The Word of the Day is Shock
In today’s For Better or For Worse, we are back to Mike visiting with Carleen and Weed. Tomorrow is a Deanna-centric strip, and I am actually happy about that. Getting only Mike's perspective on things every day is a little trying. With Mike, my objective in writing him is to make fun of the things he is doing which don’t make sense and I try to make it make sense. For example, in today’s strip, Mike was listening to Weed talk about where everyone is living in panel 2, and then out of the blue, Mike suddenly says he feels sick, and Carleen gives him that “You’re in shock” speech. Well, it just didn’t make sense. Why would Weed’s dialogue bring that reaction in Mike? So, I turned it into the realization that he would no longer be living close to Josef Weeder after spending 11 years in close proximity to him. That fit with what Weed just said and could possibly give Mike a sick feeling.
There is a tendency within the various groups that comment on For Better or For Worse to simply slam Mike for everything he does. If he spends time with his family, it is a token effort. If he spends time at work, he is ignoring his family. It’s a no win kind of situation for him with the commentators, and there is a great deal in the entertainment media today which follows the same course with working fathers.
My kids and I recently saw the movie Night at the Museum where the majour plot point is that the Ben Stiller character takes the job at the museum, in order to satisfy his son, whose acceptance of his father is based solely on his employment. In the kid’s films, I get to see on a regular basis, thanks to having kids; the fathers are frequently placed in the situation where everything would be better if only they spent less time at work and more time with their families, which is almost never a plot point with women. My wife stays at home with the kids, and I go to work. There is no way I can match the time she gets with the kids. It is simply not possible. And given the way the school system seems to set its hours and days off, I often wonder how families with 2 working parents can handle it. The schools seem to be geared towards parents who have one parent free at all times, to drop everything and come to the school at a moment’s notice.
So, these movies bother me a lot, and when the same issue comes up with For Better or For Worse, I have a great deal of empathy for Michael Patterson. And despite that natural empathy, Lynn Johnston has still managed to turn me against him. This fire plotline has tested me, to try and write him and make him seem human and not just a completely self-centred prig. I snark the strip on its discrepancies, fill in the plot holes with hopefully funny stuff, and try to make sense out of what Mike did during the fire.
Now with tomorrow’s strip, we get see Deanna handling the kids by herself…. again. I have to think that Lynn Johnston is really trying to slam this point home: Mike is neglecting his kids. Even if you empathize with Mike, it is hard to get around it. This whole fire sequence makes this point again and again, but I don’t know if this is the point Lynn Johnston is trying to make. I think she is trying to set up the idea that when Mike’s book becomes a best-seller, he no longer needs to work at Portrait Magazine, and he can concentrate on writing books, and he will magically become a more attentive father. It will be sort of a “Quit Portrait for your kids’ sake” idea. While she is putting this idea forth, what Lynn is inadvertently doing is making Michael more and more unlikable. Deanna has learned now first hand that in a crisis, Mike is undependable.
A few years ago, my wife and I were in a car accident my kids, and they cried and cried for a long time. In those kinds of situations, you hold your kids close to you and tell them “Daddy’s here” and “Everything is all right” until they calm down. When I saw the fire sequence, Mike did none of that. Lynn Johnston has turned the character into a heartless, cold man.
Unlike Lynn Johnston, I am tired of slamming Mike. So, Constable Paul Wright focused on a comparison between the ways the aboriginal people of Canada are treated in comparison to how the Kelpfroths were treated in the strip. The comparison worked pretty well, I thought. Howard gave an analysis of the different kids of shock, mainly because in researching shock I discovered that there was a whole type of shock that was specific to getting severely burned. And Jeremy Jones snarked the whole idea that these people would get together to stare at the old burnt apartment. Jeremy was finally able to entice April to take an evening out, so we could do a real-time story-telling kind of like we used to do in the old days. It worked out pretty well, even though it was not as rapid-fire as when we used to do those things.
I was floored when aprilp_katje came up with the idea for having the kids visit the Kelpfroths in the hospital, not only because I didn’t think of it at all, but mainly because it is the sort of thing that Lynn Johnston in her glory days would have done. Can you imagine it? If Mike and Deanna had taken Merrie and Robin to see them in the burn ward, and maybe even felt sorry for them? April visiting Jeremy Jones in the hospital was OK, but I think this idea would have knocked the socks off the regular readers of the strip. The idea that Merrie and Robin would try to hug the Kelpfroths was just terrific. That’s the kind of thing April’s Real Blog is really good for. It’s one thing to make fun of the strip, but if you really want to punch home its weaknesses, write up a plot that would have kicked ass and taken names.
