Keskustelujen arkisto

S?ren:
> In fact, that's what I like most about Disney comics, they are so
> amasingly flexible and one never runs out of surprices or new
> interpretations of our beloved characters...mice or ducks.

I agree. They can really be used in different kinds of settings
and some of these new versions work very well (PKNA is
my favourite example).

> So my message is plain and simple: Don't bother with consistancy and

> details, Disney comics wasn't meant for that in the first place!

Well, one of the finenesses of Disney comics is that
while you are right about they not being meant as
consistent in the first place, they allow consistency.
It works with them.

Unfortunate side effect of this - like you said - are
the people who think their One and Only
Opinion is the one everybody should have.

--
Ari Seppi (mani at iki.fi)
http://www.iki.fi/mani/
Eritt?in fanaattinen Potter-kirjojen ja Disney-sarjakuvien palvoja

Fellow Quackeroos:

Yet another week of Greek Disneys:

1) MIKY MAOUS #1852, January 11, 2002 (100 pages; cover price: 1.17 euro)
a) Black Pete in "La banda dei convegnisti", from "Topolino" #2350, 2000 (32
pages). Script: Silvano Mezzavilla; Art: Roberto Vian
b) Donald Duck in "The Nightguard", S-77064 (22 pages). Script: The Disney
Studio; Art: Tony Strobl
c) Donald & Fethry in "The Nightly Visitors", S-67066 (11 pages). Creators
unknown
d) Ludwig von Drake in "La gara di memoria", from "Topolino" #2256, 1999 (5
pages). Script: Augusto Macchetto; Art: Marina Baggio
e) Grandma Duck in "La lezione da sogno", from "Topolino" #2213, 1998 (5
pages). Script: Augusto Macchetto; Art: Lorenzo Chiavini

2) DONALD #50, January 2002 (100 pages; cover price: 1.76 euro)
a) Donald Duck in "Postino Natalizio", from "Topolino" #2352, 2000 (30
pages). Script: Carlo Panaro; Art: Marco Gervasio
b) Donald Duck in "Il sorriso della fortuna", from "Topolino" #2219, 1998
(26 pages). Script: Carlo Panaro; Art: Sandro Del Conte
c) Donald Duck in "Il Gala del 200", from "Paperino" #200, 1997 (30 pages).
Script: Tito Faraci; Art: Salvatore Deiana

''Til next week,

Archontis

--------------------------------------------------
Archontis L. Pantsios, Ph.D.
Assistant Academic Dean & Professor of Economics
The American College of Thessaloniki
Thessaloniki--GREECE
Phone #: +30-310-398228

From: "Kriton Kyrimis" <kyrimis at cti.gr>

> I just had a look and, suffice it to say that these pages need a lot of
> work, and I don't meen the addition of more indexing data. :(

Do tell *me* then :-P

Greek "is Greek" to me, that's why you'll probably found typos (I guess
that's what you're referring to, what else could it be?)

So you can report all the typos to me, privately, using the following kind
of transliteration:

w = omega
h = eta
c = chi
q = theta
ps = psi
f = phi

--
Francesco

----- Original Message -----
From: "Francesco Spreafico" <frspreaf at tin.it>
To: "DCML" <dcml at stp.ling.uu.se>
Sent: den 18 januari 2002 21:54
Subject: Re: Languages

> From: "Kriton Kyrimis" <kyrimis at cti.gr>
>
> > I just had a look and, suffice it to say that these pages need a lot of
> > work, and I don't meen the addition of more indexing data. :(
>
> Do tell *me* then :-P
>
> Greek "is Greek" to me, that's why you'll probably found typos (I guess
> that's what you're referring to, what else could it be?)
>
> So you can report all the typos to me, privately, using the following kind
> of transliteration:
>
> w = omega
> h = eta
> c = chi
> q = theta
> ps = psi
> f = phi

That translitteration key is incomplete. The complete key is:

a = ?
b = ?
g = ?
d = ?
e = ?
z = ?
h = ?
q = ?
i = ?
k = ?
l = ?
m = ?
n = ?
x = ?
o = ?
p = ?
r = ?
s = ?, ?
t = ?
y = ?
f = ?
c = ?
ps = ?
w = ?
(I think...)

Accents currently unsupported.

