Dutch editors and Don Rosa

Daniel van Eijmeren dve at kabelfoon.nl
Mon Aug 4 05:52:52 CEST 2003


ANDERS CHRISTIAN SIVEBAEK to me, 19-07-2003:

>> I repeat that - i would like to meet them [the Dutch editors] 
>> so we could clear up this long-time misunderstandment, as it 
>> probably is. 

Okay. I'm curious what they will say. (Do you mean you have plans to 
travel to The Netherlands on the short term?)

> [Donald Duck Extra] But when one can compare it looks strange to see 
> a nice magazine - but with covers made by another atist, or maybe just 
> traced by another artist. The story inside is printed in one part - but 
> the version that is meant for publishing in several issues is printed. 
> Those two things are the only things I see wrong with the printing of 
> Rosa in the extra - it's not much, but it's there. 
> But all that doesn't mean that the editors can't be big Rosa-fans - 
> I wouldn't know, I have no contact with them. 

I think the multi-part versions are used because they are already 
coloured when the Dutch editors buy them as story material from Egmont.

I've heard that the extra pages are used to give Rosa's stories some 
moments of rest and recapitulation.

>> The Dutch editors have also used improper versions of Barks's stories 
>> (like missing panels, or even pages).

> Does this make the whole thing better, if I may so ask? 

No, but my point was that the Dutch editor isn't intentionally ignorant 
towards Don Rosa's stories, as has for a long time been suggested here 
on DCML. It's rather the opposite situation, because Don Rosa's stories 
are faithfully published in albums, contrary to most other artists.

> Rosa is, maybe to say the most perhaps the heir - an apprentice who 
> didn't meet the "wizard" untill 1998. - 

What do you mean to say with this? "Don Rosa is the son of god, his only 
son, and no one else will guide you to comic book heaven", or something 
like that? I don't want to step into such a discussion. And why would you? 
There are many, MANY "Barks heirs" who write great stories and draw great 
art.

> Barks is, in the yes of many the big master - and they treat the 
> versions of his stories with the same care? Is it impossible to find 
> the original prints, so they could reconstruct what deisappered under 
> resume-boxes or put in again the pages that are gone? The italian 
> publishers does this - so why can't the dutch. 

And why can't anyone else?

>> They sometimes change Barks's words in the translations. 

> Well - translators often do that. 
> Actually i'd like to know about the dutch tradition of translating!
> I've heard about Erika Fuchs and Peter Daibenzeiher (Germany), Per 
> Westrin and Stefan Diös (Sweden), Sonja Rindom and Niels Søndergaard 
> (Denmark) and i don't remember more names right now. These people have 
> had different traditions of translating - either faithful to the 
> original, or maybe more independant How are the dutch translators?

I think the Dutch translations of Barks's stories are rather good.
They not nescessarily 100% accurate to the original words, though.
Sometimes the Dutch translations are different because of artistic 
reasons (making them more understandable, recognizable, or funnier, 
for Dutch readers), but they also have been different because of 
having to translate a foreign non-English source. The latter mostly 
happened in the past.

>> They have used/re-used odd colouring for Barks's art. 

> Well, I wouldn't accept that happily - 

I don't, but that wasn't my point.

> But it sure doesn't make the case better that they treat the stories 
> of the master in the same way as they do with "The new Duckmaster" 
> (That's the name of a homepage)

What do you mean to say with this? Don Rosa is "The new Duckmaster"
because a homepage has been titled that way? I really don't see why 
you seem to want to turn this subject into a "Barks heir" discussion.

> But you dutch people have told me before they have this tradition of
> redrawng covers and other things - Only the first couple of albums with
> barks-stories had Barks-covers in Netherland, then it was stopped - Why 
> is that? I'd like to hear the reason for this
> I don't believe that they don't find the many covers that Barks and 
> others have made not good enough? 

I think the new covers are drawn to give Dutch publications a consistent 
look and style. Different artists have different styles, and even these 
individual styles change throughout the artists's careers. Using these 
covers on principle would give the Dutch covers an inconsistent look, 
and some of these covers are simply not attractive enough for the Dutch 
market. For example, some of the later Gladstone covers would be too 
empty and stiff for a Dutch publication.

>> Here on DCML, the Dutch editors seem to have a bad reputation when 
>> it comes to Don Rosa. This has been going on for years, as long as 
>> I can remember. Do they really deserve that bad reputation, given 
>> the efforts I've just mentioned? Or are there other reasons?

> There sure isn't anything more in my criticism than the fact that 
> *I* think they could put a little more effort into some of these 
> things. Some of the other dutch Rosa-readers I've mailed with think 
> the same...

Undoubtly, there will be people who think the same about this as you 
(or me). There's no need to mention that, while defending/explaining 
your opinion. Let those people stand up and speak for themselves.

--- Daniël


More information about the DCML mailing list