See All Topics

Home / Section: Comic strips

Calvin minus Hobbes strips posted

In the same vein as Garfield minus Garfield, Jeff Ocean has created a sample of Calvin minus Hobbes. He concludes that unlike Garfield Minus Garfield, Calvin without Hobbes is “sad.”

I won?t be posting any more of these. They?re too sad. If any brave soul wants to take up the project, a la Garfield minus Garfield, have at it.

It looks like it’s not entirely without Hobbes. Jeff Photoshopped in the doll Hobbes where the “alive” Hobbes would normally be.

Community Comments

#1 Ben Paddon
June/9/2010
@ 10:26 am

I actually rather liked these.

#2 Rodd Perry
June/9/2010
@ 10:49 am

Please, please Jeff Ocean take these down before you’re forced to. Garfield minus Garfield is meta and simple and it works. Photoshopping is trying to add your own layer of meaning, and it’s not sad, it just misses the point.

#3 Scott Metzger
June/9/2010
@ 10:52 am

Creepy.

#4 Mike Cope
June/9/2010
@ 11:22 am

The imaginary numbers one (7th down) is actually pretty funny.

But knowing how much Watterson valued the art side of his commercial endeavour, I can’t imagine him jumping for joy over this sort of tampering with his personal expression.

#5 Jim
June/9/2010
@ 11:24 am

Is this really necessary? I’m not sure “sad” would be the best way to describe this. All it manages to do is present the inside joke that everyone was already aware of.

#6 jhorsley3
June/9/2010
@ 11:29 am

Comes across as a messed up kid hanging his doll. Which I guess would be the reality of Calvin & Hobbes.

Though, I find it amusing.

#7 August J. Pollak
June/9/2010
@ 11:31 am

The guy who made GMG said something about this at a convention and I agree with him. This premise doesn’t work because the key element of Garfield is how the two characters are both interacting with the audience but never (at least verbally) each other. This, like any other strip, is just removing half the dialogue.

Blondie minus Dagwood! Family Circus minus Billy! This is lazy and is going to get boring very quickly.

#8 Matt Bors
June/9/2010
@ 12:08 pm

Also, GMG makes Jon look like a nut… this makes Calvin look like a kid that plays with his stuffed animal, which… he is. Isn’t that what C+H was – a boy who pretended his stuffed animal was real because he had an awesome imagination and adults were boring and did strips like these?

#9 Nelson Dewey
June/9/2010
@ 5:21 pm

There are envelopes that don’t need pushing.

#10 Ed Harrington
June/9/2010
@ 9:33 pm

Ummm… yeah…. I Don’t like it. It’s missing the vast emptiness that Garfield Minus Garfield has. Well, I’m going to go in the opposite vein and start ADDING instead of Subtracting: Who’s in the mood for some Cathy Plus Zippy?

#11 darryl ayo brathwaite
June/10/2010
@ 8:38 am

Blasphemy.

#12 Clay Jones
June/10/2010
@ 10:41 am

I think this makes people think, in that it shows Calvin for what he really is…a kid simply playing with a stuffed animal. What’s sad is with this depiction, you’re seeing Calvin the way the other characters saw him.
The biggest way it’s sad, is that I read these strips so many times that I know what the missing dialogue/text is supposed to say.

This isn’t blasphemy. If nothing else, it’s an analysis of an art form.

#13 Rick Schmitz
June/10/2010
@ 9:27 pm

I agree with Clay… it’s pretty interesting. Also, I think a couple of the gags have been improved upon.

#14 darryl ayo brathwaite
June/11/2010
@ 8:25 am

You guys are out to lunch. This is comics heresy. It just doesn’t work as Garfield Minus Garfield did. You’re spray-painting on top of the Mona Lisa.

#15 darryl ayo brathwaite
June/11/2010
@ 8:40 am

Further

more:

I am not all-for this new culture of “recontextualizing” everything. You want something that “makes people think?” Try reading the ACTUAL text.

A culture of illiterates who have the audacity to “RE-contextualize,” you gotta be kidding me.

#16 Beulah Wormwood
June/11/2010
@ 11:27 am

Obvious, hamfisted AND imitative? Sign me up!!!

#17 Terry LaBan
June/11/2010
@ 2:12 pm

It’s like if Calvin was a real kid instead of a schizophrenic!

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.