DCML digest #723

Don Rosa donrosa at iglou.com
Mon Nov 5 14:44:39 CET 2001


> From: "Dim I Nticoudis" <dimadick at hotmail.com>

Well, rather than reproduce Dim's plethora of questions, I'll just say I
can't help him answer them, and I daresay no one can. He seems to be trying
to make a continuity between everything that Disney or Barks or I or anyone
else has ever written about these characters. I would suggest that this is
impossible and perhaps pointless, except to do just for personal amusement.
I ignore everything that Disney ever "said" about Donald in any animated
cartoon, and virtually everything said about him in comics other than by
Barks... and limiting myself only to that realm, I still have difficulty in
getting it all to work out well. Dim also seems to be asking for complex
explanations for the reasons why of this and that, or the circumstances
leading up to now or then, all of these matters being things that were
never explained in any comic book. I suggest that Dim simply create his own
reasons and explanations and histories for these matters, and his results
will be as valid as anyone's.
Dim also claims (I believe it was him) that he likes the "continuity" I
have brought to Disney comics. This comment often puzzles me and I wonder
if some people see more than there is to see. There are only two things
that I do differently than anyone else as regards so-called "continuity". I
actually make NO attempt to make all of my stories taking place in the
"current" timeline to remain part of any sort of "continuity". I might
destroy the Money Bin totally in one story, but in the next, if it suits my
purposes, I will have $crooge claim that the Bin has stood unassailed for
50+ years. I might have Donald as the world's greatest something-or-other
master (a la Barks) in one story, then have him the same unemployable
no-talent as before in the next story. I will also gleefully disregard my
own Money Bin blueprints if it makes storytelling simpler, and I'm doing so
in the story I'm working on now. After each story I tell, time will seem to
rewind itself back to the starting point.
The two ways my stories differ: one -- my characters will be aware of
events that have happened in *other* stories. They will make references to
what adventures they've had in the past, both in Barks stories, and,
naturally and logically, in my own past stories. This is simply a way to
show respect for those past stories, and often to also lend extra
motivation or importance to the new plotline.
The second way -- I *do* use a definite continuity time-line, but ONLY as
regards the PAST. What Barks stated as $crooge having done in the past is
inviolate in my stories. I place "Barksian facts" of $crooge's life into a
set timeline but nothing else. I don't see any other way to handle history
if I'm going to tell stories that are based in history. The history of the
world is a set continuity, so the history of the Ducks and Duckburg must be
treated in the same way. In MY stories, that is... this has nothing to do
with how other writers like to write their stories, and to try to mesh the
two styles together would be rather frustrating, perhaps annoying to other
writers, and should be attempted only for the personal amusement of the
"attempter". I'm often bewildered by the few people who worry about how my
"Lo$" introduced a "continuity" when all I did was elaborate on a
continuity that already existed... it's simply that other writers have
always ignored it or contradicted it, whereas I choose to utilize,
reinforce and honor it. But it was already there... I did not create it.
I also read something written by Arne Voigtmann in the previous Digest, and
want to call Dim's attention to it as it might help him understand my view
of this "Universe". The history that I consider to be inviolate is all
things that happened in Duckburg or to $crooge up until about 1949. After
that time, all of my stories are taking place in a swirl of the 1950's...
I'm not sure which year which story takes place... I may not tell all of my
stories in chronological order, maybe, maybe not. And to make my version of
the Universe work out perfectly, I don't regard any story that Barks told
after this point to be taking place in the years they were published.
That's how I can have Magica DeSpell and Flintheart all involved in a 1952
adventure, even though their first appearances took place years after that
date. That's how the Nephews never grow older.
Some readers prefer to use the explanation that this "Disney Universe" is
all "magical" and that people never grow old and kids never grow up and
Duckburg continues into the 21st Century, neverchanging, covered in pixie
dust. This is okay for them, but not for me. That sort of idea would
diminish my enjoyment by making it all too "fairy tale" silly for me and my
overly-serious viewpoint. It seems so much simpler to say that I tell
stories set in the past. That explains everything in very few words and
does not involve any sort of fairy magic. But, again, that only applies to
*my* own stories.
So, Dim, if you can figure out answers to all your questions, let us know.
It will be interesting reading.




More information about the DCML mailing list