Welcome to Unpacking Peanuts. The podcast for three cartoonists, take an in-depth look at the greatest comic strip of all time, Peanuts by Charles M. Schulz.
Hey everybody, welcome back to the show. It's Unpacking Peanuts, and this is our season finale for 1990 to 1994, our penultimate season of the original mission of this podcast. I will be your host for this proceedings. My name is Jimmy Gownley. I am also a cartoonist, do things like Amelia Rule, Seven Good Reasons Not to Grow Up, The Dumbest Idea Ever, and you can find my new comics and a different podcast even, over there on gvillcomics.substack.com. You can read it all for free.
Join me, as always, are my pal's co-hosts and fellow cartoonists. He's a playwright and a composer both for the band Complicated People, as well as for this very podcast. He's the original editor for Amelia Rules, the co-creator of the original comic book Price Guide, and the creator of such great strips as Strange Attractors, A Gathering of Spells and Tangled River. It's Michael Cohen.
Say hey.
And he's the executive producer and writer of Mystery Science Theater 3000, a former vice president of Archie Comics and the creator of the Instagram sensation Sweetest Beasts. It's Harold Buchholz.
Hello.
And making sure everything runs smoothly. It's our producer, Liz Sumner.
Greetings.
Well, guys, we made it to the end of the penultimate season. I like to say penultimate.
Yeah, the Radio 914 Penultimate.
The Radio 914 is the ultimate pen for your penultimate comic strips. So I thought it would be great to just sort of take stock, see what has happened over the five years we just covered. And maybe take a look at the future. And then we got it for the second half. We have a great discussion about Peanuts contemporary Calvin and Hobbes. Well, what kind of hot takes will be in that? So why don't we get started out since Harold, since you were delinquent on your homework last time?
Well, I guess that's one way of looking at it.
Would you like to would you like to present to the class last year's anger and happiness?
I feel like Peppermint Patty.
Yes. No, but you would never get a D minus.
You only get A pluses from me.
But now the rest of you guys out there, if you had your guesses of how many angry strips there are and how many happy strips there are, get them ready, hold them right there in your hot little hand because here's the moment you're going to find out if you win our, what do they win? Our esteem, right? Yes. All right.
Since we're doing our season ender, which represents what 1990? Through 1994, I went back and looked. And so I'm going to take us on a little journey of where Schulz was these five years. So back in 1990, can you remember that year?
I sure can.
The anger was quite low. 59 strips with a character showing anger. But then, if you remember, in 1991, it went through the roof, went up to 107.
I have to say, I was furious in 1991, too. So there's a lot. That makes sense.
And in 92, it dropped back down to about 87 and then kind of hovered around, kept dropping a little. It went to 79 in 1993. So what do you think? Do you think we've got another anomaly year? Or is it is it kind of still on that downgrade? He's not quite as angry as he used to be here in this later part of his career.
Yeah, I think that was an anomaly. I think he's going to go down in anger again.
You think he's going to go down? Okay.
Yeah. What do you think, Michael?
Oh, I would think it's going to stay the same.
Well, you're both kind of right. It's down 7 to 72, so about 10 percent, but still in the 70s. It seems like Schulz didn't have any wild mood swings this year. He seems to be roughly on an even keel, but boy, there was one month where there was zero anger. That's really rare to see that for either of those two. I was kind of surprised. Early in the year, the anger was kind of low, so it bounced back up.
And then in the happiness index, we started out in 1990 with 90 strips compared to the 59 that we had for anger. And then it was just kind of holding steady. It went 89, 84, 94. What's going on this year? Do you think, did you get any sense of the change of the vibe of the strip at all, or is it pretty much he's kind of on his even keel?
I think we're going to see a fairly even keel for the rest of the run.
Yeah, I think it's staying pretty steady.
Yeah, you're right. It's been up, went from 84 to 94 to 99, but it's still in the 90s. So more happiness and anger this year as it was the previous year. So that's kind of where we are with Schulz and trying to keep some little emotional index of where his characters are.
Thank you, Harold. Very, very cool. So here we are, it's five years from the end of Peanuts, and there's been a lot of changes. Starting with, in this season, the most fun one, I think, which is the development of rerun. What are you guys thinking now that we're finally just beginning to see the actual rerun personality?
I like the fact that he's going back to a little kid, because everybody else is so mature. It's nice to see some childish activity. She hasn't seen it in a long time. Last time we had a baby in the strip was, I mean, Sally.
Sally, I guess, yeah.
Early 60s. So we're talking rerun.
Well, Rerun was never even really a baby baby, was he? He was like a toddler.
Yeah, but he, I mean, we didn't see him doing anything except riding on the back of the bike, essentially.
Yeah.
Harold, what are you thinking?
Yeah, I'm, I'm enjoying rerun. He's really a new character to me as a reader because I, I saw so little of these later strips when they came out. So it's fun to kind of explore the fullness of who he is. And I'd seen some really late strips with him in it. And so I had a sense of who he was, but it's starting to round out a little bit for me. And I like him. He is his own, despite his appearance, he is his own character. He looks a lot like Linus, but he's not Linus.
But we haven't really seen him in action yet. So I'm still waiting.
He got angry this year, which I don't remember really seeing him angry before. And he was upset about about his Christmas presents and had an altercation with Snoopy Claus. So that was interesting. I'm really looking forward to that relationship with Snoopy because I know it's there and I know I enjoyed the ones I saw. So that's the thing I want to see unfold going forward.
Well, speaking of new siblings in the strip, we also have the appearance of the Snoopy brothers. Now, I have to say, this time I like them more than I've ever liked them before. And I think it's just because we get to talk about it and laugh about it and, you know, spin web spin about different ideas with them. I used to think that maybe they made Snoopy less unique. But I think when you when it's not an ongoing concern, like, Peanuts, you're just reading the new Peanuts in the newspaper.
And you realize that really we're at the end of Peanuts, or very close to the end. Doesn't bother me at all. And not only doesn't it bother me, I like it. I think Andy is a really cute character design. Obviously, I love Olaf, which is the dumbest character sign in the history of characters. What do you guys think about the expanding Snoopyverse?
I always thought it was a bad idea. There's more to come though, right?
One more to come, I believe. Maybe another.
Is there a sister?
There is a sister, Belle, yeah.
Okay. Yeah, I mean, I didn't like Spike. I mostly enjoy Olaf because Jimmy loves it so much.
Through the eyes of Jimmy.
Yeah, Andy seems very dog-like.
Yeah.
The thing that struck me about them was I was going back, looking at the Anger and Happiness Index was, I think there's only one strip where any of them are physically showing emotion. The rest of the time, they are just stoic, hanging out with each other, making comments and stuff. The one where they were together was they were all in Snoopy's hospital bed. It all hopped in. They were having a great time.
Yeah. I really do enjoy the little gang of puppies now. I think that's very fun. I wish we could get the Andy and Olaf sitting on the side of a barn strip going. That Michael discussed. I think that could be really, really good on.
You could really stretch that out to a full book.
Snoopy doesn't have much to do with them, does he? Yeah.
He doesn't really hang out and get involved. They're not joining in on the flying ace.
That I do like when they're on their own. I think in some ways I prefer that when there was Snoopy because of Snoopy's, that magical nature of Snoopy does seem to be somewhat diminished when he's around siblings. And so I kind of like it when they're just off on their own, doing their own thing.
