Here is a wiki source (insert error bars here) discussion of his stance on his work being officially licensed. He thought that use of his work outside of a comic strip would cheapen the value of the strip itself. This was frusterating as a child (who wouldn’t want a fucking Hobbes plushy) but now later I can see that it was at the very least a very defensible choice. Compare how people feel about C&H vs something that was commercialized to death like Garfield. Anyway, hope it’s useful.
Could you link to more information about this?
He’s famously against all commercialization of the strip and I think he’d feel this similarly devalues it.
One source.
That seems to be mostly about monetization and commodification, which should already be absent from shitposting.
I get that but I respect Watterson too much to assume his stance.
Well… which is it? Do you respect him too much to assume his stance or are you assuming he’d feel this similarly devalues it?
I mean I don’t want to assume he’d be alright with it therefore I won’t use it. Nothing I said was definitive, just what I think.
Well somebody should pop over to Chagrin Falls and ask him
Did you mean “this” stance, maybe?
I suppose that would also have worked, but no.
Here is a wiki source (insert error bars here) discussion of his stance on his work being officially licensed. He thought that use of his work outside of a comic strip would cheapen the value of the strip itself. This was frusterating as a child (who wouldn’t want a fucking Hobbes plushy) but now later I can see that it was at the very least a very defensible choice. Compare how people feel about C&H vs something that was commercialized to death like Garfield. Anyway, hope it’s useful.