I'd say that Ivan Saidenberg of Brazil deserves to be on a Hall of Fame list in part because he was one of the earliest writers to expand on Scrooge's Barksian backstory, develop more of the history of Duckburg, and follow up on some other classic Barks stories. He wrote a sequel to "The Phantom of Notre Duck" in 1981. He wrote twostories dealing with Scrooge's time in the Klondike, including Goldie, in 1977 and 1978. He wrote a "history of Duckburg" series in 1982. He wrote the Mickey story with the Gneezles in 1979.
Scarpa, of course, used Goldie in 1966. There may be more Duckburgian history done in Italy before 1980 which I don't know about. In the US, Carl Fallberg did a bit of expansion on Barksian history/characters, e.g. in his 1970 creation of Cornelia Coot, great-granddaughter of Cornelius. And the Claxton/Anderson Pipe Dreams sequel to Back to the Klondike was written in 1980. But it still seems to me that Saidenberg was a trailblazer in building on elements in the Barks canon, especially in telling stories of young Scrooge.
I would add Paco Rodriguez under Scandinavia. I think he’s easily one of the most skilled Disney artists.
I've never even heard of a "Paco Rodriguez". His family name was always listed as "Peinado" (ostensibly his mother's family name) in the credits I saw. Shouldn't the publishers be listing BOTH mothers' and fathers' family names in the credits for Spanish surnamed creators, as is generally done in their cultures?
I would add Paco Rodriguez under Scandinavia. I think he’s easily one of the most skilled Disney artists.
I've never even heard of a "Paco Rodriguez". His family name was always listed as "Peinado" (ostensibly his mother's family name) in the credits I saw. Shouldn't the publishers be listing BOTH mothers' and fathers' family names in the credits for Spanish surnamed creators, as is generally done in their cultures?
...what? Which credits did you see? He has ALWAYS been credited as "Rodriques" - or maybe in some rare cases as "Paco Rodrigues" - in the Scandinavian publications. In fact, he's even credited as Rodriques in the latest issue of the Norwegian weekly.
I would add Paco Rodriguez under Scandinavia. I think he’s easily one of the most skilled Disney artists.
I've never even heard of a "Paco Rodriguez". His family name was always listed as "Peinado" (ostensibly his mother's family name) in the credits I saw. Shouldn't the publishers be listing BOTH mothers' and fathers' family names in the credits for Spanish surnamed creators, as is generally done in their cultures?
Yeah, it’s a bit confusing how he’s credited in different countries so I just went with the name he uses on social media.
I've never even heard of a "Paco Rodriguez". His family name was always listed as "Peinado" (ostensibly his mother's family name) in the credits I saw. Shouldn't the publishers be listing BOTH mothers' and fathers' family names in the credits for Spanish surnamed creators, as is generally done in their cultures?
Yeah, it’s a bit confusing how he’s credited in different countries so I just went with the name he uses on social media.
So, which countries credit Rodríques/Rodriguez as "Peinado"? First I've heard of it.
I see that Lambiek lists his full name as Paco Rodriguez Peinado, alias Francisco Rodriguez Peinado.
I see that Lambiek lists his full name as Paco Rodriguez Peinado, alias Francisco Rodriguez Peinado.
...on which a fan drawing is visible, signed by 'Rodríques'. So I guess that is how he wanted to be credited, and matches with your observation in the Scandinavian publications.
So, which countries credit Rodríques/Rodriguez as "Peinado"? First I've heard of it.
I see that Lambiek lists his full name as Paco Rodriguez Peinado, alias Francisco Rodriguez Peinado.
He was credited as ”Francisco Rodriguez Peinado” during the IDW era.
Well, IDW seemed to use full names on everybody, regardless of how they had been credited before. For example, they always credited Casty as "Andrea "Casty" Castellan", and even wrote "Castellan" on the covers, where only surnames were used. There in particular, I think "Casty" would have been more natural.
Robb mentioned him in passing, but I think Bill Wright definitely deserves a spot in the Mouse wing of the Hall of Fame; I consider him the best Mickey artist at Western Publishing. His art and writing (I know he didn't write all of his stories) was much, much better than that of the Murry/Fallberg team; his Mickey retains an exuberance--both visually and verbally--that the stodgy Murry Mickey lacks, and as a result, Wright-written and/or drawn stories like "The Phantom Thief", "Ghost Town Airport," "The Black Sorcerer" (retitled "Sinister Sorcerer" by Gladstone I), "Battle the Giant Ants", "The Rajah's Treasure", "Jungle Magic", and "Ghost of Man-Eater Mountain" (that one was written by Don Christensen, I know) feel like they belong to the same world as Gottfredson's continuities. The Wright stories are simpler and less elaborately plotted than the continuities, but they have similar levels of humor and energy, and Mickey, Goofy, Pete, and Minnie come off as the same characters we saw in classic Gottfredson, not the bland placeholders in the Fallberg/Murry serials. I would love to see Wright get a couple of volumes in the Disney Masters series.
Whereas Arild Midthun, who I don't think is as good, got 4 Hall of Fame volumes. Of course, that's not surprising given that Midthun is Norwegian, but STILL...
