SV: Re: One mail - many topics!

Sigvald Grøsfjeld jr. sigvald at duckburg.dk
Wed Aug 13 16:33:13 CEST 2003


Daniel van Eijmeren <dve at kabelfoon.nl> wrote:

>> Not a "Rosa-fact", just a "Rosa-opinion" and
>> thus a very qualified opinion – not because
>> he is a great artist himself, but because he
>> has read and studied Barks' stories for almost
>> 50 years.
>
> Still, that doesn't turn Don Rosa into Carl
> Barks, or vice versa.

Correct! I have never seen it that way either!


> You seem to think they're interchangeable.
> That's my point. They're two *different*'
> persons, with *different* views, and
> *different* perceptions.

Off course, even though their opinions and views most often are the same.


> Carl Barks = Carl Barks
> Don Rosa = Don Rosa
>
> And there are many *more* Barks experts who
> have their own qualified opinion on Barks. Don'
> Rosa certainly isn't the only one. Can you
> accept that, Sigvald? Yes or no?

Off course I do. Our friend Rob Klein is such an expert!


> SIGVALD GROSFJELD to MARK S., 12-08-2003:
>
>> What has this Archie to do with Poirot or
>> Ms Marple who was used in my example?
>
> What has Poirot or Ms Marple to do with
> Carl Barks?

I just wanted to use Agatha Christie as an other example of an old master -
just like Barks.


>> Anyway let me give you all a new example:
>
> New homework? Does it really make you crazy
> if people just don't agree with you?

No I have no problems if people doesn't agree with me. What I do react to is
when people uses their disagreement with me to attack my person (fx. by
acusing me for being insulting towards someone, or for harming the
atmosphere here in DCML).


> Is that so difficult to accept?

What do you mean? The only opinions that sometimes seems to be difficult to
be accepted in general here, is some of mine.


> Why do you need to go on and on with your
> attempts to make clear that something is wrong
> with (this time) Blum's opinion and intentions?

Because people (in this case you) keeps arguing with me about it.


> You sound as if you have something against
> Blum in a personal way. Blum must bleed for
> something, it seems. Why are you doing this,
> Sigvald?

Then I have been misunderstood. It's not Blums' person I have cristisized,
only his style and his policy towards my idols Barks and Rosa. And please
let me add that my reactions is based upon the way his story about the dime
was presented in DD&Co last year, and the fact that he accidentaly or
delibratly *ignored* Ms Quackfasters first name that was first mentioned by
Don Rosa. As I have told you before Blum had easy access to I.N.D.U.C.K.S.
and should IMO have found this name. The situation was different 11-13 years
ago when DR needed the name for $crooges grandfather. That's why I don't
blame Don for that mistake. Still I judge both DR and Blum by the same
standards. Furthermore I have already, as you probably know, accepted to
read ACs articles conserning Blum - that may change my views.


>> Elvis Presley did what was modern music from
>> the 1950's until the 1970's. [...]
>
> Who's the first to fall into this trap?
> Let's hide in the bushes and see!
>
> But in case anyone is really interested in
> hairsplitting this new example, please go to
> an Elvis Presley mailing list or elsewhere.
> This is OFF-TOPIC!

Have you run out of contra-arguments now?

Sigvald


More information about the DCML mailing list