Keskustelujen arkisto

I asked this before on the old board way back when, but I figured that there's no harm in asking it again.

There's no doubt that Floyd Gottfredson is the Carl Barks of the Mickey Mouse world, but sadly his stories did not get as much exposure in the states as they did overseas (especially in Italy where he is revered just as highly) due to the over engorged presence of Paul Murry (for better or worse) over the span of many decades. Most Mouse fans that I know kind of see Murry as the "Tony Strobl" of the Mouse world - i.e The Other Good Mouse Artist.

I'd say that Bill Wright is more deserving of being an arguable close second, though he has the very unfortunate problem that his stories were about 50% watered down Gottfredson rewrites VS his original stories being few and far between, even with his eventual return in the bad portion of the Gold Key era. And Dick Moores didn't stay on long enough in the comics to become anything more than a fun diversion. =\

So having said that - I shift the topic back over to Murry. The general consensus is that - much like Tony Strobl - early Murry= very good, mid to late Murry = semi-decent, late to final Murry=VERY BAD. This was not true in all cases, but Murry (to me anyway) has one of the sharpest declines in the quality of artwork of any Disney artist I've seen. It's almost as if at a certain point, you can tell he just stopped caring about a lot of the stories he churned out. And no matter which way you look at it, there are just very few stories, if any, that come to the level of quality and complexity that Gottfredson managed to achieve with a simple daily adventure strip.

So having gone down that tirade, I've decided to create a questionairre for the purposes of seeing what others think and spurring ongoing discussion:

1. What would you say are the best of the Murry serials - one or two that, in your opinion, seriously deserves reprinting (it could be a non-Murry one. I've heard many people wanting "The Ghost of Maneater Mountain" to be reprinted at some point. I think it's the only original Wright serial that was ever created.)

2. What is your opinion of Ken Hultgren "The Seven Colored Terror/The Mysterious Pill Plot", Dick Moores "Goofy's Mechanical Wizard/The Wonderful Whizzix", and Jack Bradbury's "Pick one" mouse if you're familiar with them? How do they stack up to Gottfredson?

3. What is the best American/non-italian Mouse story you've ever read?

4. What do you think of the Egmont revival that began in the very late 90's to retool their mouse stories more in the vein of Gottfredson? Step in the right direction or needs more work? Is Mickey more interesting of a character now that he has traits of his old personality back as opposed to the "know-it-all-never-and-barely-a-mistake detective" of the Murry era?

5. What is the most Barksian Mouse story you have ever read? Again, no Gottfredson nominations please?

6. Speaking of Barks, what is your opinion of "Riddle of the Red Hat?" Barks is already self-professed with having said that Gottfredson's Mouse was a major influence on his work. Unfortunately the mouse he was forced to work with during his tenure at Western was bland and watered down one. Do you think things could have been different under seperate circumstances?

7. What would a modern day creator need to do to make Mickey always as interesting to read as his duck counterparts in your opinion?

8. The Murry era introduced many recurring villians though few were used to thier full potential. What is your opinion on Dangerous Dan and Idgit? Evil Emil Eagle (let's ignore the Lockman Gearloose rivalry for a bit)? Scuttle Catfoot? Anyone else that I've forgotten?

9. The Disney Era Mouse was seen as being WAAAAY too Superhero-ish and not at all like Murry OR gottfredson to many people's disdain. While Stephen DeStefano is a wonderful artists, the stories he was on didn't really capture the true essence of Mickey and instead (unfortunately) made him Marvel-like and unappealing. however, one story does stick out amazingly as a constant fan favorite. What is your opinion of the "Big Fall/A Phantom Blot Bedtime Story" two-parter if you have read it? Subsequently, has anyone read the 2 part "Return to Blaggard Castle" story that was serialized in Disney Adventures and if so what are your thoughts on that?

10. What do you want to see done with the Mouse and Goof cast now?

And that's that. Morbid curiosity gets the better of me quite often, so I'm curious as to how people will answer.

It's great to have a Murry thread; thanks, Jonathan!
My problem is that there are sooooooooooooo many points in your message that would each deserve a thread of their own-- and more knowledge on my part.

