Don Rosa video interview

Santiago Ceballos, William Van Horn, Paul Murry, Don Rosa, etc.

Postby Daniel73 » Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:13 pm

Rockerduck wrote:It's a shame to see you dismissing all Daniel's information, Kai, just because he may or may not use seceral different nicknames/aliasses. Why is the messenger that important? I think the message *itself* is what has to be discussed.

There's also the possibilty of people just being believed on their word, simply because their identity is known. He says it, so it *must* be true!
For example, a creator logging in at McDuck might be believed because he's a creator. Using an alias gives the possibility of being just a fan like others. The roleplay is just an umbrella to give people freedom of appearing under their official name and under an anonymous name. A lot of people have used this freedom already, even some who said they never would do that.
Looking at the contents, most postings seem to be send from unique posters. There are many visitors, especially at the Dutch forum, and so even the most avid visitors hardly have time to be creative with aliasses. It's just a possibility that people can opt for.
I can't (or shouldn't) say much about it, but I think it's save to say that the roleplay is mainly intended to give creators some air to also be just anyone, without being bothered about their profession. McDuck gives them the possibility to just enjoy McDuck after work.

Kai Saarto has a reason to be suspicious though. On the Dutch section there's information about this "roleplay" policy, but McDuck International has no rules at all. Foreign people are now being misled by something that only is known in Dutch so far, except for some discussions in the Welcome-topic. We miss clarity about the policy.
McDuck has grown out of its skin since last year, going from one forum to three, and there are still many decisions that float around and still have to be summed up. No wonder there's confusion and fear for waste of time. Apologies to everyone who has been troubled by that.

Rockerduck wrote:I don't want to come of as Daniel's personal body-guard, or defender, or something, but I'm tired of seeing people -both on the Dutch as on the Englsih aprt- leave or not answer the points being made, because of the persons who post the information. Like that's relevant...

I think mostly people quit reading when topics become chaotic. As happens now. If it would only be because they forget where the discussion was. That's a common problem on McDuck, and I've understood the maintainer plans to get strong about that.

There's plenty of place of McDuck. Everyone can make a new topic. And I believe it's easier to lock a double topic than to split an existant topic into new ones afterwards.

In this case, we have multiple topics in one topic now:
- Don Rosa interview
- Carl Barks interview
- The Dark Age
- identities explanation

This is something that needs to be discussed, I think. In a new topic. :)

*EDIT* boardlinking updated to McDrake
Last edited by Daniel73 on Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:31 pm

Daniel73 wrote:In this case, we have multiple topics in one topic now:
- Don Rosa interview
- Carl Barks interview
- The Dark Age
- identities explanation

And universaty thesis about Rosa and Barks "stardom", which led to the discussion about The Dark Age.

- Don Rosa interview
- Carl Barks interview
- universaty thesis about Rosa and Barks "stardom"
- The Dark Age
- identities explanation
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby digduck » Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:43 pm

Rockerduck wrote:Dutch Duck-artist Maarten Janssens said about this: "Don't believe the hype. This is Disney's." Maybe there's a bit of truth in this. Disney can't use any fighting between two popular authors. Maybe that was a reason Barks invited Rosa (and by that I don't necessarily mean Disney asked Barks to do so).

Wazzup with all this fighting?? U guys fight, barks & rosa fight? Where's da love?? /cry

Tell this poor duck how barks & rosa be fighting??? cos i thought rosa luuuvs barksey? Did barksey hate rosa??

Quack quack cuack (sad duck cryes)
Semper Fidelis Real Madrid C.F/Daisy Duck is hot momma!
digduck
New member
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: Spain

Postby Rockerduck » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:39 am

H.H.F wrote:Why is it not a Barks-advertisement? Telling that the great Barks invited Rosa and friend to his home, and show him how the master himself did ducks. Showing that Barks is a good sport, despite that younger guy getting fame he missed during his active years.

Because Barks didn't need any advertisement at all! Barks was already a famous artist. Barks earned recognition during the years he was working anonymous. People didn't know who he was, but they called him 'the good artist'. When he stopped doing the Donald Duck tenpagers for a while, the editor got lots of complaints from people who wanted to read stories from 'the good artist'. Fans have found Barks on themselves, while fans have found Rosa through advertizing articles like this one.

