It's interesting for me to see you describe this as an advantage:
If anything, Murry’s Mickey was prevented from being made the butt of whatever joke struck Walsh’s fancy; character consistency be damned.
For me, the fact that Walsh's Mickey could be comically humiliated—and frequently caught in awkward spots—made him infinitely more relatable as a character, even if an occasional gag didn't seem consistent (i. e. moments of Mickey with a Donald-like temper).
For me, the weakness in the later Western Publishing stories—Murry's included—is that Mickey seems very close to a plaster saint; coded as a member of the establishment who always gets his (underclass)man; and, should Goofy or another character ever seem to have any actual fun, wastes no time tut-tutting at them parentally. It's a persona that the stories seemingly expect us to admire, but who apart from some mild heroism is almost the weakest link.
Don't get me wrong; I enjoy much about the Murry stories and work hard to anthologize them at Fantagraphics; but to me it's almost as if they could star any main character (and, when Western produced Andy Panda crimesolving stories, they effectively did).
It's interesting for me to see you describe this as an advantage:
If anything, Murry’s Mickey was prevented from being made the butt of whatever joke struck Walsh’s fancy; character consistency be damned.
For me, the fact that Walsh's Mickey could be comically humiliated—and frequently caught in awkward spots—made him infinitely more relatable as a character, even if an occasional gag didn't seem consistent (i. e. moments of Mickey with a Donald-like temper).
For me, the weakness in the later Western Publishing stories—Murry's included—is that Mickey seems very close to a plaster saint; coded as a member of the establishment who always gets his (underclass)man; and, should Goofy or another character ever seem to have any actual fun, wastes no time tut-tutting at them parentally. It's a persona that the stories seemingly expect us to admire, but who apart from some mild heroism is almost the weakest link.
Don't get me wrong; I enjoy much about the Murry stories and work hard to anthologize them at Fantagraphics; but to me it's almost as if they could star any main character (and, when Western produced Andy Panda crimesolving stories, they effectively did).
I agree with what you're saying about Walsh vs. Murry, and about how Mickey's foibles in Walsh makes him more human. Though, at the same time, it did feel like a lot of Mickey's actual, established personality of 1930-42 went out the window with Walsh. For instance, Walsh's Mickey from the mid-40s onward lusts after practically any woman he meets, while his long-standing relationship with Minnie generally seems to be something he tries to get away from or tip-toe around. That's a pretty far cry from Gottfredson's earlier - and usually very charming - portrayal of Mickey and Minnie's relationship. (Sure, Mickey could ocassionally be attracted to other women in stories before Walsh, but Walsh's characterization gave things a very different feel.)
While it's completely true that the Murry Mickey stories could in essence star anybody, I kind of feel the same about Walsh's Mickey, different as they are. That is, I feel like Walsh's stories could really be about any "everyman" character the way Walsh liked to write them. A lot of the characteristics and traits that made Mickey a specific, interesting character when Gottfredson steered the stories are just gone.
I think that the Mickey of Paul Murry is what most people think when they think in Mickey - a detective/adventurer (in almost all the stories), meaning that (perhaps retroactively?) the Mickey of his stories "sounds" as the more quintessential Mickey.
I think that the Mickey of Paul Murry is what most people think when they think in Mickey - a detective/adventurer (in almost all the stories), meaning that (perhaps retroactively?) the Mickey of his stories "sounds" as the more quintessential Mickey.
I don't necessarily agree. I think a couple of generations who grew up with Murry's Mickey think of that iteration first and foremost. But for new and coming generations, with easier access to Gottfredson's work as well as modern creators like Casty, I think the picture will be different.
It has a lot to do with what you were exposed to and when you were. It's not until recently that Gottfredson was made properly available to the general public, and prior to Egmont's mid-90s "reboot" of Mickey into a more Gottfredson-esque version of the character, we Europeans were for the most part getting Fallberg/Murry-inspired stories with reprints of classic Murry being treated a lot like Barks reprints were. Murry Mickey was held in high regard because his stories were clearly the inspiration for the new stories we were getting at the time, and they were in general of much higher quality and had much more personality. And as for contemporary American audiences, Murry stories were by far some of the best Disney comics they were getting at the time.