I have no idea about those three Murry stages you mention, for instance; maybe the ones I know are all from roughly the same period.
In any case, I have always enjoyed his stories-- oh, and, actually, one should not overlook Carl Fallberg; I don't know what percentage of the Murry-drawn stories he wrote, but they certainly did form a team.
I like Fallberg's inventivity; he often came up with very original stories and true mysteries.
Good humor, too. I read "The Phantom Fires "for the first time two nights ago, and it had a real laugh out loud Goofy moment [slight spoiler ahead]: Mickey and he are being pursued by the villains and they get separated in the woods; Mickey does not dare call Goofy, as the bad guys would naturally hear them; Goofy has the same thought, but, of course, he comes up with a genuinely Goofy-genius idea, and yells: "Oh, er... uh... Sam! Where are yuh? It's yore ol' pal... er... uh... George!" And to top it off, it even works! [Bad Guy:] "Wait! He said Sam and George! Weren't those guys named Mickey and Goofy?" :D

I also like Bradbury & Moore's work a lot-- style and stories.

As for Scarpa, I prefer the early stories.

I will have to read some of the stories you mention. I still have plenty fo comics (Gladstone, Disney, Gemstone) to read, which I "only" got in the past two years. You might find it odd or perhaps even slightly (?) pathological, but I don't read everything at once, as soon as it's bought (as I used to as a kid); it's partly a matter of time, but it's also because I like to always have something left in store, to know there's still something to read (and discover).

There have been some very good recent stories, but I need to check the credits; in those, Mickey is often a bit more of the carefree, lucky-go-happy little guy he was at the beginning (though not as mischievous), rather than a super detective. I also like Stefan Petrucha's funny "X-Files"-like stories.

Quote:Some of the MM stories I like best are the lates 40s-early 50s Gottfredson. They're as funny and as inventful as the ones from the 30s "gold age", without some of the "childish" aspects.
I have to admit that I'm not a huge fan of the earliest Gottfredson but that doesn't have anything to do with the stories themselves, moreso (for me anyway) it's because in comparison to his later work everything from that era (the early 30's in general) was just so primitive - be it animation, comics, television. The MM strips of that period are an incredibly reflective product of its time and really show how little progress had been made in the birth of all media like it. But given its "childishness, simplicity, and naivety" I don't suppose you can fault it for that since even Superman, Fleischer Popeyes, and many black and white cartoons had that aura about them.

Quote:I think it is somehow a pity that Tello at Egmont (Gutenberghus) used Murry instead of Gottfredson as a model.
Gotta admit that I am no fan of Tello's artwork. Never have liked it and never will. I'd almost say his Mickey model is worse than late Murry. It probably sounds awfully mean and I don't mean it as such, but the stories and art by those who imitate that specific Murry period represent to a tee the stiff, zombie-ish, bland and brain-dead personality traits that are both utterly devoid of life and movement. Many if not all of the Tello stories and art are exactly what people who do not know better come to hate, expect, and unfortunately associate Mickey comics and animation with. I can't honestly sit here and say that I have ever found any enjoyment from a Tello story or cover that has been printed in the states because 95% of them are just so incredibly dull. :(

Quote:Although there are a few good Murry stories, I find that that a lot of the plots are very average. "The Wonderful Whizzix" by Moores is excellent, as a few other early ones. Ken Hultgren's is good as well, but he did very few Mickeys unfortunately (NOT the Mysterious Pill Pilot, btw).
So I noticed. I can never tell the difference between Riley Thompson and Ken Hultgren because there is so few material I've seen for either artist. (Hultgren even less so). The only thing I really know about Hultgren was that he was the only artist on Dell's staff to draw Mickey with his no shirt/button shorts look - at least for a while anyway. =\

Quote:But apart from Gottfredson and a few others, the best Mickey stories are mainly Italian to me: De Vita (Massimo)
I really lament the fact that out of all the Italian greats, Massimo DeVita is the only one left (so far) out of the "big italian three" who has had no exposure at all in the states outside of a trio of Rescue Rangers stories printed by Disney. :( One of these days I'd love to read "The Ice Sword Saga" in English just to see what all the fuss is about. That was one of my greatest laments about the pocketbooks being that we never got some of the truly great Italian material, but instead just a mild trickling of mediocre Egmont three-panel stuff. But that's a whole 'nother topic.

Quote:Cavazzano, Scarpa or more recently Casty did very good MM stories. Another very good but less known Mickey author is Attilio Mazzanti (with eg "Astralpippo n. 9999"), the infamous writer of the "Donald Duck in year 2001" story.
See, I don't even know who Casty and Mazzanti are and already I'm intrigued. We've NEVER seen Cavazzano's mice - only his ducks. I just feel like there are so many opportunities for good Mouse work that we've missed in Mickey's home country and there are little to no outlets to see this material in print. Every outlet we have had has been squandered to some extent. It's very depressing.

