[self-clown]I used to rock a 14k gold scooby chain in high school[/self-clown]
ha..
1993-1994 I was rocking the following: gold nugget ring gold diamond ring gold herringbone necklace gold rope necklace(hollow!) gold rope bracelet gold stud nosering(later switched for a gold hoop)
all purchased from the local Korean jewelry dealer at the flea market.
I had almost forgotten about it until I read your post. Thanks for reminding me.
I always thought Charles Schulz was a bit of a moralistic self-righteous prick.
Scooby on the other hand just provided me with endless laughs and good times as a kid.
Don't remember ever laughing at the Peanuts (though The Great Pumpkin was always good).
SCOOBY DOO.
B**, are you serious?
When you hate on "Peanuts" you only hate on yourself. I mean, shit if you thought Shultz was out of line, what about Trudeau, Watterson, Breathed and...god forbid I ask, McGruder?
Totally serious.
I never laughed once at Snoopy and his bitch-ass crew.
You see, this fool Schulz has you all convinced that his material was "deep."
What it was was whack.
If I want to hear religious moralizing I'll go to synagogue, not read the comics.
Scooby was everything a comic should be: irreverant, fun. Plus all the cameos? Man that show was like an ill 70's time capsule. AND it was funny.
The letter spacing is highly suspect in that last frame.
Scooby got played out, especially after Scrappy came along. I used to love that show like no other, but even I knew the formula was as dragged-out as those Hanna-Barbera hallways. Really, though: Scrappy was always for shit. Guilt by association.
Anyone knocking Schulz probably can't stand Mr. Rogers, either. The reason: they can't stand either man's personal beliefs. Folks that only listen to people they want to hear and straw-man the rest are small-minded. Schulz was never, in my mind, a Bible thumper. Yes, there was Scripture in some of the Peanuts specials, but it was pretty general and seasonally appropriate stuff that was delivered with a fairly light touch. I can appreciate MacGruder and Trudeau for their stances which mirror my own. I can also admire men like Schulz and Rogers because they obviously put People before the proselytizing.
This is like comparing AC/DC (SCOOBY) to Van Morrison (Snoopy). Scooby is funny but pretty one dimensional, whereas, Snoppy has an interior life that is interesting and complex. Gotta go with the intelligent protagonist over the goofy one every time.
Snoopy hands down is right. I mean, "Joe Cool"??? Come on peoples.
Scooby, on the other hand (aside from the occasional Momma Cass cameo), was just plain corny. Hanna Barberra at it's formulaic worst (to say nothing of Charlie Chan and the fucking Chan Clan). Give me The Funky Phantom anyday. (or for a true classic and criminally underappreciated HB series from the 70's, peep "Wait 'Til Your Father Gets Home")
And I have to think that the Franklin strip was definitely doctored. I've seen a few similar strips that were changed up a bit - and quite funny too. I'm betting that strip was part of that group.
Anyone here remember the Peanuts strips that were done during Hank Aaron's chase to beat Babe's HR record? Pretty profound stuff for the time and certainly not in step with that weird little tete a tete between Patty and Franklin.
Snoopy is the ultimate. He doesn't really speak, but understands everything, people understand him, like a rapper he flips many alter egos. The music is so good in peanuts! when snoopy gets sad and he puts his head down and that piano like eric satie type shit comes in it rips me up in side everytime.
On the other hand, Franklin, poor franklin, he never gets anywhere! barely ever gets dialogue! and when he does it's some rascist shit! So sad.
Dude, all Scooby did was look for food with Shaggy while the others actually solved the crimes...Snoopy on the other hand was refered to more than once as "the World's Greatest Detective."
if you read Shultz's letter, its pretty obvious he was using the strip to point out something that was was pretty wrong with the NHL back then. Schultz was pretty damn far from a racist (franklin was one of THE first black characters in comic strips BTW), and he was all about sports and the equality they can promote - achievement ranking over all else. Was the strip funny? No. Was it supposed to be? No. Can you make social commentary in a comic strip? Yes. Was the srtip as clear as it could have been? perhaps not.
Was Scooby-Doo fairly entertaining pre-scrappy? yes. Does Hanna Barbera suck for using the same "i got a sandwich stuck in my throat" guy for every effing adult male voice in all their cartoons 1966-1980? YES!
if you read Shultz's letter, its pretty obvious he was using the strip to point out something that was was pretty wrong with the NHL back then. Schultz was pretty damn far from a racist (franklin was one of THE first black characters in comic strips BTW), and he was all about sports and the equality they can promote - achievement ranking over all else. Was the strip funny? No. Was it supposed to be? No. Can you make social commentary in a comic strip? Yes. Was the srtip as clear as it could have been? perhaps not.
Was Scooby-Doo fairly entertaining pre-scrappy? yes. Does Hanna Barbera suck for using the same "i got a sandwich stuck in my throat" guy for every effing adult male voice in all their cartoons 1966-1980? YES!
What social commentary could shultz be making? There are few Black NHL'ers. And? I don't think there's a quota. That comic is confusing & wack.
