Talk:B.C. (comic strip)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anachronisms[edit]

Even before the strip becoming so overtly sociopolitical, there were all sorts of anachronisms, such as hunting a turkey for Thanksgiving and baseball games, so the anachronisms did not begin in the 1990s. Rlquall 18:37, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Can we put something about this strip being nonsensical and not funny any more?--Theloniouszen 05:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's POV. Somebody must find it funny. Right? ccwaters 10:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have been wondering for some time why it is called BC when there are so many references to Christmas and Easter etc. I am a Christian so it does not bother me. It just does not work with the premise of the strip. Dennis R. 12/01/05

  • Keep in mind that one of the characters is named B.C. So, in theory, it could just be a coincidence. Not likely. But keep in mind the cartoon was started in like 1959, and was strictly prehistoric at the time. Maybe it's a little late to change it. :) Wahkeenah 23:54, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It did not become overtly Christian until the last decade or so, as Hart himself changed. For the first couple of decades, it was strictly humor (and very good humor, too). - DavidWBrooks 00:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Once Johnny Hart "found it", did he also "lose it" (i.e. his sense of humour)? Wahkeenah 00:08, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's also good to keep in mind that the B.C. comic, like many comics, takes place in an artificial setting in order to sharpen the satire. This is not a new concept. The Flintstones did the same thing. And going a little farther back, Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado was plainly about the English, only disguised as Japan. Wahkeenah 00:12, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's important to realize that even now the strip is only "religious" 10 or 20% of the time. But (secular) anachronisms occur probably 80% of the time. Wasted Time R 21:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know just what it was that got him "banned" for a week. Wahkeenah 23:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just read the link. He's a zealot, and if Doonesbury deserves to be banned from time to time, B.C. certainly does. By contrast, Peanuts characters (notably Linus) often discussed religion, but not in the patronizing way that Hart evidently does. Wahkeenah 23:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate explanation[edit]

Has anyone else here encountered the idea that BC in fact takes place in a post-nuclear-apocolyptic world? It would explain pretty much all of the anachronisms (maybe the dinosaurs are mutated lizards or something, etc.), and what group of people wouldn't be extremely interested in religion if, in a sense, Armageddeon had already happened? I'm still not sure the theory is worth posting on the main article, though. Any thoughts? User:Lenoxus 16:35, 15 April 2006 Lenoxus (UTC)

I've been reading BC for four decades, and that's the first time I've encountered that idea - so, no, I don't think this belongs in the article. - DavidWBrooks 17:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No more so than The Flintstones, which also celebrated Christmas, etc. Keep in mind that both of those were/are simply literary vehicles for satirizing modern American cutlure. Much in the way that The Mikado was set in Japan, and Hamlet was set in Denmark, and Gulliver's Travels were set in exotic lands, but all of those were really about British culture. Wahkeenah 21:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, yes.... "Literary vehicles for satirizing American culture". That's it. The same as the Flintstones, even the Wizard of Id, also Johnny's strip. Read it's description. Thank you. B.C. began in 1958. Johnny Hart became a Christian in 1984. We need to tone down this article to remove the "B" score. Ppom55 (talk) 23:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Post-apocalyptic?[edit]

Gimme a break. B.C. is, and always has been, a satire about modern humans... just like the Flintstones was... or Bugs Bunny, for that matter. Wahkeenah 17:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, satire, but it most definitely post-apocolyptic. A few years ago, Clumsy clearly states he's reading a magazine from "back in 2004." http://bcblastedcavemen.blogspot.com/2006/11/bc-prehistoric-or-postapocalyptic.html This should be incorporated into the article.


