Peanuts is arse.
Calvin and Hobbes, on the other hand, is marvellous.

I've yet to find anyone who could explain the appeal of Doonesbury - any offers?
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Sun 8 Jan 2012, 21:25, 2 replies)

I suspect unfamiliarity with peanuts behind that claim
They are tainted by the organ in which they feature and also by the t.v stuff which was a little too saccharine in tone. I'm not suggesting the strips don't have some of that but there is a real darkness at the heart.

I would add that you'd be surprised at how many of Bill Waterson's gags are predated by Schulz. I have read all of Calvin and Hobbes and a big chunk of Schulz's total oeuvre and the parallels are obvious

The other problem is that Snoopy was so marketable it unbalanced the Dynamic.

I genuinely urge you to immerse yourself in a long run of Peanuts as you are missing a good thing.

Bleakness-
lakeland.edu/UserFiles/Image/peanuts_futile.jpg
peanutsblog.tumblr.com/post/2831168447
2.bp.blogspot.com/-Yft7ONAQgjE/TlcbJ15DfOI/AAAAAAAAABc/cWd0MbP8zis/s1600/peanuts.gif
www.dograt.com/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/peanuts.gif
www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=587070&gsub=89181
2.bp.blogspot.com/-uP3lYwgCTy4/Tcexvjjpl_I/AAAAAAAAADI/gN-g8K5Wkz8/s1600/1.jpg
2.bp.blogspot.com/-k7veqIvR0o4/TZt9uUKhvZI/AAAAAAAAAK0/M9lTnc3pkIQ/s1600/3675412366_0b8988becd_o.gif
pressthisstudio.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/peanuts0813611.gif

And a few which remind me of Calvin and Hobbes
4.bp.blogspot.com/_mpb3WiKWZRQ/TQI3Dv0hwLI/AAAAAAAAAoE/PM9QSCrNAhk/s1600/peanuts%2B1.jpg
www.fivecentsplease.org/dpb/snowman.gif

And just funny
4.bp.blogspot.com/-nM44tDCLKFk/TfvJ-EDJNMI/AAAAAAAAAn8/cgQmWyaZ50Y/s1600/linus-and-lucy.jpg
www.readingreview.com/comics/pages_jpg/peanutsparade-08.jpg

As for Doonesbury it's both soapy and current affairs driven. If you read it daily it can be funny but it's a bit too arch and can date poorly. When it goes right though
www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/articles/2005/12/1218doonesbury_lg.gif
(unclestinky, Mon 9 Jan 2012, 2:25, closed)

Thanks.
I've read loads of Peanuts (used to get the collections as Christmas presents, along with Garfield), but I don't remember it anything like as fondly as I do C&H.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 11 Jan 2012, 19:30, closed)

Peanuts was arse
I thinks Schultz ran out of steam in the first five years and kept plugging away for another twenty, or was it thirty.
Calvin and Hobbes - lovely stories, brilliant drawing.
Doonesbury appeals to smug liberals, he's the patron saint of Unitarians.
(the other guy not the one that gave you coochie warts, Mon 9 Jan 2012, 4:23, closed)

Peanut's ran from
1955 till 2000. Not so surprising if some themes come round again. In fact one of the links illustrates exactly that, the same strip but with different characters 20 years apart.

I would say that Calvin is much more immediately funny a but there's a generational/permissive society thing going on too. And whilst Peanuts was definitely sharper in it's earliest years it was when the full loserdom of Charlie Brown developed that the engine of the longevity was created. And in any case Lucy and the Football or Calvin trying to be good each Christmas or the variations on the unusual snow sculptures are equally thematically repeated so what's the difference?

Essentially you like one and not the other and that's the difference. Ah well De gustibus non est disputandum as they say. And they are right, there is no dispute as I am clearly right
(unclestinky, Mon 9 Jan 2012, 14:07, closed)