Thank you, Mr. Rosa, for your thought out response to my postings. You've
given me much food for thought. After much discussion and debate, I will
concede that most of the concerns that I've been wrestling with have less to
do with something you're doing wrong than with a group of fans who would
argue that your way is the only way.
ABOUT DATES IN YOUR STORIES: I admit I have more problems with the ideas you
've shared over the internet than with what has actually turned up on the
printed page, and, of course, what you choose to share over the internet is
completely up to you. I can't read your stories in isolation from what I've
read on the web now, though. Now that I've heard that you set all of your
stories in the fifties, references to the time period really jump out at me.
Sometimes that enhances a story for me; sometimes it doesn't. Honestly,
aside from "The Life of Scrooge" stories, I believe "The Treasure of the Ten
Avatars" is the only one of your stories that I read and thought, "This
wouldn't work in the nineties." At any rate, as long as time period remains
something subtle that most folks wouldn't pick up on anyway, I'll try not to
grumble anymore. J
I will quibble with you about the life of Scrooge but only a bit. While
Barks did use dates on occasion, and he obviously established that Scrooge
started down the path to his zillions through prospecting, I think you have
nailed down Scrooge's life much more than Barks ever did. I think because of
your stories, it is more difficult now for writers to give Scrooge happily
random flashbacks ("Back when I raising chickens for Colonel Sanders...") or
to create random family members. I don't know what the answer is, though.
I love the original 12 part "Life of Scrooge" series, but I also love the
openness and mystery that was Scrooge's life before.
As far as the origin tales go.I like your other stuff MUCH, MUCH more, but I
understand that my point of view here is outnumbered by what editors and
even most fans want. I can't relate to your experience of seeing Scrooge's
"Back to the Klondike" flashback years after having read the original story.
My first experience with the story was reading the unexpurgated version. I
probably will enjoy your next Yukon story. Most of my misgivings about this
sort of thing come after I've read the story and pondered long-term
ramifications.
My apologies about the Hortense/Matilda mix-up! I need to take my comics
out of their little plastic bags more often!
My face is also red concerning my too hasty posting concerning Arthur,
Sherlock Holmes, and the others! This morning, I had a flashback of picking
up a copy of THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING in high school and seeing that a whole
wall of the book store practically was devoted to continuations of Arthurian
legend. I still have some point despite my too hasty posting, though! What
dissatisfies me about thinking of all of these characters as analogous to
the ducks is that (outside of the original tales) there is no longer one
official version. There ARE truly as many Sherlock Holmes as there are
writers who have attempted to capture his struggles. Frankly, I'm a
modernist living in a postmodern world, and I don't want there to be an
endless stream of parallel duck universes! But the world is changing, and I
'll try to keep up the best that I can.
Matt
Author
Topic: 200404
(317 messages)
Matthew Williams
Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
Message 76 -
2004-04-04 at 20:14:15
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Lo$ / The Looney Lunar Gold Rush / The Dream Of A Lifetime
Message 77 -
2004-04-04 at 22:59:49
In my previous contribution, I asked Don Rosa if he has thought of
Barks's 'The Looney Lunar Gold Rush' (US 49), where dull banker
Scrooge's life, as told to the Junior Woodchucks, turns out to be
full of lies.
After sending, I remembered Rosa's 'The Dream Of A Lifetime'
(D 2002-033), in which the 'Life of $crooge' is shown as big dream
that Scrooge has, every night again. Scrooge even knows what scenes
and situations he can expect, as we can see when Donald suddenly
intrudes parts of his dream.
In that light, Rosa's 'Life of $crooge' could be just a big dream that
dull banker Scrooge had, somewhere in the mid-1950s. A dream of what
he *also* could have done during his life as banker and money lender.
A dream he decides to tell to the nephews, from time to to time, to
ventilate some of his frustration.
What do you think of this bridge between 'The Looney Lunar Gold Rush'
and 'The Dream Of A Lifetime'? :-)
--- Dani?l
"Now EVERYBODY'S mad at me! What'll I do? What'll I do?"
(Which Barks story?)
Barks's 'The Looney Lunar Gold Rush' (US 49), where dull banker
Scrooge's life, as told to the Junior Woodchucks, turns out to be
full of lies.
After sending, I remembered Rosa's 'The Dream Of A Lifetime'
(D 2002-033), in which the 'Life of $crooge' is shown as big dream
that Scrooge has, every night again. Scrooge even knows what scenes
and situations he can expect, as we can see when Donald suddenly
intrudes parts of his dream.
In that light, Rosa's 'Life of $crooge' could be just a big dream that
dull banker Scrooge had, somewhere in the mid-1950s. A dream of what
he *also* could have done during his life as banker and money lender.
