Lynn’s Comments about Today’s Strip
In the Chicago Tribune article, Lynn Johnston spoke at length about today’s strips.
And readers who see her strip in Sunday's paper, which refers to a recurring dream of Elly's, might think Johnston's recent separation is reflected there. (To avoid spoiling the strip for readers, we have decided not to give a complete description of it.)'I decided to let it run'In a poignantly ironic way, the strip is autobiographical, but the events depicted there happened a long time ago. "I drew that strip years ago ... the first year that the strip came out," Johnston said, adding that it is one of the older strips that are running as part of the hybrid plan."I really had that dream. ... I put it in a strip, never thinking that it would ever be something that I would experience."I've been going over the very first strips that I did, and I decided to let it run. ... I like it; it was good. It's really kind of unique, considering the situation. The girls at [my] studio thought it was appropriate, and we all kind of smiled and said, yes, let's run it."
Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned,Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.
William Congreve (1670 - 1729), The Mourning Bride, 1697, act III scene 8
In her comments, Lynn Johnston sounds like she is trying to make a decision about whether or not to run a particular For Better or For Worse strip where Elly dreams of John being unfaithful. She makes it seem as if the strip was one of the early strips she had done and ergo it should be presented as one of the hybrid strips, but there is the sticky problem that it manages to predict the future. What to do? It’s the next strip set to be done in the hybrid because, you know we have a rhyme and a reason for which strips we present, and we don’t want to break that logical method of choosing strips to hybrid, just because the subject is uncomfortable. Well, what do you know, “The girls at [my] studio thought it was appropriate, and we all kind of smiled and said, yes, let's run it." So Lynn thought it might be inappropriate, but the studios girls said “Yes” and with their approval, she decided to go for the strip. The studio girls gave their approval.
I don’t buy a word of it. I will cut the woman some slack for being treated badly by Rod, but I see no reason to air her dirty laundry on a national scale, except for revenge. I might have believed she did not intentionally pick today’s strip for that purpose, if she had not gone on about it so long in the article and mentioned the studio girls’ approval as they all kind of smiled.
If this awful business has reached the Sunday colours, I have a feeling we are going to see it invade the daily hybrid sooner or later.
And readers who see her strip in Sunday's paper, which refers to a recurring dream of Elly's, might think Johnston's recent separation is reflected there. (To avoid spoiling the strip for readers, we have decided not to give a complete description of it.)'I decided to let it run'In a poignantly ironic way, the strip is autobiographical, but the events depicted there happened a long time ago. "I drew that strip years ago ... the first year that the strip came out," Johnston said, adding that it is one of the older strips that are running as part of the hybrid plan."I really had that dream. ... I put it in a strip, never thinking that it would ever be something that I would experience."I've been going over the very first strips that I did, and I decided to let it run. ... I like it; it was good. It's really kind of unique, considering the situation. The girls at [my] studio thought it was appropriate, and we all kind of smiled and said, yes, let's run it."
Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned,Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.
William Congreve (1670 - 1729), The Mourning Bride, 1697, act III scene 8
In her comments, Lynn Johnston sounds like she is trying to make a decision about whether or not to run a particular For Better or For Worse strip where Elly dreams of John being unfaithful. She makes it seem as if the strip was one of the early strips she had done and ergo it should be presented as one of the hybrid strips, but there is the sticky problem that it manages to predict the future. What to do? It’s the next strip set to be done in the hybrid because, you know we have a rhyme and a reason for which strips we present, and we don’t want to break that logical method of choosing strips to hybrid, just because the subject is uncomfortable. Well, what do you know, “The girls at [my] studio thought it was appropriate, and we all kind of smiled and said, yes, let's run it." So Lynn thought it might be inappropriate, but the studios girls said “Yes” and with their approval, she decided to go for the strip. The studio girls gave their approval.
I don’t buy a word of it. I will cut the woman some slack for being treated badly by Rod, but I see no reason to air her dirty laundry on a national scale, except for revenge. I might have believed she did not intentionally pick today’s strip for that purpose, if she had not gone on about it so long in the article and mentioned the studio girls’ approval as they all kind of smiled.
If this awful business has reached the Sunday colours, I have a feeling we are going to see it invade the daily hybrid sooner or later.
posted by howard at 10:46 PM
7 Comments:
We are indeed about to be subjected to an atrocity and would have to be the gullible sheep that domiate Coffee Talh to think otherwise. She had no problems with selling out Charles Schulz just to see her name in the biography so it seems obvious we'll all have our heads thrust into her dirty linen some time soon.
I don't buy the explanation either, howtheduck. Lynn is obviously not running all of the old strips--she didn't go back to strip #1 and proceed chronologically. So really there'd be no need to run this particular strip unless she's trying to make a point.
BTW, Katie is not working with Lynn anymore. The official site updated her page to note that she's returned to Vancouver and art school.
Yes, Lynn is using her bully pulpit to make life as unpleasant as possible for Rod. But Lynn is an amazing piece of work; she can turn anything around to how victimized she is *poor thing*.
I've often wondered what the first husband (Doug?)thinks about still being slandered almost continuously in Lynn's interviews for over thirty years.
DJ
I don’t post much because it’s very late when I finally have the opportunity to read the blogs.
I want to comment on Robin being stupid. I checked with parents of three year-olds. One parent was telling me about her child, who is smart, almost knocking over the TV because she was looking for the characters in the back of the TV after the show was over.
The mothers I asked didn’t think their own children would think of “miss givings” because they refer to caregivers only by their first names. I wonder if this would also be the way they would address a caregiver who is sixty.
Anon NYC
Before you guys start snarking, I want to make it known that I’m looking forward to a week with April!
Anon NYC
Anon NYC,
When my kids were in preschool, the "Miss {first name}" method was used even for the older teachers. Daycare teachers were often either very old or very young.
Your story about the 3-year-old nearly knocking over the TV is quite surprising to me. I did not have this experience with my kids and the television, but it could be because my children had seen me do the video camera trick of recording them and putting them on the television screen.
I, too, am looking forward to a week of April. It has been almost 2 months since we had a daily strip April sequence. There has been so much Mike, I ready for some April.
In regards to Miss [Name], I teach Religious Ed and my name is "Miss [Last Name]". A lot of the younger or "more hip" teachers go by "Mrs/Mr [First Name]". I, personally, think it's ridiculous and if you're going to use your first name you should drop the "Mrs/Mr."
I think it's quite cool being called "Miss [Last Name]" by my students : ) It would annoy me to be called Miss Adrianne.
Adrianne
Post a Comment
<< Home