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???
**
**
Author
Topic: 200404
(317 messages)
Kai Saarto
Cable cars
Message 91 -
2004-04-05 at 17:22:42
Daniel J. Neyer
Gemstone Complaints and Compliments
Message 92 -
2004-04-05 at 18:46:02
Gemstone has been putting Disney comics out for quite a while now, and
while I'm glad to see the characters back, I have very mixed feelings
about some of their stories. William Van Horn and Don Rosa ("Forget It!"
was hilarious) have been wonderful, and David Gerstein gave us a great
Wolf story in "The Baddest Day." At first I was afraid that the Egmont
stories were being given complete control of the magazines, but now I'm
glad to see the works of Gil Turner and others being reprinted. I was
also bothered by all the re-reprinted Barks tales ("The Madball Pitcher"
had been done in one of Gladstone's last issues--why was it reprinted
again?), but now they've finally come out with a "new" one, "The Tuckered
Tiger." Hope this is the start of a new trend: I'd also like to see "Case
of the Sticky Money", "The Cattle King", "The Doom Diamond", "The Golden
Nugget Boat", and "The Heedless Horseman." Byron Erickson's Mickey Mouse
birthday stories were brilliant, complete with Gottfredson-style
"mini-climaxes" at the end of each page.
Now for the stuff I haven't liked: Geoffrey Blum's stories have not been
as prominent as I feared, but I have not liked what I've seen of his work
so far and dread his eventual reappearance in Gemstone magazines. The
"I-Team" stories aren't so hot either; someone compared these to the
Little Rascals shorts but that is missing a crucial difference: the
Little Rascals actually went out and had old kid-style adventures. These
new stories center around computers, which prevents them from being real
adventures at all. The nephews enter an Internet soccer competition? What
kind of story is that?
Worst of all are the new Mickey Mouse stories. Except for the
above-mentioned Erickson tales, Gemstone has not printed a worthwhile
Mouse adventure yet. I would almost rather see them stop printing Mickey
stories than carry on with their current stuff. Since the two-fisted,
adventurous Mouse seems to have no place in the current non-violent
comics world, the solution of the writers seems to be to either make
Mickey a Donald-esque bumbler (the Noel Van Horn Blot story, the Lizard
story in WDC&S 643, or "Spider-Mouse") or have him dealing with foes that
prove to be either friendly or non-existent at the end of the story (the
dreadful Secret of the Loch story, the Highland ghost ship story, the
"ghost in the theater" story). In addition, the increasing use of
unexplained "magic" in the Mouse stories is an insult to the readers'
intelligence. For instance: the villain in the painting story last month
explains his incredible magical powers with the toss-off line "my cousin,
a wizard, gave me a magic paint-pot." Excuse me, but since when have
wizards been everyday inhabitants of Mouseton? The supernatural elements
in this story, Secret of the Loch, and other may be called imaginative by
some, but to me it's just an example of laziness on the writers' part.
When they come up with an unbelievable plot twist, they can just say
"It's magic" and not have to explain anything. Joe Torcivia, in the
letter column of WDC&S 643, praises Secret of the Loch for its twist
ending, saying that in the "old days" the Loch monster would have turned
out to be the work of Pete. I only wish it had been Pete's work, since I
definitely prefer the old days.
So, to sum up: More Rosa, more Van Horn, more little-seen Barks. More
Byron Erickson, more vintage Bucky and Zeke Wolf. No more Geoffrey Blum,
no more I-Team, and give us David Gerstein, Romano Scarpa, Paul Murry,
and the shamefully ignored Floyd Gottfredson in the Mouse department
rather than Pat McGreal, Don Markstein, or Noel Van Horn.
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
while I'm glad to see the characters back, I have very mixed feelings
about some of their stories. William Van Horn and Don Rosa ("Forget It!"
was hilarious) have been wonderful, and David Gerstein gave us a great
Wolf story in "The Baddest Day." At first I was afraid that the Egmont
stories were being given complete control of the magazines, but now I'm
glad to see the works of Gil Turner and others being reprinted. I was
also bothered by all the re-reprinted Barks tales ("The Madball Pitcher"
had been done in one of Gladstone's last issues--why was it reprinted
again?), but now they've finally come out with a "new" one, "The Tuckered
Tiger." Hope this is the start of a new trend: I'd also like to see "Case
of the Sticky Money", "The Cattle King", "The Doom Diamond", "The Golden
Nugget Boat", and "The Heedless Horseman." Byron Erickson's Mickey Mouse
birthday stories were brilliant, complete with Gottfredson-style
"mini-climaxes" at the end of each page.
