fanboys argue about the content of scrooge's bin

[Don Rosa]

Subject: fanboys argue about the content of scrooge's bin

Hold it, hold it! We seem to be arguing about two totally different matters
here. Well, actually three, and I'm not saying we still don't agree to
disagree. But my entire original point was in answer to someone about how
the Europeans have traditionally colored the Money Bin contents as 100%
golden coins, all the time, close-ups as well. I stated that the original
idea in the American editions is that the Money Bin contains *normal*
currency, which is the joke -- every coin is *not* some precious
treasure -- it's just that $crooge would be putting his money into a giant
"sugar bowl" rather than a bank. Still, I support the idea that I like
seeing a tradition continued in European editions, even though it's
different than what I grew up on. Like, it's none o' my bizniz!
You (john garvin <jgarvin at bendcable.com>), on the other hand, seem to be
inferring that I am saying there is NO golden coins in the Bin, though I
often mention the presence of many types of coins in the Bin (I even
did one entire story about Donald finding a particularly special section of
golden coins at one level of depth), and which I even stated was true in
these messages. But the gold coins would be so few and far between that
they could never result in *all* the money being colored gold, or even a
majority of it.
You hunted down an impressive list of gold coins minted in the late 19th
century, and even some in the early 20th (when $crooge would have been
obtaining them and adding them to his Bin). Regardless of how you make it
sound, they were not *common".... not compared to all the *other* silver
and copper coins in circulation. "Widely" circulated, in that they were
found most anywhere, but not "plentiful" in everyone's pocket. I am certain
that there is a proportional amount of these small golden coins mixed into
the Bin, especially at lower levels, an amount proportional to their
circulation as compared to all the pennies and nickels and dimes, etc. In
views of the coins, they would appear as points of color as would the
pennies, spread throughout the bulk of silver coins.
But the coins should not ALL be colored gold. S'all I was saying.
Still, I can't avoid:

From: john garvin <jgarvin at bendcable.com>
>>>>So you grant me this point, but don't address the implication.  Why do
you assume that the pile
of coins on the cover of FC 386 is wrong, but the coins on the interior
splash of FC 386 is
correct?

Because the cover was the cover. It's meant to be an eye-catcher. So the
coins are colored brighter than in the actual story. I almost always change
facts in my cover and pin-up scenes -- I do whatever it takes to make them
eye-catching and dramatic *first*... accurate to the story second.
Then you lost me again here:

>>>>Because Barks added vault doors that were never
shown in the comics, Barks coloration of the coins should be disregarded?
I personally assumed
that the money bin paintings with the arched vaults were actually an inner
sanctum buried deep
within the actual bin.

RIGHT! Talk about logical arguments, this sounds like you're on *my* side
now! I would *agree* with you that these scenes of a vault with an
unfamiliar door, filled with jewels and treasure and *all gold coins*,
being unlike any view we've ever seen of the Bin in an actual story, I
agree that these must obviously be in some other place than the main Bin.
Or... the more obvious assumption... it's just a fantasy-in-a-fantasy scene
like my covers or pin-ups.

>>>>Barks paintings do not show ALL solid gold coins, he has many silver
coins as well.

Then what's the argument???

>>>>You want to believe that Scrooge mostly hordes nickels,
dimes, quarters, and silver dollars, and want to believe that Barks
paintings and European
editions are wrong to show the coins as gold.

They would not be "wrong" to show them as gold, or even ALL gold. They are
simply following different traditions or reasoning than the logic (and try
to refute it) that the Bin's coins, even at the lower levels, being a
conglomeration of American coins based on their proportional circulation as
compared to one another, would be predominantly silver. And that's all I've
ever said. I want to believe that $crooge mostly horded those silver coins
simply because those silver coins were *mostly* what was in circulation in
the 20th century.

But at the base of your fervor, I believe, is the third matter I
mentioned -- your having a fascination with Barks' oil paintings that some
fans don't share with you, me included. I think they are interesting, and I
am delighted ... DELIGHTED from the soles of my feet to the top of my
balding scalp... that, in painting and selling them and marketing the
lithos, he was able to finally make even a fraction of the $ he missed out
on by creating the world's most popular comic book characters for a
corporation. But some people I know actually think the paintings are garish
and ugly. Me, I like them, I think they are great fun. But they don't
especially interest me because my interest is in storytelling, not art. I
have been in this hobby (I don't mean simply as a comic reader, but as a
member of the active fandom of writers, publishers and
convention-givers-and-goers) since the time when Barks was still writing
and drawing the comics in the 60's. So I was aware from *day one* when he
was doing oil paintings of the Ducks for $50-200 each. And I was certainly
aware of the litho series that came out much later. But I *never* tried
getting on the wait-list for a painting, and I *never* bought a Barks
litho. I do not equate what he does in those oil paintings with what he did
or thought when he was telling the stories that I loved. I see it as two
completely different worlds of wonder. If you dig into your litho
collection (and I'm getting the impression you are heavily into them) and
found all sorts of evidence of the Bin being 100% gold coins or 73.9% or
... well, no matter what you found, it would not effect my view of his work
done in story form 25-40 years earlier, for a totally different purpose for
a totally different audience. If you equate the two, and/or if you think
that liking his stories means that I must like his paintings equally or be
damned... well, sorry, that's not me.

>>>>Like I said, you are certainly free to believe as you wish with
whatever faulty line of reasoning
you want to cling to...

Ouch! Let's not get testy.