Why B.D. Blows
The Boston Globe quotes Reason's own "self-described" Jesse Walker on the sad fate of Gary Trudeau, who's become even less funny than the similarly named former prime minister of Canada:
Critics such as Reason magazine managing editor Jesse Walker, a self-described libertarian, say the problem with the strip is that the older and angrier Trudeau gets, the less consistently funny and cutting edge it becomes.
"He's a cartoonist whose best days are behind him," says Walker, who is 33. "He's become more like a Democrat than a humorist. At times, he just seems mad at Bush or the NRA. Even when he's kind of `on,' he's lost that edge."
Whole thing here.
And while you're waiting for the revival of the Broadway musical version of Doonesbury, check out Walker's own excellent essay on Trudeau's slide into baby boom suckage that originally appeared in the July 2002 ish of Reason.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I'm not sure which was my most eloquent moment, the "like" or the "kind of."
In answer to someone who will soon be asking about the title, B. D. stands for Boondocks. (Gee, I hope I'm right.)
This reminds me of a critique of Herblock which may have even been written about him posthumously (saints presoive us), in Reason. Herblock was in the same scarred, tattered, much abused vein.
Humor must be a broad jump into a totally different, just barely related topic.
Herblock, Trudeau and the author of Boondocks are as humorous as watching a duck nibble bladderwort.
Indubitably
ALL daily cartoonists, even the best of them, burn out after several years and start ringing the changes on the same two or three themes. Same thing happens with stand-up comedians. Trudeau still manages to come up with a couple of amusing strips per month. Boondocks has always sucked and always will suck.
Damn... is it just me or is the staff of Reason just looking to piss up everyone's flag pole? Doonesbury? Last time I checked that's a comic strip... gimme a break...
Stopped reading Doonesbury decades ago. Just exactly when did Dilbert sell out, though? Scott's strips take two panels running up to a sharp rejoinder, but the third one goes for unfunny, flat, unlikely pabulum. Burnout or sellout?
I think all artists burn out or sell out eventually (not just limited to cartoonists).
It's a big part of the reason I will forever respect Bill Watterson. He had the foresight to stop Calvin and Hobbes (and give up TRUCKLOADS of money) before the inevitable decline.
"We are on the bleeding edge of culture," says The Boston Globe, a self-described relevant publication. "We have a writing staff on the pulse of American political satire," says The Globe, which is 132 years-old.
MALAK,
I couldn't agree more. Bloom County was the best comic strip I ever read (the Bill the Cat presidential bids in 1984 and 1988 were nothing short of inspirational), and while I was sad to see it go I respected Breathed's wanting to quit before it got stale. But when Outland showed up it was so pathetic, I didn't read more than a few of them (although as far as I know it still appears in my local Sunday funnies).
Doonesbury had a longer run than most comics; it was definitely worth reading up until the mid-80s. Of course, that was two decades ago...
As for when Dilbert went downhill, I'd say it happened when Adams decided to change the strip from a weird-and-geeky comic to a nothing-but-office-jokes comic.
Russ: You're quite right. The piece is about Doonesbury. My remark to Rick was poorly phrased; I should have said "describes" rather than "is about."
So, Jesse, when do you get your spot on VH1's "I LOVE 5 SECONDS AGO"?
I mean, you've got it down pat- snarky semi-relevant figure making fun of an Icon who's been a genius for decades.
Are you after Michael Ian Black's job?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am bored to tears with the apparently endless mantra coming from Reason's Gen X editors that baby boomers suck. For my money, the magazine was far more readable and infintely more significant when Virginia Postrel was at the editorial helm.
I am, of course, a boomer myself. While I don't think that generational distinction by itself carries any particular weight, I don't think it's a valid reason to get dumped on, either. I mean, isn't that sort of stereotyping precisely the kind of thing that real libertarians ought to disdain?
Clearly, Mr. Gillespie has some personal issues at work in this matter but, for god's sake, I wish he'd learn to keep them to himself.
Garry Trudeau's first name is misspelled.
"I am bored to tears with the apparently endless mantra coming from Reason's Gen X editors," said Rick Blaine, a self-described Boomer.
"I don't think that generational distinction by itself carries any particular weight," added Blaine, who can be reached at rickblaine1954@yahoo.com, and who is 50.
the dominant themes of american political discourse can be described as follows:
"The only person I know who can?t afford health insurance is one guy who keeps losing his job cause he gets drunk with his co-workers and calls in sick the next day."
and
"We have a nation of 18-26'ers who happily stay home on voting day, and who actually let themselves get intimidated by people who suggest that any dissent is unpatriotic -- and that goes double, embarrassingly enough, for the Ivy League bunch."
you can now fight over who the bigger fuckwit is. or who needs to leave the house/suburbs more often.