Remember that Christian doctrine states that Christ will be back... so maybe Hart is thinking "BC" in the sense of the post-apocalptic "second fall of man" - before the second coming. If yall think this is worth including, feel free -BC

To Wahkeena: I certainly wasn't being serious enough for any break to have be given (in other words, everyone who read my comment was given a break to begin with) — that's why I raised the possibility here instead of direct editing. The more I see it, it seems clear that even the points raised by the two (or possibly one) user(s) above are very much in the obsessive-consistency mode of thinking, although I have to admit chuckling at the "second coming" idea. I very much doubt any of the inconsistencies actually trouble Hart, and of course it's a satire on humans. Just wondering if there was anything to back up the possible interpretation, but I'd say the simple, obvious answer is no. Thank for responding, guys (and sorry to be so late in getting back here about it — I just figured out a good system for following the conversations I start). --Lenoxus 02:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The post-apocalyptic thing was confirmed. In the same arc where Anno and Conahonty are introduced i.e. the one where the character travels around the world on a raft. It's really weird, if you asked I doubt one in ten people would recall it even though it's pretty much the most significant moment in the strip and the arc in question lasted quite some time. I don't even think it's been put in any collections either. 206.180.38.20 17:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I happen to recall that arc, but my fuzzy memory doesn't suggest any kind of "confirmed" post-apocalyptic thing; in retrospect, I'd say I was being mostly facetious with that idea; I'm pretty sure the symbolism of having a character named "Anno" isn't enough to confirm anything, except maybe hint at Johnny Hart's liking of Christian symbolism… and now I'll shut up before this loses every strand of connection to Wikipedianess. Peace out! Lenoxus " * " 03:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I don't think he is saying that Anno is the marker that the strip is post apocalyptic, but that in the company of Anno he descends into a cave where he discovers a mouldering pile of contemporary, paper-and-binding books. See 22nd January, 2002. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.0.175 (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Controversy[edit]

Can someone find a citation on Mel Lazarus's friendship and defense of Johnny Hart? Perhaps a quote of defense instead of the remark about one of Johnny Hart's best friends being Jewish which is rather cliche, and meaningless. Gavroche42 12:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or, in short, "Lazarus? Come forth!" Wahkeenah 18:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that was made of win.
Removed "(interestingly, one of Hart's best friends and defenders is Jewish-American cartoonist Mel Lazarus)" as yes, it is cliche. Furthermore does not add any substance to the article. Discussing criticism by Jewish and Muslim groups implies that some of Hart's strips appeared anti-semitic. Making a counter-argument might serve the function of balancing the article; however, the cliche my-best-friend-is-Jewish statement is a terrible way of doing that. A quote of a defense would serve that purpose much better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.97.167.187 (talk) 04:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Character explanations[edit]

Just as a thought: Although all of the principal characters are mentioned in the article, it might not be a bad idea to have them listed in their own section, along with some brief notes about their personalities and/or any running gags that they are involved in (Wiley's Dictionary, Peter and his messages to the guy on the other side of the world, etc.). Willbyr (talk | contribs) 15:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, and really should be done to match other articles about comic strips. If someone could do that it would be great. Rhino131 22:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BC Italy.jpg[edit]

Image:BC Italy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help![edit]

I'm trying to find an old B.C. comic that my mom used to carry around. I know on the very last panel 2 ants are sitting on a cross, talking. I can't find it ANYWHERE!!!! Please reply!

Fair use rationale for Image:B.C. character Clumsy Carp.png[edit]

Image:B.C. character Clumsy Carp.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:B.C. strip 7 Dec 2006.png[edit]

Image:B.C. strip 7 Dec 2006.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BC islam strip.png[edit]

Image:BC islam strip.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BC Italy.jpg[edit]

Image:BC Italy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mason Mastroianni[edit]

on Mason Mastroianni in Wikipedia: Where is his Religious aspect? instead of Johnny Hart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.98.251 (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that Mastroianni's religious views are relevant. After Johnny Hart died Christian references largely disappeared from "B.C." and the strip became much more like it had been forty years earlier. So, Masroianni's views on religion are not important here because he keeps them out of the strip.Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 14:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on B.C. (comic strip). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on B.C. (comic strip). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on B.C. (comic strip). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Easter' gif: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.C._(comic_strip)#/media/File:Bc_easter.gif[edit]

 AS posted and now captioned, this no more and no less than a typically ad hominem slur of the lowest sort.

The caption clearly claims this 'prompted complaints from some Jewish groups'.

Unsourced, unverified, unnamed, and most importantly, no linked, sources are acceptable/unobjectionable in precisely which school of journalistic 'expertise'?