Isn't that true of all of us?
I was just about to say that. I was just about to say that because I'm an only child, so I don't know. But is that true? That once someone who knows you that well, if your whole life is there, like all your magic tricks are gone, you just like go revert back to being just who you were when you were a kid?
Except this podcast. I don't know what happens when we get together, but it sure is special. We're not siblings, we're not siblings. No, we know each other for 35 years. There is some familiarity there.
That's true, yeah. The worst thing isn't the worst. Well, how can I put this? There's no way to avoid the fact that when we're talking about getting to the end of this, it's actually also talking about mortality, which is a bummer, and I don't want to like, you know.
Yeah, it's brought up directly.
It's brought up directly, yeah, you know.
Yeah, I mean, and I think that was, Olaf was surprised to hear that we die. He didn't know that, so he's been kind of sheltered.
Lucky Olaf. You know, I wonder more how that's going to just affect us as we read through them, you know, especially next season, because, like, you know, next season we'll have, this is the last Peppermint Patty, this is the last Woodstock.
Yeah, well, it's, I'm not, I don't know from his history at what point he realized he probably wasn't going to keep doing this for a while. So it wasn't just like the last strip and then he died.
I mean, no, no, but I, he, let's, how was, I guess it was around October, November, and he just had to stop where he was.
Yeah.
But then he got, you know, December and January, whatever it was, just seeing those strips run out. And he never made another one.
So he was able to plan a little bit? No, no, no.
He had a stroke, drawing the comic and never went back to it.
So we're going to have to deal with all this hard stuff. Try to do it without crying too much.
Well, that's coming up. Yeah. Brace yourselves.
That's what I'm frankly worried about.
Yeah. It's been a journey. It's definitely been a journey and it's going to be emotional, I'm sure, when we get there and we're 19, 20th of the way there today and that's a strange feeling, but it's also a feeling of accomplishment and looking back with a lot of warmth through where this has come that we got to do this together.
I mean, what was amazing really was the reaction. I mean, most of the cartoonists who ever lived at some point drew their last strip, and it's not really thought about, like, oh, this is the last thing Jack Kirby ever drew. I never saw anybody talk about that.
That's true.
Yeah, yeah. So in five years' time north of strips, we're going to have a lot to talk about. Well, let's talk about innovation 45 years in. This is not directly Peanuts or Schulz related, I should say, but I thought this was interesting for Christmas 1994, CBS, according to our friends at Editor and Publisher, CBS went interactive with Peanuts. We got some internet, comes into the world of peanuts. They, if you were on Prodigy, remember Prodigy?
Oh, sure. I remember Prodigy. My roommate Steve had it in college, like 91. And that was like the wildest thing.
So 94 is still really, I mean, it's just on the cusp of when a lot of people start using the internet. I think 95 is when I, my wife and I really started using it. So this is early.
I got on in spring of 94.
Wow. And you were a cutting edge kind of person to be doing that. And so Prodigy was this service you would pay for it. Did it give you your internet service or were you just using?
Oh, I don't know. It was just all magic to me, Steve. I didn't even know how to turn the computer on. I'd have to add, he's my roommate. I'm like, can you turn the computer on so I could read paper? And could you call it the Prodigy? It was before Windows 95 when everything or it wasn't a Mac, you know, which was very intuitive.
It's so amazing you think of, you know, Schulz in 1950 starting doing this and what was available to him. That, you know, he's mailing all this stuff in and things have changed in these 45 years. And so what they did is if you were a member of the Prodigy online service, you could qualify for one of 100 Peanuts themed prizes. And they were giving out mouse pads, wrist pads, Christmas ornaments. And you had to answer trivia questions in order to be eligible.
So that was an innovation that was happening at the end of this year. Peanuts is a machine right now with United Media. They're licensing all this stuff for him. And as we've said before, the vast majority of his income, you know, over 90% of it is not his comic strip. It's for the licensing of the stuffed toys and the bedspreads and the...
Yeah. Oh, yeah. I do think about 70 to 75% of it was the Snoopy Snowcone machine. I think that was where most of the dough is coming from.
Oh, the elusive Snoopy Snowcone machine. I never did have a Snoopy Snowcone.
Oh, I have one.
Oh.
Check it out.
If you don't know what we're talking about, do Google Snoopy Snowcone machine if you're a younger listener. It was a pretty neat desirable item for anybody who loved peanuts.
It is very cool. Now, I didn't get one until I was in my 20s, but I got it on Christmas.
You were in a garage sale.
That's where it came from, but someone got it for me as a present. Well, just to go back along the lines of him aging, he is definitely dealing with the tremor. I'm noticing it now, but it doesn't bother me as much as it bothered me when I was reading it in the newspapers. But it definitely changes the look at the strip. What do you guys think about the way he's handling it?
I don't know if I even noticed it. Wow. To tell you the truth, I tend to read these things pretty quick.
That they're intended to be.
Yeah.
How about you, Hal?
Well, it's interesting. When I would jump in and look at the strip, when I happened to have a Sunday newspaper, or somebody had posted something on their door at college, it's jarring because my memory is mostly of the books I grew up reading from the late 50s to the early 70s. That Peanuts is the one that's floating in the back of my mind. Then to encounter Peanuts from 1988 or 1994, just randomly, and it's so different. I saw the tremor because it wasn't there before, and it changes the art.
When you see it one time out of context, to me, it was jarring and it was sad. I remember that at this all. That's as he's struggling. But reading them and getting into the world, that goes away because you get used to it. It's a consistent style as you go through strip, after strip, after strip, and it's not a problem. I said this before, I was concerned that that would really make it hard to read.
In 1994, I thought I would have really been struggling with that day-to-day as I was reading this, I'm not. I don't know if that's going to happen a little bit later, because I know it does continue to be a challenge for him, but it really hasn't been an issue for me in terms of enjoying the strips.
One of the things I really wanted to ask Lynn Johnston, and then forgot to because I was nervous. Starstruck. Was to talk to her about the fact that she aged those characters in real time, and one audience got to experience it that way. Just like we originally got to experience Peanuts in real time, day by day, with the changes being almost invisible.
But everybody else, after that, forever, will read it a completely different way, and Lin's characters will age in a month, or will go from the super slick line of the early 50s to the shaky line of the 90s in a month. Did she ever think about the fact that she was a companion to someone's life for that period of time, and that can never happen again? No other audience will.
It's such a unique thing, I think, to have something that was serialized every single day, that was constantly present in someone's life, and you can never experience it that way again.
Yeah, it's fascinating to see art that was designed for one purpose, and as it was designed in its context, like you said, can never be experienced again. And he was creating this first and foremost for people to experience daily, and he followed rules that he had to follow, understanding that there's someone who's gonna pick this up, they're gonna pop in randomly, and yet we're reading him now in order. Now, the other way in the interim was we were reading random strips.
Now, they might have a story that's strung together, but it might have been 1958 to 1960, back to 59. They were just bouncing around in those old Fawcett Crest paperbacks, and that was a different experience as well.
Yeah, that's true. That is very true.
But we judge them based on rules that didn't exist sometimes.
While he was creating them. Yeah.
I can't say it's unfair. It's just we have to keep that in mind when someone's creating.
