Keskustelujen arkisto

Quote from user: Review Or DieTo be honest, I prefer the artwork to the 'house' style of places like Egmont, and immensely over the plastic artwork of Gottfredson's later years. Reading even the few unfinished strips at the beginning, before I ever got to Gottfredson's work, it felt like the Mickey I was familiar with.

I have low quality versions of some of the strips, mostly the gaggier material, but they're so small it's awfully hard for me to comment on the specifics of the art. That's a big part of why I wanted to get copies from the Intelligencer - they printed the strip in a very nice size.
I'd say Hoover's art feels a bit more generic than Gottfredson in his prime. But at the same time, the example scans on Inducks do show off some fairly expressive and detailed artwork. You're probably right that the low resolution of those scans makes it hard to judge the art properly. To me, though, it can't really live up to Gottfredson's 40s and 50s work (which feels like the logical era of comparison, considering Mickey's design evolution), or to the work of later greats like Romano Scarpa - though it's not bad, either. I'd love to be able to read a full story in good resolution.

Quote:Looking over Mr. Gonzales' Inducks page though, it seems it was all pretty much gag a day stuff during his tenure on the Sunday strip, with Brave Little Tailor being the only exception.
Really? That's odd... I've heard otherwise either here or on some other geeky Disney forum, where people were asking if the few years of Gonzales' Sunday strip run which featured both gag pages and adventure serials might also be collected in book form. That is to say -- the few years alternating between adventures and gags AFTER "Brave Little Tailor" in 1938, and after Gottfredson was completely out of the picture as far as the Sunday strip was concerned.

Quote:It's just too much to ask, I'm sure, for a Terry and the Pirates style collection with color Sundays. But it would be nice.
Hmm. But why - assuming you mean IDW's Terry editions - would we want that? Terry and the Pirates, excepting the very beginning of its run, had the story in its dailies and Sundays intertwined. The Mickey Mouse strip always had separate stories in its daily and Sunday versions. Doing separate Sunday strip books the way Fantagraphics has done for the Gottfredson years feels like the logical way of going about it.

Quote:That's actually one thing I never figured out, if Floyd Norman's Mickey had any Sunday strips at all. If they did, I certainly can't find any evidence of them, but the strip's hard enough to track down as it is.
The Mickey strip - like the Donald Duck strip - had both dailies and Sundays produced all the way until it was discontinued in 1995. But I doubt Norman wrote the Sunday strip... or if he did, they were probably all gags. I've seen Mickey Sunday strips - gag strips - from as recent as 1994 reprinted in editions of the Norwegian Christmas annual (julehefte) "Mikke Mus og Langbein" (directly translated: Mickey Mouse and Goofy). The 1998 edition included gag Sundays from 1993 and 1994 - though they're not represented with scans in Inducks.

Quote from user: Review Or DieWhen it comes to the Sunday/daily strip format though, it's because that's how the strips were originally presented. Simple as that. The Sundays being consolidated as two volumes the way they are right now makes sense (financially, being able to look up storylines, the ability to offer special features and Gottfredson's other comic strip work), but I confess I'd rather have them printed as they were purely so I can see the comic as it progressed. You can see how writers and artists changed, appreciate the evolution parallel to the strip, and get a better sense of the time. It's a more complete and immersive read that way.

Granted, Gottfredson's adventure stories and the amount of them led to this being a good solution, but I had the same problem (to a much greater degree) with Pogo. Separate the component pieces from the whole, even if it's to better showcase those component pieces, and the whole loses something.
You would have wanted the Albert The Alligator, Albert and Pogo and Pogo comic book stories and comic book gag pages interspersed between the Pogo newspaper strips, chronologically?

Quote from user: Review Or DieNo - because that's not the same medium at all. Within one medium/iteration, I think that presenting them collectively, in as close a way as you can to how it was originally intended to be printed (as Fantagraphics has done with the Pogo sundays) is the best way to go.

In the case of the newspaper strip, I would have rather had the newspaper strips printed six days a week, then the Sunday, repeat to the finish. Because that's one medium, presented as intended for the newspaper readers... but I also think the special stories that were in say, the Pogo Poop Book trade paperback, should be included in the special features of the Fantagraphics collections, as they were as much a 'part' of that iteration of Pogo as anything else.
Sigh... Review Or Die, sorry if I come off as harsh, but it feels to me like you're forgetting a TON of contextually important details here. Firstly, one could just as well argue that the daily and Sunday strips of "Mickey Mouse" WERE, in fact, two different mediums. They were in different physical formats. They had different storylines/plots. To an extent, they even had different creative teams (for example, Gottfredson co-plotted all the daily strip adventures from the 30s and early 40s, but with the exception of "The Robin Hood Adventure", he was never involved with writing the Sunday pages).

Secondly, the daily and Sunday versions of the strip often had different newspaper subscribers. The creative team behind "Mickey Mouse", aware of this, usually made the Sunday strip adventures (and gags) more visual and lighter in tone - more targeted towards children - than the grittier daily strip stories, more geared towards adults.

And thirdly - it's blatantly clear in my eyes that "how it was originally intended to be printed" is an incredibly silly argument in this context. Let me ask you the following: "originally intended" by whom? The writers and artists of the dailies and Sundays, respectively? Do you really think that the creative team for the daily strip considered consciously, while writing a serial like for instance "Blaggard Castle", which Sunday strips from a completely unrelated storyline would happen to run every Sunday inbetween installments of the Blaggard serial? Of course not. Because it was two different storylines, done for two different newspaper strip mediums - and readers of both the daily and Sunday strip GOT that.

Quote from user: Review Or DieYou do come off harsh and condescending
Sorry about that. I actually remember being in a bit of a bad mood the day I wrote that comment. I shouldn't have let that spill out into the forums.

Quote from user: BenceWith 3 strips printed on one page, every single NON gag-a-day strip featuring Mickey Mouse made after the last Gottfredson adventure comic ("Li'l Davy") would occupy only 324 pages (if my calculations are correct). All of these comics (except 9) were written by Norman. According to Inducks, Norman additionally wrote 12 gag-a-day strips featuring Mickey, which would occupy an additional 4 pages. That's 328 pages in total. It would make a nice extra book to the Gottfredson library (nicer than a book with gag-aday strips by Gottfredson and/or Gonzales, in my opinion) .
Bence, that's a very good idea! Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that IDW it reprinting a Floyd Norman serial in MM#3.