Dollars to donuts it's "Mickey Mouse Sails for Treasure Island" and it's sort-of sequel "In Search of Jungle Treasure".
When it comes to early censures, from what I understand t's usually *ALWAYS* those two.
Jonathan H. Gray
From: bangfish at cableone.net
Subject: Gottfredson
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:42:18 -0700
To: dcml at nafsk.se
Olivier,
The blurb says "This multi-volume collection brings together the majority of Gottfredson's works".:\Does this mean the restrictions still apply?:(
I haven't seen a definitive rundown on the contents of the Gottfredson books, so I can't speak to what will finally be in them. It is my understanding, though, that there are restrictions on some of the earliest strips, due to their content.Disney does have great enthusiasm for this project, and wants to see it happen. From what I gather, and for what it's worth, they're as disappointed as we are that there are some strips they just can't see their way to allowing to be reproduced.Gary
Author
Topic: 200711
(74 messages)
Jonathan H. Gray
Gottfredson
Message 31 -
2007-11-13 at 18:31:50
Olivier (M&D)
Gottfredson
Message 32 -
2007-11-13 at 20:57:12
Gary:
>>>> It is my understanding, though, that there are restrictions
>>>> on some of the earliest strips, due to their content.
>>>> Disney does have great enthusiasm for this project,
>>>> and wants to see it happen. From what I gather,
>>>> and for what it's worth, they're as disappointed as we are
>>>> that there are some strips they just can't see their way
>>>> to allowing to be reproduced.
:(
I almost wrote "how come they can allow 'contrversial' animated shorts to be released on DVD, but cannot allow similar strips to be reprinted?", but then, I suppose the print & video media are two very separate branches.
The release of those animated features, with Leonard Maltin's introductions, was extremeley improtant in itself, and because it meant the same could be done with the strips (with special notes).
It's a terrible shame.
Even though there *wre* stereotypes, they never served a racist ideology.
The Company's policy on this subject is rather incoherent, anyway: "The Phantom Blot" can be reprinted, even though one might also argue that the stereotype of the Irish police officers is incorrect, especially as they are shown to be incompetent. Will the stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?
Aren't they aware that this can only foster the illegal distribution of scans of those stories?
Moreover, even though the art was altered in some stories, all of Barks' stories have been published, including the only two rejected ones (Donald the milkman and the delightful "Silent Night").
The adventures set in stereotypical Africa have been reprinted several times; will the Disney Company ban them now and prohibit their reprinting in comics or a new Barks Library, or will they make an exception for Barks?
This is most unfair to Gottfredson.
One might also argue that the Disney Company is actually perpetuating the very stereotypical superiority of Whites over Blacks by preventing the latter to read stories they would find offending because they are not cultivated or intelligent enough to understand the context and see they are often pretty harmless.
Olivier
>>>> It is my understanding, though, that there are restrictions
>>>> on some of the earliest strips, due to their content.
>>>> Disney does have great enthusiasm for this project,
>>>> and wants to see it happen. From what I gather,
>>>> and for what it's worth, they're as disappointed as we are
>>>> that there are some strips they just can't see their way
>>>> to allowing to be reproduced.
:(
I almost wrote "how come they can allow 'contrversial' animated shorts to be released on DVD, but cannot allow similar strips to be reprinted?", but then, I suppose the print & video media are two very separate branches.
The release of those animated features, with Leonard Maltin's introductions, was extremeley improtant in itself, and because it meant the same could be done with the strips (with special notes).
It's a terrible shame.
Even though there *wre* stereotypes, they never served a racist ideology.
The Company's policy on this subject is rather incoherent, anyway: "The Phantom Blot" can be reprinted, even though one might also argue that the stereotype of the Irish police officers is incorrect, especially as they are shown to be incompetent. Will the stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?
Aren't they aware that this can only foster the illegal distribution of scans of those stories?
Moreover, even though the art was altered in some stories, all of Barks' stories have been published, including the only two rejected ones (Donald the milkman and the delightful "Silent Night").
The adventures set in stereotypical Africa have been reprinted several times; will the Disney Company ban them now and prohibit their reprinting in comics or a new Barks Library, or will they make an exception for Barks?
This is most unfair to Gottfredson.
One might also argue that the Disney Company is actually perpetuating the very stereotypical superiority of Whites over Blacks by preventing the latter to read stories they would find offending because they are not cultivated or intelligent enough to understand the context and see they are often pretty harmless.
Olivier
Jerryblake2
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 33 -
2007-11-14 at 16:27:32
"Even though there *wre* stereotypes, they never served a racist ideology.
The Company's policy on this subject is rather incoherent, anyway: "The Phantom Blot" can be reprinted, even though one might also argue that the stereotype of the Irish police officers is incorrect, especially as they are shown to be incompetent. Will the stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue of a minor fruit vendor character.
The Company's policy on this subject is rather incoherent, anyway: "The Phantom Blot" can be reprinted, even though one might also argue that the stereotype of the Irish police officers is incorrect, especially as they are shown to be incompetent. Will the stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue of a minor fruit vendor character.
Francesco Spreafico
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 34 -
2007-11-14 at 16:56:37
jerryblake2 at juno.com wrote:
> Will the
> stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
>
> Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> of a minor fruit vendor character.
As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
Francesco
> Will the
> stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
>
> Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> of a minor fruit vendor character.
As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
Francesco
Olivier (M&D)
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 35 -
2007-11-14 at 17:22:02
(Jerry)
>>>>> Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
>>>>> OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
>>>>> dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
>>>>> of a minor fruit vendor character.
Thanks for this precision, Jerry!
(Francesco)
>> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
>> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't
>> it?
Come to think of it, I have never felt offended by the few French
stereotypes in the comics either, to the point of never having given a
thought to it-- mostly in Rosa's stories, and most notably Arpin Lus?ne.
Actually, the only thing I regret is that the mispronunciation is not quite
correctly mispronounced, it--a few things should be transcribed a bit
differently to correspond to what a non-English speaking Frenchman might say
it (but this might also be to make it easier to read for native English
speakers English).
Olivier
>>>>> Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
>>>>> OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
>>>>> dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
>>>>> of a minor fruit vendor character.
Thanks for this precision, Jerry!
(Francesco)
>> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
>> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't
>> it?
Come to think of it, I have never felt offended by the few French
stereotypes in the comics either, to the point of never having given a
thought to it-- mostly in Rosa's stories, and most notably Arpin Lus?ne.
Actually, the only thing I regret is that the mispronunciation is not quite
correctly mispronounced, it--a few things should be transcribed a bit
differently to correspond to what a non-English speaking Frenchman might say
it (but this might also be to make it easier to read for native English
speakers English).
Olivier
Stefan Persson
The Pied Piper of Duckburg
Message 36 -
2007-11-14 at 18:57:03
Today I received my copy of the latest issue of the Swedish Donald Duck
weekly, issue 47 from 2007, containing a Jippes version of The Pied Piper
of Duckburg, and I noticed that it's quite different from Rosa's version.
Barks sketches only tell what is supposed to happen on the first three
pages, so Rosa and Jippes had to come up with the rest of the story
themselves.
The first three pages are mostly the same in both versions, but I found
some differences:
* On page 1, Rosa drew the money bin much closer to Barks' original
sketches, with no grass between the money bin and the street. Jippes, on
the other hand, added a large lawn around the money bin, and drew it more
like the normal money bin, although not on top of a hill. In Jippes
version, it is on the other hand located on top of a hill on a later page
in the story, which looks a little inconsistent.
* On page 2, Gyro's electronic question answerer tells Gyro to blow up a
bridge in Barks' original sketches. In the Rosa version, this was kept,
but in the Jippes version, the answerer tells Gyro to open the bridge
instead. This difference also resulted in quite different bridge designs
in the two versions.
* On page 3, the different money bin designs are shown once again. The
lamp outside of Gyro's laboratory looks different in the two versions,
with Rosa's lamp being closer to the original Barks sketches. There are
also some other minor differences, although nothing important.
* Page 4 and on are completely different, with a completely different plot
in each version. Another difference is the page count: Rosa drew 8 pages,
while Jippes drew 9.
All in all, it was interesting to see this story in a new interpretation.
Stefan
weekly, issue 47 from 2007, containing a Jippes version of The Pied Piper
of Duckburg, and I noticed that it's quite different from Rosa's version.
Barks sketches only tell what is supposed to happen on the first three
pages, so Rosa and Jippes had to come up with the rest of the story
themselves.
The first three pages are mostly the same in both versions, but I found
some differences:
* On page 1, Rosa drew the money bin much closer to Barks' original
sketches, with no grass between the money bin and the street. Jippes, on
the other hand, added a large lawn around the money bin, and drew it more
like the normal money bin, although not on top of a hill. In Jippes
version, it is on the other hand located on top of a hill on a later page
in the story, which looks a little inconsistent.
* On page 2, Gyro's electronic question answerer tells Gyro to blow up a
bridge in Barks' original sketches. In the Rosa version, this was kept,
but in the Jippes version, the answerer tells Gyro to open the bridge
instead. This difference also resulted in quite different bridge designs
in the two versions.
* On page 3, the different money bin designs are shown once again. The
lamp outside of Gyro's laboratory looks different in the two versions,
with Rosa's lamp being closer to the original Barks sketches. There are
also some other minor differences, although nothing important.
* Page 4 and on are completely different, with a completely different plot
in each version. Another difference is the page count: Rosa drew 8 pages,
while Jippes drew 9.
All in all, it was interesting to see this story in a new interpretation.
Stefan
Jonathan H. Gray
Follow-Up Gemstone thoughts
Message 37 -
2007-11-16 at 20:58:40
To beat a dead horse for a second: Going back to the 3-three
panel discussion, I don't think I can make it any clearer than Dean and
Oliver have.
I think that "The River of
Time, Pts. 1 and 2" are a perfect example of a 3 panel story NOT by
Scarpa/Cavazzano that shocked the heck out of everybody because it was
just so amazingly well done in a sea of bleah. What did you think of "Cloned Again"?
Before reading it i was a bit leery, but after reading it I found
myself liking it quite a lot (I think that this might be because I am
very partial to Massimo Fecchi now and wouldn't mind more of his work depending on the quality of the story). The same goes for
"Quacked Quest" in WDC&S (which was honestly hilarious since I've
encountered creepy LARPer types like that). According to David,
"Brother" and "Cloned" were meant for U$ and not the pocketbooks anyway
and I can see why. "Cloned" won't win any Eisner awards but it was a
fun story. "Brother" is moot given it's Cavazzano and we haven't
gotten a bad story from him yet. Fecchi's stuff seems to be pretty
quality among the Egmont 3 panels but - I've said before that I
think his artwork is awesome - I think that has a lot to do with
the writing as well. There have been Fecchi stories with beautiful art and some mediocre writing.
