But what does the "** NR" behind the 5-pager "Somethin' Fishy Here" mean? That they didn't pay him for that, since it was the replacement for the 5 cut pages from "Back to the Klondike"?
Check this out as well. www.cbarks.dk/thepayslipsc.htm The **NR meaning is below in the page I pointed out in the other post.
Right -- I see it says, "** Payment not registered in Western's payslips to Barks nor booked by him." That might mean Barks was punished for the pages Western cut from "Back to the Klondike" by having to deliver a new 5-pager without pay. I know that happened with "Trick or Treat": as we can see from the payment sheets for 1952, Barks was only paid for the 23 pages Western used out of the 32 he delivered, and had to provide an additional 9-page story to fill out the issue.
Check this out as well. www.cbarks.dk/thepayslipsc.htm The **NR meaning is below in the page I pointed out in the other post.
Right -- I see it says, "** Payment not registered in Western's payslips to Barks nor booked by him." That might mean Barks was punished for the pages Western cut from "Back to the Klondike" by having to deliver a new 5-pager without pay. I know that happened with "Trick or Treat": as we can see from the payment sheets for 1952, Barks was only paid for the 23 pages Western used out of the 32 he delivered, and had to provide an additional 9-page story to fill out the issue.
Right -- I see it says, "** Payment not registered in Western's payslips to Barks nor booked by him." That might mean Barks was punished for the pages Western cut from "Back to the Klondike" by having to deliver a new 5-pager without pay. I know that happened with "Trick or Treat": as we can see from the payment sheets for 1952, Barks was only paid for the 23 pages Western used out of the 32 he delivered, and had to provide an additional 9-page story to fill out the issue.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here? That you DON'T believe Western punished Barks for the five censored pages in "Back to the Klondike"? The site itself says Barks didn't have any records of being paid for the "Somethin' Fishy Here" 5-pager.
Mestreius: "Comic-book publishers at the time were empathically not obligated to send unused (or used) artwork back to the creators, and in most cases they didn't"
You are totally right indeed, albeit one author may ask for his art to be returned in the event that some piece of art is rejected and not paid for by the editor. Although in this specific case it's indeed possible Barks was actually paid by Western for the censored pages.
Mestreius: "Comic-book publishers at the time were empathically not obligated to send unused (or used) artwork back to the creators, and in most cases they didn't"
You are totally right indeed, albeit one author may ask for his art to be returned in the event that some piece of art is rejected and not paid for by the editor. Although in this specific case it's indeed possible Barks was actually paid by Western for the censored pages.
Barks would have had no reason to bother with asking for his art back, since Western virtually never sent ANY art back. See the story I mentioned about the later "Mythtic Mystery" half-page.
Since we know that Barks wasn't paid for the deleted pages in "Trick or Treat", it makes more sense to me that the same happened with "Back to the Klondike". Not paying him was, in essence, the punishment Western gave Barks for stepping outside the boundaries of "good taste" or "children's entertainment" (in their eyes).
And when the additional 5-pager that Barks had to whip up for the "Back to the Klondike" issue does NOT have payment registered... it does seem like the same thing may have happened there.
I'm sorry, but I just CAN'T believe that Carl Barks was PUNISHED by losing pay for writing and drawing replacement pages for no pay, while ALSO receiving NO PAY for originally submitted pages. That was blatantly against his contract, and Western Publishing was fastidious about sticking to the letter of the contract. I even talked with him about this subject, because I had been involved with Malcolm Willits in the photographing of the original art that Willits had up for auction (which included the panels for "Back To The Klondike" which had been rejected. He told me that he was NOT paid for the deleted panels, but WAS paid for the added story "replacement pages" (and he said that the same system held true for the other stories with rejected pages, and that when Western, themselves, later cut pages/panels out of his stories for advertising or Dell's Pledge to parents, he received payment for all panels he submitted. I'd bet the farm that he was paid for replacement pages, when he didn't get payment for pages which were rejected. Also, he told me that he DID receive the original pages back from Western when he WASN'T paid for them (which is why he DIDN'T receive the original pages back from his submittal of "Queen of the Apple Festival", because that story WAS originally accepted by Western's editor, who was very soon to leave the publisher, and was summarily shelved by the in-coming editor, AFTER official acceptance AND Barks being paid (Chase Craig was one of the two editors, and a woman (whose name escapes me)was the other. I KNOW that Carl received the pages back for most of the unprinted stories and story sections, because, he himself, was the source of many of the earlier pages Malcolm had up for auction. He told me that the reason the first page of the rejected January 1945 Comics & Stories Donald/Jones Christmas Carol story was missing was because he, himself, had given it to a neighbour (friend).
Rob, that's interesting to hear about the opening page of the Jan. 1945 story. It never occurred to me before that the deciding factor in which pages were sent back to Barks was which pages Western had paid for.