And Barks showing off? That shows how little you know about Barks. Barks never wanted all that stardom. Barks wanted to be left alone. That's also the reason why, while working for Western, he would not ask for a raise in pay, despite he was the poorest paid of all of their artists. Barks said that, if he had asked for a raise, the editors would have let him work harder for his money, but now they left him alone. "I liked being left alone." Barks did the European tour in 1994 to please his fans and editors, and he was always friendly, but he didn't really like it.

But Rosa is so busy promoting himself on the Internet, he hardly has time to come up with new stories. I've read numerous e-mails by Rosa that began with: "this weekend, I was on that-and-that comic convention to be the super-special guest". Nice, Keno, so who cares anyway? Rosa even went on strike over royalties, because his anme was on the covers of some Disney books. It takes a big ego to do that. Barks never did such things.

H.H.F. wrote:I don´t buy these silly conspiracy theories some of you came up with. Is it so hard to believe that those two guys could have actually get along?

Yes, I find that hard to believe. Rosa complained many times about how "cold" Barks was in his correspondence, while in fact, Barks provided Rosa with sketches of the Duck famly tree, and even a plot for a Scrooge-story, which Rosa dismissed (Geoffrey Blum and Carlos Mota turned that into 'Dime and dime again'). Rosa wrote on the Internet that Barks came to Europe just to distract attention from Rosa. Only a very self-absorbed and paranoid person could say such a disgusting thing. He even called Barks an "evil genius".

Barks was always full of praise about Vicar, Jippes and the Italian artists. When asked about Rosa's work, Barks always remaned fairly neutral, almost never saying anything besides it was different from the usual Disney-style. Once, Barks said "I wish he hadn't done it". Jippes visited Barks in the 1980's already!

So what you're saying is: Barks provided Rosa with sketches and plot idea's, Rosa treated Barks like trash in his Internet-comments, and then Barks invites Rosa as his long-lost son (maybe to show off)?

Not very likely.
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:03 am

Rockerduck wrote:Barks never wanted all that stardom. Barks wanted to be left alone.

That Barks wanted to be left alone is the impression that Wim van Helden gives, in a book from 1985, about the Jippes and Barks interview in May 1982. That was before Bruce Hamilton's Another Rainbow published the Carl Barks Library in 1983, which contained new Barks art and new Barks Disney paintings, which last happened in 1976 and one time in 1980.
In the 1980s and the 1990s Barks gets busy again, and in especially in the 1990s Barks became a star in the sense of a celebrity who walks over a red carpet at a premiere. There are photo's on which you can see such an atmosphere. There were Barks parties where Barks art could be bought, a Barks Tour through Europe, Carl Barks Studio products, a new Barks story. Barks is often shown smiling and he looks as if he's enjoying the attention.

Rockerduck wrote:That's also the reason why, while working for Western, he would not ask for a raise in pay, despite he was the poorest paid of all of their artists. Barks said that, if he had asked for a raise, the editors would have let him work harder for his money, but now they left him alone.

Do you think it's good not to ask for a raise? I think Barks should have had more guts as he wasn't left alone at all, judging the terrible cutting in some of his stories. When Barks got a chance to do his own comic, he didn't dare to risk it.
That Barks is a good artist doesn't necessarily mean he's a good business man. And work is business. Barks has also said he was inspired by the cheque-machine. Then why didn't he go for a better price and better conditions, so that he would had to work less for more money?
I think Barks is romantizing a bit. Or maybe he doesn't want to know how much money he missed at the time.

I've read that editors didn't forward fanmail, so that Barks didn't know his stories sold very good. That gives doubt about how editors are. They are to make money from their artists, not because the artist is good at artistically feeding our brain. The cheaper the better. You can see that even when Barks sold well. That's why I tend to think of all comics as pulp. It's just material to attract costumers, to get their money into the editor's pocket. And there are often artists who are working hard while others get the money. The suggestion that Barks was a good guy for not asking a raise, would suit the editors and Disney fine.

Rockerduck wrote:"I liked being left alone."

This is in past tense, principally speaking. And is this about being left alone by editors or by fans? That's a difference.

Rockerduck wrote:Barks did the European tour in 1994 to please his fans and editors, and he was always friendly, but he didn't really like it.

I think Barks did the European tour mostly for himself. Otherwise it would be strange, if you love other people more than yourself. It sounds romantic that Barks crossed the ocean just because he loved us and the editors, but why didn't he do that travel earlier then?

Rockerduck wrote:Rosa even went on strike over royalties, because his anme was on the covers of some Disney books. It takes a big ego to do that.

