Time to retire Snoopy, Charlie, and "The Gang"
Today, I will talk about something everyone should be concerned about. The funnies.
And I promise I will talk neither about Doonsbury, nor Boondocks, nor Mallard Fillmore!
Instead, I will talk about a strip that has been around for a long time - too long - Peanuts.
When it first started, in the 1950's, everyone thought it was hilarious. And it became America's top strip. However, the sentiments did not evolve with the culture. While some strips are carried on from father to son, to son, to son, etc., and can last, and are still funny (like Blondie, Gasoline Alley, Henry, even the Katzenjammer Kids are still around!), some get old and need to be carted away. Like Peanuts. Schultz did not leave the strip to any heirs, like other artists have done.
The late Charles Schultz apparently wrote Peanuts because he had a crush on a red-haired girl who rejected him. I'm sure he didn't mind it 20 years later when he was raking in all that cash and engaged in whatever other activities he liked to pursue (if he did). In any case, everyone in the 1950's liked Peanuts and thought it was funny.
Well, humor changes. Do you still find "Who's on First?" (by Abbott and Costello) still funny? I can't find it funny - although the audience obviously loved it, who apparently roared over this in the early 1930's.
I will give an example of "Classic Peanuts" which appeared in the Sunday papers yesterday:
Now, to contrast, let me direct you to the most popular strip of today, Dilbert, from the same day:
I was rolling when I read this Dilbert strip. However, while one can see the humor from that 1959 strip, I do not find it funny. Yes, the key to good humor is inappropriatness, and what the boy (whatever his name is - it doesn't matter) does at the end is inappropriate, but my humor senses are different than those of my grandparents' generation. My grandmother would have been four years older than me when that specific strip was created, so we are thus about the same age when each respective strip was written, but each generation differs in what tickles it's funny bone.
On the other hand, someone from 1959 would have been utterly confused by the Dilbert strip. It would have made absolutely no sense. "Firewall?" "Laptop?" "Hard Drive?" "Smut?" "External Drive?" And, why is a "server" in an office? They belong in a restuarant! And why would someone put a bunch of "smut" on a server?
Thus, I will now take my keyboard to bash yet another beloved part of American culture - I don't call this "Iconoclast" for nothing.
So, despite the fact that newspapers want to hold onto something that was part of their glory days, it's time to get rid of it and make room for somthing people will find funny.
And I promise I will talk neither about Doonsbury, nor Boondocks, nor Mallard Fillmore!
Instead, I will talk about a strip that has been around for a long time - too long - Peanuts.
When it first started, in the 1950's, everyone thought it was hilarious. And it became America's top strip. However, the sentiments did not evolve with the culture. While some strips are carried on from father to son, to son, to son, etc., and can last, and are still funny (like Blondie, Gasoline Alley, Henry, even the Katzenjammer Kids are still around!), some get old and need to be carted away. Like Peanuts. Schultz did not leave the strip to any heirs, like other artists have done.
The late Charles Schultz apparently wrote Peanuts because he had a crush on a red-haired girl who rejected him. I'm sure he didn't mind it 20 years later when he was raking in all that cash and engaged in whatever other activities he liked to pursue (if he did). In any case, everyone in the 1950's liked Peanuts and thought it was funny.
Well, humor changes. Do you still find "Who's on First?" (by Abbott and Costello) still funny? I can't find it funny - although the audience obviously loved it, who apparently roared over this in the early 1930's.
I will give an example of "Classic Peanuts" which appeared in the Sunday papers yesterday:
Now, to contrast, let me direct you to the most popular strip of today, Dilbert, from the same day:
I was rolling when I read this Dilbert strip. However, while one can see the humor from that 1959 strip, I do not find it funny. Yes, the key to good humor is inappropriatness, and what the boy (whatever his name is - it doesn't matter) does at the end is inappropriate, but my humor senses are different than those of my grandparents' generation. My grandmother would have been four years older than me when that specific strip was created, so we are thus about the same age when each respective strip was written, but each generation differs in what tickles it's funny bone.
On the other hand, someone from 1959 would have been utterly confused by the Dilbert strip. It would have made absolutely no sense. "Firewall?" "Laptop?" "Hard Drive?" "Smut?" "External Drive?" And, why is a "server" in an office? They belong in a restuarant! And why would someone put a bunch of "smut" on a server?
Thus, I will now take my keyboard to bash yet another beloved part of American culture - I don't call this "Iconoclast" for nothing.
So, despite the fact that newspapers want to hold onto something that was part of their glory days, it's time to get rid of it and make room for somthing people will find funny.
posted by EricMatthew at 9:06 PM
<< Home