On which page/line/graf of Wikipedia editorial guidelines/stylebook/manual/rules are listed the conditions under which the above errors are acceptable? 

 Add to the above fact the point that the image is of such low, and inferior, resolution it is near impossible to read, thus to judge for oneself the degree of impropriety, if any at all.

 Now throw in the mix that that the image is a static image, yet is presented in .gif, a format most often used for very short and very low res vid loops, is at least questionable.

 Why, if the intent of Wikipedia and -all- Wikipedia editors, is to increase information access for all, and to get facts into human minds so individuals can make informed decisions, is this image so filled with such obvious faults, flaws, and errors journalistic and technical?

 This image should be removed if it cannot be made readable.

If it can be made readable, the caption must change to include citation links, or be rewritten to reflect facts, and only facts, accurately. 

 As it is now, readable image or not, the caption is a slur of the sort all too common on 'unbiased' Wikipedia.

No tildy key on either of my two keyboards, so: tildy tildy tildy tildy Cheers! ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.33.149.134 (talk) 12:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crescent Shaped Window[edit]

Artists (especially in cartoons) have been drawing a crescent shaped window on outhouse doors for generations, and so did the people who built real outhouses in real life. I know. We had a few different outhouses in a few different places when I was a child. They all had crescent shaped windows cut into the door.

When I was a kid I asked my great grandfather why they had windows that looked like that and he told me they need windows because of the scent/harmful fumes, and because circles and squares would easily allow birds and possibly other animals to get inside - crescents made it harder for creatures to make a home in an outhouse. And, he said (probably jokingly), because stars are more difficult to make than crescents.

And that's why artists draw them with crescents on the door: because most of them looked that way in real life. And now people expect to see them when they see a picture of an outhouse. Well, older people expect it. Perhaps most younger people don't.

That's it though. Nothing hurtful or evil.

And to suggest that it is anything more than a functional and decorative window is rather offensive, because it's the same as suggesting that every instance of crescent shaped windows on outhouse doors in real life and in every piece of art that has ever had one was only there to disparage an entire religious group. And that is a ridiculous suggestion. I knew many old timers in small towns decades upon decades ago who'd never even heard of religions that weren't Christianity and Judaism, and they had outhouses with crescent shaped windows on the doors.

Anyway, all throughout the 1900's there were animated cartoons, comic strips, comic books, graphic novels, movies and television shows that had the image of an outhouse with a crescent shaped window cut into the door.

This is just my opinion, by the way. I'm not trying to dismiss or defend anything Mr. Hart might've done. It's possible that he meant it negatively. But it's also possible that he remembered seeing outhouses when he was a kid and also remembered seeing dozens of depictions of them throughout his lifetime.

EDIT: grammar, punctuation, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartstocks (talk • contribs)

The Wikipedia article for outhouse does have images of outhouses with the crescent moon shape on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Outhouse,_Lake_Providence,_LA_IMG_7386.JPG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Outhouse_in_an_old_west_scene.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:G-Sahuaro_Ranch_Pit_Hole_small.jpg In old movies you see it too, it was a common thing. Dream Focus 02:15, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Early Bird and the Worm[edit]

Two characters not currently mentioned in the article are The Early Bird and The Worm. There were several strips featuring the Early Bird's unsuccessful attempts to get the Worm. In one strip the Worm decides to stay in bed on a cold morning, commenting through the fourth wall that the Early Bird will probably be up there "freezing his beak off". He then dozes off until a frozen beak falls down the wormhole... I haven't done it justice, you need to read the original...

In another the Dookey Bird captures and eats a worm whose name was "Bruce", much to the consternation of John the Turtle.

Another character who may have appeared only once is the Purple Bellied Doowhopper (that may not be word perfect) "the last of the species" who was caught and cooked in that same episode. Andrewa (talk) 20:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Life is a Seventy-Five Cent Paperback[edit]

This book came out in 1970, not 1975. Correcting the list. I know because I love the joke about increasing the amount on the title and have been collecting the variants and they all indicate 1970 as the original publication date. 70.73.90.119 (talk) 15:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:B.C._(comic_strip)&oldid=1199268156"