RODNEY W. BOWCOCK, 08-08-2003:
> Personally, I'd be all the more comfortable if religion of any
> sort would stay out of my Disney comics. If I had children who
> were curious about Wicca, I'd want them to come to me so we could
> discuss it together....not see any appeal of it because a duck
> practiced it in a story. Kids grow up fast enough without various
> religious beliefs being forced upon them in comic books.
Agreed. Personally and moreover, I think that kids grow up fast enough
without religious beliefs being forced upon them by their parents, and
their environment. (Force and religion don't fit together, IMO.)
--- Dani?l
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Author
Topic: 200308
(787 messages)
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Religion (mostly OT)
Message 106 -
2003-08-09 at 17:00:55
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Blumobservations
Message 107 -
2003-08-09 at 17:24:29
RICH BELLACERA to RODNEY W. BOWCOCK, 08-08-2003:
> It is this very mindset that is probably preventing Disney from
> allowing release of such great series as W.I.T.C.H. in the USA.
Are you sure you are talking about the year 2003???
Is this still going on, religious forces trying to censor other
religions/opinions in the media?
--- Dani?l (Van Winkle?)
> It is this very mindset that is probably preventing Disney from
> allowing release of such great series as W.I.T.C.H. in the USA.
Are you sure you are talking about the year 2003???
Is this still going on, religious forces trying to censor other
religions/opinions in the media?
--- Dani?l (Van Winkle?)
Daniel Van Eijmeren
DCML Digest, Vol 6, Issue 10
Message 108 -
2003-08-09 at 17:49:30
DANIEL J. NEYER to SIGVALD GROSFJELD, 08-08-2003:
> Sigvald, you are absolutely right when you say that Blum uses
> Barks to promote himself. I've always been somewhat wary of Blum
> and his take on the Ducks' world since he started writing those
> strange analytic articles about Barks' stories.
Geoffrey Blum has also written very good, informative and revealing
articles. I've learned quite a lot from his articles. When I read
his articles I am aware that I have an opinion of my own, and
sometimes I'm a bit sceptical about some of his theories and the
way he presents them. In other words, his articles inspire me to
think for myself. (I don't know if that is Blum's intention, though.)
If Blum would write bad articles, they only would anger me.
> To Blum, the Ducks are not characters, but puppets for acting out
> social-politico-psychological satires. I don't think that Barks
> ever said to himself "I think I'll satirize this particular trend
> or this particular invention in this new story"--any satire that
> occurred in a Barks story was supplementary to the plot.
I agree with you that the story should not be used as a servant for
a satire or an opinion. I don't if that's what Blum is doing, though.
--- Dani?l
> Sigvald, you are absolutely right when you say that Blum uses
> Barks to promote himself. I've always been somewhat wary of Blum
> and his take on the Ducks' world since he started writing those
> strange analytic articles about Barks' stories.
Geoffrey Blum has also written very good, informative and revealing
articles. I've learned quite a lot from his articles. When I read
his articles I am aware that I have an opinion of my own, and
sometimes I'm a bit sceptical about some of his theories and the
way he presents them. In other words, his articles inspire me to
think for myself. (I don't know if that is Blum's intention, though.)
If Blum would write bad articles, they only would anger me.
> To Blum, the Ducks are not characters, but puppets for acting out
> social-politico-psychological satires. I don't think that Barks
> ever said to himself "I think I'll satirize this particular trend
> or this particular invention in this new story"--any satire that
> occurred in a Barks story was supplementary to the plot.
I agree with you that the story should not be used as a servant for
a satire or an opinion. I don't if that's what Blum is doing, though.
--- Dani?l
Daniel Van Eijmeren
The Dirty Dozen
Message 109 -
2003-08-09 at 18:05:44
RICH BELLACERA, 08-08-2003:
> In the Wolf/Pigs stories there is a gang of badguys called
> The Foul Fellows' Club or The Dirty Dozen.
> I know several of the members are: [...]
> But that's only 10 members. Who are the other two?
Maybe there's a joke behind it? They can't count, for example?
In the Dutch stories, the club's name and announcements mostly are
misspelled. This shows that they haven't been to school very often.
(Other stories reveal that they've been to a different school where
they were *taught* to ignore regular education.)
--- Dani?l
> In the Wolf/Pigs stories there is a gang of badguys called
> The Foul Fellows' Club or The Dirty Dozen.
