For decades,Calvin and Hobbesfans have debated whether Hobbes is “real” or not, but in an interview from the late 1980s,creator Bill Watterson stated that the “ultimate reality” of the tiger’s true nature was not important –and, in fact,Watterson suggested that the ambiguity of Hobbes' existence was actually one of the cartoon’s core strengths.
Speaking withThe Comics Journalin 1989, Watterson pushed back on the idea that Hobbes is “explicitly"a figment of Calvin’s imagination, calling it an"assumption” on the part of adultCalvin and Hobbesreaders. However, rather than asserting that the character is 100% empirically real, the artist instead advocated for a more nuanced understanding of reality when it came to the comic.
In this way, Bill Watterson offered insight into his ambitious approach to the comic medium, which he was ahead of his time in viewing as an authentic literary outlet.
Bill Watterson On The “Literary Device” Of Blurring Fantasy And Reality In “Calvin And Hobbes”
On The “Fantasy/Reality Question”
As Bill Watterson explained toThe Comics Journal, one thing that the debate over whether Hobbes is real or imaginary doesn’t account for is his intentionality. The uncertainty of Hobbes' nature is a product of Watterson’s approach. Had he approached writing and illustrating the cartoon as if Hobbes were unquestionably imaginary,Calvin and Hobbeswould have been very different. The same goes for ifthe character were certifiably, unequivocally real. The openness of the question, and lack of a definitive answer, were actually baked into the experience of reading Watterson’s comic.
The author explained it this way:
The fantasy/reality question is a literary device, so the ultimate reality of it doesn’t really matter that much anyway. In other words, when Dorothy’s in Oz, if you want to make this obviously a dream, it becomes stupid — you confine yourself.
In other words, the “fantasy/realityquestion” was deliberately cultivated by Watterson, rather than arising as an inadvertent byproduct of inconsistencies. Far from wanting to put the question to rest, Watterson sought to leave it open-ended. Another way to look at it: instead of wanting to supply a single, authoritative answer to the question of Hobbes' reality, Watterson reserved the right to continue giving contradictory evidence, leaving both sides of the argument with evidence to support their perspective.
The Argument For Ambiguity, According To Calvin And Hobbes' Bill Watterson
A More “Obvious” Answer Is Less Interesting
Watterson’s use ofTheWizard of Ozas an analogy for reality inCalvin and Hobbesis interesting in its own right, and worth exploring in a bit more detail. The 1939 film is arguably most famous for its “it was all a dream’ending, butaccording to Bill Watterson, within the context of the movie,The Wizard of Ozoperates according to the logic of a real, if fantastical, fictional world, rather than the logic of a dream. As he toldThe Comics Journal:
There are inner workings inThe Wizard of Ozthat are too coherent for a dream — at least my dreams are never that coherent— and so it becomes less interesting if it is only a dream. The literary merits, the purpose of writing it that way, are better served by some ambiguity than by making everything very obvious.
Here, Watterson makes a fascinating point aboutThe Wizard of Oz’s famous final scene.
Calvin and Hobbes' Most Heartbreaking Comic Reveals the Secret That Makes It Timeless
Calvin and Hobbes' most heartbreaking strip defines what makes the comic so timeless, and that cartoons can be much more than a series of cheap gags.
By Watterson’s measure, the virtue of the film’s ending is not that it recontextualizes the preceding adventure, but that it graces it with a degree of uncertainty. Rather than a solution to a narrative problem, it is one last creative move to instill a sense of wonder in the viewer. It also serves to make the meaning of the movie less “obvious.“Calvin and Hobbesfans will know thatBill Watterson avoided the “obvious,” and rarely, if ever, failed to be “interesting” on a daily basis, and so there is certainly some merit to his approach to the “fantasy/reality” question.
Calvin And Hobbes Is Better Served By The Fluid Nature Of Bill Watterson’s Approach To “Real”
Exploring The Author’s Literary Ambitions
Bill Watterson was raised onPeanuts, but he was also a student of history, literature, and philosophy – as evidenced by the namesakes of his famous characters, philosopher Thomas Hobbes and theologian John Calvin. Watterson oftenpoked fun writers and literature inCalvin and Hobbes, but it is clear that, to at least some degree, Calvin’s occasional bout with literary pretensions mirrored his creator’s own. More than justshowcasing Watterson’s intelligence however,Calvin and Hobbeshighlighted his artistic ambitions – in the dexterity with which he used unconventional panel structures, to the scope of ideas and scenarios he engaged with.
The uncertainty of Hobbes' real or imaginary nature was in further service to these ambitions. In his 1989 conversation withThe Comics Journal, Watterson explained that there was “less potential” to an unambigious answer. The author did not want to limit himself to one “truth” or another – becauseplaying in the liminal space between the two possible answers was much more productive for him as a creator, and for the audience, it was more engaging for the matter to be left open to interpretation.
Bill Watterson’s Legendary Comic Strip Was A Celebration Of The Imagination
The Joy Of Unlimited Potential
Rather than adhering to a singular notion of Hobbes' reality as either true or false,Bill Watterson took a “Schrödinger’s cat” – or in this case, Schrödinger’s tiger – approach.In any given comic, Hobbes could either be real, or fake, or both simultaneously. The fact that readers still pour overCalvin and Hobbescomics, scrutinizing them for clues to a certain answer one way or another, is among the greatest testaments to the success of Watterson’s literary approach to authoring a comic strip.
Bill Watterson’sCalvin and Hobbeswas an ode to the limitless possibilities of imagination and fantasy, and so readers should not approach it with too rigid of a perspective.
That is to say, readers should not stop looking for those clues – but they should be more open to both sides of the conversation. Above all else,Bill Watterson’sCalvin and Hobbeswas an ode to the limitless possibilities of imagination and fantasy, and so readers should not approach it with too rigid of a perspective. As he producedCalvin and Hobbes, Watterson refused to limit himself to a single way of thinking about the comic, and looking at the world, and readers should follow his example, to get the most out of their experience reading his work.
Source:The Comics Journal, Bill Watterson Interview (1989)
Calvin and Hobbes
Calvin and Hobbes was a satirical comic strip series that ran from 1985-1995, written, drawn, and colored by Bill Watterson. The series follows six-year-old Hobbes and his stuffed Tiger, Calvin, that examines their lives through a whimsical lens that tackles everyday comedic issues and real-world issues that people deal with.