I think all artists burn out or sell out eventually ... It's a big part of the reason I will forever respect Bill Watterson. He had the foresight to stop Calvin and Hobbes (and give up TRUCKLOADS of money) before the inevitable decline.
I'm also glad that we don't have to see Watterson stumbling along in his artistic dotage. Besides the likelihood that he'd have come to rehashing old gags and grinding out lame new ones, the few political points he'd been making might have become more frequent, more obvious, and less funny. I recall one strip in which Calvin's dad is shopping at the supermarket. He looks at the shelves laden with jars of peanut butter of various kinds -- smooth, crunchy, extra smooth, extra crunchy, etc. -- and he's disturbed by the idea that such a simple food would be available in so many varieties. "Who demands so much choice?" he asks himself, utterly astonished. He makes a to-do in the supermarket about having to give up so much of his time out of his life to choose the right peanut butter for himself and his family. Imagine how thin commentary like this would wear in the same hands year after year.
What's your point Pavel?
Trudeau is like McCartney, who was also charming and talented in the early 70's. Smoking dope takes the edge off after a few decades, y'know?
What's your point Pavel?
I thought my two posts were funny because:
(1) The first direct attack on anyone based on generation was the Globe reference to Jesse's age. Jesse's article was about Doonesbury's suckage, not a direct commentary on a generation.
(2) The second generational attack was on Reason's "Gen X editors" fired from rickblaine1954@yahoo.com.
I don't care if I'm the only one laughing.
...In case you didn't know, we Xers don't care about anything.
"...retired man on a golf course sipping a Cosmopolitan" ?!
Cosmo?? Try scotch, or a dry martini. And since when (illicit hip-flasks aside) can you drink on a golf course?
I completely disagree with everything (okay almost everything) that Julia had to say, but it was a GREAT SCREED.
Jesse ain't like any of that. And the Doonesbury piece was great when he wrote it and it still is.
I will, however, concede that youth and inexperience can color one's outlook and that particular phenomenon shows up sometimes in fairly obvious ways, both here and elsewhere.
Youth is wasted on the young regards, TWC
What the hell happened on this thread? Are half the posts deleted? Who's arguing with who and why? About what?
What the hell happened on this thread? Are half the posts deleted? Who's arguing with who and why? About what?
Julia: Jesse a Republican?
Can't be 'cause just a few days ago, right here, in this forum he claimed he likes the ACLU.
That makes him a flaming pinko in my book, Ma'am.
> And since when (illicit hip-flasks aside) can > you drink on a golf course?
Erm...since a long time ago in many locales. Ever hear of the beer (girl) cart?
Timon, I guess I wouldn't know, having never actually set foot on a course that didn't feature little windmills and S-bends.
The Boston Globe quotes Reason's own "self-described" Jesse Walker...
Gee...Jesse won't even give his parents credit for anything.
The new Doonesbury drinking game: each weekend gather up the past weeks strips and drink one beer for each strip where the joke is "lol republicans r dumb"
Who's attacking boomers qua boomers, Rick? The article is about the decline of boomer liberalism, which is distinct from the liberalism of earlier and later generations.
Agreed that BLOOM COUNTY best daily strip ever.
Outland actually stopped about 10 years ago. About 3-4 months ago, Breathed returned to action with a Sunday strip OPUS.
B.D. once got a purple heart in Nam for cutting his thumb on a beer can tab back when pop tops came off and the strip was funny. That was before B.D. started to Blow.
As a person who was breathing and coherent back in the days when Doonesbury was fresh:
1. I despised everything that Trudeau stood for (still do, that whiny little schmuck)
2. I thought Doonesbury was funny as hell
Therefore I was constantly faced with the promise of eternal damnation resulting from the temptation to sneak a peek at the strip.
I am not sure that Reason has it in for Boomers (they might though). I?m betting that Nick G. may just be at the very back end of the Baby Boom generation. Plus I doubt he is a whole lot younger than Virginia so we can?t make a generalization there.
For my money though, Generation Xers are right on because they brought back good coffee. For twenty years a person could not get a decent cup of coffee anywhere on the planet except Seattle and San Francisco. Why? Because all of my pot smoking, Budweiser guzzling, long haired, drug crazed, hippie friends decided that coffee was ever so got dam bourgeoisie (and so fifties). And the market responded by giving us insipid to awful brown stuff in a cup that was supposed pass for coffee.
Then one day these kids we called Baby Busters grew up and started drinking real coffee. And we old fat guys came to rejoice because we could go anywhere in any city in the US and get a really good cup of coffee. We could buy great coffee at the market and at Costco, bring it home and grind it fresh. We could even get a passable cup of coffee in a coffee shop (now there is an irony). And who is responsible for this miracle? The Generation Xers, that?s who. This singular triumph outshines anything ever achieved by the generation that went before.
