Untitled

This issue has been the subject of debate from the outset of the character and not without consequence. Indeed, it’s been a prominent feature of many of the central and defining debates of comics studies throughout the years. 2/14

As documented by Jill Lepore in her book, “The Secret History of Wonder Woman,” the character was created to be a progressive feminine icon, but also a subversive representation of human sexuality, one that includes ample queer-coding from the outset. 3/14

Relatedly, in the 1950s, Wonder Woman was featured prominently in Frederic Wertham’s infamous “Seduction of the Innocent,” the book that caused widespread outrage over comics, ultimately leading to an artistically-limiting censorship body, the CCA. 4/14

Wertham writes “The homosexual connotation of the Wonder Woman type of story is psychologically unmistakable. …For girls, Wonder Woman and her counterparts are definitely anti-masculine….Her followers are the “Holliday Girls,” i.e. the holiday girls, the gay party girls, the gay girls… 5/14

…Wonder Woman refers to them as ‘my girls.’ Their attitude about death and murder is a mixture of the callousness of crime comics with the coyness of sweet little girls.” He also connects Wonder Woman to BDSM – Marston has admitted this – in a reading that could be described as kink-shaming. 6/14

And while the queer subtext of Wonder Woman comics is longstanding, it isn’t until 2016 that the character has been identified as canonically non-heterosexual. Author Greg Rucka establishes Wonder Woman as bisexual in his Rebirth run and confirms his interpretation in interviews. 7/14

In Rucka’s story, Diana had a previous relationship with an Amazon named Kasia. That said, a kiss to the cheek is the most physical affection depicted between the two characters on-panel. 8/14

We have seen numerous AU interpretations of Wonder Woman as openly queer, including Earth One, Dark Knights of Steel, Bombshells, and many others. The Absolute line is technically AU, but its sales put it on a different plane with a differing obligation as a DC tentpole at this point in time. 9/14

Conversely, Wonder Woman has been noticeably absent from DC’s “Pride” collections, which would seem to indicate a reticence, on the publisher’s part, to support Rucka’s interpretation of the character. Thompson has been non-commital in interviews about her Wonder Woman’s sexuality: 10/14

“I think it’s simply too soon to say if Diana is interested in Steve romantically or not. She has a lot on her plate and almost everything is new to her, so she’s not interested in boxing herself into one path when she has literally just escaped her Underworld prison.” 11/14

In issue #14 of the series, Zatanna is quite flirtatious with Diana. Issue #18 features Diana reciprocating that behaviour and also contemplating the nature of love with the Goddess Aphrodite. In short this iteration of Diana might be in love with a woman. Time (and Thompson) will tell. 12/14

The inevitable question then is simply: does it matter? Wonder Woman is a character with a longstanding queer mythology (literally and figuratively), but whether she’s overdetermined or underdetermined by her sexuality is a subjective proposition. 13/14

Into that troubling paradox lands Thompson, charged with reinventing a character who has been defined by a sexuality that has, consistently, held a huge impact within popular culture, positive and negative. It’s a strange burden to witness and worth noting, perhaps, as history in the making. 14/14

In “No limits? Multiverses, alternate universes and the media franchises,” Anne Besson discusses the impact of alternative universe storytelling within fandoms: 2/11

“Alternate Universes pose a potential threat though and must be handled with care – too many disruptions, too many versions, and the centrifugal force of “the universe” may not be strong enough to resist the pressure.” 3/11

This is a particularly relevant concern for DC comics multiverse that has featured 160 alternate universes since 1986 in addition to 3 complete reboots of the entire multiverse. The coherence and continuity of the DC universe is an openly acknowledged problem. 4/11

Besson speaks to the importance of consistency quite directly: “A well-known and well-liked narrative must be respected, it is essential to fan communities: not everything can be done.” 5/11

And here we get back to the curious properties of the Absolute line: radical reinventions that, at the same, time, emphasize the innate consistency of DC’s most iconic and enduring characters. No matter how you change their circumstance, who they are does not change. 6/11

This same concern is aptly stated in one of the foundational works of English-Language comics studies, Umberto Eco’s “The Myth of Superman,” in which the legendary scholar and author writes “The mythological character of comic strips finds himself in this singular situation:… 7/11

“..he must be an archetype, the totality of certain collective aspirations, and therefore he must necessarily become immobilized in an emblematic and fixed nature which renders him easily recognizable (this is what happens to Superman);… 8/11

…but, since he is marketed in the sphere of a “romantic” production for a public that consumes “romances,” he must be subjected to a development which is typical, as we have seen, of novelistic characters.” 9/11

This paradox is exactly what the reboot approach, or even alternate universe approach has, historically, sought to address: stories that achieve new creative direction and character evolution without diminishing (or destroying) the central fabric of who the superhero characters are. 10/11

