Weekly Discussion Thread #2

[alquackskey]

Feathery Society Weekly Discussion Thread
Week 2

Main Subject
The Master of the Mississippi - Don Rosa (1992)
I.N.D.U.C.K.S Link (D 91411)

The second chapter in "The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck" - following on from his departure from Scotland, Scrooge meets his uncle Pothole. Under Pothole's tutelage, he learns many valuable lessons, such as how to pilot a riverboat, how to combat the dishonest, and that the money-making skills of the Clan McDuck aren't limited to the conventional methods.
Of course, Pothole isn't the only person he meets: he also meets the crackpot inventor, Ratchet Gearloose, as well as having his first of many encounters with the Beagle Boys.
Ultimately, while Scrooge has several adventures, he doesn't make much progress on his fortune (Though he does come to a few interesting conclusions on his future) and decides to part ways with Ratchet, deciding to travel West.

What would you say are the highlights of this chapter? Are there any moments, panels etc that you think are underappreciated? Perhaps overappreciated?
How do you feel about the story in the grand scheme - how do you feel about Scrooge's personal progress in this chapter? How does it stand as an individual story, and how does it stand as a chapter in a saga?
What are your thoughts on the world-building; we see many major/returning characters introduced, as well as elements of Scrooge's character that become important to him later in life - how well were these concepts handled in their introductions?

And, of course, any thoughts not covered here are welcomed and encouraged!


Secondary Subjects
The Great Steamboat Race - Carl Barks (1955)
I.N.D.U.C.K.S Link (W US 11-01)

According to Porker Hogg's nephew, Horseshoe Hogg, Porker and Pothole had a race that was never finished - as such, Cornpone Gables sits by with no owner.
Donald and the nephews convince Scrooge to accept Hogg's offer to finish the race - which involves both parties needing to raise their uncles' sunken boats from the lake before they can begin!
On a timer, Hogg takes the most expensive options, while Scrooge goes with what the nephews advise from the Junior Woodchucks Guidebook - all the while, Scrooge battles with some nasty sneezing caused by the aged boat and its contents.

How did you feel about this story - the end result goes back-and-forth multiple times; did you enjoy this, and how did you feel about the ultimate resolution?
What are your thoughts on the conflict - do you think that Horseshoe got a raw deal? How about Scrooge? Did the conflict feel 'fair'?
Do you feel that Rosa did a good job of carrying on the legacy of this story?




The Fantastic River Race - Carl Barks (1957)
I.N.D.U.C.K.S Link (W USGD 1-02)

Scrooge has a chat with Grandma Duck, and relives a story from his younger days.
He tells her about how he and Ratchet Gearloose raced against the Beagle Boys in order to reach Weevil City - the first boat that gets there will have the opportunity to deliver a shipment of gold; of course, the Beagle Boys don't intend to make any deliveries.
Though Ratchet manages to invent new types of engines and bring the boat to untold speeds, the Beagles manage to pass them at every turn - it's only through the intervention of a cyclone that the outcome is changed!

What are your thoughts on this story? Did you enjoy the conflict with Scrooge and the Beagles?
How did you feel about the ending - a cop-out for Scrooge to win, or a clever resolution?
Did Rosa's story capture this generation of Beagles well? And did Rosa's story manage to fit in with the one that Barks had created?


Cover Art Discussion
            

From left to right: Uncle Scrooge #11, Uncle Scrooge Goes to Disneyland (Dell) #1, Uncle Scrooge #286

Character Discussion
Ratchet Gearloose

Ratchet, the grandfather of Gyro Gearloose, is an eccentric inventor.
He's first introduced in Rosa's timeline as a crackpot selling water purifying pills, though he quickly grows into the inventor seen in Barks' work - having been responsible for many notable inventions, many of which come to him through a swift whack on the head with a mallet.

What do you think of him as a character?
Do you have any strong opinions on his quirks (Such as his mallet or his fondness for custard pies)?
Does he work well with other characters? How does he compare to Gyro as a supporting character?



Fanon Discussion
What are your thoughts on the different generations of Beagle Boys?
The Beagle Boys are, of course, very prominent in works featuring the Ducks. As such, we've seen their family history a little more clearly than that of some other characters.

How do you think the earlier generations of Beagles compare to the modern Beagles?
Do you enjoy them better as a mob, or do you enjoy having a figure like Blackheart as their 'leader'?
How do you feel about their prominence in Scrooge's life - having been a thorn in his side since he was a young man - do you like that there is a personal history, or do you prefer them as a group of thugs with little relation to Scrooge beyond his money?


Next Week's Topics:

Main Subject: The Buckaroo of the Badlands - Don Rosa (1992) [I.N.D.U.C.K.S Link]
Secondary Subject: The Cowboy Captain of the Cutty Sark - Don Rosa (1998) [I.N.D.U.C.K.S Link]
Location Discussion: Farms (Grandma Duck's Farm, Murdo MacKenzie's Farm etc)
Fanon Discussion: TBD

(I'll get next week's fanon discussion sorted soon, just want to get the post itself up now - if no one has any suggestions, I'll come up with something tonight or tomorrow)

[Matilda]

Master of the Mississippi

This is one of the long chapters. I think it works fine on its own, apart from the two Barks stories--when I first read it in U$ 286, I had read The Great Steamboat Race recently (published in U$ 277), but didn't have a clear memory of The Fantastic River Race. But it certainly heightens my enjoyment of it to read it together with the Barks stories, especially The Fantastic River Race, since it occurs between panels 3 & 4 on page 22. I think Rosa did a great job fitting all the Barksian pieces together with his own narrative here. I like the visual jokes about the Beagles (see below) and the visual joke about the saloon woman who repeatedly tries to steal Pothole's coins. The scene of the underwater town is nicely atmostpheric and spooky, and the splash panel of the underground Drennan Whyte is very memorable. The hints of who Scrooge will become (paying nephew 30 cents, fortune should come from hard work) feel organic, not contrived.

The Beagle Boys (earlier generation)

If Rosa had invented fathers of the "current" Beagle Boys for his history, I might have found that to be overdetermined. But these characters were created by Barks, so I have no complaint. I enjoy the running joke about their looking for a gang name, the fact that it's finally Scrooge who names them, and the visual jokes in their first scenes and again in the panel where Scrooge names them based on the fact that we've never seen the Beagles maskless. I like the fact that Rosa's Beagle Boys (E.G.) are out-and-out murderous, repeatedly threatening Scrooge's and Ratchet's lives. Blackheart also says he'd be willing to let his own kin drown to get treasure. Played for laughs but still quite villainous. While the "current" Beagles are generally not so murderous, I think it's believable that they would be both less clever and more civilized than their grandfather.

How does Blackheart fit with the character of Grampa Beagle? Inducks says some people think they are the same character.

Ratchet Gearloose is also a Barks creation, and Rosa stayed faithful to Barks' Ratchet, repeating the mallet-plus-nursery-rhyme method of coming up with ideas and the fixation on pie-making. I'd find the mallet annoying if it weren't for the following rhymes, which make it quirky. The fact that he's introduced by Rosa with his invention of water-clarifying pills works fine for me. Though he looks like a snake-oil salesman at work, his pills *do* work, even if they don't make the water palatable--and they are needed later in the story. Both the pills and the plot point of their use also dovetail well with the recurrent "how muddy is it?" jokes lifted from Mark Twain. As the grandfather of Gyro, it's pleasing that he's not a Gyro clone with different cap; he has the inventing skillz, but his most enduring motivation is baking custard pies.