Well, even the other thing is the big mistakes in a creative person's life. You could ditch them if you don't want to, but if you make it one thing, I think of things like Love and Rockets, Cerebus, Bone, things that took decades and you need to read all of it. Tom Bombadil in The Lord of the Rings or whatever. Normally, people get to get rid of some stuff, but if you work on something for a decade or two or three decades, that stuff then is all collected in a complete work.
I'm thinking he didn't ever want to see those golf strips.
Right, you like to edit out things. It's funny, you know, Schulz actually had the power to say, I don't want these reprinted. But when the Phantographics books came out and it's the complete Peanuts after he passed, that goes away too. That's a really interesting point. He was selecting the ones that he thought were acceptable to bring out after the fact, and then that goes away.
How many people do you think actually will have read the entire thing? I don't know if we've missed any, but I think we've got them all. I mean, we'll have them all. Five years worth. How many artists can say that? How many artists or writers or musicians, have you heard everything they ever did? This might be it. I was thinking about that today. I could come up with some. Some are impossible. I mean, no one's read everything Kirby did. It was just too much.
But then again, there were certain artists who shined very brightly for a few years, and it's very easy. Dave Stevens, he can easily read everything he ever did.
In a weekend. That's the other thing about comics is they're so time-intensive, especially when you're doing that realistic stuff, that your output is just going to be less, just because it takes a lot of time to draw like Dave Stevens. Yeah.
Yeah.
It's interesting because we are reading books of something that was never intended to be a book, but it still is beautiful and it still works. I think this is going to be one of the things that works the best when you read it in its entirety.
Yeah. I mean, nobody seemed to ever end these comic strips.
Yeah.
What are examples of somebody who actually wrapped it up? Wrapped it up.
Yeah.
When Tater Tot went off the cliff.
Tater Tot. Suicide, of course. That's closure. Well, did you hear how they almost ended Little Orphan Annie? Okay. They said, all right, we're canceling it. This is the date. They said, no, no, please just give us another week or something. Because that Sunday ended with Annie was captive by Somali pirates or something, and the ship sank, and it was like the death of Annie. It would have ended with Annie implying that Annie died in the shipwreck, because it was a cliffhanger.
Yeah.
So they needed another week to just wrap it up, and then they did. But like, oh my God, the unthinking, unfeeling, just ended here, it doesn't matter. This character that had been around for like 90 years.
Well, how do you end an unending product? I don't like to use the word product, but you know what I mean? You've got something that was designed to just go on forever. How do you wrap it up?
Well, they weren't necessarily. I mean, but usually it's like the financial pressure was too great. I mean, I'm a big fan of Flash Gordon, the original Alex Raymond Flash Gordon, and they like somewhere like five years into the strip or more, they win and they overthrow Ming and the good guys start running the world, and Flash and his gang go back to Earth.
Are you serious? I had no idea. I haven't read much of that.
This is still Alex Raymond. I ordered that volume where they're on Earth. It's World War II. Oh, wow. There was a chapter of them helping the US kill Nazis, basically, and then they go, well, let's see what's happening back on Mongo and they fly back and the adventures continue forever. That was an ending. I don't know if he intended that.
Wow.
But we had little Abner marry Daisy Mae.
Yeah, that would have been a natural ending.
Yeah. Well, yeah.
They continued for 20 some years.
Then it went on for all these years afterward with them as a married couple. But did Terry and the Pirates, because that ended on a high. That was Milton Kniff's choice to end it, then he moved on to Steve Canyon. Did he give it a proper ending because he knew it was stopping?
There is a famous Sunday strip with Terry and he's kissing the girl, in like the middle panel. That might be the last strip. It obviously has to be a soft ending because that was continued by George Wonder or whatever. But yeah, he knew it wasn't canceled. It was so successful that he got a better contract to go create Steve Canyon. He did have the opportunity to try to end it. We should check that out.
Yes. The finale for Kniff occurred December 29th, 1946, though the strip would continue on, taken over by George Wonder. Through 1973, he had said he left with a high point in poignancy. He did get a chance to suggest a goodbye. Yeah.
I'm pretty sure it's that strip I'm thinking of. He's saying it's at an airfield and he's saying goodbye.
Yeah. They're partying and they're walking away in the snow. You see the footsteps of where she's walked away and then she turns around and runs back to Embrace.
Yes.
I think that might be the last one. That's lovely.
So Schulz was probably getting some pressure from fans to end with the football, which for some reason people thought that's good closure.
Like victory for Charlie Brown.
There is no closure in this strip.
No. Well, Lynn Johnston in that documentary, if you guys are interested in getting some, if you can't get enough of us talking, you can sign up for our Patreon. It's like five bucks a month. Then we do extra little things for you. One thing we did was we did a commentary for the PBS American Masters series. Lynn Johnston did recommend that to him, have Charlie Brown kick the football or whatever, do the final thing. But he wouldn't do it because it was tempting fate.
Yeah, it's funny. Since it's kids, there's really no way out of it because they don't control their lives. I mean, you can't do a Lord of the Rings where they go off in their separate directions and then we find out where they all died.
Yeah.
Charlie Brown had great-grandchildren when he died. There's one show that actually did. I mean, it was the best ending ever and that was the Funeral Home, what was that called? Six Feet Under. Six Feet Under, greatest finale ever. Because it basically was a show about a funeral home and it was tied in with, there was always somebody dying that week. In the finale of the season, for the whole hour, it just took every character and they showed the moment of their death. Oh, wow.
The last one was the daughter, who was a young art student when we last saw her, and she's still alive, and it was this weird science fiction-y setting. She's 110 years old or something, and the oldest person on Earth. Yeah, it's great. Some people get just die in bed, and a couple of characters got shot. That's what he should have done. Oh, well. Snoopy gets an airplane falls onto his dog.
That could be one last duel with the red baron.
Well, it is interesting when you think about what is the strip to people, and what is it about characters that never age, for the most part, and who are trying and often failing over and over again. But it's also mixed with hope. You can't conclude that without diminishing what it was, it seems like, right? This just doesn't lend itself toward conclusion, unless he had made the call that he wanted Charlie Brown to have some sort of a victory. But I don't think that was Schulz.
I don't think that was the point of where he was going. I mean, I think he considered it, and I think he cared for Charlie Brown. You could see it in that interview. But it just wasn't Schulz to do that.
Well, here's what I will say about that without... I'm worried about spoilers.
This is a comic strip.
This is like a historic moment when that last Peanuts came out. I think everybody's aware of that.
So before that, my favorite, not my favorite, but one of the things I like the best is that book Infinite Jest. I really enjoy it. And one of the things about it is that the conclusion is left up to the reader. You start with events that happen after the conclusion, and then the rest of the book leads up to just before the conclusion, but you don't see the conclusion. You have to figure out what's going on and or choose whatever it is for yourself. There's an element of that to the football.
Well, you read the last Peanuts and you want to go back and read the first one.
That's exactly right. Well, I do think there's true. Now I got it.
Now I got it. It's a big circle.
No, no.
But what I'm saying is there's ambiguity in the football strips at the end. You are able to choose your ending if you want.
In a very strange way, some of the merch around Peanuts is leaving the ending to the reader. The strip ends, but you still have your plush Snoopy. And you can do with your little Snoopy whatever you please. It's a strange thing. But yeah, the strip ends, but there's a representation of it that if you have an imagination, you can take it when you want.
