Home | Archive | FAQ | Characters | Links | Omake | Email Me
Comic and Rant for Thursday, April 25, 2002
Mostly True Tales of Telemarketing! |
After writing Tuesday’s rant, I noticed that Sunday’s Garfield wasn’t done in the usual “Vertical = No Problem” format. Fortunately (and I use that term at least somewhat sarcastically) this week’s Peanuts had even-sized panels, so I’ll bet you can guess what they did (though for some reason they also stretched them vertically just enough so something looked amiss). I don’t know what other vertical Garfield stacking papers did, but I wouldn’t be very surprised if they did the same. Too bad the Garfield didn’t appear a week earlier - it would have been interesting to see how they would have weaseled their way out of that (I bet whatever it would have been, it wouldn’t have involved allocating more space...). Incidentally, before you conspiracy theorists out there hypothesize that the Peanuts was deliberately chosen to accommodate the Garfield, keep in mind that though it’s theoretically possible (since Peanuts is all reruns - and I don’t mean the youngest Van Pelt!), it’s unlikely, as the strips are distributed by different syndicates (United Feature and Universal Press, respectively). Something tells me that Universal got some complaints about this. It would be nice if Jim Davis responded like Bill Watterson, but I really have no idea. If nothing else, perhaps I judged him a bit too hastily. I also found an informative Calvin and Hobbes site with some rare Watterson interviews. On to the strip (once I get it up - soory!)! It’s pretty much true, except that I whispered what my cartoon counterpart is shouting, and didn’t use props (which come from here and here, though the stars weren’t added until here). Seeing as how I’m late again, I’ll yet again save the lengthy rant I’d hoped to do today for Saturday. In the meantime, why not use the voting links, or email me to explain why not! 
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||