A dream he decides to tell to the nephews, from time to to time, to
ventilate some of his frustration.
What do you think of this bridge between 'The Looney Lunar Gold Rush'
and 'The Dream Of A Lifetime'? :-)
--- Dani?l
"Now EVERYBODY'S mad at me! What'll I do? What'll I do?"
(Which Barks story?)
Nat Chrenshaw
Universes (and wildlife)
Message 78 -
2004-04-04 at 23:30:30
Well, I just feel like submitting my own short thoughts on the subject, it won't mean much but maybe it's just a bit of philosophy =)
Let's say the Disney (Or Barks, or whatever) world is a big big mountain...
Everybody chose to settle themselves where they could get the best view of the mountain (and of course everybody got there own taste and sense of art), so everybody settled on different spots around the mountain.
Now, some people describes the mountain the way they see it, or the way they themselves want to look at it. It won't mean that they are are wrong.
Well, the mountain (or whatever) exists in everybodys mind,
the artists (or writers, or both) just makes it a little more fun, or interesting, or magical... and the rest we fill out on our own.
Philosophy?
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
Let's say the Disney (Or Barks, or whatever) world is a big big mountain...
Everybody chose to settle themselves where they could get the best view of the mountain (and of course everybody got there own taste and sense of art), so everybody settled on different spots around the mountain.
Now, some people describes the mountain the way they see it, or the way they themselves want to look at it. It won't mean that they are are wrong.
Well, the mountain (or whatever) exists in everybodys mind,
the artists (or writers, or both) just makes it a little more fun, or interesting, or magical... and the rest we fill out on our own.
Philosophy?
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
Anthony Vuono
Concerning the Rosa debate
Message 79 -
2004-04-04 at 23:50:52
Don Rosa said:
"Here's a warning: the only way I will allow myself to tell a story of
$crooge and Goldie *during* the Yukon is to expound on a meeting that Barks
already described, but not to add any additional Yukon adventures. This
means that I might do a story involving the month when $crooge kidnapped
Goldie to White Agony Creek. That will be a very tricky but very fun story
to tell... and yet I'm postponing it because I know that will have to be the
ONLY time I can ever do a $crooge/Goldie Yukon adventure."
Personally, I cannot wait for Don to start working on that one, as I am
a devoted fan to his work, especially the LofS series. In fact, I hope he
starts this Yukon tale after the Brazil adventure.
Anyways, I do not see what the big deal is with this entire debate.
People just have different tastes when it comes to the Ducks. Some admire
strict continuity and the 1950s setting (like I do), while many other
readers prefer standalone or more modern stories. Both views are fine. I
guess the argument revolves around being forced to accept one way of doing
things verses another. If an artists wants to follow Barks/Rosa "facts,"
then fine. If someone else wants to write and draw Scrooge stories
differently, then also fine. Even though I am a rabid Rosa fan who loves
dates, prequels, and sequels, I would never force my opinions on anyone else
nor should other devout Rosa/Barks followers do so. While I like ALL Scrooge
stories, I just prefer a particular artist's or artists' vision as the
"truth." However, that does not mean other readers or artists should
automatically follow that one timeline or history. For all I care, they can
go about and create their own one. It is just my personal taste that I
really enjoy the Rosa/Barks established lore. There is nothing wrong with
that.
Since the 3rd grade, I grew up with Don Rosa stories. I did not grow up
with Carl Barks like millions of people did. Actually, Rosa's tales first
sparked an interest in Barks and not vice versa. I am sure other Americans
and maybe some Europeans feel the same way. Naturally, I have a special
attachment to Rosa's work more than anything else available in the Duck
market. Even as a freshman in the university, I still keep track of
everything that goes on with Gemstone and Rosa. Every so often, I like to
express my respect and love through this list and private correspondence.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that or encouraging fellow fans to read
the stories. However, there is something wrong with me telling people that
they must follow Rosa/Barks strictly, support only their works, or condemn
others who do not accept that universe (s).
Now, I will continue to put on a pedastal mainly Rosa/Barks/Van Horn
comic stories. If other fans really like Rota, Jippes, or Scarpa instead,
then they should do the same and make their views and opinions known to the
public. Anyone who puts them down for doing so is a fool. Basically, we all
possess different tastes and preferences. Let us just deal with them and
admire the endless stream of creativity, which has kept these beloved
characters going for such a long time.
Sincerely,
Anthony
"Here's a warning: the only way I will allow myself to tell a story of
$crooge and Goldie *during* the Yukon is to expound on a meeting that Barks
already described, but not to add any additional Yukon adventures. This
means that I might do a story involving the month when $crooge kidnapped
Goldie to White Agony Creek. That will be a very tricky but very fun story
to tell... and yet I'm postponing it because I know that will have to be the
ONLY time I can ever do a $crooge/Goldie Yukon adventure."
