<DIV>Checked my copies and the one with the little mickey does NOT contain the K.K. Publications copyright statement. I might guess that some are store bought copies vs subscription issues.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dennis<BR><BR><B><I>dcml-request@stp.ling.uu.se</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Send DCML mailing list submissions to<BR>dcml@stp.ling.uu.se<BR><BR>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<BR>http://stp.ling.uu.se/mailman/listinfo/dcml<BR>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<BR>dcml-request@stp.ling.uu.se<BR><BR>You can reach the person managing the list at<BR>dcml-owner@stp.ling.uu.se<BR><BR>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<BR>than "Re: Contents of DCML digest..."<BR>Today's Topics:<BR><BR>1. Gemstone for dummies, some questions (Daniel van Eijmeren)<BR>2. Mickey Mouse Magazine variation? (Pedersen Hans)<BR>3. Re: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation? (SRoweCanoe@aol.com)<BR>4. Re: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation? (Ordi_sas)<BR>5. Let me plot the ways... (Lars Jensen)<BR>6. Scarpa and "Duck Tales" (Lars Jensen)<BR>7. Shrinking gag (Lars Jensen)<BR>8. Paperinik (Lars Jensen)<BR><BR><BR
>>
ATTACHMENT part 3.1 message/rfc822 <BR>From: "Daniel van Eijmeren" <DVE@KABELFOON.NL><BR>Subject: Gemstone for dummies, some questions<BR>Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 14:51:15 +0100<BR>To: <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>In private, someone asked me for information about Gemstone.<BR><BR>Can you tell me some URLs where I can find this information, <BR>or can you give a summary of what Gemstone is doing, with a <BR>list of their products, and their contact information?<BR><BR>Thanks in advance!<BR><BR>--- Daniël<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.2 message/rfc822 <BR>From: Pedersen Hans <HANSKPED@YAHOO.COM><BR>Subject: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation?<BR>Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:22:41 -0800 (PST)<BR>To: dcml@stp.ling.uu.se<BR><BR>Someone recently pointed out to me that there is a variation<BR>of the 1930s Mickey Mouse Magazines that I had never noticed<BR>or seen described anywhere. Since then, I've observed it on <BR>several other copies. Does anyone know the reason for this
<BR>difference and which issues it affected?<BR><BR><A href="http://www.hhkkpp.com/mm.html">Example</A><BR><BR>Thanks, Hans<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.3 message/rfc822 <BR>From: SRoweCanoe@aol.com<BR>Subject: Re: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation?<BR>CC: <BR>Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:31:51 EST<BR>To: hanskped@yahoo.com, dcml@stp.ling.uu.se<BR><BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 2/28/2004 7:23:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, hanskped@yahoo.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT face=Arial>Someone recently pointed out to me that there is a variation<BR>of the 1930s Mickey Mouse Magazines that I had never noticed<BR>or seen described anywhere. Since then, I've observed it on <BR>several other copies. Does anyone know the reason for this <BR>difference and which issues it affected?</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>looks like a distributor code... but i wont swear to it.....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>steven rowe</DIV><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.4 message/rfc822 <BR>From: Ordi_sas <ORDI@TEKPRO.IT><BR>Subject: Re: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation?<BR>CC: <BR>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:22:48 +0200<BR>To: Pedersen Hans <HANSKPED@YAHOO.COM>, <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>What series are you talking about? (1930/1934 or 1935/1940)<BR>and<BR>Which number of issue have got difference?<BR>Paolo Bontempi<BR><BR>> Da: Pedersen Hans <HANSKPED@YAHOO.COM><BR>> Data: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:22:41 -0800 (PST)<BR>> A: dcml@stp.ling.uu.se<BR>> Oggetto: Mickey Mouse Magazine variation?<BR>> <BR>> Someone recently pointed out to me that there is a variation<BR>> of the 1930s Mickey Mouse Magazines that I had never noticed<BR>> or seen described anywhere. Since then, I've observed it on<BR>> several other copies. Does anyone know the reason for this<BR>> difference and which issues it affected?<BR>> <BR>> <A href="http://www.hhkkpp.com/mm.html">Example</A>
<BR>>
<BR>> Thanks, Hans<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> http://stp.ling.uu.se/mailman/listinfo/dcml<BR>> <BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.5 message/rfc822 <BR>From: "Lars Jensen" <LPJ@FORFATTER.DK><BR>Subject: Let me plot the ways...<BR>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:47:32 +0100<BR>To: "Disney Comics Mailing List" <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>Eta Beta wrote:<BR><BR>> Also, in France there's a comic series devoted to "Les Petits Hommes",<BR>> a bunch of people whose diminutive size is permanent (freely chosen, I<BR>> seem to understand), rather than temporary.<BR><BR>Thanks, E. B. I've only ever seen a few pages of this series, and for<BR>years I've tried to figure out exactly what was the conceptual<BR>difference between Les Petits Hommes and the Smurfs. The idea of people<BR>who have freely chosen to be gnome-sized sounds intriguing. Does it take<BR>place in a contemporary setting? (I couldn't tell from the few pages
