Post by Baar Baar Jinx on Jan 15, 2017 3:21:40 GMT
Did Rosa ever reveal when and how Fergus' brothers died? Their passing is never mentioned in any stories. Was Fergus the oldest of the McDuck brothers? Also, how did Donald truly expect to get away with impersonating Jake McDuck in "A Christmas for Shacktown"? Did he really think that an uncle of Scrooge, himself a man in his 80s, was still alive? Then again, Scrooge never reveals that he saw through Donald's disguise ... are we to believe Barks intended for Jake to still be alive after all? On a related note, DuckTales introduced an uncle of Scrooge's, "Catfish McDuck", who was clearly based off of Barks' character, Pothole McDuck, from the "Great Steamboat Race". Barks never pictured him, and Life of Scrooge hadn't yet been released, so I understand why he looks different from Rosa's depiction (and Rosa had hardly made his mark yet when DuckTales was starting up), but why the name change?
Did Rosa ever reveal when and how Fergus' brothers died? Their passing is never mentioned in any stories. Was Fergus the oldest of the McDuck brothers? Also, how did Donald truly expect to get away with impersonating Jake McDuck in "A Christmas for Shacktown"? Did he really think that an uncle of Scrooge, himself a man in his 80s, was still alive? Then again, Scrooge never reveals that he saw through Donald's disguise ... are we to believe Barks intended for Jake to still be alive after all? On a related note, DuckTales introduced an uncle of Scrooge's, "Catfish McDuck", who was clearly based off of Barks' character, Pothole McDuck, from the "Great Steamboat Race". Barks never pictured him, and Life of Scrooge hadn't yet been released, so I understand why he looks different from Rosa's depiction (and Rosa had hardly made his mark yet when DuckTales was starting up), but why the name change?
I believe Don Rosa has hazarded guesses in interviews about Jake and Angus's deaths. However, it seems that several uncles of Scrooge have been shown to still be alive in S-coded and Italian stories, so Jake still being alive in 1951 wouldn't actually be all that absurd. It's certainly my headcanon. Disney Ducks seem to naturally be very long-lived; see Quagmire, Scrooge's great-uncle from whom he inherited in the early 1950's in another Barks story. And to be fair, anyway, Donald did make himself look very old as Jake, older than even Scrooge. However, you're right on this: Don Rosa did say that his theory is that Scrooge knew Jake was dead and was just messing with Donald (which is also why he didn't bother to include Jake borrowing ten cents from Scrooge in 1908).
I do not know for a fact why Pothole was changed to Catfish, but if I had to hazard another guess than "the writers got confused", I'd say they were afraid kids wouldn't be familiar with the term "pothole" and wanted a similar name that even four-years-olds would naturally associate with a riverboat captain.
Did Rosa ever reveal when and how Fergus' brothers died? Their passing is never mentioned in any stories. Was Fergus the oldest of the McDuck brothers?
Rosa's personal notes about birth and dates of the characters was first made public in this DCML message from 1994. The dates of Fergus and his brothers are:
Note that in A Letter from Home Rosa changed Fergus' birth date from 1830 to 1835. I think he did that to lessen the ten-year age gap between him and Downy, an age gap caused by the goof of having Downy's birth date (as listed in Lo$ part 9) being 1840 instead of 1830 as per Don's notes. The mistake, or diversion from his original plans, had already been discussed in this DCML from 1993, written before revealing all the birth and death dates; Rosa stuck with Downy's birth date being 1840 and confirmed it in A Letter from Home. Anyway, the change of birth date for Fergus means he is now the younger brother rather than the middle brother.
Of course, 19?? doesn't tell you when Pothole and Jake died, only that they were still alive in 1900, when Pothole was 71 and Jake was 68. I always figured Jake's disappearance between Lo$ part 7 (1896) and part 9 (1902) means he died between those chapters, and the introductory text of the first Italian Lo$ book I read also says that.