So don?t be baggin? on Reason for baggin? on the boomers. They might take the coffee away.
Jesse,
Your colleague and editor-in-chief has been fairly consistent in his denigration of boomers. This reference to "baby boom suckage" is only the most recent, although not the most egregious. (That distinction goes to his downright silly piece on the Beatles a few years back.)
As for TWC's take on Gen Xers and good coffee...well, I'll concede that particular point. But, as the saying goes, even a blind pig finds an acorn every once in a while.
You know what I hate about baby boomers?
The way they pretended that their standard generational rebellion constituted some sort of principled poltical sea change against oppression.
The arrogant assumption that their dismissal of their parents' generation's tastes and lifestyles was somehow a unique blow for individuality.
Right Jesse?
SteveInClearwater is actually Steve Dallas' little brother . . .
Is there any chance that we can turn this into a "my favorite comic strips" thread? If there is, allow me to report that looking at old "Maakies" (T. Millionaire) strips at the Strand Annex this weekend had me laughing out loud, and that I laugh every time I open up my dog eared "Jim's Journal" (S. Dikkers) anthology.
Thanks for the insight into my politics and motivations, Julia. I didn't realize that I was a Republican, or that a fondness for subtlety was more common among the young than the old. I sure didn't realize that I wanted to "eschew everyone over 40," and would have thought that an essay that praises early Doonesbury, early Li'l Abner, early Peanuts, early Gasoline Alley, and all eras of Pogo would indicate the opposite. But you seem very sure of yourself, so I can hardly disagree.
One question, though: If you're so down on subtletly, how come the argumentative thread connecting your points is so ... well ... subtle? At times, I must confess, it's so subtle that I can scarcely see it at all.
Berke Breathed almost did the same thing as Watterson. But then he pooched it with that odious Outland strip. Ugh!
Julie,
Thanks to the boomers the only things that I know are wrong are:
Allowing boomers who can?t get real jobs to set school curriculum so that the stupidest folks in the country don?t feel bad that they are stupid. And correct spelling is ?optional? (at least in NYC public schools).
Allowing folks on welfare to get increases in their allotments for the more children they have, yet getting decreases when they get married.
Not allowing young women to kill their children if the children are inconvenient. If a baby can be killed when it?s slightly in the way, what in god?s name is wrong with killing a bunch of smelly, weird foreigners who do not allow their women to kill their children or not wear a veil?
The idea that no one can afford health insurance, The only person I know who can?t afford health insurance is one guy who keeps losing his job cause he gets drunk with his co-workers and calls in sick the next day. This person suffers more from point #1 than from alcoholism, btw.
No one I know has died from lung cancer, but cancer is used to push all sorts of nanny state laws onto me. Seems like a scam, especially since the people dying from lung cancer smoked way more than anyone does these days, and they all grew up when every building had a coal furnace. Of course mentioning that wouldn?t support the boomers? nanny state policies, would it?
Since the boomers were so interested in pushing their religion of secularity onto the country I did not have the opportunity to go the Sunday school, because it?s all lies anyway, right? Probably cooked up by a bunch of white men, so those ideas of turning the other cheek have to be wrong, used to keep the little people in line.
And since my lack of religious instruction has made me realize that old folks are a waste of resources and Medicare and Social Security should be abolished since they are throwing good money after bad, I?d say the boomers sowed the seeds 40 years ago of the whirlwind they will soon reap!
>and that I laugh every time I open up my dog >eared "Jim's Journal" (S. Dikkers) anthology.
>Posted by Mitch at June 2, 2004 11:17 AM
"Jim's Journal" absolutely rules. Good call, Mitch.
I intend this only as constructive criticism of one essay, not as open season on Jesse Walker.
Jesse wrote in an earlier post: 'The article is about the decline of boomer liberalism, which is distinct from the liberalism of earlier and later generations.'
No it isn't. It's about the decline of Trudeau's liberalism. The essay contains only one paragraph that even hints at making that case, the one beginning "But the biggest change is political." This paragraph merely mentions other formerly liberal humor outlets without giving examples of their decline. I took that as a sideline to soften the Trudeau-bashing a bit: he's not the only one.
As a critical piece about Gary Trudeau it's great, but as an article about the decline of boomer liberalism it's strawman stuff.
I mean, you've got it down pat- snarky semi-relevant figure making fun of an Icon who's been a genius for decades.
Yes, but the problem is that the decades in which he was a genius were the 1970s and 1980s. It's been almost twenty years now. At this point he's really pushing for a Lifetime Achievement Award in Not Knowing When It's Time to Quit.