I grew up reading C&H in the newspaper and in so many dog-eared books. His comics were sharp, artfully paced, hilarious and sometimes over my head in ways I would have to revisit as an adult to appreciate fully, and always beautifully drawn with an unusually high level of artistry for the funny papers. I even had a stuffed tiger for some time, given to me because of my love of C&H. When I learned his stance on licensing I vowed never to buy any fake merch, and I have nothing but respect for Bill
I've read that he would very rarely autograph one of his books and put it on the shelf of an independent bookstore, anonymously. Imagine if he licensed at stuffed Hobbes doll?
I love that Bill Watterson & Bloom County creator Berkeley Breathed are friends since the 1980s and have drawn occasionally for eachothers comics. Which, btw, though both had retired, Berke has brought back Bloom County for Patreon subscribers. He needed an outlet because of everything the tRump administration is doing.
This was widely known at the time, too. I still remember finding an embroidered Calvin and Hobbes shirt in some little tourist shop and getting it for someone because 'oh shit they don't have merch' and it was well ripped off.
Look, the 'no need to look for alternate revenue streams' is nice for that one guy that managed to make a super-success. Everyone else that actually wants to make a living off of comics had better go all out because you might as well be working to win a lottery otherwise.
Of course he got out right when newspapers were going down in flames. The big newspaper syndication money isn't there anymore so the model that he thrived in isn't around anymore for the up and comers. Don't get me wrong, I applaud what he did or didn't do, but it would be difficult to follow his model of success these days.
He made a lot of money on his comic at the time, both through the syndication and the books. And he was popular enough to be able to make sure he got his fair share. And once you have a few million, if you invest it and don't spend it poorly, you can live a good life for a long time. He's also still likely making revenue on the books, although I'm sure not as much. The point of this video is he could have made a hell of a lot more if he chose, but he didn't.
In addition to all the rest he lived in the 80's and early 90's. When economics and pay structures were different and one person on a single income could retire and live well beforehand.
So he didn't have to get filthy rich to do that, just 2x what the average middle-class person was making.
Of course I'm sure he made more than that (newspaper syndicated cartoons were big money at the time) but it still wasn't "making movies and selling merch" rich that he could have been.
he hasn't released any rights, but lawsuits cost money and the scumbags ripping him off are slippery. he's not making any money from protecting his IP.
well the website as an image host is trying to make money off the advertisers. obviously the website isnt the one doing the work of making posts but they are benefiting off what the users post
A testament to their power, and to the fact that entire generations have been born since 1995, 31 years ago!! Who have never seen the magic of the man who captured my childhood soul so damned perfectly I had to ask if my family knew the man.
Are they making money? Are they changing the form of the comic? The only one I see posts the comic in it's entirety. I'm not going to pretend to speak for the man, but from what I see, that's in keeping with his convictions. Sharing his work, crediting him, and making no money from it.
he's asked repeatedly that people not republish his work. "sharing" his work is publishing work you didn't create. it is not in line with his convictions, it's expressly against his wishes. but Internet people seem to think it's okay to just wholesale publish other people's work like they're doing them a favor.
You're likely confusing him with Gary Larsen, the creator of The Far Side. To my knowledge, Watterson doesn't care if his comic is shared with others. If you have anything that says otherwise, I'd be happy to take it into account.
"How much of your time is spent consuming things other people made (TV, music, video games, websites) versus making your own? Only one of those adds to your value as a human being." This line has been burned into my brain ever since I first read the article back in whatever year it was written. Every time I start up a new video game, I think of it again. It's why I spend less time gaming now and more time, drawing, 3D modelling, doing photomanip, or even just chatting on the internet
Please note, he left Cracked in 2020, but they own the articles he wrote for them; also note, these were originally published under his pen name, David Wong, he did not start using his real name until after.
I never liked Cody Johnson's humor on Cracked. I found it just unnecessary. Then right towards the end he did More News and I immediately said - this is his place. I'm glad he's made it into such a success. I'm happy for Katy Stohl, too.
I mean you can literally just go to Youtube: ttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnwLbAKgVu_AAqYnjaYRT3Z_m6Z0-qplY">https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnwLbAKgVu_AAqYnjaYRT3Z_m6Z0-qplY
"Strive for self improvement. Practice things in order to get good at them. Build skills that will help you improve your world." Okay, yeah, decent life advice packaged as hard truths, written by, or in the style of, someone who I'd bet has at least once used the phrase "brutally honest" to describe himself.