Ugh... I hope this doesn't turn into a bunch of adults making scooby snacks jokes.
When I was about 5 a friend had a birthday party which I now realise was a bunch of us kids being used as a test group. But at the time they asked us all these questions about what our favorite crisps (chips) were, and why, and there were lots of magic markers and those big boards with tear-off sheets for "brainstorming". Long story short, we all left that place thinking we had invented Scooby Snacks... especially when we see it on the shelves 6 months later. Mofos! I think that's where my mistrust of corporations comes from.
Ugh... I hope this doesn't turn into a bunch of adults making scooby snacks jokes.
When I was about 5 a friend had a birthday party which I now realise was a bunch of us kids being used as a test group. But at the time they asked us all these questions about what our favorite crisps (chips) were, and why, and there were lots of magic markers and those big boards with tear-off sheets for "brainstorming". Long story short, we all left that place thinking we had invented Scooby Snacks... especially when we see it on the shelves 6 months later. Mofos! I think that's where my mistrust of corporations comes from.
that's why I don't trust mirrors, we are all part of test groups
What social commentary could shultz be making? There are few Black NHL'ers. And? I don't think there's a quota. That comic is confusing & wack.
well, i agree its not the clearest comic strip, and it is definitely awkward. but the commentary is certainly implied: "its 1970 (or so), why are there zero black players in the NHL?" (with the answer being something like: "perhaps theres a race issue in the NHL") Patty saying discouraging words to Franklin wasnt supposed to be a "sucks to be you" comment, it was more a "did you notice that you may not be able to achieve your dream because the NHL has some race issues (today, in 1970)?".
again, when you make a comment but dont offer any ideas - youre right, what good does that do? But in 1970, just making a comment like that was a fairly big deal still. Schultz was far from an activist, but he could at least call em like he saw them.
edit: and yeah, theres no quota, true that. try out for whatever sport you want, and all that. But at the time, there was definitely at least an implied "this is a white game, why dont you go play basketball?" attitude in the sport.
This is like comparing AC/DC (SCOOBY) to Van Morrison (Snoopy). Scooby is funny but pretty one dimensional, whereas, Snoppy has an interior life that is interesting and complex. Gotta go with the intelligent protagonist over the goofy one every time.
This comment is SO ON I'm glad I read through that long ass thread just to get to it.
if you read Shultz's letter, its pretty obvious he was using the strip to point out something that was was pretty wrong with the NHL back then. Schultz was pretty damn far from a racist (franklin was one of THE first black characters in comic strips BTW), and he was all about sports and the equality they can promote - achievement ranking over all else. Was the strip funny? No. Was it supposed to be? No. Can you make social commentary in a comic strip? Yes. Was the srtip as clear as it could have been? perhaps not.
Was Scooby-Doo fairly entertaining pre-scrappy? yes. Does Hanna Barbera suck for using the same "i got a sandwich stuck in my throat" guy for every effing adult male voice in all their cartoons 1966-1980? YES!
While I agree that the comic is incredibly vague, and kind of pointless, I was referring to Schultz's reaction to the letter. I have all the respect in the world for Charles Schults. I have always loved Peanuts and play the specials for my 2 1/2 year old son all the time. I was surprised by the tone of his response. I would have expected something along the lines of, "I was misunderstood but I could have been clearer." - which he could have.
As a kid, I was, of course, super into all the Peanuts specials and comics. I can still remember getting really excited by that "This is a CBS Special Presentation" logo--prime time cartoons were a big deal for kids in the 70s.
But some time in my early 20s, I realized that Peanuts--that Christmas special in particular--was the single-most depressing cartoon ever created. (Okay, nobody's fucking with Ziggy--and I guess Cathy is pretty bad, too, but I digress.)
Nobody likes Charlie Brown. Not his friends, not the cute redhead, not his teacher. Even his own goddamned dog is too cool for him. And he never really redeems himself. Or kicks the football.
After a while, you can't even pull for him because he's hopeless.
It beats Family Circus, but that's not saying much.
It was a very sad day for me when I realized that "the funnies" weren't really funny, after all.
Comments
ha..
1993-1994 I was rocking the following:
gold nugget ring
gold diamond ring
gold herringbone necklace
gold rope necklace(hollow!)
gold rope bracelet
gold stud nosering(later switched for a gold hoop)
all purchased from the local Korean jewelry dealer at the flea market.
I had almost forgotten about it until I read your post. Thanks for reminding me.
Snoopy said so much using no words at all, while Scooby said nothing in a never-ending stream of annoyingly squeaky blabber.
Totally serious.
I never laughed once at Snoopy and his bitch-ass crew.
You see, this fool Schulz has you all convinced that his material was "deep."
What it was was whack.
If I want to hear religious moralizing I'll go to synagogue, not read the comics.
Scooby was everything a comic should be: irreverant, fun. Plus all the cameos? Man that show was like an ill 70's time capsule. AND it was funny.
And Scooby had a lesbian too, by the way.
The letter spacing is highly suspect in that last frame.
