Academic literature on the topic 'Donald Duck (Comic strip)'

This research is conducted as other researches discussing translation issues focused on identifying techniques implemented to translate a specified translation issue rather than identifying all issues which are possible to be obstacles for translators. However, a research covering as many issues as possible becomes important in order to contribute theories and solutions to ease translator’s job. The aim of this research is to identify translation issues in the English version of Donald Duck Comics. The data are texts contained in the comic panel involving words, phrases, clauses and sentences which are potential to be difficulties for translators. Document analysis is employed to collect the data by reading the comic thoroughly, and noting down them. The validation is conducted by focus group discussion involving one translation expert and three members of doctoral program students majoring in translation. The result of this research shows that there are nineteen (19) translation issues involving abbreviation, cultural terms, dialect, ellipsis, humor, idiomatic expressions, informal expressions, interjections, kinship terms, measurement unit terms, non-standard grammatical structure, onomatopoeia, pronoun, proper name, sarcastic expressions, slang, speaking fluency disorder, swearing and wordplay. The result of this research can be developed into a translation model providing a translation issues mapping along with translation techniques choices which can be used as a translators’ guide.

The comic-book artist Carl Barks was one of the most-read writers during the years after the Second World War. Millions of children took in his tales of the Disney characters Donald Duck and Uncle Scrooge. Often set in the Global South, Barks's stories offered pointed reflections on foreign relations. Surprisingly, Barks presented a thoroughgoing critique of the main thrust of U.S. foreign policy making: the notion that the United States should intervene to improve “traditional” societies. In Barks's stories, the best that the inhabitants of rich societies can do is to leave poorer peoples alone. But Barks was not just popular; his work was also influential. High-profile baby boomers such as Steven Spielberg and George Lucas imbibed his comics as children. When they later produced their own creative works in the 1970s and 1980s, they drew from Barks's language as they too attacked the ideology of modernization.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to prove that narratives can be a adequate foundation for human behavior in general and economic behavior in particular using the Donald Duck universe as an example. Design/methodology/approach By using a content analysis, the authors examine 208 stories of the Donald Duck universe to prove that economic behavior is already embedded in modern narratives of the 20th century. Findings This analysis shows that behavioral finance effects are identified in a total of 52.4% of the analyzed comics. This study furthermore distinguishes the main comic characters Donald Duck and Scrooge McDuck and finds that eight of the nine considered behavioral finance biases can be detected in both. The most striking effect for Donald Duck is overconfidence and for Uncle Scrooge loss aversion. Social implications Collectively, these comics provide potential exemplars for behavioral finance. Regardless of whether these comics depict human nature or merely reflect human behavior during that time, they inevitably contribute to the understanding that psychological and sociological influences determine behavior in addition to economic factors that can be used for academic teaching. Originality/value In summary, comics, such as the Donald Duck universe, are suitable narratives for behavioral finance.

<p>The present study examines politeness strategies and linguistic politeness markers of English imperative speech acts used in The Very Best of Donald Duck Comics Series. It also identifies the translation techniques applied to translate those markers into Indonesian and evaluate their accuracy and acceptability. The findings indicate that three politeness strategies (bald on record, positive politness and negative politeness) are used and about thirty five linguistic politeness markers are identified and translated in Indonesian using five translation techniques (literal, variation, deletion, borrowing and established equivalence). The findings also show that the accuracy and acceptability of the translation of linguistic politeness markers are found to be good. Nevertheless, the application of deletion technique tends to distract the pragmatic meaning and force of the linguistic politeness markers in the target language. In such a case, deletion technique should be avoided.</p><p> </p><p>Key words: linguistic politeness stretegies, linguistic politeness markers, translation technique, accuracy, acceptability</p>

