"Adventure at Bomb Bird Island"

 Every so often, I say to myself, "hey, self, how about 1959's 'Bomb Bird Island?'  That's a story you fondly remember from your childhood.  You should write an entry about 'Bomb Bird Island!'"  And then I reread it and realize, man, I have basically NOTHING to say about this.  It's not that it's bad--it's certainly in the top half of non-Barks Western stories (and when I have I ever been circumspect about covering bad stories anyway?).  It's just that...somehow it never seems to have much about it to comment on.  But now, I have decided, it's "Bomb Bird Island" come hell or high water, dammit!  Let's do this!  It is how we will ring in the new year!

We start...here.  And the first thing you notice--or the first thing I always did--was the butler using Louie's full name.  Wait, aren't they pronounced the same either way?  Unless he's putting a particularly strong French spin on the pronunciation which Louie disapproves of.  Hard to say (yeah yeah, obviously he's meant to be pronouncing it "Lewis"--but it's sort of hard to imagine this hoity-toity butler using anything other than the French pronunciation).

Anyway, that's what most stands out--or at least, it did.  These days, the animal heads stand out more to me.  Bloody hell, people.  I know conservationism wasn't really a thing back in the day, but it is not a pretty sight.  There's a remake of this story called "Adventure at Buzz Bird Island," which I've never read, it hasn't been super-widely published, but if the image on the inducks page is to be believed, the animal heads are gone, which is good, though the art kinda looks worse otherwise.

Hey, how 'bout those birds?  I...don't want to tell you how to do your job, but I think those are generally posed on the ground or on branches.  Having them hanging from the ceiling like some kind of mobile strikes me as extremely goofy.

I don't know, though; I guess these things didn't really bother me back in the day.  I had my dad read The Swiss Family Robinson to me a number of times, and those people murdered the shit out of every wild animal they met.  It's kind of alarming.

Anyway, here's the bomb bird.  Isn't it cool-looking?  Well, maybe it looks a bit doofy, but I like it anyway, dammit.  I find the over-labeling in the book funny.  "Egg."  "Nest."  Yeah, thanks for that.  Real Ben Garrison stuff.

I have to say--I have questions here.  Mainly: who IS this guy, even?  Yes, okay, he's "the man who collects rare birds and animals for the Duckburg museum."  But he's clearly also a rich guy.  So is that how he got rich?  Collecting rare birds and animals?  It seems like that would just have to be a side-gig, something to do in his spare time; he must be independently wealthy--or so I'd have thought, but it turns out that he's planning on turning a profit of only five hundred dollars from this.  If that little money is significant to him, he can't be all that loaded, can he?  But he DOES own this mansion...hmm.  I'm almost beginning to suspect that this wasn't thought through very carefully.

...so he can't go to the island with him because of this sudden allergy out of nowhere.  Is this just so Strobl wouldn't need to draw him so much?  Really, you don't need an excuse for that; just have him say "you go to the island; I'll stay here."  No one would think twice.  But instead, we have this pointlessly distracting extraneous detail.  Great...?

Walkie talkies!  I remember those seemed so cool when I was small.  I mean, not in this story specifically; just in general.  Kids these days with their smartphones; they don't know the simple pleasures of bulky devices allowing for crackly communications over short distances.  I ask you!  Though I'm not sure how well the writer really understood them, since they appear to be conceptualized more like plain ol' phones.  "Here's hoping when we call for help, we don't get the wrong number!"  A) Our writer SUPER does not understand how walkie talkies work; but B) I can't help but love the half-assed dopiness of that line.  And why "THE wrong number?"  Are there only two numbers to choose from?

I don't know about "in a school," but it IS important to emphasize that the VAST MAJORITY of sharks are completely harmless to humans.  The Seaman's Manual is almost certainly correct.  But why do I have to look in the Seaman's Manual?  You just told me the fact that I'm going to find there!  Ya goof! 

I'm sort of bemused by "contributing to the school library so they can read that they're harmless, too."  That looks like it's supposed to be some sort of sick burn, the nephew's snappy comeback to the idea that the sharks are harmless.  If that's not what it is, then it just seems nonsensical.  And yet...it doesn't in any way disprove the idea.  And now if you need any more tips from the Manual, well tough shit.

Boooomb birds!  Everybody needs good bomb birds!  Bomb birds...have feeeeelings tooooo!  Okay.  Pretty darn goofy, but still, I would one hundred percent pay money for a plush one.  And everyone reading this would too.  Don't deny it!

This is another thing I liked about the story, but MY GOODNESS, "gee! This is easy!"  Correction: that is the opposite of easy!  It is extremely difficult and insanely dangerous!  Ya nut!

I don't know.  I don't think I have anything to say about this image.  But it's an adventure on bomb bird island, dernit!  We must appreciate, or at least acknowledge, the adventure!  I demand it!

"Good-by [sic] old world" is interesting.  You'd think, hey, don't you mean "goodbye cruel world?"  And maybe it is just a mistake.  But in perhaps excessive fairness, it should also be noted that there is apparently a hymn called "Goodbye Old World of Sin and Care," which was published in 1949, so the timing checks out.  Is that what the writer was thinking of?  I have no idea, but to me, it's kind of funnier: "goodbye cruel world" is such a cliche that it doesn't really invoke much of anything.  The other one seems much more melodramatic.  Anyway.

This is silly and probably lethal, but within the context of the story it kinda works.  He can't just jump off the mountain; he wouldn't have enough momentum to reach the ocean, and he'd just break himself on the rocks.  But this way?  Well...okay.  Sure.  I mean, I'm not sure if I'm meant to feel a way about this, but it's fine.

Hmm.  Yes, okay.  Is this a zoo or a museum?  Is this bird going to be stuffed, possibly when it gets bigger?  Not clear.

Well, here's my question: is this written by Vic Lockman?  It doesn't feel overly Lockmanesque--and inducks just gives it a "?"--and yet, I am reminded by a story that, per inducks, is (in spite of also not feeling overly etc), and that's 1960's "Stone Money Mystery."  Why am I reminded of that?  Because they both have endings that bug me in basically the same way.  As you may remember, in that story Scrooge goes to Yap Island to get one of these giant stone coins for his collection.  But then he learns that it's not just stone: in the past they used giant gold coins, so instead, he gets one of those.  And I'm left thinking, dammit, you need both of them--the non-precious stone and the gold--or your collection, which is the thing you were concerned about, is still incomplete!  You fool!  And I feel the same way about this: sure, this dumb seagull may be rarer, but you still need a bomb bird!  The one doesn't supplant the other!  And in this case it's particularly noticeable on account of how generic-looking the gull is.  It doesn't look like a particularly exciting species to have found.

But anyway, that's neither here or there.  As it turns out, I could find some things to say about this story with sufficient determination.  You gotta do what?  I gotta believe!