> I know several of the members are: [...]
> But that's only 10 members. Who are the other two?
Maybe there's a joke behind it? They can't count, for example?
In the Dutch stories, the club's name and announcements mostly are
misspelled. This shows that they haven't been to school very often.
(Other stories reveal that they've been to a different school where
they were *taught* to ignore regular education.)
--- Dani?l
Daniel Van Eijmeren
VP1 - Donald's Grandma Duck
Message 110 -
2003-08-09 at 18:14:44
FRANK BUBACZ, 09-08-2003:
> http://stp.ling.uu.se/cgi-bin/starback/dcml/story?W+VP+1-09
> A [Barks] story of many debuts indeed. Just had to get that off
> my chest. Of course I know I won't get any reply and that our
> Italian friends probably have discussed this ages ago, without
> my knowledge... ;-)
My reply would be that I don't know what to say about your discoveries.
If they are correct, then your information is *very* interesting!
--- Dani?l
> http://stp.ling.uu.se/cgi-bin/starback/dcml/story?W+VP+1-09
> A [Barks] story of many debuts indeed. Just had to get that off
> my chest. Of course I know I won't get any reply and that our
> Italian friends probably have discussed this ages ago, without
> my knowledge... ;-)
My reply would be that I don't know what to say about your discoveries.
If they are correct, then your information is *very* interesting!
--- Dani?l
David Gerstein
Foul Fellows' Club
Message 111 -
2003-08-09 at 18:43:16
Hey Michiel,
>> In the Wolf/Pigs stories there is a gang of badguys called
>> The Foul Fellows' Club or The Dirty Dozen.
>
>If I remember correctly, this Club was a Dutch invention
>by storywriter Patty Klein.
>Its original name is 'de Booswichtenclub', or, when
>spelled incorrectly by those badguys: 'de Booswigte Klup'.
>
>This club had never(?) more than five members, being the
>Fox, the Bear, the Wolf, a Weasel and a Buzzard.
Patty Klein might have invented the specific five-member version of the
club you describe here, Michiel, but as the Foul Fellows' Club, Badfellows'
Club, or Dirty Dozen it has been a regular feature of American-produced Wolf
stories since 1947. The key element is the miserable wooden shack the club
meets in, which has rarely changed over the years (except to fall apart now
and then).
What about the club's name? The club was called the Dirty Dozen in the
1940s W-coded stories.
The name became Foul Fellows' Club in 1951, and that name often recurred
in W-coded stories until the 1980s.
In the 1960s, a few W-coded stories called the organization the
Badfellows' Club. S-coded stories *always* use Badfellows' Club.
Egmont usually uses Foul Fellows, but occasionally Badfellows slips
through.
As re: the membership, with W-coded stories it varied wildly, so
sometimes even Black Pete could appear.
S-coded stories in the 1960s usually showed the dog and coyote Kalle and
Hotte? Wolfgang and Katja Schaefer creations, though they were only very
rarely addressed by name.
With Dutch stories, you yourself described the limited membership that
the club has.
At Egmont, the club can have a whole crowd of members if we need, but
Brer Fox, Dirty Bill and Willy Weasel are always there.
In my D 96442 Ricky Rat first appeared when the artist, Jorge David,
simply threw a tiny rat into one panel. Kristian H?jsteen liked the idea of
this character, so gave him a major role in a later story. I simply carried
this on in D 2002-140.
>You didn't have the Buzzard, whose Dutch name is Barend
>Buizerd.
This character's English name is Brer Turkey Buzzard. He first appeared
in the Brer Rabbit newspaper strip and early comic book stories.
>The Weasel character's name is Vittorio Wezel. His skin is grey, he has a broad
>white hat and little black moustache
And this is Brer Weasel from the Brer Rabbit newspaper strip.
>I don't know if this Weasel is the same as the Willy Weasel you
>already had, hence my description.
It's not the same character.
Willy Weasel (who appears in my story D 2002-140, as well as a number of
other 1990s Egmont BW and BR stories) is a slim, sneaky guy in a burglar's
cap and striped sweater. I'm not sure when he was first used, but he's based
on the weasels from MR. TOAD? though he's evolved to the point where he no
longer looks quite like them.