Now for the stuff I haven't liked: Geoffrey Blum's stories have not been
as prominent as I feared, but I have not liked what I've seen of his work
so far and dread his eventual reappearance in Gemstone magazines. The
"I-Team" stories aren't so hot either; someone compared these to the
Little Rascals shorts but that is missing a crucial difference: the
Little Rascals actually went out and had old kid-style adventures. These
new stories center around computers, which prevents them from being real
adventures at all. The nephews enter an Internet soccer competition? What
kind of story is that?
Worst of all are the new Mickey Mouse stories. Except for the
above-mentioned Erickson tales, Gemstone has not printed a worthwhile
Mouse adventure yet. I would almost rather see them stop printing Mickey
stories than carry on with their current stuff. Since the two-fisted,
adventurous Mouse seems to have no place in the current non-violent
comics world, the solution of the writers seems to be to either make
Mickey a Donald-esque bumbler (the Noel Van Horn Blot story, the Lizard
story in WDC&S 643, or "Spider-Mouse") or have him dealing with foes that
prove to be either friendly or non-existent at the end of the story (the
dreadful Secret of the Loch story, the Highland ghost ship story, the
"ghost in the theater" story). In addition, the increasing use of
unexplained "magic" in the Mouse stories is an insult to the readers'
intelligence. For instance: the villain in the painting story last month
explains his incredible magical powers with the toss-off line "my cousin,
a wizard, gave me a magic paint-pot." Excuse me, but since when have
wizards been everyday inhabitants of Mouseton? The supernatural elements
in this story, Secret of the Loch, and other may be called imaginative by
some, but to me it's just an example of laziness on the writers' part.
When they come up with an unbelievable plot twist, they can just say
"It's magic" and not have to explain anything. Joe Torcivia, in the
letter column of WDC&S 643, praises Secret of the Loch for its twist
ending, saying that in the "old days" the Loch monster would have turned
out to be the work of Pete. I only wish it had been Pete's work, since I
definitely prefer the old days.
So, to sum up: More Rosa, more Van Horn, more little-seen Barks. More
Byron Erickson, more vintage Bucky and Zeke Wolf. No more Geoffrey Blum,
no more I-Team, and give us David Gerstein, Romano Scarpa, Paul Murry,
and the shamefully ignored Floyd Gottfredson in the Mouse department
rather than Pat McGreal, Don Markstein, or Noel Van Horn.
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
Kai Saarto
Universes
Message 93 -
2004-04-05 at 19:52:59
I?m commenting some older posts in this thread also, so bear with me or
just skip:
---
[Anders to Daniel:]
>You don't have to skip an issue to avoid reading a certain story, of which
>you recognize the lines - you can just jump over it - that's what i did
>with certain Mickey artists for many years of my youth.
>
Excellent advice. If its mainly stories by Don that bug you Daniel, it
adds up to something like three stories per year, even with an odd
reprint there should be plenty of stories that you actually like and do
not violate your personal duckiverse. I myself skipped almost anything
not by Barks or Murry when I read some annual volumes (reprints) of
1960s Aku Ankka a while ago.
---
Daniel van Eijmeren wrote:
>A Disney comics reader is criticizing your work on an internet forum,
>and you smell a "unknown psychological agenda"??? You must be kidding!
>
>But don't try to isolate me as some kind of "rare individual"!
>
>You sound as if people need to have some hidden motives, in order to
>criticize your work and views. That's simply too much honor for a just
>a few critical emails.
>
I doubt he was simply referring to you. For as long as I've been reading
opinions about various duck-artist. none has been more controversial
than Rosa. Some Barks-fans have not liked the idea of sequels, many
others have loved them.
>> This is what I'm worried about. There are indeed Rosa fans who will use
>> just about every chance to preach about him in a way that reminds me of
>> some fundamentalistic religions.
>
>
Dan Shane responded:
>And there are Rosa non-fans who will not be satisfied to simply read the stories they like and let everyone else make their own choices. Sounds like the American religious right who are not happy believing their interpretation of scripture, or even teaching others with a hearing ear, but insist on legislating their beliefs so that everybody has to live life their way whether they believe it or not.