Rosa has the right to strike. What I found strange was that it seemed like a game. A fan or friend revealed the strike, and then Rosa was the hero for wanting to keep it silent. But if he wanted to keep it silent, then why did he tell it? I wondered if that could be a trick to manipulate media, like internet. The messenger gets the blame and Rosa can say to the editor that it went against his will, while still benefiting from the news. I looked at it as yet another self-promotion by Rosa, trying to get attention at cost of others.
The same with his correspondence with Kai Saarto, last year. Rosa gets into trouble and then uses his private network to have someone make a public statement.

What I dislike about Rosa's is his hypocrisy. He says one thing, but he does the other, while claiming that he still does the same thing, and that other is stupid for not seeing that. You never know when you can trust Rosa on his word.
I mean, if Rosa wants to make a lot of money, then just say so! I remember him writing on DCML that old comics should be sold at original cover price, and now he's auctioning his comics at Ebay. And look how it's advertised by Rosa's agent. The non-Disney comics are special because Rosa is a Disney artist. As if a comic would be worth more, simply because Rosa held it in hands.

Rockerduck wrote:Barks never did such things.

With the Carl Barks Studio there were some financial matters. Law-suits against editor Bruce Hamilton. I believe one example was a book named Unexpurgated Barks, with old Barks drawings that were free from copyright, from the 1920s and early 1930s.

I've heard that Bruce Hamilton is very hard on money. Very stingy. Like Scrooge, so to say. I don't know what was going on, but I imagine a stingy editor doesn't like any managers coming inbetween him and Barks. Managers cost extra money.
That's a reason why I'm not so convinced of just only those two managers having all the blame, as there were also other financially interested parties. 'Horsing Around with History' (1994) was sold to Egmont, and I would be surprised if that story was as cheap as the stories from other Egmont creators.
I remember accounts about editors being irritated about the higher prices that were asked by the Carl Barks Studio. (O, what a shame. Duckburg founder Barks gets a higher price.)

I think a "stardom" thesis should contain the following points when explaining The Dark Age:
- Bruce Hamilton and money
- Egmont and money
- Carl Barks and money
- Grandey and Morby and money
- William Van Horn and money
- Don Rosa and money

As Frank Zappa would say: "We're only in it for the money." And some people are better in getting their share than others.

I think working for Disney is like working for a huge franchise company where cheap employees are used. Of course there is always an employee who works harder for less. That person is of course the hero of the company, and when he retires he might get a watch for which he will be eternally thankful to his bosses.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:09 am

From what I've heard, Rosa got into trouble with Barks's managers because of money. Rosa wanted to have his original art bcak from Disney Comics, so that he could sell it. Gladstone was taken over by Disney, who started doing comics themselves. As a result art wasn't returned anymore.

At a convention Rosa saw that art by William Van Horn's was sold and complained to the sellers that this might sabotage his (Rosa's) attempt to get his art back. This became an argument where Rosa started to talk louder, unwilling to discuss further in a private room, away from the public. This angered the sellers, which as I heard it, were Grandey and Morby. This was before that Atlanta meeting with Barks.
I'm writing this from memory. Corrections are welcome. I don't know if Rosa ever told this.

I believe that later, at the time of Atlanta, the managers were still angry at Rosa. And as Barks is a master creator and Rosa a fan-creator, I don't see any reason why Rosa should have deserved any extra attention at all, anyway. Then they could have presented William Van Horn as well, for example.

Maybe the managers didn't want to play along with Rosa's editors, who apparently set up some Father and Son concept. And Rosa, who was promised to see Barks, didn't get to see Barks. And Rosa take it all too personal, gaining a lot of attention with his sad cry-baby account about only having shaken Barks a hand and that other people were more important.
Maybe Rosa was done a too-early promise which the editors shouldn't have made?
Note I'm just guessing.

There also has been a problem between Hamilton and Barks, after the Carl Barks Library was finished. Maybe that could be a reason for Barks to have managers, not having Hamilton anymore. After Barks quit with the managers he went back to Hamilton. I don't know if that was a professional return or an informal meeting.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:18 am

Daniel73 wrote:Gladstone was taken over by Disney, who started doing comics themselves.

