Livio Sellone, who sends me way too many questions, sent one I decided to answer here…

We all have heard of Jim Davis, right? The creator of the Garfield franchise! Ah…Good ol' Jim Davis. He gave birth to one of the greatest and most charismatic characters ever, Garfield, and his seemingly stupid pal Odie, whose purpose is to accompany Garfield on his many adventures and he's usually the victim of Garfield's nasty pranks. Jon Arbuckle is just a loser (just like you portrayed him in the Garfield and Friends cartoon), and I find him boring, so I don't feel the need to compliment Jim Davis for creating Jon Arbuckle.

So anyway…let's get to the point, old chap! I'm gonna ask you a very personal question: but how is Jim Davis as a person? Is he a nice and kind person? Just wanted to know. Is he../uhm.. (I don't want to be offensive) greedy as some people in the internet say? Cus, you know, he created Garfield with the sole purpose of making money. He knew Garfield would be a very marketable character.

How is Jim Davis as a person? You must have worked with him when you were writing episodes for Garfield and Friends and The Garfield Show.

Those two shows were by far the happiest experiences I ever had in the animation business and that would not have happened if Jim was not a very nice and very wise human being. I can't give him all the credit. Our other two Executive Producers — Lee Mendelson and Phil Roman — had a lot to do with it as did others. But all the benevolent, smart people in the world can't do much if the guy with Ultimate Veto Power is going to be non-benevolent and non-smart.

Yes, I worked a lot with Jim but he also gave me and others a lot of freedom and trust. I wish certain people I'd worked with in the cartoon biz could have seen the results and understood the correlation. The whole success story that is Garfield is not just because Jim hit on a great character. It's because he worked his tail off and also hired good people to assist and advise him and because — and this was key — he understood the appeal of his creation.

At other cartoon studios and in comics, I have worked with folks who owned or were in creative control of great characters and were clueless as to why people loved those characters. Just in the upper echelons of Hanna-Barbera — I'm talking now about people who had power there but weren't Bill or Joe — I worked for and with folks who viewed the output just as "product" and it was "product" they didn't (and probably couldn't ever) understand.

You often saw the results of this attitude in the cartoons but a better example of it was in the merchandising of Yogi, Scooby, Huck, Fred and Barney, and all the rest.  75% of it was badly-made, badly-designed, badly-drawn and often creatively wrong for the characters.  By contrast (and to my joy), there was no bad Garfield merchandise.  It was all well-made, well-designed, etc.  I watched Jim reject offers that the guys in that division of H-B would have grabbed.  There was a little closet in Jim's office building that held boxes of proposed Garfield toys and other merchandise that he'd rejected because its designers didn't meet the standards he demanded.  At Hanna-Barbera and a few other studios I worked for, they never rejected anything if the money was right.

So I got along great with Jim. Here's a very old photo of us together and — believe it or not — the person wearing the Garfield mask was Lorenzo Music. Honest…

I see Biden backers celebrating that he's even or slightly ahead in the latest polls. Calm down, everyone. I thought it was meaningless when those polls showed Trump a little ahead and it's just as meaningless now. Lots of things can and will happen before Election Day. If one of those guys was suddenly fifteen points ahead…okay, that might (might!) mean something. But that's unlikely to happen and we can still think of all sorts of game changing events that could swing the electorate wildly in one direction or another. It's too early to strap yourself into that roller coaster.

I'm sorry to hear that the Boston Market chain is teetering on extinction. Once upon a time, they were my favorite places to grab a quick meal, especially when I was in unfamiliar territory. This article by Emily Heil discusses the sad downfall of the brand but I can explain the decline even quicker: They just plain went from being good places to eat to being terrible places to eat.

I described my own "last straw" experience with them in this post and if you read that, make sure you read this follow-up. The nearest Boston Market to me now seems to be the one in Downey — a city that's 22 miles away and one which I never have any reason to visit. I'm not driving at the moment but if I was and if I had a reason to go to Downey, I don't think I'd count on that Boston Market even being there…or being worth patronizing.

