"Redbeard's Pirate Plunder"

Hey, it can't all be Barks.  But don't worry; we're still going to be fairly positive this week.  I wanted to cover this story because a little bit ago I did a Jack Bradbury ten-pager from 1950, and it was pretty bad (this one ain't too great either).  But I think it's unfair to judge his work entirely from that, because here's an adventure story by Bradbury from 1956, and what a difference six years make!  The marked improvement in every aspect of his craft is very noticeable, and I find it quite satisfying.  Imagine, working hard and getting better!  I'm proud of you, Jack.

(And yes, there's always the caveat that I can't know for sure if Bradbury actually wrote this, or indeed the aforementioned ten-pager.  I can note that the writing doesn't leap out at me as coming from any of the usual suspects, but I still can't say with absolute certainty.  But I really want to, because I like to see people get better, and you can't prove I'm wrong!  Unless you can, in which case, dammit.  Nonetheless.)

It does feel a little weird that a real ship plays a role here, BUT...

Just look at the fun dynamic!  All of them just nerding out over their mutual love of boats.  It's just CHARMING.  And it all looks so much better than that previous story.  Seriously, go check--they are recognizably by the same guy, but Bradbury has learned A LOT about cartooning and drawing ducks in particular in the intervening time.  Go back and take another look at that entry.  This is not a request; it is an ORDER.  You'll find that the difference is startling.

This actually seems remarkably forbearing.  Having him keep doing this over the course of fifty years in spite of consistent failure sounds like one of those definition-of-insanity thingies.  No doubt you can hazard a guess regarding the unseen owner's identity, but somehow it never occurs to me when I read it.  Possibly because I'm most acclimated to Barks and it doesn't seem very Barksian.

So!  This guy!  Not terrible as one-shotters go.  I don't have any complex psychologizing about him, but still.  Possibly woulda made a better 'sailor' character than Moby Duck, if I'm being generous.  I mean, different vibe, but still.  Is he a complex character, as presented here?  Not really, but I like him anyway.

The whole thing of going straight from "it's hard to find sailors!" to "if only we were sailors!" is funny, and typical.  Look, we need to get where we're going; there is NO TIME TO LOSE!

I feel like I shouldn't like him, because his motivations for kidnapping our heroes don't hold up too well, but I can be irrational if I want to.  So there.  "Strike out the flying jib" MIGHT not be nonsense; a "flying jib" seems to be a real thing.  You never know, unless you do.

I'm pretty sure my awareness of what a "belaying pin" is (a wooden or metal tool to secure masts) comes entirely from this story.  It's not really a concept you typically need on a day-to-day basis, you know?  Unless you happen to be a salty sea-dog.  I do think it probably wouldn't be fatal dropped from such a low height, but also, I wouldn't drop it on someone I abolutely one hundred percent wanted to continue living.

I mean, he had no choice, man.  What did you expect him to do?  NOT kidnap random strangers?  Pshaw!

Now, I do like ol' Blarney, why not, but I can't deny that the biggest flaw of the story is its signal failure to come up with any kind of real justification for this kidnapping.  I mean, when your kidnapper tells you that you're "bound to have an interestin' and excitin' voyage," I feel like you're going to redouble your efforts to escape.  But anyway, even if it isn't, ahem, quite Barks-level, the thing with the mysterious ghost ship is at least something.  You could do worse.

Now, about this "curse."  It's kind of interesting: it seems like a plot element, but it's not, really.  We never actually learn any more about the curse or get any indication of whether it's meant to be real or not.  All it is is a handy li'l thing that Bradbury can invoke whenever something bad happens, which is A LOT.  Rarely have I felt a heavier authorial hand.  Bradbury's the Disney version of Anthony Trollope (Dept. of Sentences That Have Never Been Written Before Nor Will Again).

I could just point out that saying Blarney "isn't a bad sort" does seem to require a big ol' "[citation needed]" and be done with it, but that is not my purpose here.  Instead, I want to point out that, regardless of what you think of what they're saying, you can see them actively thinking here: "We're stuck here...still, we would like him to succeed...but SCREW this; what the hell?"  No, that's all.  That's my only point.  I just like it because I feel like characters being unsure and having internal conflicts like this is REALLY rare in non-Barks-Western stories.  Also, I think maybe I'll introduce NBW as an acronym, because it's really getting tedious to write out that whole phrase.  Then again, it would also make this blog significantly more impenetrable to the uninitiated.  Then again, it may be far too late to worry about such things.

In Barks stories, Donald is generally smart-ish.  Not a genius, but above average.  It's just that he's forever prey to little fits of stupidity (brought on by his general hubris and impulsiveness) in very specific areas that cause problems for him.  But in non-Barks stories, he's more likely to just be generally kind of dumb, as here.  Not that I don't find his obviously-misplaced confidence at least a little funny.  How ya gonna roast those pigs, anyway?  Relying on Woodchuck know-how?  Or it's just kind of an image you have of tropical islands and you're not thinking about it any harder than that?  Hmm.