Well said, Dan. I don't think that any of the (current) ML-members is trying to force Daniel or anyone else to like Don's work. I?d understand his views better if there actually were vocal and fanatic Rosa-fans around in ML - still it would be wrong to direct complaints about fans to Don himself.
---
JOSEPH FARRELL wrote:
>>> I am thoroughly bewildered by this increasingly repetitive
>>> discussion --- enough so to briefly turn off lurker mode!
>>
>>
[... and Daniel van Eijmeren replied]
> Hopefully, most people notice that I'm mostly just patiently
> *replying* whatever is being sent to me. I just think that's a kind
> thing to do.
Let me summarize the events:
-This whole thing started with Andrea writing about "Barks/Rosa -universe of the 1950-53" when talking about Don's work.
-Don corrected him saying its just Rosa-universe, with the intention of NOT offending anyone by claiming his universe was Barks' vision also.
-Daniel then declared that it could never been Don's universe since the character's and whatnot were created by Barks and that "[Daniel] don't find it surprising that a lot of Barks fans feel hurt and are angry at [Rosa] for "raping" Barks's Universe."
-Others started to explain where they think Daniel went too far or had a point.
Bottomline: I think it was Daniel who started the whole thing! Whether his comments to/about Don were patient replies is something for everyone to decide by themselves.
---
Daniel van Ejmeren to Don Rosa:
>As far as I know, Barks NEVER has stated that he intended these dates to
>be put in a *timeline*, not in his stories and not in his interviews/letters.
As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story. But he was already retired when read my first duck-stories. Bummer. I'm glad that finally someone dared to do just that and write new stories about Scrooge's youth that connect to those by Barks. You?re probably absolutely right about Barks not intending these things to be put in a timeline or structuralized in any way. He didn't do it himself. That's fine, it was his choice and his way of working. Rosa made a different choice and that's it. We all must deal with the choices each writer makes. Despite being a brilliant artist/writer Barks is not someone that every writer must follow in this regard.
just skip:
---
[Anders to Daniel:]
>You don't have to skip an issue to avoid reading a certain story, of which
>you recognize the lines - you can just jump over it - that's what i did
>with certain Mickey artists for many years of my youth.
>
Excellent advice. If its mainly stories by Don that bug you Daniel, it
adds up to something like three stories per year, even with an odd
reprint there should be plenty of stories that you actually like and do
not violate your personal duckiverse. I myself skipped almost anything
not by Barks or Murry when I read some annual volumes (reprints) of
1960s Aku Ankka a while ago.
---
Daniel van Eijmeren wrote:
>A Disney comics reader is criticizing your work on an internet forum,
>and you smell a "unknown psychological agenda"??? You must be kidding!
>
>But don't try to isolate me as some kind of "rare individual"!
>
>You sound as if people need to have some hidden motives, in order to
>criticize your work and views. That's simply too much honor for a just
>a few critical emails.
>
I doubt he was simply referring to you. For as long as I've been reading
opinions about various duck-artist. none has been more controversial
than Rosa. Some Barks-fans have not liked the idea of sequels, many
others have loved them.
>> This is what I'm worried about. There are indeed Rosa fans who will use
>> just about every chance to preach about him in a way that reminds me of
>> some fundamentalistic religions.
>
>
Dan Shane responded:
>And there are Rosa non-fans who will not be satisfied to simply read the stories they like and let everyone else make their own choices. Sounds like the American religious right who are not happy believing their interpretation of scripture, or even teaching others with a hearing ear, but insist on legislating their beliefs so that everybody has to live life their way whether they believe it or not.
Well said, Dan. I don't think that any of the (current) ML-members is trying to force Daniel or anyone else to like Don's work. I?d understand his views better if there actually were vocal and fanatic Rosa-fans around in ML - still it would be wrong to direct complaints about fans to Don himself.
---
JOSEPH FARRELL wrote:
>>> I am thoroughly bewildered by this increasingly repetitive
>>> discussion --- enough so to briefly turn off lurker mode!
>>
>>
[... and Daniel van Eijmeren replied]
> Hopefully, most people notice that I'm mostly just patiently
> *replying* whatever is being sent to me. I just think that's a kind
> thing to do.
