He speaks mock-swedish with a distinct accent on "möck"
As for the "BØRK, BØRK, BØRK" I guess it's ancient sailor-lingo, from back when there were no horns to "toooot" and the river wasn't wide enough for both to pass at the same time...?
Author
Topic: Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
(142 messages)
Hedberg
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 106 -
2009-10-15 at 05:03:08
Dutch Duckfan Down Under
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 107 -
2009-10-15 at 14:11:29
Quote from user: Roger NorthDutch Duckfan Mickey is not a character from the Duck universe. All of the other characters you mentioned are though.
True, true... But in Holland (here we go again) Mickey and Donald both live in Duckburg, in the same universe. How are you going to explain that Donald and Mickey, both from seperate universes, together with Goofy also had quite some adventures?
About Børk: every time I see that word I'm thinking of møøse.
Quote from user: Robb_KAls je wilt, jij kunt mijn e-mail adres door Michiel P., Henrieke of D.D. krijgen.
How? By just asking them on McDrake? Or how else? And about my e-mail: when I have yours i'll just mail mine.
True, true... But in Holland (here we go again) Mickey and Donald both live in Duckburg, in the same universe. How are you going to explain that Donald and Mickey, both from seperate universes, together with Goofy also had quite some adventures?
About Børk: every time I see that word I'm thinking of møøse.
Quote from user: Robb_KAls je wilt, jij kunt mijn e-mail adres door Michiel P., Henrieke of D.D. krijgen.
How? By just asking them on McDrake? Or how else? And about my e-mail: when I have yours i'll just mail mine.
Robb_K
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 108 -
2009-10-15 at 19:58:27
Quote from user: Dutch Duckfan Down UnderQuote from user: Robb_KAls je wilt, jij kunt mijn e-mail adres door Michiel P., Henrieke of D.D. krijgen.
How? By just asking them on McDrake? Or how else? And about my e-mail: when I have yours i'll just mail mine.
I had hoped you would be in communication with at least one of them. As not, you can reach me at: (Email removed) (last letter is a small G)
How? By just asking them on McDrake? Or how else? And about my e-mail: when I have yours i'll just mail mine.
I had hoped you would be in communication with at least one of them. As not, you can reach me at: (Email removed) (last letter is a small G)
Coolwater
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 109 -
2009-10-16 at 15:20:13
Quote from user: Dutch Duckfan Down UnderTrue, true... But in Holland (here we go again) Mickey and Donald both live in Duckburg, in the same universe. How are you going to explain that Donald and Mickey, both from seperate universes, together with Goofy also had quite some adventures?
Very true. While the main protagonists from the stories of America's Duckburg and Mouseton, namely Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, really do not come together very often, the fact that they did together at least in a few occasions (especially in Italian stories, but also already in early stories of Gottfredson) shows that one cannot strictly speak of two separated universes but that one must rather just think of two separated places, towns, in one world.
If we, however, regard only the stories of Carl Barks as true reports of the life in real Duckburg (and that is, of course, what seriously alone makes sense), there's much indication that "Mickey Mouse" is just a fictional character of popular culture in Duckburg, just like he's here.
In Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure.
In "The Crazy Quiz Show" then (Inducks), Duck is asked for the social security number of Mickey Mouse by the quiz show master. This also speaks for the fictionalness of "Mickey Mouse" in Duckburg, since one would hardly know such a number of a real detective but rather of a fictional character (think of James Bond's license number here).
Oh yes, "The Riddle of the Red Hat". Well, I guess, Carl Barks only documented the content of one of the Mickey Mouse comic stories that are read in Duckburg ...
Very true. While the main protagonists from the stories of America's Duckburg and Mouseton, namely Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, really do not come together very often, the fact that they did together at least in a few occasions (especially in Italian stories, but also already in early stories of Gottfredson) shows that one cannot strictly speak of two separated universes but that one must rather just think of two separated places, towns, in one world.
If we, however, regard only the stories of Carl Barks as true reports of the life in real Duckburg (and that is, of course, what seriously alone makes sense), there's much indication that "Mickey Mouse" is just a fictional character of popular culture in Duckburg, just like he's here.
In Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure.
In "The Crazy Quiz Show" then (Inducks), Duck is asked for the social security number of Mickey Mouse by the quiz show master. This also speaks for the fictionalness of "Mickey Mouse" in Duckburg, since one would hardly know such a number of a real detective but rather of a fictional character (think of James Bond's license number here).