And indeed, this is the Diana that Thompson presents us with: a radically familiar iteration of an iconic character at once wholly unique and compelling but also consistent with the core values and attributes that Wonder Woman so powerfully represents. 11/11

Where the classic Wonder Woman narrative sees Steve washing up on Paradise Island and compelling feels of romantic love from Diana, Thompson’s narrative goes in an entirely different direction with some important echoes of this past. 2/12

Steve washes up on an Diana’s island in hell, not because he’s a war hero inspiring Diana to join the cause but because he is damned (so it seems). This is an interesting interpretation that puts Steve on a lower moral plain than in past iterations. 3/12

From there, the story emphasizes Steve’s helplessness. Despite his courage and will, he’s nowhere near the level of Diana or Circe and thus he (quite credibly) has to be constantly protected and eventually placed into a sort of protective custody, barely able to leave the house. 4/12

This last detail reads as an inversion of the forced domestic servitude concerns identified by Betty Friedan in her foundational text “The Feminine Mystique.” She asks: ““Why should women accept this picture of a half-life, instead of a share in the whole of human destiny?” 5/12

We can also add a mythical layer to Steve’s confinement in the manner through which it can be read as a gender-swapped take on the Persephone myth, an easy leap to make given that Persephone is quite literally Diana’s neighbour and friend in this story. 6/12

Steve expresses his unhappiness with domestic confinement and that’s rather interesting. What’s perhaps more interesting, however, is Diana’s decision to sever her own right arm in order to set him free – a condemned man who she just met. She just does it because it’s the right thing to do. 7/12

Thompson states in interview that this Diana is not in love with Steve, noting as well that “It’s not wrong to think or consider romantic love as a factor in her decision, but reading it as such feels like ignoring a lot of the other things we’re saying—in both literal text and subtext.” 8/12

Thus, the story forms a compelling critique of the ongoing gender divide in Western society, a critique in which AWW makes clear that patriarchal power is innately wrong on a moral level and, when given the choice, the superhero symbol of feminism chooses to set things right. 9/12

Steve returns from hell a better man. Inspired by Diana’s example and her heroism, Steve gets placed in the role of nurturer for her, reminding her of her humanity in order to help her recover from the Medusa transformation. 10/12

As she returns to herself, Wonder Woman reiterates: “One good man can save the world” providing a sort of atonement with the father in the Joseph Campbell sense, but here an atonement provided by a heroic and powerful woman instead. 11/12

All told, Thompson’s Trevor, like Thompson’s Diana, can be read as a compelling juxtaposition to earlier iterations of the character. It’s another fresh take that helps to push the symbolism Thompson’s working with into new territory, helping to breathe new life into an old story. 12/12

The most famous defense of Wonder Woman comes, quite famously, from Gloria Steinem who describes her as follows: “Wonder Woman symbolizes many of the values of the women’s culture that feminists are now trying to introduce into the mainstream:” 2/10

“strength and self‑reliance for women; sisterhood and mutual support among women; peacefulness and esteem for human life; a diminishment both of “masculine” aggression and of the belief that violence is the only way of solving conflicts.” 3/10

Similar praise can be found by scholars such as Lillian S. Robinson, who suggests that Wonder Woman pioneered “a kind of feminist questioning” that was rarely seen within the comics field (23).” 4/10

Trina Robbins–the editor of the landmark Wimmens Comix anthology and one‑time Wonder Woman scribe–writes that “William Moulton Marston provided a safe place for girls in the pages of his comics, away from Man’s World.” 5/10

Yet despite numerous such appreciations of Wonder Woman’s contribution to feminist‑friendly comics, there may be limitations to the positive message conveyed by Wonder Woman, particularly within the context of second and third wave feminisms. 6/10

In contrast to the praise of Robbins and Steinem, Richard Reynolds suggests that Marston’s intentions with the first superheroine were notably less progressive. “The appearance and costume of the original superheroine, Wonder Woman, was developed as…” 7/10

“a frank appeal to male fantasies of sexual domination, as disingenuously set forth by Wonder Woman’s creator, psychologist Dr. William Moulton Marston” (34).” Similar findings have also been supported by the much-cited statistic that WW’s audience has always been mostly male. 8/10

This subject has featured prominently in a wide number of scholarly works on the subject (Lepore, Berlatsky, Darowski, Robbins, Hanley and more) with no discernible critical consensus. The debate – amongst both fans and scholars – continues. 9/10

In 1941 a world-renowned psychiatrist dropped an amazon goddess into the ‘man’s world’ of comics, with both empowerment and subtextual symbols of BDSM – entirely by choice (he’s admitted it) – on his mind. What Diana means to the representation of women has been debated ever since. 10/10

"Strong female character" is simply a shorthand we use to denote complex female characters. That's basically it. I personally have tried to move on to using something like "complex female characters" as my go-to short hand” 2/10