I don't think a whole lot of people actually regard Fallberg/Murry as being better than Gottfredson, but a lot of the distaste for Murry stories seem to come from younger readers that actually got exposed to a lot of Gottfredson right away and thus get to compare Murry with him. And while Murry stories may not be up to the standards of Gottfredson stories, they're entertaining reads on their own, and compare extremely favorably to all the Murry-inspired drek that followed him for quite a while.
Murry was a lot of people's "good mouse artist". Would he have been held in that regard had people at the time been given more Gottfredson to read? Probably not. But there was obviously SOMETHING there that led so many people to favor his mouse stories over all the other mouse stories they read.
Murry loomed much larger in markets that didn't have Gottfredson and didn't have Scarpa—or a lot of Scarpa.
Some Egmont editors in the 1980s and 90s, then in charge of compiling their pocketbooks, didn't like Scarpa's art style, which is why more Scarpa was not published in Egmont-world at that time. (In some markets, earlier pocketbooks that included Scarpa were kept in print, but still the /current/ Scarpa material wasn't used very often.)
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king; so it is with mice, or something to that effect...
Murry loomed much larger in markets that didn't have Gottfredson and didn't have Scarpa—or a lot of Scarpa.
Some Egmont editors in the 1980s and 90s, then in charge of compiling their pocketbooks, didn't like Scarpa's art style, which is why more Scarpa was not published in Egmont-world at that time. (In some markets, earlier pocketbooks that included Scarpa were kept in print, but still the /current/ Scarpa material wasn't used very often.)
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king; so it is with mice, or something to that effect...
Jeez. THAT's kind of disturbing to hear...
I had been wondering why more Scarpa wasn't published in the later Scandinavian Donald Pockets, so this explains a lot. If I recall, some Scarpa comics in the 80s ended up in the less popular Uncle Scrooge pocketbook series, which I have the impression Egmont often used for material they didn't find good or interesting enough for the main pocketbook series. But obviously a lot of Scarpa material didn't come out anywhere.
The Dutch publisher still prints Murry stories to this day, if INDUCKS is to be believed. They were occasionally featured in the Dutch weekly when I was a kid, but they already stood out against the other content in the magazine as fairly old and staid. On the Dutch forums at the time, it was one of the less favorite features, along with the many 70s/80s Egmont stories that were being at the time (in the early 2000s). But I gather he's still popular with nostalgic reasons.
We did get quite a bit of Gottfredson over here, and early too. A Mickey monthly digest that ran from 1976 to 1983 published a lot of both Gottfredson and Murry -- primarily Sundays, which were likely more easy to color. Early Mickey Sundays also features on the back cover of Donald Duck in 1978, one of my favorite years for back covers. That's the Gottfredson period I prefer, too -- roundabout 1932 to 1935.
I would put Murry above Walsh in that I agree, Walsh's Mickey is too distorted. Murry's Mickey may be bland, but never un-Mickey like. The only problem I have with Murry is that too many of the plots he illustrated are just so dang repetitive. Mickey, Goofy, scientist, Scuttle, Pete, rinse and repeat. As for Scarpa and Casty, I've seen their Mickeys in action, but they don't stand out to me as being the very best of their kind. I'm a Duck fan after all, my favorite Scarpa stories are his Scrooge stories from the 1960s. After Gottfredson, the first comics Mickey I would think of is probably the Mickey used in Italian comics in the '90s.
People talk up Scarpa, but I think Martina did some genuine classics back in the day too. "Piranka Kuka Baruka", "The Secret of Zeta Bi" and "The Invisible Bandit" are all really solid mystery plots with all kinds of intriguing twists and turns.
People talk up Scarpa, but I think Martina did some genuine classics back in the day too. "Piranka Kuka Baruka", "The Secret of Zeta Bi" and "The Invisible Bandit" are all really solid mystery plots with all kinds of intriguing twists and turns.
Honestly, I don't think everything Scarpa did was gold. A lot of his stuff from the 80s and 90s strikes me as good, but most often not as great or exciting as his 50s, 60s and (to an extent) 70s work. But it varies; there are some high points later on too.
That said, though, Scarpa clearly remained enthusiastic about his work, and his art was energetic and lively to the very end. I always enjoyed the new stories by him in the weekly in the late 90s and early 2000s (by which time he was working for Egmont in Denmark).
