Okay guys, just as a heads up I must warn you that the title of this editorial is a bit misleading. While I am a fan of "Peanuts" and have great respect for what Charles M. Schulz was able to accomplish with his comic strip, this editorial is NOT being written to defend the timeless comic strip! Recently my local newspaper "The Sacramento Bee" asked their readers a question. That question was "Should we continue to print re-runs of "Peanuts," or should we replace the comic with another series?" Over one thousand people wrote to the Bee and said told them that they could screw themselves and their paper if they took "Peanuts" out of the paper. Okay, so maybe the reaction wasn't quite like that, but the general reaction was that people wanted to continue to be able to read "Peanuts" everyday in the newspaper. I wrote to the Bee too, deciding to let my voice be known too. So what did I tell the Bee? I told them "It's about friggen time!" Yes, despite what many of you may be thinking right now, I was completely for "Peanuts" being perminetly retired. Some people may be in disagreement with me, some may even be disgusted with me at the moment, but I think it's time for "Peanuts" to go. However I'm not saying this for the reasons you might be thinking about. Unlike most people I still love "Peanuts." I've loved it since I read my first "Peanuts" comic strip, and Charles M. Schulz was a great inspiration to me when I wanted to be a cartoonist (something that didn't really work out, but I tried at least).

No, the reason I wanted "Peanuts" out of the newspaper is because it shouldn't be there anymore. Comic strips aren't thought highly of anymore. It may sound silly, but it's true. Talk to kids, teenagers, and adults, and most of the time people will tell you that they don't really read the funny pages anymore. Comic strips don't sell newspapers anymore, and the reason isn't because you can read the comics online (the syndicates charge you for the privilage of getting the comics sent to your e-mail box everyday). No, the reason is far more simple: Comic strips are boring these days. Now I'm not going to ramble on about the days of Bill Waterson and Gary Larson, nor am I going to go on about how Garfield and Cathy were funny at one point in time, as that's not the point. What I am going to do is ask you one simple question: When was the last time you REALLY enjoyed reading the comic?! Be honest with me folks. When was the last time you read a comic that stuck with you throughout the day, or read a series so unique that you wanted to know more about it, or anything? Pretty long time huh? There is a reason for this lack of memory, and that reason is there has been nothing unexpecting in the newspapers for YEARS! So what is on the funny pages these days? Well let's see, there's "Garfield," "For Better or For Worse," "Rose Is Rose," ""Cathy," "Beetle Baily," "Dennis The Menace," and so on.

Notice anything familier about these comics? How about the fact that most of these series are pushing 30? How about the fact that most of the creators for these strips have either retired from drawing them or have died? How about the fact that we haven't gotten a real "new" comic strip in ages? And that's ultimately the problem with syndicated comics: We've been reading the exact same comic strips for YEARS, and there appears to be no change in the schedueled programing on the rader! I love "Peanuts," I really do, but I'm tired of reading re-runs. It bugs me to know that the newspapers are paying for re-runs of a dead guys comic, when they could be paying for something new that could bring in some new life to the newspapers. When WAS the last time a new comic strip came into the newspapers?! Well, I don't know, but the last series I remember being new in MY local newspaper was "Liberty Medows" by Frank Cho, and that went away shortly because Frank pulled the series from syndication because he didn't want to deal with editors anymore! Otherwise though, nothing. This has created a problem for the comics page. Most of the comics I mentioned above are popular comic strips, there's no denying that. However most of those series have become personal favorites to many people, and if one of those series went away there would be letters. Some of these series may not justify letters, but they would be written none-the-less.