The Great Steamboat Race

I don't often agree with Geoffrey Blum, but I do agree with him that this story is rather dull, caught up in the mechanics of the methods of raising and powering the Cotton Queen. I do appreciate the fact that the source of the ideas the Ducks use is "that fabulous fountain of knowledge," the Junior Woodchucks' Guide Book! My biggest problem with the story, though, is the racism inherent in Scrooge's fantasy of being a Southern gentleman in a mansion "sitting on the veranda at Cornpone Gables, sipping a soda and listening to the cotton pickers strum their banjos." Please, no. Just...no. It's true that the fantasy ends in a decrepit mansion downed by the story's running joke...but even in the last panel, Scrooge yells at his nephews for giving him "romantic ideas about the Old South." (This is projection; the "romantic ideas" were mostly Scrooge's own fantasy. Donald just said the mansion looked like it was worth a fortune, and one of the boys said he could live there "like a real Southern gentleman"--that's problematic, but not nearly as much so as Scrooge's fantasy.) Anyway, we all know who does and who definitely does not have "romantic ideas about the Old South."

The Fantastic River Race

This story is way better all around. The Beagles (E.G.) are a great adversary. I particularly like the details of their life that come out in the dialogue in panel 5 of p. 14: the hideout in the swamp, the pet coyotes and chicken hawks. There's more drama, and the cyclone splash panel is great. I find it satisfying that the cyclone that seems to doom Scrooge's chance of winning also saves the day for him by moving the bank to Possum Point.

.

Cover U$ 286

I like this cover fine--just thought I'd mention that it was from the supplemental material in the Gemstone L&T that I learned that it's a pretty close copy of Michel Nadorp's cover for the story in Donald Duck Extra 12/1993. Nadorp's done some terrific cover art over the years.

[bats]

Jun 8, 2021 1:08:52 GMT Matilda said:

How does Blackheart fit with the character of Grampa Beagle? Inducks says some people think they are the same character.

Rosa treats them as the same character, and he's really the only one that ever did anything with Barks' mustachioed Beagles from Scrooge's youth. I believe he was also rather unfamiliar with all the hundreds of non-Barks stories that had used Grandpa Beagle, so you get stuff like A Little Something Special trying to present the secret ringleader of the villains' as "this ancient villain from Scrooge's past" despite him being someone your average reader just thinks of as "that guy Scrooge has to fight off every other weekend".

[That Duckfan]

The Master of the Mississippi
The pacing of this story has always struck me as a little strange. The story could have ended at page 21, but then we get a small extra adventure two years later. Almost as if it was meant to published in two parts. For some reason, the final scene in the story really stuck with me as a child, though I'm not sure why.
I really like this story. It builds up a good atmosphere without getting overly carried away with itself. It's a parody of the Old West (East?), but it has more to add than rehashing old clichés. I love the cutthroat atmosphere: the pickpocket who reliefs Scrooge and Porker Hogg of their suitcases is a favorite visual gag of mine. Two fishing yokels, Pothole's girl, Porker Hogg himself: all firmly based on character types, but they add to the story rather than distract from it. Phonetic accents are thankfully kept to a minimum.
The plot is fairly clever and wholly reasonable for this type of story. Not the most amazing thing ever, but those images of the Drennan Whyte are suitably haunting.
Scrooge is beginning to develop. He's a bright kid, reminding me of Rosa's take on Huey, Dewey, and Louie. I quite like Ratchet Gearlooses (and am in full agreement that there should be Gearloose clones throughout history), and Pothole/Angus is a very interesting character. I'm looking forward to seeing him again.
Total: 7 or 8 out of 10


The Great Steamboat Race
I've covered this one before. It's a very genteel story. There's some great expressions in this story, especially when Scrooge imagines himself as a southern gentleman with a goatee. It's not out-of-character to fall to the myth of the Old South, which the story points plenty of sticks at.

Horseshoe Hogg is a memorable adversary. He's a sportsman through and through, and this is reflected in his attitude. The gag where Horseshow zips by Scrooge in his private plane is a good one to establish Scrooge's character, and it pops up in other stories as well. Scrooge is not one to throw away a perfectly salvageable riverboat, either. Or burn it up for fuel.

This is a good story. I like it.
Total: 7 or 8 out of 10


The Fantastic River Race
One thing I always like about Barks' Beagle Boys is how gleeful they are, and this story is no exception. As they tend to be quite pathetic when used by other writers, this optimism is a welcome surprise.
I don't much care for the rest of the story however, which mainly consists of ever crazier boat inventions to help Scrooge win the race. Who is this for, anyway? Scrooge never had time to be a riverboat captain, nor would he ever have allowed himself in a race with the Beagle Boys. The tornado as deus ex machina feels contrived.
I find this a rather poor story, all things considered.
Total: 4 or 5 out of 10


Cover Art Discussion
I used to own that issue of Uncle Scrooge. I quite like the cover, and Scrooge's blue clothes. The Dell Giant is inviting to look at as well. The Rosa cover isn't one of my favorites. It doesn't depict a very exciting moment in the story, like th previous cover.


Character Discussion
Ratchet Gearloose isn't all that different from Gyro in his original appearance. Rosa uses him as a more light-hearted character in the midst of all the drama, which I think really works. Who doesn't like a kooky 19th century inventor?
The custard pie thing is cute, though I think Rosa could have expanded on the joke. "What's this I taste? Cherry?"


Fanon Discussion
I'm quite happy with the wide variety of takes on the Beagles. Sometimes there's four of them, sometimes more, sometimes they in a trailer with their Gramps, and sometimes there's international Beagles as well (as seen in this story). I don't necessarily need to know more about their family, especially since Rosa's additions makes it only more complicated. I understand why Rosa wants to use Blackheart as 'main' antagonist for Scrooge (although this is most pronounced in A Little Something Special), but I tend to think of them more as common crooks. They're designed to look deliberately indistinct, not because they're all brothers/cousins.

I hope they do more than face off against Scrooge! That would certainly make them seem more interesting (and less pathetic, which is a word I often use in conjunction with the Beagles).

[alquackskey]

So, may be a LITTLE bit late with my own response here... feh, I've been busy!



Main Subject


I'll say that the characters in this chapter - particularly Ratchet and Pothole - are brilliant. I adore those two in particular; they're some of the most entertaining side-characters in the entire saga.
There are some great visual gags - ever since I read it years ago, the guy who cuts the handles from people's bags stuck out to me. It's just such a subtle joke - to the point that, if you read through quickly, you might actually miss it. Nobody draws any attention to it, it just happens - which I just love.
I'll save my discussion on Pothole for his discussion thread, but he's honestly one of my favourite characters - there's a lot to be said for him!

And, of course, there's the Drennan Whyte - it looks amazing!
Everything about it, from the intricate details, to the lighting, to  all of the sludge and decay... it's just amazing to look at, and one of my favourite sets that Rosa works with.
While, personally, I generally love vibrant, colourful backgrounds, the dreary nature of the Drennan Whyte is special in its own way.
Rosa's use of a very limited colour palette when they're in there works wonders - it's hard to describe, but it does an amazing job of making it feel like a sunken riverboat.

If I was to talk about issues... Personally, I'm honestly not very fond of the historical element in this chapter.
I know that the whole saga is showing how certain elements of Scrooge's life came to be, but things feel a little too tacked on here for my taste.
I could live with the 'paying 30 cents' bit, even if I thought it was a little on the nose, but the joke around the Beagle Boys' name just felt weak to me.
It's painfully obvious that they'll have their name by the end of the chapter, and Scrooge being the one to name them is just too much.
I understand Rosa's take on Scrooge, but having him be high-lariously responsible for so many major details or historical events goes into nonsense territory.
Even outside of that, the call-forwards just feel gratuitous in this chapter. Maybe it's just me, but the dialogue ends up feeling unrealistic because of how often somebody says something that's a "nudge nudge, wink wink, this happens in Barks' comics!"