That's just my unsolicited opinion, of course; different writing styles appeal to different people, but this article just didn't really speak to me.
I agree. His favorite movie clip in the article is a highly materialistic business man belittling employees for not desiring corporate slavery hard enough. As if overpriced watches and cars are the secret to happiness. Sure, it will make shitty people think you're "successful", but why would that make you a better, happier person? Pleasing others isn't our purpose. Producing things for "the world" doesn't make you a better person, just like not producing things doesn't make you a worse person.
Reading is easy but comprehending is hard. He’s not glorifying the coffee speech at face value, it’s the subtext that was important. How do you miss something like that when it’s spelled out for you?
The subtext of "you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills" as he words it? Bullshit corporate speak. What makes a person valuable and how others view that value is a giant blurry line, not just the sum of skills. I have many friends I value, but not for their "skills". If the ultimate goal is to bring value and joy to your own life, chasing skills to please others is not the answer.
Interesting. And you don’t understand in context that it means your actions define you, particularly how the world sees you? Because he’s pretty explicit about it.
Ask a dozen people who you are, how they would define you. Count the number of times ways you’re useful to them are listed. Try it with your partner, your parents, anyone.
You’re inferring negativity and cynicism that aren’t there, which is extremely funny considering the underlying point of the article.
CatSparkleBreaker
I grew up reading C&H in the newspaper and in so many dog-eared books. His comics were sharp, artfully paced, hilarious and sometimes over my head in ways I would have to revisit as an adult to appreciate fully, and always beautifully drawn with an unusually high level of artistry for the funny papers. I even had a stuffed tiger for some time, given to me because of my love of C&H. When I learned his stance on licensing I vowed never to buy any fake merch, and I have nothing but respect for Bill
TheFastpaws
He could have used the money to do many good things though. Charities, children's hospitals, etc. Even if he didn't want the money himself.
TheElderTrolls3Morrowind
Preach brother
ToSisPoS
We appreciate it plenty enough.
Piggybacking on something beloved to get your own upvotes and then lecturing us that we don’t appreciate it enough? No thanks.
NonyGony
A Bill Watterson interview from 1989 https://www.tcj.com/the-bill-watterson-interview/
Userlivewire
I wonder how he supported himself after that.
SeasonedCitizen
I've read that he would very rarely autograph one of his books and put it on the shelf of an independent bookstore, anonymously. Imagine if he licensed at stuffed Hobbes doll?
samanthadlcruz
i had a stuffed hobbes but pretty sure it was a very fake korean version. - i also had a very awesome stuffed bill the cat.
LinemanMatt
I love that Bill Watterson & Bloom County creator Berkeley Breathed are friends since the 1980s and have drawn occasionally for eachothers comics.
Which, btw, though both had retired, Berke has brought back Bloom County for Patreon subscribers. He needed an outlet because of everything the tRump administration is doing.
NonyGony
Seems okay until the final crack about how a "naive person" would want to emulate him.
CedricDur
That's because it's cut off, there was more which would put that in context.
NonyGony
Ah. ty
TheSpindrifter
Also seen today: https://therepublicofletters.substack.com/p/calvin-and-hobbes-and-the-price-of
[deleted]
[deleted]
TheSpindrifter
Hell, I just want to paint watercolors the way he does
bippityboppitybuttsex
Bill Watterson has something most creators will never have.
Enough.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Dogfacedboy
I'll wait for the movie.
Niagaran
That's a spambot
Niagaran
Eat shit, spammer.
(Folks, EVERY acct that links to bookverse is a spammer.)
wadatahmydamie
His cameo work is god-tier as well. He did a run on Pearls Before Swine and another one on whatever Bloom County is called these days
InablueMule
Pearls Before Swine is the only comic i read anymore. Liked it from the start.
Seethreepeeoh
If they want to do a biopic with Randy Havens, I would be OK with that.
Wombatish
This was widely known at the time, too. I still remember finding an embroidered Calvin and Hobbes shirt in some little tourist shop and getting it for someone because 'oh shit they don't have merch' and it was well ripped off.
