Lynn’s remarks about Schulz don’t seem to be new, but the conversation she recounts with Watterson, about his not being able to take C&H beyond the main characters, was interesting and some of it was new to me. She brings Watterson up after saying that Schulz needed all of his many characters to express himself wholly and that would explain why he was able to continue the strip for so long – he needed to.
C. Hart
Right. Calvin and Hobbes was not about the parents, or Susie, or Moe. It was about Calvin and Hobbes!
There’s an early story where Calvin’s uncle comes to visit. Watterson later admitted this story was a mistake because it focused on the parents and didn’t bring out anything new in Calvin.
I admire Watterson for ending the strip after 10 years. We’d probably complain about how stale it is if it were around today.
Mike Cope
“We?d probably complain about how stale it is if it were around today.”
… And yet, look how many of us enjoy frequently revisiting C&H, Peanuts, and so many others.
C. Hart
Oh, I wasn’t clear.
When I said, “if it were around today”, I meant if new material was being drawn.
I don’t want to change the topic or anything. We should all be talking about Charles Schulz’s masterpiece!
b.j. Dewey
Actually, Schulz not only needed all of his characters to express himself wholly, he was also capable of further developing his main characters, especially Snoopy as the Red Baron, Lucy as the “psychiatrist,” etc. There seemed to be no limit to how well he understood his characters and could mine their depths. And this was probably because they were parts of himself.
Mark McComas
There is an old saying in Journalism: When you have written everything in your notes, quit. Bill Waterson is a brave man, cutting off a huge income for the sake of the integrity of his characters. There are several daily strips that need to take a cue from him. They have gone to seed. They are dead, they just haven’t fallen down yet.
Comments 6
Comments are closed.