At this point in the comic strip, a better storyteller might have thought, "I should draw the shoes on April and Becky so that they look very different from each other, so this will make sense." However, I suspect Lynn Johnston's real thought was, "I need to create a reason for them to get naked tomorrow."
What I see is an example of a Patterson child being dangerously suggestible and literal-minded because she lives in a madhouse where she's always 'wrong'. This culminates in a sixteen year old girl being consumed with guilt and fear because she knows that they'll find out that she prayed a tree onto a house.
Also, we have to remember that for some ungodly reason, the insane idiot thinks that it's hilarious for children under six to be naked. Would that Unstabler use a two-by-four to disabuse her of the notion that you must be this tall to be allowed dignity.
Seriously, they need to be wearing different shoes. Even slightly different. I can see kids thinking shoes helps them go fast or jump high, but not if the shoes are exactly the same. This is Fail on a whole new level.
You would think if the shoes are the focal point of the joke, we would be getting a closer look at a very detailed shoe drawing. However, we know that Lynn's objective here was just to get these kids naked in the next comic strip.
Even she knows that she can't just come right out and say "naked preschooler = comedy gold" so a lie that makes her feel more threatening than she was is what we're going to get.
At this point in the comic strip, a better storyteller might have thought, "I should draw the shoes on April and Becky so that they look very different from each other, so this will make sense." However, I suspect Lynn Johnston's real thought was, "I need to create a reason for them to get naked tomorrow."
Reply
What I see is an example of a Patterson child being dangerously suggestible and literal-minded because she lives in a madhouse where she's always 'wrong'. This culminates in a sixteen year old girl being consumed with guilt and fear because she knows that they'll find out that she prayed a tree onto a house.
Reply
Also, we have to remember that for some ungodly reason, the insane idiot thinks that it's hilarious for children under six to be naked. Would that Unstabler use a two-by-four to disabuse her of the notion that you must be this tall to be allowed dignity.
Reply
Seriously, they need to be wearing different shoes. Even slightly different. I can see kids thinking shoes helps them go fast or jump high, but not if the shoes are exactly the same. This is Fail on a whole new level.
Reply
The colorist is no help either. Bad enough that April and Becky's shoes are the same style but they are also the same color. A minor tweak like this:
would make a world of difference.
Reply
and they wouldn't look like nurse shoes.
I thought Lynn's intent here was to make fun of sneaker commercials.
Reply
Reply
Right. The colourist could have compensated for Lynn's drawing issues as you have clearly demonstrated.
Reply
Also, "I have to make the shoes as easy to draw as possible."
Reply
You would think if the shoes are the focal point of the joke, we would be getting a closer look at a very detailed shoe drawing. However, we know that Lynn's objective here was just to get these kids naked in the next comic strip.
Reply
Definitely working backward from naked.
Reply
Even she knows that she can't just come right out and say "naked preschooler = comedy gold" so a lie that makes her feel more threatening than she was is what we're going to get.
Reply
And the rare moment where she stretches a single punchline back over two comic strips.
Reply
True. Usually she wouldn't trust her readers to connect those threads.
Reply
Good point. Lynn must have been liking her readers back then in 1995.
Reply
Leave a comment