"The McDuck Foundation"

(DID YOU KNOW? this is my first entry, alphabetically, that starts with "McDuck."  A thing like that.)

In our last entry, I was thinking a bit about the idea of Scrooge being secretly generous, which made me think I should revisit this Scarpa story which treats on the same concept (no! Spoilers! Did I spoil this entire entry in the first sentence?).  This is an early Scarpa story, from 1958, and it's even more of a narrative mess than usual.  As always with these stories, it's hard to know to what extent you want to harp on such shortcomings, and to what you just kind of gloss over them because they're not really the point of the story, which is more just goofing around and having fun.  Though I do think there are places where the putative "fun" is submerged in the goofing.  Well, we'll see.

At any rate, we must give credit where it is due, and in this instance, the story definitely hits the ground running with this phantasia of "generous Scrooge in Classical Rome."

You ARE going to assume that, oh, this is just Scrooge having a nightmare, and of course you're right, but it's fun to harbor fantasies of what other weirdness it could be.  Some sort of crazy in media res time travel thing?  If only!

No, he was reading Noble Misers by I. Gave Freely, the latest hot publishing sensation.  Why was he reading it if he hates it so much?  Does he have a bad-books podcast?  Hard to say.

To give the story more credit: Scrooge angrily cutting up the book is actually really funny.  Or so I think.

Now, I do have to say one thing.  As long-time readers will be aware, I square my liking Scrooge yet disliking real-life plutocrats by noting that this is a fantasy; Scrooge doesn't really have anything in common with these people.  And I believe this!  I think it's true as far as it goes!  And YET, in this day and age, it CAN kind of feel like special pleading.  Like, hey, we HAVE a real-world equivalent to Scrooge, wealth-wise, and he's a murderous nazi psychopath.  That's just awkward.  I can't pretend it's not.  When you go around talking about "good" billionaires (or trillionaires, as the case may be),  that's when I reach for my revolver, even if they have admittedly clever names like "Squandergilt."  So, you know, cards on the table.

(inducks calls him "John D. Buckefeller."  Is that the original Italian name?  If so, it's not great, and the localizer--Geoffrey Blum, credited with "Americanizing" the script--definitely did him one better.)

I mean, I just can't avoid it: "the great an generous billionaire" is a phrase that makes me want to throw up.  Okay, sure, maybe he endows universities, but if you want to admire him, don't look too closely at how he became a billionaire.  That's my advice.  And in any case, any Marxist dude will tell you that the evils of capitalism are not predicated on all capitalists being personally unpleasant.  I mean, they are, and that may not be a coincidence, but it's not required.

Well, let's at least try to focus on the story itself a bit.  And what it is is "kind of confusing."  What do you think is going to change Scrooge's mind about this guy?  Keeping in mind that Scrooge already knows he's a philanthropist, and thus any demonstration of this isn't going to--

...oh.  Okay.  You were doing the most predictable yet nonsensical thing imaginable.  Turns out I was right.  What a twist!  Scrooge has the predictable reaction, but why in the world did Donald imagine this could possibly work?

Why are we so fixated on physical buildings as a proxy for charity?  Actually, that part makes sense, in this world, where physicality is so important--of money itself, of course, so why not here?  The concept of a "foundation" is a bit abstract, so it's a good idea to visualize it like that.  In the real world, you'd probably just rent a suite of offices or something, but that is NOT the duck-comics way.

Presenting "a study on gypsy moths" as a bad use of money is uncomfortably close to what you'd hear from our know-nothing overlords (and not just now; certainly as long as I've been alive).  And as for Andrew Lloyd Webfoot--well, if he's as popular as his real-world counterpart, I don't think he NEEDS charity to put on a new musical.  It will pay for itself and then some.  What does Scrooge think "a worthy cause" is?  Well...we'll get there.  But first, he will fight a tramp for a nickel, which I think is meant to be some sort of commentary on what he just said, but it's a bit on the confused side.