In this regard, story selection is paramount. Pretty
artwork wasted on a craptacular story is annoying. Pretty artwork that
enhances a great story is even better. Terrible artwork on a lousy
story is just plain idiotic. Sadly, we seem to have gotten more of the 3rd than the 2nd option in many cases. =\
The only time I wince upon seeing a 3 panel story is if it's by anybody
other than Scarpa, Cavazzano, or Fecchi (for the latter I wince
depending on who the writer is). Horrible art is one thing, but
horrible scripting is the pits. I thought about it - and
Gemstone has very subtly taken care of one thing that bugged me ever
since the implosion of the main line into prestiges. If you think
about it, things are a little better than they used to be. What I mean is this:
Take
the non-pres Uncle
Scrooge VS Uncle Scrooge Adventures. At the inception of the prestiges
we
often got many mediocre short stories with a few good ones. Given
the price of paper and such I figure that if U$A were still going and
U$ were not prestige we'd be paying roughly 2.95 or a bit over for the
books. The prestiges currently costs what - $7.50? As of right now,
you're paying roughly
the same thing for the prestige that you'd be paying for two "cheaper"
books. However, the key to getting your money's worth is content.
Nowadays, Gemstone usually prints at least 1 long story (to cover the
"Adventures" bit) and reserves shorter stories for the latter portions
of the book. Occasionally we'll get two long stories, but less and less
have we gotten books with all short stories and nothing else outside of
WDC&S. This is a good thing. Gemstone has
been doing this under the radar for a while now and I like it because
if the prestiges
were filled with nothing but short stories I'd kind of feel as if they
were a
waste of my time. But at least 1 or 2 long stories is really no
different content wise than when we had the short U$ and U$A books. Its
just that now they are condensed into one. So what does that have to do
with the 3-panel discussion?
Well - I look at "Cloned"
specifically. Cloned was meant for U$ but its a long Scrooge story,
something that (back in the day) would have been a perfect fit for U$A. What
makes it different from "Quacked Quest" and "Jean Therapy" - both
printed in WDC&S? Both of those are Donald Duck stories and there
is no Donald Duck prestige. Because of this there is nothing to cover
both short DD stories and longer stories that would have been perfect
for the old school "Donald Duck Adventures". The only place to put
them is WDC&S - which ruins the variety
aspect of the series (hence the annoying "duck overload" thats
been coined as of late).
Now
if we got a M&D monthly prestige or a Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse
alternating
bimonthly - which I think may actually be a better idea to continuing
the
classic numbering - both could be in the vein of how U$ is now. A long
story to lead, short stories to follow. WDC&S could revert back to
how it was without the ducks and mice pushing out the wolves, rabbits,
chipmunks, and pups and we could get long and short stories in the
"main" books. Furthermore, I would limit any Egmont 3 panels in the
main books to an
absolute minimum. They just aren't that good: stuff like "Cloned" is
the exception, stuff like "Ring Thrice" is the clincher. And in terms
of Mickey Mouse the same thing applies: The Byron Erickson stories are
always gold, but much of the other stuff was just kinda meh. Anything
like the
pocketbook Bancells stories are just what Gemstone needs to avoid.
I would say TNT is the only big
exception (and thats not just because David had a hand in creating
them). TNT is kind of a like Duck Avenger - a subseries in the main
comic universe. The only place they could really go now is in a Donald
prestige and I wouldn't mind seeing them continue there if that comes
to fruition. Flemming Andersen kind of reminds me of Ben Verhagen in
the sense that his style is so incredibly wonky and takes some getting
used to, but its solid and consistent. Far more so than the generic
Egmont artist which is why I kinda like it.
Dean nailed it, the generic Egmont
3-panel stories get bad reps because they feel dumbed
down. Longer stories should have a grander plot to tell, not something
that could be done in 10 pages or padded out to feel like a bad Marvel
Comics trade. Furthermore, theres nothing wrong with making things a
bit more modern in small doses, but when you do it at the expense of
characters, story, or concepts this is where problems arise. This was
one of many spectacular failures associated with the early Disney run
and their often askew take on Mickey Mouse.
Concerning
trades, I'd
rather see large trade paperbacks over seasonal specials. The content
feels more special in that sense. EX: The Treasures series, the
Ducktales trades, Life of Scrooge, etc. Gemstone could use the trade
opportunity to branch out and print a lot more quality stuff rather
than "the usual
fluff" we'd see in the main books in seasonal specials. I dunno...I
wouldn't cut out the Christmas or maybe Vacation Parades, but...I think
I'm apt to buy trades first before I buy those. It's a tough call. Even
though its not my favorite story, I am looking forward to "Scrooge's
Quest" and "The Gold Odyssey" just because they're something different
and I fully support seeing things we don't often get. Hell, if we could
do it I'd go so far as to eventually request a trade of "The King of
Beasts Caper" or a reprint of "For the Love of Cheese" from the old
Rescue Rangers series. Don't laugh: they were darn good stories, and
the first would definately make for a far better collected trade than
Scrooge's Quest IMO (it'd also be a nice compliment to the Ducktales
trades though I am not so sure I would go far as to reprint its more
lackluster followup "Coast to Coast"). Not all the Disney produced
stories were bad. It just depends on context...Anyway, this is wildly
off topic.
Concerning something Oliver said: I do miss the articles and ESPECIALLY
the profiles. It's nice attatching a face to a name. I'd love one on
Marco Rota or Cesar Ferioli or the Mcgreals or even Cosme Quartieri
since his stuff is seeing print a little more via the Ducktales stuff.
I think the reasoning for cutting the articles out was perhaps a bit of
overload on them and also Gemstone needs the extra room for story or
two - which I do not mind in the least bit. I noticed that after Bruce
Hamilton passed, the "Year That Was" series quietly faded away, so I'm
guessing that was probably a pet project of his, though I can't be sure.
Despite the fact that I do not like these 3 panel
stories near as much as the 4 panel stories, I bought each and every issue of
Donald Duck Adventures and Mickey Mouse Adventures. Moreover, I would
*still* gladly be buying these titles if they were still being printed and I
would have bought the B/W collections if they had ever materialized.
You're a good
one. I'm a grad student on a budget, so I made sure whichever ones I
bought had stories that I was really interested in. Anything that fell
in the opposite category is sitting by the wayside until I can be
bothered to pick it up (thus going back to the previous argument). =\
I'm sure the comics would be more endurably
appealing to casual readers if you tried to return to the kind of stories
Gladstone used to run, rather than print such new stories, believing that their
being contemporary (cell phones, computers, future world biker Mickey, ...)
makes them more alluring. The truly good stories are never
outdated.
True, but remember also: Endless
reprints are NOT a good thing. This was one of *many* problems with
Gold Key and especially Gladstone Series 2 to an extent. After a while,
seeing the same old Barks stories every other month that we JUST saw in
an album or a trade or who knows what else becomes more of a chore and
repetetive annoyance than anything else. This is not to downplay the
mans talent but I would rather see something we DON'T often get like
the later Barks stories or something new, than seeing "Back to the
Klondike" or "Only a Poor Old Man" reprinted for the umptee three
millionth time.
Naturally, I'm still much in favor of a new
Barks Library, a Gottfredson Library, a Taliaferro Library, especially if
they are done like the E.C. Archives; I'll repeat my previous mesages on the
subject: these are the most splendid book I have; the quality of the
paper, the binding, the printing, and the coloring, is outstanding; each page is
gorgeous.
I want a Gottfredson library first more than anything and a Taliaferro
library to follow on down the line. But - while I don't want it NOW - a
hardcover Barks color library is long overdue. Especially now that we
(sadly) have a definative beginning and ending from "Pirate Gold" all
the way down to "Somewhere in Nowhere". The Albums were nice, but color
hardcovers would sell like hotcakes.
In fact,
Jonathan, did you ever consider doing some comic book work? :)
I would love to eventually draw and write my own Mickey Mouse stories.
I have so many ideas and so many things I'd love to do if I could ever
get the chance to do them. Perhaps I'll post some Mickey work after I
get some new model sheets created just for opinions sake. Its something
of a small dream of mine that may not be too far off, but who knows.
Maybe with time, patience, and a little luck... Right now I am
freelancing for Gemstone doing some dialogue work while I am in
graduate school. Its not my own stories and art, but its a start,
right? :)
I did "By Twilight's Bite" in the final Gemstone MMA book, and the
more recent "Great Gawrsh-Durn Champion" in WDC&S 681. There's one
more Scarpa that hasn't been printed yet as well as an Uncle Scrooge
story that I am currently working on and will have turned in hopefully
by the weekend. Prior to Gemstone I had done several issues of Sonic
the Hedgehog for Archie (art only). It was my first professional job in
the industry so looking back on things - its a bit amatuerish, but I am
very proud of what I did there. I like to think that its somewhat solid
for a first outing, even though all I see are the errors (I guess us
artists are temperamental like that). Even Carl Barks and Floyd
Gottfredson had to cut thier chops and hone thier skills before "Pirate
Gold" and "Death Valley" came along... **sigh**
It's depressing for me, but maybe someday... XD
Jonathan H. Gray
panel discussion, I don't think I can make it any clearer than Dean and
Oliver have.
I think that "The River of
Time, Pts. 1 and 2" are a perfect example of a 3 panel story NOT by
Scarpa/Cavazzano that shocked the heck out of everybody because it was
just so amazingly well done in a sea of bleah. What did you think of "Cloned Again"?
Before reading it i was a bit leery, but after reading it I found
myself liking it quite a lot (I think that this might be because I am
very partial to Massimo Fecchi now and wouldn't mind more of his work depending on the quality of the story). The same goes for
"Quacked Quest" in WDC&S (which was honestly hilarious since I've
encountered creepy LARPer types like that). According to David,
"Brother" and "Cloned" were meant for U$ and not the pocketbooks anyway
and I can see why. "Cloned" won't win any Eisner awards but it was a
fun story. "Brother" is moot given it's Cavazzano and we haven't
gotten a bad story from him yet. Fecchi's stuff seems to be pretty
quality among the Egmont 3 panels but - I've said before that I
think his artwork is awesome - I think that has a lot to do with
the writing as well. There have been Fecchi stories with beautiful art and some mediocre writing.
In this regard, story selection is paramount. Pretty
artwork wasted on a craptacular story is annoying. Pretty artwork that
enhances a great story is even better. Terrible artwork on a lousy
story is just plain idiotic. Sadly, we seem to have gotten more of the 3rd than the 2nd option in many cases. =\
The only time I wince upon seeing a 3 panel story is if it's by anybody
other than Scarpa, Cavazzano, or Fecchi (for the latter I wince
depending on who the writer is). Horrible art is one thing, but
horrible scripting is the pits. I thought about it - and
Gemstone has very subtly taken care of one thing that bugged me ever
since the implosion of the main line into prestiges. If you think
about it, things are a little better than they used to be. What I mean is this:
Take
the non-pres Uncle
Scrooge VS Uncle Scrooge Adventures. At the inception of the prestiges
we
often got many mediocre short stories with a few good ones. Given
the price of paper and such I figure that if U$A were still going and
U$ were not prestige we'd be paying roughly 2.95 or a bit over for the
books. The prestiges currently costs what - $7.50? As of right now,
you're paying roughly
the same thing for the prestige that you'd be paying for two "cheaper"
books. However, the key to getting your money's worth is content.
