Comments on Depressed

Peanuts fucking blows, and everyone in St. Paul is depressed, cold and bitter.

Peanuts is a masterpiece and Schulz was a genius. It's funny how his family are disregarding a biography that shows him as human and an artist.

Schultz always wanted to be like Andrew Wyeth. He had to settle for beloved characters and zillions in merchandising.

I left St. Paul years ago but I'd hardly call everyone there depressed, cold, and bitter. I'm sure Joe Mauer is doing fine.

Was this on the radio this morning? Is that why I half-dreamed about Charlie Brown's big head being a metaphor for Schulz's big head?

Over and over, Charlie Brown's trust is betrayed by Lucy. His dog is revered, and he is a loser. The Great Pumpkin is a fake. Christmas is commercialized, and the meaning is lost. Psychiatry is a farce. Love is always unrequited. Maybe Linus wasn't depressing, but he had that blanket as a crutch.

I hated watching Peanuts' cartoons when I was little. They always left me feeling so melancholy.

I'm not crazy about Peanuts..
Peter Parker is the real Charlie Brown.

Actually, the old cartoons when Snoopy was a puppy are pretty damn cute. But, Snoopy and Woodstock were really the only of the Peanuts group that I liked.

Peter Parker is the biggest dipshit on the planet, and deserves everything bad that ever happens to him. Charlie Brown is sensitive, and creates empathy; Peter Parker is just a soulless jerk, who creates contempt. A tool. A douchebag. He makes Mark Trail seem soulful and cool.

Peanuts is probably the most important snapshot of Americana in our history, moreso than anything in music or cinema.

(I haven't read the book, so I can't agree or disagree with Monte until then.)

Peter Parker is cool if you're in the closet.

Peanuts went on for too damn long -- long enough to lose meaning/magic/anything resembling a point. It's similar to the Simpsons in that respect.

Peanuts is not inferior to Garfield. Does that count for something?

I can say this much. Peanuts is x1,000,000 times better than Maakies.

But that doesn't count for anything, because everything is better than Maakies.

I guess Peanuts did go on too long. I read and watched the 60s and 70s Peanuts, and they were snarky and great. The Simpsons started at snarky and I would say 'is probably the most important snapshot of Americana in our history'. I like Peanuts, but have them confined to a sad little memories from childhood.

Homer is probably my favorite character of all time, do people really want him retired? I just can't believe that.

Here's Bill "Calvin & Hobbes" Watterson's review of the Schultz bio.

Hmmm... didn't work. Try this:

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119214690326956694.html

I heart Fnarf.

I heart Andrew Wyeth....his paintings.

Nothing is better than "The Maakies".

Except perhaps "8-Ball", "Get Your War On!" and "This Modern World".

But that's it.

JJ: Thanks for that link. When it comes to comics, Watterson has approximately 1 million times more cred than the family of Schultz, the author of his biography and every person on this thread combined.

josh

you beat me to the punch slogging about this. great when the wheels turn and refute the whiners.

bill

Jason, thanks so much for that article by Bill Watterson. Now I'm dying to read the book!

He should be depressed; that comic fucking blows!

My comments about Peter Parker are referring only to the newspaper-strip version of Spiderman -- the newspaper comic with the least action and the least interest of them all. Even "Momma" seems like a Tarantino movie compared to the newspaper Spidey.

What's so wrong with being depressed? I get the same way every winter in this dark, friendless city.