Quote:Let's see the best non Gottfredson Mickey story that I read would possibly be the Mystery Weaponeer Saga in Mickey Mouse Adventures (Disney Series) #s 11-14 or Mythos Island if crossovers count.
"The Mystery Weaponeer Saga" had a big impact on me as a kid as the only Gottfredson I'd read before reading that story was Sky Island. I loved it way back when, but I noticed later on - while checking Inducks - that it (along with nearly every other story from Disney's run) has never been printed overseas except in Brazil and it never dawned on me as to why until I began to delve deeper into the Mouse universe more and more. Paul Murry's Mouse and Disney's run in general represent two very strong, and often very negative extremes of the character. One is either very average or the other is very cliche. Mickey's personality becomes almost superheroish in the "Mystery Weaponeer", so much so that instead of being a regular citizen of Mouseton or a semi-popular adventurer/amatuer detective, instead he becomes his cities protector ala Gizmoduck or Darkwing Duck (to a lesser extreme but it's still there). This does not surprise me given that it was written by Marv Wolfman - whose background is entirely superhero comic based.

"The Mystery Weaponeer" is not not a bad story, but in terms of Mickey, looking back on it, I don't think it is a great one. I kind of look at it as way more exciting than your average Murry mouse but it suffers from serious personality flaws on all characters involved. It tried to modernize Mickey TOO MUCH, to the point where - outside of the villian revelation which was cool as heck - it rams its modernization down your throat. The twist at the end once we found out who the real villian was is the ONE SAVING GRACE that still makes the story worthwhile to me. Because of that, I have a fondness for that Mickey villian to this day. But, in terms of staying truer to the stronger character traits established by early Murry and Gottfredson - i would have to say that from the Disney run, "The Big Fall/A Phantom Blot Bedtime Story" still stands to this day as the single best Mickey story in the Disney run and IMHO one of my personal top ten Mickey stories ever. It's one of the few Mickey stories from that run along with Stephen DeStefano's painted Fantasia adaptation and "Return to Blaggard Castle" from Disney Adventures that deserve proper reprinting somewhere on down the line.

Quote:I'm not sure who did the first story but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Floyd Gottfredson.
"The Mystery Weaponeer" was written by Marv Wolfman. Part 1 was wonderfully drawn by Stephen DeStefano. The remaining parts were by Mike Royer (who tried to imitate DeStefano's erraticly wonderful sense of layout, but didn't quite make it work IMO).

Quote:I do know the second story was by Pat and Carol McGreal, and Erik Hedman.
I think I'll make a separate topic for Mythos Island/Formula One/The Orb Saga later on...

Quote:If Floyd Gottfredson is the Carl Barks of the Mickey Mouse Universe and Paul Murry is the Tony Strobl who are the Don Rosa and William Van Horn of the Mickey Mouse Universe?
Don Rosa? We don't have one. William Van Horn? Noel Van Horn of course.

At least two persons will know why I am frowning right now. :(

Quote:For a long time, Gottfredson's Mickey was pretty "childish" in his attitude; it's not exactly being carefree and adventurous, but rather unstable / fickle, and rash. He would rush headlong into any (ad)venture on a whim, act without thinking of the possible circumstances, not out of courage, but because it sounds fun.

Fortunately, Gottfredson gradually gave him more brains.
Gottfredson's earliest Mickey is a stewpot of nonsense. XD

Mickey: "Boy howdy Goofy! Pegleg Pete just stole an atomic bomb! Let's snatch it back and run around with it while fighting off cannibals willy nilly!"
Goofy: "Boy I shore is silly and full of gag based plot movement today! A-HUYCK!"
Pegleg Pete: "&%$&^ @%$&@^ KITTENS $&@%$@ VEAL PARMESEAN &^%$@&^ PUDDING!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Early Ugly Beak Donald: "LOOK AT ME I HAVE A TEMPER AND BOUNCE AROUND A LOT!!! WAKWAKWAKWAKWAKWAK!!!!"

I'd say Gottfredson began to reach his best around Blaggard Castle/The Mail Pilot but he didn't hit his peak and soar into Barksian status until the inception of "Sky Island" which I think still holds the crown as his greatest Mickey story ever next to the incredibly complex "Monarch of Medioka" which went so far as to create an international incident.

Well, Noel could have developed a very different style of storytelling & drawing, but they are in fact truly akin to his father, albeit in the mouse's world.

It's actually really interesting that he chose to work on Mickey rather than Donald. He may have felt his dad's competition was too tough to try and equal, and that Mickey was in deed of a similar touch-- though of course, the full William Van Horn take on the ducks could not work as such with Mickey, since much of the humor relies on Donald's temper and flaws.

Why do you think of Ferioli as a mouse equivalent of Rosa, Roger?

Like Robb, I cannot think of any.
First, what would be the defining qualities?
In terms of graphic style, the meticulousness, surely; the great amount of detail and the geometric precision; story-wise, an equal attention paid to logic and real world physics, and of course, the devotion to Barks' universe.

Speaking of style, to get back on track, the funny thing about Murry is the way the characters are so immediately identifiable as "good" or "bad"; this is true of Gottfredson and other artists (Eli Squinch does not look too trustworthy), including Barks (the pig villain), but somehow it has always struck me more in Murry's art.

Re "I really lament the fact that out of all the Italian greats, Massimo DeVita is the only one left (so far) out of the "big italian three" who has had no exposure at all in the states"
... and Bottaro. I've been pestering Ramapith so that a Bottaro story could be published in the US. But maybe it will happen soon now.

I want some DeVita (duck and mouse) and Bottaro too.

Gottfredson had great stories (The Seven Ghosts, Blaggard Castle, the Phantom Blot, ....), and comparing the various Gottfredson-drawn stories are a bit tough, either because he oversaw everything or because the Bill Walsh stories are so drastically different from anything that came before.
They deserve a thread of their own, because they are in a category of their own; you may prefer them or not, but it cannot be simply because he was a better writer or not; his mouse universe is quite his own.
The uncertainty you allude to, Jonathan, was a major component, and his villains were remarkable characters.

Quote from user: Lars JensenI truly, honestly cannot think of any current writer or artist who wants to be the Don Rosa of Mickey Mouse comics. Lots and lots of detail in both artwork and storyline, a somewhat large reliance on real-world people, places and happenings, attention almost exclusively to... I suppose it would be Gottfredson's stories, a strict timeline, a delving into deep layers of... I guess it would be Mickey's personality... I can't think of anyone who has ever told me that he or she would want to do that. Who are you thinking of here, WB?
Could it be done with Mickey? I remember writing something on this subject on a French Disney board a few months ago.

With Scrooge, you have years and years and years of untold stories, with a few "landmarks" established by Barks (to give the character a bit of background, but also a lot for the sake of a gag).
Mickey is much too young to have much of a past to be told.

While Mickey might be considered to embody the enthusiasm and adventurous spirit of the "young" United States of America, Scrooge undoubtedly embodies the American Dream of self-achievement, both as reality (the poor immigrant working his way to wealth) and myth (the tall-tale, the heroic nature of such an accomplishment against all odds, ...).
The latter seems a lot more powerful, possibly because it is easier to grasp (from pauper to extra-zillionnaire) than "adventure" (moving West was risky, but it was more tough and gritty than glamorously heroic), and it is the accomplishment of a lifetime (or shorter, but still a long time) rather than one episode; as a matter of fact, it can be made up of a whole lot of adventures, and thus encompass it all.
"How a scottish lad struck it rich over several decades" is thus somewhat more appealing than a string of loosely tied adventures, however exciting each might be; the "how" part of it, the mystery of it, is most appealing.

What mystery is there about Mickey?
His origins? :\

Taking Gottfredson as reference seems obligatory, given his importance, but what remains to be told?
Barks gave a few bits here and there. Gottfredson told it all; due to the continuous nature of the daily strip, and the fact that Gottfredson approached it in a "diary" way, there are no ellipses between the adventures.

A "Life and Times of Mickey Mouse" could thus merely amount to a re-telling of his Gottfredson adventures.

If you don't take those stories as a starting point, what can you do? Write a long saga of your own? But then again, what would it all lead to? "Commissioner Mouse"? "President Mouse"? :\

On the other hand, the more detailed artwork and "realistic" elements could certainly be done. I would be curious to see the result.

I took a while to reply to this because I really did take time to think about how I wanted to answer what question Lars posed to me. I think I've figured out what I wanna say now. But first ...

Quote:Yes, Bottaro was a giant as well. And there are others, such as GB Carpi...
Bottaro, huh? I've never heard of him. I looked him up on Inducks. For an Italian artist, he has such a...non-Italian-ey style. Dunno how to explain it, but in the few Inducks scans that exist I get the feeling that his artwork has a "Al Taliaferro-if-he-were-doing-modern-day-duck work" look to it. Very interesting. What makes him and this GB Carpi fellow stick out from Scarpa and Cavazzano? I'm always interested in learning about new artists I haven't heard of before. :)

**SIDENOTE** I just realized you said "was." He doesn't do Disney work anymore?

Quote:Gottfredson had great stories (The Seven Ghosts, Blaggard Castle, the Phantom Blot, ....), and comparing the various Gottfredson-drawn stories are a bit tough, either because he oversaw everything or because the Bill Walsh stories are so drastically different from anything that came before.
I was always under the impression that Gottfredson had approval over everything and pretty much oversaw all story, plot, and direction himself up until Bill Walsh came on-board. I remembered reading somewhere that this was because he never felt comfortable leaving Osborne and DeMaris to their own devices. It kind of shows if you look at the credits chronologically. I can see why given both scripters had distinct but faint cliches in their style of storytelling. Under Osborne, Mickey was incredibly random, slightly childish, overspirited, and often acted without a thought or care in the world. Under DeMaris, Mickey was still hella punchy and free spirited but his scripting style was mellower and relied more on gags to pull the story along except in rare cases. It wasn't until Walsh came along that Mickey took an absurdly dark and humanistic tone in which the threats were real and deadly ones (previous Shyster and Pete stories notwithstanding) and Pegleg Pete went from being a serious recurring threat to a devious recurring threat.

The only time Gottfredson ever let Osborne and DeMaris do their own solo work without plot accompaniments was on Sunday strips which in general are not bad (they feel more like your standard 10 to 8 page gag vignette we'd see by Barks or something) but they do not pack anywhere near a punch, polish, or distinctness as the dailies when story comes into play. I.E. - "Rumplewatt the Giant"/"The Robin Hood Adventure" (all very "eh" Osborne Sunday stories) and "Service With a Smile (a Mickey style gag story with a 10 pager style to it by DeMaris): all interesting, mindless stories in their own right, but nowhere near the level of power and quality shown in "Sky Island"/"The Mail Pilot" or "The Land of Long Ago"/"Outwits the Phantom Blot".

Quote:They deserve a thread of their own, because they are in a category of their own; you may prefer them or not, but it cannot be simply because he was a better writer or not; his mouse universe is quite his own.
I've always kind of looked at Walsh's mouse as a darker, sharper, and in the later years just like Barks - more cynical and absurd - look at the Mouse universe as set up in the earlier Gottfredson years. A lot of the old school elements are always in the forefront - adventurousness, overeagerness, childishness, naievety, lack of perfection - but the storytelling style that Walsh brought was so very different and I think that may be part of why Gottfredson let him take the reign in plotting: namely because given Walsh's background (having just come off Mary Poppins) - here was someone who could actually plot. I tend to think it all really works together - one era being the logical extension for the next.

Quote:The uncertainty you allude to, Jonathan, was a major component, and his villains were remarkable characters.
Agreed - Osborne's Pete was dumb and mean but had a cunning streak in him, DeMaris's Pete was mean and devious also, but more often than not you couldn't help but laugh at the dumb cluck (see "Pierre" in "Mystery at Hidden River" or his over-the-top infatuation with Minnie in "The Captive Castaways"), but Walsh's Pete by far remains my favorite version of him: dumb, cunning, brutal, menacing, and slightly evil - starving Professor Glockenspiel to skin and bones ("The World of Tomorrow"), implying and joking about having his comrades assasinated ("The Moook Treasure"), and not only having the know how to stockpile and hide his ingredients but setting up an elaborate plot to gas Mickey rather than slug him on top of drugging and exploiting the newcomer Eega Beeva ("Pflip's Strange Power").

Walsh Pete is the perfect combination of a classic recurring archenemy. Can you imagine how utterly insane he could have made The Phantom Blot had Gottfredson decided to use him more than just once or how much more deadlier an already deadly Sylvester Shyster (who was the primary and meanest of the Mickey villians at one point) would be had he stayed in the strip? It's a rather scary thought.

Quote:Romano Scarpa still loved Mickey right up until he passed away, yes.
You were probably one of the last few of the pros to write stories that he wound up drawing, Lars. What was it like working with him? I'm incredibly curious! :)

Quote:This is Goofy's nephew Gilbert, right? Where did you see that last name?
Yes. the brainiac one. And as far as the name...

