Calvin and Hobbes / Charlie Brown and Snoopy by Matthew Burfeind

	The following is the text of a presentation I put together in the Fall semester of 1995. It was part of the final project for a course in the Literature of the Humanities, at the Simmons College Graduate School of Library and Information Science. The assignment was intended to teach us the fundamentals of the research process. Note: All images in this document are used under the Fair Use provisions (Section 107) of U.S. Copyright Law, Title 17 of the U.S. Code.

When I first started thinking about this project, I decided that I wanted to take this chance to explore something I’d never had to chance to explore, in a field that I’d probably never again get to study, at least not for a grade. My topic came to me one day when I was reading through the latest book of Calvin and Hobbes comic strips, the sort of thing I often do when I should be thinking about assignments. In that book, Bill Watterson, the strip’s creator, admitted that three strips, Krazy Kat, Pogo, and Peanuts, had had a great deal of influence on his work. Now, I didn’t know anything about the first strip, and had only come across the second in its recent reincarnation, but I had always loved Peanuts growing up--when I was very small I even had my own security blanket. Calvin and Hobbes appeared when I was fifteen, and I saw in it much that reminded me of Peanuts years before. I have always linked the two strips in my own mind, if only because they’ve each been a favorite part of my day for half of my reading life. I began to wonder exactly what sort of influence the first strip might have had on the second, and what sort of scholarship might exist that would explore this theme.

So, I decided to explore the history of comic strips, their readers, and my two favorite strips, Peanuts and Calvin and Hobbes. I had no idea what sort of literature might exist, or whether this was a discipline that has ever been taken seriously in academic circles. What I found surprised me. I found a discipline that is still struggling to be accepted by other fields, but with some highly advanced ideas regarding the intellectual, artistic, and creative aspects of comic strips, as well as their effects on society, both children and adults.

And that was another issue that intrigued me, particularly about these two strips--their importance to adult readers. A common notion seems to be that comic strips are for children, and that adults don’t like to admit that they read the comics, in much the same way that we don’t admit we still like to play with LEGO toys. I certainly got no end of grief when people discovered that the final project for my Master’s degree was on Calvin and Hobbes. Yet, Peanuts and Calvin and Hobbes have consistently been bestsellers as books, and are each published in over 2,400 newspapers every day--newspapers that are bought by adults. The mere fact that these strips are so popular, and reach so many people, legitimizes their study.

As I’ve said, I had no idea what the literature of comics would consist of, so, I started my research by looking for monographs and general information. Books led me to articles and bibliographies, which led me to more books and articles. I went through the paces pretty methodically, and at the end I had a pretty good-sized bibliography of things I thought might be useful. It could have been much larger, but then this wasn’t an exercise is finding everything ever written about comic strips. I was able to learn a great deal about the history and function of comic strips, and I even got to think a little about what the connections might be between my two favorite strips. Unfortunately, as I discovered, nobody yet has written on this particular subject--other than the occasional mention that the one might have had some influence on the other. To explore the connections adequately would be a dissertation topic in itself.

In the interest of time, I’ll have to spare you a history of comic strips, other than to say this: Comics as they are currently understood began to appear around the turn of the century, and it was a uniquely American sense of humor and fantasy that characterized the early strips, strips such as The Katzenjammer Kids, Little Nemo in Slumberland, and Krazy Kat. Adventure strips like Buck Rogers, Tarzan, Dick Tracy and Flash Gordon became the dominant form between the late 20s and the 40s. In the 1950s and 60s, fantasy and satire dominated, with examples like Pogo, B.C., and of course, Peanuts. Doonesbury was a great crossover into political commentary in the 1970s, and some of the recent favorites, Dilbert, The Far Side, and Calvin and Hobbes, have taken comic strips to new levels of ingenuity.