And to most people out there, probably not our faithful listeners, Peanuts never end it. Right. They're waiting for the next show and the next movie.
Yeah, you're right.
And the Daily Strip is continuing to be rerun in various date ranges and all of that. And so you can still experience Peanuts as chosen. It's like watching curated reruns on MeTV or something. You know, it lives on and there's somebody there who's giving it some form of this is today's Peanuts.
Right. Speaking of MeTV, before we wrap up here, I just want to give Michael a bit of good news for the 21st century. You know, there's a lot of stuff in the 21st century that we don't enjoy as people who are aging. But you know what one great thing about it is right now on my television, I guess I just have I just have Roku. I don't even have cable, but there is a 24 hour live Dick Van Dyke channel.
All right. That's what I was hoping for.
Just plays Dick Van Dyke 24 seven. It's amazing. Takes him about four days to get through the whole five seasons.
Yeah. Then you get to watch the big finale where he quits punches mill in the nose.
Oh, they did end Dick Van Dyke though. The Alan Brady show ends and he's going to start a new show that's based. He's going to play the lead and it's based on the novel. Rob has been writing throughout the series.
Wait, wait, wait. This is true?
Yes, this is true. They really did end it.
I don't remember there being a finale.
We have to get that channel.
They did choose it, but it's very strange because that episode airs, and then I think there's one episode that comes after that, that has nothing to do with it feeling like a finale. But the actual finale is, yeah, Alan Brady starts a new show based on Rob's novel and the gang is going to write it, which is a great ending because it concludes that, but you know the gang is happy and doing their thing. It's great.
Well, listen, what we're actually going to do is take a break, and we're going to come back, and then we're going to check the mailbox, and then we're going to talk about Calvin and Hobbes. Come back and we'll do that.
Hi, everyone. We all love listening to Jimmy describe what's going on in a Peanuts trip, but comics are actually a visual medium. You can see them anytime you want at gocomics.com, or in your very own copy of the complete Peanuts available from Fana Graphics. Plus, if you sign up for our monthly newsletter, you'll know in advance which strips we're talking about each week. Learn more about the great Peanuts reread at unpackingpeanuts.com.
And we are back. Hey, so you know how Tuesday is my favorite day of the week? Well, one reason is because we get to record this podcast. The other reason though is it's the day our podcast releases. And about three or four weeks ago, our good friend William Pepper released a podcast the same day we released a podcast. So theoretically there you could spend three hours at work, blowing off work, just listening to your pals talk about Peanuts.
Well, now there's a new Peanuts podcast that's actually put out by the people over there at Peanuts Worldwide. It's called You Don't Know Peanuts. And it also releases on Tuesdays. And they talk about all different types of things in the entire Peanuts brand sphere. So they will talk about the animated Christmas special. Their new guest is the director of the Apple TV show. And they talk about various projects the Schulz organization does, like sprucing up hospitals with Peanuts art.
And so you guys should check that out. And here's what, here, I was saying, you know, good things about the 21st century. Here's a great thing about the 21st century. Theoretically, in the not too distant future, it's a podcast Charlie Brown, Unpacking Peanuts, and You Don't Know Peanuts could all release a new episode on the same day. And then you could spend almost an entire workday just listening to those podcasts and not working. So I think that's a great thing about the podcast.
Except no one's gonna have jobs.
Well, that's true, but you know, those are overrated, I find. I've had jobs, not a fan.
And You Don't Know Peanuts is hosted by Melissa Menta, who is, she's like Senior VP of Marketing and Communications for Peanuts Worldwide, so she knows.
She knows Peanuts.
About the Peanuts world. What's happening now all over the world with Peanuts?
So anyway, I just wanted to give you guys a heads up about that. It's a fun show, you gotta give it a listen. And you know, I have a dream that one day there will be 50, 60 Peanuts podcasts and we'll never have to do work again. We can just listen to people talk about Peanuts.
That's my goal.
All right. So we're going to be checking out the mailbox now, Liz. I'm hanging out here. Do we got anything?
We do. We heard from our super listener, Debbie Perry, who says in 1994 part three, you wondered how Charles Schulz did the shading in his D-Day Daily Strips. In the 1994 address to the National Cartoonist Society, Schulz gave us the answer. She's quoting, For the first time in my career, I used Kraft Tint Double Tone Shading Paper, and I called Sarah Gillespie to warn her that I'm not going to do this all the time.
I just wanted it for scenes like that, which would give it a real splashing up through the surf in one long panel.
It is duotone, that is wild.
Yeah.
I would have never thought that Schulz would have used duotone paper and peanuts. Wow, that is amazing. That is really cool to know.
Thank you, Jimmy.
Yeah, that's good in-depth intel.
Yeah, that is really cool to know. Anything else?
That's it for the mail.
All right, we got a bunch of stuff on the hotline. Good old Charles Kulak is asking us to cast the Wizard of Oz characters with Peanuts. Can we do that?
Snoopy.
All right, let's start with...
Toto.
Who is Toto?
Woodstock.
Woodstock is just...
Snoopy.
Yeah, I'd give it Woodstock.
Woodstock is one of the flying monkeys.
All of the flying monkeys are the birds.
Yeah, the birds are the flying monkeys.
Yeah, that's brilliant, okay.
But Kitey...
And Toto could be Andy too, because it's so darn adorable.
Well, okay, listen, who would be...
Lydia as.
Glinda.
Who would be Dorothy? Who would just want to go home? I could see it being Lucy as a really... It could be... Like, if you were gonna really do this, right? You were going to do like Muppet Christmas Carol. But you're gonna do this with The Wizard of Oz. You know, it could be a satirical take on it. There's all kinds of takes you could take on. So I think you could see Lucy.
She's gotta be the wicked witch.
Oh, of course. That's so stupid of me. Oh, of course.
Yeah, I can't see Lucy being bubbly and skipping down the road.
Marcy?
I mean, if it comes to mind, but she's just not a major character.
Yeah, I think it's gonna...
I would love to see Peppermint Patty because she doesn't have the confidence like these other characters who need something.
Oh, and she's got red sandals.
I'd be fascinated to see a Peppermint Patty version of... I mean, she would give her own take for sure.
That's great.
Then Marcy's gotta be one of the gang.
Well, you could have Linus be the Scarecrow because he's smart, so he would be looking for... Because the thing is, at the end, obviously, is they had the things they were looking for all along, right? So, Linus could be the Scarecrow. Who would not have a heart? Oh, Schroeder?
Schroeder.
Oh, wow. Maybe. He can be pretty cold sometimes.
This is working.
And Charlie Brown is the... Well, it's too bad. We're deep in development. We spent 40 million on this now.
Well, who's the wizard?
Well, we've got to get the lion.
Who's the wizard, yeah? Oh, yeah, he's the lion.
Cowardly. Do we have cowards? Well, we need to roll for Snoopy if Andy's going to be total.
Yeah, Charlie Brown. He's hiding behind trees when he's trying to pass out valentines and things.
Oh, my gosh. Yeah, that's really funny. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Hmm.
There aren't that many characters, frankly, except that's only the first book. There's like a million other characters.
Oh, yeah, I read it to be Lydia to the girls.
Does Sally get a role?
I thought Sally was Dorothy.