Oh yes, "The Riddle of the Red Hat". Well, I guess, Carl Barks only documented the content of one of the Mickey Mouse comic stories that are read in Duckburg ...
Kneon
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 110 -
2009-10-16 at 15:28:29
It was so strange getting used to Donald and Mickey not spending much (if any) time together in the comics. I grew up watching the Disney animated shorts, where Mickey, Donald and Goofy were often a trio.
Lars Jensen
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 111 -
2009-10-16 at 16:07:02
Quote from user: CoolwaterIf we, however, regard only the stories of Carl Barks as true reports of the life in real Duckburg (and that is, of course, what seriously alone makes sense), there's much indication that "Mickey Mouse" is just a fictional character of popular culture in Duckburg, just like he's here.
So how do you explain http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+US+++13-04 , where he used Morty and Ferdie? Or http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
So how do you explain http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+US+++13-04 , where he used Morty and Ferdie? Or http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
Coolwater
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 112 -
2009-10-16 at 17:29:12
Quote from user: Lars JensenSo how do you explain http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+US+++13-04 , where he used Morty and Ferdie?
Barks drew this report ("story") originally with Huey, Dewey and Louie, not with "Mortie" and "Ferdie". But he got the report back from his editors and had to replace the children, because, for post tariff reasons, the Gyro Gearloose report in the Uncle $crooge magazine wasn't allowed to have the same characters as the main Uncle Scrooge report. For the same reason, Barks had to replace Donald Duck by "Speedy" in the Gearloose report in the following issue of the U$ magazine.
These were clear editorial censoring or retouching measures on finished reports! One hardly should regard the results of such interferences by others into Barksian reports as the truth on Duckburg, but rather as the intendes obscuration of the truth. There are a couple of examples for censoring acts against Barks.
Quote:Or http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
Barks's covers have to be touched with fingertips, I think. Especially the "gag" covers often show strange and incredible things that somehow are in contrast to the nature of the things in Duckburg as given in reports. For example Scrooge McDuck having having a money tree and similar things. That Barks's covers actually transcend reality is also demonstrated by the fact that report-related covers often show scenes clearly different to the facts in the story. For example the cover of the report "The Gilded Man" shows Donald Duck and his nephews running out from the temple chased by the Indians. In reality, however, they only could escape from the temple because the Indians were busy with the silvered Gilded Man in that moment, not caring about the Ducks. The Gilded Man is abnormally large on the cover, by the way, much larger than in the story.--It is thus clear that Barks's covers often have an unreal-fantastic element; as source for the real Duckburg, they simply do not function on the same level as the reports.
Of hundreds of covers Barks drew that one you show is, as far as I know, anyway the only one showing the dubious characters of Mickey Mouse and Goofy, so even if the covers could be used better as source generally, it would be a rather thin string to hang on the thesis of the real existence of Mouse and Goofy. I wouldn't be surprised if Barks was advised here by the editors to pencil Mouse's and Goofy's kissers. It is known that the editors gave advices and told him to do this and that with respect to the cover drawings especially in later times, and that they loved to have as many alleged "popular Disney characters" smirking from the covers of their magazines as possible ...
Barks drew this report ("story") originally with Huey, Dewey and Louie, not with "Mortie" and "Ferdie". But he got the report back from his editors and had to replace the children, because, for post tariff reasons, the Gyro Gearloose report in the Uncle $crooge magazine wasn't allowed to have the same characters as the main Uncle Scrooge report. For the same reason, Barks had to replace Donald Duck by "Speedy" in the Gearloose report in the following issue of the U$ magazine.
These were clear editorial censoring or retouching measures on finished reports! One hardly should regard the results of such interferences by others into Barksian reports as the truth on Duckburg, but rather as the intendes obscuration of the truth. There are a couple of examples for censoring acts against Barks.
Quote:Or http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
Barks's covers have to be touched with fingertips, I think. Especially the "gag" covers often show strange and incredible things that somehow are in contrast to the nature of the things in Duckburg as given in reports. For example Scrooge McDuck having having a money tree and similar things. That Barks's covers actually transcend reality is also demonstrated by the fact that report-related covers often show scenes clearly different to the facts in the story. For example the cover of the report "The Gilded Man" shows Donald Duck and his nephews running out from the temple chased by the Indians. In reality, however, they only could escape from the temple because the Indians were busy with the silvered Gilded Man in that moment, not caring about the Ducks. The Gilded Man is abnormally large on the cover, by the way, much larger than in the story.--It is thus clear that Barks's covers often have an unreal-fantastic element; as source for the real Duckburg, they simply do not function on the same level as the reports.
