Post by mkr on Dec 30, 2023 19:49:23 GMT
![alquackskey Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/6283400/avatar/FxetIjqlJptvbMMJgQhX.png)
![(rofl)](http://storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/rofl.png)
More seriously, it's up to you if you want to recognize it officially; it would make things a nightmare by virtue of including Mickey (I've purposefully been avoiding the Mouse species in the evolutionary process), but I'm willing to work with it if we go that route
![:)](http://storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
Personally, it's bizarre to me.
I was hoping that translation would elucidate, but it seems like the INDUCKS title (Το γενεαλογικό δέντρο της Σταχτοπούτας και του Γκας) is accurate to the text - and that just means "The family tree of Cinderella and Gus".
You can see the immediate issue - that the picture of 'Gus' is actually Jaq.
I initially took it as an 'it started with Mickey and these spawned from him' situation, as in a tree of succession, but it doesn't seem like there's any coherence to it in that regard - like how and why the branching occurs.
Plus, the translation literally refers to it as a 'family tree', so pretty unambiguous.
If we do want to look at this literally and incorporate it, it would beg the obvious questions - how literally do we take it?
Obviously Minnie isn't Mickey's offspring (barf), and how some characters link together is strange at best (Pinocchio obviously can't be anyone's son except Geppetto's or the Blue Fairy's - and let's not even consider the idea that the Great Prince of the Forest might have been with Mrs. Jumbo).
We can assume that it's not a tree in the traditional sense - however, if we want to accept this as a valid source, I'm willing to work with it. Pretty much all of these characters do co-exist in Disney comics, so it's not honestly entirely infeasible.
Though, if we do go that route, worth asking: do we then consider Oswald as Mickey's brother?
If so, he and Ortensia have 420 children...
![???](http://storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png)
Maybe it isn't necessary to actually use the information from that Greek tree. At least, that was not my direct intention when posting it here. It's all just too absurd and contradictory. My main reason of posting is more that, since it is a family tree with Donald in it, it should at least have been mentioned here once, to make everyone aware of its existence.
I was anyhow wondering what the whole idea was behind this tree and in which context it has been published. According to INDUCKS it has only been published in Ελευθερία 1950, but that doesn't help much, because nothing else from the same issue has been indexed. Neither anything else from the same publisher. So was this even an official (Disney approved) publication? Otherwise we can maybe already dismiss this tree based on that.