Also, how did Donald truly expect to get away with impersonating Jake McDuck in "A Christmas for Shacktown"? Did he really think that an uncle of Scrooge, himself a man in his 80s, was still alive? Then again, Scrooge never reveals that he saw through Donald's disguise ... are we to believe Barks intended for Jake to still be alive after all?
The issue was raised in the DCML back in 1993. Rosa said:
I show Jake McDuck all through the "Life of $crooge" series, but he just sorta disappears along the line. By the last chapter he would be dead, as would all the other McDucks except $crooge. Naturally I don't show or speak of ALL these deaths -- but I DO deal with the deaths of both $crooge's mother and father in scenes unlike ANYTHING that have ever been in a Disney funnybook.
Note that the message above is one of the many sources to reveal Don originally thought that Matilda and Hortense were both dead in the present, even though as we know he later changed his mind, at lest for Matilda. Anyway, a user commented the mention of Jake's death:
Then it's strange that Donald dresses up as Jake in "Christmas for Shacktown" to fool Scrooge and that he falls for it, isn't it?
As for whether Jake McDuck was alive at the time of "Christmas for Shacktown"... no. $crooge knew that, that's why he saw right through Donald's disguise and gave him the bum's rush. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.
A similar discussion happened in 2001, and this this was Rosa's take of it (I didn't edit "part 3.5" which obviously was meant to be "part 6.5"):
Okay... I have long since considered the meaning of this sequence in "Xmas for Shacktown", if any. And I decided there is none beyond the fact that it at least tells us $crooge has/had an Uncle named Jake. I made a mental note that nothing else in that scene would force me to say anything else for certain about Jake if I ever used him again. We see Donald finding a picture of Jake in a scrapbook, but Donald may not have known anything else about him for certain... perhaps Jake died 50 years earlier? And even though $crooge seemed to not be surprised to see his long-dead uncle show up, I knew I could always say that $crooge could see it was Donald in disguise, especially if $crooge knew it couldn't possibly actually be his dead uncle. And he put on the act about the loaned shilling (was it?) for Donald, just to flummox him. Frankly, in my view of this Universe, Jake would surely be dead by 1952 (time of the "Shacktown" story), or else he'd be well over 110 years old. I had originally planned to have Jake as a character in my "Vigilante of Pizen Bluff", "Lo$" part 3.5, as the Uncle whom $crooge has a wild west adventure with, but I then decided that Uncle Pothole the pulp-fiction writer would be more fun.
On a related note, DuckTales introduced an uncle of Scrooge's, "Catfish McDuck", who was clearly based off of Barks' character, Pothole McDuck, from the "Great Steamboat Race". Barks never pictured him, and Life of Scrooge hadn't yet been released, so I understand why he looks different from Rosa's depiction (and Rosa had hardly made his mark yet when DuckTales was starting up), but why the name change?
Not sure why they felt the need to change "Pothole" into "Catfish". Whatever the reason, I guess they felt it was not big deal since they were doing loose adaptiations rather than direct ones, and since DuckTales in set in an alternate continuity anyway.
Disney Ducks seem to naturally be very long-lived; see Quagmire, Scrooge's great-uncle from whom he inherited in the early 1950's in another Barks story.
I don't think Scrooge inheriting Quagmire's watch necessarily means he died recently.
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2017 13:20:32 GMT by drakeborough
Of course, no matter what Rosa tried to make of it for his own "timeline", that was not at all what the joke in Barks' story was about. The point was that Scrooge actually DOES get tricked by DD's disguise, but that even his beloved old uncle won't escape Scrooge' miserly behaviour.
Of course, no matter what Rosa tried to make of it for his own "timeline", that was not at all what the joke in Barks' story was about. The point was that Scrooge actually DOES get tricked by DD's disguise, but that even his beloved old uncle won't escape Scrooge' miserly behaviour.
It may be, but I think Scrooge's seeing through Donald's disguise makes more sense in light of Scrooge's modern characterization, the one that conventionally starts with "Only a Poor Old Man" (and "Christams for Shacktown" predates it), in addition of avoiding the implausibility of Scrooge's uncle being still alive.