Nowadays, Gemstone usually prints at least 1 long story (to cover the
"Adventures" bit) and reserves shorter stories for the latter portions
of the book. Occasionally we'll get two long stories, but less and less
have we gotten books with all short stories and nothing else outside of
WDC&S. This is a good thing. Gemstone has
been doing this under the radar for a while now and I like it because
if the prestiges
were filled with nothing but short stories I'd kind of feel as if they
were a
waste of my time. But at least 1 or 2 long stories is really no
different content wise than when we had the short U$ and U$A books. Its
just that now they are condensed into one. So what does that have to do
with the 3-panel discussion?
Well - I look at "Cloned"
specifically. Cloned was meant for U$ but its a long Scrooge story,
something that (back in the day) would have been a perfect fit for U$A. What
makes it different from "Quacked Quest" and "Jean Therapy" - both
printed in WDC&S? Both of those are Donald Duck stories and there
is no Donald Duck prestige. Because of this there is nothing to cover
both short DD stories and longer stories that would have been perfect
for the old school "Donald Duck Adventures". The only place to put
them is WDC&S - which ruins the variety
aspect of the series (hence the annoying "duck overload" thats
been coined as of late).
Now
if we got a M&D monthly prestige or a Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse
alternating
bimonthly - which I think may actually be a better idea to continuing
the
classic numbering - both could be in the vein of how U$ is now. A long
story to lead, short stories to follow. WDC&S could revert back to
how it was without the ducks and mice pushing out the wolves, rabbits,
chipmunks, and pups and we could get long and short stories in the
"main" books. Furthermore, I would limit any Egmont 3 panels in the
main books to an
absolute minimum. They just aren't that good: stuff like "Cloned" is
the exception, stuff like "Ring Thrice" is the clincher. And in terms
of Mickey Mouse the same thing applies: The Byron Erickson stories are
always gold, but much of the other stuff was just kinda meh. Anything
like the
pocketbook Bancells stories are just what Gemstone needs to avoid.
I would say TNT is the only big
exception (and thats not just because David had a hand in creating
them). TNT is kind of a like Duck Avenger - a subseries in the main
comic universe. The only place they could really go now is in a Donald
prestige and I wouldn't mind seeing them continue there if that comes
to fruition. Flemming Andersen kind of reminds me of Ben Verhagen in
the sense that his style is so incredibly wonky and takes some getting
used to, but its solid and consistent. Far more so than the generic
Egmont artist which is why I kinda like it.
Dean nailed it, the generic Egmont
3-panel stories get bad reps because they feel dumbed
down. Longer stories should have a grander plot to tell, not something
that could be done in 10 pages or padded out to feel like a bad Marvel
Comics trade. Furthermore, theres nothing wrong with making things a
bit more modern in small doses, but when you do it at the expense of
characters, story, or concepts this is where problems arise. This was
one of many spectacular failures associated with the early Disney run
and their often askew take on Mickey Mouse.
Concerning
trades, I'd
rather see large trade paperbacks over seasonal specials. The content
feels more special in that sense. EX: The Treasures series, the
Ducktales trades, Life of Scrooge, etc. Gemstone could use the trade
opportunity to branch out and print a lot more quality stuff rather
than "the usual
fluff" we'd see in the main books in seasonal specials. I dunno...I
wouldn't cut out the Christmas or maybe Vacation Parades, but...I think
I'm apt to buy trades first before I buy those. It's a tough call. Even
though its not my favorite story, I am looking forward to "Scrooge's
Quest" and "The Gold Odyssey" just because they're something different
and I fully support seeing things we don't often get. Hell, if we could
do it I'd go so far as to eventually request a trade of "The King of
Beasts Caper" or a reprint of "For the Love of Cheese" from the old
Rescue Rangers series. Don't laugh: they were darn good stories, and
the first would definately make for a far better collected trade than
Scrooge's Quest IMO (it'd also be a nice compliment to the Ducktales
trades though I am not so sure I would go far as to reprint its more
lackluster followup "Coast to Coast"). Not all the Disney produced
stories were bad. It just depends on context...Anyway, this is wildly
off topic.
Concerning something Oliver said: I do miss the articles and ESPECIALLY
the profiles. It's nice attatching a face to a name. I'd love one on
Marco Rota or Cesar Ferioli or the Mcgreals or even Cosme Quartieri
since his stuff is seeing print a little more via the Ducktales stuff.
I think the reasoning for cutting the articles out was perhaps a bit of
overload on them and also Gemstone needs the extra room for story or
two - which I do not mind in the least bit. I noticed that after Bruce
Hamilton passed, the "Year That Was" series quietly faded away, so I'm
guessing that was probably a pet project of his, though I can't be sure.
Despite the fact that I do not like these 3 panel
stories near as much as the 4 panel stories, I bought each and every issue of
Donald Duck Adventures and Mickey Mouse Adventures. Moreover, I would
*still* gladly be buying these titles if they were still being printed and I
would have bought the B/W collections if they had ever materialized.
You're a good
one. I'm a grad student on a budget, so I made sure whichever ones I
bought had stories that I was really interested in. Anything that fell
in the opposite category is sitting by the wayside until I can be
bothered to pick it up (thus going back to the previous argument). =\
I'm sure the comics would be more endurably
appealing to casual readers if you tried to return to the kind of stories
Gladstone used to run, rather than print such new stories, believing that their
being contemporary (cell phones, computers, future world biker Mickey, ...)
makes them more alluring. The truly good stories are never
outdated.
True, but remember also: Endless
reprints are NOT a good thing. This was one of *many* problems with
Gold Key and especially Gladstone Series 2 to an extent. After a while,
seeing the same old Barks stories every other month that we JUST saw in
an album or a trade or who knows what else becomes more of a chore and
repetetive annoyance than anything else. This is not to downplay the
mans talent but I would rather see something we DON'T often get like
the later Barks stories or something new, than seeing "Back to the
Klondike" or "Only a Poor Old Man" reprinted for the umptee three
millionth time.
Naturally, I'm still much in favor of a new
Barks Library, a Gottfredson Library, a Taliaferro Library, especially if
they are done like the E.C. Archives; I'll repeat my previous mesages on the
subject: these are the most splendid book I have; the quality of the
paper, the binding, the printing, and the coloring, is outstanding; each page is
gorgeous.
I want a Gottfredson library first more than anything and a Taliaferro
library to follow on down the line. But - while I don't want it NOW - a
hardcover Barks color library is long overdue. Especially now that we
(sadly) have a definative beginning and ending from "Pirate Gold" all
the way down to "Somewhere in Nowhere". The Albums were nice, but color
hardcovers would sell like hotcakes.
In fact,
Jonathan, did you ever consider doing some comic book work? :)
I would love to eventually draw and write my own Mickey Mouse stories.
I have so many ideas and so many things I'd love to do if I could ever
get the chance to do them. Perhaps I'll post some Mickey work after I
get some new model sheets created just for opinions sake. Its something
of a small dream of mine that may not be too far off, but who knows.
Maybe with time, patience, and a little luck... Right now I am
freelancing for Gemstone doing some dialogue work while I am in
graduate school. Its not my own stories and art, but its a start,
right? :)
I did "By Twilight's Bite" in the final Gemstone MMA book, and the
more recent "Great Gawrsh-Durn Champion" in WDC&S 681. There's one
more Scarpa that hasn't been printed yet as well as an Uncle Scrooge
story that I am currently working on and will have turned in hopefully
by the weekend. Prior to Gemstone I had done several issues of Sonic
the Hedgehog for Archie (art only). It was my first professional job in
the industry so looking back on things - its a bit amatuerish, but I am
very proud of what I did there. I like to think that its somewhat solid
for a first outing, even though all I see are the errors (I guess us
artists are temperamental like that). Even Carl Barks and Floyd
Gottfredson had to cut thier chops and hone thier skills before "Pirate
Gold" and "Death Valley" came along... **sigh**
It's depressing for me, but maybe someday... XD
Jonathan H. Gray
Olivier (M&D)
Follow-Up Gemstone thoughts
Message 38 -
2007-11-16 at 21:39:07
Jonathan, quoting me:
>>>> I'm sure the comics would be more endurably appealing to casual readers
>>>> if you tried to return to the kind of stories Gladstone used to run,
>>>> rather than print such new stories, believing that their being contemporary
>>>> (cell phones, computers, future world biker Mickey, ...)
>>>> makes them more alluring. The truly good stories are never outdated.
Jonathan's reply:
>>>> True, but remember also: Endless reprints are NOT a good thing.
Oh no, I didn't mean reprints. I was referring to the *kind* of stories I said I liked, produced by Gutenbergus.
Incidentally, I also preferred Vicar's style at that time.
Is there some sort of rule, or is it just a trend, that many artist (well, too many to my taste) "roundify" the Ducks that much? It's hard to explain, but toughly, the idea is that the beak's corner ir a round bubbly thing; Cavazzano is doing that, Vicar is doing it in his own way (whereas his style was more model sheet, like so many Gutenberghus artists), others are doing it.
Do they think it's "cute" (and less "agressive" than "angles")?
Olivier
>>>> I'm sure the comics would be more endurably appealing to casual readers
>>>> if you tried to return to the kind of stories Gladstone used to run,
>>>> rather than print such new stories, believing that their being contemporary
>>>> (cell phones, computers, future world biker Mickey, ...)
>>>> makes them more alluring. The truly good stories are never outdated.
Jonathan's reply:
>>>> True, but remember also: Endless reprints are NOT a good thing.
Oh no, I didn't mean reprints. I was referring to the *kind* of stories I said I liked, produced by Gutenbergus.
Incidentally, I also preferred Vicar's style at that time.
Is there some sort of rule, or is it just a trend, that many artist (well, too many to my taste) "roundify" the Ducks that much? It's hard to explain, but toughly, the idea is that the beak's corner ir a round bubbly thing; Cavazzano is doing that, Vicar is doing it in his own way (whereas his style was more model sheet, like so many Gutenberghus artists), others are doing it.
Do they think it's "cute" (and less "agressive" than "angles")?
Olivier
Jonathan H. Gray
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 39 -
2007-11-16 at 22:32:03
> From: francesco.spreafico at gmail.com
> To: dcml at nafsk.se
> Subject: Re: Floyd Gottfredson Library
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:56:37 +0100
>
> jerryblake2 at juno.com wrote:
>
> > Will the
> > stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> > dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
> >
> > Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> > OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> > dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> > of a minor fruit vendor character.