Of hundreds of covers Barks drew that one you show is, as far as I know, anyway the only one showing the dubious characters of Mickey Mouse and Goofy, so even if the covers could be used better as source generally, it would be a rather thin string to hang on the thesis of the real existence of Mouse and Goofy. I wouldn't be surprised if Barks was advised here by the editors to pencil Mouse's and Goofy's kissers. It is known that the editors gave advices and told him to do this and that with respect to the cover drawings especially in later times, and that they loved to have as many alleged "popular Disney characters" smirking from the covers of their magazines as possible ...
Lars Jensen
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 113 -
2009-10-16 at 22:03:41
Quote from user: CoolwaterQuote from user: Lars JensenSo how do you explain http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+US+++13-04 , where he used Morty and Ferdie?
Barks drew this report ("story") originally with Huey, Dewey and Louie, not with "Mortie" and "Ferdie". But he got the report back from his editors and had to replace the children, because, for post tariff reasons, the Gyro Gearloose report in the Uncle $crooge magazine wasn't allowed to have the same characters as the main Uncle Scrooge report.
Sure, that's a well-known fact. But why did Barks use Morty and Ferdie? Why didn't he use April, May and June? Or invent some new children for this one story? Perhaps he used M&F because he felt it would be OK to use them with Gyro. In other words: the fact that Barks rarely used Mouse characters in his Duck stories doesn't mean he refused to accept their existence in his Duck universe.
Quote from user: CoolwaterQuote from user: Lars JensenOr http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
Barks's covers have to be touched with fingertips, I think. Especially the "gag" covers often show strange and incredible things that somehow are in contrast to the nature of the things in Duckburg as given in reports. For example Scrooge McDuck having having a money tree and similar things.
Off-topic, but I'm genuinely puzzled here. Why is it out of character for Scrooge to have a money tree?!
Quote from user: CoolwaterThat Barks's covers actually transcend reality is also demonstrated by the fact that report-related covers often show scenes clearly different to the facts in the story.
Let's for a moment accept your theory that covers and stories do not both reflect Barks' Duckburg. How do we know the covers aren't the true Duckburg, and the stories are the "distorted reports"?
Anyway, I only brought up that cover because you brought up "The Crazy Quiz Show" as evidence Mickey doesn't exist. That story was co-written by someone other than Carl Barks (obviously), so it should be as "unrealiable" as a cover to a Barksist.
Also, in your comment
Quote from user: CoolwaterIn Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure
you forget that Donald Duck himself at the time appeared in every issue of WDC. If the appearance of a Mickey-like figure on a fictitious WDC cover implies that Mickey doesn't exist, then surely the well-known (although unseen) contents of that issue should imply that Donald doesn't exist either.
So, to sum up: There's no evidence that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist in Barks' Duckburg. And (through Morty & Ferdie) there's strong circumstantial evidence that he does.
The entire discussion is off-topic in this thread, by the way, so let's end it here.
Barks drew this report ("story") originally with Huey, Dewey and Louie, not with "Mortie" and "Ferdie". But he got the report back from his editors and had to replace the children, because, for post tariff reasons, the Gyro Gearloose report in the Uncle $crooge magazine wasn't allowed to have the same characters as the main Uncle Scrooge report.
Sure, that's a well-known fact. But why did Barks use Morty and Ferdie? Why didn't he use April, May and June? Or invent some new children for this one story? Perhaps he used M&F because he felt it would be OK to use them with Gyro. In other words: the fact that Barks rarely used Mouse characters in his Duck stories doesn't mean he refused to accept their existence in his Duck universe.
Quote from user: CoolwaterQuote from user: Lars JensenOr http://coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=W+WDC+296-00 ?
Barks's covers have to be touched with fingertips, I think. Especially the "gag" covers often show strange and incredible things that somehow are in contrast to the nature of the things in Duckburg as given in reports. For example Scrooge McDuck having having a money tree and similar things.
Off-topic, but I'm genuinely puzzled here. Why is it out of character for Scrooge to have a money tree?!