Of course, no matter what Rosa tried to make of it for his own "timeline", that was not at all what the joke in Barks' story was about. The point was that Scrooge actually DOES get tricked by DD's disguise, but that even his beloved old uncle won't escape Scrooge' miserly behaviour.
It may be, but I think Scrooge's seeing through Donald's disguise makes more sense in light of Scrooge's modern characterization, the one that conventionally starts with "Only a Poor Old Man" (and "Christams for Shacktown" predates it), in addition of avoidi ng the implausibility of Scrooge's uncle being still alive.
In what way, though? Scrooge's miserliness and refusal to forgive a small debt of a relative he has presumably not seen for a long time is fully in keeping with his characterization as portrayed by Barks. On the other hand, if it were true that he saw through Donald's disguise, I expect that Barks would have shown us that. Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise, and coming up with the story that Jake owes him a debt, is less funny than the alternative, that Scrooge was trying to collect an actual debt from a long-lost uncle who unexpectedly reappeared. I think Barks intended the latter. He always placed humor above plausibility.
It may be, but I think Scrooge's seeing through Donald's disguise makes more sense in light of Scrooge's modern characterization, the one that conventionally starts with "Only a Poor Old Man" (and "Christams for Shacktown" predates it), in addition of avoidi ng the implausibility of Scrooge's uncle being still alive.
In what way, though? Scrooge's miserliness and refusal to forgive a small debt of a relative he has presumably not seen for a long time is fully in keeping with his characterization as portrayed by Barks. On the other hand, if it were true that he saw through Donald's disguise, I expect that Barks would have shown us that. Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise, and coming up with the story that Jake owes him a debt, is less funny than the alternative, that Scrooge was trying to collect an actual debt from a long-lost uncle who unexpectedly reappeared. I think Barks intended the latter. He always placed humor above plausibility.
In what way, you say? Well, I think Scrooge not forgiving a small debt of his young nephew Donald is totally different than him not forgiving a small debt from a 100+ years old uncle he hasn't meet for decades (a dear uncle, it is clear) and even demanding a huge compound interest in a rude way. This is not what I expect from the definitive Scrooge, which as I said is usually believed to start from "Only a Poor Old Man" and his own comic book title.
Of course, "Christams for Shacktown" predates OaPOM, but it's hard to avoid reading the older stories without having the later stories in mind. In my opinion, Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise and playing that charade so that Donald is basically hoisted by his own petard is funny. And since nothing in the story contradicts this interpretation, I like to think that's what happened, rather than believing Jake is still alive. But maybe I am conditioned by the fact that I read "Life and Times" (including the introductory article of part 9 saying Jake is dead) before reading "Christmas for Shacktown". There is also a third interpretation, made by a DCML user in this 2001 message:
About Jake:
OK, maybe Scrooge never saw through the disguise. But I don't really believe that he would be alive at this time. So, what about this:
Jake moved to the USA around 1900. After that, the family never heard anything from him. He probably died somewhere between 1910 and 1930, but since his new friends and family did not know his background and his family in Scotland, no McDuck's got to know about his death. So Scrooge THOUGHT that it may would be a chance that Jake would be alive at this stage (even though he had not seen him in 65 years) and welcomed Donald - as Jake. Even though Jake was dead. HAPPY?
Unrelated to this, but still related to Jake: in this Danish story from 1998, Scrooge says he is using his uncle Jake's golf club to help himself feeling his Scottish roots again. Assuming the name Jake was not added by the Italian translator and was present in the original version, I wonder if this was meant to be a reference to "Christmas for Shacktown" or if it just a coincidence.
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2017 15:39:27 GMT by drakeborough
In what way, though? Scrooge's miserliness and refusal to forgive a small debt of a relative he has presumably not seen for a long time is fully in keeping with his characterization as portrayed by Barks. On the other hand, if it were true that he saw through Donald's disguise, I expect that Barks would have shown us that. Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise, and coming up with the story that Jake owes him a debt, is less funny than the alternative, that Scrooge was trying to collect an actual debt from a long-lost uncle who unexpectedly reappeared. I think Barks intended the latter. He always placed humor above plausibility.
