CBL: DDA 18

[deckerd@agcs.com]

> Dwight:  I haven't read DDA 18 yet, but don't you
> like any of the articles in CBL?
>          
In a word, no. The text pieces are worthwhile only to the
extent that they fill in historical background (explaining
topical jokes circa 1947 that today's readers wouldn't
understand, for example). When it comes to _interpretation_,
I don't need somebody filtering Barks through his own 
opinion and outlook to tell me what he thinks Barks meant,
or worse, what he thinks Barks meant even though Barks
didn't know he meant it. I'm still annoyed by the essay
that interpreted Barks's postwar stories as atomic bomb
allegories even though Barks was quoted as saying he meant
no such thing. When the writers of these essays imply that
they know better than the actual creator of the stories,
they've left the real world behind and the essays are
worthless for any real understanding of Barks and his
stories. That's my opinion. Your mileage may differ.

--Dwight Decker