Personally, I cannot wait for Don to start working on that one, as I am
a devoted fan to his work, especially the LofS series. In fact, I hope he
starts this Yukon tale after the Brazil adventure.
Anyways, I do not see what the big deal is with this entire debate.
People just have different tastes when it comes to the Ducks. Some admire
strict continuity and the 1950s setting (like I do), while many other
readers prefer standalone or more modern stories. Both views are fine. I
guess the argument revolves around being forced to accept one way of doing
things verses another. If an artists wants to follow Barks/Rosa "facts,"
then fine. If someone else wants to write and draw Scrooge stories
differently, then also fine. Even though I am a rabid Rosa fan who loves
dates, prequels, and sequels, I would never force my opinions on anyone else
nor should other devout Rosa/Barks followers do so. While I like ALL Scrooge
stories, I just prefer a particular artist's or artists' vision as the
"truth." However, that does not mean other readers or artists should
automatically follow that one timeline or history. For all I care, they can
go about and create their own one. It is just my personal taste that I
really enjoy the Rosa/Barks established lore. There is nothing wrong with
that.
Since the 3rd grade, I grew up with Don Rosa stories. I did not grow up
with Carl Barks like millions of people did. Actually, Rosa's tales first
sparked an interest in Barks and not vice versa. I am sure other Americans
and maybe some Europeans feel the same way. Naturally, I have a special
attachment to Rosa's work more than anything else available in the Duck
market. Even as a freshman in the university, I still keep track of
everything that goes on with Gemstone and Rosa. Every so often, I like to
express my respect and love through this list and private correspondence.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that or encouraging fellow fans to read
the stories. However, there is something wrong with me telling people that
they must follow Rosa/Barks strictly, support only their works, or condemn
others who do not accept that universe (s).
Now, I will continue to put on a pedastal mainly Rosa/Barks/Van Horn
comic stories. If other fans really like Rota, Jippes, or Scarpa instead,
then they should do the same and make their views and opinions known to the
public. Anyone who puts them down for doing so is a fool. Basically, we all
possess different tastes and preferences. Let us just deal with them and
admire the endless stream of creativity, which has kept these beloved
characters going for such a long time.
Sincerely,
Anthony
Ari Seppi
MM Sword and Sorcery Fantasy
Message 80 -
2004-04-05 at 00:35:03
Steven:
>a couple weeks ago, i emailed Gemstone complaining about those sword and
>sorcery fantasy Mickey Mouse stories. I dislike them intensely - and I
>dont read them. I do force myself to read the HD&L "lesson of the day"
>soccer stories though.
> If anyone tries to tell me that those Mickey Stories are cannon, I will
> just smile at you, and re-read those old Fallberg-Murray stories.
I won't tell you that they are canon (ha, you don't get to smile) since I
don't know what that would actually mean. I do tell, however, that I mostly
like them. For example Ice Sword -series was excellent.
Mickey Mouse fantasy stories are not perfect, naturally. The main flaw is
that the plots are usually full of clich?s, but that's not that important.
I don't mean that originality not important at all, it's just not the main
reason I read Disney comics. If it was, I wouldn't be reading them, they
are Disney comics with all the Disney limitations after all.
I assume the story that (at least partially) made you write the mail was
The Black Orb*). I don't remember exactly how I felt about it after I had
read it, but I seem to have liked it. The fact that I have played role
playing games myself might of course affect my judgement.
*) http://coa.inducks.org/coa/c1/story.php/0/D+98246
--
Ari Seppi (ari.seppi at iki.fi)
http://www.iki.fi/mani/
>a couple weeks ago, i emailed Gemstone complaining about those sword and
>sorcery fantasy Mickey Mouse stories. I dislike them intensely - and I
>dont read them. I do force myself to read the HD&L "lesson of the day"
>soccer stories though.
> If anyone tries to tell me that those Mickey Stories are cannon, I will
> just smile at you, and re-read those old Fallberg-Murray stories.
I won't tell you that they are canon (ha, you don't get to smile) since I
don't know what that would actually mean. I do tell, however, that I mostly
like them. For example Ice Sword -series was excellent.
Mickey Mouse fantasy stories are not perfect, naturally. The main flaw is
that the plots are usually full of clich?s, but that's not that important.
I don't mean that originality not important at all, it's just not the main
reason I read Disney comics. If it was, I wouldn't be reading them, they
are Disney comics with all the Disney limitations after all.
I assume the story that (at least partially) made you write the mail was
The Black Orb*). I don't remember exactly how I felt about it after I had
read it, but I seem to have liked it. The fact that I have played role
playing games myself might of course affect my judgement.