In what way, you say? Well, I think Scrooge not forgiving a small debt of his young nephew Donald is totally different than him not forgiving a small debt from a 100+ years old uncle he hasn't meet for decades (a dear uncle, it is clear) and even demanding a huge compound interest in a rude way. This is not what I expect from the definitive Scrooge, which as I said is usually believed to start from "Only a Poor Old Man" and his own comic book title.
Of course, "Christams for Shacktown" predates OaPOM, but it's hard to avoid reading the older stories without having the later stories in mind. In my opinion, Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise and playing that charade so that Donald is basically hoisted by his own petard is funny. And since nothing in the story contradicts this interpretation, I like to think that's what happened, rather than believing Jake is still alive. But maybe I am conditioned by the fact that I read "Life and Times" (including the introductory article of part 9 saying Jake is dead) before reading "Christmas for Shacktown". There is also a third interpretation, made by a DCML user in this 2001 message:
About Jake:
OK, maybe Scrooge never saw through the disguise. But I don't really believe that he would be alive at this time. So, what about this:
Jake moved to the USA around 1900. After that, the family never heard anything from him. He probably died somewhere between 1910 and 1930, but since his new friends and family did not know his background and his family in Scotland, no McDuck's got to know about his death. So Scrooge THOUGHT that it may would be a chance that Jake would be alive at this stage (even though he had not seen him in 65 years) and welcomed Donald - as Jake. Even though Jake was dead. HAPPY?
Unrelated to this, but still related to Jake: in this Danish story from 1998, Scrooge says he is using his uncle Jake's golf club to help himself feeling his Scottish roots again. Assuming the name Jake was not added by the Italian translator and was present in the original version, I wonder if this was meant to be a reference to "Christmas for Shacktown" or if it just a coincidence.
Italian translators rarely make up such continuity. I'm pretty sure it was in the original version. As for Scrooge trying to get compound interest out of the old, dear uncle he hasn't seen in years: is his reaction in Barks's scene frankly any different from his present-day meeting with Goldie in Back to the Klondike? Endearment at first, then "What am I doing? Back to business! You owe me a billion!"
In what way, you say? Well, I think Scrooge not forgiving a small debt of his young nephew Donald is totally different than him not forgiving a small debt from a 100+ years old uncle he hasn't meet for decades (a dear uncle, it is clear) and even demanding a huge compound interest in a rude way. This is not what I expect from the definitive Scrooge, which as I said is usually believed to start from "Only a Poor Old Man" and his own comic book title.
Of course, "Christams for Shacktown" predates OaPOM, but it's hard to avoid reading the older stories without having the later stories in mind. In my opinion, Scrooge seeing through Donald's disguise and playing that charade so that Donald is basically hoisted by his own petard is funny. And since nothing in the story contradicts this interpretation, I like to think that's what happened, rather than believing Jake is still alive. But maybe I am conditioned by the fact that I read "Life and Times" (including the introductory article of part 9 saying Jake is dead) before reading "Christmas for Shacktown".
I think this discussion underlines one of the fundamental differences between Barks-Scrooge and Rosa-Scrooge, namely that Rosa tended to romanticize and sentimentalize the character in a way Barks never did. I see where you might have issues with Rosa-Scrooge behaving the way Scrooge does in "Christmas for Shacktown", but Barks-Scrooge's miserliness and greediness tended to trump all else. Rosa constructed a character for whom the pursuit and acquisition of wealth was more important than the wealth itself, but for Barks-Scrooge money was often the prize. So, Scrooge demanding that Jake pay back his loan with interest minutes after meeting him is not jarring for me (Jake being alive at all is, but that's because I tend to take a more realistic view of the Duck universe than even Barks did, apparently).
Re: the Italian introductory article that referred to Jake's death; do you remember what it said exactly? Did Rosa have any input into it?
