Disney-comics digest #265.

Don Rosa 72260.2635 at CompuServe.COM
Fri Mar 11 06:12:19 CET 1994


	I normally hesitate to make many comments about Disney stories I
don't like, as some people would regard any negatism like that from ME
with "Oh, well, who does he think HE is?" But at the thought there are
MORE abominations in the files like "A Goofy King Midas" or "Don't Call
Me Tut", I gotta open my yap. It would be difficult for me to imagine
how I could dislike this sort of stuff more. I think David's comments
are on the right track, but not harsh ENOUGH. Everything about these
stories is wrong for Disney comics -- it is more like the sort of thing
that belongs in a "zany" Warner Bros. comic or something. The art is
designed not for "storytelling" but for showing off an ability to use
up lots of space trying to dazzle readers with "artistic", useless and
confusing page lay-outs. This shows as much contempt for the subject
matter as do those "this is only a cartoon" remarks, as well as the
whole idea of using Disney characters as actors filling any roll the
writer wishes to amuse himself, rather than being real characters. And
I find the humor to be reminiscent of the junior borscht-belt stuff
you'd see in the worst years of MAD magazine... or on a really bad
LAUGH-IN copy. All in all, this sorta thing shows such a general
misunderstanding and lack of true interest in the characters that I'm
surprised Disney-Disney didn't use all this sort of thing up while they
were in charge. Yes, it not only smacks of GOOFY ADVENTURES, but of the
final issue of GA when Wolfman, Colan and them all used the Disney
characters as simply vehicles for a private gag tribute to themselves
and their past work; I'm sure they and Marvel fans thought that was
grand fun -- I thought it was insulting to the material. Peeee-you.
	The art -- oh, the art was swell. I wish I could draw that well!
	So... Oh, well, who does he think HE is, right?

	Also, the reason that "War of the Wendigo" was rejected was that
the Disney editor at the time (so I hear) showed it to one big-shot who
okayed it; however, corporate politics being what they are, to protect
himself, this editor showed it to another big-shot who okayed it; but to
protect himself, he showed it to another big-shot who okayed it; but to
protect himself, he showed it to another big-shot who okayed it; but to
protect himself... etc., etc., until he found a big-shot who dismissed
it sight-unseen, like he gave a damn. This is how you do things in large
corporations filled with nasty back-biting. When the time comes,
Gladstone will slip it in with its monthly batch of stories for
approval, only one guy will look at it and it will probably sail
through. And then you'll see it wasn't worth the wait.
	Barks' Injun stories get by because they are in those albums,
and because they are "not to be touched classics" since Indians don't
have the clout that Bombie the Zombie's relatives do, and because
nobody showed those stories to a succession of bureaucrats until one
was found who would ban them.




More information about the DCML mailing list