Let me summarize the events:
-This whole thing started with Andrea writing about "Barks/Rosa -universe of the 1950-53" when talking about Don's work.
-Don corrected him saying its just Rosa-universe, with the intention of NOT offending anyone by claiming his universe was Barks' vision also.
-Daniel then declared that it could never been Don's universe since the character's and whatnot were created by Barks and that "[Daniel] don't find it surprising that a lot of Barks fans feel hurt and are angry at [Rosa] for "raping" Barks's Universe."
-Others started to explain where they think Daniel went too far or had a point.
Bottomline: I think it was Daniel who started the whole thing! Whether his comments to/about Don were patient replies is something for everyone to decide by themselves.
---
Daniel van Ejmeren to Don Rosa:
>As far as I know, Barks NEVER has stated that he intended these dates to
>be put in a *timeline*, not in his stories and not in his interviews/letters.
As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story. But he was already retired when read my first duck-stories. Bummer. I'm glad that finally someone dared to do just that and write new stories about Scrooge's youth that connect to those by Barks. You?re probably absolutely right about Barks not intending these things to be put in a timeline or structuralized in any way. He didn't do it himself. That's fine, it was his choice and his way of working. Rosa made a different choice and that's it. We all must deal with the choices each writer makes. Despite being a brilliant artist/writer Barks is not someone that every writer must follow in this regard.
SRoweCanoe
Universes
Message 94 -
2004-04-05 at 20:11:53
In a message dated 4/5/2004 1:04:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ksaarto at mbnet.fi writes:
<<You?re probably absolutely right about Barks not intending these things to
be put in a timeline or structuralized in any way. He didn't do it himself.
That's fine, it was his choice and his way of working. Rosa made a different
choice and that's it>>
well, what was Bark's reaction when Jack Chalker wrote his biography of Uncle
Scrooge? (which is far as I know was the first structured timeline)
of course Barks did do a Duck family tree, right?
ksaarto at mbnet.fi writes:
<<You?re probably absolutely right about Barks not intending these things to
be put in a timeline or structuralized in any way. He didn't do it himself.
That's fine, it was his choice and his way of working. Rosa made a different
choice and that's it>>
well, what was Bark's reaction when Jack Chalker wrote his biography of Uncle
Scrooge? (which is far as I know was the first structured timeline)
of course Barks did do a Duck family tree, right?
Kai Saarto
Gemstone Complaints and Compliments
Message 95 -
2004-04-05 at 20:18:16
Daniel J. Neyer wrote:
>Byron Erickson's Mickey Mouse birthday stories were brilliant, complete with Gottfredson-style
>"mini-climaxes" at the end of each page.
>
Unfortunately, I can't currently afford to order Gemstone magazines
overseas. Still, I can chime in to say that Byron Erickson has written
absolutely marvelous Mickey stories. And when he teams up with
Ferioli... wow! Its at least on par with Gottfreddson and Murry in my
book. I hope Byron will write a lot more. Its thanks to him that can I
enjoy Mickey-stories once again.
>Byron Erickson's Mickey Mouse birthday stories were brilliant, complete with Gottfredson-style
>"mini-climaxes" at the end of each page.
>
Unfortunately, I can't currently afford to order Gemstone magazines
overseas. Still, I can chime in to say that Byron Erickson has written
absolutely marvelous Mickey stories. And when he teams up with
Ferioli... wow! Its at least on par with Gottfreddson and Murry in my
book. I hope Byron will write a lot more. Its thanks to him that can I
enjoy Mickey-stories once again.
Søren Krarup Olesen
Gemstone Complaints and Compliments
Message 96 -
2004-04-05 at 20:22:35
Hey Daniel J. Neyer,
I *did* in fact read the paragraphs before this but...
> So, to sum up: More Rosa, more Van Horn, more little-seen Barks. More
> Byron Erickson, more vintage Bucky and Zeke Wolf. No more Geoffrey
> Blum, no more I-Team, and give us David Gerstein, Romano Scarpa, Paul
> Murry, and the shamefully ignored Floyd Gottfredson in the Mouse
> department rather than Pat McGreal, Don Markstein, or Noel Van Horn.
Smiling and giggling a bit on this conclusion... Funny reading indeed.
What I like most is your unlimited opinion of liking this and not liking
that. If Dani?l (and ol' timer Sigvald) had the same opportunities, this
DCML mailing list would be much richer in terms of expressing views that
were or were not popular.
