Thank you, hex! It's weird that one has to be this sneaky to find the latest books, but it does work! I just tried and the latest Disney Masters books (vol 17 & 18) did finally appear in the results when I searched for "Disney Masters".
the disney masters series is truly great, thank you c fantagraphics. i browsed inducks and came about something that could be very intresting to include in the series, , amount to ca 160 pages though..inducks - william a. ward wouldn't it be really something to put in the series? a selection of very early stories with donald duck what do you think, historical value- yes, would it sell?- not sure,a great disney comic history favor?- kind of - what do folks here on board think?
I'd like to publish much of the Ward material—but there's the difficult point that in the original English, several of his stories have the same racism problem as the most dated Barks and Gottfredson content. Arguably, they are even more extreme.
Disney Masters is absolutely a collectors' series, but as a means of keeping it going, we also market it to the larger all-ages audience, in a way that we didn't with the Floyd Gottfredson Library. I couldn't, and wouldn't, promote a Ward book this way—it would be irresponsible of me.
So while I'm not absolutely opposed to publishing a Ward collection sometime, if I did, I'd want to keep it separate from Disney Masters.
I'd like to publish much of the Ward material—but there's the difficult point that in the original English, several of his stories have the same racism problem as the most dated Barks and Gottfredson content. Arguably, they are even more extreme.
Disney Masters is absolutely a collectors' series, but as a means of keeping it going, we also market it to the larger all-ages audience, in a way that we didn't with the Floyd Gottfredson Library. I couldn't, and wouldn't, promote a Ward book this way—it would be irresponsible of me.
So while I'm not absolutely opposed to publishing a Ward collection sometime, if I did, I'd want to keep it separate from Disney Masters.
thank you for taking the time to reply to my opinion. I certainly understand the difficulty of publishing ward's work in the overton window that shapes our current time. especially now when disney seems to have tighten the grip on what they consider passable to put out, e.g. the now changed dialogues in the lastest released bark's library volume, which found hard to comprehend the use of changing out that how somebody instead of getting; ''violent'' (when the character was already ''mad'') - was adjusted: to ''angry'' in the story 'good deeds'. english is not my native language but while both could be seen as just adjectives, to me ''violent'' is an act, while ''angry'' is an emotion, so if that indeed is the case, I really don't understand that specific change. however - - -
disney masters line is as you say not suitable for sensitive uncensored material from ward's time and given that ward's material is something that has not been widely published for a long time, and never in a complete collection - thus if this collection would ever be published then it should be done uncensored for the historical value.
I am forever beyond greatful that the floyd gottfredson library could be published and finished totally uncensored (as far as I know, please correct me if wrong) a masterpiece of historical high importance and significance when it comes to comic history as well as production with all the 'extras' as the cherry on top.
the disney masters series is truly great, thank you c fantagraphics. i browsed inducks and came about something that could be very intresting to include in the series, , amount to ca 160 pages though..inducks - william a. ward wouldn't it be really something to put in the series? a selection of very early stories with donald duck what do you think, historical value- yes, would it sell?- not sure,a great disney comic history favor?- kind of - what do folks here on board think?
the disney masters series is truly great, thank you c fantagraphics. i browsed inducks and came about something that could be very intresting to include in the series, , amount to ca 160 pages though..inducks - william a. ward wouldn't it be really something to put in the series? a selection of very early stories with donald duck what do you think, historical value- yes, would it sell?- not sure,a great disney comic history favor?- kind of - what do folks here on board think?
From what I saw one Ward story even had Donald use the N word! You can't get away with that nowadays can you?
at least I don't think many have tried the last decade. but I think earlier eras culture should be left untouched and unaltered when reprinted, for the sake of the author as well as readers. if we always revision past times' material, will we ever truly learn anything from history and evolve if old times' doings are erased?
the disney masters series is truly great, thank you c fantagraphics. i browsed inducks and came about something that could be very intresting to include in the series, , amount to ca 160 pages though..inducks - william a. ward wouldn't it be really something to put in the series? a selection of very early stories with donald duck what do you think, historical value- yes, would it sell?- not sure,a great disney comic history favor?- kind of - what do folks here on board think?
That German Barks fan club did an excellent job with that William Ward book. I wonder how they managed to get the licence to publish it. Or does Disney simply not care because it's a low print run and they are obscure comics?
From what I saw one Ward story even had Donald use the N word! You can't get away with that nowadays can you?
at least I don't think many have tried the last decade. but I think earlier eras culture should be left untouched and unaltered when reprinted, for the sake of the author as well as readers. if we always revision past times' material, will we ever truly learn anything from history and evolve if old times' doings are erased?
I dunno, normally I'd be in the same boat as you; most of the changes that have been made in the Complete Carl Barks Disney Library have been nonsensical, definitely not gonna disagree on that.