Ivain
Look, the 'no need to look for alternate revenue streams' is nice for that one guy that managed to make a super-success. Everyone else that actually wants to make a living off of comics had better go all out because you might as well be working to win a lottery otherwise.
JustSomePersonThere
This video is incomplete. o
Wombatish
It was an insanely different time. Newspapers and booksellers were thriving.
Guisso14
That first image is what I got a tattoo of with the quote "let's go exploring" in the signature font
Neurisko
I still have the original "let's go exploring" comic cut from the Sunday newspaper, in a box with some other old stuff.
gfamracing
.
heebro
He put out a book a couple years ago called The Mysteries with John Knascht. It was pretty disappointing if I'm being honest.
curialis
Of course he got out right when newspapers were going down in flames. The big newspaper syndication money isn't there anymore so the model that he thrived in isn't around anymore for the up and comers. Don't get me wrong, I applaud what he did or didn't do, but it would be difficult to follow his model of success these days.
rbudrick
He got out way before newspapers mostly disappeared. They were plenty strong in 95.
meme2zombie
And even then he got lucky to be syndicated. Without that you do have to hustle and hustle hard.
sansuki
Yes. You have to put this in the proper time frame. HE retired 31 YEARS ago. The landscape has significantly changed now.
martineb72
He got out 5 years before newspapers were going down. Print revenue didn't start declining until the year 2000. Then just fell off the cliff in 2005.
Cerebero
So, follow a different model of success with integrity..
HandoB4Javert
Politics? /s
ParaspriteHugger
Responsible monetization?
Ivain
Can someone explain to me how you retire at 37 WITHOUT being filthy rich?
ConspiratorM
He made a lot of money on his comic at the time, both through the syndication and the books. And he was popular enough to be able to make sure he got his fair share. And once you have a few million, if you invest it and don't spend it poorly, you can live a good life for a long time. He's also still likely making revenue on the books, although I'm sure not as much. The point of this video is he could have made a hell of a lot more if he chose, but he didn't.
meme2zombie
In addition to all the rest he lived in the 80's and early 90's. When economics and pay structures were different and one person on a single income could retire and live well beforehand.
So he didn't have to get filthy rich to do that, just 2x what the average middle-class person was making.
Of course I'm sure he made more than that (newspaper syndicated cartoons were big money at the time) but it still wasn't "making movies and selling merch" rich that he could have been.
Ivain
Apparently this comment is now worthy of being downvoted? But nobody who's doing the downvoting can be arsed to explain why?
ijustwannavote
and your request for clarification got downvoted too!
Haters gonna hate, i guess. Have a +1
Ivain
So many silent haters, glad to have someone willing to speak out in support :P
TheSpindrifter
Be smart with the damn good income you had before you retired.
Ivain
Ah, so make in 15-20 years what you would otherwise have made in 50 and out the same proportions aside, gotcha.
Bojovnik84
Shouldn't he be a zillionaire with all the lawsuits for people copying Calvin and Hobbes since, or did he release all rights?
ChickenChickenBurningBright
he hasn't released any rights, but lawsuits cost money and the scumbags ripping him off are slippery. he's not making any money from protecting his IP.
ChickenChickenBurningBright
and despite knowing all this, people on imgur repost his comics almost daily
CrazyGingerAle
yes keepimg the working moving and being seen is a good thing no one is making money here or chamging the material
LumpPump
well the website as an image host is trying to make money off the advertisers. obviously the website isnt the one doing the work of making posts but they are benefiting off what the users post
TheSpindrifter
A testament to their power, and to the fact that entire generations have been born since 1995, 31 years ago!! Who have never seen the magic of the man who captured my childhood soul so damned perfectly I had to ask if my family knew the man.
whitey211
Are they making money? Are they changing the form of the comic? The only one I see posts the comic in it's entirety. I'm not going to pretend to speak for the man, but from what I see, that's in keeping with his convictions. Sharing his work, crediting him, and making no money from it.
