The all-time greatest comic strip
IMPORTANT! Wednesday evening (depending on where you are), Monte Schulz will be in an online discussion with Mark Evanier and Lee Mendelson, long-time associate of Monte’s father, and co-producer of the famous Peanuts TV cartoons. CLICK HERE to read Mark’s post about this event.
Charles Schulz and Lee Mendelson
DON’T MISS IT! Stu’s Show on Shokus Internet Radio, Wednesday at 7 PM ET!
English author Brian Sibley has received e-mail from Jean Schulz, and he’s posted it on his blog. Click here to read.
If you haven’t read Monte Schulz’s comment on Mr. Media‘s audio interview with David Michaelis, and how the book came to be written, click here. This Peanuts cartoon seems somewhat apropos. Note that the word balloon in the first panel is not touching the top border. I’m sure you must know why!
©UFS
Cartoonist and Charles Schulz admirer Jimmy Johnson seems to have started his commentary on the Michaelis biography of Schulz. I’ve figured out how to link directly to Jimmy’s posts, so click here for the first one, and here for his second. At the moment it appears Jimmy has a missing image at that link. In reference to his former wife Rheta’s authorized biography of Sparky Schulz, Jimmy says, “As I indicated in an earlier post, I was not just a bystander to all this.” I’m looking forward to what he has to say.
Bob Andelman, aka Mr. Media, makes a comment on one of my posts about Monte Schulz, at this link. Andelman has posted an audio interview with David Michaelis, the author of the controversial book Schulz and Peanuts.
I’m going to do something I don’t normally do, and that’s hotlink to Mr. Andelman’s MP3 file. I think he should give streaming audio a try, and this is my way of nudging him in that direction. I would also suggest editing the properties of the MP3 files to include an artist and title, so the player could display something like “Mr. Media” and “David Michaelis Interview.” First, the David Michaelis interview…
[audio:http://www.andelman.com/mrmedia-pod/MM-DavidMichaelis101707.mp3]I recommend listening to what Michaelis has to say, but as I’ve said before, while reading the book I’ve come around to an understanding what Monte and his sisters Amy and Jill are getting at in their criticism of Michaelis’ analysis of Charles M. Schulz as a man and as a father.
I’m very pleased to see that Andelman has also posted an interview with none other than Joe Sinnott, who I saw in New York a week ago. Thanks very much for this, Bob!
[audio:http://www.andelman.com/mrmedia-pod/MM-JoeSinnott071007.mp3]My buddy D.F. Rogers points out that the synopsis of David Michaelis’ biography of N.C. Wyeth isn’t all that distinctly different from that of his biography of C.M. Schulz.
For forty-three years, starting in 1902, N.C. Wyeth painted landscapes, still lifes, portraits, and murals, as well as illustrations for a long shelf of world literature. Yet despite worldwide acclaim, he judged himself a failure, believing that illustration was of no importance. David Michaelis tells the story of Wyeth’s family through four generations — a saga that begins and ends with tragedy — and brings to life the huge-spirited, deeply complicated man, and an America that was quickly vanishing.
After a lot of furious flipping through various portions of the Michaelis biography of Schulz, I am now slowly and deliberating reading it front-to-finish. Yes, Schulz was complicated, but in the book “complicated” does indeed seem to mean the same thing as “negative.” By definition, a single significant aspect of someone’s personality isn’t what makes them complicated.
I got a laugh of out Monte Schulz’s comment about his brother Craig that’s in a previous post.
I just wanted David Van Taylor to tell a more complete story and to give some clarification to a story my brother tells regarding “us” riding our dirt bikes on the roads and not being bothered by the cops — none of us except him either owned or rode dirt bikes, and David only used that clip to “show” how pampered we were back then, and privileged, neither of which was true.
The reason it’s funny to me is my brother rode dirt bikes, but I never did. I would have the same reaction as Monte if my brother said “we” in a way that sounded like a reference to our family, rather than to his friends. Here’s Craig on a dirt bike.
