I fear that the next volume [v23] will be more heavily censored than was 21. Ti
Unfortunately, this is true. I got the newest volume ("Under the Polar Ice") today, and it's filled with censorship, much of it without rhyme or reason. For example, "Black Wednesday," with its comical wild Indians, is left untouched as far as I can tell, while the line "Where did you learn barbering? From an Indian war chief?" in the Wax Museum story is censored to remove the second sentence. The dialogue in "Trail Tycoon" is changed to have the Indians state they want Scrooge's "head" instead of his scalp (how is that better?), and some dialogue in the rafting story (with the Aucas) is censored as well. Most bizarrely, some of the fake dialect of the role-playing tourists (WHO AREN'T ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE INDIANS) in "Riding the Pony Express" is censored to be grammatically correct, while other lines are left untouched. Who on earth is calling the shots on this series now? I thought this collection was supposed to be for serious collectors of Barks' work; this book is an embarrassment, and I urge all fans to demand a revised edition without this paternalistic, randomized censorship. I am seriously considering canceling my order for the next volume in the series unless this is remedied.
I fear that the next volume [v23] will be more heavily censored than was 21. Ti
Unfortunately, this is true. I got the newest volume ("Under the Polar Ice") today, and it's filled with censorship, much of it without rhyme or reason. For example, "Black Wednesday," with its comical wild Indians, is left untouched as far as I can tell, while the line "Where did you learn barbering? From an Indian war chief?" in the Wax Museum story is censored to remove the second sentence. The dialogue in "Trail Tycoon" is changed to have the Indians state they want Scrooge's "head" instead of his scalp (how is that better?), and some dialogue in the rafting story (with the Aucas) is censored as well. Most bizarrely, some of the fake dialect of the role-playing tourists (WHO AREN'T ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE INDIANS) in "Riding the Pony Express" is censored to be grammatically correct, while other lines are left untouched. Who on earth is calling the shots on this series now? I thought this collection was supposed to be for serious collectors of Barks' work; this book is an embarrassment, and I urge all fans to demand a revised edition without this paternalistic, randomized censorship. I am seriously considering canceling my order for the next volume in the series unless this is remedied.
Damn. Well, I guess it's obvious who's calling the shots on THIS kind of stuff...
I forgot to add: they also changed "shanghaied" to "kidnapped" in the Polar Ice story, apparently being too historically ignorant to know that "Shanghaied" isn't some kind of racially demeaning reference to the Chinese--it simply refers to the 19th-century California waterfront-town practice of forcibly recruiting unwilling sailors for long voyages to China.
I forgot to add: they also changed "shanghaied" to "kidnapped" in the Polar Ice story, apparently being too historically ignorant to know that "Shanghaied" isn't some kind of racially demeaning reference to the Chinese--it simply refers to the 19th-century California waterfront-town practice of forcibly recruiting unwilling sailors for long voyages to China.
Even if they know the meaning of the expression, they are aware that the imbeciles that like to protest and call to boycott on twitter are not particularly bright in historical knowledge. That's what scares them. One idiot with enough followers can willingly or accidentally start a fire that goes viral. Disney doesn't want to be pointed after the facts as the origin of the fire. It's sad, but that's the world we live in. It's a relatively small side effect of the great thing that the hyperconnected society is. I would not censor the way they do, but I cannot blame them too much for not wanting to take risks. You realise how much people like to pick on 'Disney the evil corporation'? Dolce and Gabbana almost started a war between China and Italy (even if mostly Americans were making noise about it on social media) for making an advertising with a Chinese girl trying to clumsly eat pizza with chopstick. Ooowwww, how racist!!! Why they do not just add notes to explain the meaning and context of potentially controversial words? It's a win win: we get the original thing and we learn stuff. and if the stuff we learn is a bad attitude from the past, even better. 'Shangaied' is fantastic, by the way. Never heard of it before, I am going to start using it in real life ahahahaaah. (well, you see... these comics do have a bad influence on weak minded people like mine!! 😅 )
Post by Monkey_Feyerabend on Nov 11, 2020 18:03:42 GMT
Well, this could be a case of a word that is changed just because nobody would understand the meaning, and as we know they do not put side notes anywhere in Barks's books. So no actual censure, just making a passage more clear for our time. Still weird though, considering that this series goes all the way to reproduce the exact old colouring of the original issues to present the vintage experience. Why not to keep the vintage language?
Damn. Well, I guess it's obvious who's calling the shots on THIS kind of stuff...
...Disney is. No question about it.
Funny. Because meanwhile on Disney+, they do this.
I'm sure all of us would much rather have that disclaimer printed at the beginning of each volume rather than seeing random words like
be censored for... honestly no discernible reason that I can make out.
Please somebody working on the books comment on this if they're allowed to. I really don't get this.
Oh, come on. Yes, they do disclaimers like that for frikkin' DUMBO! That doesn't mean they allow EVERYTHING to get released. To take the most extreme example: Song of the South will NEVER get released on Disney+ under any circumstance, disclaimers be damned.
