• jwigum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    Shouldn’t use Watterson’s work. He fought long and hard against stuff like this…

      • can
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        He’s famously against all commercialization of the strip and I think he’d feel this similarly devalues it.

        One source.

          • can
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            I get that but I respect Watterson too much to assume his stance.

            • Instigate@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              I think he’d feel this similarly devalues it.

              I respect Watterson too much to assume his stance.

              Well… which is it? Do you respect him too much to assume his stance or are you assuming he’d feel this similarly devalues it?

              • can
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                I mean I don’t want to assume he’d be alright with it therefore I won’t use it. Nothing I said was definitive, just what I think.

              • can
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                I suppose that would also have worked, but no.

      • Numberone@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Here is a wiki source (insert error bars here) discussion of his stance on his work being officially licensed. He thought that use of his work outside of a comic strip would cheapen the value of the strip itself. This was frusterating as a child (who wouldn’t want a fucking Hobbes plushy) but now later I can see that it was at the very least a very defensible choice. Compare how people feel about C&H vs something that was commercialized to death like Garfield. Anyway, hope it’s useful.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I mean, not really though. He fought to keep companies from merchandizing C&H, mainly because he “wanted to keep the characters pure to every reader’s internal voice.” Basically to keep companies from turning it into a shitty profit center or bastardizing it with a cartoon, etc. I don’t think he really said anything or would have a problem with fans using the images to share stuff, y’know?

      • SpruceBringsteen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Becoming a meme format is a great way to strip all of the original context for most, just look at the point of this thread. Just because it’s C+H isn’t going to stop that.

        Like we saw with the bumper stickers, it wasn’t just the stupid Ford v Chevy thing, it was that anyone wanting to make a stupid point on their bumper sticker was lending Calvin’s voice to their own stupid crusade.

        • GardenVarietyAnxiety@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Cancel Culture, Woke, Communism… When you don’t understand a lot about the modern world, you just start using words and phrases you also don’t understand to mean “I dislike this”

            • GardenVarietyAnxiety@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              This isn’t cancel culture though. You are proving my point.

              And my last post wasn’t a straw man either… It was describing people who use terms they don’t understand to express their dislike of things. It’s literally you. In this thread.

              I mean… I guess it could be that you’re knowingly misusing it just to create anger and division. But you wouldn’t do that, would you? That would make -you- the problem.

            • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Again, what do you mean by cancel culture? The original comment was asking for people to honour Watterson’s view that Calvin should not be used outside the comic. Who was being cancelled and how?

                • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  So you don’t actually have an explanation. Chowder is a bigot, and people shouldn’t give him a platform. You defending him is consigning his bigotry.

                  Also he hasn’t been cancelled, nor is he likely to be.

                  Are you upset that people don’t like him and are speaking out against him? Or is it a larger disdain about the practice of speaking out against people and calling for them to be excluded?

                  If it is the second one, Chowder makes his money that way, and participates in a practice you claim to disdain.

                  Though I think it’s the first beacuse you like what he says.