I
am delighted ... DELIGHTED from the soles of my feet to the top of my
balding scalp... that, in painting and selling them and marketing the
lithos, he was able to finally make even a fraction of the $ he missed out
on by creating the world's most popular comic book characters for a
corporation. But some people I know actually think the paintings are garish
and ugly. Me, I like them, I think they are great fun. But they don't
especially interest me because my interest is in storytelling, not art. I
have been in this hobby (I don't mean simply as a comic reader, but as a
member of the active fandom of writers, publishers and
convention-givers-and-goers) since the time when Barks was still writing
and drawing the comics in the 60's. So I was aware from *day one* when he
was doing oil paintings of the Ducks for $50-200 each. And I was certainly
aware of the litho series that came out much later. But I *never* tried
getting on the wait-list for a painting, and I *never* bought a Barks
litho. I do not equate what he does in those oil paintings with what he did
or thought when he was telling the stories that I loved. I see it as two
completely different worlds of wonder. If you dig into your litho
collection (and I'm getting the impression you are heavily into them) and
found all sorts of evidence of the Bin being 100% gold coins or 73.9% or
... well, no matter what you found, it would not effect my view of his work
done in story form 25-40 years earlier, for a totally different purpose for
a totally different audience. If you equate the two, and/or if you think
that liking his stories means that I must like his paintings equally or be
damned... well, sorry, that's not me.

>>>>Like I said, you are certainly free to believe as you wish with
whatever faulty line of reasoning
you want to cling to...

Ouch! Let's not get testy.

Hi! I was a subscriber to the list late in 1996, but unsubscribed. Now, 2
computers later, I have re-subscribed, but I've been lurking this past month
or two. I have to say that I'm finding fascinating this discussion of the
contents of Scrooge's money bin.

Don Rosa said:
We've had some gold coins in the 19th century, even a $20 gold piece in the
early 1900's, and they were in extremely limited circulation. That would be
like having a thousand dollar bill nowadays! But I've still said that
$crooge surely has some gold coins in his Bin, I've mentioned it in stories.
But not ALL solid golden coins.

I'd also like to add that we (the U.S.) currently have a gold *colored*
dollar coin -- the Sacajawea dollar -- that's the same size as a quarter.
The previous dollar coin -- the Susan B. Anthony dollar -- was silver
*colored* & the same size as a quarter. People were always getting them
mixed up & buying Cokes for 3 bucks instead of 75 cents! I won't name any
names. :)

In mulling over everyone's arguments, I was thinking -- in the course of his
day-to-day business deals, Scrooge indubitably has to invest money, i.e.
spend money to make money. As such, wouldn't the contents actually change.
There might be some days when, due to routine inflow & outflow of cash, he
has largely silver (or platinum?!) coinage, and other days when gold coins
predominate. This could be another reason for bulldozers. Imagine the
industrial strength coin counter he must have!

Christopher Burton

Hey Timo!

>I have never quite understood that Duckburg/Mousetown thing. In Finland
mice
>and ducks live both in Ankkalinna(Duckburg). And as I watched the webpage
>for german Micky Mouse there was a map of Entenhausen(Duckburg) which
showed
>Donald's, Mickey's houses and Scrooge's Money Bin. All in same town.
>Is this thing with different towns stated in some American comic book?

In American comics, yes, the ducks and mice live in different towns.
It's the same way in France and Italy. In Egmontland (including Finland and
Germany), though, tradition has it that they live in the same town. That may
change in the future, but who knows?
The English name of Mickey's town is Mouseton, not Mousetown (no
"w"). It was originally Mouseville (in the Gottfredson newspaper strip), but
it changed in 1990 when Disney got into legal trouble over the use of that
name. It seems the makers of Mighty Mouse had copyrighted it for
themselves...

David Gerstein

DON:

> I am certain
> that there is a proportional amount of these small golden coins mixed into
> the Bin, especially at lower levels

Hmmm, taking stories such as your "Cash Flow", or Rota's "Money Ocean"
into account, where Scrooge's money acts as a fluid, I wonder if this
could explain why, although the bin contains a mixture of gold and silver
coins, the top should appear silver: the heavier coins settle to the
bottom with time, and you have to dig to see them!!!

Kriton (e-mail: kyrimis at cti.gr)
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis)
-----
"I am not interested in the beliefs of primitives--only in what they *taste*
like!"
-----

In the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s most of the families of American peole I knew
had at least SEVERAL US minted gold coins. They ALL had at least a few $5
and $10 gold pieces and most had $20 gold pieces (usually Double Eagles).
- These were all lower to middle to upper Middle Class families in terms
of income (no Elite or Robber Barons among them). Most American families,
that I new in those times, had at least one (uually more) adult, who kept a
$20 gold coin on a chain or amulate as a "Lucky Charm". Rob Klein

----------
> From: Rob Klein <bi442 at lafn.org>
> To: dcml at stp.ling.uu.se
> Subject: List 474 - Mouseville
> Date: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 6:36 AM
>
> "Mouseville" was not only used by Gottfredson, but also in Mickey Mouse
> regular comic books (MMOS), at least during the 1950s and early 1960s. -
> Rob Klein
>

From: "Fluks, H.W." <H.W.Fluks at kpn.com>
>>>Still, there were some complaints from parents about Don Rosa's Kalevala
(Sampo) story (published in two DD Extras)! I think the complaints were
about showing the world of the dead.