>
> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
>
> Francesco
I'd feel remiss if I didn't add to this conversation somehow.
I'm a black guy who grew up in the deep south. To put it in context, my Grandfather of 92 years was raised on one of the last surviving cotton plantations in the south where his mother and father were sharecroppers. When I was five years old my first encounter with racism was in the first grade when a little boy alerted to the class that his grandfather informed him that black people were "white people who had done terrible things and were shoved into ovens to be marked for the rest of their lives." The grandfather had most likely said this to scare the little kid into not acting bad, but considering I was 6 years old, clearly stupid in the ways of the world, and one of only 3 or 4 black kids in the class at the time - I went home to my Grandmother crying my eyes out trying to figure out what it was that we'd done wrong. Naturally, when my mother came to pick me up from my grandparents house after work, this did not go over well with the school board and the PTA. :P
Surprisingly, even after that, racism does not vex me as much as it does others, because I've come to understanding that it is the product of incredibly stupid and ignorant people who don't seem to possess even 1/4 of an iota of a brain. As someone who's goal in life is to do cartoons and comic books, I even understand the context behind the different times that many of the pieces in question were created for - Let's use the most well known "banned" Looney Tunes short "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs" for example. I knew this friend who was also in animation and also black that took offense at even the slightest thing like that. I could see where said person was coming from in this day and age where we are supposed to be past that, but i also explained that the context was totally different as well. Even if its a well animated cartoon that relies on heavily cloyed stereotypes to get its point across, in the context of a historical perspective its symbolic for the story behind it. Besides that, it isn't half as bad as many cartoons that were FAAAAAAAAAAAR worse in thier portrayal of lazy, shiftless, jive talking blacks like "Scrub Me Mama With A Boogie Beat" which even I thought was out of control. :P
Like I said, it takes a lot for something to bother me - and while I may get annoyed at things - I do understand the context and what they mean, and I don't fly off the handle at every thing that may bug me. I usually just shrug and brush it off or - because I'm a nerd like that - ingest it with rabid fervor and interest to try and find out more.
Having said that, a long time ago I managed to get my my hands on some selected scanned pages of Treasure Island - significant for being the first appearance of Captain Churchmouse and Spooks the Gorilla. It's a pretty good serial as far as early Mickey serials go. I don't remember how or where I got it from or what i did with it (I think it was an old print from a guy who owned a comic book store and collected old stuff like that), but I remember seeing it and being visibly shocked at the depiction of the savages who were like something out of a bad caricature of savages from a mediocre Tarzan movie. I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I can see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER get away with printing this today." It also doesn't help much that - if I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's Suicide Attempt" subset of strips. The lips on some of the savages are so big that they practically droop and hang unkemptly off of their faces. It's a good story as is its sequel, but its one of those where even with a discalaimer before it, it's kind of sadly got that "Wow..I can't believe they did that!" stigma attached to it. I've heard rumors that the follow-up story, featuring Pete and Squinch instead of Pete and Shyster, is just as bad in those respects. And the same would also probably go for "The Great Orphanage Robbery" which spends the entire first third of the story with Mickey and co. in blackface re-doing key scenes from "Uncle Tom's Cabin": good stories that unfortunately fall prey to the sadly bigoted backgrounds of thier times. =\
Don't get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's censorship. I detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned from seeing the far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during Gladstone Series 2?) On the other hand though, I can see the dilemma that the guys who DO WANT this stuff printed in context are facing: Given that a disclaimer just won't cut it for the hardcore unnecessarily prudish types, do you run the risk of not printing 1 or 2 stories in what was supposed to be a full collection or jeopardize the entire shebang by risking the ire of the censors and depriving the fandom further of something they've been begging for for years? And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you are allowed to print it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally redrawn? That, in and of itself mars the idea of the collection to begin with - especially when nearly an entire story would need "redrawing" and not just a few panels. If getting an almost complete Gottfredson library means taking option 2 over option 1, I wouldn't necessarily like it, but I wouldn't balk at it either given the option of not having it at all or having it censored for stuff FAR less harmless than this. =\
if now is the best time for Gemstone to do this with minimal damage, I say go for it. Furthermore, for every "me" that DOES understand the historical context and significance behind it and doesn't really care, you also have the "opportunists" and or "stupidly offended at everything types" that feel it is their job to sanitize society whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows that its always the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else. I say take the Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done for the cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't reached that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us JUST TO GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
At least we're getting some form of a Gottfredson library, even if its not truly complete. Heck, it won't be until a 3rd Barks library that we even get anything complete from him.
Food for thought. =\"
> To: dcml at nafsk.se
> Subject: Re: Floyd Gottfredson Library
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:56:37 +0100
>
> jerryblake2 at juno.com wrote:
>
> > Will the
> > stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> > dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
> >
> > Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> > OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> > dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> > of a minor fruit vendor character.
>
> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
>
> Francesco
I'd feel remiss if I didn't add to this conversation somehow.
I'm a black guy who grew up in the deep south. To put it in context, my Grandfather of 92 years was raised on one of the last surviving cotton plantations in the south where his mother and father were sharecroppers. When I was five years old my first encounter with racism was in the first grade when a little boy alerted to the class that his grandfather informed him that black people were "white people who had done terrible things and were shoved into ovens to be marked for the rest of their lives." The grandfather had most likely said this to scare the little kid into not acting bad, but considering I was 6 years old, clearly stupid in the ways of the world, and one of only 3 or 4 black kids in the class at the time - I went home to my Grandmother crying my eyes out trying to figure out what it was that we'd done wrong. Naturally, when my mother came to pick me up from my grandparents house after work, this did not go over well with the school board and the PTA. :P
Surprisingly, even after that, racism does not vex me as much as it does others, because I've come to understanding that it is the product of incredibly stupid and ignorant people who don't seem to possess even 1/4 of an iota of a brain. As someone who's goal in life is to do cartoons and comic books, I even understand the context behind the different times that many of the pieces in question were created for - Let's use the most well known "banned" Looney Tunes short "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs" for example. I knew this friend who was also in animation and also black that took offense at even the slightest thing like that. I could see where said person was coming from in this day and age where we are supposed to be past that, but i also explained that the context was totally different as well. Even if its a well animated cartoon that relies on heavily cloyed stereotypes to get its point across, in the context of a historical perspective its symbolic for the story behind it. Besides that, it isn't half as bad as many cartoons that were FAAAAAAAAAAAR worse in thier portrayal of lazy, shiftless, jive talking blacks like "Scrub Me Mama With A Boogie Beat" which even I thought was out of control. :P
Like I said, it takes a lot for something to bother me - and while I may get annoyed at things - I do understand the context and what they mean, and I don't fly off the handle at every thing that may bug me. I usually just shrug and brush it off or - because I'm a nerd like that - ingest it with rabid fervor and interest to try and find out more.
Having said that, a long time ago I managed to get my my hands on some selected scanned pages of Treasure Island - significant for being the first appearance of Captain Churchmouse and Spooks the Gorilla. It's a pretty good serial as far as early Mickey serials go. I don't remember how or where I got it from or what i did with it (I think it was an old print from a guy who owned a comic book store and collected old stuff like that), but I remember seeing it and being visibly shocked at the depiction of the savages who were like something out of a bad caricature of savages from a mediocre Tarzan movie. I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I can see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER get away with printing this today." It also doesn't help much that - if I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's Suicide Attempt" subset of strips. The lips on some of the savages are so big that they practically droop and hang unkemptly off of their faces. It's a good story as is its sequel, but its one of those where even with a discalaimer before it, it's kind of sadly got that "Wow..I can't believe they did that!" stigma attached to it. I've heard rumors that the follow-up story, featuring Pete and Squinch instead of Pete and Shyster, is just as bad in those respects. And the same would also probably go for "The Great Orphanage Robbery" which spends the entire first third of the story with Mickey and co. in blackface re-doing key scenes from "Uncle Tom's Cabin": good stories that unfortunately fall prey to the sadly bigoted backgrounds of thier times. =\
Don't get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's censorship. I detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned from seeing the far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during Gladstone Series 2?) On the other hand though, I can see the dilemma that the guys who DO WANT this stuff printed in context are facing: Given that a disclaimer just won't cut it for the hardcore unnecessarily prudish types, do you run the risk of not printing 1 or 2 stories in what was supposed to be a full collection or jeopardize the entire shebang by risking the ire of the censors and depriving the fandom further of something they've been begging for for years? And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you are allowed to print it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally redrawn? That, in and of itself mars the idea of the collection to begin with - especially when nearly an entire story would need "redrawing" and not just a few panels. If getting an almost complete Gottfredson library means taking option 2 over option 1, I wouldn't necessarily like it, but I wouldn't balk at it either given the option of not having it at all or having it censored for stuff FAR less harmless than this. =\
if now is the best time for Gemstone to do this with minimal damage, I say go for it. Furthermore, for every "me" that DOES understand the historical context and significance behind it and doesn't really care, you also have the "opportunists" and or "stupidly offended at everything types" that feel it is their job to sanitize society whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows that its always the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else. I say take the Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done for the cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't reached that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us JUST TO GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
At least we're getting some form of a Gottfredson library, even if its not truly complete. Heck, it won't be until a 3rd Barks library that we even get anything complete from him.
Food for thought. =\"
Francesco Spreafico
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 40 -
2007-11-16 at 23:30:27
Jonathan H. Gray wrote:
> I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I can
> see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER
> get away with printing this today."
We used to think that in the Eighties... I was thinking, and hoping, that
now times were a little more mature, that people could actually use their
brain when reading this stuff... like you or I do!
> It also doesn't help much that -
> if I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's
> Suicide Attempt" subset of strips.
The one suggested by Disney himself, by the way... it can't get any more
"Disney-ish" than that! 8-)
> Don't get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's
> censorship. I detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned
> from seeing the far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during
> Gladstone Series 2?) On the other hand though, I can see the dilemma
> that the guys who DO WANT this stuff printed in context are facing:
> Given that a disclaimer just won't cut it for the hardcore
> unnecessarily prudish types, do you run the risk of not printing 1 or
> 2 stories in what was supposed to be a full collection or jeopardize
> the entire shebang by risking the ire of the censors and depriving
> the fandom further of something they've been begging for for years?
But what would the risk be? Let's assume somebody protests... let's assume
it becomes big in the news (and we're assuming a lot here!), what would it
do besides boosting the sales?
Okay, this might be a very practical poing of view that "Disney" wouldn't
consider because comics for them are completely insignificant, economically
speaking, and so they would stop the series anyway.
Then why not just start from, say, 1934 and print the 1930-1933 *last*? That
way the series would be complete, definitive e there could be no stopping it
at all by Disney, since it'd be already over.
> And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you are allowed to print
> it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally redrawn?
That would be the same. Actually I think it would even be worse!
Redrawing... terrible!
> if now is the best time for Gemstone to do this with minimal damage,
> I say go for it.
