Scrooge's silk hat

[Lars Jensen]

Sigvald wrote:

> Anyway, as I am ready to learn more about how various creators are
> working I have a friendly question to our friends Lars Jensen and Rob
> Klein. If you come up with a story in where you will need to include
> an explanation like this about the origin of something - what would
> you do? And why?

Hmm... I haven't given it much thought, but looking at my stories, I
realize they take place either in the present or during a non-specific
time period. Which makes it pretty much impossible to tie them overtly
into Don Rosa's stories which happen in the 1950s.

Using Scrooge's hat as an example: If I in a story mention Scrooge
bought his hat in 1909, the implication (to me anyway) is that Scrooge
is 110+ years old - which I don't like. Assuming I desperately want to
somehow mention the age of the hat and equally desperately want to
please Rosaists, the way to do it would probably be to have Scrooge
mention he bought his hat some 45 years ago, without specifying which
year that was. This would make everybody happy. Well, most people
anyway...

Usually, though, I try not to put too many dates or origins into my
stories - especially when it comes to various iconic elements. We've
already seen the discusion on this list regarding whether the totempole
stories or Lo$ are "correct" when it comes to dating Scrooge's hat. Yes,
I could have, say, Scrooge mention in a story that he bought his cane 22
years ago at a flea market - but what if that contradicts somebody
else's "facts"? Not that it matters *too* much to me: If I come up with
an (in my opinion) great tale where I for story purposes have to mention
the cane's age and origin, I'll do it - but usually there's no reason to
bog anybody else (or myself) down with needless "facts" that may turn
out to be nothing more than annoying continuity somewhere down the line.
So usually I'll just keep things like the cane's or the hat's age and
origin to myself.

And, to be honest, I don't really feel a need to explain where something
already-established comes from or when it was bought. If others want to
explain the origin of Scrooge's hat, they should feel free, though.

If it's something I come up with myself, like, say, some pocket watch
Donald has inherited, then obviously I can establish all sorts of
things, especially if the watch only appears in one story. If I know
I'll use the watch in more than one story, I'll only put as many facts
into each story as I absolutely have to - so I later on will have some
wriggle room if I want to change my mind about something.

> Ole Reichstein Nielsen <oleroc at tdcspace.dk> wrote:
>
>> In all likelihood her frame of reference
>> is, instead of the Barks/Rosa canon, the
>> equally famous Italian story cycle of the
>> beheaded totem.
>
> Equally famous??? I sincerely doubt it! Why haven't Egmont then
> bothered to publish all episodes in the Donald Duck Pocket books?

Some Barks material has never been published in Denmark. Is this because
he was an unimportant creator? Or because the publishers have simply
never gotten around to publish those particular stories?

> I have *no* problems accepting your statements and opinions, but you
> should be aware that other and more pure Barksists in his group may
> see your statement as an offensive act against Barks' name and
> reputation.

Don't worry, I'm not offended.

Ole, you have my permission to carry on believing what you wish to
believe.

Lars