This is the second part of at least three, probably) four. If you didn't read Part 1, read Part 1 first…

The current controversy over creator credits for the Marvel character Wolverine exists because the industry has always had a "thing" about creator credits. In the early days of comics, it wasn't a huge problem because the publishers kind of wanted their books to look like the strips that appeared in the newspapers. On the funny pages, Dick Tracy was inarguably "by Chester Gould" and Blondie was inarguably "by Chic Young," even if/when those two men employed assistants. Mutt & Jeff in the papers was "by Bud Fisher" even after Mr. Fisher had turned all the daily duties over to ghosts.

So in the then-new comic books, Superman was inarguably "by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster" and Batman was "by Bob Kane" even though both features were heavily assisted. Eventually though — maybe even around the time Jerry, Joe and Bob began asking for more money — most publishers got rid of creator credits. They were worried about having to pay more to someone whose name was linked to a popular feature. They were concerned about such a person demanding creative control or some say about the merchandising and exploitation of the property. They were frightened of a named "creator" being able to screw up or demand a chunk of the proceeds if the company and/or its intellectual property was sold…

…and they were especially panicked over the prospect of someone with a creator credit being able to make claims on the copyrights. Most of those creators were not legal employees but were regarded as pieceworkers and independent contractors. In some cases, their legal status vis-à-vis the publisher was kept vague, undefined and uncommitted to paper.

One of the dirty little secrets of the comic book business was — and this is largely past-tense — how little paperwork some publishers had to prove they owned what they claimed to own. You probably have more proof that you own your car than some putative owners of million-dollar comic book properties had at some point to prove they owned those properties.

Also in some cases, the guy who owned the company wanted himself listed as the creator of a hit property — for legal protection or maybe even just as a matter of ego.

Even as late as 1970 when Jack Kirby defected from Marvel to DC, he was unable to get a clause in his DC contract that said a new property created wholly by Jack Kirby would say "Created by Jack Kirby" on it. He was told they would never in a million/billion/zillion years ever allow that for anyone…but of course they eventually did. I got into comics in 1970 and heard even the great Mr. Kirby — who in hindsight, may have made his publishers more money than any other "independent contractor" ever in the field — told many, many things which could and would never be done for comic book writers or artists…

…but I can't think of one that they haven't since done. The business evolved to a point where creators got more rights and their names had value in selling the product. And also some of those properties became very, very valuable and the rights holders couldn't not share; not if they wished to attract the "name" talent that the customers were seeking.

But too many things were still kept ambiguous or explained not as contractual agreements but as "industry custom." There are properties that are obviously the creation of one person or one team. The books Jack Kirby created for DC in the seventies are a fine example…though even there, the gent who was then running DC tried occasionally to claim he was a (or even the) creator.

At one point, this exec claimed he was really the creator of Kamandi. I've said this before — even once under oath, I believe — but I worked on the first issue of Kamandi and I had more to do with it than that exec did. Still, I do not believe I am entitled to even a smidgen of creator credit on Kamandi. I had input and others had input but that comic book was created, right before my very eyes, by Mr. Jack Kirby.

One reason I feel this way is because I've worked in the television industry where a lot more money is riding on making this kind of determination. We'll be discussing how that works in the next part of this series.

TO READ THE NEXT PART IN THIS SERIES, CLICK HERE.

Comix journalist Heidi MacDonald did a three-part oral history with Trina Robbins. I haven't listened to it myself yet but I will. It's a way of spending a little more time with the late, lovely Trina.

The folks from Voctave perform one of my favorite show tunes — the title song from On A Clear Day, You Can See Forever. The lead vocalist is Tituss Burgess.

