Gottfredson and Murry

[Lars Jensen]

Sigvald Grøsfjeld jr. wrote:

> David Gerstein wrote:
>
>> From the 1940s to the 1980s, Gottfredson's
>> work was not easily available in many countries
>> beside Italy.
>
> Not entirely correct! In Scandinavia a few giant-books featuring old
> Gottfredson classics were published during the 1970's:
> - Jeg Mikke Mus
> - Jeg Langbein
> - Vi Minni & Mikke

Note that David wrote "easily available". Those books were expensive!
There was *no* trace of the Gottfredson continuities in the (by
comparison, cheap) weekly - or the monthlies, for that matter - for most
of this time.

And just to be nitpicky: "Vi Minni & Mikke" actually came out in the
1980s. 1981, I believe.

>> WHY, Sigvald? Does that knowledge SOMEHOW
>> DIMINISH Paul Murry's art?!
>
> No, but it tell me that Murry was not as inventive as I have been lead
> to believe.

You haven't been led to believe anything. You've led *yourself* to
believe it, based on incomplete information. Or are there articles out
there crediting Murry for having written the stories he drew?

> Earlier Murry has been given the credits for inventing charcters
> like Dangerous Dan McBoo and Idgit the Midgit. It now seems that he
> just presented other persons ideas???

Murry was the first to draw these characters. Presumably he also
designed them. If true, the latter makes him a co-creator of Dan and
Idgit.

As for being a "presenter" of other people's ideas: I've worked (and
continue to work) with artists such as Vicar, Marco Rota and Flemming
Andersen. I can assure you that these people (as well as their
colleagues) are no mere "presenters" when they sit down to draw one of
my stories. Without their visual input, my meager efforts would fall
flat. Trust me on this.
*Every* artist, good or bad, contributes something unique to a comic
book story. If you've enjoyed Paul Murry's stories up to now, it has
been at least partly due to Murry's skills as an artist.

> I didn't draw any final conclusion, I just stated that the new
> knowledge might justify some rethinking when it comes to Paul Murry.

No offense, but this isn't new knowledge. It's been widely known for
years.

> IMO it's the writer who's the most important artist behind a story.

I think the term you're looking for is "creator", rather than "artist".
With that in mind, some of your statements (like Murry not being a great
artist like Gottfredson & co) actually make much more sense.

> To write a great manus the [creator] both need a lot of knowledge and
> much interest of the actual universe and the actual characters s(he)
> is working with.

Not necessarily. Depends on what kind of story he or she is writing.

Lars