David
>> In the Wolf/Pigs stories there is a gang of badguys called
>> The Foul Fellows' Club or The Dirty Dozen.
>
>If I remember correctly, this Club was a Dutch invention
>by storywriter Patty Klein.
>Its original name is 'de Booswichtenclub', or, when
>spelled incorrectly by those badguys: 'de Booswigte Klup'.
>
>This club had never(?) more than five members, being the
>Fox, the Bear, the Wolf, a Weasel and a Buzzard.
Patty Klein might have invented the specific five-member version of the
club you describe here, Michiel, but as the Foul Fellows' Club, Badfellows'
Club, or Dirty Dozen it has been a regular feature of American-produced Wolf
stories since 1947. The key element is the miserable wooden shack the club
meets in, which has rarely changed over the years (except to fall apart now
and then).
What about the club's name? The club was called the Dirty Dozen in the
1940s W-coded stories.
The name became Foul Fellows' Club in 1951, and that name often recurred
in W-coded stories until the 1980s.
In the 1960s, a few W-coded stories called the organization the
Badfellows' Club. S-coded stories *always* use Badfellows' Club.
Egmont usually uses Foul Fellows, but occasionally Badfellows slips
through.
As re: the membership, with W-coded stories it varied wildly, so
sometimes even Black Pete could appear.
S-coded stories in the 1960s usually showed the dog and coyote Kalle and
Hotte? Wolfgang and Katja Schaefer creations, though they were only very
rarely addressed by name.
With Dutch stories, you yourself described the limited membership that
the club has.
At Egmont, the club can have a whole crowd of members if we need, but
Brer Fox, Dirty Bill and Willy Weasel are always there.
In my D 96442 Ricky Rat first appeared when the artist, Jorge David,
simply threw a tiny rat into one panel. Kristian H?jsteen liked the idea of
this character, so gave him a major role in a later story. I simply carried
this on in D 2002-140.
>You didn't have the Buzzard, whose Dutch name is Barend
>Buizerd.
This character's English name is Brer Turkey Buzzard. He first appeared
in the Brer Rabbit newspaper strip and early comic book stories.
>The Weasel character's name is Vittorio Wezel. His skin is grey, he has a broad
>white hat and little black moustache
And this is Brer Weasel from the Brer Rabbit newspaper strip.
>I don't know if this Weasel is the same as the Willy Weasel you
>already had, hence my description.
It's not the same character.
Willy Weasel (who appears in my story D 2002-140, as well as a number of
other 1990s Egmont BW and BR stories) is a slim, sneaky guy in a burglar's
cap and striped sweater. I'm not sure when he was first used, but he's based
on the weasels from MR. TOAD? though he's evolved to the point where he no
longer looks quite like them.
David
Donald D. Markstein
Wicca and religions (O.T. -- sorry)
Message 112 -
2003-08-09 at 19:16:56
Sigvald on Wicca:
> AFAIK it's *not* a religion! I have heared a bit about it and it's more
like
> a cult, though a peaceful one.
I'm sure I'd have more to say on this if I knew of a clear difference
between a religion and a cult. In terms of abuse of members, violence and
coersiveness toward non-members, outlandishness of doctrine, and every other
important criterion, BOTH categories of belief system range across the
entire spectrum. The only clear difference I can see is that "religions"
have more adherents, and thus are able to squelch the sort of media bashing
that is frequently visited upon "cults".
As usual, Sigvald, your insults are based on ignorance. "Hav[ing] heared
[sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you to pass judgment on the sincere
beliefs of many decent people all over the world.
"I adhere faithfully to my traditional creed."
"You cling stubbornly to outmoded dogma."
"He, she or it is a slave to ancient superstitions."
That's all most criticism of other people's beliefs amounts to.
Quack, Don
Today in Toons: Every day's an anniversary.
http://www.toonopedia.com/today.htm
> AFAIK it's *not* a religion! I have heared a bit about it and it's more
like
> a cult, though a peaceful one.
I'm sure I'd have more to say on this if I knew of a clear difference
between a religion and a cult. In terms of abuse of members, violence and
coersiveness toward non-members, outlandishness of doctrine, and every other
important criterion, BOTH categories of belief system range across the
entire spectrum. The only clear difference I can see is that "religions"
have more adherents, and thus are able to squelch the sort of media bashing
that is frequently visited upon "cults".