Quote from user: CoolwaterThat Barks's covers actually transcend reality is also demonstrated by the fact that report-related covers often show scenes clearly different to the facts in the story.
Let's for a moment accept your theory that covers and stories do not both reflect Barks' Duckburg. How do we know the covers aren't the true Duckburg, and the stories are the "distorted reports"?
Anyway, I only brought up that cover because you brought up "The Crazy Quiz Show" as evidence Mickey doesn't exist. That story was co-written by someone other than Carl Barks (obviously), so it should be as "unrealiable" as a cover to a Barksist.
Also, in your comment
Quote from user: CoolwaterIn Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure
you forget that Donald Duck himself at the time appeared in every issue of WDC. If the appearance of a Mickey-like figure on a fictitious WDC cover implies that Mickey doesn't exist, then surely the well-known (although unseen) contents of that issue should imply that Donald doesn't exist either.
So, to sum up: There's no evidence that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist in Barks' Duckburg. And (through Morty & Ferdie) there's strong circumstantial evidence that he does.
The entire discussion is off-topic in this thread, by the way, so let's end it here.
Dutch Duckfan Down Under
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 114 -
2009-10-17 at 11:13:01
Quote from user: Robb_KI had hoped you would be in communication with at least one of them. As not, you can reach me at: (Email removed) (last letter is a small G)
You'll be the first one I have contact with, besides the forum.
You'll be the first one I have contact with, besides the forum.
Coolwater
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 115 -
2009-10-17 at 16:24:55
Quote from user: Lars JensenThe entire discussion is off-topic in this thread, by the way, so let's end it here.
Oh, come on, you addressed some good questions now to me indeed, and after all a not Donaldic, but Scroogian motto is: "I love a good fight". :P I try to keep it short, but if the whole stuff excesses, a moderator can always split it off.
Quote:But why did Barks use Morty and Ferdie? Why didn't he use April, May and June? Or invent some new children for this one story? Perhaps he used M&F because he felt it would be OK to use them with Gyro.
Barks's original, pristine vision of that episode was with Huey, Dewey, Louie. April, May and June would have been in fact just as much a falsification of the happenings as "Morty" and "Ferdie", irregardles if the one are real and the others not. "New children, invented"--oh,well, what difference would such fictional characters as surrogates for the Duck nephews do in comparison to "Mortie" and "Ferdie"?
Generally, where Barks had to accept interventions/retouchments or where he worked up other non-original material, what he then produced as hybridisation sometimes shows the crossing with oddnesses of which his untouched, original work is free of. Think of the "spirit of Christmas" or "Dumbo".
Quote:Off-topic, but I'm genuinely puzzled here. Why is it out of character for Scrooge to have a money tree?!
There are indeed (for us) exceptional natural phenomena in Duckburg, and there also exists magic there, but nowhere in all the reports there is the hint that Scrooge knew of that method to "make money", nor that anyone else in Duckburg did. In my eyes one should be carefully with the factual content of such cover "gags".
Quote:Let's for a moment accept your theory that covers and stories do not both reflect Barks' Duckburg. How do we know the covers aren't the true Duckburg, and the stories are the "distorted reports"?
"What is truth?" is the oldest question of philosophy, and nobody could ever provide the last proof that reality is not an imagination and that imagination is not he reality. An absolute last knowledge we will indeed never have, but comparing Barks's reports with his covers I tend to conclude from a position of "believing reason" and "reasonable belief" that it is indeed the reports that show the truth about that world. There, in the "adventures", we see as logical and plausible incident chains what, on respecting "adventure covers", we get presented always in one single not identical but related scenical composition. Those covers alone don't make much "sense" for me while the "stories" can stand very well without the covers ...
Quote:Anyway, I only brought up that cover because you brought up "The Crazy Quiz Show" as evidence Mickey doesn't exist. That story was co-written by someone other than Carl Barks (obviously), so it should be as "unrealiable" as a cover to a Barksist.
You are very right that, wherever "interventions" and "influences" of others can be traced back, it is the Barksist philologist's work to polish out the pure Barksian essence. As far as I see, however, one cannot say if exactly the mentioning of Mickey Mouse in that report goes to the account of someone other. But if that is so, or if one wants to drop the quiz show report completely as a source because of such questions, it only would stress the assumption of the non-existence of Mickey Mouse since it would only mean one mentioning less of that Mouse ...
