Introduction

The given text is a comic strip composed by Watterson that explores the adventures of Calvin
and his anthropomorphised friend, Hobbes. Through the representation of contemporary ideas,
the text serves as an indictment on the flawed human school of thought that justifies the
perpetuation of war. It is primarily targeted at children for it unveils the deeper meaning behind
seemingly innocent childhood games. At the same time, the text is laced with latent truth that
may be directed at the larger spectrum of human society.

Body: Significance of Text & Image

● The primary topic is introduced in the first panel through Hobbes’ dialogue: ‘How come we play
war and not peace?’
‘Play’: The verb grounds the cartoon in the context of Calvin’s childhood, which is important as
the cartoon harnesses the power of childhood frankness to criticise the sustenance of modern
warfare by eminent governments and political leaders.
Image: This idea is translated into the helmet worn by Calvin and the toy gun wielded by Hobbes.
-> The helmet is a symbol of the stereotype of rugged masculinity and valour that is demanded
by soldiers.
-> The toy gun and rubber darts communicate the characters’ childish imitation and desire to
become instruments of death that are idolised by society.
-> War and peace’: The message of the cartoon is contained within the polarity of chaos and
tranquility. It helps to trace the development of thought that takes place in the cartoon, i.e.
Calvin’s ultimate dismissal of warfare.

● ‘Too few role models’: This succinct statement is a direct response to the question proposed in
the splash panel. The use of negative space helps to rapidly move the reader’s eyes from one
panel to the other, aiding the build up to the joke delivered in the following scene. It is also
 emblematic of the human justification for indulging in mortal combat. It voices the sins that mar
mankind’s past and the impulse to continue the legacy of tyranny. Additionally, the fact that the
dialogue is spoken in a casual, off-handed manner shows that it contains a universal truth that is
yet to be acknowledged by those whom it concerns.

● ‘I’ll be the fearless American defender of liberty and democracy and you can be the loathsome
godless communist oppressor’: The cartoonist uses a long winding sentence to continue the
polarity between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ that was made in the first panel. Watterson politicizes Calvin
and Hobbes' ‘play of war’ by utilizing stereotypes upheld by the American public during the
context of the Cold War.
-> Calvin proudly adopts the persona of the ‘fearless American defender’ whose unparalleled
knowledge of war tactics is transformed into his zest for patriotism. The use of successive
adjectives that pertain to the ideal of a devoted American warrior helps to elevate Calvin’s
persona to a position of superiority. This is aided by the lack of punctuation, which symbolise his
raging passion towards the cause of his nation.
-> The principles of ‘liberty’ and ‘democracy’ are strongly juxtaposed to the ‘loathsome godless’
morals of the adversaries of justice and loyalty. An implicit reference is made to the Soviet Union,
an autocratic government that thwarted the prosperity of self-governance across the globe. The
use of extreme epithets to describe antagonistic forces implies Calvin’s fiercely determined state
of mind.
● While Watterson uses hyperbolic language to create a dichotomy between the forces of
benevolence and authoritarianism, he simultaneously uses visuals to ridicule these archetypes.
The difference in body language and facial expressions between the two characters is a physical
manifestation of their personality and thoughts.
-> Panel 3 uses a wide camera angle to deliberately highlight the height difference between
Calvin and Hobbes. Calvin is depicted at the pinnacle of his determination: his emotionally
charged language is reflected in his belligerent posture and terse facial expression. This is
contrasted with the petite frame of his body, reiterating that he is still a child who possesses a
distorted idea of the ‘real’ world. Hence, Watterson successfully injects humour into the fabric of
his narrative in order to enhance the relatability of the cartoon.
-> Hobbes, on the other hand, exhibits a lax and informal posture: his arched shoulders are
emblematic of his casual response to Calvin’s exaggerated description of the game. In the fourth
panel, Watterson adopts a narrow camera angle, placing the reader at eye level with Hobbes and
focusing on his quizzical facial expression. Additionally, the cartoonist breaks the ‘fourth wall’ by
directly making eye contact between Hobbes and the onlooker, thereby encouraging interaction
between the reader, writer and text.
-> This is essential because a vast majority of the cartoon is narrated through Calvin’s
perspective. Panel four functions as a brief moment in time when the audience receives a brief
insight into Hobbes’ state of mind.

● Colour, volume and font style are indicative of the mood, tone and atmosphere of the scene.
Throughout the cartoon, the creator uses an informal handwritten font that resembles a childlike
style. This is effective in drawing the attention of young target audiences as it resonates with their
personality, thereby creating a personal linkage between the reader and the text.
-> In the sixth panel, Watterson effectively uses visual texts to reveal changes in time, space and
movement. The imperative ‘GO!’ is written in a bold font in a significantly larger size. The stark
red elicits a sense of excitement and encapsulates the unbridled passion of the two characters;
the poignant exclamation point marks the sudden transition from a passive to a vigorous and
energetic atmosphere. This is imitated in their facial expressions, which convey their emotional
and physical involvement in the game.
 -> The cartoonist synthesises visual and auditory elements to vividly portray the detailed
movements of the characters. Unlike other texts, the onomatopoeic term ‘WAP’ is not written
within the bounds of a speech bubble, suggesting that it emulates the sound of the rubber darts
in motion. This is complemented by the use of emanata that protrude from the ends of the dart
guns, hinting that Calvin and Hobbes shot each other swiftly and simultaneously, with no
distinction of who pulled the trigger first.
-> By placing Calvin and Hobbes at an equal plane, Watterson initiates the deconstruction of the
‘good’ versus ‘evil’ paradigm that was introduced in the third and fourth panels. He bridges the
height difference that was prominent in the second frame by mirroring their postures. From this,
one may infer that there is no clear victor of war, only victims.

● Like the introductory panel, the seventh panel effectively uses negative space to aid the
progression to the punch line, which culminates the cartoon’s message in the last frame. By
placing the focus on Calvin and Hobbes’ reactions, Watterson illustrates a crucial moment of
epiphany when they realise the fallacy behind war. Both characters had armours that shielded
them from their respective enemy’s attacks: Calvin was sheathed in his metal helmet whereas
Hobbes withheld the power of his height. Thus, one may conclude that no one wields the
absolute power in the business of war: one’s vulnerabilities will inevitably protrude from the skin
of fortitude.

● ‘Kind of a stupid game, isn’t it?’: The last dialogue serves as the punch line of the cartoon,
commenting on the absurdity of war. The informal tone, coupled with the colloquial slang ‘stupid’,
is appropriate because it forms a part of a coversation between two characters. At the same
time, it belittles and marks the complete deconstruction of the glorified illusion of war. The decline
in Calvin’s level of resolve aims to accentuate the unpopular belief that conflict and bloodshed is
more infantile than a child’s game. Through the final question mark, Watterson challenges the
reader’s beliefs concerning the issue of modern warfare, compelling them to question their faith
in the leaders of the world.

Conclusion
In conclusion, Watterson successfully mirrors the futility of modern warfare through childhood
delusion. The cartoon has a transformative impact on the reader for it lends profound meaning to
the piercing honesty of juvenile remarks, driving one to re-examine the values of war and peace
in human life.