I<BR>saw.)<BR><BR>> I'm not exactly fond of Disney super-heroes, either... I find those,<BR>> especially the italian Paperinik (moreso in the recent, "modern"<BR>> incarnation) but also most of Super Goof quite repetitive and<BR>> unoriginal...<BR><BR>But just because a lot of Paperinik or Super Goof stories may (in your<BR>opinion) be dull, doesn't mean the characters themselves are bad, does<BR>it? A lot of boring Donald Duck stories have been made, too.<BR><BR>Lars<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.6 message/rfc822 <BR>From: "Lars Jensen" <LPJ@FORFATTER.DK><BR>Subject: Scarpa and "Duck Tales"<BR>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:48:07 +0100<BR>To: "Disney Comics Mailing List" <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>Francesco wrote:<BR><BR>> Scarpa had made a short (6 minutes) cartoon [...] Scarpa tried again<BR>> and made this short clip [...]<BR><BR>Thanks, Francesco. Very interesting. I'll assume the cartoons looked<BR>amazing. Do you realize how envious I am
of you
Italians, who for years<BR>have had people like Romano Scarpa walking around in the streets?<BR><BR>Lars<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.7 message/rfc822 <BR>From: "Lars Jensen" <LPJ@FORFATTER.DK><BR>Subject: Shrinking gag<BR>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:48:23 +0100<BR>To: "Disney Comics Mailing List" <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>Mads Jensen wrote:<BR><BR>> The movie series "Honey, I shrunk the kids" (which I believe is made<BR>> by Disney) reuses the gag in several movies, and now even started a<BR>> half-hour comedy show based on the storylines.<BR><BR>It's Disney, yes, but the series was actually a one-hour sci-fi family<BR>show. Pretty entertaining, too.<BR><BR>Lars<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>> ATTACHMENT part 3.8 message/rfc822 <BR>From: "Lars Jensen" <LPJ@FORFATTER.DK><BR>Subject: Paperinik<BR>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:51:25 +0100<BR>To: "Disney Comics Mailing List" <DCML@STP.LING.UU.SE><BR><BR>Jonathan H. Gray wrote:<BR><BR>> I seem to recall ONE
[Paperinik story] being printed in Disney<BR>> Adventures way back when, but I honestly dont remember if it was any<BR>> good...<BR>><BR>> ...or for that matter if it was even Italian [...]<BR><BR>It was American-produced. I haven't read it, so I'll let somebody else<BR>comment on whether it was good.<BR><BR>Olivier wrote:<BR><BR>> It's a odd convention that a mere mask or change of costume makes you<BR>> unrecognizable / unidentifiable: Clark Kent can in no way be Superman<BR>> [...]<BR>> (it's all in the glasses, like Clark)<BR><BR>If people look the same with or without glasses, how come so many have<BR>dropped the latter and begun wearing contact lenses? Obviously, there<BR>*is* a difference.<BR><BR>Maciek wrote:<BR><BR>> This olwey's bother me theat now body never notice Theat SuperGoof and<BR>> Goofy are the one guy evev whail the Only difren't betwen Goofy and<BR>> SuperGoof only difrence is dres. SuperGoof is don't wering a mask and<B
R>>
face are dissame. Disame gouse for Papiernik. It's just wird theat<BR>> people relly don't see theat they are one.<BR>> And In fackt for some strange resson's wen Donald swich to his alter<BR>> ego he stop's beaing clamsy and Un-lucky.<BR><BR>The original Super Goof is a (very basic) parody of Superman: "What if<BR>we let Goofy play the part of Superman?" Part of the parody is that<BR>nobody realizes Super Goof is Goofy, even though it should be blindingly<BR>obvious.<BR><BR>The original Paperinik is an empowerment fantasy. Imagine Donald<BR>thinking: "Everybody may be laughing at me, think I'm a zero and treat<BR>me like dirt... But if I were a superhero, I'd show them all! They'd<BR>treat me with respect and admire me! And people who treat my Donald<BR>identity badly (Gladstone, Scrooge and so on) would get their<BR>come-uppance!"<BR>As you yourself pointed out, the original Paperinik goes from being a<BR>failure (in his Donald identity) to being a success (as Pap
erinik).
Pure<BR>wish fulfilment! And since the idea of having his secret identity<BR>revealed (on a permanent basis) would spoil part of the empowerment<BR>fantasy, nobody is ever going to realize that Donald the nobody is<BR>"actually" a strong, competent, awe-inspiring winner. Donald can<BR>continue to dream...<BR><BR>Lars<BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>dcml@stp.ling.uu.se - Disney Comics Mailing List<BR>http://stp.ling.uu.se/mailman/listinfo/dcml<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Get better spam protection with <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailtag_us/*http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools">Yahoo! Mail</a>