In fact I don't disagree much on your points of view, with a few
exceptions (and those are all in MHO):
1) William van Horn is highly over-estimated. The plots are boring and
too much Barks wannabe, and the drawings are (sigh) plain amateurish.
You'll find faces which doesn't match the size of the bodies of the
ducks, eyeballs not looking in the right direction and more (Don Rosa,
despite his minor inability to draw ducks is very superior to that of
William's!)
2) Noel is brilliant. Especially his Goofy is excellent--reminds me of
early Bottaro or something.
3) The Pat McGreal and wife have made great stories for many years, and
I certainly hope they'll continue to do so. They are extremely
productive so of course there are stories which you don't like so much,
but still...
All for now,
S?ren
I *did* in fact read the paragraphs before this but...
> So, to sum up: More Rosa, more Van Horn, more little-seen Barks. More
> Byron Erickson, more vintage Bucky and Zeke Wolf. No more Geoffrey
> Blum, no more I-Team, and give us David Gerstein, Romano Scarpa, Paul
> Murry, and the shamefully ignored Floyd Gottfredson in the Mouse
> department rather than Pat McGreal, Don Markstein, or Noel Van Horn.
Smiling and giggling a bit on this conclusion... Funny reading indeed.
What I like most is your unlimited opinion of liking this and not liking
that. If Dani?l (and ol' timer Sigvald) had the same opportunities, this
DCML mailing list would be much richer in terms of expressing views that
were or were not popular.
In fact I don't disagree much on your points of view, with a few
exceptions (and those are all in MHO):
1) William van Horn is highly over-estimated. The plots are boring and
too much Barks wannabe, and the drawings are (sigh) plain amateurish.
You'll find faces which doesn't match the size of the bodies of the
ducks, eyeballs not looking in the right direction and more (Don Rosa,
despite his minor inability to draw ducks is very superior to that of
William's!)
2) Noel is brilliant. Especially his Goofy is excellent--reminds me of
early Bottaro or something.
3) The Pat McGreal and wife have made great stories for many years, and
I certainly hope they'll continue to do so. They are extremely
productive so of course there are stories which you don't like so much,
but still...
All for now,
S?ren
Kai Saarto
Universes
Message 97 -
2004-04-05 at 20:27:30
SRoweCanoe at aol.com wrote:
>well, what was Bark's reaction when Jack Chalker wrote his biography of Uncle
>Scrooge? (which is far as I know was the first structured timeline)
>
I had forgotten about it. I'd like to hear what he did think about it.
Can you summarize?
>well, what was Bark's reaction when Jack Chalker wrote his biography of Uncle
>Scrooge? (which is far as I know was the first structured timeline)
>
I had forgotten about it. I'd like to hear what he did think about it.
Can you summarize?
Nat Chrenshaw
Cable cars
Message 98 -
2004-04-05 at 20:46:53
Kai Saarto wrote:
< 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.
Ok, if that picture didn't work, it makes everything a bit harder, BUT,
I am having a lot of fun searching for this stuff... but what kind of pictures?
Does it have to be from the specific years of the 40's or 50's?
What about this, kind of "official" website: http://www.bondinho.com.br/galeria.htm where it seems to be some old pictures (and the history of the cabel cars...)?
But I mean, if some people searched the internet for this, they should have found this website too, right?
But, what to look for?
If they had just shot Moonraker just a couple of years earlier...
At least I already know a lot more about Rio de Janeiro and Sugarloaf Mountain, than I did before... =)
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
< 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.
Ok, if that picture didn't work, it makes everything a bit harder, BUT,
I am having a lot of fun searching for this stuff... but what kind of pictures?
Does it have to be from the specific years of the 40's or 50's?
What about this, kind of "official" website: http://www.bondinho.com.br/galeria.htm where it seems to be some old pictures (and the history of the cabel cars...)?
But I mean, if some people searched the internet for this, they should have found this website too, right?
But, what to look for?
If they had just shot Moonraker just a couple of years earlier...
At least I already know a lot more about Rio de Janeiro and Sugarloaf Mountain, than I did before... =)
H?strusk och gr? moln - k?p en resa till solen p? Yahoo! Resor
Don Rosa
DCML Digest Issue 13
Message 99 -
2004-04-05 at 21:07:48
> From: Nat Chrenshaw <natchrenshaw at yahoo.se>
> Subject: Cable cars
> Have you checked this website:
Well, I didn't expect these messages to be sent through the ML where they
will get in the way -- you can send me such help privately.
