DCML digest, Vol 1 #377 - 15 msgs

Henri Kunne HJC.Kunne at net.HCC.nl
Mon Jan 15 22:16:15 CET 2001

At 09:36 14-1-01, Rob Klein wrote:

>Regarding Henri Kunne's query over opinions on Carol Voges' Ducks:
>Hoi Henri!
>I agree with Harry.  To me, Carol's Ducks are ugly.  Of course, (as Ole
>Reichstein Nielsen pointed out) that is likely because I am measuring the
>quality of all Duck drawings based on my having been introduced to the
>Ducks by seeing Carl Barks' Ducks.

Could well be right. In the early 1960, Strobl was a regular guest in the Dutch
Donald weekly and I still like him (see below).

>I do Not like the Ducks of Carol, Romano Scarpa, post 1958 (1959 and later)
>Tony Strobl work, most of the Italian artists, McSavage, Harry Balm, Danny
>Wanner, Jules Coenen (sometimes), Marc de Jonge, most of the other Western
>Publishing artists, Don Rosa, Paul Murray,many of the Hachette artists,
>many of the Egmont Spanish artists....etc.
>Eddy van Schuylenburg, Vicar, Jules Coenen (at his best), Michel Nadorp,
>Endre Lucasz, Carpi, Cavazzano (at his best)
>It is a matter of style chosen by the artist, and individual taste of the 

You are quite right, of course: it's a matter of taste. Hoewever, I want to put
one thing straight. There are two standards to judge Disney art c.q. Duck art
by: is it technically correct? Are the Ducks "cute"? It's clear that you are on
the technical side. This can be seen from your choices: Barks, old Strobl,
and _not_ the Italian artists, not even Scarpa.
         I'm on the cute side; so I do like most of the famous Italians, 
of Strobl. Of course I'm not exactly a Barks hater <g>, but I read his
stories to read the stories, if you know what I mean. Enjoying nice, charming
art is a different thing. To everyone, his specialism. Voges is one of the cute
Duck artists, and I love his stories for it. (Not as stories indeed, 
they're full
of cliches.)

>As you can tell from these lists, my views (....) come from personal taste,
>and do not relate exactly to technical competence of the artist.

As you've read, I do not completely agree with that. I think they do; but
chances are that it's not exactly competence that counts, but the artist's
goal, or specialization.

At 14 Jan 2001 11:37:45, Frank Stajano wrote:

>At 2001-01-13 20:20 +0100, Henri Kunne wrote:
> >         Other Dutch list members here with any expressed opinion about
> >Voges' Disney art?
>Obvious follow-up: why not putting up a few scans somewhere so that we can
>all form first-hand opinions?

Very good excuse: because I haven't got a scanner at the moment.

At Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:19:47, Harry Fluks wrote:

> > I consider Voges' Duck art even very good. We
> > already talked about
> > this, Harry, but I want other list members to know about my
> > "second opinion",
> > so they won't take yours for a scientific fact.
>Of course my opinion is not a scientific fact. I'm not sure why you think
>anyone would think it is.

Well, maybe I should have put a smiley behind that one. Or said: take
your words for granted. I know nobody will think of science. I cannot see
why you think that I think that they think.... ;-)

>I'm not surprised you like Voges' work. For every artist there is or has
>been at least one fan who says his/her work is very good. My most favourite
>artists to dislike are Perego, Lockman, and Voges. And now I know that all
>three of them have a bunch of true fans too. 8-)

Well, at least we agree about Perego. I'm not exactly fond, either, of his
"rush hour work" in the bean string stories in the very old LTB's.

Greetings, Henri

More information about the DCML mailing list