And there's something to me that feels a little off about Scrooge being so against striking it rich.
Like, obviously, I don't mind him questioning it, but... "How much satisfaction can there be in having your life's fortune just handed to you?"
Like, from what Pothole says, the safe has $100,000 in it. That's a LOT of money, but it's not really a life's fortune, is it? The line just feels kind of preachy. Like "Scrooge understands the value of earning your money whereas Pothole doesn't!" but... honestly, I think Pothole has the right idea.
"This is the best unsatisfied feeling I've ever had!"
Maybe it's intended to show Scrooge's inability to understand the finer things (Like his response to Donald in Barks' works) but the presentation makes me think it's kissing up to Scrooge a little too much.

Also, I can't remember whether or not I've mentioned it before, but there's no harm in bringing it up again if I have - does anyone else really not like text being flipped for gags?
Like, I get the joke, but more often than not I find it frustrating - I don't like having to flip the book or use a mirror to read the text; it's not a major gripe, but it annoys me.

All in all, it has a few glaring issues in my opinion, but the better parts of this chapter really stand out.
Plus, as I mentioned in the beginning, Ratchet and especially Pothole are just a joy to read.

Secondary Subjects
The Great Steamboat Race

Something I love about this story is how Scrooge's cheapness is used - I like how much it's mixed up throughout the story.
One minute, him being cheap causes him a problem (The old map, Horseshoe getting a headstart on him) and within moments, it's benefitting him (Getting the boat started before Horseshoe, getting his sneezes from the musty boat). It keeps you on your toes while reading, and helps the story to stay fresh while you're reading it.

The ending takes what's a pretty predictable gag (Cornpone Gables being in disarray after so many years) and manages to flip it into something clever.
Scrooge winning the race with a sneeze feels like a clear ending to the gag - it's been a hindrance so far, and it's come around to helping him.
So having one last sneeze blow the place down caught me off-guard; a solid ending to the story, at least as far as I'm concerned.

One thing that stands out to me is that, honestly... I can't fathom why Donald and the nephews got annoyed with him for roping them into the whole ordeal.
It's Scrooge McDuck. What did they expect when they convinced him to get involved in the race?
The story doesn't really throw blame at Scrooge - it's mainly just a joke about the situation - but I can't fathom why they're surprised.

All in all, a solid story - the gags and progression happen at a mile a minute, which give the story an enjoyable pace.


The Fantastic River Race

Ehh... like That Duckfan, I just wasn't really taken with this story.
I don't think it's bad per se - as Matilda mentions, it's a pretty solid Beagle story. Plus, Ratchet is always a delight to see.
My main issue is with the ending -  the entire story hinges on the race, so ending it with a contrived twist retroactively makes the whole thing feel weak to me.
Personally, I'm very much of the opinion that a work can be ruined by its ending - and while I don't think this story was ruined, I find myself enjoying it a lot less knowing how things turn out.
I don't mind a shaggy dog story - like with The Great Steamboat Race - but knowing that the entire thing was a waste of everyone's time ruins it a little. It's not that Scrooge won and messed it up by himself - he won because of a cyclone and nothing he did actually mattered.

Plus, minor gripe, I just... hearing Scrooge talking about a Disneyland stern-wheeler is just weird to me.
I know it's not necessarily uncommon, but it just takes me out of things hearing stuff like that mentioned.

However, if I was to pick any major criticism I'd have, it's how the Beagle Boys look in this one.
They look rough. Everyone else looks pretty solid - with Ratchet and Scrooge being as wonderfully expressive as ever - but the Beagles look really off-model to me for some reason.

Personally, it was the weakest of the three stories for me - the plot was weak, and the gags aren't really enough to carry it either.
It's a decent enough story, but not one of the best you'll read.


Cover Art Discussion

For Uncle Scrooge 11... it's a solid comical picture, but it's just horrifying to see him ironing money!
Obviously, it's just a gag, but it's just anxiety-inducing to look at 

I really like the Dell Giant one - there's something that I really enjoy about cartoony figures that lack an outline but have distinct areas and body parts.
Scrooge's posing is a little strange - having an ice-cream and balloons isn't exactly his typical fare, after all - but I still love the design and the colours.

Rosa's cover... it serves its purpose.
It doesn't really stand out to me too much, but it's not a story that really allows for that in the cover; it effectively communicates what the story is about, but I haven't got much to say otherwise.


Character Discussion

As I've mentioned a few times, I adore Ratchet.
While he's mainly just a stand-in for Gyro, I like that he has his own defined personality, too.

Admittedly, him having invented things like the car or everything in Fantastic River Race isn't a gag I'm too fond of, but it works well enough in-universe that it isn't too bothersome.
I think it's saved somewhat by how little attention he draws to it; he just doesn't dwell on things. He'll come up with something brilliant and then move on because he has no real need for it any more.
It doesn't make my dislike for the trope disappear, but I like that it's fleshed out a little so it's not just "Ha, he invented this brilliant thing!" as a gag by itself.
Plus, I like that we get to see him with less useful inventions - the water-purifying pills are incredibly niche given their limited effectiveness.

He's a screwball, naturally - his system of logic is noticeably strange, but not absurd.
The 'Mark Twain' gag was funny by itself, but his follow-up about Lily Langtry is just golden.
Plus, there's his line of logic in Fantastic River Race - he's created a revolutionary piece of technology, but is disappointed because it won't be able to bake custard pies.
It feels real, to an extent - he's so close to being a genius, but his bizarre system of logic is a double-edged sword; it helps him to come up with unique ideas, but it also blinds him to what he could do if he put his focus in the right places.

Plus, his line about the first lightbulb not tasting so great in Master of the Mississippi is one of my favourites.

He mightn't have the most depth to him, but he's still a great memorable character - and I really appreciate that he's more than just "Gyro but in the past".


Fanon Discussion

Admittedly, I don't really have the strongest opinion on the Beagle Boys.
I don't dislike them or anything - they just never really had much of an impact on me. They're perfectly serviceable as villains for Scrooge, but they're never characters that I'm hyped to see or anything like that, compared to other members of Scrooge's rogues gallery.

Personally, I prefer the modern Beagles for the most part; they're not very complex, but they don't really need to be.
I like them as a nameless collective - a group of thugs that can't really be told apart outside of one liking prunes.
I don't mind the different takes on them, but I'm not overly fond of them having a leader - one thing that stands out about the Beagle Boys is their power dynamic. Is there a leader? That one who just came up with a plan, was he the same one as before? Does it really matter?
They fill all of the traits of typical goons - but they don't actually follow a leader. They just blindly follow each other's ideas - sometimes to success, sometimes not.
When you give them a leader... well, then they are just goons.

I don't know how well I'm articulating my point, but the idea is that I absolutely see the Beagle Boys as nothing more than goons - like the ones that serve Maleficent or the like. However, I thought that they were unique because they lacked any real leader to follow - as such, it's like seeing the goons of these major characters having to function on their own.
It's an interesting take, and I feel like Blackheart or any other leader figure somewhat takes away from that.

As for them having a personal history with Scrooge... eh.
It's fine, but I'm not a fan.
Scrooge is the richest duck in the world - they're a bunch of greedy thugs. Why overcomplicate things?
It's not awful or anything, but sometimes there doesn't need to be a big, complicated backstory - sometimes, thieves just want to steal from a rich guy.

[That Duckfan]

Jul 17, 2021 19:00:09 GMT alquackskey said:

And there's something to me that feels a little off about Scrooge being so against striking it rich.
Like, obviously, I don't mind him questioning it, but... "How much satisfaction can there be in having your life's fortune just handed to you?"
Like, from what Pothole says, the safe has $100,000 in it. That's a LOT of money, but it's not really a life's fortune, is it? The line just feels kind of preachy. Like "Scrooge understands the value of earning your money whereas Pothole doesn't!" but... honestly, I think Pothole has the right idea.
"This is the best unsatisfied feeling I've ever had!"
Maybe it's intended to show Scrooge's inability to understand the finer things (Like his response to Donald in Barks' works) but the presentation makes me think it's kissing up to Scrooge a little too much.

