UY 128 is finally finished!

MikeM · Post by **MikeM** » Tue May 25, 2010 7:31 -0700

I spoiled the last panel for Shaxper at the Motor City Comic Con Dojo dinner. (sorry again)

MikeM

Texcap · Post by **Texcap** » Thu May 27, 2010 8:54 -0700

Y'know, a couple of months ago I decided that I'd try to save some time and money each month by simply waiting for the Usagi trades (as I've done with 99% of the books I pick up) but I gotta say, that's awful tough to actually do in Usagi's case.

I really missed the monthly Usagi adventures, the cover art (front and back), the letter page and other goodies waaaay too much, and so -- thankfully -- I'm back to picking up both the single issues and the trade, and have since gone back and ordered those few issues I had missed. Whew!

Anyhow, my thanks to Stan for making it a book that can't be missed (each month) and really looking forward to reading issue UY #128!

MikeM · Post by **MikeM** » Thu May 27, 2010 8:56 -0700

Texcap, I did the same thing a few years ago. Lasted about 9 months before I broke and went and bought all the back issues. Now I get the trades AND the individual issues!

And I love it!

MikeM

Texcap · Post by **Texcap** » Fri May 28, 2010 17:49 -0700

MikeM wrote:Texcap, I did the same thing a few years ago. Lasted about 9 months before I broke and went and bought all the back issues. Now I get the trades AND the individual issues!

And I love it!

Ha, well then that makes two of us.

Just read issues #125-126 and it would have been a shame not only to have had to wait month after month for them to be collected but I would have missed those large panels, the inside cover art, insight into the story in the letters page, the letters themselves and the editor's notes so -- yea -- singles and the trades are definitely the only way to go.

Stan Sakai · Post by **Stan Sakai** » Mon May 31, 2010 6:51 -0700

One thing I did change, which I questioned if I should or not up to the time I sent the art in, was the use of the word "sweets." Usagi gave the boy some candies which were referred to as sweets. It was originally supposed to be "wagashi", which are a specific type of sweets and are drawn in the panel (even though the word might not have been coined until much later). This would have given me an excuse to do a short explanation of wagashi in a story notes section.

However, I did not want to cause any confusion when the monster would say "wagashi" as he attacked the boy. I did not want the reader to go, "Huh? What is this? Oh yeah, it was mentioned earlier." It would break the flow for the reader. So I used the easier "sweets." I still question the change.

If you want to know more about wagashi, follow this link:

http://www.kitchoan.com/E/wagashi.html

shaxper · Post by **shaxper** » Mon May 31, 2010 15:52 -0700

MikeM wrote:I spoiled the last panel for Shaxper at the Motor City Comic Con Dojo dinner. (sorry again)

MikeM

No worries. I'll let you live this time

Honestly, I fully intended to read it before MCCC, realizing that just such a thing was likely to happen, but my wife and I read them together, and I couldn't get her to find the time to read it with me.

Stan, I fully understand your sense of regret over the change, but the monster demanding "Sweets!" was much more adorable

Post by **Mayhem** » Mon May 31, 2010 19:18 -0700

"Sweets" is also curiously British friendly... it's what we tend to label "candy" over here...

Thomas Froehling · Mon May 31, 2010 21:53 -0700

I can understand your problem with that, I think. Although it is correct to translate "wagashi" with "sweets" and although it might have been historically inaccurate to introduce the term "wagashi" in that period of time, a very good opportunity to give readers a glimpse of Japanese culture is lost....
Or so it would seem; maybe that piece of information could be added to the future TPB/HC collecting this issue as a story note, along with a short explanation for the change.
You know, I enjoy reading the story notes almost as much as reading the actual stories; it adds a deeper level of understanding.

Stan Sakai wrote:

However, I did not want to cause any confusion when the monster would say "wagashi" as he attacked the boy. I did not want the reader to go, "Huh? What is this? Oh yeah, it was mentioned earlier." It would break the flow for the reader. So I used the easier "sweets." I still question the change.

This would have given me an excuse to do a short explanation of wagashi in a story notes section.

Edited by Thomas