Keskustelujen arkisto

If I were Don Rosa, after a career like I've had, by no means would I want someone else drawing my stories.
I don't think he would even consider it.
In my opinion Don's storylines, his layouts and his drawing and inking are interwoven and inseparable. I don't believe they could be created assembly line style. A Rosa project is not one of writing a script and then hiring make-up and actors. His images are as much a part of the story as his writing. A story scripted by Don and drawn by Van Horn (assuming they would both agree to the project, which seems highly improbable) would be about as smooth as William Hung singing "she bang[s], she bang[s]!"
The only remote possibility that I can see is if Don wrote and rough-drew a story and then someone else penciled it and inked it. And still I doubt that he would go for that.
Don's vision problems are certainly an obvious factor, of course, but I suspect another reason he may have stopped doing stories, and forgive me Mr. Rosa, but I think it may have more to do with motivation and the sheer volume of work and energy that he puts into them. No other Disney artist ever has researched and sweated the details like Don Rosa has done. A man reaches a point when he tells himself that enough is enough. Perhaps this is the case here. And who could blame him?

Quote from user: Lars JensenQuote from user: MorequackNo other Disney artist ever has researched and sweated the details like Don Rosa has done.
On the contrary: many artists (and writers) have. You can take my word on this.
I haven't seen evidence of it.

I'm positive that accomplished artists like Daan Jippes and William Van Horn would not be viable work partners for Don Rosa, as they would want to change most of his poses, and to stage his stories very differently from his original staging. They'd want to also get half of the storywriting (and deserve it), for putting so much work into their pre-final pencil stage. In the end, Don wouldn't be happy with how much they changed. The styles are simply too different. It's not like the situation with Jippes, Heymans, or even myself(as I did with his "Pied Piper of Duckburg" pages) following Barks' scribble lines.
Other artists would change a Don Rosa-written story so much as to make it unrecognisable as a Rosa story (much to my delight, but hated by Rosa fans). Don would likely also be unhappy with such results.

Quote from user: ramapithThe best research is folded into stories so elegantly that some readers may not guess how much was done behind the scenes, but goodness, Morequack?that doesn't mean it WASN'T done.
Well, hells bells and little fish, where did I ever say "it wasn't done" by other Disney artists/writers!? I just said that no one else has done it LIKE Don Rosa has. Meaning TO THE EXTENT OF.

Look, when looking at Rosa's work of the past 20 years it is quite obvious, to me at least, that the blue ribbon for the systematic investigation into and study of history, events and sources in order to establish accuracy clearly goes to Rosa. To me it's a self-evident. And I don't believe one needs to be a professional Disney cartoonist to qualify oneself to make an "educated" observation here.

But I didn't mean for this thread to become a contest, a Disney's Got Talent of sorts. I guess it's understandable that when one person is placed upon the proverbial dais... there will be blood.

Touché, WB!
But nobody here is challenging Barks.
No one EVER does.
Yet people here are often quick to criticize Rosa.
And had you read all the posts within this thread you would perhaps be more likely to answer a tad more within the context of the conversation and perhaps with a tad less sarcasm. Please read the first post, along with post #22 in its entirety. I'm referring to LIVING artists, particularly within the last two decades. We're not talking about Barks here; at least I'm not. I apologize for not being more clear.
But since you've **whistled, giggled, and left the conversation** what can I say... 8-)

Quote from user: Morequacknobody here is challenging Barks.

No one EVER does.

Yet people here are often quick to criticize Rosa.
I haven't seen Don Rosa criticized that much on this board, to be honest. What I do see criticized is most often the repeated automatic statement from some people that Rosa is better than everyone else -- not based on these people's subjective personal preferences (which would of course be OK), but on some vague preconceived notions of objective facts that are nevertheless never backed up with *actual* facts.

Let me give you one example:
Quote from user: MorequackQuote from user: Lars JensenQuote from user: MorequackNo other Disney artist ever has researched and sweated the details like Don Rosa has done.
On the contrary: many artists (and writers) have. You can take my word on this.
I haven't seen evidence of it.
Note how the poster first makes an indirect slam against Scarpa, Cavazzano, Jippes, Milton, Cimino, Bottaro, Rawson, the McGreals, Transgaard, Klein, Ferioli, Paco Rodriguez, Rota, Gattino, Pihl, Casty, Sarah Kinney, Petrucha, Lustig, Boschi, Markstein, Halas, Solstrand, Martina, Canepa & Barbucci etc. etc. -- and, yes, of Barks too. Then, when a professional Disney writer tells him that many of his fellow writers and artists do indeed make as much research as Don Rosa, the poster replies: "I haven't seen evidence of it."