We have said "strong female character" because it's a mouthful to say -- every time you get asked this-- "yes, it's important to me that my female characters are complex and layered, that they are as nuanced and well rendered as their male counterparts have been for years. 3/10

Women as protagonists and antagonists, young and old, thin and fat, strong and weak, smart and dumb, badasses and wallflowers, flawed and exceptional, funny and grave, strident and gracious, dark and light, heroic and maniacal, grim and glorious, blessed and tragic, subversive and traditional.4/10

That they can be all of these things or only a few, like real people are. Women who have strong character work. That female characters are, quite simply allowed - and assured - all the many variations that male characters are allowed by default." 5/10

When we say "strong female characters" we don't mean women who can bench press dump trucks (though sometimes we also mean this) or women who are one-note tough badasses, we just mean women allowed to be women the same way men are allowed to be men.” 6/10

Thompson, appropriately, singles out Wonder Woman as the rare example of a strong female character - “we have literally NO other stories of female characters at Wonder Woman's level - none with the lasting power, the history, the iconic impact of Wonder Woman” 7/10

For Thompson, the issues then can be boiled down to the representational burden of having Wonder Woman stand alone amongst her peers. Happily, she foresees a solution to the problem: 8/10

“The answer, as always, is MORE complex female leads. More LASTING complex female leads. Proliferation can save us all. Only through great female lead characters becoming as prolific and commonplace as their male counterparts can we even begin to overcome this hurdle.” 9/10

You can read the full article here; it’s a delightful paratext to help inform Thompson’s take on an iconic character that she’s in the process of reinventing.

Circe is a figure of tremendous cultural fascination spanning millennia. In order to simplify my approach here a little bit, I’m going to isolate the Homeric version of Circe through the lens of Judith Yarnall’s landmark reading of the character. 2/15

In “Transformations of Circe: The History of an Enchantress,” Judith Yarnall argues that Circe’s transformation of men into swine can “be interpreted as the primordial feminine’s acting according to its own nature and making manifest the comparative inferiority of individual male being.” 3/15

While villainous on the surface, Yarnall articulates that a “major problem with many later interpretations of Circe is that they sever rather than honor the wholeness of her myth.” This reading of the character is what has made Circe one of the most famous (and maligned) witches in history. 4/15

As Yarnall notes, however, Circe also “uses her formidable powers beneficently” and even sets the course for Odysseus and his men after developing pity for Odysseus. Circe occupies the halfway point of the Odyssey and transitions the story from one of lacking direction to one of finding it. 5/15

This plays quite well with the Circe that we see in AWW, a character who is both powerful and vengeful, but justly so, righteously so, in consequence of the treatment that she has received at the hands of men. 6/15

Far from Christian-era portrayals of the character as an evil witch (a portrayal frequently recapitulated in other Wonder Woman comics that cast Circe as a malevolent villain), Thompson’s Circe is equally capable of love and compassion – so long as she’s treated with love and compassion. 7/15

Thompson, a self-professed Greek Mythology nerd, identifies poignant potential in Circe, arguing: “Circe is just a terrific character — both in a lot of Wonder Woman mythos and in Greek Mythology more generally. 8/15

When you read her mythology, “Circe almost feels like a character pulled out of time to me – she’s so uncompromisingly self-made and feminist. Utterly her own person.” Thompson further describes how it was Circe who helped her to unlock the core of her new Wonder Woman mythology: 9/15

“Realizing that Diana’s love is a transformative thing and that once it transformed Circe, Circe would begin feeding it back to Diana, and even though they were in hell, it would be home for them. It would still be love and kindness and finding a better way…” 10/15

“…And in fact, it would shine all the more brightly as it was contrasted against their surroundings. It’s the most I’ve ever known that a story just worked and “was right.” It was a great feeling.”” 11/15

Circe’s influence on the reimagining of Wonder Woman can also provide an important update to Wonder Woman’s feminist politics. Where previous iterations of Wonder Woman were instilled with a Christ-like capacity to turn the other cheek, this Wonder Woman has a different (larger) edge. 12/15

Thompson makes it clear that this edge comes from Circe: “Diana, not every thing you meet will decide to be your best friend. Many will try to kill you even before shoving away your hand of friendship.” Circe isn’t cynical in Thompson’s take – just practical; and willing to set the boundaries.13/15

The ultimate manifestation of Circe’s influence is the weapon she creates/is for Diana, one that allows her to embrace, for lack of a better term, monstrosity. Diana transforms into a giant Medusa (another maligned feminine creature) in order to defeat a giant monster threatening a city. 14/15

Thompson’s Wonder Woman is still a figure of love, and in a distinctly feminist context, but, through Circe, that feminist context comes with a righteous fury that need not contradict the love, but rather protect and advance it through an active and aggressive will. 15/15