Yes. Oh, no, we were to Pepperman Patty as Dorothy. Oh. Sally could definitely. Well, Sally could be like Aunt M, who someone would have to be Aunt M. Or Marcy could be Aunt M. No, Marcy would be a good witch, could be the good witch. I don't know.
I think that would be hilarious if Sally was just an extra character. Who cares? How am I supposed to know?
Oh, yeah. That would be funny. And then he also writes, please cast Blood Meridian. No, I'm just kidding.
Untimed it.
All right. Thank you, Charles. Then we got a couple of voicemails. This is our pal Sawyer Honeycutt.
Hey, my name is Sawyer Honeycutt. I'm a huge fan. I'm currently listening to 1984, part 2. And I vaguely remember y'all mentioning a book where a bunch of artists did their own version of Peanuts strips and where Jimmy, in particular, you wrote, I think it's like a 10 page whatever in the book. And I was just wondering what was the name of that book again? Anyway, y'all be a good cheer and have a good day.
Okay. Thank you for writing Sawyer. We appreciate it. And I think I got another text from Sawyer as well. So we'll check that out. But the title of that book is Peanuts, a tribute to Charles M. Schulz. It was put out in like 2015, something like that. Yeah, 2015, because it was the 65th anniversary. So you should still be able to find copies of that around.
And that's got your story in it.
Yep, that's got my story in it.
Which is on the Obscurities page.
Yeah. So Jimmy does a great story, but you also need to read the Evan Dorkin story, which is the Lovecraft version of Peanuts.
Yeah, everybody does their own thing, and a lot of them are really, really fun. He also wants to know where I got that Linus security blanket. That was a Christmas present about 20 years ago. It was from a place called FYE for your entertainment. I don't think they, it was like a record store. I don't even think it exists anymore. But I was listening to one of our episodes to approve it before it goes out. And Harold, you asked, oh, can you shape it in different things?
And I'm like, oh yeah, I just want to be clear. I was being sarcastic. It doesn't come across that at all in the show. It sounds like it's just a blanket with a little Linus embroidered on it.
Although you could embed some wire and starch it up.
You could.
Or you could put it on a Roomba and it can stalk you.
That's a scare Lucy.
We also heard from Andrew Cadell.
Hey guys, this is Andrew Cadell Cohen, a long-time listener of the show. I just want to say that I enjoy listening to Jimmy narrate the strips, but the satisfaction of listening to Jimmy talk about the strips is amplified by Michael's piano playing in the background. I was just wondering what instruments Michael plays as well as the piano. I just started playing piano myself. I'm taking lessons and I'm just wondering what other instruments he played.
So Michael, thank you very much for the show and be a good cheer. Bye guys.
Well, I don't play piano. That's something I simulate a piano using a program. I do write the music.
But we should point out it's not automated. You're actually composing.
No, I'm writing the sheet music and it makes piano sounds. Now, I'm a guitarist by trade and I also play mandolin and dobro and banjo. When called upon.
You announced you were learning banjo playing.
Yeah, I can play it. There's no call for it though. Here in Italy, they don't know what the hell the banjo is.
He could wow him. Let's go out on the street corner.
Michael makes fun of me for having a bunch of different guitars. I mean, he's like, I don't know, I'm just happy with my guitar. What is your guitar, Michael?
It's a Martin Triple 018-1949.
Yeah, he's just happy with this little old guitar.
Well, I'll beat to hell but I'm since I'm never going to sell it, it doesn't bother me.
Who cares? That's, oh my God, it's the most beautiful thing ever. When I was a kid, all I wanted like 18-19 was to one day be able to buy a vintage guitar. But I thought, I'll never be able to afford a vintage guitar. It's impossible, they're so expensive. I didn't think that there is another way to get a vintage guitar, which is to buy a new guitar when you're young and then not die.
I bought mine for 300 bucks.
That's incredible. My gosh. You couldn't get the fret wire for 300 bucks. All right. Well, thank you, Andrew, for writing. I'm glad people are digging the music because Michael is an amazing composer. All right. That is the mailbox. If you guys want to get in touch with us, there's a couple of different ways you can do it. The first thing you could do is go to unpackingpeanuts.com. Sign up for that great Peanuts Reread and that'll get you one email a month from us.
That'll let you know what we're going to be talking about ahead of time. You can also just email us if you have something to say or question about the podcast. That's unpackingpeanuts at gmail.com. You can call us or leave a message on our voicemail or text message. It's 717-219-4162 for the good old Unpacking Peanuts hotline. I'll tell you all about the social media and stuff at the end. Okay, so that brings us to the finale.
Now, this has been requested by some people, most specifically, Super Listener Charlie Sweeney has requested we discuss Calvin and Hobbes and Peanuts. We also got a letter from one of our listeners. Liz, can you explain?
Sure. Sarah Wilson, who has been a wonderful regular listener and contributor, wrote to us and said, I recently read through the entire Calvin and Hobbes Oeuvre, which I poured over again and again, almost as much as peanuts in my youth, curious to see how it would feel after so many years, and especially after following along for nearly 45 years of peanuts with the podcast.
You asked for our thoughts on what to do after you finish the whole peanuts run, so I'm sending this along as a possible topic. Calvin and Hobbes, In Light of Peanuts. Then she goes through eight points of observations.
The first observation, Sarah writes, the gimmick quote unquote of Calvin and Hobbes is the question of Hobbes' reality. A live tiger with a distinct personality and predatory instincts, and not always in Calvin's best interests when they're alone together, but a mere stuffed toy in the presence of others. Could Hobbes have been possible before Snoopy?
No.
Well, all right, number two.
One of the big things that I have thought about on this reread is, how much of the language of Peanuts just becomes the language of comics. Yeah. And Snoopy is sui generis, if I pronounced that correctly, he's out of nowhere, just one of a kind. There was nothing like him before, and I think Hobbes owes a huge debt to Snoopy. So does Calvin, actually.
I agree with that, but somewhere in the back of my memory, inaccessible, there was some cartoon character who had an invisible friend.
Barnaby.
Barnaby.
Is it Barnaby?
Yeah, with Mr. O'Malley.
So that was a character who wasn't necessarily real.
Yeah, that's another direct inspiration, I would think. You're right.
I think that's so true. In the world of cartooning, I can't think of a creator who in the It's a Wonderful Life, If He Never Existed category, that the history of comics would be completely different. You know, what happened in comics would be completely different if Schulz hadn't existed. Because, you know, a lot of times you have somebody who's just at the right time and the right place at the right time and they're the one who did something that was inevitable.
I don't know that that's true with Peanuts. It's possible that nobody would have hit on the tone of what Schulz did.
No, I think that, especially in the 50s, I think the 50s, you know, certain things come to mind and Peanuts is definitely one of them. I think it captured the zeitgeist perfectly.
And the 60s and the 70s.
Yeah, it's crazy. Yeah, I don't know the zeitgeist of the 70s.
But yeah, that is the short answer is no. I don't think it would have existed. You can see that Watterson and so many cartoonists, certainly myself included, I don't think I would have wanted to be a cartoonist if there hadn't been Peanuts. I mean, let alone what I would have done. It's just I wouldn't have done anything, probably. That's, I think that's true for dozens and dozens and dozens of cartoonists who made it and have had their impact on the world of cartooning.
Absolutely.
But I like the idea that what Watterson could bring to the table was his pushback against ever making the stuffed toy of Hobbes. That's what he did different than Schulz, but he's an absolute response or reaction to Schulz.