As usual, Sigvald, your insults are based on ignorance. "Hav[ing] heared
[sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you to pass judgment on the sincere
beliefs of many decent people all over the world.
"I adhere faithfully to my traditional creed."
"You cling stubbornly to outmoded dogma."
"He, she or it is a slave to ancient superstitions."
That's all most criticism of other people's beliefs amounts to.
Quack, Don
Today in Toons: Every day's an anniversary.
http://www.toonopedia.com/today.htm
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Wicca and religion in the Disney comic
Message 113 -
2003-08-09 at 19:35:23
KATIE SULLIVAN, 08-08-2003:
> One last note...I don't recall very many references specifically
> to Christianity in the duck comics.
Vidar Svendsen has made a site about references to religion in Duck
comics by Barks, Taliaferro, and Rosa. I think you'll be surprised
to see how many references there are.
The sections of the site are divided in christianity, mythology, good
and bad luck, spirits, and witches.
The English version of the site can be found at:
http://home.c2i.net/vidarland/comics/disney/religion/intro.htm
The Norwegian version of the site can be found at:
http://home.c2i.net/vidarland/comics/disney/religion/innled.htm
--- Dani?l
> One last note...I don't recall very many references specifically
> to Christianity in the duck comics.
Vidar Svendsen has made a site about references to religion in Duck
comics by Barks, Taliaferro, and Rosa. I think you'll be surprised
to see how many references there are.
The sections of the site are divided in christianity, mythology, good
and bad luck, spirits, and witches.
The English version of the site can be found at:
http://home.c2i.net/vidarland/comics/disney/religion/intro.htm
The Norwegian version of the site can be found at:
http://home.c2i.net/vidarland/comics/disney/religion/innled.htm
--- Dani?l
Sigvald Grøsfjeld Jr.
Florence Quackfaster
Message 114 -
2003-08-09 at 20:23:23
M.J. Prior <M.J.Prior at student.rug.nl> wrote:
> Afaik, the first and probably only apparition
> of Miss Quackfaster's first name as 'Emily'
> was in Don Rosa's Lo$ part 11. Geoffrey Blum
> could easily have missed that piece of
> information as it's probably not very
> widespread.
Or it again proofs his (IMO) lack of respect for other artists, Barks
included.
Sigvald
> Afaik, the first and probably only apparition
> of Miss Quackfaster's first name as 'Emily'
> was in Don Rosa's Lo$ part 11. Geoffrey Blum
> could easily have missed that piece of
> information as it's probably not very
> widespread.
Or it again proofs his (IMO) lack of respect for other artists, Barks
included.
Sigvald
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Rosa in Holland - answer to daniel
Message 115 -
2003-08-09 at 20:43:03
ANDERS CHRISTIAN SIVEBEAK to me, 04-08-2003:
>> (Do you mean you have plans to travel to The Netherlands on the
>> short term?)
> No, not any firm plans.
> But hoping that this discussion stays what i intended it to be -
> afriendly discussion - I hope it's not totally impossible to some
> time drive to the netherlands and perhaps visit the ducth fans i
> know here from dcml.
Too late. You already have been placed on our ferocious black list.
Once you're name is carved onto this list, you will *never* be
forgiven by our happy Dutch society of Disney comics fans. It also
means that I'm not allowed to discuss with you any longer. Otherwise
I'll end up on that terrible list, myself. Brrr! :-)
But seriously, I didn't intend to sound unfriendly at all.
I cannot judge for others, but I think you shouldn't worry about being
unwelcome here in The Netherlands. I would like to meet you when you
come over, at least.
>> Barks is, in the yes of many the big master - and they treat the
>> versions of his stories with the same care? Is it impossible to
>> find the original prints, so they could reconstruct what deisappered
>> under resume-boxes or put in again the pages that are gone? The
>> italian publishers does this - so why can't the dutch.
>> And why can't anyone else?
> Erm, I got lost in our conversation here. Do you imply that i imply
> that the italians are the only ones who do it right?
No, I just wasn't clear enough. I thought that the discussion was
much too focussed on what the Dutch editors should do, while there
are many *other* editors who also can improve their publications.
For example, a lot of colouring comes from the Egmont countries.
BTW. In the instances when the Dutch editors colour the stories
themselves, the colouring is among the best I've ever seen. Maybe
it's just too expensive to do the same for stories which already
have been coloured, like the Egmont stories.
