Barks's Glittering Goldie paintings

[Daniel van Eijmeren]

LARS JENSEN to KATIE SULLIVAN, 10-09-2003:

>>> So what? Glittering Goldie also is a one-time Barks fenomenon.

>> In the comics, true.  But she popped up in an awful lot of his oil
>> paintings. http://www.sullivanet.com/duckburg/barksoils/ [...]

> I don't know much about Barks' oil paintings, but... Did he paint the
> Goldie-oriented ones because he had a desire to use that character? Or
> because the customers who ordered the paintings had asked for Goldie 
> to be included in them?

I don't know. But if so, Barks could have objected to using her. 

Maybe a variation of this question would be:
Did Barks create the Duck-oriented stories because he had a desire to 
use these characters? Or because the editor who ordered the stories had 
asked for the Ducks to be included in them?

Barks has often said that he'd rather would have drawn humans instead 
of ducks. So, according to the point you seem to be making, most of 
Barks's comic book work should also be put aside as "commissioned work".

Well, is that really what you meant? :-)

--- Daniël