Quote:Also, in your comment
Quote from user: CoolwaterIn Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure
you forget that Donald Duck himself at the time appeared in every issue of WDC. If the appearance of a Mickey-like figure on a fictitious WDC cover implies that Mickey doesn't exist, then surely the well-known (although unseen) contents of that issue should imply that Donald doesn't exist either.
Basically, one has to point out one thing here: The world of Duckburg, as a "parallel universe", is relatively similar to our world, but not identical with it. One striking difference is for example the existence of a city "Duckburg" at the western coast of North America; another one that there are humans there that look like animals. All that is not the case in our world.
So if there exists a magazine "Walt Disney's Comics" in Duckburg and if, obviously, a Mickey Mouse-like character is title hero there (until now all "identical" with the things in our world), that doesn't necessarily mean that Donald Duck must also be known as comic character there. You are right that his actual existence in Duckburg doesn't make it impossible that they've got there also comic stories with him, but from the saying and acting of the Ducks and the Duckburgians in a few hundred or so reports there is nowhere something like even a little hint that he was known in that way as a character of popular culture in his own world ...
Quote:So, to sum up: There's no evidence that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist in Barks' Duckburg. And (through Morty & Ferdie) there's strong circumstantial evidence that he does.
Well, since actual appearances of Mouse and friends in Barks's Duckburg are extremely scarce (three, to be exact: "Mortie" and "Ferdie" in the one Gearloose report; then the "Red Hat"; finally the one cover) and since they all have there grounds either in acts of censoring/retouching, or in generally somehow problematic cover drawings, or in script material probably provided by other people (that is indeed what Geoffrey Blum as well as Barks himself later believed with respect to the "Red Hat"; but it's not clear if the "Red Hat" story plays in "Donald's world" anyway), I simply do not agree.
Besides, Barks himself said that "there was a structural separation between the sort of worlds and characters that fitted best with Mickey and Donald".--So quite apart from the question of an "exterior"- or "interior"-Donaldistic approach on Barks's work, one can state that the man believed that "Mickey Mouse" had nothing lost in the Ducks' realm.
Oh, come on, you addressed some good questions now to me indeed, and after all a not Donaldic, but Scroogian motto is: "I love a good fight". :P I try to keep it short, but if the whole stuff excesses, a moderator can always split it off.
Quote:But why did Barks use Morty and Ferdie? Why didn't he use April, May and June? Or invent some new children for this one story? Perhaps he used M&F because he felt it would be OK to use them with Gyro.
Barks's original, pristine vision of that episode was with Huey, Dewey, Louie. April, May and June would have been in fact just as much a falsification of the happenings as "Morty" and "Ferdie", irregardles if the one are real and the others not. "New children, invented"--oh,well, what difference would such fictional characters as surrogates for the Duck nephews do in comparison to "Mortie" and "Ferdie"?
Generally, where Barks had to accept interventions/retouchments or where he worked up other non-original material, what he then produced as hybridisation sometimes shows the crossing with oddnesses of which his untouched, original work is free of. Think of the "spirit of Christmas" or "Dumbo".
Quote:Off-topic, but I'm genuinely puzzled here. Why is it out of character for Scrooge to have a money tree?!
There are indeed (for us) exceptional natural phenomena in Duckburg, and there also exists magic there, but nowhere in all the reports there is the hint that Scrooge knew of that method to "make money", nor that anyone else in Duckburg did. In my eyes one should be carefully with the factual content of such cover "gags".
Quote:Let's for a moment accept your theory that covers and stories do not both reflect Barks' Duckburg. How do we know the covers aren't the true Duckburg, and the stories are the "distorted reports"?
"What is truth?" is the oldest question of philosophy, and nobody could ever provide the last proof that reality is not an imagination and that imagination is not he reality. An absolute last knowledge we will indeed never have, but comparing Barks's reports with his covers I tend to conclude from a position of "believing reason" and "reasonable belief" that it is indeed the reports that show the truth about that world. There, in the "adventures", we see as logical and plausible incident chains what, on respecting "adventure covers", we get presented always in one single not identical but related scenical composition. Those covers alone don't make much "sense" for me while the "stories" can stand very well without the covers ...
Quote:Anyway, I only brought up that cover because you brought up "The Crazy Quiz Show" as evidence Mickey doesn't exist. That story was co-written by someone other than Carl Barks (obviously), so it should be as "unrealiable" as a cover to a Barksist.