I didn't care much for the show but I think the lyrics for this number are about as perfect as song lyrics can be. In his autobiography, Alan Jay Lerner — the man who wrote those lyrics — wrote about how long it took him to write the words for "She's Not Thinking of Me," a song for the movie, Gigi. And what he wrote was…

I passionately wish I could say that outside of "Wouldn't It Be Loverly?", "She's Not Thinking of Me" took me longer to write than any other lyric. But it would not be "the vrai." Six years later I sat down to do the lyric for "On a Clear Day You Can See Forever." After two weeks of the usual run-of-the-mill torture, I realized that if I were ever to finish the rest of the score and complete the play I had better move on.

So I decided to allot the first three hours of every morning to working on that lyric and I did. Seven days a week. I finished it eight months later. During the eight-month period I wrote ninety-one complete lyrics and discarded them all. Several years ago a friend of mine who lives in Bar Harbor, Maine, in the summer wrote me a letter and told me that the minister at the local church had used the lyric as the text for his Sunday sermon. I wrote back and told him to tell the minister not to wait for the second chorus.

I think it was worth it…

Hey. remember that video I posted of an unaired special, Burlesque is Alive and Living in Beautiful Downtown Burbank? Well, Brent Seguine has some more info on it…

I've heard the pre-emption for "too risque" story too, I also once heard a claim that it was bumped by NBC News for a special report on Apollo 12, which splashed down earlier that day (Nov. 24).

Joe Besser's leather-bound script is in The Stoogeum. The script includes cast information for each sketch. Sheldon Leonard is not listed at all.

In addition to Besser, a 2nd stagehand was to be played by Johnny Puleo (of Harmonica Rascals fame). The scripted bits have the two arguing about who will do the stage work, while the other watches the showgirls.

In the striptease scene with Goldie Hawn, the bit was scripted for both Puleo and Besser. Puleo has a crush on Goldie and follows her onstage, Besser chases after him, and the two argue in the wings. As Goldie discards her costume, the gloves, the boa, and then the skirt fly offstage and hit Johnny. It ends with a shot of Puleo hit in the face with Goldie's bra.

Goldie was profiled in the June 1970 issue of Life. It says that the special had not yet aired, and was scheduled for a TBA sometime that summer.

The way the show was edited makes me suspect that they taped a lot of material that didn't make it in and that it was chopped up a lot before airing. And I suspect that NBC decided not to air it because they (a) expected protests and (b) didn't like the show and didn't think it was worth defending.

For those who don't know: The Stoogeum is an entire museum devoted to The Three Stooges. It's located in Ambler, PA which is about 40 minutes north of Philadelphia and no, I've never been there. I'll have to make a pilgrimage some day.

It's open only by appointment and you can find out more about it on this website. Brent Seguine is a recognized authority on Larry, Moe, Curly and Curly's replacements and as I understand it, Brent's one of the people behind the place.

Having spent way too much of my life following and reading about the O.J. Simpson Murder Case, I feel like I should have something pithy and interesting to say on this, the day his death has been announced. But I don't. Nothing clever, nothing incisive, nothing witty, nothing worth posting here. Except maybe this…

As you can see, I'm well aware I paid too much attention to that trial. And I'm probably about to make the same mistake with Mr. Trump's.

A piece of the marquee on the Ed Sullivan Theater — a piece removed when Letterman moved out and Colbert moved in — was raffled off for a good cause. Dave L. and his longtime producer Barbara Gaines delivered it themselves to its new owner. Well, there was a moving van involved but they went along. I don't recall the last time we saw Dave looking this happy…

New York Times obit for Trina Robbins.

Did I make it clear what a delightful person she was? The only downside of knowing her was because I also know the great comedy writer Treva Silverman — another funny and delightful lady. At least once, I called Trina "Treva" and at least once, I called Treva "Trina." It's kinda like David Letterman's Uma/Oprah joke.