> Or should i just stop thinking...
What? Are you still a *thinking* individual? I'm afraid I'll have to
report this to the Comic Book Cops, so they can clean up your brain
with a nice, fresh brainwash. :-)
--- Dani?l
"This is where I FEEL that I belong -
but I wish some kind soul was here to tell me WHY!"
(Which Barks story?) :-)
>> (Do you mean you have plans to travel to The Netherlands on the
>> short term?)
> No, not any firm plans.
> But hoping that this discussion stays what i intended it to be -
> afriendly discussion - I hope it's not totally impossible to some
> time drive to the netherlands and perhaps visit the ducth fans i
> know here from dcml.
Too late. You already have been placed on our ferocious black list.
Once you're name is carved onto this list, you will *never* be
forgiven by our happy Dutch society of Disney comics fans. It also
means that I'm not allowed to discuss with you any longer. Otherwise
I'll end up on that terrible list, myself. Brrr! :-)
But seriously, I didn't intend to sound unfriendly at all.
I cannot judge for others, but I think you shouldn't worry about being
unwelcome here in The Netherlands. I would like to meet you when you
come over, at least.
>> Barks is, in the yes of many the big master - and they treat the
>> versions of his stories with the same care? Is it impossible to
>> find the original prints, so they could reconstruct what deisappered
>> under resume-boxes or put in again the pages that are gone? The
>> italian publishers does this - so why can't the dutch.
>> And why can't anyone else?
> Erm, I got lost in our conversation here. Do you imply that i imply
> that the italians are the only ones who do it right?
No, I just wasn't clear enough. I thought that the discussion was
much too focussed on what the Dutch editors should do, while there
are many *other* editors who also can improve their publications.
For example, a lot of colouring comes from the Egmont countries.
BTW. In the instances when the Dutch editors colour the stories
themselves, the colouring is among the best I've ever seen. Maybe
it's just too expensive to do the same for stories which already
have been coloured, like the Egmont stories.
> Or should i just stop thinking...
What? Are you still a *thinking* individual? I'm afraid I'll have to
report this to the Comic Book Cops, so they can clean up your brain
with a nice, fresh brainwash. :-)
--- Dani?l
"This is where I FEEL that I belong -
but I wish some kind soul was here to tell me WHY!"
(Which Barks story?) :-)
Sigvald Grøsfjeld Jr.
Wicca again!
Message 116 -
2003-08-09 at 20:45:47
Donald D. Markstein <ddmarkstein at cox.net> wrote:
> As usual, Sigvald, your insults are based on
> ignorance.
Crap, pure crap! I am tirred to see that almost everything I write to DCML
is said to be insulting to someone even when that was not my intention. I'll
admit that some, yes, even most of the times I have deserved the critic, but
this time it's definately you that insults me by saying that I am insulting
someone and even adding that I am ignorant.
> [sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you
> to pass judgment on the sincere beliefs of many
> decent people all over the world.
OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I know about
the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV program where a Norwegian
Wicca-lady openly told about how at least some wiccas practice nudism and
sexual orgies out in the forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a
cult than a religion.
Sigvald
> As usual, Sigvald, your insults are based on
> ignorance.
Crap, pure crap! I am tirred to see that almost everything I write to DCML
is said to be insulting to someone even when that was not my intention. I'll
admit that some, yes, even most of the times I have deserved the critic, but
this time it's definately you that insults me by saying that I am insulting
someone and even adding that I am ignorant.
> [sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you
> to pass judgment on the sincere beliefs of many
> decent people all over the world.
OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I know about
the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV program where a Norwegian
Wicca-lady openly told about how at least some wiccas practice nudism and
sexual orgies out in the forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a
cult than a religion.
Sigvald
Rich Bellacera
Apology to Rodney (Religion in Disney Comics)
Message 117 -
2003-08-09 at 20:46:43
In my earlier post I said:
> I'm sorry, but sometimes I see how much the religious Right of the USA
> tries to control every aspect of our culture and it both frightens and
> angers me, especially when it gets into my "escapist activities" like
> reading comics.
To which Dan Shane replied:
> If your expression of ire was directed at Rodney as a member of the Religious
> Right you could not be farther off the mark.
