Egg wrote:Speak for yourself, baby boy.
* crying * Mama!
Egg wrote:Stephan says: topic special on Don Rosa-bashing... doesn't mean this is the place to bash Don Rosa...
I don't get it. Why not just call it 'Rosa vs Barks', or 'Rosa vs Disney'?
Because I don't want this topic to sound negative towards Don Rosa. It's not an invitation to make Don Rosa look bad, it's a place were fans of Barks and Rosa can discuss 'Rosa-bashing'.
Egg wrote:And again Stephan gets personal, only trying to lure Egg into the discussion. Afterwards, Stephan will complain and cry with regrets again, leaving Egg the blame.
Of course I get personal. We're in the middle of an discussion, which means interaction.
(btw, is it
an or
a discussion? I never really understanded the difference.)
Egg wrote:What do you know about Egg's fandom of a Dutch poet? Aren't you getting a bit outside of your borders, Stephan?
I heard you saying Nijgh was really important to you, on the offtopic-forum. And I just checked his site by vEijmeren.
Egg wrote:That says a lot about your little tiny knowledge of culture and art.
It says alot about where my intrests lie, not about about my knowledge of culture and art.
Egg wrote:For Rosa and the Rosaïsts it's very hard to understand Barks, yes.
It's obvisiously harder for an egg to understand Barks.
What do you mean with 'understanding Barks' anyway? Sounds like some kind of weird religion. I think I understand Barks when I like reading his work.
Egg wrote:Really, you'd better just talk for yourself.
You keep talking for Don Rosa, Egg. You 'explain' all his posts to us. And now you're complaining when I treat you in that way?
Egg wrote:That's very interesting, if a so-called heir makes such a very big fool out of himself, by acting like a parasite.
I think Egg seems more like a parasite. You keep talking about Don Rosa and how bad he is. Why don't you leave him alone, if you don't like his work, to spend more time talking about Barks?
I don't like i.e. Britney Spears' music. But that's not a reason to make up all kinds of things to make her look like some kind of evil witch who's out for worlddomination, or whatever.
Doctor Witchie Britchie wrote:One of my many big problems with him is the "question and answer" format he feels obliged to pigeonhole the Duck world into. In Rosa's Duck-world-view, there is only one answer to the question "does the Number One Dime supply Scrooge with luck?" There is only one answer to the question "was Scrooge really the King of the Klondike during his days in the Yukon?" There is only one answer to the question "Does Scrooge love Glittering Goldie?" and so forth.
Mmm, that's true. But of course Don Rosa lets everyone free to answer these questions for themselves.
Doctor Witchie Britchie wrote:Rosa posits HIS own conclusions as unescapeable fact.
I'm not sure about this. I never felt obliged to believe everything Don Rosa says. For example, I really like the story 'The Magic Hourglass' while Don Rosa regards this story as 'fictional fiction'. I don't care. To me, all Barks-stories are part of the Duck-universe.
Doctor Witchie Britchie wrote:Rosa wants to pigeon-hole everything concerning the Ducks into a nice, smooth, workable FAQ webpage, while Barks showed more respect for his readers by not filling in corners and defining everything about his characters. Just my opinion.
Well, it makes sense. I understand that people don't like Don Rosa for sorting everything out where Barks left open spaces on purpose, each to his own.
What I don't understand is that some people often take this a reason to bash Don Rosa. They keep insulting Don Rosa and socalled 'Rosaïsts' from being stupid, evil, egocentric or whatever.