At least as far back as classical Greek times, humankind has speculated over the complexities of creativity as a concept and the modes of its transmission (Madden 133-134). This paper considers what happens when our inherited conceptions of creativity collide with the World Wide Web. It concludes with a brief survey of the Creativity Resource Portal, a current on-line project managed by the authors and related to the conceptual issues raised in the body of the text. Today, creativity has moved beyond its traditional home in the rhetoric of the philosopher and the exploits of the artist to form an integral part of both the theory and practice of a myriad of disciplines. Health professionals (Dossey; Kirklin & Meakin; Meites, Bein & Shafer; Rees; Satalof), scientists (Bohn 1-3, 13-15; Culross), educators (Guilford; Sawyer; Sternberg & Williams; Wilks) and those involved in the corporate world (Forbes & Domm; Mauzy & Harriman; Robinson & Stern) all consider creativity to be a fundamental criterion by which they measure and achieve their successes. In this way, however, creativity has become something of an over-burdened signifier. Now the market is flooded with highly idealised and ever expanding models for understanding and transmitting creativity, in which the medium (transmission) strives to outdo the message (creativity itself). We are not attempting here to arbitrate between these various models with a view to providing a rank order of creativity. Instead, we want to focus on and explore the ways in which recent technological developments, primarily the internet, have been, and might be, used to transmit and facilitate new directions and expressions of creativity and the creative process itself. Although the internet has no single inventor or birth date, its origins lie in the communication system devised by the RAND corporation in the 1960s: a system designed to survive a nuclear war because it had no central point of control. To this extent, one could say that its initial egalitarianism tips towards the expression of creativity. From here, the internet evolved through various mutations, such as APRANET and Bulletin Boards, to become the World Wide Web that emerged in the 1990s. Since then, the internet has encroached further and further into our everyday lives: we buy and sell goods at sites like Amazon or E-bay, we communicate to the world via email accounts at Hotmail or Yahoo, we court potential partners at Lavalife or Okcupid, and we engage in scholarly debates on sites such as M/C – Media and Culture. The point here is that the sheer ubiquity of the internet has brought about a quiet revolution in our everyday modes of creativity. Web navigation, for example, is heavily dependent on the creativity of the user to move through virtual space, even or perhaps especially when he/she must counter the ‘point and click’ inducements of advertising and marketing strategies. Little wonder then that the emergence of creativity as a fundamental tenet for success across a wide array of disciplines, coupled with the pervasiveness of cyberspace, has led to an explosion of both the production and transmission of creativity on-line. One such development is the transmission and dissemination of already created products via the web: that is, products hijacked from the ‘real’. In its most controversial and publicized form, the creative output of musicians has become tender for trade between individuals who subscribe to programs such as Napster and Limewire. Beyond this, the internet extends ever outwards in a panoply of both solicited and pirated images and video clips of people’s creative output. Here the internet seems to move beyond the liberating potential that Benjamin saw in technology’s ability to reproduce the image (Benjamin) towards the simulacra (or hyper-real copies of the ‘real’) proposed by Baudrillard (Baudrillard). On-line creativity has not, however, been limited to the reproduction of artistic output that exists in the ‘real’. As with any practice fundamental to the expression of the human condition, creativity has found new and exciting ways to express itself on-line. For example, digital art has emerged as a serious artistic pursuit since the late 20th century. Here, a number of artists have fused their creative ability and their technological skills to generate new ways in which their creativity can be transmitted. A cyber-poet may meld both the classical poetic forms of stanza and rhyme with the language of HTML or Java to create a cyber-poem (see the work of Komninos Zervos). Visual artists such as Han Hoogerbrugge have also been able to successfully adapt their works to the digital world: Hooderbrugge converted a comic strip he wrote in the mid-1990s to a series of digital animations. As well as this, new on-line formats such as blogs have been used by a number of artists to express their creativity in new and interesting ways (see the work of Olia Lialina). Other artists have dived even further into the simulacra, preferring the aesthetic value of the code itself over the presence of images or words that might signify something in the ‘real’ (see this work by Jason Nelson). Unlike traditional art forms, these emerging digital art forms are intensively interactive and thereby encourage the creativity of their audience. By allowing the artistic product itself to be manipulated, digital artists facilitate new ways of ‘reading’ art. It is tempting then to offer the internet up as something of a creative utopia – an Aladdin’s Cave – a place where creativity, in all its manifestations, can be transmitted to the masses. However, in the final chapter of her book The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace, Margaret Wertheim discusses the notion of a ‘cyber-utopia’ and asks “Who is this cyber-utopia really going to be for?” (Wertheim 295). She goes on to point out that not only do the majority of the world’s inhabitants not have access to the internet, but that out of those who do, many are discriminated against in the virtual world because of their gender, their sexuality, their skin colour or their ethnicity. (Of course, this does not necessarily make online space any less democratic than traditional technologies such as print forms). More recently, Lawrence Lessig has taken Wertheim’s questioning of cyber-utopia to its logical dystopian antithesis in his book Free Culture. Here, Lessig agues that the internet has had a direct impact on the way that culture is made. Specifically, the control that major media conglomerates and governments have over the internet has meant that “the ordinary ways in which individuals create and share culture fall within the reach of the regulation of the law, which has expanded to draw within its control a vast amount of culture and creativity that it never reached before” (Lessig 8). Have we therefore clicked open a Pandora’s Box through our incessant attempts to get wired? All technologies are open to abuse. Cyberspace is neither Aladdin’s Cave nor Pandora’s Box but simply a work in progress. And it is on this basis that we are currently creating an online Creativity Resource Portal. This portal does not attempt to resolve immediately the many debates over the nature and transmission of creativity, nor does it set out to completely resolve the quandaries raised by creativity’s cyber manifestations. Instead, it aims, at least initially, to disseminate a broad range of knowledge about creativity – thus encouraging inter-fertilization across disciplines and practices – and also to act as a catalyst for currently unrecognized ways of creating and expressing creativity in the online world. That being said, we hope that future refined manifestations of the site will possess the characteristics of a ‘laboratory’, in which the serious issues of creative freedom and control outlined in this paper – issues of transmission in the broadest sense – might be more directly engaged with. It is through this direct virtual engagement that we hope to reach conclusions capable of extending outwards to the wider, global online environment. This might happen via experiments with new types of non-hierarchical site structures, or with the level of control given to visitors over what happens in the site. But can any structures resist the exercise of power? Can egalitarianism (cyber or otherwise) ever fully eschew borders and margins? These are the questions that challenge and excite us as managers of the CRP. References Benjamin, Walter. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” In Illuminations. London: Fontana, 1992. Baudrillard, Jean. The Ecstasy of Communication. New York: Semiotext(e), 1988. Bohn, David. On Creativity. London: Routledge, 1998. Culross, Rita R. “Individual and Contextual Variables among Creative Scientists: The New Work Paradigm.” Roeper Review 26.3 (2004): 126-27. Dossey, Larry. “Creativity: On Intelligence, Insight, and the Cosmic Soup.” Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine [NLM – MEDLINE] 6.1 (2000): 12-17, 108-117. Forbes, Benjamin J., and Donald R. Domm. “Creativity and Productivity: Resolving the Conflict.” S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal 69.2 (2004): 4-11. Guilford, J. P. Intelligence, Creativity, and Their Educational Implications. San Diego: Robert R. Knapp, 1968. Kirklin, Deborah, and Richard Meakin. “Editorial: Medical Students and Arts and Humanities Research: Fostering Creativity, Inquisitiveness, and Lateral Thinking.” Journal of Medical Ethics 29.2 (2003): 103. Lessig, Lawrence. Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. New York: The Penguin Press, 2004. Madden, Christopher. “Creativity and Arts Policy.” Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 34.2 (2004): 133-139. Mauzy, Jeff, and Richard Harriman. Creativity, Inc.: Building an Inventive Organisation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2003. Meites, E., S. Bein, and A. Shafer. “Researching Medicine in Context: The Arts and Humanities Medical Scholars Program.” Journal of Medical Ethics: Medical Humanities 29 (2003): 104-108. Rees, Colin. “Celebrate Creativity.” Nursing Standard 19.14-16 (2004): 20-21. Robinson, Alan G., and Sam Stern. Corporate Creativity: How Innovation and Improvement Actually Happen. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1998. Sataloff, Robert Thayer. “Interdisciplinary Opportunities for Creativity in Medicine.” Ear, Nose & Throat Journal 77.7 (1998): 530-533. Sawyer, Keith R. “Creative Teaching: Collaborative Discussion as Disciplined Improvisation.” Educational Researcher 33.2 (2004): 12-20. Sternberg, Robert J., and Wendy M. Williams. How to Develop Student Creativity. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1996. Wertheim, Margaret. The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace: A History of Space from Dante to the Internet. Sydney: Doubleday, 1999. Wilks, Susan. Critical and Creative Thinking: Strategies for Classroom Inquiry. Armadale: Eleanor Curtain Publishing, 1995. Citation reference for this article MLA Style Isakhan, Ben, Jason Nelson, and Patrick West. "creativity.com: Aladdin’s Cave or Pandora’s Box?." M/C Journal 9.1 (2006). echo date('d M. Y'); ?> <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0603/07-isakhan_nelson_west.php>. APA Style Isakhan, B., J. Nelson, and P. West. (Mar. 2006) "creativity.com: Aladdin’s Cave or Pandora’s Box?," M/C Journal, 9(1). Retrieved echo date('d M. Y'); ?> from <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0603/07-isakhan_nelson_west.php>.