That I will not allow licensing of a stuffed toy because that ruins the whole premise, which I don't buy personally, but it was, you know, when one of your most famous stances in the world of cartooning is your reaction to another cartoonist, Charles Schulz, and what happened with him and with his licensing, that's really interesting. Again, that just shows the power of Schulz in that world. He's just a looming figure.
I understand not wanting to overexpose the thing, but the whole argument of whether or not Hobbes is real or not, Bill, Hobbes is not real. He's an ink drawing. You made him up. You should know Hobbes is not real.
Calvin's not real either, so what the heck? Right.
Exactly.
Exactly. So it's an absurd argument. That's not what the argument is. I don't know what the real argument is, but that's not it. I don't know why he doesn't want, I don't think he wanted to deal with people is the answer. I don't think he was a people person. I don't think he liked people in authority over him, which this is not criticism by the way. I understand all of this, right? But to say it's that you're letting the reality of Hobbes up to, it's stupid. I'm sorry.
Well, it gives you a level of control that there is no version of Hobbes of any merit that you didn't control yourself. When you hand a plus, like I just said earlier, when you hand a plush toy to Snoopy, you can make your own reality of what Snoopy is going forward when the strips are long gone.
Right.
Because you can play around with little toy.
Yeah. But you can, it can't be a man. I mean, I haven't read a whole lot of Calvin and Hobbes, but when I do read it, I never question whether Calvin's alone by himself in the woods talking to himself. Because clearly, I mean Hobbes is affecting the environment.
Correct.
Yeah. So he is there.
Right.
So the problem is with the adults who can't see him.
See him. That's actually a really interesting way of looking at it.
Yeah.
Yeah. Although I could see a long argument. I mean, he did a good enough job of that, that you could have people in a room argue about that for 100 hours. I think.
All right. So that's step one. What are our other points here?
Number two, adults. Calvin is rendered tiny, often tinier than an actual six-year-old one would be. Sometimes only the top of his head is showing when an adult is pictured. That's true. Their peanut style kind of sizing on Calvin.
Even small. I think Calvin's like two heads high.
Yeah.
He's really, really small. One of the things that works great with Peanuts and also then works great with Calvin and Hobbes, is when it is just kids, they're the perfect size characters for comic strip panels. I'm drawing an Amelia story in the style of the first Amelia book, which I haven't drawn like that in 15 years or whatever. I'm doing it like, oh yeah, little kids work great in comic strip panels. They just fit better.
I do think Watterson did a great job of keeping that scale between the adults and the kids, because that's not easy without having the adults look cramped in a panel.
Yeah. Master cartoonist. But yeah, I don't think he would have necessarily come up with that look, if there hadn't been Peanuts. His innovation, again, is putting the adults back in, even though there's heavy fantasy world like in the Peanuts. So yeah, it's an interesting twist. He's doing twists on Peanuts in my mind and doing them brilliantly.
Yeah. Now, of course, the other great thing that inspired, well, I don't know if it inspired him directly, but the other great forebearer of Calvin and Hobbes is The Secret Life of Walter Mitty by James Thurber, right?
Which I know from the Danny Kaye movie.
Oh, I didn't know it was. Oh, yeah. There was a movie in the 2000s.
Walter Mitty, we are lost.
Yeah. There was also, do you remember that Chuck Jones cartoon, Harold, about the little kid daydreaming in class?
Yeah.
I mean, that is Calvin and Hobbes, really.
Is that like called A to Zoom or something? I can't remember.
I don't remember what it's called, but it's very-
But yeah, it's very, very much like it. Yeah. He just is sitting there, and then he just goes off into his own reveries and-
He gets that ridiculous smile on his face.
Yeah, that Jonesy Grinchy smile. Yeah. Number three, and by the way, Sarah, I'm sorry we're burning through your entire idea for our possible topic after we're done with Peanuts. Maybe we can reconsider that there's a little more to talk about in the future.
Yeah, well, we're just doing, this is like, you know.
Test run.
This is a one shot. This is our fresh, what are they called, our hot takes.
Hot takes, well, lukewarm.
Those are lukewarm takes, room temperature takes.
Number three, closely related perspective. The POV shifts frequently within the same strip, almost like a camera is revolving around the fixed point of action. That's a really interesting insight, Sarah. He is such a good draftsman.
Oh my gosh.
He loves to play with the drawings and make them interesting. I've mentioned before, at least in the early strips, I noticed that he did a lot of MC Escherist things where impossibilities, you look very closely at them like the hinge is on the wrong side of the record player. But you wouldn't notice unless he really jumped in. But there are a lot of delights to be found in Calvin and Hobbes. I think again, influenced by Schulz, Schulz's whole thing was every drawing has to have its own interest.
You're drawing for interest and for it to be appealing. Watterson knocks that out of the park, I think. Oh, yeah.
Now, I know someone who will remain nameless so that they are not shunned from society. We were talking about Calvin and Hobbes once and they go, I don't understand what people say when they talk about it being well drawn. I think it's ugly and I'm like ugly and it's like, yeah. And basically after, this is not a cartoonist, it was just a person. But after drilling down, it's just a person.
A real human being.
Not a cartoonist, just a person.
Just a person.
Not like us, us elevated in the pantheon of life.
Yeah. People, I think I'm joking when I say, I think of cartoonists as like Jedi Knights. I really do. Yes. So some plebe out there was saying this to me. Anyway, yeah, it was clearly the inking. It's that editorial style inking. To them, that reads as rushed and ugly, which is pretty wild.
I can see that. I mean, some people.
I think it might have to do with the fact that it was a brush ink when everybody was using pens and comic strips. No one was using brushes at that point.
He was not afraid to do it on a rough stock where the, like Walt Kelly's pogo, brushwork is just beautiful lines for the most part. What Watterson would do is if he got a really rough edge because of the ink is drying out a little bit or he's going so fast that it's got a little dry brush technique in there. Yeah, he likes that quick drawing. I enjoy it because as a cartoonist who's dealt with brush, I know how hard it is for him to do it that fast and make it look that good. Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah. I mean, the changing perspectives, the inventive layouts, especially in the later Sundays, that is stuff that he is, that's his own. He's great at all of that stuff.
Yeah. Or I go back to Windsor McKay, who showed what you could do with just insane drawing skills. That's the guy I think of that inspired everybody after him to raise their game.
Which is another fantasy strip about a little kid.
That's true.
That's true.
Little Nemo in Slumber Land is the most famous of his strips if you guys want to check it out.
All right.
Number four. Oh my, look at all that Zip-A-Tone. At least early on, it vanishes in later years, the opposite of Peanuts.
Well, I think this may be an illusion of the way you're reading those strips. I'm going to guess that you are reading those from the original printings of those books, the reprint collections. And Watterson went in and added Zip-A-Tone for that collection. I have no idea why he would do that. That seems like an insane thing to do.
Yeah, that's interesting. I did not realize, because when I was reading that, I was like, gosh, I don't remember that.
Actually, you know what it is? He went in and he added Zip-A-Tone to All the Sundays to make it look like it's shades of gray matching the colors.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, I'm not sure. Well, he doesn't do it later, put it that way, because that's a lot of work for not a lot of payoff, I wouldn't think.