As for whether or not to call it a "punishment", maybe that's too extreme a word considering that Barks was paid for the pages that Western actually used. But the fact still remains that, in the case of "Trick or Treat", Barks was paid for 32 pages but had to write and draw, in total, 41 pages (plus the new 1 1/2 page opening for "Trick or Treat"). That's 10 and a half pages and several days' worth of work without pay. And since there's no record of Barks having been paid for the "Somethin' Fishy Here" 5-pager in FC #456, there's a good chance that more or less the same happened there: Western paid Barks in full for the 32 pages of "Back to the Klondike", but since they only used 27 pages worth of material, they instructed him to do an additional five pages without pay.
Here's some of what Michael Barrier says about "Trick or Treat" and "Back to the Klondike" in Funnybooks (pages 307-308), and about how Western's reception to them resulted in Barks taking fewer creative chances:
Rob, that's interesting to hear about the opening page of the Jan. 1945 story. It never occurred to me before that the deciding factor in which pages were sent back to Barks was which pages Western had paid for.
As for whether or not to call it a "punishment", maybe that's too extreme a word considering that Barks was paid for the pages that Western actually used. But the fact still remains that, in the case of "Trick or Treat", Barks was paid for 32 pages but had to write and draw, in total, 41 pages (plus the new 1 1/2 page opening for "Trick or Treat"). That's 10 and a half pages and several days' worth of work without pay. And since there's no record of Barks having been paid for the "Somethin' Fishy Here" 5-pager in FC #456, there's a good chance that more or less the same happened there: Western paid Barks in full for the 32 pages of "Back to the Klondike", but since they only used 27 pages worth of material, they instructed him to do an additional five pages without pay.
Here's some of what Michael Barrier says about "Trick or Treat" and "Back to the Klondike" in Funnybooks (pages 307-308), and about how Western's reception to them resulted in Barks taking fewer creative chances:
I'm sorry. There is a misunderstanding here. I took your statement to mean that Barks was originally paid ONLY for the 27 usable pages, and ALSO NOT paid for the 5-page replacement story, so that he was punished by submitting the full 32 book inner pages, but only receiving pay for 27 pages. THAT result would have been a flagrant breaking of Western Publishing's required action under their contract with Barks. So, I assumed that they must have paid him the full payment for 32pages, and then, per the contract, he was not paid for the 5 replacement pages (per the contract) as Western had stipulated that they wouldn't pay for pages they couldn't use (based on descriptions of non-usable overly-violent, scary scenes, or those with sexual connotations. So, technically, receiving NO payment for the non-accepted pages was NOT a punishment, because Barks signed an agreement that Western was not required to pay for pages they couldn't use. I contend that Barks was paid for ALL 36 pages (whether in a complete original complete story payment BEFORE the editor cut the 5 pages, and then received no payment for the replacement story ("Somethin' Fishy Here"), OR, he originally received pay for only the 27 usable pages, but then MUST have received the pay for the replacement story when IT was submitted. So, he was only self-punished, for the privilege of working to finish stories without periodic oversight and input by his editors at different stages throughout the process, by needing to rewrite and redraw pages that didn't meet Western's requirements, based on the loose criteria in the contract. So, he became his own in-house editor after "Trick or Treat" and (although he was paid for) "The Queen of The Apple Festival", to avoid ending up having to draw many story pages for free, and having entire, fully-drawn stories rejected.
Wow! I just today found out about this as I was googling info on cut material for Back to the Klondike.
VERY EXITING DISCOVERY! Now I'm intrigued about the other three panels. I was alway suspicious about this part.... While the reason for cuting the first 4-page made sense to me (the reason why it was cut) I always wonder about the reasoning behind the two falf pages. What always felt OF to me about it, is that the Flashback just sort of ends akwardly. Scrooge is telling the story and then we just cut to Donald walking in? No transition? No Scrooge ending the story? Hm... So If I had to guess it was the uper half that was for sure. Heck, maybe if this was found then emotions how Scrooge ended the story might in fact be something that changes the perspecitve on this story. Scrooge talks about Goldie in a sentimental way but in this flashback he is shown to be very cold in their relation. Having Scrooge end the story acting all sentimental or even say something like "If I had a chance to apologise to her"....
So what Daan Jippes drawn wasn't base on actual script and just Barks recolection? Interesting. If that what Barks clamed that at least some of this must have been in that final version - Donald reminding Scrooge to take his medicine?
Then agian, seeing some un-used Barks scene presented in Fantagraphic (Stone Ray story for example has some alternative takes unused by Barks) I wonder is there's an option this was in fact cut material....
Last Edit: Oct 23, 2022 19:23:24 GMT by Pan Maciej
Know as Maciej Kur, Mr. M., Maik, Maiki, Pan, Pan Miluś and many other names.