I mean that Gladstone's work was taken over by Disney. Gladstone and Another Rainbow belong to Bruce Hamilton. After Disney Comics quit, because sales dropped, Gladstone took over again.
Note that this is also about money.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby jimbo » Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:24 am

Daniel73 wrote:I believe that later, at the time of Atlanta, the managers were still angry at Rosa. And as Barks is a master creator and Rosa a fan-creator, I don't see any reason why Rosa should have deserved any extra attention at all, anyway. Then they could have presented William Van Horn as well, for example.

Rosa heard about Barks going to Atlanta and asked Hamilton (who was involved) if he could arrange a meeting. Rosa wanted to do it as a private person on his own expenses. Hamilton sniffed an opportunity and made that "History will be made"-ad to Comic Book Guide. Rosa called him and said that's exactly not what he wanted and then promptly wrote to Barks saying that he will not come if Barks had a problem with that. Barks said it was okay, but didn't want to do a public spectacle out of it either.

Rosa flies in, Barks flies with his managers. Rosa does not get that invite, waits for couple of days and only gets to shake Barks' hands after Steve Geppi introduces them. He is disappointed and returns home. Afterwards Gready starts this fax-campaign claiming that Rosa had sneaked in, was drunk, angry and stalking Barks. Several witnesses shoot down those accusations as blatant lies and Gready later apologizes when wanting to avoid court.

Sounds like Gready and Morby had a problem with Rosa there and sabotaged meeting by telling Barks that Rosa was crazy. Rosa wenting his frustration after that does sound somewhat understandable, he didn't understand why he was ignored after Barks promise to see him. Only later the whole thing started to unfold and that Barks' managers showed their true skin to both Carl and Rosa.


Daniel73 wrote:And Rosa take it all too personal, gaining a lot of attention with his sad cry-baby account about only having shaken Barks a hand and that other people were more important.

We are all humans. Would anyone here have taken it any better? Your idol agrees to meet you, you buy a ticket, fly in happily. and the you are ignored as an angry drunkard for no reason you can comprehend at the time.

Daniel73 wrote:There also has been a problem between Hamilton and Barks, after the Carl Barks Library was finished. Maybe that could be a reason for Barks to have managers, not having Hamilton anymore. After Barks quit with the managers he went back to Hamilton. I don't know if that was a professional return or an informal meeting.

Hamilton made Barks look classy and he made him rich. He didn't run his errands though, and that's what those 2 managers offered, besides probably promising a better deal also. It was a sad thing that they milked the elderly all they could. Hamilton must have sounded a good, known option at the time and one that didn't require that much work for a guy near 100 years old.
jimbo
 

Postby Rockerduck » Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:44 pm

Daniel73 wrote:That Barks wanted to be left alone is the impression that Wim van Helden gives, in a book from 1985, about the Jippes and Barks interview in May 1982. That was before Bruce Hamilton's Another Rainbow published the Carl Barks Library in 1983, which contained new Barks art and new Barks Disney paintings, which last happened in 1976 and one time in 1980.
In the 1980s and the 1990s Barks gets busy again, and in especially in the 1990s Barks became a star in the sense of a celebrity who walks over a red carpet at a premiere. There are photo's on which you can see such an atmosphere. There were Barks parties where Barks art could be bought, a Barks Tour through Europe, Carl Barks Studio products, a new Barks story. Barks is often shown smiling and he looks as if he's enjoying the attention.

People who had the luck to meet Barks during his European tour tell that Barks was always willing to please his fans and the editors, but that he himself found the tour to be too tiring. Barks often rather wanted to stay in his hotelroom, but did those things to please the people who were being so kind to him.
http://www.cbarks.dk/theeuropeantour.htm (Click on the flags to read some reports on the tour by people who witnessed Barks.)

You yourself, Daniel, have mentioned an interview with Barks. You said Barks was interviewed rather amateurishly (sp?) but he kept smiling and being polite. That's just the way Barks was, I guess.

Daniel wrote:Do you think it's good not to ask for a raise? I think Barks should have had more guts as he wasn't left alone at all, judging the terrible cutting in some of his stories. When Barks got a chance to do his own comic, he didn't dare to risk it.
That Barks is a good artist doesn't necessarily mean he's a good business man. And work is business. Barks has also said he was inspired by the cheque-machine. Then why didn't he go for a better price and better conditions, so that he would had to work less for more money?
I think Barks is romantizing a bit. Or maybe he doesn't want to know how much money he missed at the time.