The Midthun volumes weren't "proper" Hall of Fame volumes, but a semi-separate chronological Midthun series that got published under the Hall of Fame banner pretty much in order to make in more enticing to subscribe to. Same with the Don Rosa volumes. Both could've been published separately, but if they had, the Hall of Fame series would've probably been canceled much earlier due to low sales and low subscription numbers.
Whereas Arild Midthun, who I don't think is as good, got 4 Hall of Fame volumes. Of course, that's not surprising given that Midthun is Norwegian, but STILL...
The Midthun volumes weren't "proper" Hall of Fame volumes, but a semi-separate chronological Midthun series that got published under the Hall of Fame banner pretty much in order to make in more enticing to subscribe to. Same with the Don Rosa volumes. Both could've been published separately, but if they had, the Hall of Fame series would've probably been canceled much earlier due to low sales and low subscription numbers.
Sadly, that sounds just about right. And even with Midthun as the new "banner", the Norwegian Hall of Fame series ended in 2013 after 50 books.
Are the Midthun volumes actually complete and chronological collections, though? When I browsed the first volume a while back, I didn't get the impression that all the stories were presented in chronological order.
Are the Midthun volumes actually complete and chronological collections, though? When I browsed the first volume a while back, I didn't get the impression that all the stories were presented in chronological order.
No, not entirely, but more or less. I'm not entirely sure why they were presented in the order they were, but the first three volumes collect almost every Midthun story published at the time, and the fourth one I think is a complete collection of everything Midthun did after the third volume's publication.
Well, IDW seemed to use full names on everybody, regardless of how they had been credited before. For example, they always credited Casty as "Andrea "Casty" Castellan", and even wrote "Castellan" on the covers, where only surnames were used. There in particular, I think "Casty" would have been more natural.
In the early days of credits, Egmont asked that many of their exclusive artists only be credited with a one-word name or pen-name. In the USA, this transpired during an era (early 1990s) where first Disney Comics, Inc. and then Gladstone were burning off a lot of relatively weak 1970s Egmont backlog stories. As a result, lots of those somewhat lesser stories were among the first to appear in our market with artists' names attached, and single-word names were used.
In practice, fans often associated the relative weakness of the stories with the appearance of single-word names, and by the late 1990s, editors would often hear complaints about "the artists with the one-word names." Artists billed with them were often popularly assumed to be dispassionate studio artists at best, interchangeable cogs at worst. (Sadly, even I perceived a few that way in my teenage years, so I too was capable of unfair generalizations.)
Later, as an editor, I realized that at least for our market—where the product doesn't have a very high saturation level, no matter what I might wish—the act of prominently displaying an artist's full name helps flesh them out for casual readers who might otherwise regard them as enigmas.
Thus our more recent use, for instance, of the full name Francisco Rodriguez Peinado, which he established for me himself in the early 2000s. "Rodriques" as a standalone single word, with a Q, originated as a modified pen-name used at Egmont long before, specific to that market. Similarly, Andrea "Casty" Castellan simply looks more appropriate to me than simply "Casty," even if I call him Casty when chatting with him personally.
Well, IDW seemed to use full names on everybody, regardless of how they had been credited before. For example, they always credited Casty as "Andrea "Casty" Castellan", and even wrote "Castellan" on the covers, where only surnames were used. There in particular, I think "Casty" would have been more natural.
In the early days of credits, Egmont asked that many of their exclusive artists only be credited with a one-word name or pen-name. In the USA, this transpired during an era (early 1990s) where first Disney Comics, Inc. and then Gladstone were burning off a lot of relatively weak 1970s Egmont backlog stories. As a result, lots of those somewhat lesser stories were among the first to appear in our market with artists' names attached, and single-word names were used.
In practice, fans often associated the relative weakness of the stories with the appearance of single-word names, and by the late 1990s, editors would often hear complaints about "the artists with the one-word names." Artists billed with them were often popularly assumed to be dispassionate studio artists at best, interchangeable cogs at worst. (Sadly, even I perceived a few that way in my teenage years, so I too was capable of unfair generalizations.)
Later, as an editor, I realized that at least for our market—where the product doesn't have a very high saturation level, no matter what I might wish—the act of prominently displaying an artist's full name helps flesh them out for casual readers who might otherwise regard them as enigmas.
Thus our more recent use, for instance, of the full name Francisco Rodriguez Peinado, which he established for me himself in the early 2000s. "Rodriques" as a standalone single word, with a Q, originated as a modified pen-name used at Egmont long before, specific to that market. Similarly, Andrea "Casty" Castellan simply looks more appropriate to me than simply "Casty," even if I call him Casty when chatting with him personally.
I agree completely. The creator's full name should be known by the fan and researcher, so he or she can have access to as much information as possible about the person's background, credits and history from all possible sources.
The ones I would add are the Italians Tito Faraci and Silvia Ziche. Faraci's stories are full of absurdities that are, however, always funny instead of annoying. For me, with regard to writing humoristic scenes and dialogues, I can't think of a writer who does it better than Faraci. Ziche has a drawing style that I personally like a lot, and although she is primarily an artist, she has also written a few stories. Of those I read only 'Paperina di Rivondosa', but that one is easily among my favorite Disney comics.
Ziche should draw Darkwing stories- Darkwing is much better suited to exaggerated physical comedy and body-squashing and stretching slapstick that the average Ducks. That does align with Ziche's cartoony hyper artwork.