Kangaroonie or Australia?

Daniel van Eijmeren dve at kabelfoon.nl
Mon Apr 12 12:47:09 CEST 2004


JOHN LUSTIG to LARS JENSEN, 03-04-2004:

> I'm certainly not arguing against the use of real world locations 
> and legends. And I'm sure that some creators just get lazy and it's 
> easier to come up with a fictional place than use a real one. But 
> sometimes fictional locations with fictional customs can be critical 
> to making the story work. Or they can be funnier than their real 
> world counterparts.

And they can help to stay out of politics, while still jumping in the 
middle of it.

In The Netherlands, I think somewhere in the early 1990s, there has been 
a Dutch story (by Mau or Bas Heymans?) about two countries being in a 
long-term war with each other. 

In one country, every man has a *short* moustache. In the other country, 
every man has a *long* moustache. I believe I've heard that these fictional 
countries were intended to be refering to real places like Iraq and Iran.

What I mean to say is that a fictional name can also help to get *closer* 
to situations in real life. I guess that if the above story clearly would 
have refered to Iran and Iraq, by mentioning these countries by their real 
name, this story promptly would have been rejected or censored.

BTW1. Some Barks stories contain both real places and fictional places, 
as a mix. For example, 'Lost in the Andes!' (OS 223) refers to both the 
Andes and Plain Awful.

BTW2. Does someone know which Dutch story I mean?

--- Daniël

"GROAN! Gasp! Alas! Alas! Oh, woe! Alas!"
(Which Barks story?) :-)




More information about the DCML mailing list