Donaldists

[Fluks, H.W.]

Sigvald:

> > We have been through this before on DCML, but..
> Well, that was before I joined...

Yes, it was in the years that you were on Internet, but decided not to join
DCML.

> > 1. I don't think there is such a thing as a
> > "serious Donaldist".
> 
> That off course depend on your definition of that
> term.

Okay. Let's assume there is something like a serious Donaldist.

> > 2. I see no reason why people would want to
> > distinguish between "serious" Donaldists and
> > other people. To me that's an insult
> > to the other people.
> 
> Well people still distinguish between serious
> politicians, scientists, historians, etc. and other
> people without insulting anyone.

But your distinction is different. Saying "Most serious Donaldists only
consider Barks (and Rosa)" is at the same level as "Most serious literature
analysts do not consider comics". Or "comics is no serious literature".

If you want to define a term like "serious Donaldist", I want to be called a
serious Donaldist. Even though I *don't* stop my analyses at Barks or Rosa
stories. If you then say that such analyses should not be taken seriously,
then yes, that's an insult. (But don't take the word "insult" in this
conversation too seriously...)

> > 3. Carl Barks has had many successors. Don Rosa
> > is only one of them.

> What you're saying here is *not wrong*, but this is
> actually a matter that can be discussed. Don't forget
> that many publishers treat Don Rosa as if he indeed is
> THE successor of Barks, and don't forget that many
> publishers do mention it on the cover when they print
> Don Rosa stories. In the cover of the last DD&Co
> (19/2000)

Did they stop 2 years ago? 8-)

> Don's signature is even larger than Walt
> Disney's. Some countries (like Germany) even prints
> separate Don Rosa albums.

Many countries have printed albun series of other artists than Barks or
Rosa. And even many years before Rosa became popular.

One thing one needs to consider is that in older times, names of creators
(other than Disney) were not allowed on the cover of a Disney comic (or
anywhere in the comic, in fact). Don just happens to be working in a time
where such things *are* possible.

And yes, Rosa *is* one of the most popular Disney comics creators of this
moment. And rightfully so.

> > But please don't tell other people that
> > that's the *only* "serious" (?) way to go.
> And I didn't do that...

Technically, no. But writing "most serious Donaldists do X" strongly
suggests "anyone not doing X is not a serious Donaldist".

My only point is that there's more in Disney comics than just Barks and
Rosa.

--Harry.