But if there is censorship involved it means that now is not. Probably the
time are not as ripe as I thought they were... apparently we're still in the
Eighties!
> Furthermore, for every "me" that DOES understand the
> historical context and significance behind it and doesn't really
> care, you also have the "opportunists" and or "stupidly offended at
> everything types" that feel it is their job to sanitize society
> whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows that its always
> the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else.
But consider that sales will be considerably lower this way. When all the
people I've told about this reprint who were very exited about it found out
about the censorship, they said "No thank you". Me, I'm buying it anyway
'cause I'm a sucker for these things, but most people, who would have,
won't.
> Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done for the
> cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't reached
> that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us JUST TO
> GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
But that's the point, isn't it? These are "just comics". As a friend of mine
said about this, people would be horrified if this were about censoring any
other art, but these are just comics, who cares? (I'm not talking about you,
nor Gemstone, of course!)
Best,
Francesco
> I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I can
> see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER
> get away with printing this today."
We used to think that in the Eighties... I was thinking, and hoping, that
now times were a little more mature, that people could actually use their
brain when reading this stuff... like you or I do!
> It also doesn't help much that -
> if I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's
> Suicide Attempt" subset of strips.
The one suggested by Disney himself, by the way... it can't get any more
"Disney-ish" than that! 8-)
> Don't get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's
> censorship. I detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned
> from seeing the far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during
> Gladstone Series 2?) On the other hand though, I can see the dilemma
> that the guys who DO WANT this stuff printed in context are facing:
> Given that a disclaimer just won't cut it for the hardcore
> unnecessarily prudish types, do you run the risk of not printing 1 or
> 2 stories in what was supposed to be a full collection or jeopardize
> the entire shebang by risking the ire of the censors and depriving
> the fandom further of something they've been begging for for years?
But what would the risk be? Let's assume somebody protests... let's assume
it becomes big in the news (and we're assuming a lot here!), what would it
do besides boosting the sales?
Okay, this might be a very practical poing of view that "Disney" wouldn't
consider because comics for them are completely insignificant, economically
speaking, and so they would stop the series anyway.
Then why not just start from, say, 1934 and print the 1930-1933 *last*? That
way the series would be complete, definitive e there could be no stopping it
at all by Disney, since it'd be already over.
> And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you are allowed to print
> it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally redrawn?
That would be the same. Actually I think it would even be worse!
Redrawing... terrible!
> if now is the best time for Gemstone to do this with minimal damage,
> I say go for it.
But if there is censorship involved it means that now is not. Probably the
time are not as ripe as I thought they were... apparently we're still in the
Eighties!
> Furthermore, for every "me" that DOES understand the
> historical context and significance behind it and doesn't really
> care, you also have the "opportunists" and or "stupidly offended at
> everything types" that feel it is their job to sanitize society
> whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows that its always
> the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else.
But consider that sales will be considerably lower this way. When all the
people I've told about this reprint who were very exited about it found out
about the censorship, they said "No thank you". Me, I'm buying it anyway
'cause I'm a sucker for these things, but most people, who would have,
won't.
> Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done for the
> cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't reached
> that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us JUST TO
> GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
But that's the point, isn't it? These are "just comics". As a friend of mine
said about this, people would be horrified if this were about censoring any
other art, but these are just comics, who cares? (I'm not talking about you,
nor Gemstone, of course!)
Best,
Francesco
Olivier (M&D)
Floyd Gottfredson Library
Message 41 -
2007-11-17 at 00:11:51
Thank you very much, Jonathan, for a most interesting personal experience
and viewpoint.
As I said clearly, I would naturally prefer to have a reprint the original
strips, with a several forewords, as on the DVDs-- and indeed, as I should
have recalled sooner, as is the case in Gemstone's own (splendid) "Disney
Treasures" book, which features a page by David Gerstein on this subject: "A
Closer Look at 'The Money Mint' and 'Race to the South Seas'". As a matter
of fact, David used two panels from "In Search of Jungle Treasure" to make
a point on Gottfredson's undermining of the stereotype (p 34):
"Old-time Disney comics invoke ethnic and regional stereotypes-- even as
they mock Western culture for its faith in those stereotypes. In this
example from 'In Search of Jungle Treasure' (1937-- not included in this
volume), Goofy bears the brunt of the joke for his presumption that rural
Africans should be uneducated."
(Goofy is stunned: "Fur Gawsh sakes! Imagine them natives understandin' a
foreign language like that! I thought they was *ignorant*!")
Like the DVDs, this note by David made me hope for the best.
I am quite aware that the decision is easier to make in our shoes than in
that of the people actually in charge, and Gemstone certainly is not to
blame.
David & Gary, if it's not too indiscrete: what was the Company's reaction to
David's note?
Did they read submissions for more such essays that could introduce comic
strips?
Like Francesco, I don't think I will boycott this, because I know Gemstone
will do the best job of printing it and, as I said in my previous message,
we surely are a minority compared to the millions who will buy the books and
not be aware of anything missing.
On the other hand, I have never bought a compressed audio-only download-only
release of any film score, because I want uncompressed audio; in this
specialized, niche market, the opinion of many like me did make a
difference, and one small publisher increased the bitrate, then decided to
switch from download-only to download and physical CD releases.
Here, though, I doubt we can make a difference.
The only hope, then, would be a special (official) "Forbidden Disney"
collection, but that would be even riskier a move on Disney's part.
It's a terrible thing, really.
Even a redrawn reprint would be better, with sample panels and explanations.
I think it would be a huge step, that might lead later by the complete and
unadulterated anthology we want.
Olivier
and viewpoint.
As I said clearly, I would naturally prefer to have a reprint the original
strips, with a several forewords, as on the DVDs-- and indeed, as I should
have recalled sooner, as is the case in Gemstone's own (splendid) "Disney
Treasures" book, which features a page by David Gerstein on this subject: "A
Closer Look at 'The Money Mint' and 'Race to the South Seas'". As a matter
of fact, David used two panels from "In Search of Jungle Treasure" to make
a point on Gottfredson's undermining of the stereotype (p 34):
"Old-time Disney comics invoke ethnic and regional stereotypes-- even as
they mock Western culture for its faith in those stereotypes. In this
example from 'In Search of Jungle Treasure' (1937-- not included in this
volume), Goofy bears the brunt of the joke for his presumption that rural
Africans should be uneducated."
(Goofy is stunned: "Fur Gawsh sakes! Imagine them natives understandin' a
foreign language like that! I thought they was *ignorant*!")
Like the DVDs, this note by David made me hope for the best.
I am quite aware that the decision is easier to make in our shoes than in
that of the people actually in charge, and Gemstone certainly is not to
blame.
David & Gary, if it's not too indiscrete: what was the Company's reaction to
David's note?
Did they read submissions for more such essays that could introduce comic
strips?
Like Francesco, I don't think I will boycott this, because I know Gemstone
will do the best job of printing it and, as I said in my previous message,
we surely are a minority compared to the millions who will buy the books and
not be aware of anything missing.
On the other hand, I have never bought a compressed audio-only download-only
release of any film score, because I want uncompressed audio; in this
specialized, niche market, the opinion of many like me did make a
difference, and one small publisher increased the bitrate, then decided to
switch from download-only to download and physical CD releases.
Here, though, I doubt we can make a difference.
The only hope, then, would be a special (official) "Forbidden Disney"
collection, but that would be even riskier a move on Disney's part.
It's a terrible thing, really.
Even a redrawn reprint would be better, with sample panels and explanations.
I think it would be a huge step, that might lead later by the complete and
unadulterated anthology we want.
Olivier
Cgeraci
Stereotypes
Message 42 -
2007-11-17 at 15:50:50
I'd like to thank Jerry Blake for adding his food for thought. Very interesting. And thanks to Francesco Spreafico for his comments, as well.
The Italian stereotypes may not bother native Italians, but to (some) Italian-Americans, it gets old. Not that I'm really that offended--it just gets to be ubiquitous. I'm surprised that this was altered by Disney, for usually Italian stereotypes are left to stand. The popularity of The Sopranos and the constant portrayal of Italian Americans as either gangsters or buffoons grates after a while. Sadly, many Italian-Americans even find this association with crime "cool." There's truth there, to be sure, but some more balance would be nice.
But Jerry's experiences are more far-reaching. What did you think of the cartoon "Coal Black"? I'm sure it was done with affection (and the enthusiastic participation of black artists) at the time, and the cartoon is joyously active: great music, non-stop pace... but the stereotypical designs are just too much to bear. I'll watch it and love it, but at the same time regret the look of it. It's a real dilemma. And no disclaimer is going to completely ameliorate that feeling.
Mammy Two-Shoes in the Tom & Jerry cartoons was a great memory of mine--but my memory grows hazy. Would I enjoy her today? In my memory, she was a benign, loveable character (we only saw her feet), but I recall the voice being one that I heard often here in the southern US. Or is my remembrance faulty?
Finally, I don't mean to be offensive, but my other favorite duck is Daffy (the original daffy Daffy). And you can't deny he's black. (One of my favorite lines: "Mighty sporting of the little black duck!" If you can identify that, you're a true duck fan.) Of course, I'm goofing around now--but is that offensive humor? We walk a fine line....
Carmen (Carmelo) Geraci
> From: francesco.spreafico at gmail.com
> To: dcml at nafsk.se
> Subject: Re: Floyd Gottfredson Library
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:56:37 +0100
>
> jerryblake2 at juno.com wrote:
>
> > Will the
> > stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> > dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
> >
> > Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> > OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> > dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> > of a minor fruit vendor character.
>
> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
>
> Francesco
I'd feel remiss if I didn't add to this conversation somehow.
I'm
a black guy who grew up in the deep south. To put it in context, my
Grandfather of 92 years was raised on one of the last surviving cotton
plantations in the south where his mother and father were
sharecroppers. When I was five years old my first encounter with racism
was in the first grade when a little boy alerted to the class that his
grandfather informed him that black people were "white people who had
done terrible things and were shoved into ovens to be marked for the
rest of their lives." The grandfather had most likely said this to
scare the little kid into not acting bad, but considering I was 6 years
old, clearly stupid in the ways of the world, and one of only 3 or 4
black kids in the class at the time - I went home to my Grandmother
crying my eyes out trying to figure out what it was that we'd done
wrong. Naturally, when my mother came to pick me up from my
grandparents house after work, this did not go over well with the
school board and the PTA. :P
Surprisingly, even after that,
racism does not vex me as much as it does others, because I've come to
understanding that it is the product of incredibly stupid and ignorant
people who don't seem to possess even 1/4 of an iota of a brain. As
someone who's goal in life is to do cartoons and comic books, I even
understand the context behind the different times that many of the
pieces in question were created for - Let's use the most well known
"banned" Looney Tunes short "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs" for
example. I knew this friend who was also in animation and also black
that took offense at even the slightest thing like that. I could see
where said person was coming from in this day and age where we are
supposed to be past that, but i also explained that the context was
totally different as well. Even if its a well animated cartoon that
relies on heavily cloyed stereotypes to get its point across, in the
context of a historical perspective its symbolic for the story behin!