But this creates the problem in the fact that people's unwillingness to let go of a childhood favorite is harming the funny pages. Not only is the comics page filled with comics that many people consider "outdated," but there is virtually no chance anything new will ever be added. Webcomics are becoming popular. People are created their comics, and instead of publishing them in newspapers they are posting them on the internet. Why are people doing this? Well part of the reason is because you get total freedom from editors (there's no denying that that is quite a bennefit to have), but the other reason is even more obvious: They simply have no choice BUT to turn to the internet to publish their comics! Scary, but true. I know there are a lot of cartoonists who frown upon webcomics for a number of reasons. They say printing webcomics on the internet cheapens the industry, it's artistic suicide, amoung other things. And I agree with them. I agree that posting your comics on the internet cheapens things a little bit, but on the flip side on the coin I can't say I blame them. Why? Simple: Because it's ger your work out to the world online, or don't have it out there at all. I read several comics that would fit in nicely in syndication. "PVP," "Todd and Penguin," "Real Life," and "General Protection Fault" (just to name a few). These comics would be PERFECT in newspapers, and many people would love them withen days!

They are fresh, they are original, they are good, and they have not been drained creatively yet. So why are they online? Because no newspaper would buy them. Not because the comics are too raunchy or vulger to print in newspapers (they're not), but because no newspaper wants to get rid of a "sure thing" for an unknown. And that's why I hate most of the current comics in the papers right now, because most of them should have died years ago, and they are keeping us from reading potentially good and (in some cases) better comic strips. Yeah "Peanuts" will always be funny, but if the Sacramento Bee would replace "Peanuts" with "Todd and Penguin" they would get letters until everyone realized how much they were enjoying the new comic on the block. Most newspapers could actually create two sections of comics: Contemperary and Classic. They would put all the new stuff in the Contemperary section, while all the classics would be preserved on the Classics page. What they would then do is premeir tons of new comics, ask readers what they think of these new series, and then they could slowly replace the outdated series with the new series. The new stuff would even help in bringing people back to the comics section, knowing that there's fresh original stuff to read instead of series that have been around for more then thirty years and are starting to show their age.

Now some people may be thinking that I'm out to attack classic comic strips, but that's not the case. I still read "For Better or For Worse," "Garfield" used to be my favorite comic strip, and I think "Drabble" is still pretty darn funny. But with the exception with "For Better or For Worse," most of the classic comics (like "Beetle Baily," "Cathy," and "Garfield") just aren't that funny anymore, and most people just don't find themselves caring for the comics anymore. Wouldn't it be great if people started talking about the funny pages again? New material could greatly help that cause, but as long as newspapers keep getting scared to give something new a shot, the comics page will continue to lose interest as it has been doing for the past several years. So personally I think the newspapers need to put there foots down, and do the job they need to do to keep interest in the comics page alive. If a newspaper wants to remove "Peanuts" from their papers, then they just need to pull "Peanuts" and explain to people that they are removing it to make room for a new series that they hope everyone will like. If they MUST do a survey, instead of asking people whether or not they would keep "such and such" series in the papers, they should tell people that they will be re-evaluating their comics page, and they want to know what series people have grown tired of. Don't tell us which series you love, just which one's you can't stand anymore.

Pick say...the top five series that gets the most votes from people who don't like them anymore, and replace those series with new series. You WILL get letters, but at least you can sleep knowing that there were (more then likely) FAR more people who didn't enjoy those comics then those who did!! Simple huh? I know there has been talk about how webcomics have cheapened the industry, but keeping old comics alive have cheapened it even more. Printing re-runs of dead series and continuing series that are no longer funny does NOT help the industry out, and it is completely unfair to people who might not enjoy the comics because they feel 98% of the series are old and outdated! Some people may still love reading "Peanuts," but if they love the comic that much, then they can easily go to their local bookstore and buy the "Complete Peanuts Collection" books from Fantagraph Books. But please, I'm begging you guys, PLEASE remove "Peanuts" and print a new series that could be just as good as "Peanuts" once was! You may make some fans angry, but it's a risk that could...wait, no that's wrong. It's a move that WOULD pay off in the long run! My plea to all newspapers is to save the comics page. If you want to start then Scott Kurtz is offering "PVP" to newspapers for free. How's that for a cheap gamble?

- -Kevin T. Rodriguez- -