*) http://coa.inducks.org/coa/c1/story.php/0/D+98246
--
Ari Seppi (ari.seppi at iki.fi)
http://www.iki.fi/mani/
Don Rosa
DCML Digest Issue 11
Message 81 -
2004-04-05 at 00:43:04
> From: "Matthew Williams" <kingofduckburg at apptechnc.net>
> Subject: Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
> Now that I've heard that you set all of your
> stories in the fifties, references to the time period really jump
> out at me.
> Sometimes that enhances a story for me; sometimes it doesn't. Honestly,
> aside from "The Life of Scrooge" stories, I believe "The Treasure
> of the Ten
> Avatars" is the only one of your stories that I read and thought, "This
> wouldn't work in the nineties."
Heh heh... you don't know the haffuvvit. I recall when I wrote that story, I
had a scene where somebody mentions the exchange rate between dollars and
rupees. To get that correct for the time period of my story, I consulted a
1950's encyclopedia yearbook! Now WHO would know I did that?!?! Nobody! But
this is one of the many (*many*!) extra bits of labor (unpaid!) that I go to
on my stories simply for my own personal, private amusement. I enjoy
thinking about all the hidden secrets there are in my stories waiting to be
discovered, or possibly *never* discovered.
Another incident -- at a big book signing at a shopping mall in Helsinki, a
man (not wanting to stand in line for 4 hours) passed me a note (I think
I've told this story here before?); when I later read it, it said he was a
botanist who had read my "The Last Lord of Eldorado" story which took place
on the Bolivian plateau... and he was amazed to see in the corner of a panel
an orchid of the type that only grows in that region in all the world.
Yeah... he was the one guy I put that detail there for. I love it.
> From: "Anthony Vuono" <avuono at UDel.Edu>
> Subject: Concerning the Rosa debate
No... no specific comments. Just thank you for one of the most level-headed
(and flattering!) comments on the matter thus far.
(But please don't say things like you've been reading my stories since the
third grade. I can't monkey with my own timeline like I can with $crooge's!)
(Creeeeaaaaaakkkkk...)
> Subject: Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
> Now that I've heard that you set all of your
> stories in the fifties, references to the time period really jump
> out at me.
> Sometimes that enhances a story for me; sometimes it doesn't. Honestly,
> aside from "The Life of Scrooge" stories, I believe "The Treasure
> of the Ten
> Avatars" is the only one of your stories that I read and thought, "This
> wouldn't work in the nineties."
Heh heh... you don't know the haffuvvit. I recall when I wrote that story, I
had a scene where somebody mentions the exchange rate between dollars and
rupees. To get that correct for the time period of my story, I consulted a
1950's encyclopedia yearbook! Now WHO would know I did that?!?! Nobody! But
this is one of the many (*many*!) extra bits of labor (unpaid!) that I go to
on my stories simply for my own personal, private amusement. I enjoy
thinking about all the hidden secrets there are in my stories waiting to be
discovered, or possibly *never* discovered.
Another incident -- at a big book signing at a shopping mall in Helsinki, a
man (not wanting to stand in line for 4 hours) passed me a note (I think
I've told this story here before?); when I later read it, it said he was a
botanist who had read my "The Last Lord of Eldorado" story which took place
on the Bolivian plateau... and he was amazed to see in the corner of a panel
an orchid of the type that only grows in that region in all the world.
Yeah... he was the one guy I put that detail there for. I love it.
> From: "Anthony Vuono" <avuono at UDel.Edu>
> Subject: Concerning the Rosa debate
No... no specific comments. Just thank you for one of the most level-headed
(and flattering!) comments on the matter thus far.
(But please don't say things like you've been reading my stories since the
third grade. I can't monkey with my own timeline like I can with $crooge's!)
(Creeeeaaaaaakkkkk...)
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Lo$ / The Dream Of A Lifetime / Scrooge as banker / brave ducks
Message 82 -
2004-04-05 at 01:00:39
Here's an addition to the Barks references in my previous email,
in connection Rosa's 'The Dream Of A Lifetime' (D 2002-033), in
which the 'Life of $crooge' is shown as one big dream.
In panel 7.1, of Barks's 'The Cattle King' (US 69), Scrooge flies
away from his desert ranch, saying to Donald and the nephews:
"I'm leaving you lads to learn the cattle business by EXPERIENCE!"
And in the next panel, he continues, thinking:
"I learned that way! That's why I became a BANKER!"
This could mean that Scrooge never really was the cowboy superhero as
shown in, for example, 'Life of $crooge' part 3.
