Lynn Imitates Charles Schulz...Again!!!
Today’s observations about today’s reprint of For Better or For Worse:
1. Mike has windjammers on his pyjamas. I wonder if he will write a book some day based on this experience.
2. Michael’s pyjamas are not even. Normally, with kids this means that they have gotten their buttons matched to the wrong buttonhole, but everything else appears to be lined up at the top. Maybe we are seeing an example of Elly’s sewing prowess.
3. The dialogue (“That’s that!...Do you hear me?”) and Michael’s stance (head back, nose in the air, giant gaping maw for a mouth, and shouted words) are blatantly stolen from Peanuts.
4. Michael’s eyes glow in the dark. Maybe he’s not completely human and has cat eyes.
5. I don’t understand how this light was removed in Panel 3. In Panels 1 and 2, Michael appears to be standing in a doorway, presumably the doorway to his room, which should have its own individual lighting system. Is Elly turning off the light in the hallway outside Michael’s room to make everything so black? And if so, why doesn’t Michael just turn the light on in his own room?
6. What happened to Michael’s face in the last panel? It looks like his eyes have been pushed together on his face?
7. Isn’t it spelled “superiour” in Canada?
8. Why would turning off a light on a boy cause him to go to bed? Is Michael nyctophobic?
When my children were Michael’s age and they didn’t want to go to bed, turning off a light on them would have had no effect. As soon as the adult left, they would have turned the light back on and kept on playing. They would take a long time brushing their teeth, or putting on pyjamas to stall going to bed. They would come to me and ask for a drink of water, or a bedtime story, or a second bedtime story. They would wander around in the dark, until they made too much noise and were caught out of their bed. The one thing they would not do is decide to stand in one place all night and announce that was what they were going to do. What’s the fun in doing that?
The basic problem with this strip, in my mind, is that it is Lynn imitating Charles Schulz and not imitating real life. In her first few years, her Schulz imitations were among her worst strips. Her best strips are almost always strips taken from real-life incidents.
1. Mike has windjammers on his pyjamas. I wonder if he will write a book some day based on this experience.
2. Michael’s pyjamas are not even. Normally, with kids this means that they have gotten their buttons matched to the wrong buttonhole, but everything else appears to be lined up at the top. Maybe we are seeing an example of Elly’s sewing prowess.
3. The dialogue (“That’s that!...Do you hear me?”) and Michael’s stance (head back, nose in the air, giant gaping maw for a mouth, and shouted words) are blatantly stolen from Peanuts.
4. Michael’s eyes glow in the dark. Maybe he’s not completely human and has cat eyes.
5. I don’t understand how this light was removed in Panel 3. In Panels 1 and 2, Michael appears to be standing in a doorway, presumably the doorway to his room, which should have its own individual lighting system. Is Elly turning off the light in the hallway outside Michael’s room to make everything so black? And if so, why doesn’t Michael just turn the light on in his own room?
6. What happened to Michael’s face in the last panel? It looks like his eyes have been pushed together on his face?
7. Isn’t it spelled “superiour” in Canada?
8. Why would turning off a light on a boy cause him to go to bed? Is Michael nyctophobic?
When my children were Michael’s age and they didn’t want to go to bed, turning off a light on them would have had no effect. As soon as the adult left, they would have turned the light back on and kept on playing. They would take a long time brushing their teeth, or putting on pyjamas to stall going to bed. They would come to me and ask for a drink of water, or a bedtime story, or a second bedtime story. They would wander around in the dark, until they made too much noise and were caught out of their bed. The one thing they would not do is decide to stand in one place all night and announce that was what they were going to do. What’s the fun in doing that?
The basic problem with this strip, in my mind, is that it is Lynn imitating Charles Schulz and not imitating real life. In her first few years, her Schulz imitations were among her worst strips. Her best strips are almost always strips taken from real-life incidents.
posted by howard at 9:45 PM
10 Comments:
howard,
The basic problem with this strip, in my mind, is that it is Lynn imitating Charles Schulz and not imitating real life. In her first few years, her Schulz imitations were among her worst strips. Her best strips are almost always strips taken from real-life incidents.
In real life, Mike would have a reason that isn't related to thinking that his parents are having fun he doesn't get to have; I remember at that age seeing ominous shapes in the dark that made it hard for me to rest. If Elly really did have superior intellect, she'd reassure him that the boogeyman isn't going to eat him up while he's asleep.
dreadedcandiru2,
I remember at that age seeing ominous shapes in the dark that made it hard for me to rest.
That's pretty common. I had the same problem growing up. It would have made for a more realistic strip. Of course Calvin and Hobbes worked that territory so well with the monster under the bed, I would hate to see what Lynn would do with it. Maybe it's better she stuck with a lame Schulz imitation.
Isn’t it spelled “superiour” in Canada?
Nope, it's not.
An aside--not long ago, my son declared, "I hate bed time!" A few days later, I was leafing through collection #1 and saw this strip. But the similarity ended right after panel one. After voicing his protest, my son went ahead with his bedtime routine. No screeching about standing in a doorway all night.
Anyone else wondering what's up with the fborfw website? Things seem to be changing, or at least disappearing.
Anonymous, a bunch of content was moved over to their "Classic Content" section, so that the rest of the site can pretend the reload is real-time.
aprilp_katje,
Isn’t it spelled “superiour” in Canada? Nope, it's not.
It’s good to have that settled. I never can tell what the rule is for “or” vs “our” in Canada.
After voicing his protest, my son went ahead with his bedtime routine. No screeching about standing in a doorway all night.
You can take pride that your son has a superior intellect to young Michael Patterson and the woman who serves as his voice. Tell him today, “Son. You are smarter than Lynn Johnston.”
I never can tell what the rule is for “or” vs “our” in Canada.
When in doubt re. "-or" or "-our" endings, a good place to check is AskOxford.com. When you enter a word into the search box at the top, right corner of the window, select "English dictionary" from the drop-down menu.
Although there are differences between British and Canadian English, the Canadians seem to follow British rules about the -or/-our endings. An example from the AskOxford site: "exterior".
Tell him today, “Son. You are smarter than Lynn Johnston.”
Heh. :)
aprilp_katje,
Are there any rules, or is it just one of those, "You have to know every word" kind of situations?
Well, I found that
Wikipedia has a rundown.
They may say that the Prairies have more -or endings, and that may be true in ordinary life, but IIRC I was docked spelling marks for anything that deviated from Wikipedia's "British usage" rules.
InsertMonikerHere,
Thanks for the link. The unstressing or stressing of the final "or" or "our" syllable is an easy enough rule to remember for Canadian/US spelling differences.
Post a Comment
<< Home