A few notes: Disney on Ice really is showing at the Rogers Center in Toronto, although the show is at 4 pm. I set it at a later time so, aprilp_katje would have time to get off work and participate. The description of the Disney on Ice show comes from the Disney on Ice website, which kindly provided pictures of the show for my snarking. Baloo the Bear is not in the show, but I thought the idea of Gerald in a bear costume on skates was amusing. I decided Jeremy’s unnamed future sis would be into seeing a Disney on Ice show, mainly because I would like to see one. The last one that came through town, my kids didn’t want to see because they were “too big.” That’s a problem with me, because I have always liked those things, and having kids was always a good excuse to see them. Who would have thought my kids at ages 9 and 11 would be “too big?”
Other notes: The CN tower really is known for fine desserts, and has a revolving restaurant on top. I have not been there, but Reunion Tower in Dallas, Texas is like that, and I have been there. It is supposedly a romantic place to go, so I thought having Gerald and April there would be fun, and I could run through a little “meta” style conversation with Merrie and Robin.
There is a tendency within the various groups that comment on For Better or For Worse to simply slam Mike for everything he does. If he spends time with his family, it is a token effort. If he spends time at work, he is ignoring his family. It’s a no win kind of situation for him with the commentators, and there is a great deal in the entertainment media today which follows the same course with working fathers.
My kids and I recently saw the movie Night at the Museum where the majour plot point is that the Ben Stiller character takes the job at the museum, in order to satisfy his son, whose acceptance of his father is based solely on his employment. In the kid’s films, I get to see on a regular basis, thanks to having kids; the fathers are frequently placed in the situation where everything would be better if only they spent less time at work and more time with their families, which is almost never a plot point with women. My wife stays at home with the kids, and I go to work. There is no way I can match the time she gets with the kids. It is simply not possible. And given the way the school system seems to set its hours and days off, I often wonder how families with 2 working parents can handle it. The schools seem to be geared towards parents who have one parent free at all times, to drop everything and come to the school at a moment’s notice.
So, these movies bother me a lot, and when the same issue comes up with For Better or For Worse, I have a great deal of empathy for Michael Patterson. And despite that natural empathy, Lynn Johnston has still managed to turn me against him. This fire plotline has tested me, to try and write him and make him seem human and not just a completely self-centred prig. I snark the strip on its discrepancies, fill in the plot holes with hopefully funny stuff, and try to make sense out of what Mike did during the fire.
Now with tomorrow’s strip, we get see Deanna handling the kids by herself…. again. I have to think that Lynn Johnston is really trying to slam this point home: Mike is neglecting his kids. Even if you empathize with Mike, it is hard to get around it. This whole fire sequence makes this point again and again, but I don’t know if this is the point Lynn Johnston is trying to make. I think she is trying to set up the idea that when Mike’s book becomes a best-seller, he no longer needs to work at Portrait Magazine, and he can concentrate on writing books, and he will magically become a more attentive father. It will be sort of a “Quit Portrait for your kids’ sake” idea. While she is putting this idea forth, what Lynn is inadvertently doing is making Michael more and more unlikable. Deanna has learned now first hand that in a crisis, Mike is undependable.
A few years ago, my wife and I were in a car accident my kids, and they cried and cried for a long time. In those kinds of situations, you hold your kids close to you and tell them “Daddy’s here” and “Everything is all right” until they calm down. When I saw the fire sequence, Mike did none of that. Lynn Johnston has turned the character into a heartless, cold man.
Unlike Lynn Johnston, I am tired of slamming Mike. So, Constable Paul Wright focused on a comparison between the ways the aboriginal people of Canada are treated in comparison to how the Kelpfroths were treated in the strip. The comparison worked pretty well, I thought. Howard gave an analysis of the different kids of shock, mainly because in researching shock I discovered that there was a whole type of shock that was specific to getting severely burned. And Jeremy Jones snarked the whole idea that these people would get together to stare at the old burnt apartment. Jeremy was finally able to entice April to take an evening out, so we could do a real-time story-telling kind of like we used to do in the old days. It worked out pretty well, even though it was not as rapid-fire as when we used to do those things.