I agree with this up to a point. The moment is supposed to show the difference between Scrooge and his uncle, but Scrooge never learns this little nugget of knowledge, he just intrinsically knows it. One of my critiques of the Life and Times is that the adventures are by and large by-the-book, and Scrooge rarely gets an opportunity to learn from his mistakes. Imagine if this story cut out the Beagles for the most part, and Scrooge and Pothole got to the treasure early. They celebrate, but Pothole -- being thoroughly Americanized by this point -- does a bit too much celebrating, emptying out the treasure in a matter of days. Not only would it add to the 'you win some, you lose some' attitude established at the start of the adventure, giving Scrooge a spendthrift uncle would be a bit of supreme irony, and would give him the right motivation to attain his stingy, miserly attitude from then on.

Other than that, there's a little meta joke hidden in Rosa's dialogue, as Scrooge attaining his fortune this early is highly suspicious in the structure of a 12-part epic. (It could be an interesting decision, but Rosa seems to have intended to have Scrooge learn a couple of sitcom lessons before giving him his big break at the end of the second act.)

[AzureBlue]

**The Great Steamboat Race**

I'm not sure what the standard for input is in these threads, or if an incomplete response to the prompt fails to meet it, but I wanted to say that The Great Steamboat Race holds a very special place in my heart. The first two issues I ever owned were a Goofy Adventures and the Disney in-house Uncle Scrooge that featured this story. For a long time, they were the *only* issues I owned, so I naturally read that particular lead story over and over. I don't think I could really offer up any unbiased criticism of it. For what it's worth, I do personally really like its focus on the mechanics.

**Cover Art Discussion**

That stack of money on the Dell cover sure is buoyant-- just look at the gaps between each neatly ironed bill!

I just got a beautiful copy of the Gladstone Uncle Scrooge Goes to Disneyland with the same cover, and it's a very charming one, I think. My response to the logic of it is very similar to what alquackskey said, but it's no skin off my back for a cover. As a side note, I really like the in-house cover for the Great Steamboat Race issue (277), but again, childhood nostalgia is inextricable.

I've spent a lot of time poring over Don Rosa covers as reproduced in The Life and Times for the hidden details, so I tend to think of them more in that vein than as actual covers, since I don't own the original Gladstone run of the stories. In that sense, this isn't one of his most fascinating, but it's *comparative* simplicity for a Rosa cover is perhaps a bit better for clarity on an actual issue. I still wouldn't rank it as one of my favorites, but I like it.

**Fanon Discussion**

Insular to the Life and Times, I loved Rosa's rendition of the Beagle Boys, and they stood out as more entertaining for me there than they often do. Beyond that, I don't have particularly strong opinions, and my appreciation of their presence in the Life and Times doesn't mean that I think other writers should necessarily follow that same idea for their origin.

They're good characters for story mechanics, and seeing Scrooge pitted against them in different ways can be fun. I can't say I've ever had much interest in buying the Gold Key/Whitman comics dedicated to them. They don't particularly compel me in and of themselves.

[alquackskey]

Jul 18, 2021 21:09:41 GMT That Duckfan said:

Jul 17, 2021 19:00:09 GMT alquackskey said:

And there's something to me that feels a little off about Scrooge being so against striking it rich.
Like, obviously, I don't mind him questioning it, but... "How much satisfaction can there be in having your life's fortune just handed to you?"
Like, from what Pothole says, the safe has $100,000 in it. That's a LOT of money, but it's not really a life's fortune, is it? The line just feels kind of preachy. Like "Scrooge understands the value of earning your money whereas Pothole doesn't!" but... honestly, I think Pothole has the right idea.
"This is the best unsatisfied feeling I've ever had!"
Maybe it's intended to show Scrooge's inability to understand the finer things (Like his response to Donald in Barks' works) but the presentation makes me think it's kissing up to Scrooge a little too much.

I agree with this up to a point. The moment is supposed to show the difference between Scrooge and his uncle, but Scrooge never learns this little nugget of knowledge, he just intrinsically knows it. One of my critiques of the Life and Times is that the adventures are by and large by-the-book, and Scrooge rarely gets an opportunity to learn from his mistakes. Imagine if this story cut out the Beagles for the most part, and Scrooge and Pothole got to the treasure early. They celebrate, but Pothole -- being thoroughly Americanized by this point -- does a bit too much celebrating, emptying out the treasure in a matter of days. Not only would it add to the 'you win some, you lose some' attitude established at the start of the adventure, giving Scrooge a spendthrift uncle would be a bit of supreme irony, and would give him the right motivation to attain his stingy, miserly attitude from then on.

Other than that, there's a little meta joke hidden in Rosa's dialogue, as Scrooge attaining his fortune this early is highly suspicious in the structure of a 12-part epic. (It could be an interesting decision, but Rosa seems to have intended to have Scrooge learn a couple of sitcom lessons before giving him his big break at the end of the second act.)

The main reason I take issue with it is because, at that point, it's not really about his life's fortune.
Sure, becoming wealthy is important to him and, at the end of the day, he is a McDuck... but, as you say, he just seems to have an intrinsic need to earn his money square.
At this point, he still has a family that he wants to support - if he was so determined to make his fortune square, why not just send his share back to them and continue on his own personal journey?

Honestly, I feel like your version is a far better way of doing things.
Pothole wasting the fortune would be pretty in-character, and, your most important point, it would be a very believable (And even relatable) reason for his attitude towards Donald.
It would add another layer of depth to why Scrooge gets so vexed whenever Donald is happier with an ice-cream or the like instead of investing his money - he'd have learned from Pothole how easy it is to waste money with such an attitude.

I can sort of see it being a meta joke, but there's nothing very jokey about it that I can see?
Like, if his comment had specifically been about how suspicious it was that he had earned his fortune so easily, or having a sinking feeling that his fortune wasn't going to last, I'd get that - but as it stands, it looks like Pothole having informed wrongness; showing Scrooge as morally superior to his uncle because he doesn't succumb to his vices so easily.
Then again, that's probably in part because I wasn't happy with the meta jokes in this chapter - I personally felt like there were far too many, and several felt unnatural - so I suppose I might have something of a bias at this point.

Aug 5, 2021 23:54:35 GMT AzureBlue said:

**The Great Steamboat Race**

I'm not sure what the standard for input is in these threads, or if an incomplete response to the prompt fails to meet it, but I wanted to say that The Great Steamboat Race holds a very special place in my heart. The first two issues I ever owned were a Goofy Adventures and the Disney in-house Uncle Scrooge that featured this story. For a long time, they were the *only* issues I owned, so I naturally read that particular lead story over and over. I don't think I could really offer up any unbiased criticism of it. For what it's worth, I do personally really like its focus on the mechanics.

**Cover Art Discussion**

That stack of money on the Dell cover sure is buoyant-- just look at the gaps between each neatly ironed bill!

I just got a beautiful copy of the Gladstone Uncle Scrooge Goes to Disneyland with the same cover, and it's a very charming one, I think. My response to the logic of it is very similar to what alquackskey said, but it's no skin off my back for a cover. As a side note, I really like the in-house cover for the Great Steamboat Race issue (277), but again, childhood nostalgia is inextricable.

I've spent a lot of time poring over Don Rosa covers as reproduced in The Life and Times for the hidden details, so I tend to think of them more in that vein than as actual covers, since I don't own the original Gladstone run of the stories. In that sense, this isn't one of his most fascinating, but it's *comparative* simplicity for a Rosa cover is perhaps a bit better for clarity on an actual issue. I still wouldn't rank it as one of my favorites, but I like it.