Scrooge MacDuck said:
As for Scrooge trying to get compound interest out of the old, dear uncle he hasn't seen in years: is his reaction in Barks's scene frankly any different from his present-day meeting with Goldie in Back to the Klondike? Endearment at first, then "What am I doing? Back to business! You owe me a billion!"
This particular instance I would tend to view differently, as I always saw it as Scrooge's way of shrugging off the awkwardness and shyness engendered by his reunion with a woman with whom he has some history. But it's open to interpretation, which is why I like it (Rosa wouldn't have allowed such ambiguity when it comes to Goldie).
Italian translators rarely make up such continuity. I'm pretty sure it was in the original version.
I also think so, but the question is whether "uncle Jake" is an homage to the character created by Barks and reused by Rosa, or if it is a coincidence based on the fact that Jake is a common name.
As for Scrooge trying to get compound interest out of the old, dear uncle he hasn't seen in years: is his reaction in Barks's scene frankly any different from his present-day meeting with Goldie in Back to the Klondike? Endearment at first, then "What am I doing? Back to business! You owe me a billion!"
Well, I do think it's very different: in that story Scrooge was trying to build up a façade of being a jerka$$ to avoid showing his hidden softness, though he manages to keep the façade only about half of the time: that's basically the main theme of the story. And it's implied that collecting the debt was just and excuse to go back to the Klondike and meet her again.
I think this discussion underlines one of the fundamental differences between Barks-Scrooge and Rosa-Scrooge, namely that Rosa tended to romanticize and sentimentalize the character in a way Barks never did. I see where you might have issues with Rosa-Scrooge behaving the way Scrooge does in "Christmas for Shacktown", but Barks-Scrooge's miserliness and greediness tended to trump all else. Rosa constructed a character for whom the pursuit and acquisition of wealth was more important than the wealth itself, but for Barks-Scrooge money was often the prize. So, Scrooge demanding that Jake pay back his loan with interest minutes after meeting him is not jarring for me (Jake being alive at all is, but that's because I tend to take a more realistic view of the Duck universe than even Barks did, apparently).
I think it is questionable whether "Barks-Scrooge's miserliness and greediness tended to trump all else", since there are many examples which would contradict it. Of course Barks and Rosa are different authors and as such they have, or had, thieir own views, but I think it's undeniable that in the early Scrooge stories Barks was still trying to understand what to do with the character, which often changed in physical appearance and personality.
Scholars usually use the start of the Uncle Scrooge comic title (where he became the main character in his own stories rather than just being a supporting character in Donald Duck stories) as a point to indicate when Scrooge was standardized into his definitive persona. Of course it's a conventional point, and like all conventions it has its problems and limits; plus, even in Uncle Scrooge stories, Barks would not mind doing a change if it suited a particular story. Still, I think it is equally undeniable that in most of the early stories Scrooge was more of an a$$hole than he was in later stories.
So yes, if this was a Barks Uncle Scrooge story released at a later time I could see Scrooge behaving differently to a long-lost beloved uncle who also happens to be over 100 years old. But I guess each reader will have his own interpretation of that scene, and I'm fine with that.
Re: the Italian introductory article that referred to Jake's death; do you remember what it said exactly? Did Rosa have any input into it?
I am referring to the Paperdinastia volume, released in 2000: it was the first edition of Lo$ I got and I still have it. Rosa did not have any input in it, or in any other edition of his Italian works, with the exception of the 2016 release of the two volumes of Lo$ as the first two issues of the new comic title Tesori International. Anyway, the introductory article of chapter 9 of Paperdinastia includes the following bit (I'm translating it into English):
"In Scotland there's not his mother to wait for him. She passed away, as we learned in the previous chapter, in 1897. Even uncle Jake, which we last saw in the seventh chapter (it was 1893 [sic: it actually was 1896]), is no more. And soon it will be the turn of his father, old Fergus, to follow them in an ineluctable, stupendously poetic exception to the rule of comics signed Walt Disney, in which no one ever dies."
