Rumpus was a funny but honestly unnecessary character. But that is also part and parcel of what made William Van Horn’s work unique...the odd little characters like Rumpus Mc Fowl, Woimly Filcher and Baron Itzy-Bitzy that only showed up in a Van Horn story.
I always got the impression that he was trying to popularize this creation of his and make him mainstream by using him as much as possible in the hopes that others would follow suit. It never worked, since to date Van Horn is the only writer to have ever used Rumpus (barring a cameo appearance in [...]
In my experience, Van Horn's editors within Egmont actively discouraged other creators from using Rumpus, in part due to the belief that only Van Horn could get him just right.
Admittedly, I speak only of the period when I was an Egmont editor (1997-2005), so things may have changed since then. Still, the idea that no one else wanted to use Rumpus is a bit inaccurate, so I felt I should clarify.
I've read a very, very small amount of stories featuring Rumpus, so I'm not the best judge. Still, from what I've read thus far, the character isn't too appealing. He's not awful, and I think he works very interestingly as a foil to Scrooge. As already mentioned, Jubal Pomp arguably fills almost the same role minus the half-brother stuff. I haven't read many Jubal Pomp stories either, but from what I have read, Jubal seems to be smarter and craftier than Rumpus. Maybe I'm wrong, and Rumpus is just as clever as Jubal. If I'm right, I think there's an argument to be made that Rumpus does fit a niche that no other character does. As the Scrooge McDuck Wiki puts it, "Rumpus McFowl is a lazy, gluttonous man who has neither the finesse of Jubal Pomp nor the laid-back, simple needs of Gus Goose..."
While I might be okay with him as a side character and foil to Scrooge, I can't say that I'm convinced that he's good as a leading character. The Stick Upis the only story I've read where he was the lead, and I didn't enjoy it very much. The pitch from the very first page is basically, "Hey let's watch this incredibly lazy character waste his time." It's just hard for me to sympathize with Rumpus, and his antics just aren't that entertaining to me. His lethargy makes me feel lazy. Maybe it's just me, but I just find him unappealing in the lead. Does anyone have any suggestions for stories where Rumpus is the main protagonist?
Anyway, the design, backstory, and concept of Rumpus is all pretty good. His design isn't the most appealing, but it really fits his character. His backstory is very intriguing and an important part of Clan McDuck lore. The idea of giving Scrooge a lazy half-brother is an interesting one. In theory, he sounds like a very interesting character. In practice, I'm not sure he works all too well. As a side character, I think he does well. As the main protagonist, not so much. Then again, as I've already stated, my sample size for Rumpus McFowl stories is exceptionally small, so I am far from being a good judge of his character, even though I do have opinions on the topic.
No matter what I say or do, know that Jesus loves you.
I always got the impression that he was trying to popularize this creation of his and make him mainstream by using him as much as possible in the hopes that others would follow suit. It never worked, since to date Van Horn is the only writer to have ever used Rumpus (barring a cameo appearance in [...]
In my experience, Van Horn's editors within Egmont actively discouraged other creators from using Rumpus, in part due to the belief that only Van Horn could get him just right.
Admittedly, I speak only of the period when I was an Egmont editor (1997-2005), so things may have changed since then. Still, the idea that no one else wanted to use Rumpus is a bit inaccurate, so I felt I should clarify.
Sometimes i think Egmont is a waste of talent, they don't give freedom to the writers
Titus, while I may have had differences of opinion with other editors at Egmont, any singling out of Egmont for a collective drubbing is uniquely unfair. Every producer of Disney comics has multiple editors and points of view flying around within it—and I've rarely worked for a comics studio, either as writer or editor, in which any creative party had complete freedom; even editors have power over other editors. On some level it's the nature of any big comic company, Disney or no.
(Ask me about working on a DC Thomson British comic sometime... actually, no, please don't!)
I can complain about the Mickey stories I wrote in the 1990s that were shelved, but an editor could talk about the Mickey stories I wrote in the 1990s that they thought were too unbelievably silly, or too difficult for an artist to draw. As a professional, I can't find the very *nature* of an intrinsically collaborative process objectionable, especially after being alternately in the writer OR editor OR colorist position for various different stories, every time reporting to someone else.
I feel downright passionately about the kinds of stories, and the kinds of characterization, dialogue, art and color that I personally want to write, edit, and publish most. In some circumstances I'll argue strongly for why I like what I like. But I can't collectively blame an entire creative house for anything, especially when there are so many differing (and often disagreeing) voices within each one.