Eh, force of habit I'm afraid. You see, Goofy's real name - Goofus Dippy Dawg - was really only JUST cemented here in the states with that Goofy anniversary issue of WDC&S and through one of the McGreal's stories that was printed here. I have to get it out of my head that "Goof", the rather stupid surname that was used in Goof Troop for both he and Max and in the early animated shorts, is not canon. I figured by reason of deduction, that would make Gilbert's real name either Gilbert Goof (if you want to go the Duck/McDuck angle) or Gilbert Dawg (if you want to be literal about it). I think "Gilbert Goof" sounds better myself, but what do I know.

.....

**SIDE NOTE** Heh. Given that Max's name was actually descibed as "Max Goof", I wonder if that would make him "Max G. Dawg" if he were a regular mainstay of classic continuity? Too bad his existance is a clusterfreak of continuity woes. Of course - you could just say Max's mother was Glory Bee since she is a Gottfredson character and was created by Walsh/Gottfredson for the purposes of giving Goofy a stable girlfriend that wasn't Clarabelle. Mystery solved? :)

Quote:Yeah, Dan, Idgit and Emil all have potential. I've only used Emil Eagle once, but it was lots of fun.
I wish more writers and editors had your attitude Lars. Just because a character was used in a series of bad and/or awful stories doesn't mean said character can't be made fun, relevant or used in new stories that DON'T follow the trail of the old ones.

Sadly, it reminds me of the current situation with Ludwig Von Drake in some places.

Editor bias can oftentime really stifle creativity, can't it?

Quote:I truly, honestly cannot think of any current writer or artist who wants to be the Don Rosa of Mickey Mouse comics. Lots and lots of detail in both artwork and storyline, a somewhat large reliance on real-world people, places and happenings, attention almost exclusively to... I suppose it would be Gottfredson's stories, a strict timeline, a delving into deep layers of... I guess it would be Mickey's personality... I can't think of anyone who has ever told me that he or she would want to do that. Who are you thinking of here, WB?
This is the part that kept me from replying to this thread immediately. Before I go any further I suppose I should clarify something:

I love Don Rosa's epic style and sense of storytelling. I love his short stories also which I think are HILARIOUS (I've heard he doesn't think so highly of them and for the life of me I can't see why). And though at times I do I love his detailed artwork and sense of intricacy - i'm probably among the minority that do think that sometimes he can "overdo" it. His ducks have a "stiffness" about them that has always bugged me somewhat, but the stories, the intricate sense of adventure, the fact that his stuff is not dumbed down, and is JUST PLAIN FUN TO READ makes me smile.

However - and gawd knows I don't want this to turn into a Rosa bashing thread because lord that's hella annoying - there are quite a lot of his storytelling PHILOSOPHIES that I do not agree with under many circumstances. Key among them being the strict timeline and the "death" for Scrooge McDuck. I think it's somewhat selfish to put a time of death on a character written and loved by so many people. I know he's used the "adding realism to a fictional character" argument before - but in my humble opinion it reeks more of fanfiction rather than proper storytelling and that's something that if not left in check could be DEVASTATING.

Now - I don't mind death in Disney comics. Truth be told I think the death of Fergus and Downy in Life and Times was not only sad, but one of the most poignant moments in Disney comics. I wish other writers did, or were allowed to do it WHEN RELEVANT in making a STRONGER story. Walsh used death in his Mickey stories and it made it all the more powerful when it happened. To this day, I want to know what became of Huey, Dewey, and Louie's parents - and I've got a strong feeling that if it ever gets told, that too would be a very sad but poignant and powerful story. However - there is a stark difference to be found in the deaths of Fergus or Downy or possibly Della and her husband, or one of Pegleg Pete's ancestors as opposed to the death of Scrooge McDuck. Unlike the previous characters, Scrooge is primary. For one of the writers to hint at that and make it part of a publically discussed - albeit noncanon - timeline, I think is just a little bit irresponsible and (I'm sorry Don, I really love your work) mildly pretentious. Now of course - if you think about it with a realistic aspect, as Don does, NOBODY will live forever, but the thing about comics - specifically Disney comics - is that realism only went so far. Barks and Gottfredson and Walsh and Scarpa knew when to let the realism show and when to not be bound so tightly by their own constraints. Thankfully, Don has editors to make sure that it doesn't become the case where "Scrooge's eventual death" never comes to fruition.

