Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Does anyone think that Calvin's parents' criticism of his snowman-building is a bit ''too'' critical? If I was Calvin's father, and I saw my son making the enormous snow-monster devouring snowmen (you know the one), I certainly wouldn't think to myself, "The schools don't assign enough homework." I'd be thinking about the possible moneymaking opportunities involved with having a natural-born snow sculptor for a son. Yes, I know things like that were more or less Watterson's way of criticizing social prejudices of art forms (or something like that), but this sort of thing needs to be brought up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 103 (click to see context) from:
to:
** [[ComplainingAboutShowsYouDontWatch Calvin is bad at math.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Adding something
Added DiffLines:
*I know it's a small point, but one strip that has always bugged me is the one where Calvin and Hobbes are playing Scrabble, where the conversation goes
Calvin: Ha! I've got a great word and it's on a "Double word score" box!
Hobbes: "ZQFMGB" isn't a word! It doesn't even have a vowel!
Calvin: It is so a word! It's a worm found in New Guinea! Everyone knows that!
Hobbes: I'm looking it up.
Calvin: You do, and I'll look up that 12-letter word you played with all the Xs and Js!
Hobbes: What's your score for ZQFMGB?
Calvin: 957.
He got an odd number of points for playing a word on a "Double Word Score" box. That doesn't make sense.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Hobbes is a stuffed animal.
Added DiffLines:
****I've actually done that tied up in a chair thing to myself before. You just tie the knots and then sit down.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**From Calvin's perspective Hobbes isn't an Imaginary Friend, he's a real person with his own unique personality. From that perspective it's completely logical that Hobbes would be at odds with Calvin's views and behavior, and since Hobbes is manifested as a tiger it is also logical that he display these disagreements in a violent/aggressive fashion since Hobbes constantly displays legitimate tiger instincts (as opposed to his made-up ones, such as good math skills that is to say).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 89 (click to see context) from:
to:
** RuleOfFunny. RunningGag.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
***** Yes, but by failing to make any official merchandise, it makes it much, much harder to successfully bring legal action to anyone making un-official merchandise, since one of the four main tenants used to figure out if something is free-speech, or copyright infringement is how it affects the revenue of the accuser, so if, like Waterston, you don't have any official merchandise that is being passed up in favor of the unofficial stuff, it's a lot harder to prove your being harmed by it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** I don't doubt it. It's his creation to do with as he pleases. That doesn't change the fact that he was incredibly naive in the way he handled it, though. Also, consider: When's the last time you saw bootleg Garfield merchandise? I'm sure it must exist, but for the most part people don't bother because they can get perfectly legal stuff for the same price, ''and'' it's higher quality.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** To be fair, even if he did approve merchandising, there would still be a healthy market in bootleg/blackmarket Calvin goods that he would have no control over. You don't have to agree with his reasons, but you do have to accept that it's his right to limit the media his creations appear in.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 85 (click to see context) from:
to:
* The whole "character-building" thing Calvin's dad seems to be pushing onto the poor kid. Hell, he even ruined it at one point when Calvin was freezing in the house and complained that they should raise the heat a little bit. His dad gives perfectly good reasons on why they shouldn't (heating bills, etc), and Calvin seems to accept that...and then dad says "And being cold builds character." WHAT THE FUCK.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 83 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** I do read it, and I still think he's an idiot. Again, he didn't prevent anyone from having their merchandise; all he did was prevent himself from being able to control any of it. And that corrupted his vision ''WAY'' worse than any legal merchandising ever could.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 82 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Bill Watterson liked doing everything himself, and to him, that was control, illegal T-shirts be damned. The fans weren't really important to him. Maybe he was an idealist in that he wanted a world where everyone would be satisfied with a single newspaper strip each day, but as the artist, it's his choice what to do with his work. Maybe it's not what our consumerist society wants, but if you read Calvin and Hobbes, you'll know his opinions on consumerism all too well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80 (click to see context) from:
** Armchair psychology time: I don't think Hobbes is an imaginary friend in the strictest sense. My read is that he's supposed to be the ego/superego to Calvin's id, except that rather than exercise any real restraint on Calvin's destructive (and self-destructive) impulses, he merely comments passively on them. Of course that does nothing to explain why Hobbes is constantly beating the holy bejeezus out of Calvin by pouncing on him...
to:
** Armchair (okay, swivel chair) psychology time: I don't think Hobbes is an imaginary friend in the strictest sense. My read is that he's supposed to be the ego/superego to Calvin's id, except that rather than exercise any real restraint on Calvin's destructive (and self-destructive) impulses, he merely comments passively on them. Of course that does nothing to explain why Hobbes is constantly beating the holy bejeezus out of Calvin by pouncing on him...