What I enjoy here is the nakedness of Donald's avarice.  Here we also see one of many instances of blaming stuff on this alleged curse.  I mean, really, the problem was caused by Donald's very human greed.  There's nothing extraordinary about it.  Or is the idea that the curse just kind of generally sets up situations for you in which you're likely to fuck up due to your own weaknesses?  Sounds kind of baroque, but I dunno; maybe some curses might really work like that.  And I hasten to clarify that I don't actually believe in supernatural curses.  Just arguendo, okay?  

Or maybe we could emphasize the metatextual aspect by interpreting "just like Captain O'Duck said" as "just like the author wrote."  Look, I'll admit that I'm a little stoned as I write this, so my perceptions may be imperfect, but I feel like the more I write about this story the more it feels like I'm going to just thoroughly deconstruct it, transforming it into a pure textual artifact.  Should I delete this paragraph?  It's maybe a little embarrassing and I'm not sure how much it's really contribu--NO!  Editing is for COWARDS!  In it stays!

Donald's technique seems both more complicated AND more plausible than HDL's.  It may possibly break a few laws of physics, but not quite as obviously so as the kids'.  

And look, let's not be TOO effusive in our praise here--this sequence would be better if it were longer, better-written, and better-drawn--but it's still an effort at being atmospheric that at least somewhat works.  Overall, I daresay I WOULD say this is probably worthy of a contemporary reprint.  That's actually a good idea: a hardback collection of stories by writers who don't get much play and maybe don't have fantastic reputations, but still produced some worthwhile stuff.  I can't believe I'm getting so positive about the company.  They released a truly unbelievable volume of utter garbage!  And yet...here we be.

On fire with ROCK AND ROLL, you mean.  I don't know why I said that; it was just the immediate thing that came to mind after hearing "we're on fire."  Donald, you are deeply shitty at hiding sensitive documents.  That is all.

This part is quite weird, because...what, until Donald made that offer, you'd just been planning on silently sinking beneath the waves?  Also, O'Duck is supposed to be a good guy; why is he hinging the ducks' continued survival on this condition?  Is he only doing it because he knows that he himself doesn't actually have any claim on the treasure--that his extremely mysterious boss is going to get it all anyway?  Maybe he's actually NOT that good, and I'm just ignoring all the ample subtext of such?  That's impossible!  I would NEVER be that naive, except for sometimes.

Jeez, Don.  He's about to battle these dudes for the treasure.  Would it kill you to be a little more positive about it?  Also, "you're a generous soul...turning over your claim to the treasure to save our lives!"  What kind of insane statement is that?  Okay okay, even though I like this story, but things like that are the reason I would append "...more than it deserves" to the end of that.

As we are about to see, he absolutely has a chance alone.

See?  Easy peasy.  Bada bing bada boom.  Bish bash bosh.  Bob's yer uncle.  Job's a good'un.  Et cetera.  No accomplices needed.

Don't you like how dang humane our guy is being?  I do not know how sustainable this diet is, but if they can find prey animals or some sort of legume for protein, I suppose they can last a while.  Still, I really don't think we're adequately considering their future here.

No!  The nonsense curse strikes again!

So yeah, we kind of knew Scrooge was coming, but somehow I can't help but find this vaguely...deflating?  Get the heck outta here, Scrooge!

"There it goes...splashy-splashy!"  There's a phrase that needs to catch on with the kids of today.  I enjoy the fact that, without even talking about it, the ducks are of one accord that if it's Scrooge, why even bother?

"What luck!  It stunned that whale!" is the sort of dialogue I'm so used to that somehow it doesn't even strikes me as batty.  And yet, it is!

Ha ha!  That's what you get for stunning a whale!

Once again the story calling attention to its own textuality, but I dunno; I like this for O'Duck.

Why SHOUDN'T he get a job that matches his qualifications?  God knows I'm never gonna.  Anyway, everyone's happy, so huzzah.  BUT ALSO, let's not forget that the USS Constitution is a real ship, which does make the idea of a cartoon duck captaining it feel a bit bizarre.

Well...sort of.  As a child, I just enjoyed the cartoonish idea of using an octopus as a claw machine.  As an adult, I think it was wildly irresponsible of the Duckburg Aquarium to lend it to him.  But, if we can just assume this is in purely a cartoony idiom and the octopus isn't being harmed in any way, I STILL think it's kinda neat.  However, the fact that this Donald story centers Scrooge at the end kinda-sorta rubs me the wrong way.  It always comes back to the dang money, doesn't it?

Do I like this story more than it deserves?  Clearly.  Would Bradbury think me a wide-eyed maniac if he saw me writing so much about it?  Nineteen-hundred-odd words, many of them fairly unhinged?  Probably.  But that's what I'm here for!