I never said he was a good bussiness man. I only know he said he could've earned more if he wanted to, or asked for it, but he was rather being left alone. Also, Barks was happy to sell his paintings for $200, and then see another guy making hundreds of dollars more by selling them again. That was no problem to Barks: "That's good old capitalism!" And when Disney stopped giving permission to paint, Barks didn't protest, but obviously he lost a source of money there. What he did, was telling his fans not to be angry with Disney.

This doesn't show a man who's interested in money.

Daniel wrote:I've read that editors didn't forward fanmail, so that Barks didn't know his stories sold very good. That gives doubt about how editors are. They are to make money from their artists, not because the artist is good at artistically feeding our brain. The cheaper the better. You can see that even when Barks sold well.

You can also see it with the 'newest' edition of the Dutch bimonthly Disney-magazine 'Katrien' ('Daisy'). The no. 4-2006 has exactly the same contents as no. 4-2000, with even the same cover. That's money easy made.

Daniel wrote:That's why I tend to think of all comics as pulp. It's just material to attract costumers, to get their money into the editor's pocket.

No, you don't. You're always praising Barks' comics, and other Disney comics, like those from Daan Jippes, and Bernadó and Jonker's 'Madam Mim'-comics. And you're lyrical about the Dutch newspaper comic 'S1ngle'.

Daniel wrote:I think Barks did the European tour mostly for himself. Otherwise it would be strange, if you love other people more than yourself. It sounds romantic that Barks crossed the ocean just because he loved us and the editors, but why didn't he do that travel earlier then?

Look above, what I wrote there. 1994 was thé year to do it, because it was Donald's 60th birthday. Can you think of any better motive to do such a tour?

And why are you so eager to portray Barks as some money-grabbing old crook, when normally, on the Dutch section, you're always defending him and praising him for his working ethics and his modesty. Is this another role?
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Rockerduck » Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:03 pm

Apart from a short trip to Mexico and British Columbia, Carl Barks had not set foot outside USA when in 1994 he embarked on a voyage to visit The Old World. In the years before he had received numerous invitations to visit the European countries but his wife's deteriorating health had kept him from accepting any of them. However, after Garé's death her husband decided to make the long overdue trip.
http://www.cbarks.dk/theeuropeantour.htm
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:25 pm

Rockerduck wrote:People who had the luck to meet Barks during his European tour tell that Barks was always willing to please his fans and the editors, but that he himself found the tour to be too tiring.

If he found the the tour be to tiring, that doesn't necessarily mean the he did it against against his will, just to please others. Barks was in his 90s, so it would be strange if he would not find the tour tiring. It was a miracle that he had the energy to do it anyway. It was a very busy tour. Excitement also is tiring. Barks had a lot of energy, but on DCML it was suggested that he may not even survive the tour.
On DCML the quarreling overschadowed how big a miracle it was, that Barks went to Europe. No one ever expected that.
It would be interesting to find out how much Barks was doing it for himself. If it was really against his will there are people to blame for it. But if he did like the tour, then there should be some praisings, too.

Judging from a short Dutch NOVA broadcast of Barks visiting Amsterdam, show a man who is sure of himself and assertive when someone misunderstands his question about bricks during a boot travel through the Amsterdamse grachten. Barks replying something like: I didn't ask how they make them, but how they BAKED them.

Later, during the (1998/1999?) lawsuit between Barks and the 'Carl Barks Studio', there was reasoning that Barks had moments of amnesia lately. Which so far hasn't matched any Barks quote I've seen, apart from some understandable contradictiveness that everyone would have when memorizing. But if, and I say IF, Barks would have suffered amnesia, it would have been the biggest crime of all to have the old man working until 1997, and having him sign off his rights.
So that would leave the choice between an almost-dead Barks signing off his life for $2000 to the managers, or the contract must have been a misleading fraud. Either way there's a problem.

On the other side, if Carl Barks would have desired to gently and friendly give away his name for $2000 to any buyer or any friend, his managers Grandey and Morby would have had the function to block that immediately, protecting the old demented old Barks from doing such crazy things.
Grandey and Morbey didn't only fail to block the suspicious buyers, they were even the buyers themselves!

How did the law-suits between Barks, Grandey and Morby end? I haven't seen much about it, except for an article in an American magazine about comics.

Why did Grandey and Morby bring themselves into so much trouble? They were managers! They should have known that people would eventually become suspicious of an old man in his 90s, living together with two managers.

Later they became managers of Marc Davis, known from creating Tinkerbell. I received a mailing about that, as I put on their mailing list after showing interest in Barks. I even got christmas cards. The material I've received from them is a story on its own, it includes a booklet compiling quotes of Rosa and other DCML-member.