But I'll publicly make a few details clearer:
Please don't suggest websites for me to search. You can't imagine the hours
I and others have already spent doing just that. As I said, my time for
research is up -- what I'm trying to "bribe" someone to do, if they wish, is
find a photo and send me that single perfect photo.
Now, what izzit exactly that I need?
I need a close up view of the fronts of either or both of the Sugar Loaf
cablecar stations, the side where the passengers enter, at the bottom and at
the top of the run. Note -- there is a intermediate station on a rock
partway up the route where passengers change cars -- I can't use that. The
date of the photo must be prior to 1960 as I know that the stations were
rebuilt by then... I have distant, unusable pics from 1954 and 1960, and I
can see the buildings in each shot are totally different. The old building
style is square, like the old cars; the modern building has lotsa 45 degree
angles, matching the modern cars. I don't think the pic can be too old, not
like 1910, as I believe the stations were also rebuilt maybe around 1915-20.
Now... please don't search for this unless you have LOTS of spare time.
First, I don't think you'll find anything. Second, the views have to be so
ideal to be of use to me that after all your work I might say that it won't
do. Obviously, it must be a photo that's just right for my use, not just any
photo.
But if anyone enjoys a potentially futile challenge, have at it.
But consider: I've had a person actually IN Rio searching for such pics for
months, and he can't get anywhere. Sure, I could find it if I had the time
(and the fat $ advance!) that a novelist has for research, but I can only
spend a few extra weeks of my own time on this stuff, time I take to please
myself but which is unpaid labor, hacking away at my page-rate, and then I
gotta go with what I got, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
> Subject: Cable cars
> Have you checked this website:
Well, I didn't expect these messages to be sent through the ML where they
will get in the way -- you can send me such help privately.
But I'll publicly make a few details clearer:
Please don't suggest websites for me to search. You can't imagine the hours
I and others have already spent doing just that. As I said, my time for
research is up -- what I'm trying to "bribe" someone to do, if they wish, is
find a photo and send me that single perfect photo.
Now, what izzit exactly that I need?
I need a close up view of the fronts of either or both of the Sugar Loaf
cablecar stations, the side where the passengers enter, at the bottom and at
the top of the run. Note -- there is a intermediate station on a rock
partway up the route where passengers change cars -- I can't use that. The
date of the photo must be prior to 1960 as I know that the stations were
rebuilt by then... I have distant, unusable pics from 1954 and 1960, and I
can see the buildings in each shot are totally different. The old building
style is square, like the old cars; the modern building has lotsa 45 degree
angles, matching the modern cars. I don't think the pic can be too old, not
like 1910, as I believe the stations were also rebuilt maybe around 1915-20.
Now... please don't search for this unless you have LOTS of spare time.
First, I don't think you'll find anything. Second, the views have to be so
ideal to be of use to me that after all your work I might say that it won't
do. Obviously, it must be a photo that's just right for my use, not just any
photo.
But if anyone enjoys a potentially futile challenge, have at it.
But consider: I've had a person actually IN Rio searching for such pics for
months, and he can't get anywhere. Sure, I could find it if I had the time
(and the fat $ advance!) that a novelist has for research, but I can only
spend a few extra weeks of my own time on this stuff, time I take to please
myself but which is unpaid labor, hacking away at my page-rate, and then I
gotta go with what I got, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Universes
Message 100 -
2004-04-05 at 21:23:08
KAI SAARTO, 05-04-2004:
> Let me summarize the events: [...]
> Bottomline: I think it was Daniel who started the whole thing!
Is it important to know whether or not I "started the whole thing"?
Even my initial message was a reply to what has been sent to me.
But if even if you insist to think that I did start the discussion,
it wouldn't make any difference to the *opinion* I've tried to share.
Let's just discuss Disney comics and artists, instead of all this
personal bickering about who started what.
--- Dani?l
"Now EVERYBODY'S mad at me! What'll I do? What'll I do?"
(Which Barks story?) :-)
Hint #1: nephews go to summer camp
> Let me summarize the events: [...]
> Bottomline: I think it was Daniel who started the whole thing!
Is it important to know whether or not I "started the whole thing"?