Still, if the N-word was used, that'd be a different story. I'm curious to know what the context was - Was it meant to be derogatory, or was it an unfortunate case of the word being used in an ignorant way?
I think that, as far as censorship goes, severity and context are important. Say, the word "violent" being changed to "angry" - most, if not all, would agree that the change makes no sense. The word "violent" is not an offensive term - it can come up frequently in topics where offensive subjects are discussed, but the word itself is not offensive.
Then, you look at many old Merrie Melodies cartoons - they contained many extremely offensive racial stereotypes, as well as other dated concepts that wouldn't fly today. Warner Bros. managed that by putting out a disclaimer - that it's being preserved for posterity, and that they understand that it has extremely offensive caricatures in it. The censorship, in this case, is putting up a clear warning about the material - it does not hide the fact that the material is likely to offend. While the animation itself should be celebrated, the depictions and general attitude of the short should not be celebrated. When releasing the Looney Tunes Golden Collection, they were VERY clear - their stance was that to alter these offensive depictions would be to forget their impact.
The thing is, you simply can't get away with that in certain circumstances. The Censored Eleven never showed up on any official DVD releases because their content was simply too far past what was acceptable to be shown. There's an ever-changing line with what's okay to distribute, and these shorts are considered to be too far past it to be shown. There's also the very thin line of between "These cartoons are being shown because to hide them would be offensive in its own right" and "Profiting off of racist depictions/virtue signalling".
Disney, of course, is known for staying clear of that line for their own safety. When it comes to offensive content, Disney tends to either bury it or pretend it's not there.
Now, they're willing to make exceptions in some cases, but not in others - say, they have never and will never release Song of the South. Meanwhile, I've heard that Saludos Amigos, on Disney Plus, restores the scene in which Goofy smokes. It can be hard to know where their line is, but they have no issue cutting certain content if it may affect their bottom line.
Now, to get back to comics, some changes are pure nonsense - specifically, a Donald Duck comic in which the word "violent" is censored. Others, while we may not like them, make sense - terms like "Shanghaied" or "holocaust", regardless of their context, could easily be misconstrued by certain readers. Such misunderstandings can easily snowball, especially when many people who would complain wouldn't actually be reading the comics. As such, it makes sense for Disney to censor it.
Now, imagine how the average journalist or reviewer would react to the N-word being used in a Donald Duck comic. As it was Donald himself that said the N-Word, they would have a field day with it. There's no chance that Disney would allow that to fly - that could cause serious trouble for their brand, especially when it's involving one of their core mascots.
That being said... I honestly don't think I could agree with the stance that media should never be altered or hidden away. Disney shaped the childhoods of many, and the core of most of their stories will always hold up. Still, look at Fantasia - is it really a loss to anyone to cut out a black centaur that's a dopey slave to the pure, white ones? It was altered so that everyone could enjoy a beautiful film without being discriminated against - especially since Sunflower doesn't really add anything to the film. Or, look at the old Warner Bros. shorts - many will tell you that Coal Black and de Sebben Dwarfs should be preserved because of its influence and achievements in animation - which makes sense. But what about, say, Tokio Jokio? That one is nothing but crass racism - it doesn't really have any comedic value and it's nothing special.
I understand what you're saying - that to wipe atrocities away is to, in a way, say they never happened. If they wanted to put them up for free and explain that they're wrong, sure, go for it. But to have such media available for purchase feels wrong to me - it's hard to believe it as a learning experience when I know that someone is making a profit from it.
All in all, I think censorship has a time and place - sure, I'd agree that certain offensive media should be made available as a learning experience, but not if profit will be made on it. In the same vein, sure, they could distribute media that's fully in-tact, but I think that should be secondary. Have a version that meets social and cultural standards, but have the "true" version available as a special option or the like.
Disney probably wouldn't be bothered doing all of that, so I can understand that, when push comes to shove, they're going to censor rather than put out potentially offensive material when possible.
Last Edit: Jan 22, 2021 22:09:22 GMT by alquackskey: Misread mickeyanddonaldfan's comment - they specify clearly that Donald was the one to use the N-Word
Resident autistic, diabetic duck fan.
I love hearing about bizarre/obscure Disney works - recommendations welcome!
Still, if the N-word was used, that'd be a different story. I'm curious to know what the context was - Was it meant to be derogatory, or was it an unfortunate case of the word being used in an ignorant way?
Neither, "WAK" was a neutral word in Britain at the time these stories were written. Fairly common dog name, too.
I am forever beyond greatful that the floyd gottfredson library could be published and finished totally uncensored (as far as I know, please correct me if wrong)
The Gottfredson Library is absolutely uncensored as far as dated material goes.
