Mark Frauenfelder at 11:51 am Mon, Dec 21, 2009
ADVERTISE AT BOING BOING!
Another great example of R. Sikoryak's admiration for the source material on which his Masterpiece Comics parodies are based. The lettering here really looks like Schulz'.
Pah! I did it in one panel.
This completely inaccurate. The parent’s caption should read, “Whaaa wha wha wha whaaa.”
Oh man, I don’t want to be that guy. But, in the Peanuts strips, adult voices were used in rare instances, although the adults were never pictured. It was the TV cartoon that used the muted trumpet (and then the kid would just repeat what the adult had said: “You want me to sit down, Miss Othmar?”). So this is accurate. Charlie Brown’s mother was occasionally present and talked to him from another room.
But yes, this is really nicely done. I’m glad he got the lettering correct. It always bugs me when someone does a parody but missing such a key part of comic strips.
I hear you bobcatgoldfinger. Just think if someone were insensitive enough to make a comic version of the Holocaust, using animals like mice and pigs to depict the humans.
Sikoryak’s visual pastiches can be variable (it’s hard to duplicate the style of an artist who uses a brush when you’re using a pen), but I think this one may be his finest. Down to the lettering (as others pointed out), he has Schulz’s style in his blood. The Sprang Batman “Crime and Punishment” is more inspired, but this one is supernaturally true to its cartoon inspiration.
While “The Metamorphosis” is Kafka’s best known work, I much prefer “In the Penal Colony”. Which, “In the Penal Colony”, rendered in Peanuts, would be utterly hilarious.
//Charlie would be the captain, Lucy the interviewer.
//And the machine would go OM NOM NOM.
What does that even mean, that WWII was already “neutered” in the mass media? Maybe it was to you, but that’s really subjective, even in the realm of broad sweeping generalizations. WWII, Columbine & everything else you’ve mentioned are *real* events while Metamorphosis is *fiction*. I think you’re upset at R. Sikoryak for not having the same make-believe arguments going on his head that you are having in yours.
So what, exactly, is your point? When “underground” cartoons got started the idea was basically “nothing sacred.” Not that Sikoryak is an underground cartoonist. You seem to be looking for something to get sore about.
Mail (will not be published) (required)