Unpublished Material

[sigvald@duckburg.dk]

bi442 at lafn.org (Rob Klein) skrev:
>
> I agree with Lars, that just because an artist or writer
> wrote or drew something in unpublished or deleted material,
> or made some personal notes, does not mean that that
> information should be automatically used as "canon" 
> or "gospel", by other Disney production contributors or
> fan "analysts". This is especially true of notes and story
> portions that have been deleted by the artist, himself,
> which have been contradicted by that artist's final version.

Correct!


> Such situations must be looked at individually, on a case
> by case basis. Even then, i am sure we would never get
> everyone to agree as to whether a given bit of information
> should be the "official" version. As a Duckburg "geographer" 
> and "historian", I want to use ALL the information possible
> (but without contradictions).

That's how I see it too.


> This requires assumptions to be made about those 
> contradictions to "correct" them (e.g. some of the
> information must be ignored, or "seen in a
> different light").

Ecsactly!


> Notice that I have resisted the temptation to go off-topic
> (except for this comment)8-!

This thread about the value of unpublished material is IMO
definetly on-topic.

Sigvald :-)