No, my ire was not *intended* to be directed at Rodney, but to the
general annoyance I have toward
this enigma in the American society we call "The Religious Right."
Rodney's comments just made
me think of the attempted controls and tactics they place in our
society. So I apologize for my misplaced
attack on Rodney as though he was in any way affiliated with the
Religious Right. Please accept my
apology.
Thank you,
Rich Bellacera
> I'm sorry, but sometimes I see how much the religious Right of the USA
> tries to control every aspect of our culture and it both frightens and
> angers me, especially when it gets into my "escapist activities" like
> reading comics.
To which Dan Shane replied:
> If your expression of ire was directed at Rodney as a member of the Religious
> Right you could not be farther off the mark.
No, my ire was not *intended* to be directed at Rodney, but to the
general annoyance I have toward
this enigma in the American society we call "The Religious Right."
Rodney's comments just made
me think of the attempted controls and tactics they place in our
society. So I apologize for my misplaced
attack on Rodney as though he was in any way affiliated with the
Religious Right. Please accept my
apology.
Thank you,
Rich Bellacera
David Gerstein
DANIEL NEYER: Various Things
Message 118 -
2003-08-09 at 21:01:15
Hi Daniel,
>I wanted to ask Mr. David Gerstein if his Mickey stories are going to be
>carried by Gemstone as they were in the past
No need to call me Mr. ? I'm just David.
Editor John Clark does plan to use my stories. He hasn't scheduled any
of my Mickeys yet, or so he tells me, but you can expect to see a Fethry
Duck short and a Big Bad Wolf story from me in the coming months.
Admittedly, as an editor for Egmont from 1997-present I haven't had time
to write a lot of stories myself? I've been too busy working on other
people's.
>to my mind, David and Romano Scarpa are the only writers who ever
Thanks for the incredibly high praise! But I urge you to consider the
high qualities of some other modern Mouse creators, too, many of whom will
have stories coming out from Gemstone soon.
In particular, you'll be seeing stories I edited at Egmont for writers
Stefan Petrucha, Don Markstein, and Sarah Kinney; and then there's the work
of Byron Erickson, my *own* editor. He's the guy who taught me to write
Mickey, and edited such stories as "The Timber Topper" and "The Past
Imperfect". If you like my stuff, I think you'll like his.
>[Gemstone has] only run a couple of short [Mickey] tales that are far inferior
Eh? I actually enjoyed these myself, and in particular envied Pat and
Carol McGreal for coming up with that "Spidermouse" parody idea before I
could.
>I'm an American and Blum's "wicca" references were pure gibberish to me, nor do
>I want to have them explained. Also, almost all of the computer talk was over
>my head
Please don't take this the wrong way, but? why don't you want to have
them explained? I've read plenty of Disney comics stories that referenced
subjects I didn't get, and I treated the stories as my opportunities to
begin learning more about those subjects, many of which I ended up finding
fascinating. Had I decided instead that I didn't want to learn any more
about what was being referred to, I would have missed a lot of great
chances.
>Rosa and Van Horn deliver stories for other people's enjoyment, while
>Blum seems to prefer delivering stories for his own personal
>satisfaction.
Honestly, I think you should get to know Rosa, Van Horn, and Blum before
you judge them in this way. Who's to say that Rosa and Van Horn don't also
want to entertain themselves? or for that matter, that Blum doesn't care
about what his readers want?
>I've always been somewhat wary of Blum and his take on
>the Ducks' world since he started writing those strange analytic articles
>about Barks' stories. To Blum, the Ducks are not characters, but puppets
>for acting out social-politico-psychological satires.
For me, Blum's take on the Ducks has been quite enjoyable over the
years? both in research articles and in actual Duck stories. In the 1980s, I
looked for Blum's name in the credits as a sign that a Danish Duck story was
going to have good American dialogue. Blum's cultural and literary
references did a lot to help shape my adult fascination with literature and
history. But this is not to dis his treatment of the Ducks themselves: I
thought Blum's characterizations? insofar as they may have differed from the
foreign Duck stories he started with!? were fine; dripping with very funny
cynicism and sarcasm, in the Barks tradition yet still unique.
My "Ten-Penny Opera" story (UNCLE SCROOGE AND DONALD DUCK #1, 1997) was
to some degree intended as a tribute to what I I liked about Blum's 1980s
creations. Literary squibs, historical tidbits, outrageous operetta
references but, most critically, an interpretation of the Ducks themselves
that make it all come together? because at the bottom line, it's a Duck
story, not a textbook.
