Post by That Duckfan on Apr 1, 2020 15:48:41 GMT
I've been thinking a lot lately about how longtime Disney characters relate to the modern world. Back when Barks was creating Duckburg, he did so with a satirical eye to the society of his time. In the 70 years since, some elements have been updated, others have not.
Which brings me to Uncle Scrooge. I've been re-reading a lot of Barks stories recently, and the role Scrooge plays in his his stories changed over time. He started out as this morally ambiguous force, sometimes antagonistic to Donald, sometimes providing a springboard for a story. (Sometimes both of these at the same time.) Scrooge losing his money worked as a kind of karma (most clearly demonstrated in The Magic Hourglass, A Christmas For Shacktown and A Financial Fable, and to Donald in The Trouble With Dimes). Sometimes it was just the result of a funny ten-pager (Terror of the Beagle Boys, The Big Bin on Killmotor Hill). The antagonism between Scrooge and Donald got played up in some overseas continuities -- especially the Italian comics, where it stayed for decades.
But then something happens: Scrooge gets his own title. He becomes the protagonist of his own story starting with Only A Poor Old Man, and it's as if Barks wipes the slate clean to introduce a more sympathetic Scrooge. The sentimental value he attaches to his money becomes a way for Barks to give him a heart -- and it's a version of the character later Scrooge writers (most notably Don Rosa) have run with. It provides us with a way to connect with Scrooge as he tries to hold on to his possessions.
Because Scrooge's money continues to be in danger. The bin gets destroyed (The Money Well, Hall of the Mermaid Queen, Land beneath the Ground), his cash gets changed into greenbacks a couple times (The Round Money Bin, How Green Was My Lettuce), but now, the story always ends up re-establishing the status quo. Scrooge is the hero, after all.
But is it the same? Scrooge's sentimental connection with his money doesn't get brought up again after Only A Poor Old Man. If anything, Barks finds a better symbolic representation of this bond when he introduces Scrooge's #1 Dime a year later.
Of course, I can't speak in absolutes because every writer has their own feelings about the character, but overall Scrooge's image has become more positive over the decades. He still plays an antagonistic role every now and again, but rarely to the extent we saw in 1947-51. ""Me --- I'm different! Everybody hates me and I hate everybody!" echoes like a relic of an earlier time.
But when I try to imagine what a contemporary version of Duckburg would look like, inspired by Barks' satirical eye on society, that darn Money Bin sticks out like a sore thumb over the Duckburg skyline. There's a fantastic-illionaire whose whole ethos is about acquiring money, and keeping it. And that makes me feel uncomfortable, you know? We're in an era where massive wealth disparity is one of the main economic concerns. Now, I know that I should keep contemporary politics and Disney comics an arm's length away from one another --- thinking of other long-running franchises that find themselves in the middle of a culture war --- but as a writer, it's important to keep an eye on your relevance. Today's Scrooge equivalent is Jeff Bezos: owning the wealth of a small country, dominating certain trade sectors, and giving charity not as much as a glance. And I just don't feel that I could write a story where that guy is the hero.
I'd like to see a return to a more morally ambiguous (or outright antagonistic) Scrooge to reflect the changing times, but I'm aware that I'm in no position to demand anything either.
What's your take on Uncle Scrooge as a character? Am I being too political? Are the Beagle Boys out of touch? Are they a sign of how difficult it is to create long-lasting kid-friendly villains in the Scrooge environment? Or are the comics forever bound to some version of the 1950s? Discuss.
Which brings me to Uncle Scrooge. I've been re-reading a lot of Barks stories recently, and the role Scrooge plays in his his stories changed over time. He started out as this morally ambiguous force, sometimes antagonistic to Donald, sometimes providing a springboard for a story. (Sometimes both of these at the same time.) Scrooge losing his money worked as a kind of karma (most clearly demonstrated in The Magic Hourglass, A Christmas For Shacktown and A Financial Fable, and to Donald in The Trouble With Dimes). Sometimes it was just the result of a funny ten-pager (Terror of the Beagle Boys, The Big Bin on Killmotor Hill). The antagonism between Scrooge and Donald got played up in some overseas continuities -- especially the Italian comics, where it stayed for decades.
But then something happens: Scrooge gets his own title. He becomes the protagonist of his own story starting with Only A Poor Old Man, and it's as if Barks wipes the slate clean to introduce a more sympathetic Scrooge. The sentimental value he attaches to his money becomes a way for Barks to give him a heart -- and it's a version of the character later Scrooge writers (most notably Don Rosa) have run with. It provides us with a way to connect with Scrooge as he tries to hold on to his possessions.
Because Scrooge's money continues to be in danger. The bin gets destroyed (The Money Well, Hall of the Mermaid Queen, Land beneath the Ground), his cash gets changed into greenbacks a couple times (The Round Money Bin, How Green Was My Lettuce), but now, the story always ends up re-establishing the status quo. Scrooge is the hero, after all.
But is it the same? Scrooge's sentimental connection with his money doesn't get brought up again after Only A Poor Old Man. If anything, Barks finds a better symbolic representation of this bond when he introduces Scrooge's #1 Dime a year later.
Of course, I can't speak in absolutes because every writer has their own feelings about the character, but overall Scrooge's image has become more positive over the decades. He still plays an antagonistic role every now and again, but rarely to the extent we saw in 1947-51. ""Me --- I'm different! Everybody hates me and I hate everybody!" echoes like a relic of an earlier time.
But when I try to imagine what a contemporary version of Duckburg would look like, inspired by Barks' satirical eye on society, that darn Money Bin sticks out like a sore thumb over the Duckburg skyline. There's a fantastic-illionaire whose whole ethos is about acquiring money, and keeping it. And that makes me feel uncomfortable, you know? We're in an era where massive wealth disparity is one of the main economic concerns. Now, I know that I should keep contemporary politics and Disney comics an arm's length away from one another --- thinking of other long-running franchises that find themselves in the middle of a culture war --- but as a writer, it's important to keep an eye on your relevance. Today's Scrooge equivalent is Jeff Bezos: owning the wealth of a small country, dominating certain trade sectors, and giving charity not as much as a glance. And I just don't feel that I could write a story where that guy is the hero.
I'd like to see a return to a more morally ambiguous (or outright antagonistic) Scrooge to reflect the changing times, but I'm aware that I'm in no position to demand anything either.
What's your take on Uncle Scrooge as a character? Am I being too political? Are the Beagle Boys out of touch? Are they a sign of how difficult it is to create long-lasting kid-friendly villains in the Scrooge environment? Or are the comics forever bound to some version of the 1950s? Discuss.