Scooby got played out, especially after Scrappy came along. I used to love that show like no other, but even I knew the formula was as dragged-out as those Hanna-Barbera hallways. Really, though: Scrappy was always for shit. Guilt by association.
Anyone knocking Schulz probably can't stand Mr. Rogers, either. The reason: they can't stand either man's personal beliefs. Folks that only listen to people they want to hear and straw-man the rest are small-minded. Schulz was never, in my mind, a Bible thumper. Yes, there was Scripture in some of the Peanuts specials, but it was pretty general and seasonally appropriate stuff that was delivered with a fairly light touch.
I can appreciate MacGruder and Trudeau for their stances which mirror my own. I can also admire men like Schulz and Rogers because they obviously put People before the proselytizing.
This book is a killer:
don't stop there.
Snoopy hands down is right.
I mean, "Joe Cool"???
Come on peoples.
Scooby, on the other hand (aside from the occasional Momma Cass cameo), was just plain corny.
Hanna Barberra at it's formulaic worst (to say nothing of Charlie Chan and the fucking Chan Clan).
Give me The Funky Phantom anyday.
(or for a true classic and criminally underappreciated HB series from the 70's, peep "Wait 'Til Your Father Gets Home")
And I have to think that the Franklin strip was definitely doctored.
I've seen a few similar strips that were changed up a bit - and quite funny too.
I'm betting that strip was part of that group.
Anyone here remember the Peanuts strips that were done during Hank Aaron's chase to beat Babe's HR record? Pretty profound stuff for the time and certainly not in step with that weird little tete a tete between Patty and Franklin.
On the other hand, Franklin, poor franklin, he never gets anywhere! barely ever gets dialogue! and when he does it's some rascist shit! So sad.
WHO HAS SOLVED THE MOST SERIOUS CRIMES?
classic material
http://www.thesneeze.com/mt-archives/000485.php
That kind of sucks.
Dude, all Scooby did was look for food with Shaggy while
the others actually solved the crimes...Snoopy on the other
hand was refered to more than once as "the World's Greatest Detective."
but hold on - what sucks about it though?
if you read Shultz's letter, its pretty obvious he was using the strip to point out something that was was pretty wrong with the NHL back then. Schultz was pretty damn far from a racist (franklin was one of THE first black characters in comic strips BTW), and he was all about sports and the equality they can promote - achievement ranking over all else. Was the strip funny? No. Was it supposed to be? No. Can you make social commentary in a comic strip? Yes. Was the srtip as clear as it could have been? perhaps not.
Was Scooby-Doo fairly entertaining pre-scrappy? yes. Does Hanna Barbera suck for using the same "i got a sandwich stuck in my throat" guy for every effing adult male voice in all their cartoons 1966-1980? YES!
What social commentary could shultz be making? There are few Black NHL'ers. And? I don't think there's a quota. That comic is confusing & wack.
When I was about 5 a friend had a birthday party which I now realise was a bunch of us kids being used as a test group. But at the time they asked us all these questions about what our favorite crisps (chips) were, and why, and there were lots of magic markers and those big boards with tear-off sheets for "brainstorming". Long story short, we all left that place thinking we had invented Scooby Snacks... especially when we see it on the shelves 6 months later. Mofos! I think that's where my mistrust of corporations comes from.
that's why I don't trust mirrors, we are all part of test groups
well, i agree its not the clearest comic strip, and it is definitely awkward. but the commentary is certainly implied: "its 1970 (or so), why are there zero black players in the NHL?" (with the answer being something like: "perhaps theres a race issue in the NHL") Patty saying discouraging words to Franklin wasnt supposed to be a "sucks to be you" comment, it was more a "did you notice that you may not be able to achieve your dream because the NHL has some race issues (today, in 1970)?".
again, when you make a comment but dont offer any ideas - youre right, what good does that do? But in 1970, just making a comment like that was a fairly big deal still. Schultz was far from an activist, but he could at least call em like he saw them.
edit: and yeah, theres no quota, true that. try out for whatever sport you want, and all that. But at the time, there was definitely at least an implied "this is a white game, why dont you go play basketball?" attitude in the sport.
This comment is SO ON I'm glad I read through that long ass thread just to get to it.
While I agree that the comic is incredibly vague, and kind of pointless, I was referring to Schultz's reaction to the letter. I have all the respect in the world for Charles Schults. I have always loved Peanuts and play the specials for my 2 1/2 year old son all the time. I was surprised by the tone of his response. I would have expected something along the lines of, "I was misunderstood but I could have been clearer." - which he could have.
But some time in my early 20s, I realized that Peanuts--that Christmas special in particular--was the single-most depressing cartoon ever created. (Okay, nobody's fucking with Ziggy--and I guess Cathy is pretty bad, too, but I digress.)
Nobody likes Charlie Brown. Not his friends, not the cute redhead, not his teacher. Even his own goddamned dog is too cool for him. And he never really redeems himself. Or kicks the football.
After a while, you can't even pull for him because he's hopeless.
It beats Family Circus, but that's not saying much.
It was a very sad day for me when I realized that "the funnies" weren't really funny, after all.