As to the criticism leveled against Van Horn vis-à-vis his decision to make Rumpus Scrooge's "sole surviving sibling"; yes, he ignored Gideon (whom he must have been aware of) but he did remain true to the Barks-via-Rosa canon. Barks had already declared (in "Some Heir Over the Rainbow") that Donald, Gladstone and HD&L were Scrooge's only heirs (and in another Barks story Donald refers to Scrooge as his only uncle), and when "Travails" came out, Rosa had not yet published his decision to have Matilda (and, although thankfully withdrawn, Hortense) still be alive.
As to the criticism leveled against Van Horn vis-à-vis his decision to make Rumpus Scrooge's "sole surviving sibling"; yes, he ignored Gideon (whom he must have been aware of) but he did remain true to the Barks-via-Rosa canon. Barks had already declared (in "Some Heir Over the Rainbow") that Donald, Gladstone and HD&L were Scrooge's only heirs (and in another Barks story Donald refers to Scrooge as his only uncle), and when "Travails" came out, Rosa had not yet published his decision to have Matilda (and, although thankfully withdrawn, Hortense) still be alive.
Wait, why do you think Hortense was "thankfully withdraw"? Personally, i would love if she had appeared in a Letter from Home.
Also, Eider Duck and Cuthbert Coot (and Luke Goose, if you consider as canon the fact that he did the in-universe version of the Duck Family Tree) are still alive, so i think when Donald said Scrooge was his sole uncle, he was reffering to his uncles on his mother's side
Wait, why do you think Hortense was "thankfully withdraw"? Personally, i would love if she had appeared in a Letter from Home.
Also, Eider Duck and Cuthbert Coot (and Luke Goose, if you consider as canon the fact that he did the in-universe version of the Duck Family Tree) are still alive, so i think when Donald said Scrooge was his sole uncle, he was reffering to his uncles on his mother's side
We've discussed it on other threads extensively, but I personally can't see Donald's parents still being alive, given the dynamics of the Duck family (matters of inheritance, family gatherings, etc.), and as pointed out, Barks did not think any of Scrooge's siblings were alive.
Isn't Cuthbert Donald's cousin? As for Eider, I believe he died sometime after sending Farragut to Donald.
He is, but Don Rosa made him one generation older than Donald, with a relationship that is IRL that of a cousin (thus fitting the word of the Barks story) but is more commonly used in Disney comics as meaning "distant uncle".
Wait, why do you think Hortense was "thankfully withdraw"? Personally, i would love if she had appeared in a Letter from Home.
Also, Eider Duck and Cuthbert Coot (and Luke Goose, if you consider as canon the fact that he did the in-universe version of the Duck Family Tree) are still alive, so i think when Donald said Scrooge was his sole uncle, he was reffering to his uncles on his mother's side
We've discussed it on other threads extensively, but I personally can't see Donald's parents still being alive, given the dynamics of the Duck family (matters of inheritance, family gatherings, etc.), and as pointed out, Barks did not think any of Scrooge's siblings were alive.
Isn't Cuthbert Donald's cousin? As for Eider, I believe he died sometime after sending Farragut to Donald.
Cuthbert can be considered both Donald's uncle and Donald's cousin. Since he is his great-uncle's son, i like to consider him his uncle
I really dont like the idea of Grandma's children being dead, she had lost his husband and possibly her brother. As Rosa wrote in "The Richest Duck in the World", i think they have a discrete life, maybe far from Duckburg
I really dont like the idea of Grandma's children being dead, she had lost his husband and possibly her brother. As Rosa wrote in "The Richest Duck in the World", i think they have a discrete life, maybe far from Duckburg
Rosa didn't suggest that any of Grandma's relatives, other than the regulars (Donald, Gladstone, HD&L) were alive by the time of "Richest Duck in the World".
I really dont like the idea of Grandma's children being dead, she had lost his husband and possibly her brother. As Rosa wrote in "The Richest Duck in the World", i think they have a discrete life, maybe far from Duckburg
Rosa didn't suggest that any of Grandma's relatives, other than the regulars (Donald, Gladstone, HD&L) were alive by the time of "Richest Duck in the World".
I read all chapters of L&T of Scrooge McDuck. In chapter 12 is clearly said that, nowadays, Quackmore, Hortense and Matilda have a discrete life
Rosa didn't suggest that any of Grandma's relatives, other than the regulars (Donald, Gladstone, HD&L) were alive by the time of "Richest Duck in the World".
I read all chapters of L&T of Scrooge McDuck. In chapter 12 is clearly said that, nowadays, Quackmore, Hortense and Matilda have a discrete life
Not sure if the foreign translations are different, but the English version leaves it ambiguous: