Another thing: how did the German translator handle the part in "l'attaco nostalgico" where Mickey travels from Mouseton to Duckburg in order to meet Scrooge? If I remember correctly, German comics have Mickey live in Duckburg.
On page six, first panel: Mickey: I haven't been in this part of Duckburg for ages. Sign reads: Welcome to the Business Center of Duckburg!
second panel: Mickey: Everything is still exactly as before. Policeman: Oh, hello, Mister Mouse!
I don't have the story on hand now, but I think the original version has the sign simply saying the equivalent to "Welcome to Duckburg", while I can't recall Mickey's lines.
I checked the story, and here are the references to Topolinia and Paperopoli:
*On page 1, panel 1, the caption box says "This adventure is not like all the others! It is about Uncle Scrooge, but it starts in Mouseton...". The same panel shows the exterior of the Mouseton Museum, with a sign reading, well, "Mouseton Museum".
*On page 6, panel 1, Mickey says "Here I arrived! Duckburg always keeps its charm!". The sign reads "Welcome to Duckburg. Regular traffic."
*On page 6, panel 2, Mickey says "Everything is still as before", while the policeman says "Go on! Keep going!". I wonder why the German translator had the policeman talk to Mickey instead of directing the traffic.
*On page 8, panel 2, Scrooge asks Mickey "Are you on the track of some criminal here in Duckburg?", to which Mickey answers "No, no! It's a pleasure trip!" *On page 16, panel 6, the caption box says "... our heroes arrived to Mouseton!". The same panel shows again the exterior of the Mouseton Museum, which means we see again the "Mouseton Museum" sign the I mentioned above.
*One page 30, panel 4, Donald asks "Do we return to Duckburg?"
How were these scenes handled by the German translator? Of course, my question doesn't include page 6, panels 1-2, since for them there is already an answer in Matilda's message.
Last Edit: May 24, 2017 14:36:46 GMT by drakeborough
I don't have the story on hand now, but I think the original version has the sign simply saying the equivalent to "Welcome to Duckburg", while I can't recall Mickey's lines.
I checked the story, and here are the references to Topolinia and Paperopoli:
*On page 1, panel 1, the caption box says "This adventure is not like all the others! It is about Uncle Scrooge, but it starts in Mouseton...". The same panel shows the exterior of the Mouseton Museum, with a sign reading, well, "Mouseton Museum".
*On page 6, panel 1, Mickey says "Here I arrived! Duckburg always keeps its charm!". The sign reads "Welcome to Duckburg. Regular traffic."
*On page 6, panel 2, Mickey says "Everything is still as before", while the policeman says "Go on! Keep going!". I wonder why the German translator had the policeman talk to Mickey instead of directing the traffic.
*On page 8, panel 2, Scrooge asks Mickey "Are you on the track of some criminal here in Duckburg?", to which Mickey answers "No, no! It's a pleasure trip!" *On page 16, panel 6, the caption box says "... our heroes arrived to Mouseton!". The same panel shows again the exterior of the Mouseton Museum, which means we see again the "Mouseton Museum" sign the I mentioned above.
*One page 30, panel 4, Donald asks "Do we return to Duckburg?"
How were these scenes handled by the German translator? Of course, my question doesn't include page 6, panels 1-2, since for them there is already an answer in Matilda's message.
Page 1, panel 1: "this adventure is a bit different from the others, because Uncle Scrooge plays a role in it." Museum is the "Duckburg (Entenhausen) Museum"
Page 8, panel 2: Scrooge: Are you in our part of town (Stadtteil: neighborhood, district) after a criminal? Mickey: No, it's a friendly visit.
Page 16, panel 6: ...the two go (drive) with Mickey to the museum (of course, sign still says "Duckburg Museum")
Chief O’Hara: Commissario Basettoni It means Commissioner Big Sideburns. Because you know...he has those big sideburns!
In Italy he also has a first name (Adamo), first used in the 1996 story which introduced his wife. Does he have a first name in English? The Italian Wikipedia claims his English name is Seamus, is it true?
According to Inducks, "Seamus" was used in the American printing of D/D 2002-005 "With Friends Like These...", in Walt Disney Treasures #1 by Gemstone. My copy is very buried, so I can't confirm that, however.
Confirmed! The story is by Byron Erickson. The name "Seamus" appears in the first panel on the last page of the story, which is also the very last page of the book. He is being addressed by the woman he's dating, hence the first name.
About O'Hara: I just read the 1996 story I linked in my old message, and I saw two curious notes at the top of the first page:
The note on the left is in Italian, and says "Commiss. Adamo Basettoni". It is likely a reference to the fact that in this story Chef O'Hara ("Commissario Basettoni" in Italian) got a first name ("Adamo") for the first time in Italy.
The note on the right is in English, and says "Chief Adam O'Hara's wife". It is likely a reference to the fact that O'Hara's wife makes her debut here.
I don't know who wrote these notes and when (the scan is from a 2014 reprint), or why they put such notes into a published story (maybe they were meant to be removed and were left by accident?), but at any rate we can say that, if the messages above are correct, the name Adam is not canonical, since Seamus is his official English name.
I wonder if IDW will introduce her, or a married Disney character is just TOO FAR for the American Disney Comics
I don't know if a married Disney character is too far for the American Disney Comics or not, but I see that in Petulia's debut story she and O'Hara are shown sleeping in separate beds for unknown reasons:
I guess this was supposed to somehow "protect" the innocent little kids. Sigh.
Last Edit: Jun 7, 2017 11:08:59 GMT by drakeborough
Never understand their logics. Most of the kids living with their parents!
Like you, I also don't see the logic of the "separate beds even for married couples" hypocrisy, especially since other duck/mouse comics have no problems showing a married couple sleeping in the same bed.
And speaking of kids, I am also reminded of the fact that in Gottfredson's stories, O'Hara and her unseen/unnamed wife had a kid, while Italian stories showing the private life of O'Hara and Petulia imply they have no children.
Last Edit: Jun 7, 2017 14:32:18 GMT by drakeborough
And speaking of kids, I am also reminded of the fact that in Gottfredson's stories, O'Hara and her unseen/unnamed wife has a kid, while Italian stories showing the private life of O'Hara and Petulia imply they have no children.
Maybe the kid grew up? How many years had passed between the Gottfredson story with the kid, and the first story to clearly show O'Hara and his wife living together without children?
And speaking of kids, I am also reminded of the fact that in Gottfredson's stories, O'Hara and her unseen/unnamed wife had a kid, while Italian stories showing the private life of O'Hara and Petulia imply they have no children.
Maybe the kid grew up? How many years had passed between the Gottfredson story with the kid, and the first story to clearly show O'Hara and his wife living together without children?
In the story "The Gleam" (Gottfredson & De Maris/Gottfredson, 1942) O'Hara mentions his wife.
In the story "Mickey's Dangerous Double" (Walsh/Gottfredson, 1953) O'Hara mentions both his wife and his son, which is said to be five-month old, though we don't see him. We also don't know his name (except for the 2010 Italian translation, which calls him Adamo Junior).
The Italian stories showing the private life of O'Hara and Petulia were created many decades after 1953, but from an in-universe point of view there's no way the kid grew up to the point of moving out.
Incidentally, previous messages on this thread mentioned David Gerstein's story "With Friends Like These..." (code: D/D 2002-005), which supposedly has O'Hara dating a woman. Does the story imply he is not married, or was the word "dating" used in a loose sense? Also, what is the point of the double "D" in the story code?
I also see that Inducks lists Petulia among the characters of this Danish story from 1994, which predates her supposed debut by two years. Does O'Hara's wife actually appear there? And if so, how is she called? Does she look like the Italian version of her?