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2017 18:00:59 GMT by drakeborough
Did Rosa ever reveal when and how Fergus' brothers died? Their passing is never mentioned in any stories. Was Fergus the oldest of the McDuck brothers?
Rosa's personal notes about birth and dates of the characters was first made public in this DCML message from 1994. The dates of Fergus and his brothers are:
Note that in A Letter from Home Rosa changed Fergus' birth date from 1830 to 1835. I think he did that to lessen the ten-year age gap between him and Downy, an age gap caused by the goof of having Downy's birth date (as listed in Lo$ part 9) being 1840 instead of 1830 as per Don's notes. The mistake, or diversion from his original plans, had already been discussed in this DCML from 1993, written before revealing all the birth and death dates; Rosa stuck with Downy's birth date being 1840 and confirmed it in A Letter from Home. Anyway, the change of birth date for Fergus means he is now the younger brother rather than the middle brother.
Of course, 19?? doesn't tell you when Pothole and Jake died, only that they were still alive in 1900, when Pothole was 71 and Jake was 68. I always figured Jake's disappearance between Lo$ part 7 (1896) and part 9 (1902) means he died between those chapters, and the introductory text of the first Italian Lo$ book I read also says that.
Also, how did Donald truly expect to get away with impersonating Jake McDuck in "A Christmas for Shacktown"? Did he really think that an uncle of Scrooge, himself a man in his 80s, was still alive? Then again, Scrooge never reveals that he saw through Donald's disguise ... are we to believe Barks intended for Jake to still be alive after all?
The issue was raised in the DCML back in 1993. Rosa said:
I show Jake McDuck all through the "Life of $crooge" series, but he just sorta disappears along the line. By the last chapter he would be dead, as would all the other McDucks except $crooge. Naturally I don't show or speak of ALL these deaths -- but I DO deal with the deaths of both $crooge's mother and father in scenes unlike ANYTHING that have ever been in a Disney funnybook.
Note that the message above is one of the many sources to reveal Don originally thought that Matilda and Hortense were both dead in the present, even though as we know he later changed his mind, at lest for Matilda. Anyway, a user commented the mention of Jake's death:
Then it's strange that Donald dresses up as Jake in "Christmas for Shacktown" to fool Scrooge and that he falls for it, isn't it?
As for whether Jake McDuck was alive at the time of "Christmas for Shacktown"... no. $crooge knew that, that's why he saw right through Donald's disguise and gave him the bum's rush. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.
A similar discussion happened in 2001, and this this was Rosa's take of it (I didn't edit "part 3.5" which obviously was meant to be "part 6.5"):
Okay... I have long since considered the meaning of this sequence in "Xmas for Shacktown", if any. And I decided there is none beyond the fact that it at least tells us $crooge has/had an Uncle named Jake. I made a mental note that nothing else in that scene would force me to say anything else for certain about Jake if I ever used him again. We see Donald finding a picture of Jake in a scrapbook, but Donald may not have known anything else about him for certain... perhaps Jake died 50 years earlier? And even though $crooge seemed to not be surprised to see his long-dead uncle show up, I knew I could always say that $crooge could see it was Donald in disguise, especially if $crooge knew it couldn't possibly actually be his dead uncle. And he put on the act about the loaned shilling (was it?) for Donald, just to flummox him. Frankly, in my view of this Universe, Jake would surely be dead by 1952 (time of the "Shacktown" story), or else he'd be well over 110 years old. I had originally planned to have Jake as a character in my "Vigilante of Pizen Bluff", "Lo$" part 3.5, as the Uncle whom $crooge has a wild west adventure with, but I then decided that Uncle Pothole the pulp-fiction writer would be more fun.
On a related note, DuckTales introduced an uncle of Scrooge's, "Catfish McDuck", who was clearly based off of Barks' character, Pothole McDuck, from the "Great Steamboat Race". Barks never pictured him, and Life of Scrooge hadn't yet been released, so I understand why he looks different from Rosa's depiction (and Rosa had hardly made his mark yet when DuckTales was starting up), but why the name change?