Beautiful…talented…important…I don't know which quality of Trina I should start with. I'll start with important. Trina Robbins was one of those cartoonists who did things that mattered. No one did more to elevate the awareness of and the opportunities for females in the realm of cartooning and comic art. And along the way she did not neglect the males; did not neglect anyone or anything worthy of attention. One of the first times I met her, she touted me on a bevy of underground cartoonists of both genders whose work, she said, I might enjoy and she was right on all counts. Her Wikipedia page is a long, long list of books she worked on and causes for which she fought and usually won.

She loved talent and had plenty of it herself. Go over that list and pay attention to the books that she wrote and/or drew. Most of 'em were the kind of books that changed things for the better. I was especially fond of a short-run book she did for Marvel called Misty which showed uncommon insight into the dreams and motives of young women. Most comics of that genre you could tell were written by someone who was no longer young and had never been (or maybe even understood) a woman. Trina was young enough at heart…or maybe she just had a good memory…to make that comic what all comics for that market share should have been.

It was just a pleasure to know her…to talk with her…to dine with her. If this reads like I'm a little in shock, I am. We heard she was ill but she was one of those people who just seemed too full of life to ever run out of it. My condolences to all of us who knew and loved her and especially to Steve Leialoha.

I have not been paying a whole lotta attention to the news lately…too many pressing matters including deadlines. But I peek now 'n then at the trouble Donald Trump is in as it increases daily. We're about to see the first criminal trial ever of a U.S. ex-President and that'll be hard to ignore. If you'd like to know what it's all about, David Corn wrote an "everything you need to know" piece about the alleged crime.

I did see Trump's new wishy-washy pivot on Abortion which seems to have a dual goal: To convince Pro-Choice voters that he won't ban it if elected and to assure Pro-Life voters that he will. Does anyone anywhere believe this man really cares about the issue except as it impacts who'll vote for him and who won't? William Saletan explains why it's so obvious that Donald doesn't.

The Legal Eagle brings in an associate to explain all about the rise and fall of Trump Media stock. This, the Bible sale, the sneakers…all of it leaves some of us wondering if the folks sending cash to the alleged billionaire understand they're being treated as obedient cash cows or not. I would imagine some of them are fine with that…

The evening of April 9, 2017, I got the call I'd been expecting, that I knew was coming: A representative of the hospice society that had been watching over my dear love Carolyn Kelly called about 10:30 PM to inform me she had died about twenty minutes earlier. In a sense though, she had died a week or more earlier when she could no longer speak or open her eyes and there was no reason to believe she even knew where she was. She had finally stopped breathing around 10:10 that evening.

For some reason, I asked the man who phoned me, "How many of these phone calls have you made in your life?" His answer was "More than you could possibly imagine."

He asked if I needed anything. I'm not sure what he was expecting in the way of an answer but I asked, "When will they be taking her out?" For 10+ months, Carolyn had been living in an Assisted Living Facility and had become friends with all the other women — for no particular reason, they were all women — who lived there, all of them older than she was, all of them probably there for what remained of their lives. He said their representatives were en route to the home to — there is no nice way to say this — remove the body. They'd probably be there around 11.

He asked, "Do you want them to wait so you can say goodbye?" I told him no, I'd said my goodbyes…several times, in fact. I said, "I'm sure they'll do this but if you speak to them, tell them to please do it quietly. Everyone there is probably asleep now. I wouldn't want them to be awakened and see the body being taken out. The other residents there will find out tomorrow morning, I'm sure."

Which they did. The next morning, my assistant John and I went to the facility to begin cleaning out Carolyn's room, aided by a friend of hers who'd volunteered to help out. Everyone who resided there stopped me to tell me they'd heard over breakfast and wanted me to know how much they'd loved Carolyn and would miss her. I think I told most of them, "You and me both."

Until very close to the end, Carolyn had a way of brightening up any room she entered…even a place like that place. When I took her off the premises for medical attention or a good meal, she'd always ask to stop at a grocery store — or better still, a farmers' market. She'd buy a big bag of apples or pears of whatever looked especially fresh and when she got back to the Assisted Living place, she'd pass them out to all the residents.