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
***** You're missing the above Troper's point. He/she isn't arguing that Watterson should work for free, just that he seems to only care about the evils of merchandising when it gives him a chance to feel self-righteous about doing so. Cut him/her some slack.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 79 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Armchair psychology time: I don't think Hobbes is an imaginary friend in the strictest sense. My read is that he's supposed to be the ego/superego to Calvin's id, except that rather than exercise any real restraint on Calvin's destructive (and self-destructive) impulses, he merely comments passively on them. Of course that does nothing to explain why Hobbes is constantly beating the holy bejeezus out of Calvin by pouncing on him...
* Sort of building on the IJBM a few entries up: ''Calvin and Hobbes'' is a great strip, there's no denying that. It bothers me, though, how far its fans are willing to go to put it (and by extension, Bill Watterson) on a pedestal when he's done very little to deserve it. For instance, Watterson, for all his talent as a cartoonist, is an idiot when it comes to business acumen. Think about it: He fought tooth and nail to keep his characters from being licensed for merchandising purposes. That's all well and good, and very idealistic and all that, but it's also ridiculously naive; rather than preventing C&H merchandise from existing, all he did was prevent himself from having any artistic control over it. I'm not convinced that those stupid "Calvin pissing on logos" decals would exist at all had Watterson just agreed to let the syndicate market his characters, but insisted on maintaining final veto on whatever they came up with to sell, much like George Lucas did with Star Wars. (I'm aware that the situations were slightly different, but the precedent was there nonetheless.) Frankly, if he didn't want to deal with the issue of licensing his characters, he got into the wrong business. But what really bugs me is that, time and again, Watterson has shown next to no respect for his fans; in addition to the abovementioned refusal to market his characters--which is, incidentally, what his ''fans'' wanted in the first place--he's refused most interviews even to this day. This Troper once sent him a fan letter as a kid, and the response was something along the lines of "I can't answer you because I'm busy with all these awesome projects that you're absolutely gonna love." That was something like twenty years ago, and This Troper is still wondering what happened to those "projects." Bill Watterson may be talented, but he's not as great as everyone seems to think he is.
* Sort of building on the IJBM a few entries up: ''Calvin and Hobbes'' is a great strip, there's no denying that. It bothers me, though, how far its fans are willing to go to put it (and by extension, Bill Watterson) on a pedestal when he's done very little to deserve it. For instance, Watterson, for all his talent as a cartoonist, is an idiot when it comes to business acumen. Think about it: He fought tooth and nail to keep his characters from being licensed for merchandising purposes. That's all well and good, and very idealistic and all that, but it's also ridiculously naive; rather than preventing C&H merchandise from existing, all he did was prevent himself from having any artistic control over it. I'm not convinced that those stupid "Calvin pissing on logos" decals would exist at all had Watterson just agreed to let the syndicate market his characters, but insisted on maintaining final veto on whatever they came up with to sell, much like George Lucas did with Star Wars. (I'm aware that the situations were slightly different, but the precedent was there nonetheless.) Frankly, if he didn't want to deal with the issue of licensing his characters, he got into the wrong business. But what really bugs me is that, time and again, Watterson has shown next to no respect for his fans; in addition to the abovementioned refusal to market his characters--which is, incidentally, what his ''fans'' wanted in the first place--he's refused most interviews even to this day. This Troper once sent him a fan letter as a kid, and the response was something along the lines of "I can't answer you because I'm busy with all these awesome projects that you're absolutely gonna love." That was something like twenty years ago, and This Troper is still wondering what happened to those "projects." Bill Watterson may be talented, but he's not as great as everyone seems to think he is.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Sorry if I corrected the spelling without your permission.