So one thing that's weird about this story is that we have these periodic nighttime scenes, and I just can't tell, because on the one hand, it does feel like there's meant to be some sort of sense of mystery here, with the characters featured in silhouette like that, but on the other hand, it's clearly Scrooge and Squandergilt.  Who else could it be?  Or maybe we're sort of lightly making fun of this notion of mysterious, clandestine goings on.  Or maybe it's everything everywhere all at once!  That does seem to be the Scarpa MO, more or less.

Never mind the analysis; sometimes it can be difficult just to straightforwardly describe what's happening in these Scarpa stories.  So Donald is excited here, about something that's going to make Scrooge have a fit.  Apparently, that "something" has to do with the price of Squandergilt's skyscraper?  Is the idea that Scrooge is now going to have to build his own skyscraper.  Are we supposed to imagine that he somehow implied earlier that he'd match whatever Squandergilt does, even though he definitely didn't?  You can say "don't sweat the details so much; it's just a silly, fun thing."  I'm in favor of silliness!  But I'm also in favor of stories being minimally comprehensible.  Scarpa did not always get that ratio right, I'm thinking.  I very much empathize with that "did we miss something?"

(Also, SEVENTEEN cents?!?  What the heck?!?  We all know that Scrooge has, in addition to his dollars, SIXTEEN cents!  It would be a major economic upset if it were suddenly seventeen!  Oh em gee!

Look: some people accuse me of being too hard on this stuff, just accept it, and the thing is, I really want to.  And I do when I can.  I'm fine with a story where Scrooge gets pressured against his will into doing philanthropy stuff.  But fercryinoutloud, you have to make at least a token effort to explain why he feels compelled to do this.  I'm not asking much, but Scarpa sure doesn't provide it.  This nonsense "I had to go and shoot off my big fat beak" stuff--there's good nonsense and then there's infuriating nonsense, I feel.  Sure, he vaguely suggested that under some circumstances he might help, but he didn't sign a contract, and if he shot off his fat beak, Scarpa signally failed in showing us this, which seems like it would've been super-easy to do.

 And I just cannot EVEN with Donald's "yippee!"  What is he cheering?  Is he just thinking of the prospect of Scrooge having to spent more money, and how hilarious it'll be?  Possessed by crazed exuberance?  Not sure what else.  I don't see why he'd be unironically cheering this stupid "effect of mold spores" stuff.

Hi.  Can I ask a question, just for clarification's sake?  Does this Squandergilt fellow do any real, actual, serious charity work, or is it just this money-themed stuff that nobody except he and Scrooge could ever possibly care about?  I know there was guff about him supporting the NEA and stuff earlier, but that all just fades away as we get into the story proper.  Again, I don't mind if that's the case!  It can be goofy if it wants to!  But the story doesn't make even the slightest effort to clarify these things, and that leads to pointless confusion.  I think.  And if it IS the case, why did that woman call him "great and generous?"  See what I'm talking about?  Ack!

But at any rate, it IS cool to see them battling on the scaffolding like that.  Credit to Scarpa.

Okay, so this is interesting, and it is a CRAZY coincidence that I even noticed it.  But: does Donald's line there look vaguely familiar?  Well, I have to admit, it didn't to me, but earlier this week, as I was preparing this entry, friend-of-the-blog Debbie Anne just happened to post this panel on facebook, from Barks' "Boat Buster:"

...huh.  Obviously they're not exactly the same, but I'm fairly sure the echo is intentional; Blum had a habit of sticking Barks dialogue in his localizations.  Does this mean anything?  Not that I can think of!  But it's still kind of fun.  And, again, something that in the normal course of human events I'd've totally missed.

I feel like maybe that "low wages" part is something you should've kept to yourself?  But apparently not; Scrooge's personality is such that he has to do such things at any opportunity even if it makes no sense to.  Apparently.

Was nepotism a big problem in Italian NGOs in the fifties?  Otherwise, Scrooge's line in the bottom right there seems to make no sense.

