Keskustelujen arkisto

Like all of you, I am also extremely disappointed, and a bit disgusted by this whole situation. But playing devil's advocate, we must remember that we're living in a time when so much as looking at someone the wrong way can cost you your job and maybe even your home. I can see certain groups, or guys like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson going ballistic over some of those old comics. Remember, these are the same guys that protested Mexico's postage stamps commemorating comic book character Memin Pinguin. Do a quick Google search if you aren't familiar with what took place. They protested something that took place in MEXICO, imagine the noise they'd make here. So in a way, I can see why Disney decided to play it safe. Having said that, I'd much rather stir things up and cause some noise than tolerate any sort of censorship.
In my opinion it is important that we have reminders, such as uncensored comics and cartoons, that we must not revert to our old ways of thinking. Trying to hide the uglyness and pretend it was never there is not only insulting, but a disservice to the very people trying to be 'protected'.

Quote from user: sirredkneeHow so? Possibly because I hate censorship.
I thought maybe you believed there wouldn't be *any* Gottfredson project. And that Amazon.com's announcement of one couldn't be true and therefore was a cruel joke. Thanks for clearing it up.

And just for the record: I'd like to see an unchanged and complete version of Floyd Gottfredson's stories too. But if Disney decides that some things should be deleted or redrawn in material they themselves own, it isn't censorship -- no more than George Lucas "censored" the original Star Wars Trilogy when he released the Special Editions back in 1997. It's simply the rights holder of the material changing something. Even though, yes, I'd rather they didn't. And I think an unchanged version of the complete Gottfredson Library will sell significantly better than a changed incomplete version.

Quote from user: sirredkneeThe target audience of a Gottfredson Library would surely consist of grown-up, mature Disney comic fans as well as folk interested in the history of comics in general (and, of course, the whole picture of it!). You'd like to think they're all able to think and judge for themselves, and even if they can't you can make use of long-winded prefaces to point out that some of [...] Floyd's material does indeed contain racist stereotypes and prejudices out of its day.
Agreed, although I'd substitute "long-winded" with "detailed".

Quote from user: sirredkneebad old Floyd [...] So why is it there always have to be one or two people who feel entitled to rain on the fun of thousands? Do they censor just to revel in their own "importance"?
I realize you're disappointed (as am I), but do you really feel these kinds of arguments (implying certain Disney employees are childish jerks who are self-important even though they are in fact unimportant) will convince Disney that an unchanged and complete Gottfredson Library should be released? Or will it just piss them off? Your earlier arguments were better.

Quote from user: OlivierThe 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.
Again: I want the unchanged and complete Gottfredson strips as much as you guys, but giving Disney advice on which other stories should *also* be banned (so Gottfredson won't be unfairly treated) is a really, really bad idea! Several cartoons have been banned over the years because angry animation fans told the rights holders: "Hey, if you're banning Cartoon A, you might as well ban cartoons B, C and D." And then those cartoons were banned too.

Quote from user: OlivierOne 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.
Let me get this straight: if Disney choose to ban material that they deem to be racist and offensive, then they themselves are racists?!? Come on, that argument makes *no* sense!

Quote from user: OlivierThe might Walt Disney Company will not heed the disapointment of a few hundreds.
As I wrote earlier: I doubt these kinds of mocking remarks will help, rather than hurt the chances of getting an unchanged and complete Gottfredson.

Now, now. I've never claimed to only talk sense when I'm in an emotional state. We're not talking about just another comic artist who did some nice Disney stuff, we're talking about Gottfredson - as far as influence on other comic artists goes, he was even bigger than Barks! Ask Uderzo or anybody else still alive of those who have left a lasting mark in the genre of funny and semi funny comics themselves. Gottfredson's work is an important part of twentieth century's popular culture, it is of interest for many more people than your average Disney consumer, and consequently has to be treated adequately, i.e. made available in complete and unaltered form, un-pc warts and all.

Quote from user: Lars JensenAnd just for the record: I'd like to see an unchanged and complete version of Floyd Gottfredson's stories too. But if Disney decides that some things should be deleted or redrawn in material they themselves own, it isn't censorship -- no more than George Lucas "censored" the original Star Wars Trilogy when he released the Special Editions back in 1997. It's simply the rights holder of the material changing something.
Lars, you know the example you provide is too different to be correct. Never mind the law, we're talking about art here. This is censorship, no doubt about it. Lucas was the artist behind Star Wars, so he can change whatever the heck he wants (even when he does it bad, as he did in 1997). The Walt Disney Company is NOT the artist behind the Mickey Mouse strips, so all they actually do is censor.