**Fanon Discussion**

Insular to the Life and Times, I loved Rosa's rendition of the Beagle Boys, and they stood out as more entertaining for me there than they often do. Beyond that, I don't have particularly strong opinions, and my appreciation of their presence in the Life and Times doesn't mean that I think other writers should necessarily follow that same idea for their origin.

They're good characters for story mechanics, and seeing Scrooge pitted against them in different ways can be fun. I can't say I've ever had much interest in buying the Gold Key/Whitman comics dedicated to them. They don't particularly compel me in and of themselves.

Don't worry, there's no failing or anything like it - in future entries, I might have to clarify that!
The different categories are mainly just there so that people have different things to talk about; so, if you're not interested in cover arts, you can still talk about the comics - and if you happen not to have read them, you can still participate in the fanon discussion. It's just so that people have options 

This is just my personal opinion, but I'd say that there's no issue with offering a biased opinion - it's always fun to see someone be passionate about a subject, after all!

[That Duckfan]

I should add that I've been going through Futurama recently (oh, the joys of the Disney-Fox merger!), which was a big influence on my "sitcom" quips. When I say "losing the treasure in a couple of days", I'm imagining Fry and Bender wasting their money on something ridiculous and probably alcoholic. And it reflects the experience of gold miners, of so many nouveau riche who couldn't hold on to their money because they couldn't handle it properly.

It's particularly the younger Scrooge that Don doesn't know how to handle. There are some interesting dramatics in the later episodes, but here he's just a stand-in Huey/Dewey/Louie, inexplicably wise beyond their years. It reminds me of his main character before Disney, Lancelot Pertwillaby (who later became Captain Kentucky). Rosa thinks in types, so Lance is a certain hero type (and a lot of the comedy in CK comes from the rest of Louisville not caring about his a superhero antics). There's no reason why Lance should want one thing or another, his motivations are just there. Because Rosa decided that's his type. Scrooge gets a bit more leeway in his stories, but not here.

In Thread #4 (originally in the DuckTales section), I've been trying to summarize what it is that makes Scrooge hard to write, as an emotionally mature character. Part of it is that you have to take a position on his wealth and what it means, which is a big big question. Barks changed his views from story to story, Rosa inserts some sentimental journey, and Angones pretty much ignores it as I understand.

[alquackskey]

Aug 6, 2021 18:12:27 GMT That Duckfan said:

I should add that I've been going through Futurama recently (oh, the joys of the Disney-Fox merger!), which was a big influence on my "sitcom" quips. When I say "losing the treasure in a couple of days", I'm imagining Fry and Bender wasting their money on something ridiculous and probably alcoholic. And it reflects the experience of gold miners, of so many nouveau riche who couldn't hold on to their money because they couldn't handle it properly.

It's particularly the younger Scrooge that Don doesn't know how to handle. There are some interesting dramatics in the later episodes, but here he's just a stand-in Huey/Dewey/Louie, inexplicably wise beyond their years. It reminds me of his main character before Disney, Lancelot Pertwillaby (who later became Captain Kentucky). Rosa thinks in types, so Lance is a certain hero type (and a lot of the comedy in CK comes from the rest of Louisville not caring about his a superhero antics). There's no reason why Lance should want one thing or another, his motivations are just there. Because Rosa decided that's his type. Scrooge gets a bit more leeway in his stories, but not here.

In Thread #4 (originally in the DuckTales section), I've been trying to summarize what it is that makes Scrooge hard to write, as an emotionally mature character. Part of it is that you have to take a position on his wealth and what it means, which is a big big question. Barks changed his views from story to story, Rosa inserts some sentimental journey, and Angones pretty much ignores it as I understand.

I know, right? Having all of the FOX shows on Disney Plus has been amazing - especially Futurama

I definitely see what you mean about Rosa thinking in types; it works well for individual stories (in that you can contrast characters against each other and make certain points clearly), but I think it can come at the detriment of the character in question.
Like, in certain chapters, Scrooge's type is the gung-ho adventurer, the one who'll leap into any adventure - and, for the most part, it works. We see the drive he has to do better, that need to be the best - and him earning that title. It doesn't always fit in neatly with Barks' characterization, but it works for the most part.
In this chapter, he's the morally sound character that's determined to do things the right way; as you say, a stand-in for the triplets. I don't actually think that it's a problem to focus on his moral side - my main issue is that, as you said earlier, it's not something that he learns.
Like, when he meets Jabiru and decides to leave the opal behind - it's still a moral decision, where he's sacrificing wealth because it's not the right thing to do. There, it works well because he's grown jaded, and doesn't want to be the kind of backstabber that he's had to deal with recently. In this chapter, there's no push, nothing to drive his question - Scrooge just doesn't like taking the easy way out.
I hadn't really noticed this element of Rosa's work, but it's pretty spot-on; it probably explains my distaste for Scrooge in this chapter, too. I don't mind Scrooge being the 'type' he's portrayed as, but I think it's too early for that to apply to him yet.

I look forward to seeing what you say on the subject!

[That Duckfan]

Well, that's not quite what I was going for, I think you just invented tropes.

What I mean is that Rosa writes characters through the prism of his childhood. Both The Pertwillaby Papers and Captain Kentucky exist mainly to play with old adventure / superhero tropes. The stories in themselves are pretty much meaningless, unless viewed through that particular pop cultural lens. Believe, when I get to my CK review, you're not going to believe how much it depends on knowing local radio hosts! (And the Iranian hostage crisis, that too.)

So in Rosa's mind, Scrooge isn't a natural character who can take on elements of his creator. Scrooge is an Iconic Hero, as decreed by Barks. So that's his role in the story. But then Rosa adds a personal element to it. I can't comment on Rosa's psychological relationship to Barks' comics, but his life-long comic fandom evidently shaped his understanding that Scrooge must have a sentimental relation to his money. I mean, imagine that! You could only come to that conclusion by meticulously going through each and every one of Barks' comics. (Yes, there's precedent in Only a Poor Old Man, but Barks' characterization is nothing if not inconsistent.)

You can see it develop, too. You can see germs of the idea in The Money Pit (a massively underrated story, btw) and you can see it develop further and further. My the time we get to the last three Scrooge stories, he's become a parody of his earlier self! And Donald, who once had some dignity, slowly loses it. Donald pre-L&T is a completely different person from the one we meet after.
One is the Donald of The Crocodile Collector, Return to Plain Awful, The Master Landscapist, Treasure under Glass, The Duck Who Fell to Earth, and War of the Wendigo. A flawed hero, but always ready to try again.
The other is the Donald of Guardians of the Lost Library, The Duck Who Never Was!, The Treasury of Croesus, An Eye for Detail, and The Three Caballeros Ride Again!. A duck who has given up on life, who is irrelevant, undignified, pathetic. That's his role in the Duck Pantheon, by and large. So it is written.

---

I claim that there is a trilemma in writing Scrooge. The perfect Scrooge is

1. Heroic
2. Relevant to today's society
3. True to Barks

Now, you can have two of the three. Doesn't matter which you like, but you can't take three. You can't write about a stingy, eccentric multi-trillionaire in a positive light and get away with it in today's society. Barks pulled it off in 1952 because everybody was getting richer and being capitalist was cool, but it hasn't been 1952 for a very long time. Even Barks began to feel that by the early '60s. So as a writer, what do you do?

You could put Scrooge in an unsympathetic light. Italian writers did this for the longest time, but so did Egmont and Dutch writers. Problematize the relationship between Donald and Scrooge. This one's been on the retreat for the last 20 years, presumably because Disney decreed there was too much conflict in Disneytown.

You could divorce Duckburg from reality. This is what most writers do, including TV's DuckTales. Scrooge McDuck is just a funny cartoon character who lives in a cartoon world where he goes on cartoon adventures. This one's easiest to write, but also the least satisfying to read. It's pulp fiction at its most pulpy. Disney comics have always done a lot of this, but it's not what garners fans. You see this especially in the pandemic, which has not been addressed in any Disney comic despite it being a fact of life for all of us. There's plenty of lockdown comedy to be mined, as Disney once did in World War II and in the Depression, but those days are long over. But I digress.