The move away from modern dance and ballet to jazz dance as the prominent movement lexicon employed on Broadway is explored. I examine Katherine Dunham and Jack Cole’s influence on a generation of choreographers and Bob Fosse’s fusion of the dominant paradigms established by de Mille and Robbins. I give special attention to Fosse’s choreographic influences, including his early exposure to nightclubs and strip joints, comic/eccentric dancer Joe Frisco, Fred Astaire, and Jack Cole. Beginning with his work in The Pajama Game (1954) under the mentorship of Robbins and examining selected works from Damn Yankees (1955) and Sweet Charity (1966), I study Fosse’s choreographic development. My close reading of the musical number “Big Spender” reveals Fosse’s dramaturgical process. I examine the number in relation to the 1960s sexual revolution; representations of the female dancing body in both commercial theater and concert venues; and in relation to de Mille’s “Postcard Girls” from her Oklahoma! dream ballet, “Laurey Makes Up Her Mind.” I also consider Fosse’s post-Sweet Charity objectification of the female body; his late career disregard for the precepts of time and place in relation to character, and his formulation of a distinctly identifiable movement lexicon—the “Fosse Style.” The chapter closes with three more influential director-choreographers: Gower Champion, with his innovative cinematic approach to stage musicals and his standard use of showbiz dance lexicons undisturbed by modernist methods; Michael Bennett, a strict proponent of Robbins methods and the inheritor of the Robbins’ mantle; and Donald McKayle, one of the only African American director-choreographers working in the late twentieth-century Broadway arena.