Finally, I'll say that the name Petulia was probably chosen for the character because it sounds similar to "petulante", an Italian adjective meaning "someone who asks something/insists on something in an annoying and overbearing way".
Maybe the kid grew up? How many years had passed between the Gottfredson story with the kid, and the first story to clearly show O'Hara and his wife living together without children?
In the story "The Gleam" (Gottfredson & De Maris/Gottfredson, 1942) O'Hara mentions his wife.
In the story "Mickey's Dangerous Double" (Walsh/Gottfredson, 1953) O'Hara mentions both his wife and his son, which is said to be five-month old, though we don't see him. We also don't know his name (except for the 2010 Italian translation, which calls him Adamo Junior).
The Italian stories showing the private life of O'Hara and Petulia were created many decades after 1953, but from an in-universe point of view there's no way the kid grew up to the point of moving out.
Depends on your headcanon; it's perfectly reasonable to assume he did, in mine (with the whole "none of the classic characters age" idea). But even without that, couldn't we theorize that, as presumably-wealthy Chief of the Mouseton Police, O'Hara sent his kid to some well-reputed boarding school, explaining his absence?
Depends on your headcanon; it's perfectly reasonable to assume he did, in mine (with the whole "none of the classic characters age" idea). But even without that, couldn't we theorize that, as presumably-wealthy Chief of the Mouseton Police, O'Hara sent his kid to some well-reputed boarding school, explaining his absence?
I expected you would theorize something like that, since I remember your view on continuity/timilines and your attempts to rationalize everything. Still, if O'Hara's son is only five-month old when Morty and Ferdie are at a school age, then I would be disappointed to see him being magically older than Mickey's nephews.
Depends on your headcanon; it's perfectly reasonable to assume he did, in mine (with the whole "none of the classic characters age" idea). But even without that, couldn't we theorize that, as presumably-wealthy Chief of the Mouseton Police, O'Hara sent his kid to some well-reputed boarding school, explaining his absence?
I expected you would theorize something like that, since I remember your view on continuity/timilines and your attempts to rationalize everything. Still, if O'Hara's son is only five-month old when Morty and Ferdie are at a school age, then I would be disappointed to see him being magically older than Mickey's nephews.
Has it been explicitly stated in the Italian stories in question that the O'Haras are childless? Since his family life is so seldom shown, the fact that we haven't seen any little O'Haras in the few scenes that depict it is not necessarily indicative of their non-existence.
Even if so, could "Mickey's Dangerous Double" have taken place after the Italian stories that suggest O'Hara is childless (in-universe, not publication date-wise), rather than before? He could have become a new father and the child could have easily grown up to be five months old, in-universe, with anyone else (including Morty and Ferdie) looking too much older. Then everything could be reconciled continuity-wise.
It is quite explicit in "With Friends Like These" that O'Hara is romantically involved with the woman. I don't think his marital status is discussed at all. Maybe, in an effort to maintain continuity, he was divorced from his "petulant" wife at this point? All these events could happen in a reasonable in-universe period of time (if you ignore story publication dates).
Has it been explicitly stated in the Italian stories in question that the O'Haras are childless? Since his family life is so seldom shown, the fact that we haven't seen any little O'Haras in the few scenes that depict it is not necessarily indicative of their non-existence.
I wouldn't say his family life is seldom shown, as Petulia has already appeared in 75 stories (the first one from 1996, the most recent one from last February), though 20 of these are one-pagers. And that figure (I didn't count the puzzling Danish story from 1994) will quickly become outdated.
I don't think O'Hara or his wife ever explicitly said "we are childless", though I can't be sure since I am not the biggest expert in these stories (but such a line would look weird in a Disney comic). Still, from what I saw of these stories they clearly live the life of a couple without children.
Even if so, could "Mickey's Dangerous Double" have taken place after the Italian stories that suggest O'Hara is childless (in-universe, not publication date-wise), rather than before? He could have become a new father and the child could have easily grown up to be five months old, in-universe, with anyone else (including Morty and Ferdie) looking too much older. Then everything could be reconciled continuity-wise.
