3 ms·
Eh. There is one thing I don't agree with in the name of integrity: Waterson didn't allow sales of a stuffed pet tiger akin to Hobbes, which millions of childre
by selfmodruntime 4mo ago
Eh. There is one thing I don't agree with in the name of integrity: Waterson didn't allow sales of a stuffed pet tiger akin to Hobbes, which millions of children (me included) must've dreamt of. He could've made it affordable and so keep his integrity.
- tombert 4mo agoI mean, I think he was just afraid that the comic would become a merchandise machine instead of a comic, and I think he didn't want that.
- fragmede 4mo agoThere's like 100 of them on Etsy right now.
- wrs 4mo agoAs the article points out, the reason for that particular lack of merchandise is even deeper. > Watterson insisted that if he wasn’t going to settle the question of Hobbes, then he definitely wouldn’t let some toy manufacturer settle it by turning Hobbes “into a stuffed toy for real, and deprive the strip of an element of its magic”.
- vasco 4mo agoHaving a toy representation of the tiger doesn't mean anything about what the tiger is or represents. I'm with the downvoted OP, it's a holier than thou position and many people would've had even extra joy compared to just having the comic books. Plus, people make their own anyway.
- steve_adams_86 4mo agoSomeone making their own is exactly how it should be. This is perfectly aligned with the spirit of the character. A factory churning out clones of Hobbes, and Watterson essentially making a statement that Hobbes is in fact just a toy would go against that spirit. Some things really are better when you need to use your imagination.