Now, I'm not sure whether that's an indirect request for photographic evidence of such research having taken place or merely a condescending, but utterly meaningless, reply. Either way, I'm sure you can see why such behaviour doesn't endear Don Rosa's more passionate followers to the general population of Duck fans on these boards. And to return to your first point of Rosa often being criticized: yes, I'm sure there are people somewhere out there who as a consequence of this kind of behaviour turn sour on Don himself. Which means that Don Rosa ends up paying the price for comments such as "No other Disney artist ever has researched and sweated the details like Don Rosa has done." Making rude, ill-considered and factually groundless remarks such as the ones we've seen here does Don Rosa no favours.

Oh, and...
Quote from user: MorequackQuote from user: ramapithThe best research is folded into stories so elegantly that some readers may not guess how much was done behind the scenes, but goodness, Morequack?that doesn't mean it WASN'T done.
Well, hells bells and little fish, where did I ever say "it wasn't done" by other Disney artists/writers!? I just said that no one else has done it LIKE Don Rosa has. Meaning TO THE EXTENT OF.
[...]
But I didn't mean for this thread to become a contest, a Disney's Got Talent of sorts. I guess it's understandable that when one person is placed upon the proverbial dais... there will be blood.
As someone who knows the work processes of several people in this field, I can tell you this unequivocally: yes, there are Disney creators (and no, not just me) who put as much work into research as Don does. And that's not an indirect criticism of Don, it's a mere statement of fact.

And placing someone (in this case Don Rosa) upon a dais doesn't lead to bloodshed. Putting down the hard work of every other creator in this business does.

Quote from user: Lars JensenI haven't seen Don Rosa criticized that much on this board, to be honest. What I do see criticized is most often the repeated automatic statement from some people that Rosa is better than everyone else -- not based on these people's subjective personal preferences (which would of course be OK), but on some vague preconceived notions of objective facts that are nevertheless never backed up with *actual* facts.

Now, I'm not sure whether that's an indirect request for photographic evidence of such research having taken place or merely a condescending, but utterly meaningless, reply. Either way, I'm sure you can see why such behaviour doesn't endear Don Rosa's more passionate followers to the general population of Duck fans on these boards. Making rude, ill-considered and factually groundless remarks such as the ones we've seen here does Don Rosa no favours.
Well, that being the case following is probably another 'utterly meaningless reply,' chockful of more 'rude, ill-considered and factually groundless remarks' that are based on 'vague preconceived notions of objective facts that are nevertheless never backed up with *actual* facts' (Wha...???).

So here goes:

First of all, don't take it so *personally.*

"The greatest living Duck-artist" is as the name suggests a unique title bestowed upon Mr. Rosa not by 'professional Disney writers who know the work processes of several people in [the] field' but by thousands and thousands of *readers* of Disney comics for whom the stories are drawn and written. Now what this honor suggests of its recipient *of course* is no *actual* fact but rather actual *opinion* (which should of course be OK?or not!) based on personal preference.

(Personal preference = subjective.)

Additionaly, the statement that Mr. Rosa has researched and sweated the details like no other Disney artist would undoubtedly be worthless in a court of law since it is not a testimonial of *fact* given under oath but rather an *opinion* based on *observations* that the eyes, a reader's eyes, scan on a page of comics. Whether it's actual *fact* or not is not what matters, just as the assertion that 'there are [other] Disney creators who put as much work into research as Don does,' cannot be submitted as fact since no one but Don and maybe his wife and his dogs really know how many hours of research Don puts in. And since this is not a court of law but a thread where individuals can share their *opinions* and express their *personal preferences* there is no grounds for accusing those who offer them in the spirit of honoring their favorite as 'rude, ill-considered and factually groundless.'

(I really like using *asterisks.*)

We don' need no stinkin' badges! In fact we don' need no stinkin' so-called *facts!* We got comics to enjoy and favorite artists to admire and praise!

I reckon there *has* been blood.

Quote from user: Lars JensenI haven't seen Don Rosa criticized that much on this board, to be honest. What I do see criticized is most often the repeated automatic statement from some people that Rosa is better than everyone else -- not based on these people's subjective personal preferences (which would of course be OK), but on some vague preconceived notions of objective facts that are nevertheless never backed up with *actual* facts.
You know, that automatic statement is one of the reasons why I have mostly stopped discussing comics at various message boards. It seems to me that every time you mention some news or a statement about some creator, someone jumps in and claims that "well, what you are talking about doesn't involve Barks or Rosa, so it is not worth to mention". I really dislike that kind of behaviour from comic fans. IMO everyone are free to have their own preferences, like e.g. Morequack who thinks DR is good at composing and drawing comics. But somehow, many fans of DR seems to have a problem with other people, who don't like his work, or just don't rate it higher than a lot of other creator's work.