ChickenChickenBurningBright
he's asked repeatedly that people not republish his work. "sharing" his work is publishing work you didn't create. it is not in line with his convictions, it's expressly against his wishes. but Internet people seem to think it's okay to just wholesale publish other people's work like they're doing them a favor.
hawkesnightmare
You're likely confusing him with Gary Larsen, the creator of The Far Side. To my knowledge, Watterson doesn't care if his comic is shared with others. If you have anything that says otherwise, I'd be happy to take it into account.
bippityboppitybuttsex
David Wong wrote the essay that changed the way I view the world.
https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-truths-that-will-make-you-better-person
SmergBlaerghl
. of Remembrance +1
SnakuPlisskin
"How much of your time is spent consuming things other people made (TV, music, video games, websites) versus making your own? Only one of those adds to your value as a human being."
This line has been burned into my brain ever since I first read the article back in whatever year it was written. Every time I start up a new video game, I think of it again. It's why I spend less time gaming now and more time, drawing, 3D modelling, doing photomanip, or even just chatting on the internet
BuckFudddy
That is an excellent read
bippityboppitybuttsex
His other life-changing article was this one:
https://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html
Please note, he left Cracked in 2020, but they own the articles he wrote for them; also note, these were originally published under his pen name, David Wong, he did not start using his real name until after.
NotSomoneElse68
Doesn't he die in the end?
bippityboppitybuttsex
No, that was John, David is fine... sort of.
NotSomoneElse68
David wrote the book, though.
bippityboppitybuttsex
Yes, if he died, he probably wouldn't have written the book
NotSomoneElse68
TBF he doesn't die until the end.
InfocalypseRising
god I was trying to find this recently and I couldn't because Cracked is such a trash fire now
bippityboppitybuttsex
Yep... I used to LOVE Cracked... the articles and lists were great... the videos even better...
A lot of remnants still exist elsewhere, esp Cody with the Showdy https://www.youtube.com/@SMN/featured
Daniel O'Brien ended up as a writer on Last Week Tonight; Michael Swaim just makes fun of Dan O'Brien https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r_EXYJ4BZQ
JimFromMarketing
.
NotSomoneElse68
I never liked Cody Johnson's humor on Cracked. I found it just unnecessary. Then right towards the end he did More News and I immediately said - this is his place. I'm glad he's made it into such a success. I'm happy for Katy Stohl, too.
wadatahmydamie
The Internet Archive is basically the only way to view their better work
bippityboppitybuttsex
I mean you can literally just go to Youtube: ttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnwLbAKgVu_AAqYnjaYRT3Z_m6Z0-qplY">https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnwLbAKgVu_AAqYnjaYRT3Z_m6Z0-qplY
and https://www.youtube.com/@cracked
It is all still up
wadatahmydamie
Yes, but I’d rather not give them the ad revenue or the clicks if I can avoid it
Neednoggle
"Strive for self improvement. Practice things in order to get good at them. Build skills that will help you improve your world."
Okay, yeah, decent life advice packaged as hard truths, written by, or in the style of, someone who I'd bet has at least once used the phrase "brutally honest" to describe himself.
That's just my unsolicited opinion, of course; different writing styles appeal to different people, but this article just didn't really speak to me.
drivergrrl
Lolll agree.
bippityboppitybuttsex
Not everything is for you.
super3dcow
I agree. His favorite movie clip in the article is a highly materialistic business man belittling employees for not desiring corporate slavery hard enough. As if overpriced watches and cars are the secret to happiness. Sure, it will make shitty people think you're "successful", but why would that make you a better, happier person? Pleasing others isn't our purpose.
Producing things for "the world" doesn't make you a better person, just like not producing things doesn't make you a worse person.
wadatahmydamie
Reading is easy but comprehending is hard. He’s not glorifying the coffee speech at face value, it’s the subtext that was important. How do you miss something like that when it’s spelled out for you?
super3dcow
The subtext of "you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills" as he words it? Bullshit corporate speak. What makes a person valuable and how others view that value is a giant blurry line, not just the sum of skills. I have many friends I value, but not for their "skills". If the ultimate goal is to bring value and joy to your own life, chasing skills to please others is not the answer.
wadatahmydamie
Interesting. And you don’t understand in context that it means your actions define you, particularly how the world sees you? Because he’s pretty explicit about it.
Ask a dozen people who you are, how they would define you. Count the number of times ways you’re useful to them are listed. Try it with your partner, your parents, anyone.
You’re inferring negativity and cynicism that aren’t there, which is extremely funny considering the underlying point of the article.