Our ongoing discussion

[Olaf Solstrand]

> 1) The Donald Duck character had been in use for 13
> years in 1947.

...or in other words - the character "Donald" was 13 years old. Or can you
show me references to the character that is older than 1934?

> Being born arond 1920 Donald was around 27 years in
> 1947.

...yes, IF and ASSUMING Donald was born around 1920, he would be around
25-30 years old in 1947. (he was not born in 1920, he was born AROUND 1920.
Saying "around 27" sounds strange to me. But that/this is just a paranthesis
anyway.) That has never been printed, so let's not call it a fact. But the
character would still be 13, wouldn't it? I'm sure everybody that has read
"Christmas on Bear Mountain" figured out that Donald was not 13 years old in
this story (whether they support the "around 1920" theory or not), so I
don't see the point in clearing it up - but thanks anyway.

> 2) I still think that the 1940s represent an early stage in
> the development of the Duckburg universe as we know
> it today.

And probably, the 1990s represent an early stage in the development of the
Duckburg universe as we know it in 50 years.

> Well as stated in an other posting, Scrooge being
> Donald's uncle without  being married implicates that he
> had to have at least one sibling. The difference between
> Donald's and Scrooge's last names implicates that that
> sibling would have to be a sister of Scrooge and thus
> the mother of Donald.
> Pure logic - Barks didn't need to state that anywhere!

No, not at all. I just contradicted when you said that he did after all.

> He does at least contardict Barks's Duck Family Tree.
>
> (...)
>
> Well, Barks never gave another explanation for that.
>
> (...)
>
> No. AFAIK Barks left the background of HD&Ls
> father open.

But - according to your logic - Barks clearly said in the family tree that
Donald didn't have an uncle Eider either. (He didn't include a brother for
Quackmore, and he didn't include a brother for Scrooge.)

Remember that the family tree is not published in a comic (reprinted in a
book perhaps, but so was many of Barks' letters. That doesn't make them
comics.) Should we also state the fact that Grandma and Grandpa Duck had a
restaurant in Klondike? That story was also shown in a never published
schetch.



> > Barks always drew HD&L with stupid caps,
>
> At least they were worn in a serious way.

What is a serious way, then? It may be because I'm a lot younger than you -
but I don't think of wearing the caps backwards as especially unserious -
and I doubt that youngsters of today (as Huey, Dewey and Louie are) do that
either. It's just a way of wearing your hat - it doesn't make you unserious.
Maybe it does for someone your age, but not for anyone my age, and certainly
not for someone Huey, Dewey and Louie's age.


> Well, the clothing weared by HD&L in some of Ehapas
> covers implicate that HD&L tries to be cool the modern
> way - which often implicates bad attitudes, criminal
> behaviour and to some extent even experimenting with
> or using illegal drugs as teenagers - and that's far away
> from the serious JW-generals that I love.

Please, Sigvald. This is prejudice and you know it. You can't say that
everybody with cool clothes are criminals and using drugs.


> And don't forget that Egmont denies Don Rosa to let
> Donald wear other clothings - so why change HD&Ls
> clothing to something far worse?

Because Ehapa isn't Egmont?


> WRONG! Barks stories - just like Rosa's stories - did
> take place around the 1950's, not in the 1990s or after
> 2000.

Because that is when he wrote them.




Olaf the Blue
www.andebyonline.com