I guess it's theoretically possible, though it would create many problems. To make a random example, Gottfredson's serials are clearly in chronological order, and "Mickey's Dangerous Double" comes before the introduction of characters like Eega Beeva. With your theory, what should we think when a childless Petulia and Eega Beeva appear in the same story?
It is quite explicit in "With Friends Like These" that O'Hara is romantically involved with the woman. I don't think his marital status is discussed at all. Maybe, in an effort to maintain continuity, he was divorced from his "petulant" wife at this point? All these events could happen in a reasonable in-universe period of time (if you ignore story publication dates).
I find it strange that a Gottfredson fan and expert like David Gerstein wrote a story that has O'Hara romantically involved with a woman. Well, since David pops up in this forum every now and then, maybe he will explain some behind-the-scenes of that story. Maybe he wasn't aware that in Gottfredson's stories O'Hara has a wife? It would be possible, since I only know of two stories (out of the author's 45 years of activity) in which O'Hara's wife is mentioned, and in both cases it is an off-hand remark. Still, "The Gleam" and "Mickey's Dangerous Double" are two of the most famous Mickey stories, and David even discussed the plot of the former in the DCML as early as 1994, way before writing "With Friends Like These...", so I would find it strange that he didn't know Gottfredson's O'Hara is a married man. Maybe the idea of portraying O'Hara as a bachelor and having him date a woman was an editorial imposition?
Also, why does this story (and, I see, many other stories) have a code that starts with "D/D"? I can understand the "I/D" code for joint Italian and Danish productions, but the double "D" seems redundant.
Oh, and I can't help feel amused for being reminded that there's a "petulant" word in English after I bothered explaining what is the meaning of the Italian adjective "petulante".
Last Edit: Jun 8, 2017 9:12:57 GMT by drakeborough
I find it strange that a Gottfredson fan and expert like David Gerstein wrote a story that has O'Hara romantically involved with a woman. Well, since David pops up in this forum every now and then, maybe he will explain some behind-the-scenes of that story. Maybe he wasn't aware that in Gottfredson's stories O'Hara has a wife? It would be possible, since I only know of two stories (out of the author's 45 years of activity) in which O'Hara's wife is mentioned, and in both cases it is an off-hand remark. Still, "The Gleam" and "Mickey's Dangerous Double" are two of the most famous Mickey stories, and David even discussed the plot of the former in the DCML as early as 1994, way before writing "With Friends Like These...", so I would find it strange that he didn't know Gottfredson's O'Hara is a married man. Maybe the idea of portraying O'Hara as a bachelor and having him date a woman was an editorial imposition?
What if (and I don't know how likely it is based on Gerstein's personality, as I do not know him) his line of thinking was that he wanted to sneak an extramarital affair involving a recurring character into an official story; and he precisely chose O'Hara because while he (and the Disney Comics cognizanti) would know O'Hara was married, the Disney censors hopefully wouldn't know this little bit of trivia.
What if (and I don't know how likely it is based on Gerstein's personality, as I do not know him) his line of thinking was that he wanted to sneak an extramarital affair involving a recurring character into an official story; and he precisely chose O'Hara because while he (and the Disney Comics cognizanti) would know O'Hara was married, the Disney censors hopefully wouldn't know this little bit of trivia.
Somehow I doubt that's the case, but at any rate we may soon know the onswer since Gerstein is a user of this forum.
And does anyone know about the 1994 Danish story that supposedly shows Petulia two years before her official debut?
I think the best explanation is that Chief O'Hara had 2 sons, ages several years apart.
Uh? How is O'Hara having a second son the solution to the contradiction between Gottfredson stories (where he has at least one son, five-month old) and modern Italian stories (where he has no kids)? If anything, a second son would make the contradiction even bigger.