Instead, Scrooge could have left the cattle business as fast as he
could, having decided to earn his money in a much *easier* way, by
becoming a banker. A bragging old banker telling about all the dreams
he has, about having been on a sinking Titanic, known by presidents
like Roosevelt, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Already in his debut, Barks's 'Christmas on Bear Mountain' (OS 178),
Scrooge is introduced as a coward. On page 18, he hides after the sofa
when he sees a little bear. Then, on page 19, he gets himself together,
bragging(!) that he doesn't know the "meaning of fear", but when he
sees his nephew Donald sleeping in the arms of a sighing bear, he just
flees away in panic.
In panel 1.1 of 'The Cattle King', Donald is hmffing about Scrooge's
"brazen ARROGANCE". And on page 3, banker Scrooge fails to keep his
ranchers, which seems to prove Donald right. After that, Scrooge lets
his problems be solved by his family. Just like he very often lets his
family do the difficult work for him. (Otherwise he wouldn't have taken
them with him, in most cases.)
This is another reason why I doubt that banker Scrooge really is the
brave person as he often wants us to believe.
In Scrooge's second adventure, Barks's 'The Old Castle's Secret'
(OS 189), the not-so-bravery of both Scrooge and Donald is present
again, throughout the story.
Maybe Barks intended the not-so-bravery to be an obvious part of
Scrooge's and Donald's characters?
--- Dani?l, making some spelling mistakes "from time to to time" :-)
in connection Rosa's 'The Dream Of A Lifetime' (D 2002-033), in
which the 'Life of $crooge' is shown as one big dream.
In panel 7.1, of Barks's 'The Cattle King' (US 69), Scrooge flies
away from his desert ranch, saying to Donald and the nephews:
"I'm leaving you lads to learn the cattle business by EXPERIENCE!"
And in the next panel, he continues, thinking:
"I learned that way! That's why I became a BANKER!"
This could mean that Scrooge never really was the cowboy superhero as
shown in, for example, 'Life of $crooge' part 3.
Instead, Scrooge could have left the cattle business as fast as he
could, having decided to earn his money in a much *easier* way, by
becoming a banker. A bragging old banker telling about all the dreams
he has, about having been on a sinking Titanic, known by presidents
like Roosevelt, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Already in his debut, Barks's 'Christmas on Bear Mountain' (OS 178),
Scrooge is introduced as a coward. On page 18, he hides after the sofa
when he sees a little bear. Then, on page 19, he gets himself together,
bragging(!) that he doesn't know the "meaning of fear", but when he
sees his nephew Donald sleeping in the arms of a sighing bear, he just
flees away in panic.
In panel 1.1 of 'The Cattle King', Donald is hmffing about Scrooge's
"brazen ARROGANCE". And on page 3, banker Scrooge fails to keep his
ranchers, which seems to prove Donald right. After that, Scrooge lets
his problems be solved by his family. Just like he very often lets his
family do the difficult work for him. (Otherwise he wouldn't have taken
them with him, in most cases.)
This is another reason why I doubt that banker Scrooge really is the
brave person as he often wants us to believe.
In Scrooge's second adventure, Barks's 'The Old Castle's Secret'
(OS 189), the not-so-bravery of both Scrooge and Donald is present
again, throughout the story.
Maybe Barks intended the not-so-bravery to be an obvious part of
Scrooge's and Donald's characters?
--- Dani?l, making some spelling mistakes "from time to to time" :-)
Don Rosa
DCML Digest Issue 11
Message 83 -
2004-04-05 at 02:39:28
> From: "Matthew Williams" <kingofduckburg at apptechnc.net>
> Subject: Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
> Now that I've heard that you set all of your
> stories in the fifties, references to the time period really jump
> out at me.
I just realized there's another interesting (?) anecdote on this topic. A
current situation...
As you might know, I'm currently doing a story of the Three Caballeros in
Brazil. The story opens with Donald's arrival in Rio and the three compadres
meeting on Sugar Loaf Mountain to discuss their plans for adventure.
Naturally I have Donald arriving on a Boeing Stratocruiser prop-plane, circa
1949 vintage.
But when he rides the cablecar to the top of Sugar Loaf I encountered a
problem!
That cablecar system was renovated, I deduce, about 1960. I found numerous
pics of pre-1960 cablecars in my 60-year NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC set and
elsewhere... but nobody ever bothered to print a picture of the pre- or
post-1960 cablecar *stations*.
I searched high and low for such pics. I had fans actually *in* Brazil
search Portuguese language websites for me. I'd already sent a Rio fan
"agent" to photograph the current stations which he was told were built in
the 1940's, but my research ultimately proved that to be false. He then
directly consulted all the official government reference and publicity
departments, but none of them could (or were willing) to provide pics of the
pre-1960 cablecar stations.