That's interesting. Well, he is in some ways a real perfectionist in the idea that, oh my gosh, this is going to be reprinted in black and white. I created this for color. I'm actually going to do my own version of colorizing my strip, and since it's me, it's okay. Right. Number five, much greater variation in line thickness and type, which is what we were talking about before. He's using a brush and not the pen like Schulz is using.
Although Schulz is a master at getting very subtle but consistent line variation, which gives life to the lines, I think. But yeah, he's hacking away at that with a brush and just with amazing skill.
Yeah. Yeah. It looks really beautiful. Tough to imagine. I bet some of his things, especially the early ones, printed thicker than he wanted and he probably had to make some adjustments. You know, I think there's any way to avoid that when you're a cartoonist just starting out and you haven't seen your stuff in print. But you know, he had that experience as an editorial cartoonist, which made him like a brush master. And he really just takes that exact aesthetic and applies it to this kid strip.
And it makes it this totally new looking thing. It's really nice.
That's an interesting thing about cartooning that you have, I guess, kind of two chances to bring life to your character. One is the full effect of the character and the other is the life of the line. There is something about a really good artist who makes the lines that build up to the character have a vibrancy to them that is kind of separate from the actual full effect of the character. Does that make sense?
Yeah.
Not to me. It might to all of our cartoonists out there listening, it might, but that was Greek.
Well, so when you're drawing a character in pencil, your point is to rough in where he or she is going to be in the panel, how the panels are going to relate to each other, rough expressions and stuff like that. Those drawings oftentimes have a lot of life and spontaneity to them. You then ruin them by tight penciling it and trying to make everything look right.
But then you have another chance to, with the brush line or pen line or whatever you're using, you're not just tracing the lines, you're redrawing the lines with this new tool, with those lines as a guide. And that's the opportunity, Harold's talking about the second chance to bring life to it, because you could have bouncy lines, you could have clear line that has no variation, all of that changes it.
I think what Watterson, one of his superpowers as a cartoonist, is that he pencils very, very, very loosely, and then inks very, very quickly. And that's why he gets that real spontaneous tons of energy and life in it. But you have to be a great artist to be able to do that, because if you're basically just drawing with an ink brush over very lightly penciled lines.
You're going to be throwing out a lot of stuff or pasting over it because you got it wrong, you know, because you went so fast. Well, Liz, I want to ask you, you know, you brought this up before, that the line really doesn't have its own meaning for you when you look at it. When the tremor, we've been talking about the tremor all this time. Does that have any impact on you when you read it? Do you notice it at all?
Well, first, I want to say that thank you, Jimmy, that explained what I was needing to hear, that clarified it all for me.
Oh, good.
And yeah, I see the tremor, but mostly because you guys are pointing it out. It's definitely not the first thing I look at.
And it doesn't necessarily impact your response to a strip one way or another?
No.
Now, Michael, you drew a lot of strange attractors with the brush, correct?
I was working up towards it.
Yeah, you did a lot.
I was trying to learn the whole time, yeah.
Talk about what it's like to ink with the brush.
It's, I mean, it's just a weird instrument to try and control when you're not used to it. Yeah. I've never painted either. Yeah. If you're thinking in terms of pen lines, you're probably going to be doing fairly short lines. All of a sudden on the brush, you can swoop across the page and vary the width as you go.
Yeah, massive variation.
Which is a real skill and yeah, I never mastered it. You have to really care for your brush, first of all, which is something I'm lazy and I end up ruining the brush. I mean, if you baby it, you can use the same brush for years. I knew people, I mean, people I admired use brush, so that's why I figured, okay, well, I got to use brush too. But I can't say I ever was good at it.
It's so hard.
I told that story of Milton Kineff, who we just talked about for Terry and the Pirates, how when Joe Kuebert took his sons to visit Kineff after telling them how to take care of their brushes, that Kineff just broke out this thing that was caked in the varnish and India ink that had dried onto his brush, and he just slammed it on the drawing board, dipped it in ink and then drew the most beautiful.
The show was like, Oh man, I just ruined about 10 years of training for my sons watching Kineff do that.
Well, you're supposed to be able to actually get it down to one hair at the end. So if you want a really thin line with a brush, there's one hair at the very center, the end part of the brush, that just the right amount of pressure, it'll just give you that one tiny thin line.
I didn't ink a lot of stuff with brush. I did some things. I did that Gracie Landstrip from about a decade ago with brush, and it's when you are using it and you're having a good day, I just mean by your own standards, not that you're as good as Watterson or whatever, but you're doing pretty well.
It's very meditative, because you are really focused, like Michael said, like one hair on a brush, or that very tip of a brush, you have to have a Zen level of focus to be able to make it work, and to not make it look tortured, that's the real trick.
Yeah, and that's the thing, you've got to commit. The other secret that I learned, it took me a while, is don't look where the line is being drawn, look to where it's going, look a little bit ahead of it, and then you can make the swooping line without getting all nervous and shaky, and I'm not placing it to the right place.
You got to look a little ahead, which is kind of the Zen thing, I guess what you're saying is, you're in this place where you're ahead of where you're going to go, and like Michael said, to me, there's nothing more satisfying than that beautiful swooping line, that kind of spreads out and then tapers back down. That is just so satisfying as an artist, if you can pull it off.
It's weird because inking with a pen is different. Inking with a pen, you have to focus where the pencil is, or the pen is touching the paper. You can't do it the other way. So it's really, a brush is a unique instrument. And I think it's at least 40% of what makes Calvin and Hobbes look Calvin and Hobbes-ish.
It's a completely different skill. A lot of the great comic book artists never went beyond pencil.
Yeah, Jack Irving.
It's just a totally different skill. And a lot of them thought probably it was a lesser skill because it wasn't actually drawing. It was more like tracing. But the great inkers, most of the great inkers in comics were originally artists that did everything. And you'd think that they got demoted somehow. But you'd say, okay, from that one, you're not going to draw anything. You're just going to ink. Basically tracing someone else's work. But it was really a separate art form.
It's true. And it's interesting over time, that kind of got put into a strange value code because you had to pay your writer in comic books, let's say, you had to pay your penciler, you had to pay your inker, had to pay your letterer. And this could have to do with time, you could say, but it also has to do with perceived value. And it seemed like the average comic book company would pay two-thirds for the inking of what they would pay for the penciling. So they value the penciling the most.
That's you're creating the images and deciding where they're going to go. And then the inker is going to make two-thirds of what you do to bring it to life in ink. And then the letterer is going to get something like another one-third of what those guys are making. It's roughly and then it's like there are these, it kind of gives tears in perception because of how much you're getting page reach page based on what your role is. So yeah, inking is its own art form.
And I guess it's faster because you are not having to decide where things go. But it also requires that precision.
There's less of a tradition in the newspaper.
Yeah, right.
I can't think of any anchors, any newspaper stripping who are known anyway.
You know what though, it would be people like, there is one anchor did like, I think the last 30 years of Doonesbury.
Doonesbury, yeah.
I can't remember. Al Cap would have anchors, but they were just called assistants, right? Generally, so they would do some penciling, some backgrounds.
The great fantasy artist, Frank Frazetta, I believe.
Yeah. Oh yeah.
And did some of the little Abner.