According to Jesse Schedeen of IGN, “the Absolute Universe asks a key question - what would Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman be like if they lacked many of their innate advantages and privileges?” The answer is: still Batman, still Superman, Still Wonder Woman. Their heroism is absolute. 2/11

In the case of Wonder Woman, de-privileging means having our heroine raised in hell rather than paradise and by the witch Circe, one of Wonder Woman’s greatest foes, rather than by the loving tribe of Amazon warriors and their leader, Hippolyta. 3/11

Privilege studies expert Kim A. Case defines privilege as “automatic unearned benefits bestowed upon perceived members of dominant groups based on social identity.” Case notes that privilege is often invisible and that privileged voices can “deny the existence of oppression” implicitly. 4/11

And here the “Absolute” argument becomes contentious. If Batman could be Batman without ludicrous wealth and the power and privilege that comes with it, the thesis of this juxtaposition of Batmen becomes one that does indeed deny the privilege of the wealthy. 5/11

In the case of AWW, the compelling privilege is that of an idyllic upbringing in an otherworldly paradise, surrounded by supportive role models and empowering tutelage – effectively drawing forward the nature vs nurture argument on childhood development. 6/11

Is a child raised in hell different from a child raised in paradise? Well, a little. In appearance she is more “metal” and more willing to use violence as a tool to end oppression, but she remains the kind, empathetic, and caring young woman that fans all over the world will recognize. 7/11

And though the circumstances seem antithetical, Diana’s upbringing in hell still provides her with many of the privileges that Paradise Island did: superhuman strength, otherworldly charisma, a loving (eventually) mother, and access to all manner of powerful artifacts and allies. 8/11

We should also note that the core concept of Wonder Woman has always been one that explores the societal privileges experienced by men over women, and thus being underprivileged, in some way, has always been in play. AWW might just add other forms and thus raise intersectional potential. 9/11

One of the cuter ways that the text foregrounds the impact of hell is through a series of ironic comic strips called “Li’l Diana,” showing Diana having an idyllic childhood in Hell, largely by forcing the world to align with her values. Like Milton’s Mammon, she would make hell into a heaven. 10/11

So this is where Absolute Wonder Woman leaves us: either with a powerful message about how innate character shines through regardless of circumstance (that we have agency and are not defined by our environment) or with an uncomfortable evasion of the very concept of privilege. Or both. 11/11

The ways Wonder Woman changed post-WWII partly extend from the emphasis on domesticity & traditional gender roles in Cold War America. Wartime justified WW’s heroism, just like it justified real women working in munitions factories. Postwar, that justification evaporated. 2/9

Wonder Woman also changed because her implied gender & sexual deviance were attacked by Fredric Wertham in “Seduction of the Innocent,” which influenced the 1954 Comics Code. “For boys,” wrote Wertham, “Wonder Woman is a frightening image. For girls, she is a morbid ideal.” 3/9

The 1954 Comics Code specifically banned “sex perversion” & “sexual abnormalities,” both of which Wertham accused Wonder Woman of promoting. It also said stories must “emphasize the value of home and the sanctity of marriage.” IOW: heteronormative gender roles were mandatory. 4/9

The Wonder Woman comics of the late 50s/early 60s followed the lead of other comics of the era in creating a superhero family, establishing a domestic grounding. By 1961, WW was joined by Wonder Girl and Wonder Tot and her mother Queen Hippolyta plays a larger role. 5/9

But while Wonder Girl & Wonder Tot function like Diana’s sisters, they are really versions of her. The three characters appear in “impossible stories” enabled by Hippolyta, who has the power to splice together films of Diana and herself at various ages and make them live. 6/9

In other words, even as they add a veneer of domesticity to Wonder Woman’s world, these Silver Age stories also feature a powerful female ruler manipulating futuristic technology to create utopian female communities of superpowered girls and women who are heroic at every age. 7/9

Thus, while the Wonder Woman comics of the late 50s/early 60s generally lack the subversive sexual charge and more overt empowerment of the Marston/Peter era, they are not without their own potential for female identification and resistance to worlds controlled by men. 8/9

These Silver Age Wonder Woman comics also prove the durability of the superhero genre when it comes to creating symbolic subversions. Fantastical spaces require fantastical conceits, and fantasy rarely sits well with normativity. 9/9

The series represents a new reimagining of the iconic character for DC comics, but, unlike previous iterations, one committed to alternate takes on the character, her world, and her place within it. 2/6

The series received the 2025 Eisner Award for Best New Series, thus achieving the highest level of both critical and commercial success in mainstream comics basically from the outset. 3/6

Where previous iterations of the character showcased an empathetic will moulded by the love and care of an amazon paradise, this version of Diana is instead, in the words of Thompson “radicalized by deep injustice.” 4/6

