Further Daisy Analysis
Danehog at aol.com
Fri Jan 30 01:02:28 CET 2004
>I suppose you have a point. I guess I just dislike flat characters who are
>there just to take up space kinda.
I don't know if she exists to take up space more than she does to move the
plot along. I think some writers even try to get rid of her for most of the
story, in exchange for an easy-to-write setup and/or ending.
But what do I know? I once bought an "Archie" digest.
>I mean - she's supposed to be Donalds
>girlfriend, but with how she's written (or rather not written) it makes it
>very hard to care about her at all and as a result whenever she appears in
>the story its kind of like an "oh lord, what now" kinda reaction. XD
Hey - there was a reason Barks used her sparingly.
What I always found amusing about Daisy was that she was constantly trying to
"do good" in the community, whether it was for fund-raising or any other
random do-gooding plot device. And yet, she has no morals whatsoever. That says
more about humanity than any large, thick books with carpeted spines.
>But you are right - Daisy is, as of right now - nothing more than a plot
>device in a big poofy bow tie.
Yeah, as of now. But would you really want her to exist in her own spinoff
comic book, DAISY DUCK'S MAGICAL LAND OF CHARACTER INEXCLUSION & NO FRIENDS #1?
I don't think there's any hope in saving the character, since, really, the
damage has been done.
If you remove Daisy's clothes, her character design is essentially Donald,
which reminds me of a vintage "Golden Book" in which Donald cross-dressed as
Daisy (and looked exactly like her, of course, thanks to the lazy underpaid
illustrator). All I remember is that he was at a party and everyone laughed.
I don't know. It was a long time ago.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the DCML