Comics have had an amazing influence on other disciplines, film being one of them. Many cinematic concepts and techniques had their birth in comic strips, from montage to the close-up. Many of the great film directors--Federico Fellini, Orson Welles, George Lucas--have all acknowledged their debt to comic strips. Perhaps the greatest influence is on language. H.L. Mencken commented on comic-strip artists in The American Language, noting that they not only use many older English words like "slam" and "smash", but they make up their own, like "bam", "whap" and "flooie". Many of these descriptive or onomatopoeic words have entered our language and become common. Other words and phrases from comic strips include "googly-eyed", "heebie-jeebies", "yard-bird", "baloney" (as an expletive), "jeep", and Charles Schulz’s most lasting contribution, "security blanket". And, although Schulz did not invent the phrase "Good Grief", who can say it without thinking of Charlie Brown?

What is important to know in studying comic strips is that they are essentially an American invention of the 20th-century--along with jazz, one of the only art forms indigenous to the United States. Many historians link comics to such things as the Bayeaux tapestry, eighteenth-century prints by Hogarth, and 19th-century illustrated novels and children’s books. What they are doing is trying to legitimize the field by placing it within the context of already established disciplines. Comics are seen as forms of communication, as graphic art, as narration, or as a dramatic form related to theater or film. Benjamin Botkin’s entry on comics in Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend, says that "the comics use familiar folk themes and motifs...and transmute these universal and local elements into a gallery of folk characters that take their place beside the heroes of fairy tale, mythology, and fable." Umberto Eco wrote the introduction to the first Italian translation of Peanuts in the 1960s, and has compared the serial quality of Peanuts to the sort of musical variation found in the greatest works by Bach. Ultimately, however, comic strips have an interaction of word and picture unlike that of any other medium, and what is needed is the language to describe and discuss comics as a discipline all its own.

Transparency #1: C+H "High Art vs. Low Art"

This is Bill Watterson’s own, ironic look at the issue of public perception.

Peanuts, as I’m sure you all know, is the creation of Charles M. Schulz. Peanuts is a strip that looks at life through the eyes of children, whose names you’ll all recognize: Charlie Brown, an average, mediocre kid, a loser in all of life’s games; Lucy, his constant adversary; Linus, her brother, whose philosophical outlook on life perhaps explains his need for a security blanket; Sally, Charlie Brown’s sister; Peppermint Patty and Marcie, her sidekick; and, of course, the animals, Snoopy and Woodstock. Snoopy is in many ways as important a character as Charlie Brown--perhaps he is the most human character--and Woodstock is his closest companion.

Schulz uses this format, completely devoid of adult characters, to examine many of the social and psychological tensions of modern, and adult, society. Charlie Brown is a little bit of everybody, and through him we are able to see the humor in our own failings. Thomas Inge, who wrote Comics as Culture, said that comics "soften the impact of reality by providing a comic distance on life’s dangers, disasters and tragedies, and enable us to laugh at ourselves." Umberto Eco has called Schulz "a poet of the human condition." These comments pretty much sum up why Peanuts has so much resonance for so many people.

At the same time, Schulz uses the characters, in particular Snoopy, to examine the role of fantasy in our lives. Snoopy’s many alter egos--the World War I Flying Ace, Joe Cool, the frustrated novelist who never seems to get beyond, "It was a dark and stormy night",--all serve to take the reader to places they might have visited as a child, or might still be visiting as an adult.

Calvin and Hobbes, by Bill Watterson, has a history that is much shorter, but as impressive. In just ten years, the strip has grown to an immense popularity, rivaling that of Peanuts. The strip is about a precocious 6-year old, Calvin, and his companion, a tiger named Hobbes. Hobbes, to the rest of the world, is a stuffed animal, a toy, but to Calvin he is more alive than anyone else, and opens up a world of activity limited only by Calvin’s imagination. The only other constant characters in the strip are; Calvin’s parents; a love interest named Susie Derkins, the local bully, Moe; Rosalyn, the baby-sitter; and Calvin’s teacher, Miss Wormwood. No one else is needed, because the strip is primarily about Calvin’s interaction with Hobbes through his own imagination, and how they see the world around them.