Now someone will probably read that and go, "You're taking it way too seriously Jon. He's just putting finality on his timeline." But that's just it - what he did in Life and Times was a MASTER STROKE of work but it's not just his timeline. Carl Barks provided the framework. Don Rosa took those random bits of jokes and throwaway comments and turned it into one of the best stories done this decade, but he couldn't have done that without Barks' throwaway lines in the first place. That research and dedication is indeed worthy of all the awards it got, but - let's examine many brought up conundrums a bit further:

I like Rumpus McFowl as Scrooge's half brother. I like the fact that after Downy died, Fergus chose to move on and rebuild his life and family. It adds a sense of development to a character that was not even often featured in the story where he was mentioned and I think William Van Horn had balls for going that route. Plus, Rumpus/Scrooge adds a whole new dimension of tales that can be told not just with Scrooge but with the other ducks as well. I also find Gideon McDuck - Scrooge's other half brother - created and used by Romano Scarpa to be interesting. Now Gideon does not fit in with "the last of the Clan McDuck" - but what's to say he didn't come around at the same time as Rumpus? Scarpa is seen as being just as influential, if not moreso in Italy, than Barks. So by strict, militaristic adherence to Rosa's tree - does that invalidate Gideon and Rumpus? No. Not at all. And thats what I like. What I don't like is when someone who is STRICTLY Barks/Rosa mistakes it so that Rosa's tree is the BE ALL END ALL of everything. I'm certain NOBODY wants to see Tony Strobl's million and one throwaway family members as continuity - but you can't help but find Rumpus or Gideon relevant to the mythos, just as others would probably see Matilda or Hortense relevant as well.

Furthermore - Don Rosa has a burning hatred of Fethry Duck - largely because he is not Barks. Normally - given how Gold Key/Dell was back in the day i can see WHY he'd dislike non-Barks characters that could be so utterly stupid that they deserve to be locked away and never seen again. But it is this shortsightedness that prevents him from taking Fethry - an otherwise fun character - and using him in Barksian like spin so that he can be more relevant and loved by those that see it differently. Heck - if that had not been what was done with Fethry in Italy - where he WAS used to his fullest potential - I could sympathize the dislike. But Fethry was one of the few lucky non-Barks character from America that someone somewhere embraced way back when, and actually made relevant. It's no different that what Barks did for Grandma Duck (who was nothing more than a gag character in the Taliaferro strips back in the day) and Gus Goose (who never even had a speaking role the one cartoon he co-starred in).

Lars - you took a throwaway character - Douglas McDuck, a Scrooge cousin who was utterly forgettable much like any random late-Strobl Gold Key "relative" and not at all worth bringing back, as well as Whitewater Duck - a Barks character in a oneshot no less - and used them in a story that not only made both interesting but added new foils for both Scrooge AND Donald. I think that says something about other writers' looser approach to the Duck world VS Rosa's strict adherence to it VS some writers' TOO LOOSE approach. Limiting ones self as Rosa does is not a BAD thing as Rosa has done a COMMENDABLE job of expanding upon the Barks world, but I think that sometimes Rosa limits HIMSELF to the breadth and scope of stories that he could tell.

I detest most late Murry stories - but I find Dan and Idgit and Emil Eagle (who come from one of the WORST Mickey periods IMO) to have enough potential that they are salvageable in the context of the true Gottfredsonian world, much as Douglas and to a greater extent Fethry were salvageable for the Barksian Donald world. Adherence is nice, but strict adherence and hubris to it be it through the writers, editors, OR fandom can lead to rifts which can ultimately lead to downfall and nonsense. This was never an issue way back when, but I understand that in some mild sense it is now among some writers and/or fans which I think is distressing.

So I guess the answer to your question Lars, is that i wasn't really thinking of anybody in particular, but I was thinking moreso along the style, sense of storytelling, and detail of artwork without the general faults that tend to be associated with Rosa. We don't have anyone who continues Gottfredson's work in an approach that Rosa continued Barks: IE Someone who continued where Gottfredson left off with his characters but did it in a Rosa-like way WITHOUT falling prey to the things that many don't like about his PHILOSOPHIES

...if that makes any sense at all.

