I was a huge Dilbert fan for a long time. I subscribed to the DNRC list, and had all of the books as they came out. Then someone bought me The Dilbert Principle, and that was when I realized that Adams was really pretty one dimensional. In fact, I suspect that I would have slit my own throat a long time ago if I saw the world the way he does. Of course, I still read Dilbert and laugh. But it certainly killed off a lot of the enjoyment for me.
I still wish I hadn’t lost my printout of the strip in which Dilbert had to show the PHB how to reset his new laptop again.
As much as music, and TV shows (like SNL and The Simpsons), all comics are remembered more fondly in the past than in the present. You remember “ah, Dilbert used to be funny” when in reality, just like today, there was 1 or 2 strips every couple of weeks that made you laugh.
I think that if a “future man” were really able to look at a Dilbert from today, and a Dilbert from 10 years ago, he would find them equally amusing. The fact that WE have been reading Dilbert for 10-12 years makes it impossible to give it an unbiased critique.
So, I don’t really agree agree that quality declines with comics in general, but it’s impossible for the material to stay fresh.
I really respect the Berkely Breatheds and Wattersons and Larsons who can walk away from it.
It’s kind of sad because these people are artists/writers/comedians who just get pigeon holed by their own success. Even if they try to branch out, like Jim Davis with the barnyard strip, or Breathed with Outlands, they’re still damned by their previous accomplishments.
It seems to wear on Aaron Macgruder. He’s in repeats 2 or 3 times a year it seems.
He actually may be in permanent repeats. The strip has been in reruns for the last seven months, since MacGruder decided to devote whatever creative energy he still has to the TV cartoon, and there’s some doubt as to whether he will return. He had already been farming out the artwork for years, anyway.
Even Scott Adams says that a typical Dilbert comic appeals to only 20% of Dilbert readers. So if one falls flat for you, take comfort in being in the majority.
You can also put a more positive spin on it. The early years are often spent by the creator trying to find out who their character is. Later on in the run they know them a lot better and how they want to use them. For instance early in both Dilbert and Garfield the human took the animal out for a walk on a leash. Later on they knew their characters better and would not do that. Although personally I found that strip in Garfield very funny.
Also I think as strips go on the creator gets more and more bold about inserting personal opinions. I think these often tend to turn out lame and preachy like Watterson and his awful “Chewing” strips.
