- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,767
Below is an image from the TWU sponsored anti-AMFA website:
Ubiquitous Stickitus
I've seen them, you've seen them - chances are someone who has read this website (a decidedly slim demographic, I assure you) is driving around with one on his car right now. It's that decal that shows a devious-looking little boy with his back to you, urinating on the emblem of your choice. He may be wearing a sombrero, a fireman's helmet, or any number of more specific garb. Usually though, he's just wearing tousled hair, a striped rugby shirt, and a mischievous expression. Oh yeah, and the crack of his ass is hanging out. I'm all for freedom of expression, but the pervasiveness of this vulgar little design just bothers me.
Low Class, White Trash
Let me be clear: it's not the vulgarity itself that gets to me. I'm a big fan of some of the most off-color material you've ever heard. It's the one-two punch of a tasteless cartoon with a little boy with his pants down, wizzing on (insert your unloved symbol here), and the fact that it's rubber-stamped all over my world. The first time I saw it, it was edgy. Sometime between then, and the hundredth time I saw it, the novelty wore off. It's just so damn CRASS. And I usually like crass! Not this time...
Where Have You Gone, Calvin & Hobbes?
For those of you who don't know, "Calvin and Hobbes" was a syndicated comic strip that ran for years, featuring a stuffed tiger who came to life with the magical imagination of his owner, a little boy who slyly combined a childish innocence and wonder with a grizzled cynicism and wit. This was no mindless "Dennis the Menace" ripoff where the same one-dimensional situations were rehashed into a new square box, day in and day out - this cartoon had a wry outlook, with sarcasm that could slice right through the newsprint and dribble out into your morning coffee, if you weren't careful. And the art, while typically simple and sketchy, could suddenly veer off into snarling dinosaurs and vibrant alien landscapes when Calvin's fervid inventiveness took over during a dull schoolday, or at play in the woods surrounding his home. While Calvin could be a devious little runt, the overall feel of this cartoon was not one that lent itself to this kind of undignified trash. Which leads to the next point:
Does Calvin's Owner Approve?
Aside from the simple tastelessness, I have to wonder about this sticker's omnipresence: does Calvin and Hobbes's creator, Bill Watterson, know that people are using his cartoon's image for this vile little enterprise? Is he cashing in on this gross form of expression? Is there some copyrighting loophole that allows for this nonsense to go on, leaving the character's creator powerless to enforce his control over his creation? Or is it possible that he is unaware that Calvin's image is being used in this coarse manner? Given the ubiquity of the decal, at least in my area, I cannot imagine his has not seen it somewhere...
As you can tell from the third paragraph, I have a lot of esteem for the Calvin & Hobbes comics, and am appalled that their star character is being used in this light. I only hope that his creator is nobly unaware of this betrayal of sensibility, or at the very least, that he bought something really nice with the money he got selling Calvin's soul.
Ubiquitous Stickitus
I've seen them, you've seen them - chances are someone who has read this website (a decidedly slim demographic, I assure you) is driving around with one on his car right now. It's that decal that shows a devious-looking little boy with his back to you, urinating on the emblem of your choice. He may be wearing a sombrero, a fireman's helmet, or any number of more specific garb. Usually though, he's just wearing tousled hair, a striped rugby shirt, and a mischievous expression. Oh yeah, and the crack of his ass is hanging out. I'm all for freedom of expression, but the pervasiveness of this vulgar little design just bothers me.
Low Class, White Trash
Let me be clear: it's not the vulgarity itself that gets to me. I'm a big fan of some of the most off-color material you've ever heard. It's the one-two punch of a tasteless cartoon with a little boy with his pants down, wizzing on (insert your unloved symbol here), and the fact that it's rubber-stamped all over my world. The first time I saw it, it was edgy. Sometime between then, and the hundredth time I saw it, the novelty wore off. It's just so damn CRASS. And I usually like crass! Not this time...
Where Have You Gone, Calvin & Hobbes?
For those of you who don't know, "Calvin and Hobbes" was a syndicated comic strip that ran for years, featuring a stuffed tiger who came to life with the magical imagination of his owner, a little boy who slyly combined a childish innocence and wonder with a grizzled cynicism and wit. This was no mindless "Dennis the Menace" ripoff where the same one-dimensional situations were rehashed into a new square box, day in and day out - this cartoon had a wry outlook, with sarcasm that could slice right through the newsprint and dribble out into your morning coffee, if you weren't careful. And the art, while typically simple and sketchy, could suddenly veer off into snarling dinosaurs and vibrant alien landscapes when Calvin's fervid inventiveness took over during a dull schoolday, or at play in the woods surrounding his home. While Calvin could be a devious little runt, the overall feel of this cartoon was not one that lent itself to this kind of undignified trash. Which leads to the next point:
Does Calvin's Owner Approve?
Aside from the simple tastelessness, I have to wonder about this sticker's omnipresence: does Calvin and Hobbes's creator, Bill Watterson, know that people are using his cartoon's image for this vile little enterprise? Is he cashing in on this gross form of expression? Is there some copyrighting loophole that allows for this nonsense to go on, leaving the character's creator powerless to enforce his control over his creation? Or is it possible that he is unaware that Calvin's image is being used in this coarse manner? Given the ubiquity of the decal, at least in my area, I cannot imagine his has not seen it somewhere...
As you can tell from the third paragraph, I have a lot of esteem for the Calvin & Hobbes comics, and am appalled that their star character is being used in this light. I only hope that his creator is nobly unaware of this betrayal of sensibility, or at the very least, that he bought something really nice with the money he got selling Calvin's soul.