?d
it. Besides that, it isn't half as bad as many cartoons that were
FAAAAAAAAAAAR worse in thier portrayal of lazy, shiftless, jive talking
blacks like "Scrub Me Mama With A Boogie Beat" which even I thought was
out of control. :P
Like I said, it takes a lot for something to
bother me - and while I may get annoyed at things - I do understand the
context and what they mean, and I don't fly off the handle at every
thing that may bug me. I usually just shrug and brush it off or -
because I'm a nerd like that - ingest it with rabid fervor and interest
to try and find out more.
Having said that, a long time ago I
managed to get my my hands on some selected scanned pages of Treasure
Island - significant for being the first appearance of Captain
Churchmouse and Spooks the Gorilla. It's a pretty good serial as far as
early Mickey serials go. I don't remember how or where I got it from or
what i did with it (I think it was an old print from a guy who owned a
comic book store and collected old stuff like that), but I remember
seeing it and being visibly shocked at the depiction of the savages who
were like something out of a bad caricature of savages from a mediocre
Tarzan movie. I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I
can see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER
get away with printing this today." It also doesn't help much that - if
I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's Suicide
Attempt" subset of strips. The lips on some of the savages are so big
that they practically droop and hang unke!
?mptly off of their
faces. It's a good story as is its sequel, but its one of those where
even with a discalaimer before it, it's kind of sadly got that "Wow..I
can't believe they did that!" stigma attached to it. I've heard rumors
that the follow-up story, featuring Pete and Squinch instead of Pete
and Shyster, is just as bad in those respects. And the same would also
probably go for "The Great Orphanage Robbery" which spends the entire
first third of the story with Mickey and co. in blackface re-doing key
scenes from "Uncle Tom's Cabin": good stories that unfortunately fall
prey to the sadly bigoted backgrounds of thier times. =\
Don't
get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's censorship. I
detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned from seeing the
far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during Gladstone Series 2?) On
the other hand though, I can see the dilemma that the guys who DO WANT
this stuff printed in context are facing: Given that a disclaimer just
won't cut it for the hardcore unnecessarily prudish types, do you run
the risk of not printing 1 or 2 stories in what was supposed to be a
full collection or jeopardize the entire shebang by risking the ire of
the censors and depriving the fandom further of something they've been
begging for for years? And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you
are allowed to print it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally
redrawn? That, in and of itself mars the idea of the collection to
begin with - especially when nearly an entire story would need
"redrawing" and not just a few panels. If getting an almost complete
Gottfredson !
?library means taking option 2 over option 1, I
wouldn't necessarily like it, but I wouldn't balk at it either given
the option of not having it at all or having it censored for stuff FAR
less harmless than this. =\
if now is the best time for Gemstone
to do this with minimal damage, I say go for it. Furthermore, for every
"me" that DOES understand the historical context and significance
behind it and doesn't really care, you also have the "opportunists" and
or "stupidly offended at everything types" that feel it is their job to
sanitize society whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows
that its always the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else. I say
take the Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done
for the cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't
reached that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us
JUST TO GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
At
least we're getting some form of a Gottfredson library, even if its not
truly complete. Heck, it won't be until a 3rd Barks library that we
even get anything complete from him.
Food for thought. =\"
The Italian stereotypes may not bother native Italians, but to (some) Italian-Americans, it gets old. Not that I'm really that offended--it just gets to be ubiquitous. I'm surprised that this was altered by Disney, for usually Italian stereotypes are left to stand. The popularity of The Sopranos and the constant portrayal of Italian Americans as either gangsters or buffoons grates after a while. Sadly, many Italian-Americans even find this association with crime "cool." There's truth there, to be sure, but some more balance would be nice.
But Jerry's experiences are more far-reaching. What did you think of the cartoon "Coal Black"? I'm sure it was done with affection (and the enthusiastic participation of black artists) at the time, and the cartoon is joyously active: great music, non-stop pace... but the stereotypical designs are just too much to bear. I'll watch it and love it, but at the same time regret the look of it. It's a real dilemma. And no disclaimer is going to completely ameliorate that feeling.
Mammy Two-Shoes in the Tom & Jerry cartoons was a great memory of mine--but my memory grows hazy. Would I enjoy her today? In my memory, she was a benign, loveable character (we only saw her feet), but I recall the voice being one that I heard often here in the southern US. Or is my remembrance faulty?
Finally, I don't mean to be offensive, but my other favorite duck is Daffy (the original daffy Daffy). And you can't deny he's black. (One of my favorite lines: "Mighty sporting of the little black duck!" If you can identify that, you're a true duck fan.) Of course, I'm goofing around now--but is that offensive humor? We walk a fine line....
Carmen (Carmelo) Geraci
> From: francesco.spreafico at gmail.com
> To: dcml at nafsk.se
> Subject: Re: Floyd Gottfredson Library
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:56:37 +0100
>
> jerryblake2 at juno.com wrote:
>
> > Will the
> > stereotypical Italian fruit vendors in several stories have their
> > dialogue changed to proper English so as not to vex Italians?"
> >
> > Actually, they've already done that--Gladstone's version of OSCAR THE
> > OSTRICH from back in their first run was altered to Anglicize the
> > dialogue of the crooked pet-store owner Tony, as well as the dialogue
> > of a minor fruit vendor character.
>
> As an Italian, let me add that I'm "vexed" by such censorship, and not in
> the least by the language originally used. But that was obvious, wasn't it?
>
> Francesco
I'd feel remiss if I didn't add to this conversation somehow.
I'm
a black guy who grew up in the deep south. To put it in context, my
Grandfather of 92 years was raised on one of the last surviving cotton
plantations in the south where his mother and father were
sharecroppers. When I was five years old my first encounter with racism
was in the first grade when a little boy alerted to the class that his
grandfather informed him that black people were "white people who had
done terrible things and were shoved into ovens to be marked for the
rest of their lives." The grandfather had most likely said this to
scare the little kid into not acting bad, but considering I was 6 years
old, clearly stupid in the ways of the world, and one of only 3 or 4
black kids in the class at the time - I went home to my Grandmother
crying my eyes out trying to figure out what it was that we'd done
wrong. Naturally, when my mother came to pick me up from my
grandparents house after work, this did not go over well with the
school board and the PTA. :P
Surprisingly, even after that,
racism does not vex me as much as it does others, because I've come to
understanding that it is the product of incredibly stupid and ignorant
people who don't seem to possess even 1/4 of an iota of a brain. As
someone who's goal in life is to do cartoons and comic books, I even
understand the context behind the different times that many of the
pieces in question were created for - Let's use the most well known
"banned" Looney Tunes short "Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs" for
example. I knew this friend who was also in animation and also black
that took offense at even the slightest thing like that. I could see
where said person was coming from in this day and age where we are
supposed to be past that, but i also explained that the context was
totally different as well. Even if its a well animated cartoon that
relies on heavily cloyed stereotypes to get its point across, in the
context of a historical perspective its symbolic for the story behin!
?d
it. Besides that, it isn't half as bad as many cartoons that were
FAAAAAAAAAAAR worse in thier portrayal of lazy, shiftless, jive talking
blacks like "Scrub Me Mama With A Boogie Beat" which even I thought was
out of control. :P
Like I said, it takes a lot for something to
bother me - and while I may get annoyed at things - I do understand the
context and what they mean, and I don't fly off the handle at every
thing that may bug me. I usually just shrug and brush it off or -
because I'm a nerd like that - ingest it with rabid fervor and interest
to try and find out more.
Having said that, a long time ago I
managed to get my my hands on some selected scanned pages of Treasure
Island - significant for being the first appearance of Captain
Churchmouse and Spooks the Gorilla. It's a pretty good serial as far as
early Mickey serials go. I don't remember how or where I got it from or
what i did with it (I think it was an old print from a guy who owned a
comic book store and collected old stuff like that), but I remember
seeing it and being visibly shocked at the depiction of the savages who
were like something out of a bad caricature of savages from a mediocre
Tarzan movie. I remember seeing it and thinking to myself "HOLY COW. I
can see how this could be gotten away with back then, but they'd NEVER
get away with printing this today." It also doesn't help much that - if
I remember correctly - it begins with the infamous "Mickey's Suicide
Attempt" subset of strips. The lips on some of the savages are so big
that they practically droop and hang unke!
?mptly off of their
faces. It's a good story as is its sequel, but its one of those where
even with a discalaimer before it, it's kind of sadly got that "Wow..I
can't believe they did that!" stigma attached to it. I've heard rumors
that the follow-up story, featuring Pete and Squinch instead of Pete
and Shyster, is just as bad in those respects. And the same would also
probably go for "The Great Orphanage Robbery" which spends the entire
first third of the story with Mickey and co. in blackface re-doing key
scenes from "Uncle Tom's Cabin": good stories that unfortunately fall
prey to the sadly bigoted backgrounds of thier times. =\
Don't
get it twisted, now. I'm not standing up for Disney's censorship. I
detest censorship. (Remember how we were almost banned from seeing the
far more harmless "War of the Wendigo" during Gladstone Series 2?) On
the other hand though, I can see the dilemma that the guys who DO WANT
this stuff printed in context are facing: Given that a disclaimer just
won't cut it for the hardcore unnecessarily prudish types, do you run
the risk of not printing 1 or 2 stories in what was supposed to be a
full collection or jeopardize the entire shebang by risking the ire of
the censors and depriving the fandom further of something they've been
begging for for years? And to gild the lily a bit more, lets say you
are allowed to print it, but only if strips are omitted and or totally
redrawn? That, in and of itself mars the idea of the collection to
begin with - especially when nearly an entire story would need
"redrawing" and not just a few panels. If getting an almost complete
Gottfredson !
?library means taking option 2 over option 1, I
wouldn't necessarily like it, but I wouldn't balk at it either given
the option of not having it at all or having it censored for stuff FAR
less harmless than this. =\
if now is the best time for Gemstone
to do this with minimal damage, I say go for it. Furthermore, for every
"me" that DOES understand the historical context and significance
behind it and doesn't really care, you also have the "opportunists" and
or "stupidly offended at everything types" that feel it is their job to
sanitize society whether society likes it or not. And everybody knows
that its always the loudmouths that ruin it for everybody else. I say
take the Leonard Maltin DVD Treasure approach, but sadly what is done
for the cartoons can't quite be done for the comics yet. We haven't
reached that point, apparently. But hey, look at how long it took us
JUST TO GET the cartoons out there and uncut to begin with.
At
least we're getting some form of a Gottfredson library, even if its not
truly complete. Heck, it won't be until a 3rd Barks library that we
even get anything complete from him.