Then there's the third option, which is the risky one. It forces a writer to advance their own belief of what Scrooge could be. There aren't a lot of writers who grapple with the realities of modern business. Kari Korhonen is one artist I would place firmly in this category, based on what I've seen of his work. Well, as firm as you can get in a Disney comic of course. Any time Scrooge is up against the Junior Woodchucks also belongs here. (Of course, in a perfect world Scrooge would be with the JWs and Rockerduck would be against them, but I'll save that for a future rant.)

---

Corporate pop fiction today is increasingly like an ouroboros, the snake who eats its own tail. From Ready Player One to the new Space Jam movie, to indeed Angones' DuckTales, the matter of is relevant in corporate pop culture is recognizing pastiches from older, good material. Did you like Star Wars? Well, here's some more Star Wars. It can't refer to things actually going on in real life, because we're too busy tearing each other to shreads politically, and you want to make a product that doesn't produce hard feelings from anyone.

Rosa, who's lived his life in a popular culture bubble, is not wholly unlike this either. He was one of the pioneers in this genre, with newer writers basing their stories on his stories such as in the case of the new DuckTales, as he once did to Barks. Rosa has his own detractors, but for the most part he got away with it because it was new and interesting, and he had his own type of "comic realism". He could never write something as profound as A Christmas for Shacktown, A Financial Fable, or Back to the Klondike (albeit that is already a 'second-hand tale', based on the popular imagination of the gold rush). But Rosa did know one or two things very well --- especially sentimentality. He made a career out of being the ultimate Barks fan.

But we're getting to a point where the game of telephone is breaking down now. At some point, it's just better to create your own characters and your own stories. That's why I was so insistent on finding out what Angones had to say as an artist.

---

Anyway, I hope this clears up a thing or two. I hope this section will see some more life in the future. I was hoping we'd at least get to Chapter 11, which is my favorite part by some length.

[alquackskey]

Aug 6, 2021 23:17:37 GMT That Duckfan said:

Well, that's not quite what I was going for, I think you just invented tropes.

What I mean is that Rosa writes characters through the prism of his childhood. Both The Pertwillaby Papers and Captain Kentucky exist mainly to play with old adventure / superhero tropes. The stories in themselves are pretty much meaningless, unless viewed through that particular pop cultural lens. Believe, when I get to my CK review, you're not going to believe how much it depends on knowing local radio hosts! (And the Iranian hostage crisis, that too.)

So in Rosa's mind, Scrooge isn't a natural character who can take on elements of his creator. Scrooge is an Iconic Hero, as decreed by Barks. So that's his role in the story. But then Rosa adds a personal element to it. I can't comment on Rosa's psychological relationship to Barks' comics, but his life-long comic fandom evidently shaped his understanding that Scrooge must have a sentimental relation to his money. I mean, imagine that! You could only come to that conclusion by meticulously going through each and every one of Barks' comics. (Yes, there's precedent in Only a Poor Old Man, but Barks' characterization is nothing if not inconsistent.)

You can see it develop, too. You can see germs of the idea in The Money Pit (a massively underrated story, btw) and you can see it develop further and further. My the time we get to the last three Scrooge stories, he's become a parody of his earlier self! And Donald, who once had some dignity, slowly loses it. Donald pre-L&T is a completely different person from the one we meet after.
One is the Donald of The Crocodile Collector, Return to Plain Awful, The Master Landscapist, Treasure under Glass, The Duck Who Fell to Earth, and War of the Wendigo. A flawed hero, but always ready to try again.
The other is the Donald of Guardians of the Lost Library, The Duck Who Never Was!, The Treasury of Croesus, An Eye for Detail, and The Three Caballeros Ride Again!. A duck who has given up on life, who is irrelevant, undignified, pathetic. That's his role in the Duck Pantheon, by and large. So it is written.

---

I claim that there is a trilemma in writing Scrooge. The perfect Scrooge is

1. Heroic
2. Relevant to today's society
3. True to Barks

Now, you can have two of the three. Doesn't matter which you like, but you can't take three. You can't write about a stingy, eccentric multi-trillionaire in a positive light and get away with it in today's society. Barks pulled it off in 1952 because everybody was getting richer and being capitalist was cool, but it hasn't been 1952 for a very long time. Even Barks began to feel that by the early '60s. So as a writer, what do you do?

You could put Scrooge in an unsympathetic light. Italian writers did this for the longest time, but so did Egmont and Dutch writers. Problematize the relationship between Donald and Scrooge. This one's been on the retreat for the last 20 years, presumably because Disney decreed there was too much conflict in Disneytown.

You could divorce Duckburg from reality. This is what most writers do, including TV's DuckTales. Scrooge McDuck is just a funny cartoon character who lives in a cartoon world where he goes on cartoon adventures. This one's easiest to write, but also the least satisfying to read. It's pulp fiction at its most pulpy. Disney comics have always done a lot of this, but it's not what garners fans. You see this especially in the pandemic, which has not been addressed in any Disney comic despite it being a fact of life for all of us. There's plenty of lockdown comedy to be mined, as Disney once did in World War II and in the Depression, but those days are long over. But I digress.

Then there's the third option, which is the risky one. It forces a writer to advance their own belief of what Scrooge could be. There aren't a lot of writers who grapple with the realities of modern business. Kari Korhonen is one artist I would place firmly in this category, based on what I've seen of his work. Well, as firm as you can get in a Disney comic of course. Any time Scrooge is up against the Junior Woodchucks also belongs here. (Of course, in a perfect world Scrooge would be with the JWs and Rockerduck would be against them, but I'll save that for a future rant.)

---

Corporate pop fiction today is increasingly like an ouroboros, the snake who eats its own tail. From Ready Player One to the new Space Jam movie, to indeed Angones' DuckTales, the matter of is relevant in corporate pop culture is recognizing pastiches from older, good material. Did you like Star Wars? Well, here's some more Star Wars. It can't refer to things actually going on in real life, because we're too busy tearing each other to shreads politically, and you want to make a product that doesn't produce hard feelings from anyone.

Rosa, who's lived his life in a popular culture bubble, is not wholly unlike this either. He was one of the pioneers in this genre, with newer writers basing their stories on his stories such as in the case of the new DuckTales, as he once did to Barks. Rosa has his own detractors, but for the most part he got away with it because it was new and interesting, and he had his own type of "comic realism". He could never write something as profound as A Christmas for Shacktown, A Financial Fable, or Back to the Klondike (albeit that is already a 'second-hand tale', based on the popular imagination of the gold rush). But Rosa did know one or two things very well --- especially sentimentality. He made a career out of being the ultimate Barks fan.

But we're getting to a point where the game of telephone is breaking down now. At some point, it's just better to create your own characters and your own stories. That's why I was so insistent on finding out what Angones had to say as an artist.

---

Anyway, I hope this clears up a thing or two. I hope this section will see some more life in the future. I was hoping we'd at least get to Chapter 11, which is my favorite part by some length.

Ahh, okay, I think I'm following you now.
Yes, that does make a lot of sense - if I'm understanding you correctly, it's the idea that there are certain elements of a character that must be present and consistent?
As in, there are certain elements (Like, say, Scrooge having a sentimental attachment to his money) that must always be present for the character, even when such elements feel unnatural?

If I'm following you properly this time, then yeah, there are certainly times when Rosa's writing gets frustrating - especially, as you say, with Donald.