The series thus unfolds as a new beginning for a classic character but also a bit of autocriticism through the juxtaposition of this “radical” new Diana with the many previous takes on the Amazon Princess over the course of nearly a century of Wonder Woman comics. 5/6

What we have to discuss then, in the weeks ahead, is a popular and adored iteration of one of the most recognizable comics characters in human history – a noteworthy departure that speaks to the past, present, and future simultaneously. 6/6

There are many reasons popular comic strips rarely end succinctly. First, newspapers, publishing syndicates, and cartoonists generally like making money, so cancelling a popular strip rarely makes financial sense. Second, cartoonists often don’t own the rights to their own creations. 2/12

In the original version of Watterson’s contract with his publishing syndicate, the syndicate would have had the right to continue the strip under the same name with a different artist. Watterson fought several difficult legal battles to rewrite his contract to maintain creative control. 3/12

The uniqueness of Watterson’s situation underscores the emotional impact of his decision to definitively retire “Calvin and Hobbes.” Simply put: readers of popular newspaper comics were not used to popular strips coming to an end. As a result, many felt confused, unfulfilled, even “cheated.” 4/12

Watterson’s reclusive persona contributed to the frustration of some fans. For decades, Watterson has generally declined media interviews and does not answer or receive fan mail. This has led to various attempts to “find” Watterson or convince him to be interviewed. 5/12

Initially, Watterson’s only direct statement on ending the strip was a brief letter published a month before its conclusion. This was the extent of his explanation: “My interests have shifted… and I believe I’ve done what I can do within the constraints of daily deadlines and small panels.” 6/12

As Michael Hingston observes, Watterson’s simple farewell letter wasn’t always received warmly: “To its fans, Calvin and Hobbes was like a masterpiece. Yet Watterson’s public statements suggested he saw it as nothing more than an interesting experiment, one that was easily discarded.” 7/12

Over the years, various individual artists and artist/fan collectives have attempted to continue or speculate on the future of Calvin and Hobbes. One popular version of the future involves Calvin growing up and marrying Susie and passing Hobbes on to their daughter. 8/10

Some of these attempts at continuation are more optimistic than others. For instance, Martine Leavitt’s award-winning 2015 YA novel “Calvin” features a 17-year-old title protagonist haunted (and perhaps protected) by a menacing version of his childhood toy, evoking experiences of schizophrenia. 9/10

Contrasting these often-melancholy continuations and the emotional bereavement of some fans, Watterson’s final “Calvin and Hobbes” strip is demonstrably joyful. In one reading, the title characters’ excitement to explore the fresh snow evokes Watterson’s eagerness to explore other pursuits. 10/12

But the final strip isn’t an exercise in ego. It also celebrates the timelessness & boundless creativity of its title characters, who are bigger than the confines of their strip. Calvin and Hobbes the comic strip may have ended. But Calvin and Hobbes the characters are eager to keep exploring. 11/12

Childhood, like any stage of life, both is and isn’t finite. Time passes, but the past is kept alive by our memories and its indelible influence upon whoever we are and might become. So too with Calvin and Hobbes, whose adventures ended but never end, because there’s always more to explore. 12/12

The naughty child in 18th century culture was a warning, embodying moral imperatives. But by the early 20th century, comic strips like The Katzenjammer Kids & Buster Brown embraced the naughty child as an emancipatory figure, chaotically defying authority & cultural norms. 2/11

Positioned outside adult society, indestructible cartoon children are ideally suited to the kinetic mayhem comics excel at. It also makes them very identifiable; the most popular cartoon kids exemplify Scott McCloud's "amplification through simplification." 3/11

The meanings attached to the naughty child shift in different eras. While naughty boys dominate, Michelle Ann Abate’s Funny Girls: Guffaws, Guts & Gender in Classic American Comics shows a surge of naughty girls between the 1920s & 60s, reflecting destabilized gender roles. 4/11

In every case, naughty children confront social mores, questioning & sometimes critiquing them through their shamelessness & inherent challenge to discourses of innocence that both protect children & police them, demanding they embody a divine purity inaccessible to adults. 5/11

Which brings us, finally, to the X-Babies. The X-Babies are cute and chaotic. They’re also mobilized to enact self-reflexive critiques, of both the X-Men characters themselves & the entire entertainment industry, including work-for-hire superhero comics. 6/11

In UXM Annual #12, the X-Babies are created by Mojo, the spineless dictator of a reality TV-based hellscape, desperate for a new ratings splash. He cycles through multiple X-Men derivations before embracing the X-Babies as a perfectly salable combo of sweetness & violence. 7/11

The X-Babies are a self-effacing nod to the perceived juvenility of superhero comics. In Mojo Mayhem, published 2.5 years before writer Chris Claremont was forced out of the franchise he indelibly transformed, they also reflect the bittersweetness of writing characters one can never own. 8/11