It's interesting for me to see you describe this as an advantage:
If anything, Murry’s Mickey was prevented from being made the butt of whatever joke struck Walsh’s fancy; character consistency be damned.
For me, the fact that Walsh's Mickey could be comically humiliated—and frequently caught in awkward spots—made him infinitely more relatable as a character, even if an occasional gag didn't seem consistent (i. e. moments of Mickey with a Donald-like temper).
For me, the weakness in the later Western Publishing stories—Murry's included—is that Mickey seems very close to a plaster saint; coded as a member of the establishment who always gets his (underclass)man; and, should Goofy or another character ever seem to have any actual fun, wastes no time tut-tutting at them parentally. It's a persona that the stories seemingly expect us to admire, but who apart from some mild heroism is almost the weakest link.
Don't get me wrong; I enjoy much about the Murry stories and work hard to anthologize them at Fantagraphics; but to me it's almost as if they could star any main character (and, when Western produced Andy Panda crimesolving stories, they effectively did).
Ramapith,
I suppose my reasoning for Murry’s more staid characterization appealing to me resides in my background to Mickey Mouse comics. I NEVER even knew Mickey Mouse comics existed until I saw Volume #1 of the Gottfredson Library in the Library of Congress bookstore (which means I have you and Floyd to thank for emptying my wallet! Got me hooked!). Yes, a diehard MM fan who went to WDW nearly every year of his childhood until my teenage years (family finances and high school prevented yearly excursions at that point) and collected MM plushes like mad never knew of MM comics. A distressing sign on how far Disney comics were allowed to disappear in the public conscience. Believe me if little MouseMasetro knew MM comics existed he would have brought the whole stock. So, as I read through Gottfredson’s run, I encountered the heroic Mickey along with a Mickey that the narrative generally held up as a beacon of goodwill with the proper support it deserves.
Once Walsh was installed as the writer, I realized how Mickey slowly became more of a target. Sometimes it worked really well. Other times, I disliked how contorted his character would become for the sake of a gag. Of course, Walsh also gave me some of my favortie MM stories: Atombella and the Rhyming Man, World of Tomorrow, and Mickey’s Dangerous Double. But the shift jarred me. Often the Walsh Mickey felt alien to the Mickey portrayed in the middle volumes. I still liked his Mickey but something felt lacking.
When I first started reading the Murry serials (this is after I completed the FG volumes and started the Disney Masters series. Many thanks for all the hard work on those volumes), I already heard of all the Murry MM stereotypes: dull, staid, peevish. When I read the stories, I noticed some of those traits but at other times, I appreciated his dedication to solving a crime even if his 1930s gung-ho attitude was missing.
To put it best, I suppose my viewpoint comes to that I have always viewed Mickey as a hero to be admired and all of the MM content I grew up seeing (cartoons and parks) generally portrayed him that way so the Walsh's take which could border on iconoclastic surprised me. But like I said, Walsh has given me plenty of iconic MM stories to enjoy. So, has Murry. And I do think Murry’s Mickey could relax at times. Fun is allowed!
Something that I mentioned on another thread and that gets a bit overlooked is that Murry also had his fans in Italy. One of them is Massimo De Vita. Giorgio Cavazzano also lauded Murry in an interview I read recently. In fact, I think a lot of the Italian detective stories from the 70s and 80s strike a pretty good balance between the Gottfredson/Scarpa line of things and the Murry type of story. One quintessential example is this one: inducks.org/story.php?c=I+TL+1302-AP
There are times in the story where Mickey really veers on the edge of arrogance, even driving the mayor and O'Hara crazy because he has a inkling of what's happening while the two are basically risking their careers and reputations. Also, Goofy is kind of dumb and only provides some gags (although him sabotaging Mickey's fishing is almost post-modern and strangely appropriate considering how fishing has now become taboo due to internal restrictions). Still, there is a bit more playfulness than in a lot of "Murry type" stories.
My biggest complaint isn’t Murry’s art but Carl Fallberg’s writing. Bill Walsh, Romano Scarpa and his writers, Casty, and even the writers in “The New Adventures of The Phantom Blot” all created stories that weren’t as predictable and bland as Carl Fallberg’s were. Fallberg’s stories are fine one at a time, but after reading a bunch of them one after the other, they start to run together.