Food for thought. =\"
Deanmary
A whole lotta thoughts
Message 43 -
2007-11-19 at 07:24:24
Bunches of thoughts on lots of stuff!
First off, the upcoming Gottfredson Library. I very much hope that the Library is in color instead of black and white. Now I can see an argument (and a good argument at that) that by printing them in B/W that we will be getting Gottfredson's work at the "purest" as they were originally never meant to be in color. However, over the past 20+ years I know I have very much been "spoiled" by seeing almost all Gottfredson and Taliaferro work in color. Do others feel as "spoiled" as I do? So while B/W may be a purer form, I could not help but feel like something was being left out if the library was only in B/W. Having said this, I still of course will buy the Gottfredson Library if it is in B/W, but it won't be the same as a color Library.
As far as possible censorship in the Library, I have some thoughts to share as well. However, I first want to thank Jonathan so much for sharing his views on censorship. He expressed himself so eloquently and brought a very interesting perspective to the discussion. I myself would very much like for the Gottfredson Library to be uncensored. I am very much opposed to censorship in general. Also, I think seeing the early Gottfredson stories that contain awful portrayals of blacks to be very much an enlightening experience. I am only 40 years old, so I obviously did not get to read these Gottfredson strips at the time they were first printed. It seems to me though that while these strips contained awful stereotypes and racism, that "many* forms of entertainment (other strips, cartoons, movies) at this contained similar awful things. So perhaps the saddest part of this is that these Gottfredson strips were the norm instead of the exception... :( Of course perhaps it is very easy for me to want to see these strips uncensored when I am white and have not experienced first hand this sort of racism. If I was black, might I have quite a different view? Quite possibly.
Does anyone wonder what will be censored in the future? I think it would be very naive to think that stories produced today will not have items in them that 50 or 100 years down the line will be considered unacceptable. So if I live into my 90s, perhaps I will see Disney comics produced in the 1980's that will be edited due to content!
While I do want to see the Library uncensored, that does not mean that if some censorship occurs that I will not buy the Library. I would just hope that Gemstone keeps the censorship as limited as they can. For some stories I imagine little or no censorship will be needed. Others may need a lot of redrawing and redialoguing done. I realize that there may be (many?) fans who will protest a censored Library by not buying it at all, and I truly respect that. I myself though would rather be able to read *most* of the stories with *some* censorship than not be able to read these stories at all.
Jonathan, I was joking when I asked if you had ever thought of doing any comic book work. :) I knew you did work on Sonic and have done work for Gemstone as well. It would be a dream come true if I could ever in any way be involved in a Disney comic story. I am not exactly holding my breath though... As far as art goes, on a *good* day I might be able to draw a stick figure! :) I would love to be able to write a Duck story someday, but doubt that will happen either. The closest I think I will ever get is the "story" of "When Donald Met Daisy". A number of years ago the Don Rosa D.U.C.K.H.U.N.T. site had a contest for the best story idea and I think I placed fourth. Of course, there very well may have been only 4 entrants... :) Actually I only had a plot of several sentences. And calling it a "plot" is probably *far* too generous! Perhaps it would be more accurately be called a "story idea". The one thing I think I *might* be able to do would be to dialogue and "Americanize" an Egmont story that is already in English. It would be so fantastic to see my name in the credits of a Gemstone comic! So if anyone at Gemstone ever needs any dialoguing done for cheap, I would love the chance. I wouldn't even charged 30 cents an hour -- I would be willing to work for zero cents per hour. That is a price even Scrooge would like! :)
Jonathan, I wish I could say the reason I bought all the issues of the pocket book titles was because I am well off and could just afford to spend money day and night. Unfortunately, that is not the case! :( It is simply that Disney comics are one of the biggest passions I have in life. Gemstone could print *ten* prestige titles each month and I would gladly buy all ten! I would just then cut down a great deal on my other discretionary spending to spend more on Disney comics. I wish I had the *problem* of having to spend most of my discretionary spending only on Disney comics!
I like your idea Jonathan of a third prestige title being a bi-monthly title of "Donald Duck " and "Mickey Mouse" so as to keep the numbering going. However Gemstone could title a third monthly title *anything* as long as they would print one. How does a monthly called "Dean Rekich is an Idiot!" sound? :)
While I do like the holiday titles, the Barks/Rosa specials, etc. that Gemstone produces, I would gladly give up all of them for TPBs that came out bi-monthly or quarterly. I truly think TPBs are the future for comics and that the more Gemstone focuses of them, the better off they will be. I even have a *very* off the wall idea that I in no way expect Gemstone to do or for many people to like the idea of, but I will share it none the less The idea is this: what if we got rid of *all* the monthly titles and instead got a monthly TPB? The two monthly titles now have 64 pages each (for a total of 128) and cost together about 16 dollars. The soon to be released Walt Disney Treasures TPB costs 17 dollars and has 160 pages. So how about having a monthly TPB of say 192 pages (3 prestige title pages combined) for say about 20 dollars? I would love to have such a monthly TPB title and have them sitting nicely on my shelves. And while this is just an unrealistic fantasy, I *don't* think having a bi-monthly or quarterly TPB is too much to dream for or more than Gemstone and/or the readers could handle.
That is all for now even though I have many more thoughts. I will save some of these for another issue of the ML as I do not want drive ML members *too* crazy with my views and ideas! :) As always, I would love to hear what people think of anything I wrote.
Dean Rekich
First off, the upcoming Gottfredson Library. I very much hope that the Library is in color instead of black and white. Now I can see an argument (and a good argument at that) that by printing them in B/W that we will be getting Gottfredson's work at the "purest" as they were originally never meant to be in color. However, over the past 20+ years I know I have very much been "spoiled" by seeing almost all Gottfredson and Taliaferro work in color. Do others feel as "spoiled" as I do? So while B/W may be a purer form, I could not help but feel like something was being left out if the library was only in B/W. Having said this, I still of course will buy the Gottfredson Library if it is in B/W, but it won't be the same as a color Library.
As far as possible censorship in the Library, I have some thoughts to share as well. However, I first want to thank Jonathan so much for sharing his views on censorship. He expressed himself so eloquently and brought a very interesting perspective to the discussion. I myself would very much like for the Gottfredson Library to be uncensored. I am very much opposed to censorship in general. Also, I think seeing the early Gottfredson stories that contain awful portrayals of blacks to be very much an enlightening experience. I am only 40 years old, so I obviously did not get to read these Gottfredson strips at the time they were first printed. It seems to me though that while these strips contained awful stereotypes and racism, that "many* forms of entertainment (other strips, cartoons, movies) at this contained similar awful things. So perhaps the saddest part of this is that these Gottfredson strips were the norm instead of the exception... :( Of course perhaps it is very easy for me to want to see these strips uncensored when I am white and have not experienced first hand this sort of racism. If I was black, might I have quite a different view? Quite possibly.
Does anyone wonder what will be censored in the future? I think it would be very naive to think that stories produced today will not have items in them that 50 or 100 years down the line will be considered unacceptable. So if I live into my 90s, perhaps I will see Disney comics produced in the 1980's that will be edited due to content!
While I do want to see the Library uncensored, that does not mean that if some censorship occurs that I will not buy the Library. I would just hope that Gemstone keeps the censorship as limited as they can. For some stories I imagine little or no censorship will be needed. Others may need a lot of redrawing and redialoguing done. I realize that there may be (many?) fans who will protest a censored Library by not buying it at all, and I truly respect that. I myself though would rather be able to read *most* of the stories with *some* censorship than not be able to read these stories at all.
Jonathan, I was joking when I asked if you had ever thought of doing any comic book work. :) I knew you did work on Sonic and have done work for Gemstone as well. It would be a dream come true if I could ever in any way be involved in a Disney comic story. I am not exactly holding my breath though... As far as art goes, on a *good* day I might be able to draw a stick figure! :) I would love to be able to write a Duck story someday, but doubt that will happen either. The closest I think I will ever get is the "story" of "When Donald Met Daisy". A number of years ago the Don Rosa D.U.C.K.H.U.N.T. site had a contest for the best story idea and I think I placed fourth. Of course, there very well may have been only 4 entrants... :) Actually I only had a plot of several sentences. And calling it a "plot" is probably *far* too generous! Perhaps it would be more accurately be called a "story idea". The one thing I think I *might* be able to do would be to dialogue and "Americanize" an Egmont story that is already in English. It would be so fantastic to see my name in the credits of a Gemstone comic! So if anyone at Gemstone ever needs any dialoguing done for cheap, I would love the chance. I wouldn't even charged 30 cents an hour -- I would be willing to work for zero cents per hour. That is a price even Scrooge would like! :)
Jonathan, I wish I could say the reason I bought all the issues of the pocket book titles was because I am well off and could just afford to spend money day and night. Unfortunately, that is not the case! :( It is simply that Disney comics are one of the biggest passions I have in life. Gemstone could print *ten* prestige titles each month and I would gladly buy all ten! I would just then cut down a great deal on my other discretionary spending to spend more on Disney comics. I wish I had the *problem* of having to spend most of my discretionary spending only on Disney comics!
I like your idea Jonathan of a third prestige title being a bi-monthly title of "Donald Duck " and "Mickey Mouse" so as to keep the numbering going. However Gemstone could title a third monthly title *anything* as long as they would print one. How does a monthly called "Dean Rekich is an Idiot!" sound? :)
While I do like the holiday titles, the Barks/Rosa specials, etc. that Gemstone produces, I would gladly give up all of them for TPBs that came out bi-monthly or quarterly. I truly think TPBs are the future for comics and that the more Gemstone focuses of them, the better off they will be. I even have a *very* off the wall idea that I in no way expect Gemstone to do or for many people to like the idea of, but I will share it none the less The idea is this: what if we got rid of *all* the monthly titles and instead got a monthly TPB? The two monthly titles now have 64 pages each (for a total of 128) and cost together about 16 dollars. The soon to be released Walt Disney Treasures TPB costs 17 dollars and has 160 pages. So how about having a monthly TPB of say 192 pages (3 prestige title pages combined) for say about 20 dollars? I would love to have such a monthly TPB title and have them sitting nicely on my shelves. And while this is just an unrealistic fantasy, I *don't* think having a bi-monthly or quarterly TPB is too much to dream for or more than Gemstone and/or the readers could handle.
That is all for now even though I have many more thoughts. I will save some of these for another issue of the ML as I do not want drive ML members *too* crazy with my views and ideas! :) As always, I would love to hear what people think of anything I wrote.
Dean Rekich
Olivier (M&D)
A whole lotta thoughts
Message 44 -
2007-11-19 at 12:28:44
Hello everyone!
>>>> I very much hope that the [Gottfredson] Library is in color
>>>> instead of black and white.
With the focus on the alterations, and my own admiration of the E.C. Archives' coloring, I had not even considered this angle.
Firstly, Gemstone has a great staff of colorists, so there is nothing to worry about if it's colored.