This isn't so complicated once you take a closer look. Disney puts disclaimers on the somewhat-problematic stuff that they allow to get released... but everything that's too problematic either gets modified or locked away.
To be entirely clear: I'm talking about stuff that Disney deems too problematic for whatever reason, not what I find problematic. djnyr's complaints and comments about the censored stuff in Vol. 23 seem 100% rational to me.
Why they do not just add notes to explain the meaning and context of potentially controversial words? It's a win win: we get the original thing and we learn stuff. and if the stuff we learn is a bad attitude from the past, even better.
But that's exactly the problem: Disney USUALLY puts disclaimers on racially insensitive or otherwise problematic stuff -- there were tons of them in the Gottfredson books. But in these cases, someone there has (bizarrely, yes) deemed certain elements TOO problematic to even be put in context and explained. They have decided to just hide the problematic stuff instead. It's exactly like what happened with "holocaust" in the story "The Lovelorn Fireman" in Vol. 21.
Post by Monkey_Feyerabend on Nov 11, 2020 18:39:38 GMT
The mystery is that these are Fantagraphics book. It is not in line with the general attitude of the publisher - if anything, it is strongly against the principles of that company - to modify or edulcorate in any possible sense comic material, especially historic one. They have quite a strong political view on this, especially the big boss Gary Groth. It's in their history of the publisher that had to fight since the 80's for the recognition of good quality cartooning in the North American landscape hostage of the superheroes mainstream dumbness. And from the credits in Barks' volumes what I understand is that people at Fantagraphics are the only ones producing this series...or not? Fantagraphics has paid money to get the right to publish adult books containing this material. Any outdated material should pass, maybe with some note. Since the target is not kids, nothing should be deemed impossible to put in context and explained.
The mystery is that these are Fantagraphics book. It is not in line with the general attitude of the publisher - if anything, it is strongly against the principles of that company - to modify or edulcorate in any possible sense comic material, especially historic one. They have quite a strong political view on this, especially the big boss Gary Groth. It's in their history of the publisher that had to fight since the 80's for the recognition of good quality cartooning in the North American landscape hostage of the superheroes mainstream dumbness. And from the credits in Barks' volumes what I understand is that people at Fantagraphics are the only ones producing this series...or not? Fantagraphics has paid money to get the right to publish adult books containing this material. Any outdated material should pass, maybe with some note. Since the target is not kids, nothing should be deemed impossible to put in context and explained.
Which is exactly why it's so obvious that Disney is making Fantagraphics do these changes. You really think it was up to Fanta whether or not "holocaust" should remain in that speech bubble in Vol. 21?
Oh, come on. Yes, they do disclaimers like that for frikkin' DUMBO! That doesn't mean they allow EVERYTHING to get released. To take the most extreme example: Song of the South will NEVER get released on Disney+ under any circumstance, disclaimers be damned.
This isn't so complicated once you take a closer look. Disney puts disclaimers on the somewhat-problematic stuff that they allow to get released... but everything that's too problematic either gets modified or locked away.
They released Peter Pan! That movie is way more problematic than some of the language in a late '50s Barks comic. And again, Voodoo Hoodoo got a pass in 2011.
(I honestly think they could release Song of the South now, with the new disclaimers.)
I'm starting to worry about the earlier and later stories that haven't been released yet. What will happen to The Firebug, Salesman Donald, The Treasure of Marco Polo?
Is there a definitive list of the changes that have been made across the volumes? Or is it only with recent volumes that changes have actually been happening?
As That Duckfan mentioned, this series has Voodoo Hoodoo unedited. From what I've seen, Voodoo Hoodoo is one of the most well-known stories surrounding Scrooge and Donald - or, rather, it's infamous for the concept and the depictions of characters like Foola Zoola. Maybe my logic is off, but would it not make more sense that that one, of all stories, would actually need to be edited? If the assumption that the changes were made to avoid backlash in regards to the negative depictions of certain races is true, why edit issues that aren't quite on people's radars, but leave issues where a decent amount of people are aware of the insensitive caricatures untouched?
I don't know. Maybe they've just changed their minds, maybe there have been complaints, maybe there are reasons that have eluded me... But, unless there are more changes that I'm not aware of (Admittedly, these collections are my first exposure to many of these comics), the fact that the changes are happening now for no apparent reason is a little fishy.
Resident autistic, diabetic duck fan.
I love hearing about bizarre/obscure Disney works - recommendations welcome!
The issue with Song of the South is not that it's super racist and "problematic" and whatever (which it REALLY isn't), but that so many people that have never seen it THINK - or rather, "know" - that it's super racist and "problematic". No matter how many people complain about scenes in Peter Pan and Dumbo and the like, enough people out there have seen those movies and know what they're about that the movies can never get THAT heavy a stigma against them.
But Song of the South is a movie that's unfortunately best known these days as "that movie that's so super racist Disney banned it forever", and Disney knows that no amount of disclaimers thrown onto it will prevent an explosion of "Disney exposes children to infamous racist white supremacy alt-right WAK propaganda and must be boycotted" outbursts from people that have never seen the movie, and that's something they'd rather be without.