Strobl illustrated stories such as This is Your Life, Donald Duck and Donald in Mathmagicland, as well as the Ludwig von Drake stories.
.
I’d love to see a book with just these in them. I didn’t realize they did the cartoons in a comic and I’ve always enjoyed Ludwig. Here in the US what comics am I looking for if I want to read these?
Also very happy to hear the box sets will be continuing. I had bought them individually and then liked the boxes so I sold those off to buy the box sets. I was fearing they were gone and I’d need to hide the boxes to make my shelves look ok.
Strobl illustrated stories such as This is Your Life, Donald Duck and Donald in Mathmagicland, as well as the Ludwig von Drake stories.
.
I’d love to see a book with just these in them. I didn’t realize they did the cartoons in a comic and I’ve always enjoyed Ludwig. Here in the US what comics am I looking for if I want to read these?
Also very happy to hear the box sets will be continuing. I had bought them individually and then liked the boxes so I sold those off to buy the box sets. I was fearing they were gone and I’d need to hide the boxes to make my shelves look ok.
Ah, do I get to introduce you to the glories of INDUCKS? Here is the index page for Mathmagic Land, the comic book version. Here is the page for This Is Your Life. On the page for any specific story, you'll find a list of all indexed printings in any country; find the USA at/near the bottom of the list, and it will list the American comic books which printed that story. Here is the page listing stories drawn by Strobl and featuring Ludwig Von Drake. This includes the stories in the comics you might want to look for first, the Ludwig Von Drake title; there were four issues. Click on "next" at the top of the page for Ludwig Von Drake #1 I just sent you to, and you'll see issues #2, 3, 4.
I actually have a preference for Strobl over Murry, artistically speaking--Strobl's art, to me, is more idiosyncratic (without being off-model) and more lively than Murry's technically slick but rather mechanically predictable artwork. I can't think of a repeated "stock" Strobl pose off the top of my head, but can immediately recall the same expressions and poses recurring like clockwork throughout Murry's stories (Mickey explaining a plan with his right hand outstretched, a smile, and V-shaped eyebrows; Goofy standing with a puzzled look and one hand in front of his mouth). Strobl had a much wider range of poses, gestures and expressions; I think his reputation is worse than Murry's because Strobl dealt mainly in Ducks and was thus in the giant shadow of Barks through most of his career, while Murry did most of his Mouse work long after Gottfredson's heyday was over--and was, in any case, not having his work printed side-by-side with Gottfredson's in Western's titles; he kind of became the comic-book Mouse Man by default.
I actually have a preference for Strobl over Murry, artistically speaking--Strobl's art, to me, is more idiosyncratic (without being off-model) and more lively than Murry's technically slick but rather mechanically predictable artwork. I can't think of a repeated "stock" Strobl pose off the top of my head, but can immediately recall the same expressions and poses recurring like clockwork throughout Murry's stories (Mickey explaining a plan with his right hand outstretched, a smile, and V-shaped eyebrows; Goofy standing with a puzzled look and one hand in front of his mouth). Strobl had a much wider range of poses, gestures and expressions; I think his reputation is worse than Murry's because Strobl dealt mainly in Ducks and was thus in the giant shadow of Barks through most of his career, while Murry did most of his Mouse work long after Gottfredson's heyday was over--and was, in any case, not having his work printed side-by-side with Gottfredson's in Western's titles; he kind of became the comic-book Mouse Man by default.
Spot-on analysis of Murry's artwork. I've been thinking the same for SO many years about his stock poses -- you really (literally!) can set your clock to them.
Don't forget characters who are pondering something scratching their heads and simultaneously holding their hats between two fingers. Or characters who are walking having one hand stretched out in front of them like they're pushing something.
Don't forget characters who are pondering something scratching their heads and simultaneously holding their hats between two fingers.
Or Mickey, when he's pondering, holding his nose between two fingers!
Murry and Strobl occupied a similar niche in some ways—both were prized not only by Western Publishing but by Disney itself. Disney in 1971 had the two draw Mouse and Duck model sheets that, until 1997, comics licensees were often required to imitate. In 1992, Jaime Diaz—one of the strictest adherents to these models—actually told me that in his view, Barks was overrated and old-fashioned, whereas Strobl's 1971 Ducks were much more appropriate for children. A Disney editor of the era gave me the impression that this had once been the Disney studio's own view.
Here are two of Strobl's Scrooge sheets. One pose is partly copied from Barks, but most are original Strobl:
If you look closely at 1987 DuckTales, you'll see that Scrooge's design owes much more to this 1971 Strobl look than to anything from Barks. (And notice an especial oddity: Strobl specifies a difference in beak shape between Donald and Scrooge that I've never seen anyone else use.)
Strobl’s model sheets are technically good, yet they lack the liveliness that artists like Daniel Branca, Bas and Mau Heymans or Giorgio Cavazzano (to name just a few) brought to Scrooge McDuck.
While reading Disney Masters vol 11 and 12 with stories I absolutely love I found something I'd rather not know about.
In my opinion there is nothing to justify doing this with works of Disney MASTERS. After I found that they made Nataniele O'Hara cousin in english translation I thought there won't be anything worse, but there it is. And I'm afraid there is more of this, but I don't know these stories good enough to notice it...