Changed line(s) 68 (click to see context) from:
***** There's a difference between wanting to get paid for your work and releasing a bunch of cheap merchandized crap. Just because you never pay for anything doesn't mean its hypocrytical for someone to want you to pay for it. You're obviously convinced that the internet represents a glorious future of no copyright and artistic integrity, but just like everyone else who talks about this, you never think about the creator themselves, just the consumer (yourself) and how much of an injustice it is that they should ever have to pay for something. Just because someone isn't poor doesn't mean that they don't need or deserve money.
to:
***** There's a difference between wanting to get paid for your work and releasing a bunch of cheap merchandized crap. Just because you never pay for anything doesn't mean its hypocrytical hypocritical for someone to want you to pay for it. You're obviously convinced that the internet represents a glorious future of no copyright and artistic integrity, but just like everyone else who talks about this, you never think about the creator themselves, just the consumer (yourself) and how much of an injustice it is that they should ever have to pay for something. Just because someone isn't poor doesn't mean that they don't need or deserve money.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Jim Davis is in a class by himself in many ways. He's barely picked up a pencil in decades; the mountains of Garfield stuff is turned out by legions of cartoon drudges. JD is an executive cartoonist... and respect should be saved for those who pick up the pen every day to turn out their work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Wondered why Hobbes is more an imaginary ennemy than a friend
Changed line(s) 76 (click to see context) from:
to:
* This troper, while enjoying Calvin & Hobbes immensely, has always been bugged by one detail: While normal kids have imaginary friends, Hobbes almost qualify as an imaginary ennemy. I mean, half the times, he just bugs Calvin, bullies him, makes fun of him, etc. What's the point of having an imaginary friend if you imagine him to treat you barely better than everybody else does?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Bill Watterson lived in the US and wrote for an American audience, and was talking about the American DarkAge. The comics of, say, Europe were kind of irrelevant to his subject.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 74 (click to see context) from:
to:
** They're both named "Dear."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
** Because Calvin doesn't think things through.
to:
** [[FridgeBrilliance Because Calvin doesn't think things through.through]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added line(s) 8 (click to see context) :
*** The above poster really needs to see the post that's above him....
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
** Maybe Watterson has a personal vendetta with Alan Moore? Because that deffinately seems like a shot at Watchmen
to:
** Maybe Watterson has a personal vendetta with Alan Moore? Because that deffinately definitely seems like a shot at Watchmen
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
***** There's a difference between wanting to get paid for your work and releasing a bunch of cheap merchandized crap. Just because you never pay for anything doesn't mean its hypocrytical for someone to want you to pay for it. You're obviously convinced that the internet represents a glorious future of no copyright and artistic integrity, but just like everyone else who talks about this, you never think about the creator themselves, just the consumer (yourself) and how much of an injustice it is that they should ever have to pay for something. Just because someone isn't poor doesn't mean that they don't need or deserve money.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
***RobAndElliot referenced this to great effect:
--->They take a fictional character known and loved by millions worldwide, and then they draw Calvin praying to him.
--->They take a fictional character known and loved by millions worldwide, and then they draw Calvin praying to him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 68 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Tom and Melanie.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Since Calvin is able to see, hear, and interact with Hobbes, then he would have Schizophrenia as well as Dissociative Identity Disorder, assuming that there is something wrong with him psychologically, which I don't like to think there is. On the bruises being his way of hiding his being bullied by Moe, it may be that I just plain don't want to believe it, but I don't think it's sound. Calvin's scenes in school never depict him with bruises, and he seems to be submissive to Moe, going at great lengths to avoid being hit. He also seems to be rather open with his mom regarding his problems with Moe, since when Moe is extorting Calvin for money, his mother knows. There's also the strips where he hides behind the door, tries to get Susie to act as bait, and even goes so far as to CUT UP HIS FATHER'S BROOM in order to make a decoy. To go to such great lengths just to preserve a flimsy lie doesn't seem realistic, even for a boy as imaginative as Calvin. Besides, I never thought his encounters with Hobbes left him terribly beat up at all; it always seemed to me he was just dirty ("stepped on a land mine" could be interpreted as being incredibly dirty) from rolling in the mud, with a few scratches, scrapes, or bruises from twigs or rocks he may have bumped into, all this occurring before his mother noticed he was home. I don't find it hard to believe that Calvin's first action upon coming home would be to grab Hobbes and then go play.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 66 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Brad and Janet.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**It's especially weird that, 30 pages into the future, he says, "...It's not the medium, but the quality of perception and expression, that determines the significance of art."
