To push back, Lucy is the character that gives Charlie Brown the director gig. I don’t think it passes the bechdel test but my reading of the whole thing is an expression of the felt alienation of growing up in capitalist America. The little girls in the story act as a sort of Greek choruses for the feelings of insecurity and inadequacy that are brought on by the “commercialism” (re: Capitalism) ruining Christmas. Lucy also has a great moment at her therapy stand where, after collecting payment and celebrating it, she begins to try and diagnose Charlie Brown, implying that alone will be helpful. The whole exchange does a great job of mirroring the transactional and alienating feeling of therapy under capitalism. And the punchline at the end is that Lucy, a child, wants real estate for Christmas! Hilarious!
None of this is to say Charles Schulz wasn’t a misogynist, he probably was, 1965 was definitely a misogynistic time. I just feel it’s an oversimplification to call Charlie Brown Christmas misogynistic. There’s a reason that it had an unbroken string of Christmas airings for 5 decades. Something about it resonates with people. Again, there’s undeniably deeply flawed gender politics suffusing the whole thing, but it is an artifact of the past and so that’s part of the story of it.
I guess I’m writing all this because I don’t always feel the positives outweigh the negatives when appreciating historical media. I feel very strongly that the artistic value of A Charlie Brown Christmas vastly outweighs whatever ambient misogyny is embedded within it.
The choice to make many of the most critical comments come from little girls is surely gender coded in a problematic way, and yet it also reads as very realistic. Little kids can be very mean! Especially to each other. If memory serves the male characters are also very unkind to Charlie Brown.
The pacing, the music, the humor, The way it captures the American ennui that is the background radiation of so many American lives. Certainly flawed, but beautiful in a way I really love. If that’s a bad take than you can keep your good ones.
All of the girls bar none are huge assholes for literally no reason and are all obsessed with either looks, money, or boys. I googled and apparently Charles Schultz had some deeply unhappy marriages which explains it I think
Not an argument, but good lord Charlie Brown Christmas is incredibly misogynistic
To push back, Lucy is the character that gives Charlie Brown the director gig. I don’t think it passes the bechdel test but my reading of the whole thing is an expression of the felt alienation of growing up in capitalist America. The little girls in the story act as a sort of Greek choruses for the feelings of insecurity and inadequacy that are brought on by the “commercialism” (re: Capitalism) ruining Christmas. Lucy also has a great moment at her therapy stand where, after collecting payment and celebrating it, she begins to try and diagnose Charlie Brown, implying that alone will be helpful. The whole exchange does a great job of mirroring the transactional and alienating feeling of therapy under capitalism. And the punchline at the end is that Lucy, a child, wants real estate for Christmas! Hilarious!
None of this is to say Charles Schulz wasn’t a misogynist, he probably was, 1965 was definitely a misogynistic time. I just feel it’s an oversimplification to call Charlie Brown Christmas misogynistic. There’s a reason that it had an unbroken string of Christmas airings for 5 decades. Something about it resonates with people. Again, there’s undeniably deeply flawed gender politics suffusing the whole thing, but it is an artifact of the past and so that’s part of the story of it.
I guess I’m writing all this because I don’t always feel the positives outweigh the negatives when appreciating historical media. I feel very strongly that the artistic value of A Charlie Brown Christmas vastly outweighs whatever ambient misogyny is embedded within it.
The choice to make many of the most critical comments come from little girls is surely gender coded in a problematic way, and yet it also reads as very realistic. Little kids can be very mean! Especially to each other. If memory serves the male characters are also very unkind to Charlie Brown.
The pacing, the music, the humor, The way it captures the American ennui that is the background radiation of so many American lives. Certainly flawed, but beautiful in a way I really love. If that’s a bad take than you can keep your good ones.
the Vince Guaraldi soundtrack carries it (and all the other Peanuts cartoons) imo
deleted by creator
haven't watched it in a while, how so?
All of the girls bar none are huge assholes for literally no reason and are all obsessed with either looks, money, or boys. I googled and apparently Charles Schultz had some deeply unhappy marriages which explains it I think
i assume all cartoonists are like dilbert guy or rick and Morty guy.
TBF only charlie and Linus don't act awful. But yeah that's fair.