In 1992, Jaime Diaz—one of the strictest adherents to these models—actually told me that in his view, Barks was overrated and old-fashioned, whereas Strobl's 1971 Ducks were much more appropriate for children. A Disney editor of the era gave me the impression that this had once been the Disney studio's own view.
It's funny how even though Don Rosa never considered the children reading his comics when he was creating them, he still understood more what children wanted than the entire Jaime Diaz Studio did. Children do not want something that looks and feels like kiddie stuff. They want comics that look interesting and are complex. That is why even as a little kid I was always looking forward to more Don Rosa comics but never cared about any of the Jaime Diaz Studio stuff and that is why Don Rosa is by far the most well-known and respected Duck comic creator of our time.
On a different note, phalanx091 I completely agree with what you wrote in your comment above. I don't understand why they are doing this, especially in hardcover books mostly aimed at adults. Then again, I never understood the concept of "localization". Why not just translate the text faithfully? Boggles the mind.
While reading Disney Masters vol 11 and 12 with stories I absolutely love I found something I'd rather not know about.
In my opinion there is nothing to justify doing this with works of Disney MASTERS. After I found that they made Nataniele O'Hara cousin in english translation I thought there won't be anything worse, but there it is. And I'm afraid there is more of this, but I don't know these stories good enough to notice it...
Okay, this is kinda shocking... were those speech bubbles really added for the Disney Masters editions? :S If so, why?
On a different note, phalanx091 I completely agree with what you wrote in your comment above. I don't understand why they are doing this, especially in hardcover books mostly aimed at adults. Then again, I never understood the concept of "localization". Why not just translate the text faithfully? Boggles the mind.
For me, this isn't about whether the text is 100% faithful to the original, but about adding speech bubbles which apparently weren't there in the original Italian versions. That amounts to changing the artwork.
On a different note, phalanx091 I completely agree with what you wrote in your comment above. I don't understand why they are doing this, especially in hardcover books mostly aimed at adults. Then again, I never understood the concept of "localization". Why not just translate the text faithfully? Boggles the mind.
For me, this isn't about whether the text is 100% faithful to the original, but about adding speech bubbles which apparently weren't there in the original Italian versions. That amounts to changing the artwork.
Sure, it doesn't have to be 100% faithful, but it sure should be at least 95% faithful to the original. Altering the text in any significant way is just as bad as altering the art in my opinion.
While reading Disney Masters vol 11 and 12 with stories I absolutely love I found something I'd rather not know about.
In my opinion there is nothing to justify doing this with works of Disney MASTERS. After I found that they made Nataniele O'Hara cousin in english translation I thought there won't be anything worse, but there it is. And I'm afraid there is more of this, but I don't know these stories good enough to notice it...
The translated Disney Masters books have always featured this kind of "translations", followed by all kinds of justifications about why they're actually a good thing and why you shouldn't want something more accurate to what was originally written. So yeah, if you want to read the actual stories the origial writers did, don't buy these books, you're not their audience.
While reading Disney Masters vol 11 and 12 with stories I absolutely love I found something I'd rather not know about.
In my opinion there is nothing to justify doing this with works of Disney MASTERS. After I found that they made Nataniele O'Hara cousin in english translation I thought there won't be anything worse, but there it is. And I'm afraid there is more of this, but I don't know these stories good enough to notice it...
The translated Disney Masters books have always featured this kind of "translations", followed by all kinds of justifications about why they're actually a good thing and why you shouldn't want something more accurate to what was originally written. So yeah, if you want to read the actual stories the origial writers did, don't buy these books, you're not their audience.
I have no problem with localization, I have problem with infantilisation that was done to these two stories by adding these bubbles. Dante bubble made this page anticlimactic, but in Forgetful Hero it is even worse - original ending is altered by this additional bubble. In italian version we don't know if Fhon regained his memory. It is possible that it didn't work at all, but DM version makes it flat - his memory is back, BUT it doesn't make sense at all considering last panel (according to current boom in Duckburg explained on first pages, he will make billions on book about Fhon Watt and spending a little part of it on getting his nephews' memory back could be exaggerated reaction of Scrooge, but then it is just meh then, in italian version it was better suited - Scrooge lost money and will lose even more of it, so his reaction is justified).
The translated Disney Masters books have always featured this kind of "translations", followed by all kinds of justifications about why they're actually a good thing and why you shouldn't want something more accurate to what was originally written. So yeah, if you want to read the actual stories the origial writers did, don't buy these books, you're not their audience.
I have no problem with localization, I have problem with infantilisation that was done to these two stories by adding these bubbles. Dante bubble made this page anticlimactic, but in Forgetful Hero it is even worse - original ending is altered by this additional bubble. In italian version we don't know if Fhon regained his memory. It is possible that it didn't work at all, but DM version makes it flat - his memory is back, BUT it doesn't make sense at all considering last panel (according to current boom in Duckburg explained on first pages, he will make billions on book about Fhon Watt and spending a little part of it on getting his nephews' memory back could be exaggerated reaction of Scrooge, but then it is just meh then, in italian version it was better suited - Scrooge lost money and will lose even more of it, so his reaction is justified).
Yep, that's what they do. Translators doesn't agree with how a plot point was originally handled, thinks the original dialogue is out of character, or otherwise thinks the story can be improved by adding something that wasn't there or changing something up a bit, they'll change it. What you call infantilisation, they call improvement.