You are very right that, wherever "interventions" and "influences" of others can be traced back, it is the Barksist philologist's work to polish out the pure Barksian essence. As far as I see, however, one cannot say if exactly the mentioning of Mickey Mouse in that report goes to the account of someone other. But if that is so, or if one wants to drop the quiz show report completely as a source because of such questions, it only would stress the assumption of the non-existence of Mickey Mouse since it would only mean one mentioning less of that Mouse ...
Quote:Also, in your comment
Quote from user: CoolwaterIn Barks's "The Smugsnorkle Squattie" (Inducks) Donald reads a magazine "Walt Disney's COMICS" in the first panel that shows on the cover a head of a Mickey-like figure
you forget that Donald Duck himself at the time appeared in every issue of WDC. If the appearance of a Mickey-like figure on a fictitious WDC cover implies that Mickey doesn't exist, then surely the well-known (although unseen) contents of that issue should imply that Donald doesn't exist either.
Basically, one has to point out one thing here: The world of Duckburg, as a "parallel universe", is relatively similar to our world, but not identical with it. One striking difference is for example the existence of a city "Duckburg" at the western coast of North America; another one that there are humans there that look like animals. All that is not the case in our world.
So if there exists a magazine "Walt Disney's Comics" in Duckburg and if, obviously, a Mickey Mouse-like character is title hero there (until now all "identical" with the things in our world), that doesn't necessarily mean that Donald Duck must also be known as comic character there. You are right that his actual existence in Duckburg doesn't make it impossible that they've got there also comic stories with him, but from the saying and acting of the Ducks and the Duckburgians in a few hundred or so reports there is nowhere something like even a little hint that he was known in that way as a character of popular culture in his own world ...
Quote:So, to sum up: There's no evidence that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist in Barks' Duckburg. And (through Morty & Ferdie) there's strong circumstantial evidence that he does.
Well, since actual appearances of Mouse and friends in Barks's Duckburg are extremely scarce (three, to be exact: "Mortie" and "Ferdie" in the one Gearloose report; then the "Red Hat"; finally the one cover) and since they all have there grounds either in acts of censoring/retouching, or in generally somehow problematic cover drawings, or in script material probably provided by other people (that is indeed what Geoffrey Blum as well as Barks himself later believed with respect to the "Red Hat"; but it's not clear if the "Red Hat" story plays in "Donald's world" anyway), I simply do not agree.
Besides, Barks himself said that "there was a structural separation between the sort of worlds and characters that fitted best with Mickey and Donald".--So quite apart from the question of an "exterior"- or "interior"-Donaldistic approach on Barks's work, one can state that the man believed that "Mickey Mouse" had nothing lost in the Ducks' realm.
Roger North
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 116 -
2009-10-17 at 23:18:28
In some stories Mickey and Donald live in the same city but in some Mickey lives in Mouseton while Donald lives in Duckburg.
Gober
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 117 -
2009-10-22 at 09:04:42
Hey, everyone. I'm new here. I've been a huge fan of Disney comics particularly the ones published by Egmont and in Topolino (Italian comics).
Okay, on topic... In Italian universe, Mickey lives in Mousetown so he does not often meet Donald. But as I remember there are 3 panel 'On The Road" stories where Mickey and Donald go on an adventure to Alaska, Burma and others. The series begin with the story "The Lucky Strike".
Okay, on topic... In Italian universe, Mickey lives in Mousetown so he does not often meet Donald. But as I remember there are 3 panel 'On The Road" stories where Mickey and Donald go on an adventure to Alaska, Burma and others. The series begin with the story "The Lucky Strike".
Roger North
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 118 -
2009-10-22 at 11:36:27
I'm not familiar with those stories Gober. Have they been released in Americ.a.
Olivier
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 119 -
2009-10-22 at 12:32:41
Quote from user: Roger NorthI'm not familiar with those stories Gober. Have they been released in Americ.a.
Nope.
:\
Nice opening page.
Nope.
:\
Nice opening page.
Kneon
Introducktion (introduce yourself here!)
Message 120 -
2009-10-22 at 13:05:22
Those "On the Road" stories sound like a lot of fun! I would like to see more Mickey / Donald / Goofy stories as kind of a throwback to the old cartoons I grew up with.