One time she did that, a woman in her eighties thanked her for the offer of an apple but said, "My teeth aren't working. There's no way I could eat an apple." That didn't stop Carolyn. She went down to the little kitchen that fed the residents there, borrowed some utensils and, fifteen minutes later, presented the lady whose teeth weren't working with a dish of freshly-sauced applesauce. My friend Carolyn just always did things like that, even for people she barely knew.

It's been seven years since we lost her and at one moment, it feels like a very long time. Then at another, it feels like last week. I have done what I think is the only sane thing to do after a loss like that. I have rearranged my life without her but I have never forgotten about her, nor will I ever. That's what she wanted. That's what I want when I go. It's what everyone should want.

I have a mess o' messages asking me to comment on a sudden controversy in the comic book industry.  It has to do with the "created by" credits on the Marvel character Wolverine.  The credits have always said that the character was created by writer Len Wein and artist John Romita, Sr.. That apparently has changed and a lot of folks are not happy about it.  The whole controversy has been covered well by journalist Rob Salkowitz who writes for Forbes in this article and this article. But I'll quote from one to summarize here…

Last week, former Marvel editor Bobbie Chase broke the news on Facebook that Marvel had informed Christine Valada, the widow of original Wolverine writer and co-creator Len Wein, that Roy Thomas, Marvel's editor in chief at the time, was being added as a credited co-creator alongside Wein and John Romita Sr. on the hotly anticipated Deadpool & Wolverine feature film this summer. The report gained traction on social media, where numerous comics professionals chimed in on the unseemliness of Thomas, the last surviving member of the creative team, claiming a credit that is rarely if ever accorded to an editor.

I didn't chime in on this debate right away because I've been largely offline lately (both reading and writing) and because what I did see was others saying what I would have said — for instance, Mark Waid…

A rule in comics: Staff editors don't get to claim a co-creator credit on characters their writers and artists create for them. Throwing out suggestions and brainstorming is part of the editor's job. Change my mind.

I'm kidding. You'll never change my mind on this.

Or current Marvel editor Tom Brevoort writing about the role of editors in general…

Creators get the credit, editors get the blame. That is the compact of the job, and those who cannot abide by it do dishonor to our profession. Don Draper had the right of it: "That's what the money is for!"

Or former DC Comics editor, writer and president Paul Levitz…

That's always been a rule I believe in…Editors make small or very large contributions to the work, but the work, the credit, and the compensation for writers and artists shouldn't be diminished by it.

And there are plenty of others. I concur with Mark, Tom, Paul and the plenty of others. But I'd like to add this to the discussion…

The root problem here is that there are not, nor has there ever been, an agreed-upon rulebook as to how to assign creator credits for comic book properties.  There are industry customs and a big one is that the writer of the first story and the pencil artist of the first story are the co-creators of the property.  Or if one person did both, he or she is the creator. That custom was bent a little in the case of Wolverine by crediting John Romita (he designed the visual) instead of Herb Trimpe (he drew the first story). That might in this case have been a correct decision. I know it did not bother Herb.

But that original credit determination was made long ago when all the possible participants were still alive and able to object or at least speak for themselves. What has riled many about this new change in the credits is that it's being made way after the act of creation and after Wein, Romita, Trimpe and even Stan Lee (who might have had something to say about it) are deceased. Only Roy is still with us.

What do I think? As I said, I agree with the above quotes. I think Roy should get all the accolades he deserves for what he did contribute to the existence of a popular and valuable property. So should others who came along later and added to the mythos and popularity of that guy with the Adamantium claws. But co-creator credit? No. I also think I'm going to continue this in another article in a few days…and maybe another article after that. History does not have to be rewritten by the survivors.

TO READ THE NEXT PART IN THIS SERIES, CLICK HERE.