Did the Dutch translators actually call it "the world of the DEAD"? Tuonela
(was that its name?) was the "underworld" of the Kalevala... I was always
very careful to never refer to it in my script as "the land of the dead".
I don't even recall if that was my implied intention -- I don't know if the
Kalevala made it clear *what* was in the Underworld. But I needed Louhi to
be somewhere, so I said she was in Tuonela, the "realm of the sleepers"...
and I showed it to be a place where people are all frozen in blocks of ice.
But did the Dutch call it literally the land of the "dead"?
Even if they didn't, if the Dutch readership is anything like the modern
American readership of anything, somebody would still complain about what
they think might be implied by something meant to maybe mean one thing but
then again it might be something else if you stood on your head and held it
up to a mirror and it's clearly designed to pollute minds and bodies. And
that's the way it goes. But I'm just curious as to whether it actually said
"land of the dead" there in the Netherlands...
... which gives me pause to wonder! Maybe they can't translate my original
script quite right since I called it the Underworld. The NETHERworld. The
Netherlands. And the readers would think that Louhi was in a retirement
home in Amsterdam, and the Ducks cowering at the thought of going to that
spooky, scary, dangerous "Netherlands".
...which gives me another pause to wonder: do the Dutch call their country
"the Netherlands" in their own tongue? Literally, "the underworld"? Or is
that a term used only outside your borders?

From: "Rob Klein" <bi442 at lafn.org>
>>>In the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s most of the families of American peole I
knew
had at least SEVERAL US minted gold coins.

Sure, I had a number of them in my lil' coin collection when I was a tad.
But I'm not sure what line of reasoning was being pursued in the discussion
you refer to...

From: Kriton Kyrimis <kyrimis at cti.gr>
>>>>I just got my copy of the "Don Rosa Archives" in the mail today, and
rushed to read the introductions.
>>>A question to the "slightly world famous" author: who is Gary, to whom
these volumes are dedicated?

You puzzled me greatly with this query, and I rushed to get my copies and
see where me or anyone else had written a dedication. I didn't recall doing
so! But it then dawned on me -- you mean that your copies have "TO GARY"
written in them by yours truly??? Ah -- then the Tronsmo Book Store in Oslo
who you ordered them from has *sent you the wrong books*! I signed hundreds
of mail order copies while I was there, and they must have gotten them
jumbled. Somewhere there's a Gary wondering what a "Kriton" is.

From: Mike Pohjola <mikep at iki.fi>
>>>"At lower levels"... That's a good point. Whatever money Scrooge made
during the 1800's would naturally be at the bottom. Then would come his
early 1900's money he made all around the world.

We must assume, if $crooge made his first big break in the Yukon in 1898,
that he had none of the money left that he made in the 1900's, having spent
what little there was as he went along. But some of that money was still in
circulation, so coins of earlier years would still have come into his hands
during the next few years. However, his entire "first billion" (which I
determined was what he made up until 1902 for my own purposes) is all
seperated from the rest of his cash as it is contained (according to Barks)
in several large casks at the bottom of the Bin.

>>>:>I have the impression that the money he has in the Bin is money he's
made
himself with his own two hands. That's not the kind of money he'd
spend. But he's got lots of bank accounts with huge amounts of money, and
that he would spend.

Keep in mind that this is *my* personal idea, and as far as I know, I'm the
only writer who sees it that way. As I was writing that "Lo$", the idea
that the Bin had *all* of his money just seemed too ... well, inconvenient
to be reasonable. So I thought it might seem like an interesting idea that
the Bin contained, as you say, the money he made *by himself* before his
business ventures became so complex as to require armies of assistants.
That would also enhance the "sentimental" value of the Bin money, as Barks
showed $crooge joyfully diving and playing in it and recalling the story
behind each coin. But, whatever the case, don't annoy the non-Rosaists by
implying that *everyone* agrees with that notion.

Don:

>> Still, there were some complaints from parents about Don
>> Rosa's Kalevala story. I think the complaints were
>> about showing the world of the dead.

> Did the Dutch translators actually call it "the world of the
> DEAD"?

No, they didn't. But I thought it was pretty obvious, with a skeleton as a
guard.

> Tuonela was the "underworld" of the Kalevala...

For an outsider, there's no difference between "underworld" and "world of
the dead". I think only two or three Dutchmen had ever heard of Kalevala
before your story.

> I was always
> very careful to never refer to it in my script as "the land
> of the dead".

But Donald *did* laugh Death in his face, didn't he?

> Maybe they can't translate my original
> script quite right since I called it the Underworld. The
> NETHERworld. The Netherlands.

No, there's a clear distinction between "under" (a relation to something
else) and "nether" (an absolute measurement). The Netherlands are just low,
not BElow something else.

> do the Dutch call their country
> "the Netherlands" in their own tongue?

We call it "Nederland", which is the singular form of "the low countries".
It seems the Norwegians are the only other people who were sensible enough
to change the plural (NetherlandS) to a singular form.
When I was in America (Texas, actually), I had trouble explaining that "the
Netherlands" was just ONE country, and that Finland wasn't one of them...

(Why plural in the first place? Because in the 16th century, 17 small states
were united in "The Republic of the United Netherlands". A "United States"
avant la lettre...)

Anyway, "Nederland" = "Low country", which perfectly describes the situation
in most of the country. Large parts are below sea level.

--Harry.