I was floored when aprilp_katje came up with the idea for having the kids visit the Kelpfroths in the hospital, not only because I didn’t think of it at all, but mainly because it is the sort of thing that Lynn Johnston in her glory days would have done. Can you imagine it? If Mike and Deanna had taken Merrie and Robin to see them in the burn ward, and maybe even felt sorry for them? April visiting Jeremy Jones in the hospital was OK, but I think this idea would have knocked the socks off the regular readers of the strip. The idea that Merrie and Robin would try to hug the Kelpfroths was just terrific. That’s the kind of thing April’s Real Blog is really good for. It’s one thing to make fun of the strip, but if you really want to punch home its weaknesses, write up a plot that would have kicked ass and taken names.
A few notes: Disney on Ice really is showing at the Rogers Center in Toronto, although the show is at 4 pm. I set it at a later time so, aprilp_katje would have time to get off work and participate. The description of the Disney on Ice show comes from the Disney on Ice website, which kindly provided pictures of the show for my snarking. Baloo the Bear is not in the show, but I thought the idea of Gerald in a bear costume on skates was amusing. I decided Jeremy’s unnamed future sis would be into seeing a Disney on Ice show, mainly because I would like to see one. The last one that came through town, my kids didn’t want to see because they were “too big.” That’s a problem with me, because I have always liked those things, and having kids was always a good excuse to see them. Who would have thought my kids at ages 9 and 11 would be “too big?”
Other notes: The CN tower really is known for fine desserts, and has a revolving restaurant on top. I have not been there, but Reunion Tower in Dallas, Texas is like that, and I have been there. It is supposedly a romantic place to go, so I thought having Gerald and April there would be fun, and I could run through a little “meta” style conversation with Merrie and Robin.
posted by howard at 11:37 PM
2 Comments:
I agree Mike ought to be helping Dee reassure their children that everything is okay.
How do the kid movies tend to treat working mothers? Not a kid's film, but I can't help thinking of the Diane Keaton movie Baby Boom, where she unexpectedly becomes to caretaker of a toddler, learning along the way that her life as a driven career woman had been all wrong, so she should drop it all and move to Vermont.
This sentiment seems fairly common in popular culture in general, but I'm blanking as far as kid movies go.
These are the kid’s movies I have seen this year. It's a scary long list:
Charlotte’s Web – In this movie, the mothers are both farm wives. No one makes any notice of their job, but Fern’s mom despairs that Fern’s only friends are the barn animals, and tries to convince Fern to wear a bright pink dress to the County Fair.
Happy Feet – penguins, no working mothers
Flushed Away – animated mice, no working mothers
Flicka – Mom is a farm wife. The negative comments are directed at the dad, who tries to prevent the daughter from doing what she wants, because he is over-protective.
Night at the Museum – Mom works and her new husband works. Mom and the son are very critical of dad’s get-rich schemes and demand he find a regular job.
Eragon – Mom’s dead. Eragon raised by uncle.
Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause – Mrs. Claus, a school principal in the Santa Clause 2, is pregnant, but also runs the elf school as a principal. No negative comments towards her at all.
The Ant Bully – Mom and Dad disappear on a trip.
Monster House – Mom and Dad disappear on a trip.
Cars – animated cars
Over the Hedge – animated animals
The Wild – animated zoo animals
Hoodwinked – no parents, although Little Red Riding Hood has a grandmother, and she is quite active in Extreme Sports.
Open Season – animated forest animals
Barnyard – animated barn animals
Brother Bear 2 – animated bears plus a human female love interest
Cheaper by the Dozen 2 – Mom is a successful author, Dad is a football coach. No negative comments on mom’s career, because as an author she never has to leave her kids.
Racing Stripes - Mom died from being a jockey. Overprotective father tries to prevent daughter from being a jockey, but ultimately agrees and it results in his daughter saving his career. There is a career woman in this one, who is the villainess, but no one tells her she is evil because she has a career. She is evil more in the traditional, "I am ruthless and want to win no matter what" kind of vein.
As far as the year 2006 for kid's movies, working moms get a pretty good treatment, if anyone pays any attention to what they do at all.
The movies I can think of which were similar to Baby Boom in recent years was Raising Helen with Kate Hudson, where she had kids pushed on her and she worked in the fashion industry. That was 2004.
Then there was Uptown Girls with Britanny Murphy, where she was an irresponsible nanny converted to good parenting by Dakota Fanning. That was 2003.
Post a Comment
<< Home