Get a grip, GetAGrip. Just like all other Rosa-fans, you can't come up with any counter-arguments when your idol Rosa is rightfully criticized. Instead, you shoot down the messenger (in this case Daniel). Why is it like that with all Rosa-fans? Why can't they *for once* just answer the points that are being made and come up with real counter-arguments, instead of trashing the critic or saying "it are just comics"? Can't Rosa-fans do that? I know it's a hard, almost impossible job, because I tried, when I was a much bigger Rosa-fan than I am today. Nowadays, I'm just a reader, not a fan.
GetAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:Rosa is notorious for using Barks's name.
Rosa is loved by millions for making stories folks wanted to read.
That's true, no doubt about that. But what does popularity say about quality? Isn't it right that the most horrible, irritating and un-inspired songs always end up being the number 1 in the music charts, meaning that most people buy that drivel?
Popularity doesn't mean anything. Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler were the most beloved political leaders of their times.
GatAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:the fact that Rosa has skipped Penny Wise from his (so-called) complete 'Life of $crooge' makes Rosa's denial even more disturbing. It's a miracle how canonic Rosa turned Penny Wise into some apocryphical woman.
You're talkin about Lo$ and Barks work like they a frickin' Quran and Bible. Apocryphical.. Maria Magdalene. Chill, mate, them are just comics. You take 'em more serious than Barks or Rosa ever did. Spanish inquisition is no longer hiring!
Instead of trying to make these matters look trivial, just try to refute Daniel's point. Come with counter-arguments. Miss Penny Wise is the *only* person Scrooge is afraid of and the only person would could ruïn him. Doesn't that sound like a person that should be included in Rosa's Lo$? And if not: give me one good reason.
People who think Rosa is giving out the true Barks-message -and there are a lot of those!- are led to believe some editor changed the story to include Penny Wise, and that it's a reason to dismiss her. That's Rosa's fault, and I think you can look critically at those things.
If it really all matters nothing to you, like you claim, then why making such a big deal out of Daniel's message? Why even respond at all? Do you know that Rosa himself, your big idol, doesn't thing of Scrooge as just a comic character, but as a real living person (well, 'living'... according to Rosa Scrooge even died in 1967). So if Daniel is over-reacting according to you, then so is Rosa.
GetAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:As it seems, just because Rosa much too easily went for some on-going soap between Scrooge and Goldie. There could be many ways to include Penny Wise, but Rosa rather reasons that Penny Wise should be seen as some outtake.
Fer cryin' out loud, buddy... You are not writing 'em stories and got no business whatsoever to tell anyone how they should write.
You don't have to be a comic artist to criticize those who are! If that were true, no Internet forum about comics should have any right to exist.
You don't have to be a politician to criticize politics, right? And you don't have to be a soccer player, to criticize your national soccer team at the World Championship, right? With comics, it's no different.
What strikes me, however, is that reasoning like "you're not an artist, so shut up" is never used when discussing comics, *unless* when discussing Rosa. Is this because the Rosa-defenders have no *real* counter-arguments?
GetAGrip wrote:[Lo$]It's been applauded by a huge majority of all duck-fans around the globe.
Like I said above: popularity doesn't say anything about quality. I enjoyed every chapter of Lo$. This was one of my favorites comic series in the 1990's when I was much younger, and even today I enjoy it very much. But does that mean we can't criticize Rosa for leaving important things out? Hell no!
GetAGrip wrote:Every work gets critic, even those winning Eisners or Oscars.
Yes, you're right. Take a movie like -say-
Fahrenheit 9/11. It has won the Palm D' Or at the filmfestival at Cannes, and is until today the highest-grossing documentary ever, and has broken record-sales when it appeared on DVD all over the world. Still, the movie has attracked a lot of controversy, and a lot of criticism. Is that wrong? No. Should Rosa's work be treated any different? I can't think of an reason why.
GetAGrip wrote:Your issues do not warrant some special attention in articles, websites and everywhere.
That's just the problem Daniel has with all the praise for Lo$, if I nderstand his posts correct.
GetAGrip wrote:Rosa included almost every Barks "fact", some didn't fit to _his_ or his editor's vision...
Don't blame the editor for what Rosa did. The editor, Byron Erickson, should get a lot of praise for rejecting Rosa's first drafts of Chapters 1 and 8, and make Rosa do it all over again. The result is incredibly better.
Rosa deliberately left out some important facts, without really explaining why, instead coming up with excuses, like 'an editor' changed Barks' Penny Wise-story, with no proof for such a claim.
GetAGrip wrote:and he even tells in those collections that he couldn't fit certain aspects.
Rosa didn't tell about Miss Penny Wise. A reader had to remind him of her existence on DCML! The only thing Rosa 'explains' in those collections, is he left out some contradicting data, but not that he cut out entire stories and characters.
GetAGrip wrote:Much ado about nuthin'
Then why are you even replying?
Come up with a real counter-argment to defend Rosa, instead. That would be much more constructive.
GetAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:As I understood it, Rosa reasons that he wants to honour Barks as he (Rosa) saw him in his youth, excluding the Barks comics his sister didn't buy. Some so-called Rosa-haters have had a big laugh in amazement. But in fact it's just a shame that a fan-boy like Rosa, can take advantage of a very limited view on master Barks.
Those Rosa haters have then big mental issues.
Why do those Rosa-haters have 'big mental issues'? What's wrong with them, according to you? They're pointing out some absurd part of Rosa's reasoning why to exclude certain characters. Rosa could've easily said: "I don't like the dog, so I leave him out". That would be a normal explanation. But instead Rosa comes up with his sister and her comics as an excuse. Then Rosa-haters can't do anything but have a big laugh. Can you blame them?
Why not saying Rosa has 'big mental issues', for coming up with such a theory, to mask his lack of knowledge about Barks. That's pretty twisted, if you ask me.
GetAGrip wrote:Some guy being greatly influenced by other does not mean he has to become him.
There are two problems with this sentence.
The first is that it's not about 'some guy'. It's about Don Rosa, who is -as you said yourself before- the most popular Disney comics artist of this time. What he says is taken by a lot of uncritical readers, who know nothing about Barks -like you-, as the ultimate truth. Those fans take over Rosa's wrong views on Barks and spread them even further on their fan sites. This way, Rosa is responsible for distorting the Barks-world.
Second, Rosa doesn't have to be Barks. You said that, and I agree with you 100%! If only Rosa would agree. Rosa is pretending he's the next Barks. He has even 'finished' the Barks-story 'Back to the Klondike'. Barks deliberatly left open what happened at Scrooge's claim during that famous month (it even got cut out the first time!). Rosa makes a story about that, as if Barks' story wasn't finished already.
If Rosa doesn't want to be compared to Barks, then he should stop trying to become him.
GetAGrip wrote:['Letter from home' not consistent with Lo$]"Fiction (from the Latin fingere, "to form, create") is storytelling of imagined events and stands in contrast to non-fiction, which makes factual claims about reality." - From Wikipedia
Instead of making it all sound very trivial -again: why are you even here then?- you should've come up with real counter-arguments to defend Rosa. But as always, the Rosa-fanboy *can't* defend his idol, because there is no way to defend him. So the Rosa-fanboy has to resort to distracting the attention away from the actual discussion, saying "it's just fiction".
Again, I must point out to you what you're own idol Rosa has said about this. Rosa has always bragged on the Internet how he always keeps all his stories consistent with each other and with Barks. Both claims are untrue. If somebody brags about something, ans it turns out it isn't true, doesn't that deserve a least a critical look?
Rosa claims to be consistent. Then let him be consistent.
GetAGrip wrote:It's like you can alter things for dramatic/comical situations, as opposed to be writing about real happenings [and even then they can do that way].
You can't do both. You can't alter real happenings. Yes, I know that often happens in books, and Hollywood films, and comics, but it's slandering history. And Rosa has always claimed all facts in his historical adventures are right. And that his stories are consistent. So none of these explanations are of any relevance when criticizing Rosa's 'Letter from home'.
GetAGrip wrote:Every writer of fiction makes such choices or errors.
Rosa makes errors.
GetAGrip wrote:[Rosa about 'Prisoner of White Agony Creek']OMG! someone asked him to tell about and he did! And made it sound like it was commercial!
Yes, Rosa said something like: "be sure to catch the new chapter in the Eisner Award-winning series Life of Scrooge". If that isn't a commercial, I don't know what is. He could've said: "My next story is about..." but Rosa hd to brag. As usual.
GetAGrip wrote:Surely that man is evil!
Rosa has said in an e-mail what happened between Scrooge and Goldie in their cabin, including remarks as "Ooooh baby! But I tells it like I sees them." For a Disney artist and a midle-aged man, that's not a healthy way to correspond with his fans, who are usually 20 years younger.
GetAGrip wrote:Cost of Barks reputation? Yeah, right. Earth to Daniël.
Due to Rosa's stories, many people now believe Scrooge and Goldie have been romantically involved in Klondike, and that it was in Barks' original story (which is *not* true). So yes, Rosa is making stories at cost of Barks' reputation. Earth to GetAGrip.
GetAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:Because Rosa's ranting on internet about having to see Barks in real life?
I'd expect people to shy away.
You are the only one ranting here or in DCML about comic artists. Don't be surprised if people indeed shy away from you.
Rosa's ranting is being discussed here, not Daniel's. Daniel is just a reader. Rosa is a professional Disney artist, whose opinion is heard and read all over the world. Rosa has incredible power, Daniel not. That's the big difference.
And yes, Rosa's ranting has driven me, a former fan, further and further away from him.
GetAGrip wrote:What I've understood they flood in by the hundreds to get signatures everytime he appears in any European city.
But who knows how many people stay clean of Rosa comics? That's never been measured. In theory, for every Rosa-fan, there could be a Rosa-hater. But Rosa-haters aren't going to conventions to tell him they hate him, or make anti-Rosa websites. So we can't really compare, can we?
GetAGrip wrote:You should try "not being bothered at all" approach, and concentrate on Barks.
The problem is that nowadays, it's very hard to concentrate on only Barks. There are always websites which name Barks and Rosa in the same sentence, claim that Rosa is the 'successor' of Barks, and even talk about the 'Barks/Rosa-universe'. Even on Wikipedia, when reading about Barks, one can't avoid Rosa. That's the whole problem!
GetAGrip wrote:People could actually see past your obsession. Someone dedicating so much time on making someone else look bad is not generally doing himself any favors.
Daniel doesn't make Rosa look bad. Rosa makes Rosa look bad. His remarks speak for themselves. It just takes a critical observer like Daniel to point that out. I'm very thankful he pointed it out to me.
GetAGrip wrote:[Bolivar]That dog again! Every character Barks used but Rosa hasn't is a good reason for fans to start having second thoughts? Your view of mankind is severely flawed.
Like I've said before: it's not about Bolivar. It's about Rosa's reasoning. He claims to be the expert on Barks, but doesn't know Barks has used Bolivar in at least 6 comics! Then he comes up with an excuse about his siter buying comics when he was growing up. What do readers care about Rosa's sister? If you don't want to use Bolivar, then don't, but don't come up with these kind of laughable excuses.
GetAGrip wrote:Daniel73 wrote:Rosa either thinks everyone is crazy, or he has ran out of excuses.
You seem to have lots and lots of pathetic excuses to tell us how bad person someone else is.
You, being a die-hard Rosa-fanboy, call it 'pathetic excuses'. I call it 'rightfull criticism'. And I'm even more certain of that, when I see you can't refute a single of Daniel's points, but are only bust by shootig down him, instead of his message.