Keskustelujen arkisto

In a message dated 12/19/2003 5:09:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jehan126 at hotmail.com writes:
<<(2) the position of Disney comics
vis-?-vis the Comics Code Authority (CCA)? I know that Disney comics did not
need to have the CCA logo when they were published. Will you please tell me
what else you know about this issue?>>
In the USA, it was the decision of Dell Comics (who published the Disney
comics) not to join the other comics company in starting the CCA -- indeed, their
ads at the time state that they dont have to censor their comics, cause they
never contained material that needed censoring...

I seem to recall that the Disney comics that Marvel produced, were under the
Code....

In the USA, comics were never subjected to Goverment censorship (they were
however several states where crime comics were banned)

steven rowe

Stefan wrote:
> What strange version is that? When was it published?

Poster was published in "Kaczor Donald" 8-1996 (11th April), stickers were
added to issues 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 (6th June).

> Are there any
> scans of it somewhere?

I've just put the scan here:
http://disneymania.w.interia.pl/ftree.jpg

Best wishes,
Mateusz Lis

mateusz lis wrote:
> I've just put the scan here:
> http://disneymania.w.interia.pl/ftree.jpg

What a strange version! The extra characters are not even drawn by
Rosa. Was he in any way involved in the addition of them to the tree,
or were the Polish editors (or editors in some other country) solely
responsible for these changes? Was this version published in any other
country? Western Europe seems to have got the standard versions (with
and without the sidebar) only, but what about other Eastern European
countries?

Stefan

Hi all,

maybe a dumb question, but it bothers me too much, and a fellow DCML
member answering me in private didn't know either (let's call him
Pound Big in disguise as he didn't know the answer either ;-) )...

If I am not wrong, "L_o_T"- is always used as abbreviation for ROSAs
masterpiece "Life _a_nd Times of Scrooge McDuck"...

Why not "L_a_T", then? I understand it that the "o" can't stand for
"of" as there is no "t" to come after the of?
Do I get something grossly wrong or is there a sensible explanation /
origin for this?

Besides that I wanted to point out that I very much liked a two-part
Christmas story featurign Scrooge, published in this and next week's
german Micky Maus (D2003-043), by Marco Rota.

It's another variation of the "cold shell, though nice in hiscore"
theme... with a strong role of a small, beaked, poor boy, and what's
worth a dime...
Don't want to spoil too much, just wanted to pinpoint on this story,
as only VERY FEW stories NOT by Rosa or Barks made me shiver so
far....

And thus I also got a nice transition to wishing you all nice
christmas (or Wednesday, for those not celebrating it (If I remember
correctly, credits for that expression need to go to Don)) and a
happy, successful new year.

Yours,

Soeren Schridde
Soeren Schridde

--- member of the AAAAA
(Anonymous Association Against Acronym Abuse) ---

Stader Str. 206, 21075 Hamburg, Germany
eMail: sschridde at web.de (2nd: sschridde at gmx.de)
Tel./Fax: Acc.Code+ (0)40/98760818
Fax: Acc.Code+ (0)40/98761995

OLAF SOLSTRAND, 21-11-2003:

> I suddenly understood that it was Ferioli we were talking about.
> [...] Always great having living legends on the list!

I agree. So far, the *deceased* legends on this list do nothing more
than lurking... :-)

OLIVIER to me, 19-12-2003:

> I don't remember having an address to a web site of yours. Could
> you link to it, please?

The site is still heavily under construction, so that's why I rarely
mention it. The URL is: http://www.seriesam.com/barks/index.html

I've updated it, last week. (Finally!)
Among other things, I've added an "Animation"-section.
The "Bibliography"-section is still a mess, with unordered listings.
(Look at the horrible codes!)

In general, the site structure is still in preliminary form.
A section like "Dairy" is nothing more than a test.
Etc. etc. etc.

It's a long-term project. But I'm too impatient for that. In my head,
the whole thing already is finished. So, in real-life, it looks like
one big todo-list to me.

Why did I ever start that thing? My entire life will be lost on it.
I will never be free again! Oh me! Oh my!

--- Dani?l (always complaining)

TIMO RONKAINEN to OLAF SOLSTRAND, 25-11-2003:

>> Hm... I notice that in INDUCKS (or COA?), at least _two_ stories
>> are listed as Donald's first appearance...
>> http://coa.inducks.org/coa/c1/story.php/0/U+MMA++3-B34//_

[This URL doesn't work properly for me, because of the slashes at the
end of the URL. Why are they included there? Here's the URL without
slashes: http://coa.inducks.org/coa/c1/story.php/0/U+MMA++3-B34 ]

> Mickey Mouse Annual doesn't have the very same Donald Duck as we
> know him. English 1932 appearance is more of like coincidence: a
> duck-character just having the same name. I think this was
> discussed here some time ago.