Even my initial message was a reply to what has been sent to me.
But if even if you insist to think that I did start the discussion,
it wouldn't make any difference to the *opinion* I've tried to share.
Let's just discuss Disney comics and artists, instead of all this
personal bickering about who started what.
--- Dani?l
"Now EVERYBODY'S mad at me! What'll I do? What'll I do?"
(Which Barks story?) :-)
Hint #1: nephews go to summer camp
Elon Brisola
Cable cars
Message 101 -
2004-04-05 at 21:23:20
I know Don and others have been researching this for a while, but... Did you
check this site, by any chance?
http://www.bondinho.com.br
It's the cable car company official site. It didn't do anything when I
clicked on the "English" button, but when I chose "Portuguese", then "Galeria de
Fotos", it showed several pictures from various years, including pre-1960.
There is also a postcard gallery here:
http://www.bondinho.com.br/historia/histpostais.html
Elon in Campinas, Brazil
--
+++ NEU bei GMX und erstmalig in Deutschland: T?V-gepr?fter Virenschutz +++
100% Virenerkennung nach Wildlist. Infos: http://www.gmx.net/virenschutz
check this site, by any chance?
http://www.bondinho.com.br
It's the cable car company official site. It didn't do anything when I
clicked on the "English" button, but when I chose "Portuguese", then "Galeria de
Fotos", it showed several pictures from various years, including pre-1960.
There is also a postcard gallery here:
http://www.bondinho.com.br/historia/histpostais.html
Elon in Campinas, Brazil
--
+++ NEU bei GMX und erstmalig in Deutschland: T?V-gepr?fter Virenschutz +++
100% Virenerkennung nach Wildlist. Infos: http://www.gmx.net/virenschutz
Søren Krarup Olesen
Universes
Message 102 -
2004-04-05 at 21:42:21
KAI + STEVEN:
> As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in
> chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I
> wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story.
Perhaps this is where we differ so much. I've never wanted or wished for
anything like that to be written by Barks or anyone else.
I don't wish to know the unquestionable secrets behind the behaviour of
Scrooge's. I don't want an accalaimed "truth" of his life, where people
afterwards can postulate that this is right and that is wrong. Some
years ago I posted that "History is unpredictable" and I stick to that
as far as Disney comics is concerned.
Don Rosa keeps sending us messages about him being innocent, since he
only posed the idea(s), and that he is not responsible of his
backslappers' opinions. This is okay of course. Yet, little mice like
Steven keeps popping up, fully equipped in armour and ready for full
defense. Hey, grow up kids!
This is about Disney comics and not only about praising Don Rosa (which
is okay to a certain extent). I am not the one to "protect" DCML from
such things to happen, but sometimes things get a bit "angular" here...
Keep reading.
S?ren
> As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in
> chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I
> wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story.
Perhaps this is where we differ so much. I've never wanted or wished for
anything like that to be written by Barks or anyone else.
I don't wish to know the unquestionable secrets behind the behaviour of
Scrooge's. I don't want an accalaimed "truth" of his life, where people
afterwards can postulate that this is right and that is wrong. Some
years ago I posted that "History is unpredictable" and I stick to that
as far as Disney comics is concerned.
Don Rosa keeps sending us messages about him being innocent, since he
only posed the idea(s), and that he is not responsible of his
backslappers' opinions. This is okay of course. Yet, little mice like
Steven keeps popping up, fully equipped in armour and ready for full
defense. Hey, grow up kids!
This is about Disney comics and not only about praising Don Rosa (which
is okay to a certain extent). I am not the one to "protect" DCML from
such things to happen, but sometimes things get a bit "angular" here...
Keep reading.
S?ren
Klartekst
Rosa's own li'l Universe
Message 103 -
2004-04-05 at 22:33:36
Kai Saarto wrote:
<I wonder why some people just can?t embrace the fact that
there
are as many duck-universes that there are creators?>
I believe there are as many duck universes as there are
READERS. The duck universes are inside our heads and we each
choose what we put into them. Although I don't accept all
Don's premises, most of his stories adds a little bit to my
own version of Duckburg, making it richer and more detailed.
Nils Smeby
<I wonder why some people just can?t embrace the fact that
there
are as many duck-universes that there are creators?>
I believe there are as many duck universes as there are
READERS. The duck universes are inside our heads and we each
choose what we put into them. Although I don't accept all
Don's premises, most of his stories adds a little bit to my
own version of Duckburg, making it richer and more detailed.
