An Interview with Bill Watterson (1987)

Post by walterbell » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 7:10 PM UTC

khazhoux wrote: post #16

vunderba wrote: post #6

Side note, but every time I DON'T see a Hobbes plushy, a Calvin bauble head, the Calvin and Hobbes TV series, etc. I'm so thankful that Watterson grimly held onto the merchandising rights of his characters. He maintained such a high standard for his comic right unto the end. Not everything in this world needs to be commoditized to death. "But how will new generations learn about Calvin and Hobbes without Calvin and H…

Whenever the topic of copyright comes up on HN, the prevailing view in comments section is that copyrights should be relatively short and cultural artifacts should be available to everyone to use as they please. So I find it interesting ("interesting") how people seem to universally appreciate that Calvin & Hobbes are protected from any 3rd-party use, meanwhile they universally revile Disney for not allowing people t…

Post by khazhoux » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 7:14 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #31

khazhoux wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever the topic of copyright comes up on HN, the prevailing view in comments section is that copyrights should be relatively short and cultural artifacts should be available to everyone to use as they please. So I find it interesting ("interesting") how people seem to universally appreciate that Calvin & Hobbes are protected from any 3rd-party use, meanwhile they universally revile Disney for not allowing people t…

A living artist exercising creative control is different from an immortal corporation repeatedly lobbying governments to extend copyright beyond an artist's lifetime.

Post by Miraste » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 7:15 PM UTC

psunavy03 wrote: post #27

Miraste wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have immense respect for Watterson. He's the only artist I can think of to achieve that level of fame and success and not sell out. Selling out is barely even a concept any more because it's simply assumed, and Watterson is still out there in a cabin in the woods, communicating only by mail and refusing every corporate offer that comes his way.

I respect his decision, but for many people "selling out" is actually code for "financial security and stability for themselves and their families," which is not nothing and not necessarily worth scoffing at.

Post by hinkley » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 7:26 PM UTC

khazhoux wrote: post #16

vunderba wrote: post #6

Side note, but every time I DON'T see a Hobbes plushy, a Calvin bauble head, the Calvin and Hobbes TV series, etc. I'm so thankful that Watterson grimly held onto the merchandising rights of his characters. He maintained such a high standard for his comic right unto the end. Not everything in this world needs to be commoditized to death. "But how will new generations learn about Calvin and Hobbes without Calvin and H…

Whenever the topic of copyright comes up on HN, the prevailing view in comments section is that copyrights should be relatively short and cultural artifacts should be available to everyone to use as they please. So I find it interesting ("interesting") how people seem to universally appreciate that Calvin & Hobbes are protected from any 3rd-party use, meanwhile they universally revile Disney for not allowing people t…

Post by walterbell » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 7:30 PM UTC

khazhoux wrote: post #33

walterbell wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A living artist exercising creative control is different from an immortal corporation repeatedly lobbying governments to extend copyright beyond an artist's lifetime.

It's disingenuous to suggest people are mainly interested in Watterson's ability to control the profits of C&H during his lifetime. No, it's because we cherish C&H's purity and are protective of it. I claim it's a purely emotional thing.