Two sides of the story? There are many stories, sides and viewpoints. And many people rather forgetting about it all. That's why it's so difficult to be bothered with what happened. It's enough to fill and entire thriller, I'm afraid.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:48 pm

I'm typing too fast. I meant: I received a mailing about Marc Davis, as I was put on Grandey and Morby's mailing list after showing interest in Barks.

Via via I had shown interest. I think that was at the end of 1997. I received a package which I (of course) still have. It looked commercial but lovely, except for the fact that it included a mysterious looking blue booklet with quotes of Rosa and others on DCML, postings from 1993-1995, without any explanation why it was included. As I understood it, they were asked to stop with distributing it.
When mentioning and describing the book, people at DCML got very angry. As if I was asking for such confrontations when searching for Barks.

That mailing about classic Disney artist Marc Davis must have been in 1999 or later. They were calling themselves the Marc Davis Studio, if I'm correct. Their logo and information looked almost identical to what was used as Carl Baks Studio. Only the drawing was different, being a line-art (self?)caricature of Marc Davis. If I'm not mistaken, even the blue color of the logo and lettering was the same.

And there's another connection: Marc Davis also was an old man, like Barks.

What became of the Marc Davis Studio?
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:50 pm

Rockerduck wrote:[European Barks tour 1994] Barks often rather wanted to stay in his hotelroom, but did those things to please the people who were being so kind to him.
http://www.cbarks.dk/theeuropeantour.htm (Click on the flags to read some reports on the tour by people who witnessed Barks.)

Looking at the tour scheme and seeing the reports the tour could be compared with Barks's story 'A Duck's-eye View of Europe' (WDC 273). The way I interpret it, Barks wanted to please people but he also had to have his rest, being in his 90s. There were days of interruption and also moments of rest during the public appearances. I think the tour would have been tiring for everyone, but that doesn't mean that he "rather wanted to stay in his hotelroom". I want to see sources for that. I think Barks sometimes needed to stay in his hotelroom, if only to save him for himself if being too enthousiastic.
The way you seem to look at it, Barks was forced out of his hotelroom, to held the great Barks up for an audience while he is wishing he was home, or at least hidden in his hotelroom. If that the case, then Barks was a great actor with all those photographers and people around him. As a witness saw it, Barks did enjoy the tour and people. But then, principally speaking, one could say he's prejugded because of being there in the first place.
I turning this black-and-white just to show how easy it is to put meanings in texts, even though they were not intended that way. Therefore I think this subject deserves investigation: How much did Barks enjoy the 1994 European Barks tour?

Rockerduck wrote:You yourself, Daniel, have mentioned an interview with Barks. You said Barks was interviewed rather amateurishly (sp?) but he kept smiling and being polite. That's just the way Barks was, I guess.

That's the video I described here, in this topic. Barks keeps polite and smiling, but I think his patience is put to the test. The interview begins good, with interesting accounts from Barks's about his youth, and then it seems like the interviewer doesn't really know what to ask this old Disney legend about Donald Duck comics, as if he doesn't see the significance of it, what is so special about this Disney artist. As if he's running out of subjects, or just trying to get something that could be used for broadcast, in the news-item in which a snippet appeared. Maybe the interview just took too long for such a short broadcast on Dutch television for the general audience.
My theory about what goes wrong, is that Barks and his managers expected a different attention in the interview. But I should see first how other European countries treated Barks in television interviews. I have examples but only the Dutch one has stuck into memory. Also because it's raw footage (in the technical sense), un-edited material. I hope Barks didn't have more of such interviews, because anyone would have tired after such a long interview between two people trying to have a conversation.

Rockerduck wrote:I never said he was a good bussiness man. I only know he said he could've earned more if he wanted to, or asked for it, but he was rather being left alone. Also, Barks was happy to sell his paintings for $200, and then see another guy making hundreds of dollars more by selling them again.

It's clear Barks isn't a good business man then. As I understand, Barks had a growing list of spontaneous buyers in the early 1970s. It was then decided that the list system would be abandoned, and that paintings would be auctioned. You can see a photo of an auction in Van Helden's book. Judging from Geoffrey Blum's article with Barks letters, Barks was very busy at that time. Really very busy. So that's why I think one shouldn't say that Scrooge died in 1967, as Barks worked very hard in 1970s. Not only just for fun, but also with the intention to sell them. For money.