Good point about the Barks library Sigvald. If Egmont were in charge of this project there might be a chance to see it uncensored. I suppose Disney just feels a stronger urge to control things in their own home country.
Unfortunately I haven't heard any rumors about a European Gottfredson library, and if Egmont choose to bring one in the future it may very well just be a translated reprint of the censored Gemstone edition. Gottfredson is not nearly as popular as Barks, so it's probably quite unlikely that Egmont will create a whole library from scratch when there is a nearly complete library around.

Hello all. New member here (first post)!
While I am also disappointed that this collection of newspaper strips will not be complete, I will definitely be buying it! I'm a long time comic book buyer/reader/collector (going back to at least age 10, 1982) but am very much a Disney comics newbie, having only just now started collecting/reading Disney comics with Gemstone's current run (2003 to present). I have everything Gemstone has done, Disney wise, aside from the Halloween ashcan issues (which weren't available for individual purchase). I even have the Free Comic Book Day issues (which wasn't easy as I buy my comics via mail order; no local comics shops around here).
Every time I get a new issue in my hands, the first thing I do is look to the table of contents to see which vintage U.S. stories are reprinted. Those are always my favorites (although I am of course also excited whenever I see a Don Rosa story listed). I've been working on making a spreadsheet of all of the Gemstone issues, indexing them with the help of the I.N.D.U.C.K.S. database website, so that I can go back and read the stories in the order in which they first appeared. It is an interesting little project--if very time consuming; there's over 200 issues that have been done by Gemstone since 2003, I think!--seeing which decades of Disney comics are represented the most and which have not really been tapped yet.
Anyway, one of the things I've most been looking forward to have been Barks and Gottfredson collections. And I would love to see the other Disney newspaper strips reprinted, too (Donald, Silly Symphonies, etc.), whether in books of their own or as they have been in the two prestige monthly books. So, again, while I am sorry (although not really surprised) to hear that the Gottfredson collection will not be a complete collection of the strips, as a Disney comics "newbie" I'll definitely take whatever they choose to allow Gemstone to print. I'm just sorry that it won't be here sooner!
Furthermore, it distresses me a bit when I hear some here saying that people should boycott this because of the missing strips and "censorship". While I can understand their concerns over this and would never tell people what they should or should not buy, I worry about seeing people here encouraging folks *not* to buy Gemstone Disney products. Ever since the line was reduced from four monthlies and two bi-monthlies to two monthlies due to poor sales, I've been concerned about the continued success of the remaining line. I'd hate to see Gemstone have to cease their remaining titles or to have Disney decide to discontinue the license (which just happened with Marvel yanking the license for the wonderful comics-on-DVD-ROM sets that GIT was putting out, leaving us fans of those DVD sets in the lurch) due to shrinking sales. And the idea of boycotting something on a particular principle that one is hoping to get across (an, "I'm not buying this to show Disney not to do these censored versions and to do complete versions instead") doesn't usually work. Any lack of sales on a set like this would simply be taken by Disney as evidence that there isn't enough interest in reprints of their newspaper strips, period.
Well, I guess that's all I have to say on that. Any word on a Barks collection? How about a collection of Donald newspaper strips? And is it too late to start talking about what might be in the third Disney Treasures trade paperback? (Perhaps these are already covered in other threads.)
I really hated to see that we won't be getting a Christmas Parade this year (that it's been postponed due to the scheduling issues). Understandable, but still sad. Those are some of my favorites. I love any of the issues comprised primarily of the older U.S. stories.
Okay. I think I've covered everything. :)
Excited by what 2008 will have in store for us Disney fans coming out from Gemstone. Keep up the good work guys!
Regards,

I'd rather have no censorship. But I'll be happy if it's printed at all, and will accept minor changes in dialog and Third World natives' faces. I hope that stories depicting the German and Japanese enemies of USA in WWII will still be allowed to be printed, with a preface discussing the history, and why they were portrayed that way. It will be a crime if Gottfredson's great work is not reprinted for posterity.

I wonder if this book is really scheduled by Gemstone for August? What I mean is that the dates shown on Amazon are not always the most accurate and oftentimes books like this one actually ship a bit earlier to comics shops. Hopefully that's the case here. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on those early Mickey newspaper strips, the sooner the better. (Also, I'm reading some other 1930s newspaper strip collections right now--Tarzan, Dick Tracy, Popeye/Thimble Theater, Flash Gordon. Will be getting the first volume of Little Orphan Annie in a month or so, too. Would like to be able to read these 30s strips around the same time but guess I'll have to wait a few more months for the Mickey book to come out.)