Requested Reading? Hmm...???

[Mattias Hallin]

CHRIS:

      I my 'umble hopinion, there's no such thing as required reading outside
the educational systems -- myself e.g., I almost NEVER read recent Nobel Prize
winners (lit.winners, I mean -- well, nor do I read the sci.winners, but...)
for the reason I positively HATE being told what to read, or to read sumpin'
jes' because it suddenly became elevated to "Nobel Prize Lit.". Of course I'm
also aware of the fact that I'm stubbornly and stupidly denying myself reading
I would quite likely enjoy -- but that's the prize us rugged freedomloving
individual individualists has to pay... tsk, tsk, tsk!

Anyway, what I'm tryin' t'tell ya: there ain't no perticlar curriculum of Duck
and/or Disney comics; and a persons personal enjoyment of any certain comic is
reason enough to read it! With which sentiment I'm sure we all agree.

What there IS, however, is (to my mind) RECOMMENDABLE reading -- which can be
CLASSIC comics, ODD comics, GOOD comics, BAD (!!!) comics or just about ANY
comics, depending on who does the recommendin' and who recieves it.

So, when it comes to ME recommendin' YOU Disney stuff to check out, I will of
course start by saying: "ANYTHING by Carl Barks -- period". This is rather
self-evident to any ardent Barks-fan, but no less true because of this; and a
good source for Barks is: a) Gladstone-Disneys (previous and present) and
Disney-Disneys, where there are a fair deal of reprints to be found with no or
little trouble; and b) Gladstone's Carl Barks Library in Color-albums (priced
between $8 and $10 -- not too steep, I think myself). Unless you get as
seriously hooked as some of us, there's no particular reason why you should
start any systematic collection, but what if you try'n pick up a few Barks 
stories and let us know what you thought about 'em...?

DON:

    Go on, fer gosh sakes, and be as opinionated and frank as you damn well 
want to! Of course you shouldn't be either bland nor falsely modest or
insincere on the list, just to avoid disagreement, or possibly steppin' on
someone's toes; BUT I also think there is a minor lesson for us ALL in this
discussion, namely to be a tad more CAREFUL if and when we vent negative
critique, or disagree with one another... for the simple reason that things
don't always read the same as they write -- the reader can't hear the intended
mode of speech or other inflections that the writer might have in mind when
writing, and things do have a tendency at times, I think, to come out a little
more harsh then they were ever intended.

These remarks are NOT intended as any analysis of your particular posting, Don,
but as general observations.

I don't see any particular reason to continue this discussion, unless anyone
wants too; but that was my two cents worth, anyway.

All my best, etc. and so on!

Hmm...?

Mattias