So... I have a dilemma: should I draw the pre-1960 cablecars with the
post-1960 stations? Even if I could draw it all pre-1960, that will surely
confuse the Brazilian readers who don't know what the old car system looked
like, and I *know* the story will see print there since my strange work is
becoming as popular in South America as it is in Finland (i.e.: "very").
(That's why I get a free tour of Brazil next month! Hoo-hah!) But it's more
important to me to be true to my own intentions, as close as I can. So, it
looks like I'll have pre-1960 cars arriving in post-1960 stations.
But I'll offer a deal: if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960 Sugar
Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck they
choose. Maybe that will get some extra research done that I can no longer
spend time on whilst I work feverishly towards my next,
already-delayed-due-to-research-time, paycheck. Eh?
Again... you never realize all this nutty extra work is going on in my
stories, eh? It's what keeps the job interesting for me!
> Subject: Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
> Now that I've heard that you set all of your
> stories in the fifties, references to the time period really jump
> out at me.
I just realized there's another interesting (?) anecdote on this topic. A
current situation...
As you might know, I'm currently doing a story of the Three Caballeros in
Brazil. The story opens with Donald's arrival in Rio and the three compadres
meeting on Sugar Loaf Mountain to discuss their plans for adventure.
Naturally I have Donald arriving on a Boeing Stratocruiser prop-plane, circa
1949 vintage.
But when he rides the cablecar to the top of Sugar Loaf I encountered a
problem!
That cablecar system was renovated, I deduce, about 1960. I found numerous
pics of pre-1960 cablecars in my 60-year NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC set and
elsewhere... but nobody ever bothered to print a picture of the pre- or
post-1960 cablecar *stations*.
I searched high and low for such pics. I had fans actually *in* Brazil
search Portuguese language websites for me. I'd already sent a Rio fan
"agent" to photograph the current stations which he was told were built in
the 1940's, but my research ultimately proved that to be false. He then
directly consulted all the official government reference and publicity
departments, but none of them could (or were willing) to provide pics of the
pre-1960 cablecar stations.
So... I have a dilemma: should I draw the pre-1960 cablecars with the
post-1960 stations? Even if I could draw it all pre-1960, that will surely
confuse the Brazilian readers who don't know what the old car system looked
like, and I *know* the story will see print there since my strange work is
becoming as popular in South America as it is in Finland (i.e.: "very").
(That's why I get a free tour of Brazil next month! Hoo-hah!) But it's more
important to me to be true to my own intentions, as close as I can. So, it
looks like I'll have pre-1960 cars arriving in post-1960 stations.
But I'll offer a deal: if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960 Sugar
Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck they
choose. Maybe that will get some extra research done that I can no longer
spend time on whilst I work feverishly towards my next,
already-delayed-due-to-research-time, paycheck. Eh?
Again... you never realize all this nutty extra work is going on in my
stories, eh? It's what keeps the job interesting for me!
Shad Z.
Barks's exact years / new Rosa sequels / Glittering Goldie
Message 84 -
2004-04-05 at 03:04:05
From: "Daniel van Eijmeren"
>
> But on the other hand, I do understand why some artists like Herg?
> (Tin Tin) and Uderzo (Asterix) have stated that they don't want their
> characters to take place in new adventures, after their death. Heirs
> tend to screw up the original vision sooner or later, calling it an
> improvement. But often, after a while, this "improvement" all the more
> shows that the original vision wasn't old-fashioned, but *timeless*
> and *timeproof*.
You do know that eventually the copyrights on the Tin Tin and Asterix
stories will expire, and the characters will be in the public domain,
and anyone will be able to do Tin Tin and Asterix stories, no matter
what Herg? and Uderzo (and their heirs) said?
Of course, these new storries will be unofficial and unauthorised, so
Herg? and Uderzo probably don't care (from their graves). They just
didn't want any new "authorized" stories, I bet...
--
Shad Z.????????????????????? ^Q^
??????????? http://shadz.homestead.com/files/
HONK TO SEE PUPPIES
?????????????????????????????? Sign along US 287, Loveland CO
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> But on the other hand, I do understand why some artists like Herg?
> (Tin Tin) and Uderzo (Asterix) have stated that they don't want their
> characters to take place in new adventures, after their death. Heirs
> tend to screw up the original vision sooner or later, calling it an
> improvement. But often, after a while, this "improvement" all the more
> shows that the original vision wasn't old-fashioned, but *timeless*
> and *timeproof*.
You do know that eventually the copyrights on the Tin Tin and Asterix
stories will expire, and the characters will be in the public domain,
and anyone will be able to do Tin Tin and Asterix stories, no matter
what Herg? and Uderzo (and their heirs) said?
Of course, these new storries will be unofficial and unauthorised, so
Herg? and Uderzo probably don't care (from their graves). They just
didn't want any new "authorized" stories, I bet...