It would be romantic if some sort of Santa Claus is working hard just to give his audience a picture to hang on the wall, but in reality Barks wanted to earn money for his work. It's clear that he didn't get out of his way to get every cent he could get, but as far as I know, the price of $200 was mostly in the beginning when few expected that there would be a Barks painting mania. I believe that in 1976, there were already high prices given for paintings, also for new paintings auctioned by Barks's agents.

What I've understood is that in 1975/1976 someone decided to make poster-reproductions of Barks paintings, and Barks was sent a copy and payment. Barks then decided to alarm Disney. Barks had a permission on a yearly basis, under the condition that it would be stopped if there would be trouble. When Barks saw the illegal poster-reproduction, he had no choice than to make that known to Disney. I don't know if Barks stopped immediately or if the year was just finished without opting for a new year. From what I know, Barks was happy to stop with the paintings. But it wasn't in principal decision, as he went on making series of non-Disney watercolors and non-Disney paintings in 1976-1979, and already in 1980 a new Disney painting appeared.

I think it's fair to say that Barks wasn't stopped by Disney at all in 1976. There was just an intermission. A pause. Both Barks and Disney saw that the situation got out of hand, and so time was taken to either quit it or get on with it later. In retrospective there are just about four years without Disney paintings in the 1970s-1990s. Four years as a solo-artist, comparable with the period 1967-1971.

I've understood that the Barks solo-works sold less, and that it was a reason to get back on Disney paintings. Barks wanted to earn more money with painting, which was a reason to choose for Disney paintings.
When suggeted duck painting, Barks was sceptical if a comic book character could be transferred to a painting, but with a ping-pong ball he could study the shadows of the ducks' heads. It gave a new direction to work with material he was good at, the Disney ducks.

Somewhere in 1971-1976 is one painting which could almost be non-Disney, with only Bombie the Zombie. This was an attempt for Barks to make a painting without ducks. But as it turned out, he wasn't as good as Garé Barks in painting a swamp, so the painting became a problem on its own.

Barks has been given the chance to work solo. In the 1950s as comic book artist, which he didn't do because he found it financially too risky. (BTW. At this time there was some change in the payment of Barks, if I'm not mistaken. Something with life insurance or so.)
In the 1970s he could have choosed for solo-work, but money led him to working with Disney characters again. And this time he was allowed to sign his work.

A old-time Barks-fan wrote me that he heard Barks was eager to sign his work, or to hide an identification in it. Few of such signs are known, but that could be because of the editor whitening out. Or maybe the account is a bit exaggerated. (I think the source is Garé Barks.)
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:05 pm

There is much information about Barks around the world. Most information is publicly known, waiting to be transcribed to internet.
I think one benefit for Rosa is that he became known just before internet became a hype in 1995/1996. Fresh information was typed right onto the screen, and OCR-scanners became popular later. In 1997, still few people had a scanner. And the Barks-fans mostly were older than the Rosa-fans, who were more into the new techniques and stimulated by internet contact with Rosa himself, and they got their quotes directly onto the screen.
In 2006, I think Rosa still benefits from that, as on internet he is better recorded than Barks. But even with Rosa, most fans only know a few excerpts. There's not really some sort of internet library community which really collects facts on either Barks or Rosa. Mostly the same old information and misconceptions, copied from place to place, and distorted in the many discussions.

I think it's because most people are just mostly interested in just the work of the artist. In that way, "stardom" has a dark side when people are just discussing and discussing, more interested in themselves than in any idol.
An artist may think the people are interested in him, but then I have to think of the Easter story where Donald preaches to kids about himself, while they're just interested in the candy. And when something goes wrong with the candy, by someone else's fault, the offended kids immediately bash the creator out of the city.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Rockerduck » Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:02 pm

Of course I never said he was a 'Santa Claus', or he was 'forced' to do the European tour. Sure, he will have enjoyed some parts of it. I remember a bit of video, in which he admires Rembrandt's 'The nightwatch' in Amsterdam. I just think he didn't like all the attention he was getting, all the publicity. I've read the accounts of some of the people who witnessed him on that tour, which are published at the site I linked to.

I've never said I believe Barks was working for nothing, or didn't want to make as much money as possible. Everybody wants that! I just meant that... well, you can read for yourself what I meant, as long as they don't read your over-exaggeration or mis-interpretation of my words-- and God knows where that's coming from.
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Other creators

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron