Keskustelujen arkisto

This is why I never end up posting, but I guess if I'm going to get in this I'm going to need to go all the way.

"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; I'm literate enough in computers to use them, but all the pseudo-jargon that flys around is pretty meaningless to me--and I think most other people are the same way."

Please please please do not make the rest of Americans look ignorant. If you don't understand something look it up, thats what most of us did when Barks would write about Pizarro or Holograms or terms we didn't understand when we were children. I for one try to learn something new everyday and every moment that I can, and I know I'm not the only one. I realize that your mentioning of America was in reference to a direct question, but that along with blatant ignorance (flat out not want to learn something) just crystallizes the stereotype.

"And fads like this wicca nonsense aren't going to be popular for long..."

You just insulted a Religion. I do not practice it myself but already one other DCML member posted that they did. I assume from your post that you were unaware of the fact that it is a Religion. Now you are.

"I know, I know, but those are *fictional* stories by Barks -*Fictional* even in a Duckburg context."

I look at Barks' work as a whole because he created all of the stories, and even in stories where Duckburg does not have a space port there's still technology far outside of the 1950's there.

So far I have simply addressed how Barks work was not stuck in 1950 concepts, opinions on which stories count and which don't are subjective. Objectively they were not set in any kind of stone, not in time nor continuity nor every geography (Duckburg changed in almost every book).

Aside from all that, and addressing the story in question directly, bringing new stories into more modern terms while keeping the characters the same is as difficult as assembling the Carl Barks universe into an arc. If you want to know how hard that is to do ask Mr Rosa. This is Blums first story printed in the US, if we (the Disney Comics Community) judged Don Rosa by his first work we would have judged him far before his greatest work (let alone whats still to come from him). Was this story good, was it bad, it's all a matter of taste really. I for one am looking forward to more from him, and since he has been around American Disney Comics since the beginning of Gladstone he has earned his place.

What I find most ironic in all of this is even after 300 years if you mention Wicca to the wrong people they'll still burn you at the stake. People are always people I guess.

Geo

=======================
"I used to have a handle on life, but it broke."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

On July 27, I sent you a link to an extensive review of Donald Ault's
book "Carl Barks Conversations", written by Kevin McGowin:
http://www.eclectica.org/v7n3/mcgowin_barks.html

Here are some more links. They are from Gottfried Helnwein's
international site, including a link to a Barks interview(!!!).

- - - - - - -

An abstract of the Kevin McGowin review, with an extract from the
interview about Helnwein:
http://www.helnwein.de/texte/international_texts/abstracts_1.html

Helnwein's July 11, 1992 Barks interview in its totality, along
with a bio of Kevin McGowin and Donald Ault:
http://www.helnwein.de/texte/international_texts/artikel_1358.html

There's also a teaser for other relevant sites, like:
http://www.helnweincomic.homestead.com/
It's about "The Darker Side of Playland", which shows Helnwein's work
on reconstituting what could be called a "noir duck" (as well as a
"noir mouse").

http://www.helnwein.com/texte/international_texts/artikel_398.html
An reminiscence ("Memories of Duckburg") about Helnwein's post-WW II
reaction to the duck comics. Helnwein originally translated it for
Donald Ault in its entirety because Donald thought Mississippi might
want to use it as a foreword to the book or something, but they
weren't interested, or so it seemed. Now it's available online.

- - - - - - -

Donald Ault's "Carl Barks Conversations" is published by University
Press of Mississippi (2003). It contains more than 238 pages. There's
a hardback and a paperback edition. It's also for sale via internet.

--- Dani?l

Kriton Kyrimis wrote:

ME:

> never getting tired of working with the times,

I meant "with the DUCKS"!!!

Kriton (e-mail: kyrimis at cti.gr)
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis)
-----
"That particular problem is impossible to solve... how *did* you solve it?"
-----

Rodney said:
> 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.

Despite the fact that "Christianity" (and I am a Christian) is
thrust upon the readers quite frequently in Disney comics...

But I digress...

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. From what I saw and read while in China, I really
liked it.

Ironically, this debate over "wicca" is strange since the very
idea of witches and witchcraft is so tightly woven into the
history of Disney since the earliest of days (considering BEDKNOBS
& BROOMSTICKS, MARY POPPINS and so forth). Witches are a legacy
in Disney, why should knowing one more aspect of them make them
somehow more prohibitive? And, yes we MUST bring up the fact
that 'small children' are reading Disney comics, that way we
can make it seem even more horribly prohibitive.