As far as other alterations:
There were two stories in 1938-39 in which a few words were changed at King Features, with words relettered by a hand that I've seen in some non-Disney King strips of the time; possibly Doc Winner. I "decensored" them because it was instantly obvious what was changed.
In "Mighty Whalehunter," the Portuguese sailor Pedro—a loose caricature of Spencer Tracy as Manuel Fidello in the movie Captains Courageous—frequently calls Mickey "leetle feesh" (= little fish). But at one point he jokes that if a tidal wave hits, a "leetle bug like you wake up drown[ed]." Here it was easy to guess that "bug" had been "feesh" too, but was "corrected" at King due to the illogic of a fish drowning—when that was supposed to be the joke! So we re-corrected it to "feesh."
In "Unhappy Campers," almost every reference to the campsite as "Camp Phooey" was clumsily altered, referring instead to "the camp" or "the site"—perhaps because someone at King found the endless use of "Phooey" somehow offensive (?). Just a couple of uses slipped through, enough to make it clear that all the other spots had used "Phooey" too. So we fixed it back.
Beyond that...
In "Death Valley," a single sentence had two words that seemed out of place, probably the result of some editing that was done before lettering (in a discussion about Sylvester, Horace says "he will" in reference to him, but it's not clear what is meant); we removed them so the sentence would make sense.
Also in Death Valley, a misspelling of Clarabelle as "Clarabell" was corrected.
In "The 'Lectro Box," the ending scene had been drawn by Gottfredson with the scientists' underwear showing, but it was censored by King in 1943. While still living, Gottfredson had told Thomas Andrae—then with Another Rainbow—that if/when a Gottfredson Library was published, this should be redrawn to put the underwear back. So we "censored" it to do this; since Gottfredson's original art couldn't be found, we had it redrawn in Gottfredson's style by Henrieke Goorhuis. Elsewhere in the book, we reprinted the 1943 King version unchanged.
In my memory, these were the only examples of changed content in all 14 books!
Overall, strips were changed to remove some of the copyright and distribution notices when that could be done without any meaningful changes to the art (e. g. if it was absolutely obvious what, if anything, had been covered by the notices).
Still, if the N-word was used, that'd be a different story. I'm curious to know what the context was - Was it meant to be derogatory, or was it an unfortunate case of the word being used in an ignorant way?
Neither, "WAK" was a neutral word in Britain at the time these stories were written. Fairly common dog name, too.
I'd have chalked that up under the second category, but the more I think about it, the more I get what you mean in saying neither.
I've seen and heard one of the British slurs (beginning with a W) and have seen several of the associated dolls used over here in Ireland, so that term does carry a similar weight over here.
It's bizarre to think of the word being commonplace and legitimately being truly neutral. Part of me wonders if they'd get away with having a foreword explaining this context, and discussing its use in Britain in comparison to its use in America. The rest of me is well aware that that would never fly.
I don't agree with the sentiment that any attempt to censor the word is just "the PC brigade", but this example in particular is surprisingly nuanced. I doubt that the Donald Duck example is the same (As in, in enough of a position that it would feel wrong in some way to remove or replace the term), but this is a surprisingly complex one to think about.
Resident autistic, diabetic duck fan.
I love hearing about bizarre/obscure Disney works - recommendations welcome!
Post by Monkey_Feyerabend on Jan 22, 2021 23:44:17 GMT
Neither, "WAK" was a neutral word in Britain at the time these stories were written. Fairly common dog name, too.
You can read some comments on its general usage in Britain back in the day here in this wikipedia talk page
Yeah, the word 'n....r' used in the disgusting derogatory sense of 'black person who should be considered less than human' is mostly an American notion. European western cultures had banished slavery (not racism, of course) from the continent basically since the fall of the Roman Empire (the reintroduced it in the colonies, in some cases, later), so the notion was never much of use. You can perceive this in languages like French or Italian, where there is no word that literally translates 'n....r', so in dubbing American movies or translating American novels they have to translate it with the (local translation of) the English word 'negro' (which on the other hand had in Europe a similar evolution than in America: acceptable and politically correct till the early 70's, incrementally inappropriate after). Correct me if I am wrong, but in Spanish the situation is even more complicated, as there is no actual distinction between 'black' and 'negro', since in Spanish 'black' is translated 'negro' ('negro' was just the Latin word for 'black'). So, assuming that the link provided by bats is reliable, it would not surprise me that when the British imported the word from America they used it without the derogative meaning. But it remains that they imported it from America, where it was always derogatory in the first place. So, I for once would honestly be careful in printing Ward in the original way. On the other hand, if we keep the word 'n....r' in Mark Twain's novels (and Twain was American!), it would seem fair to me to leave it in poor Ward.
In any case, by giving a look at Ward's Donald comics, I would like to point out a much more relevant reason why it would be hard to print that material today: those comics were WEIRD.