Artist Tom Everhart is on a mission to make the case that his friend Charles Schulz was self-aware artist of the highest degree. Here’s an abbreviated version of his lecture.

Exhibit A: Schulz left clues in his strip.

Even as he professed himself unsophisticated in the press, Schulz was actually very well-read and closely followed art trends, says Everhart. Thomas Eakins and Vincent Van Gough are named in Peanuts,  but some references are much slier. Case in point: Schulz knew and admired painter Phillip Guston and paid quit homage to his famous closet light bulb (left) in a cartoon published shortly after Guston’s death in 1980 (right)

Exhibit B: He cultivated a form of line work that was revolutionary for its day.

A line-work detail from Peanuts (left) and an untitled panting by American abstract expressionist Franz Kline (right). Everhart says that Schulz intensely followed that developments of the abstract expressionists in the early 1950’s, when his comic strip was just a few years old.

A detail image from Peanuts (left) and “Palladio” by abstract-expressionist painter Franz Kline (right).

Exhibit C: He was tremendously influenced by Dutch post-Impressionist master Vincent van Gough. Van Gough’s line drawing “enclosed Field with a Sower in the Rain” (Left) and Peppermint Patty walking through the rain in Peanuts (right.)

A love of agitated line work
Charles Schulz was deeply influenced by the line work of Vincent Van Gough, the post-impressionist master. (top right) A section of van Gough’s painting “Marches De Pierres Dans Le Jardin De L’Hospice.” The other three images are examples of Schulz’s line drawings, as printed in the Peanuts comic strip.

Exhibit D: Schulz developed a distinctive wavy-line effect that added incredible visual interest.

Says Everhart: “Most people thought his line looked like this because his hand was shaking. Schulz himself would sometimes use this excuse. But the truth was that his pen work was incredibly controlled, and he would lightly push and pull up on his pen to get that exact wiggle effect.”

Exhibit E: Schulz believed the best line work incorporated lots of light.

“His lines move from fat to thing and then from thing back to fat — almost like a stoplight flashing at you,” says Everhart. “The effect is one of the dappled light.

Exhibit F: Schulz was able to explain complex ideas, such as time and space.

Says Everhart: “he told me once that every mark on a piece of paper plays with the surface. So in that way, each mark is noted by the eye individually and thus represents time.” In this way, Schulz’s Woodstock never says a word, but he speaks nonetheless.

Exhibit G: Schulz toyed with the artistic fell of his strip to such a degree that the earliest panels are virtually unrecognizable as Peanuts.

He used traditional perspective in the early 1950’s (right). Note the horixon line with the house and the trees in the distance.

Exhibit H: Toward the end of his life, Schulz became a little more frank.

In 1975, in the Peanuts jubilee book, he printed one of his high-school report cards and this first-person caption: “This report card is printed to show my own children hat I was not as dumb as everyone has said I was.” In 1999, in Golden Celebration, he reflected on 50 years of work: “As the strip grew, it took on a slight degree of sophistication. Although I have never claimed to be the least sophisticated myself.”

In the same volume, he wrote, “there are several factors that work against comic strips, preventing them from becoming a true art form in the mind of the public. First, there is the quality of the reproduction. Comic strips are reproduced with the express purpose of helping the publishers sell their publications. The paper on which they appear is not the best quality, so the reproduction loses much of the beauty of the originals . The strip is not always exhibited in the best place, and there are always annoying things like copyright stickers or the intrusion of titles in the first panel just to save space. The true artist, working on his canvas, does not have to put up with such desecrations.”

But perhaps the frankest quote of all was given to Hugh Morrow of the Saturday Evening Post in 1956. “you Know.” Said Schulz reflectively, “I suppose I’m the worst kind of egoist — the kind who pretends to be humble.”

From Artist to Abstract Artist
From 1950 to 1960, Charles Schulz changed almost everything about his comic strip.

He removed spatial depth.
As Schulz read more about the abstract expressionists, he realized his art needed to be distilled and clarified, that he needed to remove visual obstacles and create a stronger bond of intimacy between character and reader. In the mid-1950’s, Schulz began to eradicate traces of spatial depth from his strip. A peanuts panel from the early 1950’s (left) and the panel printed in post – 1960 (right).

He Clarified his backgrounds.
A panel of Schroeder’s piano in 1950 (left) and a panel from 1960 (right), “by removing perspective, Schulz brings his readers inside the strip, “ explains Everhart. “It almost feels as though we are on top of that piano. Once he gets rid of the traditional perspective, nothing fades away from us.”

He Picasso-ified his characters.
A detail shot from “interior with a Girl Drawing.” By Pablo Picasso (left) and a post 1960 drawing of snoopy (right.) Schulz had a favorite Picasso quote: “A face has two eyes, a nose and a mouth. You can put them where you want.” Like Picasso, Schulz abstracted his characters to such a degree that when they turned their heads, their eyes wouldn’t be in the same place (creating an exceptional challenge for the animators of the Peanuts TV specials and movies). Charlie Brown is never shown riding a tricycle, for example, as his arms and legs are too short. A real-life Charlie Brown would not be able to get his arms over his head.

He Stripped each character down to it’s most essential, expressive self.
An image of Woodstock from 1950 (left) and Woodstock circa 1960 (right). Schulz told Everhart that he believed Woodstock to be his greatest achievement in character development, noting: “Woodstock demonstrates perfectly my contention that the drawing is vitally important. Abstracted cartoons can express emotions.”

Next page> Read on to page 3, Everhart's Evolution