Nils Smeby
Mark A. Semich
Rosa stories in Gemstone books?
Message 104 -
2004-04-05 at 22:45:33
People here keep talking about "Dream of a Lifetime" and other Rosa Scrooge
stories that I haven't read. Maybe even some tale about the philosopher's
stone? (I can't be sure, since there are so many messages that they all
blur together if I try to read too many at once.)
But - Have these stories been printed by Gemstone yet? Either my mind is
completely going and I've forgotten that I've read them, or I've somehow
missed some of the issues that have come out since the re-launch.
Help!
stories that I haven't read. Maybe even some tale about the philosopher's
stone? (I can't be sure, since there are so many messages that they all
blur together if I try to read too many at once.)
But - Have these stories been printed by Gemstone yet? Either my mind is
completely going and I've forgotten that I've read them, or I've somehow
missed some of the issues that have come out since the re-launch.
Help!
Kai Saarto
Universes and Barks
Message 105 -
2004-04-05 at 23:27:44
S?ren Krarup Olesen wrote:
> KAI + STEVEN:
>
>> As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in
>> chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I
>> wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story.
>
>
> Perhaps this is where we differ so much. I've never wanted or wished for
> anything like that to be written by Barks or anyone else.
I guess you are after something here. Perhaps this "inner craving" for
order in things is one of the main reasons why some people like Rosa so
much. And the very reason why some don't like this aspect of his stories.
> Don Rosa keeps sending us messages about him being innocent, since he
> only posed the idea(s), and that he is not responsible of his
> backslappers' opinions. This is okay of course. Yet, little mice like
> Steven keeps popping up, fully equipped in armour and ready for full
> defense. Hey, grow up kids!
Steven a mouse? A you referring to mr. Rowe? Now I am baffled, he said
hardly anything on the subject. Growing up might be good for many of us,
but not too much. Some might think that reading comics is childish!
> This is about Disney comics and not only about praising Don Rosa (which
> is okay to a certain extent). I am not the one to "protect" DCML from
> such things to happen, but sometimes things get a bit "angular" here...
This makes me think about something. Has anyone EVER done here anything
else but praised Barks? Everyone else seems to get some criticism here
from time to time. Is he so big he's untouchable? I am not about to say
that he is not the best ever, but it just hit me that everyone on the
planet seems to love him. No controversiality there. After reading some
interviews in Donald Ault?s book I got the feeling he was perhaps not
the sweetest man ever alive in his personal life (but no worse than the
next guy) - but his work is just so great that it is hard to say
anything bad about it. What sayest thou?
> KAI + STEVEN:
>
>> As a kid I always wanted to read about Scrooge's youth in
>> chronological order. I wanted there to be some kind of structure. I
>> wanted Barks to do one and hoped that there was this one big story.
>
>
> Perhaps this is where we differ so much. I've never wanted or wished for
> anything like that to be written by Barks or anyone else.
I guess you are after something here. Perhaps this "inner craving" for
order in things is one of the main reasons why some people like Rosa so
much. And the very reason why some don't like this aspect of his stories.
> Don Rosa keeps sending us messages about him being innocent, since he
> only posed the idea(s), and that he is not responsible of his
> backslappers' opinions. This is okay of course. Yet, little mice like
> Steven keeps popping up, fully equipped in armour and ready for full
> defense. Hey, grow up kids!
Steven a mouse? A you referring to mr. Rowe? Now I am baffled, he said
hardly anything on the subject. Growing up might be good for many of us,
but not too much. Some might think that reading comics is childish!
> This is about Disney comics and not only about praising Don Rosa (which
> is okay to a certain extent). I am not the one to "protect" DCML from
> such things to happen, but sometimes things get a bit "angular" here...
This makes me think about something. Has anyone EVER done here anything
else but praised Barks? Everyone else seems to get some criticism here
from time to time. Is he so big he's untouchable? I am not about to say
that he is not the best ever, but it just hit me that everyone on the
planet seems to love him. No controversiality there. After reading some
interviews in Donald Ault?s book I got the feeling he was perhaps not
the sweetest man ever alive in his personal life (but no worse than the
next guy) - but his work is just so great that it is hard to say
anything bad about it. What sayest thou?