I do think Blum is aware of this, too.
Best, David
>I wanted to ask Mr. David Gerstein if his Mickey stories are going to be
>carried by Gemstone as they were in the past
No need to call me Mr. ? I'm just David.
Editor John Clark does plan to use my stories. He hasn't scheduled any
of my Mickeys yet, or so he tells me, but you can expect to see a Fethry
Duck short and a Big Bad Wolf story from me in the coming months.
Admittedly, as an editor for Egmont from 1997-present I haven't had time
to write a lot of stories myself? I've been too busy working on other
people's.
>to my mind, David and Romano Scarpa are the only writers who ever
Thanks for the incredibly high praise! But I urge you to consider the
high qualities of some other modern Mouse creators, too, many of whom will
have stories coming out from Gemstone soon.
In particular, you'll be seeing stories I edited at Egmont for writers
Stefan Petrucha, Don Markstein, and Sarah Kinney; and then there's the work
of Byron Erickson, my *own* editor. He's the guy who taught me to write
Mickey, and edited such stories as "The Timber Topper" and "The Past
Imperfect". If you like my stuff, I think you'll like his.
>[Gemstone has] only run a couple of short [Mickey] tales that are far inferior
Eh? I actually enjoyed these myself, and in particular envied Pat and
Carol McGreal for coming up with that "Spidermouse" parody idea before I
could.
>I'm an American and Blum's "wicca" references were pure gibberish to me, nor do
>I want to have them explained. Also, almost all of the computer talk was over
>my head
Please don't take this the wrong way, but? why don't you want to have
them explained? I've read plenty of Disney comics stories that referenced
subjects I didn't get, and I treated the stories as my opportunities to
begin learning more about those subjects, many of which I ended up finding
fascinating. Had I decided instead that I didn't want to learn any more
about what was being referred to, I would have missed a lot of great
chances.
>Rosa and Van Horn deliver stories for other people's enjoyment, while
>Blum seems to prefer delivering stories for his own personal
>satisfaction.
Honestly, I think you should get to know Rosa, Van Horn, and Blum before
you judge them in this way. Who's to say that Rosa and Van Horn don't also
want to entertain themselves? or for that matter, that Blum doesn't care
about what his readers want?
>I've always been somewhat wary of Blum and his take on
>the Ducks' world since he started writing those strange analytic articles
>about Barks' stories. To Blum, the Ducks are not characters, but puppets
>for acting out social-politico-psychological satires.
For me, Blum's take on the Ducks has been quite enjoyable over the
years? both in research articles and in actual Duck stories. In the 1980s, I
looked for Blum's name in the credits as a sign that a Danish Duck story was
going to have good American dialogue. Blum's cultural and literary
references did a lot to help shape my adult fascination with literature and
history. But this is not to dis his treatment of the Ducks themselves: I
thought Blum's characterizations? insofar as they may have differed from the
foreign Duck stories he started with!? were fine; dripping with very funny
cynicism and sarcasm, in the Barks tradition yet still unique.
My "Ten-Penny Opera" story (UNCLE SCROOGE AND DONALD DUCK #1, 1997) was
to some degree intended as a tribute to what I I liked about Blum's 1980s
creations. Literary squibs, historical tidbits, outrageous operetta
references but, most critically, an interpretation of the Ducks themselves
that make it all come together? because at the bottom line, it's a Duck
story, not a textbook.
I do think Blum is aware of this, too.
Best, David
Rich Bellacera
Florence Quackfaster & Wicca again...
Message 119 -
2003-08-09 at 21:09:37
Sigvald said:
> Or it again proofs his (IMO) lack of respect for other artists,
> Barks included.
You really don't want to open this can of worms, do you? You're
not implying that you/your vision of the "Ducks" is better because
it "DOES" respect other artists, are you? If so, where's Webby,
where's Gideon McDuck or Rumpus McFowl in your world... just to
list a few items.
Donald sortof said:
> [sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you
> to pass judgment on the sincere beliefs of many
> decent people all over the world.
To which Sigvald replied:
> OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I
> know about the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV
> program where a Norwegian Wicca-lady openly told about how at
> least some wiccas practice nudism and sexual orgies out in the
> forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a cult than a
> religion.