I have such a publication mentioned as 'The Adventures of Mickey Mouse'
(1931 booklet).

'The Adventures of Mickey Mouse' (1931) tells about Mickey's life "in
the old barn and the barnyard". In the illustrated story, his "many
friends" are listed. Beside Minnie Mouse, Henry Horse, Carolyn Cow,
Patricia Pig, Clara Cluck, and Robert Rooster, the name Donald Duck
is mentioned. The accompanying group portrait does not contain a duck,
but a small little duck is shown in an illustration elsewhere in the
booklet.

According to my files, I took this information from Dutch article
'1934 - 1984 Donald Duck Vijftig Jaar?' in "Donald Duck 50 Jaar In
Beeld" (Oberon specialreeks nr. 6), published as a special release
of Dutch weekly 'Donald Duck Weekblad', 1984.

Is this information correct?

If so, how does this match with Inducks? Is 'The Adventures of Mickey
Mouse' a booklet title on its own? Or is it the the title of the story
that's part of that Mickey Mouse Annual? Or does Mickey Mouse Annual
contain a reprint? Or... etc.

In the Carl Barks Library, there might also be some information about
this first appearance of a character named Donald Duck, but I'm not sure.
If it's in there, does someone know where?

--- Dani?l

"Yikes! How can anything that stuffs itself with HAY be so HARD?"
Which Barks story?
Hint #1: cowboys
Hint #2: Donald's nephews

ZELDASTRIFORCE, 03-12-2003:

> I came across some previews of the Gemstone Disney comics for the
> next 2 or 3 months. Maybe some of it will be news to you. [...]

> UNCLE SCROOGE #325 by Various Carl Barks' classic "Only a Poor Old Man"
> ??? the first full-length Uncle Scrooge adventure ever produced by the
> Old Duck Man ??? is reprinted in its entirety!

'Only a Poor Old Man'? AGAIN??? Barks did so many more stories than those
few "classics" from around 1952. Why don't those stories get a reprint?

I'm sorry for being so hot-headed, but I'm thinking of all the money I'm
paying to get the same stuff over and over again. I'm (indirectly)
subscribed to 'Walt Disney's Comics and Stories' and 'Uncle Scrooge', but
I'm seriously considering unsubscribing. I've always wished Gladstone and
Gemstone the best, and I still do, but if they go on with this policy,
they'll have to survive without me.

'Uncle Scrooge' costs me $6,95, excluding the distribution. Half of this
particular issue is filled up with a re-reprint. That's $3,50 right into
the wastebasket!

To make things worse, at least for me, some of the Gemstone Barks reprints
look awful. At least those I've received so far. I've heard that there were
some technical difficulties, but I don't find that an excuse at all.
Gemstone could have postponed those stories, by replacing them for stories
with clean, (re)printable artwork. I think a muddy quality should only be
reserved for stories which can't be printed in any other way, like some of
Barks's giveaway stories.

Please Gemstone, give this re-reprint policy some serious thinking. You may
not have much money to produce comics. But I don't have much money to *buy*
comics.

Even if the comics would be filled up with new material from the front to
the back, those comics are already very expensive. And now they even begin
to contain fillers of 32 pages... Within one year of existance, no less.

Still, the issue can't be ignored for a lot of people, because it contains
the first English reprint of Rosa's "The Beagle Boys vs. The Money Bin"...
That story must be CRAMPED with jokes to give me a smile again, after
having paid seven dollars for only half a comic.

I'm afraid of becoming a persona non grata for saying this, but I have to
get this off my chest. One other reason for being so heated is that this
policy makes me dislike Barks's stories. Such a re-reprinted story looks
like a lame filler to me, while it has been one of my favourites before...
For example, I'm beginning to really hate that over-used 'Only a Poor Old
Man' tale.

I think those prestige format comics should contain rarities, like
*facsimiles* of Barks stories that have never been reprinted in their
original form. That way, I even would have been glad to see this 'Only
a Poor Old Man' tale again.

And what about Gottfredson? And what about rare Taliaferro stuff, which
has never been reprinted before? Just to name two other classic artists.

In those prestige comics I would like to see material that I am
*searching* for, or material that's new and fresh. Not those overused
"classics" which are lying on almost everybody's shelves, all coming
from the same retouched/redrawn reprint source.

--- Dani?l