--
Shad Z.????????????????????? ^Q^
??????????? http://shadz.homestead.com/files/
HONK TO SEE PUPPIES
?????????????????????????????? Sign along US 287, Loveland CO
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
Shad Z.
Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
Message 85 -
2004-04-05 at 03:09:40
Subject: Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
>
> My face is also red concerning my too hasty posting concerning Arthur,
> Sherlock Holmes, and the others! This morning, I had a flashback of picking
> up a copy of THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING in high school and seeing that a whole
> wall of the book store practically was devoted to continuations of Arthurian
> legend. I still have some point despite my too hasty posting, though! What
> dissatisfies me about thinking of all of these characters as analogous to
> the ducks is that (outside of the original tales) there is no longer one
> official version. There ARE truly as many Sherlock Holmes as there are
> writers who have attempted to capture his struggles. Frankly, I'm a
> modernist living in a postmodern world, and I don't want there to be an
> endless stream of parallel duck universes! But the world is changing, and I
> 'll try to keep up the best that I can.
When it comes to characters from folklore and legend like King Arthur
and Robin Hood, there NEVER was any original, official version...
--
Shad Z.????????????????????? ^Q^
??????????? http://shadz.homestead.com/files/
HONK TO SEE PUPPIES
?????????????????????????????? Sign along US 287, Loveland CO
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> My face is also red concerning my too hasty posting concerning Arthur,
> Sherlock Holmes, and the others! This morning, I had a flashback of picking
> up a copy of THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING in high school and seeing that a whole
> wall of the book store practically was devoted to continuations of Arthurian
> legend. I still have some point despite my too hasty posting, though! What
> dissatisfies me about thinking of all of these characters as analogous to
> the ducks is that (outside of the original tales) there is no longer one
> official version. There ARE truly as many Sherlock Holmes as there are
> writers who have attempted to capture his struggles. Frankly, I'm a
> modernist living in a postmodern world, and I don't want there to be an
> endless stream of parallel duck universes! But the world is changing, and I
> 'll try to keep up the best that I can.
When it comes to characters from folklore and legend like King Arthur
and Robin Hood, there NEVER was any original, official version...
--
Shad Z.????????????????????? ^Q^
??????????? http://shadz.homestead.com/files/
HONK TO SEE PUPPIES
?????????????????????????????? Sign along US 287, Loveland CO
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
Matthew Williams
Yet More Universe Talk/Reply to Don Rosa
Message 86 -
2004-04-05 at 05:05:03
Shad Z wrote:
>When it comes to characters from folklore and legend like King Arthur
>and Robin Hood, there NEVER was any original, official version...
Let me clarify myself even further (Matt's face is turning an unpleasant
shade of red)! While most of the great legendary characters began from a
loose oral tradition, by the time we reached the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, scholars and publishers had agreed somewhat on what
stories were cannon and what stories weren't. SO there was something of an
official version for a little while. Yes? At any rate, even if you
disagree with me here, your point would prove my earlier point that the
ducks are certainly not analogous to the classic characters of legend.
I swear that this is all very clear in my head, and I am not making up
anything as I go along!
Matt
>When it comes to characters from folklore and legend like King Arthur
>and Robin Hood, there NEVER was any original, official version...
Let me clarify myself even further (Matt's face is turning an unpleasant
shade of red)! While most of the great legendary characters began from a
loose oral tradition, by the time we reached the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, scholars and publishers had agreed somewhat on what
stories were cannon and what stories weren't. SO there was something of an
official version for a little while. Yes? At any rate, even if you
disagree with me here, your point would prove my earlier point that the
ducks are certainly not analogous to the classic characters of legend.
I swear that this is all very clear in my head, and I am not making up
anything as I go along!
Matt
Dan Shane
Point not taken...
Message 87 -
2004-04-05 at 16:39:17
MATT WRITES:
> Let me clarify myself even further (Matt's face is turning an unpleasant
> shade of red)! While most of the great legendary characters began from a
> loose oral tradition, by the time we reached the late nineteenth and early
> twentieth centuries, scholars and publishers had agreed somewhat on what
> stories were cannon and what stories weren't. SO there was something of
> an
> official version for a little while. Yes? At any rate, even if you
> disagree with me here, your point would prove my earlier point that the
> ducks are certainly not analogous to the classic characters of legend.
AND I REPLY:
It may prove the point to you (and that's fine, since the whole topic we're
discussing is purely subjective), but to me it proves just the opposite.
Because classic literary characters are often amalgams of loosely woven oral
traditions, it means that people have taken often disjointed tales and
pieced them together to create a sensible narrative.