I certainly do not believe this comic was in anyway heavy-handed
in it's delivery of Magica's interest in Wicca, nor do I believe
Disney generally pushes any particular religion (though I do believe
Christianity is depicted far more often than any other religious
belief in their comics, live-action movies and animated films).
I generally don't have a problem with this, and "SMALL ONE" is
among my favorite animated shorts, too.

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.

Thanks,

Rich Bellacera
(Email removed)

---- Msg sent via CWNet - http://cwnet.com/

From: S?ren Krarup Olesen<raptus at stofanet.dk>
Subject: AC, DvE and DR
>>>Don, you once wrote to me in private, that you "pity me" for not liking
your stories (in fact I do but apparently you ignored that in your eager to
promote yourself).Well, I pity you for not liking the Disney comics
universe! And that message applies to all your disciples.

Good lord! I'm downloading e-mails while on a camping trip in Olympic
National Park... and I belatedly catch this crack.What is this!?!??! What a
foul lie!!!!!!!!
I challenge you to produce any message where I said any such thing or
ever attempted to "promote myself" in the least way. I don't think that in
the past 15 years I've ever done or said one thing that could be construed
as "self promotion". Editors complain that the texts I write about my work
are too self-deprecating. List members bemoan the fact that I never discuss
my current projects or convention visits unless I am specifically asked
about them. I purposely choose not to have my own website, and, when
frequently asked, I even decline to contribute even a simple
guestbook comment to any of the many Rosa fansites because I feel it might
look even *vaguely* like self-promotion to some cruel observer. I go around
telling people that I already get *too much* attention and they should ease
off. As you should know if you were paying attention, self promotion would
do me no good whatsoever... if I could do or say something that succeeded in
selling an extra TRILLION of my own comics, it would not put one extra penny
in MY pocket... it would only make more $ for the publisher or for Disney. I
can't even imagine what I could have said that you could have misconstrued
as meaning this, or what I could have written concerning this "pity"
business such that you could pull it out of context to imply a meaning other
than was intended!

But, moreover, even if someone DID write something to you in a PRIVATE
e-mail, what right do you have to publish a public announcement of that
private conversation?! You can get yourself sued in a very nasty way for
this sort of reckless, sneaky and libelous activity!

And while we're at it, why do you suddenly address me directly in the midst
of an argument that I was not even part of, implying that I have some secret
involvement? I write/draw my stories, the publishers print them, then
*whatever* reaction comes from the readers is completely their own creation.
I have no control over what is said or not said, written or not written, by
my fans or detractors... and I resent your implication that I do by your
insinuating use of the word "disciples". I neither encourage nor discourage
anything written pro or con about my work. And if you think I am constantly
pleased by *every* syllable that is written or said by the Rosa fans around
the world, you're sadly mistaken. But they are on their own... I am not
their leader. I am not a "secret master" of every Rosa site on the WWW. I'll
thank you not to attempt to drag me into your squabbles just because you
resentfully want to blame me *personally* for every word written by a
professed fan of my work.
What happened? Did you just write that entire e-mail in a moment of
INCREDIBLY poor judgment?!
Let's have a retraction of your statement and an apology.

S?ren Krarup Olesen:

> Amazed to see how small remarks are being treated as main
> subjects here.

If you say something important in a "small remark", you can't expect other people not to react to it.
In this case, your "small remarks" were puzzling (and on places wrong).

--Harry.

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:
Br'er Fox (Leader)
Br'er Bear
Zeb Wolf (Zeke's brother)
Zeke Wolf
Willy Weasel
Ricky Rat
Dirty Bill (a Bulldog)
Br'er Gator
Kalle (a Dog)
Hotte (a Coyote)

But that's only 10 members. Who are the other two?
I know Li'l Wolf usually attends their meeting along with his pop, but is he
actually considered a member. I would think Li'l Wolf's reputation would prevent
his membership. Maybe Izzy Wolf? Br'er Wolf? Aunt Terrible?

Thanks,

Rich Bellacera
(Email removed)

---- Msg sent via CWNet - http://cwnet.com/