Big nose, big heart, big name

Peppermint Patty did not come into the strip with a full name (as Charlie Brown did), nor did she make it through her run without gaining a last name (as Franklin did), nor lacking a first name (as Schroeder did.) She was around for years before the name of Reichardt was placed on her.

Schulz often used the names of friends when naming his characters, and he did the same for Peppermint Patty. When young Randy Reichardt (well, then young; I presume he’s gotten somewhat older in the meantime) saw that name, he got excited and wrote Schulz a query, the response to which he has kindly just shared with me and allows me to share with you.

click to enlarge

Dear Randy,

My secretary has always loved Peppermint Patty above all of the rest of the Peanuts characters. Also, she and Peppermint Patty have a lot in common. Therefore, when it came time to give Peppermint Patty a last, it just seemed natural to give her Sue’s last name. (My secretary’s name is Susan Reichardt.)

We both enjoyed hearing from you. I am pleased to know that you enjoyed having your name in the strip.

Kindest regards.

Sincerely yours, 

Charles M. Schulz

Schulz didn’t warn his secretary what he was up to; it came as a nice surprise when she saw the strip.

What a keen answer to have gotten. I’m so glad that Randy chose to share that.

General
The real Linus’s real cartooning

Like many Peanuts fans, I knew that the character of Linus was named after Linus Maurer, who worked at Art Instruction alongside Schulz. Like seemingly fewer fans, I knew that Maurer himself had been a syndicated cartoonist… but for some reason I never saw any of his strip before today. …

General
Campaign Peanuts redux

I don’t normally just repost my blog entries… but this one seems as relevant now as when I first posted it in 2019. Only the word “many” seems dated. Of the many presidential candidates, I think Schulz only mentioned one in Peanuts. which isn’t to say that you can’t find …

General
I suspect that’s not Schulz

The only thing I have to say about this ad from 1967 is “no”.   40 SHARES Share Tweet this thing Follow the AAUGH Blog