In Mojo Mayhem, the X-Babies are cared for by Ann Nocenti surrogate Ricochet Rita & the perennially identifiable Kitty Pryde. They also kick Claremont out of his own van, leaving him watching from the side of the road as they speed towards their next adventure. 9/11

On the one hand: the X-Babies’ chaotic naughtiness suggests a melancholy acknowledgement of the powerlessness of work-for-hire creators. The X-Men might have felt like Claremont or Nocenti’s children, but they were always really Marvel’s—and Mojo’s. 10/11

On the other hand: the X-Babies’ bombastic resilience embraces the dynamic multiplicity of popular characters whose meaning is always collaborative, between numerous creators and between producers & fans. The X-Babies exceed Claremont’s control—but they also exceed Mojo’s. 11/11

Sometimes, Watterson directly addresses perceptions of comics. Here, Calvin lectures Hobbes about the difference between high art and low art, placing comics in the “low” category. Note how Watterson references pop art appropriations of comics, which many comics fans & creators have criticized. 2/12

But Watterson is also dismissive of some attempts to transform comics into art. This strip evokes fannish defensiveness about the maturity of superhero comics. In commentary on this strip, Watterson says, “you can call it a ‘graphic novel,’ but comic books are still incredibly stupid.” 3/12

Watterson also enjoys using Calvin’s creative ambitions to comment on discourses of art criticism and analysis, exposing and poking fun at both the substance of high art and how it’s sometimes discussed. Calvin’s snow sculptures are frequently employed for this purpose. 4/12

Here, it’s not difficult to infer that Watterson isn’t just commenting on the high art world; he’s also commenting on the demands of being a critically acclaimed syndicated newspaper cartoonist, who’s expected to both inoffensively capture public sentiments and maintain artistic integrity. 5/12

There is often a self-deprecating tone to these comics about art and comics, with Calvin being forced to admit the hollowness of his own pretention. It could be argued that this self-deprecation undercuts the commentary, since the critique is concluded with a dismissive “nevermind.” 6/12

But this undercutting is undercut by Calvin’s genuine (albeit frequently macabre & cynical) creativity. Calvin is legitimately transforming his generic suburban neighborhood into something more magically surreal, just as the comic is transforming the stereotypically bland newspaper comics page. 7/12

But perhaps Watterston’s favourite target is the intersection of art & capitalism. In a world where art–including comic book art–is often bought as an investment to be locked away from public view (or, in the case of comics, slabbed so it can never be read), value is inseparable from marketing. 8/12

Here, Calvin’s saurian rampage, which is “captured on anti-theft cameras,” repeatedly references commodification. Dino-Calvin destroys “priceless paintings” and “wealthy benefactors.” Also, Calvin’s parents contemplate a “Krazy Kat” landscape, evoking the elevation of comics–and its drawbacks. 9/12

Other gestures of artistic self-reflexivity are primarily invested in stylistic playfulness. In this strip, Watterson transforms the strip into a “neo-cubist” style to creatively showcase Calvin’s rejection of mature, empathetic subjectivity in favor of childish simplicity and certainty. 10/12

Calvin and Hobbes also offers commentary on the emotional & material demands of creation. Watterson’s personal history is at play here. He fought a hard battle with his syndicate to take 2 sabbaticals from the strip; at the time, this (objectively reasonable) demand was considered unheard of. 11/12

Calvin and Hobbes wasn’t the first comic to debate its own status as a work of art, and it won’t be the last. But it offers an impressively rich catalog of artistic commentary and debate that is deftly accessible, insightful, and empathetic, embracing cynicism without abandoning optimism. 12/12

From a storytelling perspective, the top panels are extraneous. There’s a practical reason for this. At this time, Watterson (and every other newspaper cartoonist) was required to make strips printable as either 2 or 3 rows, depending on how much space individual papers chose to grant them. 2/12

But the top panels are still meaningful. Plot-wise, they establish that Hobbes enables Calvin; it’s technically Hobbes pushing Calvin down the hill. Visually, the empty backgrounds evokes timelessness while the long panel conveys a sense of space & distance as the wagon picks up speed. 3/12

The third panel establishes the thesis of the debate/monologue. Calvin looking back at Hobbes as the wagon tilts at an alarming angle, wheels bent by speed, humorously reflects Calvin’s egotism. For Calvin, making sure Hobbes hears him is more important than watching the road. 4/12

Throughout, Calvin’s egotistic carelessness is contrasted with Hobbes’ more grounded skepticism. This is represented narratively through Hobbes’ relative silence and mildly sarcastic comments, and visually through his observation of physical perils of which Calvin is defiantly ignorant. 5/12

On the subject of groundedness: note how neither the characters nor their wagon actually touch the earth until the final crash. Calvin rides high on hot air until the logic of gravity pops his bubble. But of course, Calvin doesn’t learn anything; he may be humbled in body but not in spirit. 6/12