Okay, so we know these two are supposed to be just faking their argument, for reasons, but how can Squandergilt have this great reputation if he's forever having dumb fights over petty bullshit?

Also, please ponder why they might feel the need to do this, while we're waiting for the reveal.

Most of the rest of the story intercuts between Donald, HDL, and Gyro attempting to do Scrooge's bidding.  And, you know, you could certainly argue that by, like, the letter of the law, Scrooge dragging the kids of on treasure hunts in Barks stories could violate child labor laws.  But boy oh boy, does this ever make it more explicit that that's what's happening!  I mean, not that forcing adult people to work is great either, but the child exploitation is what stands out.  I know, this is one of those things I'm just not meant to think about for the sake of a story, but man, I feel like being effectively silly really demands that you deal with these things, lest readers get tripped up.  Scarpa would prefer not to.  And I feel like I've made basically that same comment on a ton of his stories I've done.  Hope y'all aren't too bored of it.

Even though these vignettes take up a lot of space in the story, they're kind of boring and I don't want to cover them too closely.   But in brief:

HDL's efforts to defy the laws of physics run into difficulties.

Donald's weird, nebulous task of researching "the effects of cobwebs on paper money" leads to a long and somewhat grotesque thing of him collecting spiders--to try to get web, presumably, though it's pretty vague.

Like, "docile" spiders?

Why do you think wild spiders are going to be "docile?"  This whole thing is just URGH.

Meanwhile, Gyro invents locks and them gets the Beagle Boys to test them.  He eventually succeeds, or so it seems, but it turns out the Beagles were just PRETENDING to be stumped!  So they break into the Money Bin easily, only to be stopped by Donald's spiders.  Get all that?

Don't fight it.  Just let it wash over you.  It's the only way to get through this.

HDL do this silly but sort of visually fun business with trying to make money fit in different shapes.

And then their story comes to an end on this extremely nonsensical punchline.  Is the idea supposed to be that the bills fused together and somehow morphed into one, like a group of slimes in Dragon Quest becoming a king slime?  It's as good a guess as any.

Oh hey, this farce?  We've gotta keep it going.  Apparently.  Please continue cogitating on why that might be.

"I gave my word."  No you bloody well didn't.  Stop trying to gaslight us about your own dang story.

Say what you will about his responses to Gyro and Donald, which are at least within the realm of possibility.  But boy--the way he solemnly spouts this gibberish at HDL--I dunno.  I guess spouting gibberish is kind of okay, but would it have killed Scarpa to make the said gibberish even remotely related to what they spent their time as researchers doing?  Instead of it being a complete non-sequitur?

Anyway, I was just funnin' when I said we'd get an explanation.  Why are Scrooge and Squandergilt colluding on...something?  Oh, no reason.  Or at least none that the story deigns to provide.  I don't know why I wrote that last sentence; if the story doesn't provide it, it doesn't exist!  It's not like this narrative has some sort of reality outside of the comic itself.  If you really, really wanted to push a point, you could maybe suggest that it has something to do with the common people finding out that Scrooge is involved with the foundation, but if that's the idea, that sure wasn't hinted at by the story in any way.

And should I even ask whether this backroom stuff is real charity or just lame money-related stuff?  I don't think the story knows any better than I do.

See, I wanted this entry to be less vitriolic than entries past, like a wise monk who knows how to dissociate and put everything in its proper perspective.  And who also likes cartoon ducks.  But man, there really appears to be something about Scarpa at his flakiest that really sets me off.  My effort to get a new perspective on what a generous Scrooge might look like met with failure, but I do not think this entry is unfair.  I'll say it again: you can be silly!  It's fine!  Van Horn is silly, and he's great!  I rarely write about him because I don't think I have much to say, but nonetheless!  But his stories aren't crazed fever dreams.  You gotta put work into it, and "it's meant to be like that" really can't excuse absolutely any ol' nonsense.

And I should finish this by noting that Scarpa actually drew and wrote a ton of stories that I really, really like.  At his best, he WAS brilliant.  But man alive, people...