Dear Mr. Watterson • Hacker News Board

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#31

Post by T-hawk » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 3:41 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #14

danso wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing so little about him (I think this documentary claims to have the first audio recording of him in 10 years), it's hard to know how he's viewed the Web age...it's possible that he, being someone who grew up and was inspired by Peanuts in newspapers, still believes that is the prime medium (that, and books), and may not feel compelled to produce for the web, especially if his success so far has allowed him to li…

I'm still confused how the litany of "Calvin peeing on X" stickers have been allowed to happen. It's clearly Calvin, and not some derivative. It clearly isn't parody or satire (of the work itself, or otherwise protected). And there are clearly financial beneficiaries of the stickers. As a long-time lover of C&H, it simply confounds me.

Well, there's no central source or single manufacturer to shut down. Pretty much anybody with a printer can make them. The most likely explanation is Watterson knows trying to challenge them would be futile and a waste of his time.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#32

Post by Roboprog » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 3:49 PM UTC

Thank God for a respite from the endless stories of the empire that have been on HN lately. I have very fond memories of Calvin & Hobbes, as well as Bloom County, and was sad to see those strips shut down in the 90s. I guess it's good for both artists that they quit before things got too tired, though.

Spaceman Spiff forever!

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#33

Post by Roboprog » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 3:49 PM UTC

Roboprog wrote: post #32

Thank God for a respite from the endless stories of the empire that have been on HN lately. I have very fond memories of Calvin & Hobbes, as well as Bloom County, and was sad to see those strips shut down in the 90s. I guess it's good for both artists that they quit before things got too tired, though. Spaceman Spiff forever!

Oh, and can I get an "enterprise" version of the Transmogrifier? I'm gonna need that.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#34

Post by fusiongyro » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 4:03 PM UTC

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #27

fusiongyro wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He never said it wouldn't, either, and our experience with creative people who work in the public eye suggests that this is anomalous. I get that he's not, like, accountable to us, but our expectations were not unreasonable and neither is our disappointment. Of course if you have a gift, you can decide to selfishly guard it instead of sharing it, even after sharing it for so long. Doing so kind of makes you an asshol…

This comment reminds me of the Simpson's Treehouse of Horror episode where an omnipotent Bart is forcing Crusty to perform 24 hours a day. He made people happy for a decade (and longer with reruns and memories) and you've decided he's an asshole for not doing it for longer. I think that's harsh - ultimately you're saying you want him to do work he isn't happy with and causes him stress for your entertainment.

Your version of me is detestable, but it isn't what I'm really saying. I think you should be able to appreciate the nuances of my point. When a person in a particular line of work says they're going to work on different projects, you interpret that differently than if they say they're going to retire. If someone is not retiring but simply choosing not to exercise their talents, they're being selfish. I am not saying he's an asshole for not doing C&H anymore. I'm saying he's a hypocrite. That's fine, we all are to some extent, but there's no need to promote him to sainthood or work over everything he's ever said with laser precision to exonerate it. Sure, people run out. But sometimes people just get selfish and lazy, and just as creating something great once doesn't mean you necessarily have other great things in you, it also doesn't exempt you from having to live in the world, work like the rest of us, and deal with negative opinions.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#35

Post by m0shen » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 4:05 PM UTC

I saw this at the [Wisconsin Film Festival this year](http://wff.to/10SMEZh). It was very well done, with a fair amount of detail of Watterson's early work, inspirations and philosophy. His peers in the cartooning world, fans and critics speak of what he created with irreverence that seems mostly reserved for the great painters of the past century. Simply: Watterson created art that has inspired a generation.

As mentioned in some other comments, die-hard fans will probably not find any new information here, but I would say see it anyway. Even people who haven't even heard of Calvin & Hobbes, and casual readers should find it insightful and entertaining.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#36

Post by icebraining » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 4:08 PM UTC

RodericDay wrote: post #13

I love Calvin & Hobbes but I dislike how casually it's touted as the best comic strip of all time. It's pretty unfair given that most people haven't really exhausted the genre. I think (Mafalda)[ http://hoodedutilitarian.com/2010/07/dwyck-the-dreams-of-chi... ] is at least just as good.

C&H has a special place in my childhood, but I agree that in terms of quality, Mafalda is just as good, or better.

That said, it's a strongly political strip, which no doubt alienates some people, and of course, it requires a good translation for anyone who can't read Spanish.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#37

Post by alanctgardner2 » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 4:17 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #14

danso wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing so little about him (I think this documentary claims to have the first audio recording of him in 10 years), it's hard to know how he's viewed the Web age...it's possible that he, being someone who grew up and was inspired by Peanuts in newspapers, still believes that is the prime medium (that, and books), and may not feel compelled to produce for the web, especially if his success so far has allowed him to li…

I'm still confused how the litany of "Calvin peeing on X" stickers have been allowed to happen. It's clearly Calvin, and not some derivative. It clearly isn't parody or satire (of the work itself, or otherwise protected). And there are clearly financial beneficiaries of the stickers. As a long-time lover of C&H, it simply confounds me.

Watterson writes about this in one of the bigger compilation books (one like The Days Are Just Packed): infringers are too numerous for him to track down, and he was loathe to hire on assistants just to hire IP. I couldn't find that source, but I did find him talking at length about why there's almost no officially licensed merchandise:

http://iheartpicturebooks.blogspot.ca/2010/04/bill-watterson...

I think if he had gone down the official licensing road, someone else would have taken care of infringers for him. As it is, he wanted to do what he loved and not worry about that aspect of the business.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#38

Post by techtalsky » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 4:24 PM UTC

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #20

fusiongyro wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody who liked Garfield as a kid has an object lesson in exactly what he was trying to avoid. At the same time, I think the OP's point is that the "trying something else" never seems to have materialized.

Interestingly Jim Davis stopped doing Garfield ages ago - he just had a team of people doing it on his behalf so he could keep making the money... Obviously it diminished any legacy Garfield has had but he's still got to go and do what he wanted (Orson's Farm). But it's not clear that Waterson's something else would ever be commercial or public - just that he was going to go and do something that wasn't Calvin and Ho…

I wonder how he managed to be "financially secure for life" without any merchandising. Just from book sales and syndication money? That seems amazing.

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#39

Post by scott_karana » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 5:10 PM UTC

techtalsky wrote: post #38

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly Jim Davis stopped doing Garfield ages ago - he just had a team of people doing it on his behalf so he could keep making the money... Obviously it diminished any legacy Garfield has had but he's still got to go and do what he wanted (Orson's Farm). But it's not clear that Waterson's something else would ever be commercial or public - just that he was going to go and do something that wasn't Calvin and Ho…

I wonder how he managed to be "financially secure for life" without any merchandising. Just from book sales and syndication money? That seems amazing.

If he lives as modestly as I suspect, he may be able to easily live off the growth of investments on one or two million dollars. :)

Re: Dear Mr. Watterson

#40

Post by breadbox » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 5:14 PM UTC

fusiongyro wrote: post #16

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The page you link to gives the reason from an interview he did in 2010: "This isn't as hard to understand as people try to make it. By the end of ten years, I'd said pretty much everything I had come there to say. It's always better to leave the party early. If I had rolled along with the strip's popularity and repeated myself for another five, ten, or twenty years, the people now "grieving" for Calvin and Hobbes wou…

Anybody who liked Garfield as a kid has an object lesson in exactly what he was trying to avoid. At the same time, I think the OP's point is that the "trying something else" never seems to have materialized.

It is generally believed that Watterson has been painting in his retirement. The fact that he hasn't tried to make a splash by selling his art should come as a surprise to exactly nobody.