Hacker News Reader

Comment by xenadu02 | Hacker News Reader

> I suspect that newspaper cartoonists who knew that 1/3 of their strip might get lopped off, or the panels reshuffled, from paper to paper may have a more inherent understanding of the work itself as being modular.

This was something Bill Watterson hated and eventually Calvin & Hobbes got popular enough he dictated that newspapers had to print the whole thing or nothing. That's why some papers printed it squished down to a smaller size.

It sure seems like he should have taken his work online. No format restrictions, publish on your own schedule. He was popular enough to blaze a trail for the new generation but he threw it away instead. That's his choice but seems like a missed opportunity.

FWIW if they printed comics as half page color prints weekly (and not just gag strips) I'd subscribe to that. As newspapers were dying they seemed to cut back on that sort of thing though.

View on HN

Taking a comic strip online in 1988 would have not been a smart move -- nobody would have been able to read it.

Waterson ended Calvin and Hobbes at the end of 1995; slightly early for moving online but not by much.

> In 1995, the Pew Research Center did just that, finding 14% of U.S. adults with internet access.4 Most were using slow, dial-up modem connections—just 2% of internet users were comparatively screaming along with an expensive 28.8 modem.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2014/02/27/part-1-how-t...

I can't tell where you think we disagree?

if 86% of households don't have internet, it's much too early for launching a comic strip, not merely slightly.

This sets aside the fact that revenue streams were not present for comics on the internet, as monetized webpages did not exist yet. He was paid by newspapers directly. It's an absurdity to give up 70% distribution and a guaranteed paycheck for 14% maximum distribution and no income stream at all.

> monetized webpages did not exist yet

The first banner ad was 1994; By the end of 1995, when he would have been deciding to go online, internet advertising was definitely a thing people were aware of. On the other hand, Waterson hated advertising.

> 70% distribution ... 14% maximum distribution

These numbers are not comparable: 70% is the fraction of newspapers he was in, but not everyone got a newspaper.

> It's an absurdity to give up 70% distribution and a guaranteed paycheck for 14% maximum distribution and no income stream at all.

He was done with newspapers, so he was giving up that guaranteed paycheck regardless. His alternative, which he took, was retiring.

> Waterson ended Calvin and Hobbes at the end of 1995; slightly early for moving online but not by much.

Dilbert was the first syndicated comic online that same year. As for whether Waterson could/would/should have done the same, why would he if he was ending the strip anyway?

Waterson talked about how he was unhappy with the constraints of the newspapers; it's possible that he would have found webcomics, with essentially no restrictions, interesting enough to keep going?

He also said he had said what he wanted with Calvin and Hobbes, and all that was left was variations on a theme, over and over again. Might as well end on a high note and be remembered, rather than just fade into the background, like Peanuts.

You have to love this HN crowd. Here's Bill Watterson being lectured on what he - cartoonwise - threw away and which opportunities he missed. More is better. He just never got the memo.

Think of all of the brand value he could have created and the engagement maximimized! Foolish Bill Watterson being a retired watercolor painter when he could have cornered the market on Calvincoin by now if he'd understood the market opportunity.

he did corner the market on those stickers where Calvin was peeing on either a ford or chevy logo..

AFAIK he never authorized any merchandise, so he likely never got a single cent for those.

He authorized one calendar, one year. I've always loved and respected that he was able to stop & let the strip be the amazing thing it was. He declined astonishing money, for enough.

I assume subsubzero knows that and is being sarcastic.

I never realized that he did this! I always noticed how the longer colour strips started with a two panel throw-away for papers that wouldn't print it. Was that still a thing after he demanded the whole thing be printed? If so it's interesting that he kept up the two-panel thing after that!

He got pretty experimental with the format once he had the freedom to do so:

https://i.imgur.com/ddU50.jpg

https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1995/02/26

https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/12/19

Ohhhhhh ya. I totally forgot about those! I still have my books (as well as the collection) but it's been a while since I read the later ones.

Not really -- the format of the Sunday strips became a lot looser and more varied after the throwaway panels stopped being a thing. Compare, for example, these two Calvin-as-a-dinosaur strips, from 1988 and 1994:

https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1988/08/14

https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1994/01/30

Just two days ago, BC noted that two panels could be thrown away on Sunday. https://www.gocomics.com/bc/2020/11/22

Huh, I see that all the time in Wizard of Id and never realized the somewhat incongruous first panels were due to this.

> FWIW if they printed comics as half page color prints weekly (and not just gag strips) I'd subscribe to that. As newspapers were dying they seemed to cut back on that sort of thing though.

You might be interested in subscribing to the dead trees version of the Funny Times:

https://funnytimes.com/subscribe/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com