Secondly, I'm not sure; it's true that the original art is better appreciated in b&w; but then, you could argue that zip-a-things (what's the name exactly? zip-a-tone? I don't remember) were used to add shades of gray, which is coloring too.
Or maybe an altered color Library first, then an unaltered b&w Library just for us. :D
>>>> It seems to me though that while these strips contained awful stereotypes
>>>> and racism, that "many* forms of entertainment (other strips, cartoons, movies)
>>>> at this contained similar awful things. So perhaps the saddest part of this
>>>> is that these Gottfredson strips were the norm instead of the exception... :(
It is, and others were certainly much worse and some truly racist.
I have been reading a few things related to this subject lately.
First, I re-read David's note in the "Disney Treasures" book, which I mentionned previously. It was an excellent introduction.
Two nights ago, I read again "The Sacred Jewel" (1934), which is set in Stumbool (geography buffs will remember that's in Umbrellastan); many of the Turks/Arabs are actually African stereotypes, essentially in a graphic manner; actually, the locals are in Oriental garb, but the they are all "black" characters.
The dialogue, however, is an interesting mix: convoluted sentences convey a stereotypical obsequiousness, which sometimes is but fork-tongued, as the following sentence is actually not-so friendly; on top of this, the whole is phrased in mangled pseudo-Elizabethan English ("wouldst", "thou", "hast", ...), which makes for very odd dialogue (and adds to the artificiality and superficiality of the polite phrasings, or just a touch of recurring humor).
The thing is, even though the names and architecture hint at a region, it is only for the sake of exoticism, and you could hardly say it aims to point at a specific place with a very specific intention in mind, especially with this Arabo-Africano-Elizabethan mix. You can always discuss those stereotypes, and the use of a name that is very close to that of an actual city, but the latter is not a target.
Here are a few samples of dialogue from the story...
- (October 20, 1934)
(Emissary 1) "A thousand pardons, noble Captain, we are as dust at thy feet but it seemeth strange that a vessel should try to deliver a box across the sea by remaining at the warf!"
(Emissary 2) "Of course, the magnificent Captain can explain this, even unto such stupid fools as we!"
- (October 22, 1934)
(Emissaries 1 & 2, in unison) "We have conferred and reached to a decision! Doubt, we have none, of the honorable Captain's story and our faith in his noble character never falters! But--!!"
(continues) "-- He lies like a snake!"
- (November 12, 1934)
(innkeeper) "Somet'ing we canst do for help our extreme noble visitors-- No?"
(same) "Ah! Those extreme noble gentlemen! Indeed, they wilt become over-happy to receive thy party! First left door on gallery-- just enter, and thou wilt be welcomed!"
>>>> Does anyone wonder what will be censored in the future?
Outside of comics, TV shows are often in the line of fire, leading to explanations and changes.
"24", for instance, was criticized for depicting Arabo-Americans as terrorists only.
>>>> I think it would be very naive to think that stories produced today
>>>> will not have items in them that 50 or 100 years down the line
>>>> will be considered unacceptable. So if I live into my 90s,
>>>> perhaps I will see Disney comics produced in the 1980's that will
>>>> be edited due to content!
Let's resume this discussion in fifty years!
(We already have a message waiting for us in 2016.)
>>>> The two monthly titles now have 64 pages each
>>>> (for a total of 128) and cost together about 16 dollars.
>>>> The soon to be released Walt Disney Treasures TPB
>>>> costs 17 dollars and has 160 pages. So how about
>>>> having a monthly TPB of say 192 pages (3 prestige title pages
>>>> combined) for say about 20 dollars?
The logic is economically sound and appealing, but the idea of no longer having WDC&S and US is distressing, though you could still call that TPB "WDC&S".
>>>> That is all for now even though I have many more thoughts.
>>>> I will save some of these for another issue of the ML as I do not
>>>> want drive ML members *too* crazy with my views and ideas! :)
With few people actually writing, it's nice to have some relatively long messages.
Have a nice week!
Olivier
>>>> I very much hope that the [Gottfredson] Library is in color
>>>> instead of black and white.
With the focus on the alterations, and my own admiration of the E.C. Archives' coloring, I had not even considered this angle.
Firstly, Gemstone has a great staff of colorists, so there is nothing to worry about if it's colored.
Secondly, I'm not sure; it's true that the original art is better appreciated in b&w; but then, you could argue that zip-a-things (what's the name exactly? zip-a-tone? I don't remember) were used to add shades of gray, which is coloring too.
Or maybe an altered color Library first, then an unaltered b&w Library just for us. :D
>>>> It seems to me though that while these strips contained awful stereotypes
>>>> and racism, that "many* forms of entertainment (other strips, cartoons, movies)
>>>> at this contained similar awful things. So perhaps the saddest part of this
>>>> is that these Gottfredson strips were the norm instead of the exception... :(
It is, and others were certainly much worse and some truly racist.
I have been reading a few things related to this subject lately.
First, I re-read David's note in the "Disney Treasures" book, which I mentionned previously. It was an excellent introduction.
Two nights ago, I read again "The Sacred Jewel" (1934), which is set in Stumbool (geography buffs will remember that's in Umbrellastan); many of the Turks/Arabs are actually African stereotypes, essentially in a graphic manner; actually, the locals are in Oriental garb, but the they are all "black" characters.
The dialogue, however, is an interesting mix: convoluted sentences convey a stereotypical obsequiousness, which sometimes is but fork-tongued, as the following sentence is actually not-so friendly; on top of this, the whole is phrased in mangled pseudo-Elizabethan English ("wouldst", "thou", "hast", ...), which makes for very odd dialogue (and adds to the artificiality and superficiality of the polite phrasings, or just a touch of recurring humor).
The thing is, even though the names and architecture hint at a region, it is only for the sake of exoticism, and you could hardly say it aims to point at a specific place with a very specific intention in mind, especially with this Arabo-Africano-Elizabethan mix. You can always discuss those stereotypes, and the use of a name that is very close to that of an actual city, but the latter is not a target.
Here are a few samples of dialogue from the story...
- (October 20, 1934)
(Emissary 1) "A thousand pardons, noble Captain, we are as dust at thy feet but it seemeth strange that a vessel should try to deliver a box across the sea by remaining at the warf!"
(Emissary 2) "Of course, the magnificent Captain can explain this, even unto such stupid fools as we!"
- (October 22, 1934)
(Emissaries 1 & 2, in unison) "We have conferred and reached to a decision! Doubt, we have none, of the honorable Captain's story and our faith in his noble character never falters! But--!!"
(continues) "-- He lies like a snake!"
- (November 12, 1934)
(innkeeper) "Somet'ing we canst do for help our extreme noble visitors-- No?"
(same) "Ah! Those extreme noble gentlemen! Indeed, they wilt become over-happy to receive thy party! First left door on gallery-- just enter, and thou wilt be welcomed!"
>>>> Does anyone wonder what will be censored in the future?
Outside of comics, TV shows are often in the line of fire, leading to explanations and changes.
"24", for instance, was criticized for depicting Arabo-Americans as terrorists only.
>>>> I think it would be very naive to think that stories produced today
>>>> will not have items in them that 50 or 100 years down the line
>>>> will be considered unacceptable. So if I live into my 90s,
>>>> perhaps I will see Disney comics produced in the 1980's that will
>>>> be edited due to content!
Let's resume this discussion in fifty years!
(We already have a message waiting for us in 2016.)
>>>> The two monthly titles now have 64 pages each
>>>> (for a total of 128) and cost together about 16 dollars.
>>>> The soon to be released Walt Disney Treasures TPB
>>>> costs 17 dollars and has 160 pages. So how about
>>>> having a monthly TPB of say 192 pages (3 prestige title pages
>>>> combined) for say about 20 dollars?
The logic is economically sound and appealing, but the idea of no longer having WDC&S and US is distressing, though you could still call that TPB "WDC&S".
>>>> That is all for now even though I have many more thoughts.
>>>> I will save some of these for another issue of the ML as I do not
>>>> want drive ML members *too* crazy with my views and ideas! :)
With few people actually writing, it's nice to have some relatively long messages.
Have a nice week!
Olivier
Francesco Spreafico
A whole lotta thoughts
Message 45 -
2007-11-19 at 12:44:10
deanmary wrote:
> First off, the upcoming Gottfredson Library. I very much hope that
> the Library is in color instead of black and white. Now I can see an
> argument (and a good argument at that) that by printing them in B/W
> that we will be getting Gottfredson's work at the "purest" as they
> were originally never meant to be in color. However, over the past
> 20+ years I know I have very much been "spoiled" by seeing almost all
> Gottfredson and Taliaferro work in color. Do others feel as
> "spoiled" as I do? So while B/W may be a purer form, I could not
> help but feel like something was being left out if the library was
> only in B/W. Having said this, I still of course will buy the
> Gottfredson Library if it is in B/W, but it won't be the same as a
> color Library.
It will actually be a lot better if it's in b/w. I can't see how color in
Gottfredson's dailies could spoil someone... color on dailies is bad and
*looks* bad too, because those strips weren't supposed to be colored, and it
shows. So it's because I'm spoiled by all the wonderful reprints of other
strips (Krazy Kat, Terry and the Pirates, Popeye, Dick Tracy and so on) in
black and white that can't see how color could ever improve something that's
already perfect as it is. Color would actually only spoil... the books.
Having said this... I'd still buy it even if in color (maybe for commercial
reasons? I don't know, I'd do in in black and white for those too), of
course, but just to support Gemstone, as I always do, for the books it would
only be another flaw.
Francesco
> First off, the upcoming Gottfredson Library. I very much hope that
> the Library is in color instead of black and white. Now I can see an
> argument (and a good argument at that) that by printing them in B/W
> that we will be getting Gottfredson's work at the "purest" as they
> were originally never meant to be in color. However, over the past
> 20+ years I know I have very much been "spoiled" by seeing almost all
> Gottfredson and Taliaferro work in color. Do others feel as
> "spoiled" as I do? So while B/W may be a purer form, I could not
> help but feel like something was being left out if the library was
> only in B/W. Having said this, I still of course will buy the
> Gottfredson Library if it is in B/W, but it won't be the same as a
> color Library.
It will actually be a lot better if it's in b/w. I can't see how color in
Gottfredson's dailies could spoil someone... color on dailies is bad and
*looks* bad too, because those strips weren't supposed to be colored, and it
shows. So it's because I'm spoiled by all the wonderful reprints of other
strips (Krazy Kat, Terry and the Pirates, Popeye, Dick Tracy and so on) in
black and white that can't see how color could ever improve something that's
already perfect as it is. Color would actually only spoil... the books.
Having said this... I'd still buy it even if in color (maybe for commercial
reasons? I don't know, I'd do in in black and white for those too), of
course, but just to support Gemstone, as I always do, for the books it would
only be another flaw.
Francesco