Stefan

From: "Stefan Persson" <reimersholme at hotmail.com>

> That translitteration key is incomplete. The complete key is:

Oh wait, I thought you were talking about accents. But what are those
strange signs? Did you (sigh) write non-ascii characters?

If so, in what was "my" list incomplete, (saying the names of the letters,
not typing the letters themselves that'll never show up here!)

--
Sprea

From: Søren Krarup Olesen <raptus at stofanet.dk>
>>>The only thing that really bothers me is when someone claims that they
are closer to the "true fact", the so-called "original" and stick to
that, not for sake of making good Disney comics but for the sake of
being original only.

If this is a reference to my methodology, it would puzzle me. I am in the
forefront of saying that these stories should be flexible, each writer or
artist choosing the style he likes to work with, that traditions once
established in a country should be continued, that there should be
something in these comics for all types of readers.
But if this *is* a reference to me, I ask again how or why you would expect
me to have any other view?! The only version I *know* is the original,
therefore that is the version I stick to. I stick to it because I can make
a good story within that original tradition just as someone else can make a
good story within the altered versions. Why should I go out of my way to
alter my view to a version that is false in my reality?

>>>So my message is plain and simple: Don't bother with consistancy and
details, Disney comics wasn't meant for that in the first place!

But you DO demand consistency, I hope you realize that. $crooge is always
rich. He wears a top hat. Gladstone is lucky. There are three Nephews.
There is... well, I could fill pages. Just go look at the "writers' bible"
for these stories that list all the hundreds of elements that MUST be
consistent in each and every one of these stories. What you are referring
to are apparently (as near as I can guess) some additional facts that are
not consistent 100% of the time in certain stories. I can't begin to
understand how you draw a distinct line at which facts you want to be
consistent and which ones you want flexible. But I won't argue that --
that's your preference and that's fine. There are plenty of stories in the
comics for you. But are you saying that *every* one of these thousands of
stories should be done exactly the way you want them done? Cripes, I hope
not! What an attitude! Simply because it's not your preference, does not
make it wrong.
So my message is plain and simple: If you don't enjoy an extra percentage
point of consistency and details, don't read the stories that use that
technique. Those Disney comics wasn't meant for you in the first place!

I just got a message from Luca (which he has also sent to the ML) implying,
unless I misunderstand it, that the Italians apparently stumbled on that
ancient & obscure use of Grandma Duck's name in the old WDC&S just as I
did, and had already been using the name... independant of my
"rediscovery"! I'm stunned... but delighted! Leave it to my countrymen!!!!!
It's in the blood! They know more about American comics books and newspaper
strips than any American I've ever met, and I've been hangin' around with
the foremost American funnybook collectors since the late 60's!

From: Rob Klein
>>>Thanks Don, for the reference. I know the WDC secondary story you found
Grandma referred to as "Elviry" was NOT WDC 132, whose Grandma Duck story
was
drawn by Barks. So, it must have been one of the other Western Pub.
writers
and artists. I am curious to know in which WDC issue it was printed.

I checked my old research notes for the "Lo$" and I see it was in WDC&S
#121, which I think was the very first Grandma Duck comic book story.
Another issue in that same range had the name of her deceased husband,
Humperdink Duck, in another scrapbook scene... but it was David who told me
about that so perhaps he recalls that issue #.

>>>Your reference has now jogged my brain. I seem to remember Grandma
referred to
as "Elviry" in Al Taliaferro's Donald Duck strip (I believe it was in a
late
1930s strip. It makes sense that HE might have named her, as he was in on
the
introduction of various characters to the Duck universe. Can anyone
enlighten
us on this matter?

If that were so, it would be another shock and another delight for me! But
I somehow doubt it. Maybe those Italians will know...

>>>Three cheers for Soeren!!!! I second his comments on the opinion that
we have
beat to death the argument over the colour of coins and other small
details.
There are enough Disney Duck story pages printed each month to please both
the "purists" and the "laissez faire" (wider taste) fans.

That's what *I* say, but s'funny, I read those same words, and to me it
read as a proclamation that any stories that had X.3% of the story facts
being consistent rather than X% as he preferred were all improper and
*that's* why the discussion was moot. But let's hope your kinder
interpretation was more accurate.

>>>Let us move on, eh?

Well, me, I get bored by discussions of all these European Duck stories
that I have never seen and never will see, but people should discuss
whatever they wanna here, and you and I can just skip past those messages
that don't interest us, eh? "It's all grist for the mill".