Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/10/05/donald-and-his-imaginary-publi.html
Tom the Dancing Bug, IN WHICH Calvinist Donald and his Hobbesian publicist John Miller prepare for a debate in a cartoon world of their own making.
2 Likes
The Dilbert and Pepe cameos were a nice touch.
21 Likes
Wrong!
21 Likes
ā[I donāt pay taxes] because I was smart enough to lose a billion dollars!ā is the most concise takedown of Donaldās supposed business acumen Iāve seen yet.
29 Likes
I do appreciate the peek into his 3 AM thought process ā his tweets make sense now.
11 Likes
that was good 
4 Likes
As much as I admire this strip, which is consistently great, and as much as I think Bill Watterson would agree with the sentiment, I donāt think it is good form to use his Calvin and Hobbes style without his consent (I am assuming none was given, as Mr. Watterson fiercely protects this strip from being cheapened by merchandise, spin-offs, etc) Sorry to be a wet blanket.
1 Like
Itās fair use (parody) isnāt it? Does good form belong in a comic about Trump? Trump is the peasants coming to the castle with torches and pitchforks ā not very good form, in castle terms, anyway.
3 Likes
I believe he was being sarcastic. Watterson seems to have done nothing to stop the (mis)use of his characters by various groups:
Watterson actually has expressed frustration at various groups stealing his art for those kinds of things, especially people who make money selling unauthorized Calvin & Hobbes merchandise. Heās just powerless to do much about it.
I think this comic is a completely different situation though. Ruben didnāt steal Wattersonās artwork or even his characters, he created new artwork in a parody that pays homage to Wattersonās comic.
18 Likes
I didnāt say it was illegal, I said it was rude. What does Trumpās behaviour have to do with respect among artists for a well-loved and well-respected peer?
Is this distinction between ālegalā and ādecent, ethical, honorableā something only Americans obsess over? This has been a pet peeve of mine lately (in politics, banking, businesses externalizing costs, political lobbying), Iām not just picking on you specifically (once something begins to irritate you, of course you start to notice it a lot more).
You are not wrong (although he did appropriate the characters). Personally though, I feel that Wattersonās work is a special case, and it would just be the honorable thing to do to ask him first since he has expressed unambiguously how he feels publicly. Regarding homage, thatās a tricky beast and a subjective interpretation. My entirely subjective feeling about the strip was that it wasnāt homage as much as a convenient vehicle to express what he wanted to express in the strip. There is nothing in the strip that appears to me to honor Watterson or Calvin and Hobbes aside from the art style and imaginary friend mechanic.
1 Like
Iām curious what you think Watterson could have done to prevent literally hundreds, if not thousands, of Chinese and American junk manufacturers and head shops from exploiting his workā¦
1 Like
In this case, selling out (even a little) would have helped.
By refusing ANY merchandising or licensing beyond reproduction for authorized collections, Bill Watterson not only retains a huge amount of (ostensible) control over the characters, he also retains the huge number of responsibilities with regard to copyright. Plenty of popular characters are subject to misappropriation, but if the onus of hunting them down is not spread among various interested parties, then the original creator gets to shoulder the entire burden.
Would you rather be under siege by yourself, or share the cost of defense among others who benefit by assisting you?
BTW, @thirdworldtaxi - Sorry about misinterpreting the intent of your original post.
Not to attack you at all, because Iām sure you didnāt mean to imply this, butā¦ it just kind of struck me how thatās a pretty good analogy for victim blaming: He wouldnāt have gotten into this mess, if heād just forsaken his self-respect and let other parties have control of a piece of him?
1 Like
You could try to call it victim blaming, or you could see it for what it is: risk resulting from a business decision made by the owner of an intellectual property.
Kind of like the risks of Trumpās shitty decisions that heās trying to spin into an example of business acumen being satirized by appropriating Wattersonās style.
I would like to propose a shift of topic, from hand-wringing about Watterson to snickering about Adams.
6 Likes
Plus, where are all of you when Bil Keane gets victimized by Bolling on a regular basis?
Hanging out here.
1 Like
Victimized? Family Circus, in my personal opinion, has always needed some touching up in order to make it readable.
2 Likes