You can get a book of just the little Abner strips that Frank Frazetta worked on. If you want to, it's hard to even really be able to articulate verbally the difference an anchor makes. But there is a great book by Gary Martin. It's like the complete guide to comic book inking. If you just type in inking book Gary Martin, you'll find it. And what they did was they had penciler Steve Rude draw a pencil page and they gave it to like 10 or 11 different anchors.
And they all inked it and they all look different. That's amazing. It's really interesting to see. The other thing is just start reading the early Fantastic Four's and then go, hey, why is this book terrible all of a sudden? And you don't, it's the inking change. That's the only component.
George Bill.
Poor George Bill.
Who was a penciler in the 40s?
Yeah.
Liz, I'd love for you to see those Steve Rude things and get your take on, you know, do you get a different vibe from those interpretations?
Yeah, that sounds really interesting. I would love to.
The only, if I can critique Gary Martin's 30-year-old book, the only bad side about getting Steve Rude to do it is Steve Rude pencils super tightly and super perfectly, so like even if you are a terrible inker, you're not going to screw Steve Rude up too badly.
Not too bad.
But it's okay, yeah.
And one of my proudest possessions on my wall is a Steve Rude nexus page inked by Steve Rude, which he almost never did.
Never?
Wow, that is cool. I have a few things to say about Calvin and Hobbes.
All right.
If I may interject. I was not reading newspapers at the time. So I never read Calvin and Hobbes as it was coming out. And at some point years later, there used to be libraries used to have book sales once a year where people would donate books and they were super cheap. And I ended up coming home with a pile of Bloom County and other strip books. So it was all new for me. And at the time Bloom County was the one that I really enjoyed a lot. And I kind of dismissed Calvin and Hobbes.
For some reason, it didn't do it for me. And so I realized, okay, I really don't have enough to say about it because I know he's super respected by every cartoonist. So I thought what I'd do today is go to good old Go Comics and just do some random Calvin and Hobbes just to get a flavor for the whole entirety of the strip. Because I had read the early ones in that book. So I said, okay, why don't I just do 20 random Calvin and Hobbes strips and then I could talk about it at least.
And I came up with some really interesting things. My initial impression was, okay, Calvin and Hobbes, it seems like almost all the strips were to him and mom and dad sitting around like the dinner table and Calvin like being annoying. In the 20 strips I found, there was not one they were sitting around the dinner table with Calvin being annoying. So I don't know if I got a, this was just a freaky collection of random strips, but they're almost all Calvin with Hobbes and no adults.
But the first one I got just came up, well, let me describe it briefly. Calvin is fantasizing that he's like a space guy, and so it's kind of a-
Spaceman spiff.
Yeah, a parody of a science fiction strip, and you know, retro gizmos and flying through space. And the fourth panel is, he kind of snaps out of his fantasy, he's in the classroom, someone has asked him a question, teacher has asked him a question, and it's a straight peanuts, it's a Peppermint Patty ripoff. He goes like, George Washington, 29, Washington, DC.
Right.
So basically, that's Peppermint Patty, and you know, just taking wild guesses because she doesn't know the answer. And that had to be, I mean, that was knowingly a Peanuts reference. Right. One of them had Calvin calling the library because he wanted the definition of a word he didn't understand. And the librarian is like really flustered. And you realize at the end that he found some kind of dirty word that he wanted to explain by the librarian. There's this really weird one. This was bizarre.
I mean, this would not be a peanut strip. He's on a tree branch and he's hanging a noose. He's tying the noose and he's measuring how long it is. And then in the fourth panel, he's home and his dad's there and he asks his dad how tall he is.
Oh my god.
It was shocking. That is edgy.
I don't know that would run today. Yeah. Wow. That's that is.
And then another one, Calvin and Hobbes are talking about Santa and Calvin goes, all the reasons he, he goes, well, you know, how does he get these reindeers and how does he get down the chimney and how does he know what kids want? And how does he know anything? I don't believe it. And then, and the last one only kind of goes like, well, I have the same questions about God too.
This was Sunday?
No.
Yeah.
I have the same questions about Hobbes.
Yeah. I mean, so it definitely is going places, peanuts wouldn't go. Yeah.
Well, yeah. I think there is a very distinct personality difference in certain ways between Watterson and Schulz, and that absolutely gives Watterson space to do his take on things that, yeah, Schulz would never do. It's just not who he is. And I think both of them are excellent at expressing these things as extensions of themselves.
And since these were totally random, so they could have come anywhere in the Calvin and Hobbes run, every one of them was funny. So I think it's generally, at least during the same time period, it's a much funnier strip and it's an edgier strip.
I think that was what people were generally saying at the time. Yeah, Schulz is, he's aware, and he said it in that 1994 speech, he's aware of people saying, hey, you're beyond your prime and that's gotta hurt.
And for Schulz to constantly be trying to figure out where he fits in now, he's not just in his own bubble, I think does help him a lot, even as people would say, well, we don't like where you are now personally, because we say so much as an extension of Schulz, just maybe where he is in his life, it's not gonna have the sting or the punch, but it's still true to him.
Yeah, and the other thing is, once you've written 14,000 funny comic strips, writing another really funny punchline isn't probably gonna float your boat.
And yes, it's not where he is, yeah.
No, it's a different...
Yeah, it's not like he's trying to rise to the challenge of the young hotshot.
Right, right.
He's playing his own game.
Yep, yep, yep, I agree. Well, you know what? To have some... What's the word I'm looking for? Some compassion for our editor Liz. I say we end this conversation now and wrap up the season.
Yeah, well, and thank you to Sarah. I just want to say thank you for sending that in. And we didn't get to three of your points, so that's what we could base the rest of our new series on, those three remaining points that we did not cover today.
So for everybody out there who wanted us to talk about some Calvin and Hobbes, hope that tied you over. Always fun to talk about another great cartoonist. If you want to talk about other great cartoonists or the one we focus on, Charles M. Schulz, with us, you could do it a bunch of different ways.
The first thing you could do is you could go over to unpackingpeanuts.com, sign up for the Great Peanuts Re-Read, get our once a month newsletter to let you know what strips we're going to be covering. If you have anything to say directly to us, you could call us on our hotline, 717-219-4162, or you could write us at unpackingpeanuts.gmail.com. And remember, when I don't hear, I worry.
And if you want to follow us on the good old social media, we are at Unpack Peanuts on Instagram and threads and at Unpacking Peanuts on Facebook, Blue Sky, and YouTube. So you could just leave a message there and we'll see it. Thanks for listening to us prattle on for so long. Like I said, it's my favorite day of the week. And this has just been such a wonderful journey. So come back next season. We have a special season of guests. We have Judy Sladky, the real life Snoopy.
We have Raida Grimsley-Johnson, the author of Good Grief and Lynn Johnston, creator for better for worse. So be here or be square. And that's it this week. For Michael, Harold and Liz, this is Jimmy saying, be of good cheer.
Yes.
Be of good cheer.
Unpacking Peanuts is copyrighted by Jimmy Gownley, Michael Cohen, Harold Buchholz and Liz Sumner. Produced and edited by Liz Sumner. Music by Michael Cohen. Additional voiceover by Aziza Shukralla Clark. For more from the show, follow Unpack Peanuts on Instagram and threads. Unpacking Peanuts on Facebook, Blue Sky and YouTube. For more about Jimmy, Michael and Harold, visit unpackingpeanuts.com. Have a wonderful day and thanks for listening. Or we could just stop now.