How is that different than what Don has done with the pretty much standalone
tales of Barks (and in one case, Strobl) -- flexing and joining the
disparate "facts" (whether "literally" lived by Scrooge or simply "imagined"
by his tale-tale mind) into a cohesive epic? ROBIN HOOD AND HIS MERRY MEN
and LE MORTE D'ARTHUR make for ripping yarns as a whole, but it is easy to
see the seams of the oral tales without looking very hard. And it isn't
difficult for others to pull at those seams to make all new episodes of
"in-between" stories in much the same way Don writes his Episode 10b, etc.
fill-ins.
But as I said above, you're wholly correct to view the Duck timeline
differently. It's YOUR timeline! It's just that it doesn't run parallel to
mine.
Dan
> Let me clarify myself even further (Matt's face is turning an unpleasant
> shade of red)! While most of the great legendary characters began from a
> loose oral tradition, by the time we reached the late nineteenth and early
> twentieth centuries, scholars and publishers had agreed somewhat on what
> stories were cannon and what stories weren't. SO there was something of
> an
> official version for a little while. Yes? At any rate, even if you
> disagree with me here, your point would prove my earlier point that the
> ducks are certainly not analogous to the classic characters of legend.
AND I REPLY:
It may prove the point to you (and that's fine, since the whole topic we're
discussing is purely subjective), but to me it proves just the opposite.
Because classic literary characters are often amalgams of loosely woven oral
traditions, it means that people have taken often disjointed tales and
pieced them together to create a sensible narrative.
How is that different than what Don has done with the pretty much standalone
tales of Barks (and in one case, Strobl) -- flexing and joining the
disparate "facts" (whether "literally" lived by Scrooge or simply "imagined"
by his tale-tale mind) into a cohesive epic? ROBIN HOOD AND HIS MERRY MEN
and LE MORTE D'ARTHUR make for ripping yarns as a whole, but it is easy to
see the seams of the oral tales without looking very hard. And it isn't
difficult for others to pull at those seams to make all new episodes of
"in-between" stories in much the same way Don writes his Episode 10b, etc.
fill-ins.
But as I said above, you're wholly correct to view the Duck timeline
differently. It's YOUR timeline! It's just that it doesn't run parallel to
mine.
Dan
Nat Chrenshaw
Cable cars
Message 88 -
2004-04-05 at 16:39:52
Don Rosa:
< if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960
< Sugar
< Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck
< they
< choose.
Well... =)
Have you checked this website: http://www.virtualtourist.com/vt/16f3ed/4/2fb0/
in the end of the page you can see a small photo of what I think is a station...
Or is it a station?
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
< if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960
< Sugar
< Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck
< they
< choose.
Well... =)
Have you checked this website: http://www.virtualtourist.com/vt/16f3ed/4/2fb0/
in the end of the page you can see a small photo of what I think is a station...
Or is it a station?
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
Nat Chrenshaw
Cable cars
Message 89 -
2004-04-05 at 16:46:40
< a small photo of what I think is a station...
And... well, if you click on it it gets bigger... =)
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
And... well, if you click on it it gets bigger... =)
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
Kai Saarto
Cable cars
Message 90 -
2004-04-05 at 17:08:55
Nat Chrenshaw wrote:
> Don Rosa:
> < if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960
> < Sugar
> < Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck
> < they
> < choose.
>
> Well... =)
> Have you checked this website:
> http://www.virtualtourist.com/vt/16f3ed/4/2fb0/
> in the end of the page you can see a small photo of what I think is a
> station...
> Or is it a station?
If you mean the one taken in 1912, then Don has. Don's agents in Brazil
and at least myself have been roaming around the internet for weeks in
search of this. It seems that its not something that can be found
directly via Google. I wonder if there is a movie that takes place
during late 1950's that would feature the said stations? I've done some
searching on this idea as well, but so far no banana. There's a
documentary film called Rio de Janeiro: City of Splendour (1936) that
might show it, but where could one find it???
**
**
> Don Rosa:
> < if anyone can find me useful pics of pre-1960
> < Sugar
> < Loaf cablecar stations, I'll do them a color drawing of whatever Duck
> < they
> < choose.
>
> Well... =)
> Have you checked this website:
> http://www.virtualtourist.com/vt/16f3ed/4/2fb0/
> in the end of the page you can see a small photo of what I think is a
> station...
> Or is it a station?
If you mean the one taken in 1912, then Don has. Don's agents in Brazil
and at least myself have been roaming around the internet for weeks in
search of this. It seems that its not something that can be found
directly via Google. I wonder if there is a movie that takes place
during late 1950's that would feature the said stations? I've done some
searching on this idea as well, but so far no banana. There's a
documentary film called Rio de Janeiro: City of Splendour (1936) that
might show it, but where could one find it???
**
**