Not sure why they felt the need to change "Pothole" into "Catfish". Whatever the reason, I guess they felt it was not big deal since they were doing loose adaptiations rather than direct ones, and since DuckTales in set in an alternate continuity anyway.
Disney Ducks seem to naturally be very long-lived; see Quagmire, Scrooge's great-uncle from whom he inherited in the early 1950's in another Barks story.
I don't think Scrooge inheriting Quagmire's watch necessarily means he died recently.
Uncle Quagmire had to have lived at least into the 1950s, as Gyro was an adult in that story, and there was no talk of Scrooge inheriting the watch from another family member (who would have inherited it from Quagmire).
Uncle Quagmire had to have lived at least into the 1950s, as Gyro was an adult in that story, and there was no talk of Scrooge inheriting the watch from another family member (who would have inherited it from Quagmire).
I am not doubting that the story ("Heirloom Watch") takes place in the 1950's. However, the story just says Scrooge has been named sole heir of his great-uncle Quagmire's estate, not that Quagmire died recently. As far as we know, he may have been dead for 50+ years before Scrooge got his estate. As for the watch, the story makes it clear that Scrooge had that for many years.
drakeborough: I also think so, but the question is whether "uncle Jake" is an homage to the character created by Barks and reused by Rosa, or if it is a coincidence based on the fact that Jake is a common name.
I wouldn't say "Jake" is a common name at all. Extremely high probability that Dave Rawson was referring to the "Uncle Jake" we all know.
I wouldn't say "Jake" is a common name at all. Extremely high probability that Dave Rawson was referring to the "Uncle Jake" we all know.
Indeed, this source has a list of the top 100 boys' names in Scotland, and Jake is #72 in 2016; it was #58 or #54 in 2015 (depending on the source), #59 in 2014 and #76 in 2013. For some reason I expected it to be in a higher position. Still, Jake is often a diminutive of Jacob, who is #11 in 2016; it was #11 or #10 in 2015 (depending on the source), #19 in 2014 and #20 in 2013. Then there's the name Jack, who is #1 on every list since 2008: non-English speakers often mistake it for Jake (or vice versa) due to similar spelling and pronunciation, plus the name Jack may also derive from Jacob.
Anyway, you are right that it may be a reference to the "Uncle Jake" we know, and I'm listing it as such in my notes of stories that refer to Barks and/or Rosa. I hope to finish my list soon so that I can make it public.
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2017 22:10:18 GMT by drakeborough
I wouldn't say "Jake" is a common name at all. Extremely high probability that Dave Rawson was referring to the "Uncle Jake" we all know.
Indeed, this source has a list of the top 100 boys' names in Scotland, and Jake is #72 in 2016; it was #58 or #54 in 2015 (depending on the source), #59 in 2014 and #76 in 2013. For some reason I expected it to be in a higher position. Still, Jake is often a diminutive of Jacob, who is #11 in 2016; it was #11 or #10 in 2015 (depending on the source), #19 in 2014 and #20 in 2013. Then there's the name Jack, who is #1 on every list since 2008: non-English speakers often mistake it for Jake (or vice versa) due to similar spelling and pronunciation, plus the name Jack may also derive from Jacob.
Anyway, you are right that it may be a reference to the "Uncle Jake" we know, and I'm listing it as such in my notes of stories that refer to Barks and/or Rosa. I hope to finish my list soon so that I can make it public.
Jack is definitely a nickname for John, not for Jacob (though of course there may be individuals named "Jacob" who choose to go by "Jack"). Rawson is an English speaker and is not going to confuse the two. And I wasn't saying that "Jake" is uncommon in Scotland. It's not a common name to me, an American. (Peak use in 2005--1,000 per million, according to Name Voyager.) Dave Rawson is also an American. It's not a name an American is likely to pick out of a hat. Scrooge has been said to have an Uncle Jake in comics Rawson is sure to know; Rawson had Scrooge referring to an Uncle Jake. I'd be very surprised indeed if he wasn't referring to Uncle Jake from "Shacktown" et al. I would eat my hat, or my spats.