I think those are some interesting points you make regarding WWII and the Depression; like you say, the idea of Disney touching the pandemic with a thirty nine and a half foot pole is laughable, even though they had done so with previous tragedies.
Times certainly have changed on that front - I suppose that, with internet fandoms and how heavily people focus on the notion of 'official/canon' material, I can understand them being wary.
I don't know how many current Disney comic artists/writers would be able to handle the issue with some degree of tact, but, as we all know here, they would be widely met with derision regardless of whether or not they did.
There are a great many people who wouldn't care about the contents, they'd just mock the idea that "the pandemic is canon" or sensationalist headlines that could be mined from the stories themselves; and, of course, most of the people pushing these ideas would never have read a Disney comic in their life.
I can't fathom why, but a lot of popular culture involves mockery of things that many people don't have any familiarity with; people will ridicule Der Fuehrer's Face without knowing that it was all a dream, decry Song of the South as some sort of horrifically racist monstrosity without ever having seen it... I don't mind if people have such complaints after seeing a film, but so many just share opinions because they hear them elsewhere.
I fully agree with you that there's plenty of comedy that could come from pandemic stories - and, if handled correctly, genuinely insightful commentary to be made, too - but it just couldn't happen. Many people would immediately mock it and spread rumours about it, and those rumours would grow quickly - and that's assuming it's as good as it has the potential to be.

I also get what you mean about modern pop culture - I certainly think there's a place for it, of course (As, sometimes, you really do need a break from what's going on in the world), but sometimes, the divorce from reality is just a little too ridiculous.
Like, pulling from some of your examples, there's Space Jam - regardless of what could be said with it, I know going in that Bugs Bunny and LeBron James are there for some laughs, mainly.
However, comparing that to Star Wars or even Ducktales, there are elements in there that are simply too real to avoid real-world commentary without it being forced, especially considering the time of release.
The Star Wars sequels feature the First Order, a sort of a 'Neo-Empire' - considering the analogies made with the original Empire, the connection to what they represent isn't hard to make. I'm not going to comment on how well the movies handle the subjects, but these films blatantly make reference to a problem that is prominent in society today.
Likewise, as you've mentioned, Ducktales feature a rich capitalist as its protagonist - and how he (Along with the likes of Glomgold and Beaks) is handled makes some kind of comment, even if the intent isn't necessarily there. It all falls in line with your trilemma - all I can really do is repeat what you've said: "You can't write about a stingy, eccentric multi-trillionaire in a positive light and get away with it in today's society".
I suppose I'm just rambling at this point, seeing as what I'm saying is basically just a side-note to what you've said, but it's just frustrating to see what you've described - this need to make content that doesn't offend or take any strong stances, but at the same time uses characters and settings in which that's just not feasible.

I'm fairly on the fence when it comes to using pre-existing characters vs creating new ones, though I suppose I would have to be as a fanfic writer 
I think that, in some cases, people have ideas for a specific character or setting that can't really be done elsewhere - and, assuming that something worthwhile is brought to the table, I'm all for that.
However, it's clear that many cases are simply using a character for the sake of it, and telling a story that doesn't really fit with that character.
I do get what you're saying, though - some characters can be altered to fit a more modern mold, but others are simply products of their time. Instead of either completely changing a character, whitewashing their problematic elements or twisting in knots to justify certain elements of a character, sometimes it's better to just come up with something new.

Assuming I haven't bungled your point again, it's definitely been an interesting read!

And, for the record, I haven't given up completely on the discussions - I just took a break because no one was responding.
I figured that having several topics with 0 replies would be kind of pointless, so I was waiting for a little more 'go' before going ahead.
Given the traffic that's coming now, I'll try to have another post up this Thursday - we'll see how it goes.

[That Duckfan]

I'll try to clarify further.

When we talk about stories, there is often an implicit divide between high art and low art --- what in my country we call literature and lecture. Literature is supposedly situated in some kind of high-minded intellectual discussion, while lecture is junk food for the masses. I reject this distinction. I care more about the effort that went into a story, and the intentions of the author.

So a good story, for me, involves characters and situations relatively drawn from life. You can be fanciful in your world-building, like JRR Tolkien, but there's an overarching theme all of us can relate to on a deeper level. Barks was so beloved because he could channel real-life frustrations into the exaggerated, cartoony world of Donald Duck. The Ducks are caricatures of real people, but we identify ourselves with their wants and needs.

At the same time, Barks drew on popular fiction. As in the cartoons, many of Barks' best adventure stories are based on the popular pulp fiction of his day, but with a Disney twist. He adapted those stories to his own vision, whether they included zombies, dangerous spies, or damn hippies. The tradition of adventure fiction goes back many centuries of course, and it's just as literary as the domestic affairs, but Barks they were both grounded in a fictional reality. Barks thought of characters mostly as people.

The contrast with Rosa is that he doesn't draw on real life as much as he draws on the realm of pulp fiction. Rosa conceives of stories in terms of tropes: sequels, continuity, character types. A Barksian plot would be: Donald wants to enjoy his pool while his nephews are away, but gets interrupted (WDC 129, Pool Sharks). A Rosa plot would be: a classic travel adventure in search of ancient treasure that brings us back to Duckburg and reinforces the importance of my favorite hero Scrooge, in ironic contrast to Donald (Guardians of the Lost Library). He works through it like a logical puzzle, like how Gladstone's luck works in Oolated Luck or gravity in A Matter of Some Gravity.

Rosa does not conceive of stories "things that happen to people", he thinks of them as "things characters do in movies that I like". That's not the whole story, I'm simplifying, but I'm trying to draw a contrast between the two approaches to storytelling. Rosa's conception of "real life" in stories runs through a prism of his favorite stories, with his own twists added. Now, Rosa has great taste in classic movies, and he's clever/quirky enough to develop his own brand of humor. But most of what he writes is more postmodern, in the sense that it's largely a pastiche on earlier fiction. His most famous characters, such as Arpin Lusène, are a direct lift from popular stereotypes.
(Rosa wasn't the only one to do this, but his methodical mind and insistence on his own Disney comics universe make it a more notable feature. Indiana Jones was also a lift from '30s adventure heroes, with a modern update.)

At least, that's the sense I get. That's why I thought the joke was "Scrooge is self-aware enough to know that it's too early in the story for him to win and get rich".

What you see today, with writers who grew up on "brands", are stories based on those properties. That's how you end up with all the Disney Princesses in Wreck-it-Ralph 2, or all the LEGO licenses in The LEGO Movie. Or indeed, the Barksian modulator in the new DuckTales, which is based on the old DuckTales and Rosa's stories, which are based on Barks' stories, which are based on the fiction of his period. Which is my way of explaining why the new DuckTales felt so hollow to so many people: it doesn't draw on life, but is the third-generation property of pulp fiction tropes. You're right to want escapism, but this is escapism through collective nostalgia for licensed property.

It's not a bad thing in and of itself, but once you jump through this many hoops, you have to put in a LOT of work to get your voice through these original characters. If you do this, and you don't have a vision of what YOU want to say, it comes off as superficial and "do you remember this?". Family Guy often gets a lot of flak for that, and rightly so sometimes, but it's also indicative of the mood of a generation. Its style of humor has been incredibly influential, but not without considerable backlash. You lose all sense of reality, unless you're very very careful.

The LEGO Movie is actually a very good example of how to do it well. It's got a hero's journey that's pretty much by the books, it gets to make fun of Batman, and it gets to pull everything aside for a schmaltzy message about a dad and his son. It's shameless corporate propaganda, but it's so layered, it's impressive. Emmett isn't some ordinary guy, he's written with the exact specifications to go against the traditional hero type. It is steeped in fiction tropes, but it pulls it off through some amazing writing.
Shrek would be another example: it was the nihilistic Gen-X answer to Disney's multibillion dollar plucky heroine romances. By Jeffrey motherforking "I'll cut 12 minutes of finished footage from The Black Cauldron myself if you won't" Katzenberg.

But I digress, again.