As I mentioned above, I was able to spend a little bit of time thinking about the links between the two strips, but to do so properly would involve lots more "strenuous" research--reading all 15,000 Peanuts strips, watching the animated specials, perhaps even compiling a motif-index. What I’ll do here is just mention some of the common threads and important differences that I’m noticed.

The World Encyclopedia of Comics states that the humor of Calvin and Hobbes "is one of character rather than one of action or situation", and states that Peanuts "has evolved from largely a gag-a-day strip to more of an amusing character study, a humorous slice of child life."

Transparency #2: Peanuts "Report on the Past"; C+H "Last-Minute Panic"

As in many strips, the humor relies on a familiarity with personalities and character traits, which in both cases are highly developed and idiosyncratic. The humor in these strips is increased by our knowledge of these characters--we expect them to behave this way, and we laugh all the more when we see it happen.

Both strips see the adult world through the eyes of children, though the two strips differ in the details. The world of Peanuts is entirely inhabited by children, independent of the adult world. While much of the humor simply plays off of our memories of childhood, much of it forces us to think about our own lives and actions.

Transparency #3: Peanuts "Running in the same direction"; C+H "Swift Kick in the Butt"

Though Calvin’s perspective is that of a child, his world includes adults--largely because his imagination is shaped by the absurdity of the adult world around him. He longs to have the material advantages of adulthood, but refuses to give up the freedoms of childhood.

Another common theme is the exploration of imagination. In this, I see Snoopy as inspiration for both Calvin and Hobbes. Snoopy’s many alter egos clearly provide models for those of Calvin--Spaceman Spiff, Tracer Bullet, Stupendous Man--while the fantasy world of Peanuts, in which a beagle is able to live, think, and imagine, is the same type of world that allows Hobbes to be alive with Calvin and inanimate with everyone else.

A clear example of artistic influence can be found in these two strips:

Transparency #4: Peanuts "Snoopy downhill"

This first one was published in 1975, ten years before Calvin and Hobbes. Schulz uses a very simple visual ploy to make us think about serious issues--acceptance of who we are and of what cannot be changed.

Transparency #5: Calvin and Hobbes "Downhill"

Watterson repeatedly uses the exact same device, the hazardous downhill ride, to tackle philosophical issues--in the winter it’s a sled and in the summer it’s a wagon. This particular instance is interesting because, artistically, it’s almost a direct quotation.

Another intriguing way in which the strips are connected is in the artistic changes that each artist has been able to make over the years. Peanuts started as a small, four-panel strip, able to be printed horizontally, vertically, or as a box. In later years, Schulz has experimented with different panel sizes, sometimes creating strips that are one, full-length panel. In the same way, thanks to his popularity and clout, Bill Watterson has been able to break away from some of the restrictions that are imposed on comic strip artists. His Sunday strips no longer have to conform to the standard frame sizes and dimensions imposed upon other artists, leaving him free to explore new creative ideas.

Transparency #6: "Calvin and Art"

Of course, Schulz has taken that exploration to new heights in his career, licensing his characters left and right, so that you can see Snoopy on a greeting card, on the Broadway stage, or selling insurance. Watterson has always refused to license, despite the additional riches that would come his way. He firmly believes that to place Calvin and Hobbes outside of their original context would destroy what makes them special. He recognizes the unique potential of comic strips, and it’s a shame that more artists don’t feel the same way.

Of course, as some of you may have heard, Bill Watterson announced last month that he would be ending the strip on December 31st, leaving him free "to work at a more thoughtful pace, with fewer artistic compromises." He hasn’t stated that the characters are to be retired--just that he was burned out from the pressure of daily deadlines and the restrictions of space that he had to face with the strip. It’s a great loss, but I hope that he will continue to work with his characters, in whatever format he is able to.

Transparency #7: "Talking Heads"

I’ll close with this image--an example of Watterson’s not-so-subtle commentary on the restrictions that he and other comic strip artists have to deal with--restrictions that are profitable for newspapers, but that hamper creativity for artists.