First, ONE television program doesn't qualify you (nor would a hundred)
if this
is your reference point for such qualification. On the other hand, to
use your
standard, then Christianity also "sounds more like a cult than a
religion" since
I've seen TV programs where people don't just "say" some Christians practice
nudism and sexual orgies, but actually take cameras to the places where
such
practices occur and "document" it, they also have documented the
practices of
how some Christians prove their faith by handling poisonous snakes in a
ritual
where many often get bit and have serious life-long medical problems...
and then
there are others..... well, I think you get my point. If we judge ALL
Christians by
the practices of some or, worse yet, the statements of a few, then
surely Christianity
should be listed as a "cult" too.. Yes?
Rich Bellacera
xephyr at cwnet.com
> Or it again proofs his (IMO) lack of respect for other artists,
> Barks included.
You really don't want to open this can of worms, do you? You're
not implying that you/your vision of the "Ducks" is better because
it "DOES" respect other artists, are you? If so, where's Webby,
where's Gideon McDuck or Rumpus McFowl in your world... just to
list a few items.
Donald sortof said:
> [sic] a bit about it" does not qualify you
> to pass judgment on the sincere beliefs of many
> decent people all over the world.
To which Sigvald replied:
> OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I
> know about the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV
> program where a Norwegian Wicca-lady openly told about how at
> least some wiccas practice nudism and sexual orgies out in the
> forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a cult than a
> religion.
First, ONE television program doesn't qualify you (nor would a hundred)
if this
is your reference point for such qualification. On the other hand, to
use your
standard, then Christianity also "sounds more like a cult than a
religion" since
I've seen TV programs where people don't just "say" some Christians practice
nudism and sexual orgies, but actually take cameras to the places where
such
practices occur and "document" it, they also have documented the
practices of
how some Christians prove their faith by handling poisonous snakes in a
ritual
where many often get bit and have serious life-long medical problems...
and then
there are others..... well, I think you get my point. If we judge ALL
Christians by
the practices of some or, worse yet, the statements of a few, then
surely Christianity
should be listed as a "cult" too.. Yes?
Rich Bellacera
xephyr at cwnet.com
Donald D. Markstein
Wicca again! (O.T., but I'll stop soon)
Message 120 -
2003-08-09 at 21:19:38
Sigvald, it is not my policy to engage in lengthy off-topic discussions
here, in which insults are traded. But I'm making an exception for you --
except that I don't expect to let it get much more lengthy than it already
has (this is the second exchange).
> OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I know about
> the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV program where a
Norwegian
> Wicca-lady openly told about how at least some wiccas practice nudism and
> sexual orgies out in the forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a
> cult than a religion.
So, you once watched a sensation-mongering TV show that mentioned their most
lurid practices. (And non-universal ones, to judge from Wiccans I know
personally.) THAAAT makes you WAAAAY qualified to insult millions of people
you don't know by calling their religious beliefs a cult.
As for your taking offense at my calling you "ignorant": If the above is
your idea of speaking out of knowledge, then please, DO take offense,
because I persist in believing you ignorant -- a fact you confirm every time
you open your mouth.
Quack, Don
Today in Toons: Every day's an anniversary.
http://www.toonopedia.com/today.htm
here, in which insults are traded. But I'm making an exception for you --
except that I don't expect to let it get much more lengthy than it already
has (this is the second exchange).
> OK, you asked for it! I'll be open and tell you exactly what I know about
> the Wiccas. Fact is that once I saw a Norwegian TV program where a
Norwegian
> Wicca-lady openly told about how at least some wiccas practice nudism and
> sexual orgies out in the forrests somewhere, to me that sounds more like a
> cult than a religion.
So, you once watched a sensation-mongering TV show that mentioned their most
lurid practices. (And non-universal ones, to judge from Wiccans I know
personally.) THAAAT makes you WAAAAY qualified to insult millions of people
you don't know by calling their religious beliefs a cult.
As for your taking offense at my calling you "ignorant": If the above is
your idea of speaking out of knowledge, then please, DO take offense,
because I persist in believing you ignorant -- a fact you confirm every time
you open your mouth.
Quack, Don
Today in Toons: Every day's an anniversary.
http://www.toonopedia.com/today.htm