The variation and juxtaposition of angles, colours, and framing helps convey the rapid, chaotic motion of the wagon and maintain visual interest through Calvin’s lengthy monologue. It also underscores the content of the monologue, in which Calvin discusses chain reactions and arbitrary choices. 7/12

Watterson’s use of contrasting styles is also notable. Calvin, Hobbes, and the wagon are more expressionistically exaggerated than the comparatively realistic landscape. This contrast both adds depth to Calvin’s monologue and undercuts it; his context is serious but he’s ultimately a cartoon. 8/12

Here, a shift in perspective that places us alongside the characters in the wagon helps build dynamic tension; like the characters, we’re careening over the edge into the unknown. It also continues to ironize Calvin’s egotism; despite the evident danger, Calvin continues to bloviate. 9/12

This panel distills an important aspect of our investment in Calvin’s fantasies & flaws. While we know Calvin is full of it, part of us also roots for him to succeed and admires his reckless courage, expressed here through Calvin’s brief, dramatically heroic moment of flight. 10/12

The two penultimate panels are “prolongation” panels, a technique frequently employed in comic strips to set up a punchline that will land harder through the juxtaposition of one state of affairs and another. We can see Charles Shultz employ a similar technique in this classic “Peanuts” strip. 11/12

The punchline includes self-reflexivity via Hobbes’ wish that “we could talk about these things without the visual aids.” Without the visuals, nothing Calvin says is profound. With the visuals, his words are still silly but capable of inspiring deeper meanings & sincere emotional reactions. 12/12

“Although Calvin spends virtually all of his time with Hobbes, he does not feel sad, isolated, or depressed. Rather than lamenting his limited social life, Calvin embraces it. Watterson’s protagonist does not merely prefer spending time alone, he relishes it.” 2/9

“Whether he is frolicking in nature or fantasizing about travelling through outer space, the best times that Calvin experiences are times that he spends alone. In so doing, this feature forms an overlooked aspect to the strip’s premise as well as to its popularity.” 3/9

Abate reads Calvin against some 2000+ years of scholarship on the subject of the human need for social interact, tracing the concept back to Aristotle. She concludes that there is a longstanding false presumption that being alone is being lonely. 4/9

“Individuals who shun human company and prefer to be alone, however, do not do so because they are immune to loneliness. Rather, they opt for this state because they desire solitude.” Read in this light, Calvin isn’t a sad lonely kid, but simply someone who thrives in solitude: 5/9

“During a time when the ability of individuals to time spent alone was increasingly scarce and even stigmatised, Calvin and Hobbes offered a powerful case study about the benefits, joys, and importance of solitude.” 6/9

Abate then applies C&H’s treatment of isolation to “changes taking place in American daily life and especially within the realm of childhood in the closing decades of the twentieth century.” Here she finds the emergence of helicopter-parenting in response to a media panic over child safety. 7/9

For Abate, Calvin “contradicts this social shift…Solitude allows Calvin the emotional, physical, intellectual, and psychological time to explore, imagine, adventure, ponder, innovate, challenge, dream, question, create, and – of course – have fun.” 8/9

In conclusion, Abate offers the following: “Calvin and Hobbes has long been seen as a comic about friendship. I agree, but with an important modification: Watterson’s strip is about the relationship that we can have with ourselves when we are by ourselves. Let’s go exploring, indeed.” 9/9

Every medium of expression has different tools to represent or transform realities or perceptions. Readers/viewers also bring different expectations to different mediums. Basic examples include: we generally don’t expect novels to have pictures and we generally expect movies to have sound. 2/14

Similarly, we tend to have different expectations of reality in drawn visual mediums, such as comics & cartoons, vs live-action visual mediums, such as films. In general, while live-action visual mediums are often spectacular, we expect them to have more fidelity to observable reality. 3/14

Case in point: comics readers immediately accepted Superman’s ability to “leap tall buildings” (and later, fly). But the marketing slogan for the 1978 Superman film, “you’ll believe a man can fly,” suggests film-goers had to be convinced that Superman could “look real” in live action. 4/14

Because comics realities are fully drawn, readers tend to more readily accept distortions of reality. While advances in CGI technology have made live-action more similar to cartoons, filmic adaptations of superhero comics still emphasize the perceived need to make characters feel “realistic.” 5/14

Darieck Scott and Ramzi Fawaz argue that in comics, “anything that can be drawn can be believed.” Within these fully drawn realities that customarily employ dramatic exaggeration & simplification, a dinosaur piloting a fighter jet is just as acceptable and believable as anything else. 6/14

Which brings us, at last, to Calvin and Hobbes. Watterson represents Hobbes in two distinct ways: as an obviously unalive stuffed toy and as a real albeit cartoonishly anthropomorphic talking tiger. In general, Hobbes is only “alive” when he’s alone with Calvin; everyone else only sees the toy. 7/14