The most important thing to keep in mind is the Scroogean trilemma. I really like that idea.

[alquackskey]

Aug 7, 2021 17:29:10 GMT That Duckfan said:

I'll try to clarify further.

When we talk about stories, there is often an implicit divide between high art and low art --- what in my country we call literature and lecture. Literature is supposedly situated in some kind of high-minded intellectual discussion, while lecture is junk food for the masses. I reject this distinction. I care more about the effort that went into a story, and the intentions of the author.

So a good story, for me, involves characters and situations relatively drawn from life. You can be fanciful in your world-building, like JRR Tolkien, but there's an overarching theme all of us can relate to on a deeper level. Barks was so beloved because he could channel real-life frustrations into the exaggerated, cartoony world of Donald Duck. The Ducks are caricatures of real people, but we identify ourselves with their wants and needs.

At the same time, Barks drew on popular fiction. As in the cartoons, many of Barks' best adventure stories are based on the popular pulp fiction of his day, but with a Disney twist. He adapted those stories to his own vision, whether they included zombies, dangerous spies, or damn hippies. The tradition of adventure fiction goes back many centuries of course, and it's just as literary as the domestic affairs, but Barks they were both grounded in a fictional reality. Barks thought of characters mostly as people.

The contrast with Rosa is that he doesn't draw on real life as much as he draws on the realm of pulp fiction. Rosa conceives of stories in terms of tropes: sequels, continuity, character types. A Barksian plot would be: Donald wants to enjoy his pool while his nephews are away, but gets interrupted (WDC 129, Pool Sharks). A Rosa plot would be: a classic travel adventure in search of ancient treasure that brings us back to Duckburg and reinforces the importance of my favorite hero Scrooge, in ironic contrast to Donald (Guardians of the Lost Library). He works through it like a logical puzzle, like how Gladstone's luck works in Oolated Luck or gravity in A Matter of Some Gravity.

Rosa does not conceive of stories "things that happen to people", he thinks of them as "things characters do in movies that I like". That's not the whole story, I'm simplifying, but I'm trying to draw a contrast between the two approaches to storytelling. Rosa's conception of "real life" in stories runs through a prism of his favorite stories, with his own twists added. Now, Rosa has great taste in classic movies, and he's clever/quirky enough to develop his own brand of humor. But most of what he writes is more postmodern, in the sense that it's largely a pastiche on earlier fiction. His most famous characters, such as Arpin Lusène, are a direct lift from popular stereotypes.
(Rosa wasn't the only one to do this, but his methodical mind and insistence on his own Disney comics universe make it a more notable feature. Indiana Jones was also a lift from '30s adventure heroes, with a modern update.)

At least, that's the sense I get. That's why I thought the joke was "Scrooge is self-aware enough to know that it's too early in the story for him to win and get rich".

What you see today, with writers who grew up on "brands", are stories based on those properties. That's how you end up with all the Disney Princesses in Wreck-it-Ralph 2, or all the LEGO licenses in The LEGO Movie. Or indeed, the Barksian modulator in the new DuckTales, which is based on the old DuckTales and Rosa's stories, which are based on Barks' stories, which are based on the fiction of his period. Which is my way of explaining why the new DuckTales felt so hollow to so many people: it doesn't draw on life, but is the third-generation property of pulp fiction tropes. You're right to want escapism, but this is escapism through collective nostalgia for licensed property.

It's not a bad thing in and of itself, but once you jump through this many hoops, you have to put in a LOT of work to get your voice through these original characters. If you do this, and you don't have a vision of what YOU want to say, it comes off as superficial and "do you remember this?". Family Guy often gets a lot of flak for that, and rightly so sometimes, but it's also indicative of the mood of a generation. Its style of humor has been incredibly influential, but not without considerable backlash. You lose all sense of reality, unless you're very very careful.

The LEGO Movie is actually a very good example of how to do it well. It's got a hero's journey that's pretty much by the books, it gets to make fun of Batman, and it gets to pull everything aside for a schmaltzy message about a dad and his son. It's shameless corporate propaganda, but it's so layered, it's impressive. Emmett isn't some ordinary guy, he's written with the exact specifications to go against the traditional hero type. It is steeped in fiction tropes, but it pulls it off through some amazing writing.
Shrek would be another example: it was the nihilistic Gen-X answer to Disney's multibillion dollar plucky heroine romances. By Jeffrey motherforking "I'll cut 12 minutes of finished footage from The Black Cauldron myself if you won't" Katzenberg.

But I digress, again.

The most important thing to keep in mind is the Scroogean trilemma. I really like that idea.

Ahhh, that makes a lot of sense. I'm hesitant to say I follow this time, but I think I have it 

Yes, your assessment makes a lot of sense, and is one I'd agree with.
It's what I love most about my favourite Duck artist, Al Taliaferro - even with minimal dialogue or panels, he manages to portray Donald as a genuinely human character.
Sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses. Sometimes he deserves what he gets, sometimes he doesn't. No matter how it happens, he's a relatable figure, and something simple is often communicated with a great laugh.

What you mention is definitely something that tends to pop up in Rosa's work, occasionally to eye-rolling degrees.
It does lead to something of an unnatural feeling in some of Rosa's stories - not enough for them to be poorly made or anything, but it certainly doesn't feel as natural as Barks' works.

I think that your "Rosa does not conceive..." paragraph explains the point the most clearly; with that one, I feel like I understand your point clearly.
I follow you when you say that it's not the whole story, but it elucidates your point; if I'm picking you up right, Rosa is making the characters fit the right mold, whereas Barks adapted the mold to fit his characters.
Not an exact comparison, of course, but as an overall understanding of both authors.

I think that Ralph Breaks the Internet is another solid example that makes things clearer.
I was really not a fan of that movie - and I hated how poorly handled the Disney Princesses were. They felt nothing like the original characters, and were remolded to fit a specific narrative that the film wanted to convey. Every scene featuring them just felt wrong.
Of course, I feel like that's what you're getting at - they're so far-removed from their original characters that they feel empty.
And, naturally, Ducktales is the same - the characters are sanded down and remolded to fit a specific narrative and specific modern views, but without much thought as to how that impacts any of them.

You make a valid point - it's one thing when it's a revival of somewhat obscure characters, but officially licensed use of Donald Duck certainly doesn't come easily.
I won't turn this into harping on Ducktales, so your example of Ralph Breaks the Internet is a solid second; the Princesses added nothing to the movie, and were either a lazy marketing ploy or just the people involved going "Why don't we add THIS!" without thinking it through.

I'd agree on both The LEGO Movie and Shrek; seeing as Shrek has been out for much longer, it's easier to say that it has stood the test of time, but I feel like The LEGO Movie is on a similar path.
Even if both have the intention of subverting tropes, they still stand as their own works; they still make other points, and don't devote too much time to anything without purpose.
Unlike certain other works that are determined to subvert expectations without actually putting any effort into making the subversion worthwhile...

Hopefully I followed you more clearly this time!
And yes, the Scroogean Trilemma is definitely a solid concept 

[That Duckfan]

Oh, I think you've got it this time! Your "shaping the character to the mold" is a great way of putting it.

That's why Scrooge has such a hard time showing growth in these early stories. He's already been cast (pun not intended) as Classic Hero [Young] and Would-Be Icon. Now you can write a brief like that when you're doing a script and you get the actors to breathe life into the character, but artists are bound to be their own casting director and Rosa only limited range.

(Why am I now imagining '90s Leslie Nielsen as a live-action Scrooge?)

It's a shame about the less interesting parts of the Life of Scrooge, because the parts that are really interesting aren't given nearly enough "screentime". But then, Rosa only had 15 pages to fill most of the time. Outrageous.
I really hope we'll see more Disney graphic novels in the coming decade. Imagine what some artists could do with a canvas like that.