Someday I would love to do work drawing and writing Mickey myself (David knows this first hand). I share a lot of the same dreams as a fan on the outside that guys like you or Rosa once did, but instead of doing ducks only, I've always been a fan of the mouse world. I hope that should I ever get that chance, god willing, I wouldn't limit myself so much that it would be something of a hindrance to the other writers around me or that it would stifle myself or my stories and art either. I cannot speak for Europe, but I think Don's one of the best thing to happen to the ducks in America since the awful and terrible Whitman days. Just as many people know him here as they do Barks. HOWEVER sometimes I wonder if Don's POPULARITY among Europeans and Americans - not Don himself - is one of those side effect monsters that could must be sometimes kept in check lest it get too out of hand.

Eh. What do I know? :P

(If you wanna continue the Rosa discussion please do it in another thread so we don't get this one too far off topic. I have a feeling I'll probably have to expand my views on that if the wrong person takes something I said out of context. And the last thing I wanna do is open a can of worms that can never be closed... =\)

Quote:What mystery is there about Mickey?
His origins? :\

A "Life and Times of Mickey Mouse" could thus merely amount to a re-telling of his Gottfredson adventures.
Quote:That's one of my points. You don't become an adventurer; you may be caught in events or go on an adventure, but it's not a "concrete", "quantifiable" goal, unlike becoming the world's richest man (or duck-- or even the second-richest).
Agreed - one thing I always liked about the Mickey world VS the Duck world is that in the Barks world the ducks are more focused on family and togetherness whereas in Gottfredson's mouse world there's more of a focus on friendship and comradery and standing up for the little guy. That is not to say that the Mouse world doesn't have family - its just that for some reason - even now - no one has really explored it outside of maybe Morty and Ferdie. Gottfredson's original plan was to make Morty and Ferdie not like Huey Dewey and Louie and instead given them different traits even though they eventually looked alike and dressed alike. The very quiet Ferdie vanished and Morty was given a lot of personality traits that really made him stand out from his brother. But many writers ignore this and often turn the two into HDL clones because that is what was done during the Dell/Gold Key era.

Having said that - If there is one thing I appreciate about Disney's run is that they tried to give Mickey his own identity. Mouseton doesn't exist in the Egmont world, but in the states I know I HATED that Mickey and Goofy lived in Duckburg. I thought it was very lazy that Mickey was never given a chance to really develop his own identity OR CITY outside of the ducks. It's like no one ever thought to try something different. IMO, rewriting the bit in Mythos Island that made Mouseton and Duckburg twin cities on the west coast of Calisota was really a stroke of brilliance on Gemstone and the McGreal's. It allowed for the ducks and mice to co-exist naturally, not make previous stories where Mickey is shown in Duckburg non canon, and still allowed Mickey and his crew to keep an identity they'd established in the states.

Mickey doesn't really need a too much origin beyond that. We know he grew up on a farm. We know he met Minnie as she wandered by the farm they lived on. If you want to put the Rosa/Barks/Gottfredson worlds together: we know Mouseton is probably a mid-sized suburb/city outside of Duckburg - probably connected to Duckburg via a bridge over the Tulebug since it's the main river in the Disney comics world. Since Gottfredson always depicted Mickey's hometown as being small even as time went on, we can figure Mouseton is quiet and access to a lot of rural areas and is not a larger metropolis type area like Duckburg. It fits with the barnyard motif established in the early shorts and comics. In fact - all early Mickey characters are animals or concepts you'd find in a rural barnyard:

Mickey & Minnie - Mouse
Goofy - Old dog you just can't bear to get mad at
Horace - Horse
Clarabelle - Cow
Pluto - New dog that's far more efficient and curious
Donald - Duck
Clara - Chicken
Patricia & Percy - Pigs
Pete - Predatory cat
Shyster - Weasel

All we're missing is a barn owl. :)

Personally, rather than his origins I would like to see more expansion on Mickey's BACKGROUND - who he is, why he does what he does, why his friends react and love him, and why he is the linchpin for all of them. Plus better adventure stories that take more of an extended, detailed Gottfredsonian focus to storyline in charactrer development and adventure than a phoned-in Murry one or a mouse story disguised as a Donald Duck story - my biggest pet peeve. Just because Rosa did his way of telling Scrooge one way does not mean the same should be done for Mickey. An idea on the early days could be nice, but....everything in moderation.

Also Roger - we know how Mickey and Minnie meet - in the first serial under Walt Disney and Byron Erickson's expansion on that in "The Past Imperfect" - and afterwards how both met Pete and Shyster - which is told in the second Mouse serial: "Death Valley".