The easiest (and most reductive) explanation for this dichotomy is that Hobbes is not alive, but simply imagined as such by Calvin. IOW: Hobbes is simply a stuffed toy turned imaginary friend (or, in some darker readings of the dynamic, a spectre of Calvin’s dangerously unstable mental health). 8/14

But Watterson also uses stylistic experiments to question the nature of reality within the comic strip, encouraging a looser, more subjective understanding of its world. For instance, some of the wilder forays into fantasy are rendered in a more realistic style than more mundane events. 9/14

For instance, in many of the strips where Calvin and Hobbes are sledding or careening through the forest on their wagon, the cartoonish, impossible movements of the characters are juxtaposed the philosophical nature of their discussions and the more subdued, realistic style of the landscapes. 10/14

Watterson also likes to experiment with more realistic drawing styles when depicting Calvin’s dreams about dinosaurs. While these dreams are clearly delineated as dreams, the juxtaposition of styles encourages us to notice and contemplate these juxtapositions of reality. 11/14

The relative realism of Calvin’s dreams could express the urgency of his dreaming. Or, Calvin’s comparatively lush, detailed dreams are rendered more realistically than our or other characters’ perceptions of simpler, more cartoonish realities to emphasize the subjectiveness of reality. 12/14

Time and time again, Calvin and Hobbes makes the real cartoonish and makes the cartoonish real. Here, Watterson uses the comparatively realistic style of soap operatic serials to depict Calvin & Susie’s presumptively realistic but ultimately ludicrously childish attempt to impersonate adults. 13/14

Douglas Wolk argues that “cartooning is, inescapably, a metaphor for the subjectivity of perception.” So maybe Hobbes’ reality is up to us. Or maybe it doesn’t matter, because in a comic, everything is real because nothing is real. This has always been true. But Watterson underscores it. 14/14

In “The Calvin and Hobbes Tenth Anniversary Book,” Bill Watterson namechecks several influences, including Charles Shultz’s “Peanuts.” Writes Watterson: “Peanuts books were among the first things I ever read, and once I saw them, I knew I wanted to be a cartoonist.” 2/12

Watterson specifically praises Peanuts’ “flat, spare drawings, the honesty of the children’s insecurities, and… Snoopy’s bizarre and separate world.” Calvin and Hobbes similarly embraces the melancholic aspects of childhood and incorporates an animal companion who ruptures reality. 3/12

But Watterson’s Calvin and Hobbes also differs from Peanuts in important ways. While prioritizing spare drawing, Watterson often experiments with lush transformations of his characters’ world. Watterson also pairs portraits of childhood melancholy with anarchic joy and the power of friendship. 4/12

Watterson’s second cited influence is Walt Kelly’s “Pogo”: “Whereas Peanuts is a visually spare strip about private insecurities, Pogo was a lushly drawn strip, full of bombast and physical commotion…. The strip is a wonderful lesson in what a lively, rich world comics can present.” 5/12

Watterson’s love of Pogo can be seen when Calvin and Hobbes roam the lush forests that border Calvin’s home, discussing human nature and world events from the simultaneously ignorant and innocent, and subsequently revealing, perspectives of a child and an anthropomorphic animal. 6/12

But Watterson reserves his highest praise for George Herriman’s “Krazy Kat”: “Everything about the strip is idiosyncratic and peculiar…. In its singular, uncompromised vision, its subtle whimsy and its odd beauty, Krazy Kat stands alone.” 7/12

Calvin and Hobbes is less aggressively experimental than Krazy Kat, which is often discussed in conversation with Dadaist and Surrealist art. But Watterson similarly pursued an uncompromised vision and sometimes directly pays tribute to Herriman. Here, Calvin dreams a very Krazy Kat landscape. 8/12

We can also read Calvin and Hobbes in conversation with other “naughty child” comic strips, from “Buster Brown” through “Nancy” and “Dennis the Menace.” And Calvin’s bombastic yet sometimes melancholy & menacing dreamscapes can evoke Winsor McCay’s classic “Little Nemo in Slumberland.” 9/12

Other of Watterson’s preoccupations, such as his verbal and visual engagements with discourses of fine art, can also be traced back to earlier comics. For instance, Calvin’s experience of becoming “neo-cubist” has much in common with this 1930 strip from Frank King’s “Gasoline Alley.” 10/12

Arguably, Calvin and Hobbes is immediately appealing not because it’s totally unique, but because it possesses a sophisticated ability to incorporate and innovate aspects of the familiar. This combination of sameness and difference makes the comic feel both comforting and challenging. 11/12

Readers raised on comics can quickly recognize the world of Calvin and Hobbes while appreciating altered expectations for that world, in which kids may or may not be innocent, realities may or may not be real, and artistic visions are both entirely seriously and seriously self-deprecating. 12/12