Skipping the Feminist
With today’s reprint of For Better or For Worse, we get confirmation of aprilp_katje’s guess yesterday that Lynn Johnston is reprinting the strip sequence where John took a business trip, while Elly went out with Connie Poirier. Aside from skipping the strip where Elly dropped John off at the airport, with today’s strip we learn that Lynn has also skipped the strip where Elly is having trouble sleeping in her bed listening to night noises without John there and she thinks, "I wonder how many feminists are afraid of the dark."
There are several good reasons why that strip was skipped:
a. The word “feminists” would date the strip. I know the word is still used today, but AMU reprints tells me the word hasn’t been used in For Better or For Worse since before 1996, the start year of the AMU reprints archives.
b. Elly is shown to be dependent on John to make her feel safe.
c. The usual – it doesn’t make John Patterson look bad.
The strip that follows shows Elly thinking the line, “Now to give the impression of being irresistible – yet able to resist.” This line does go along with Connie’s lines from yesterday, where she tells Elly to wear “something sexy and flirty” and the dreadful catch-and-release fishing analogy, on how to handle men.
Elly’s line today is a little confusing. Elly is trying to give an impression. That impression is of being irresistible, meaning someone can’t resist her. That impression also includes being able to resist, which I presume means that she can resist the someone who can’t resist her. In other words, someone will be unable to resist being attracted to Elly, while Elly will have no trouble resisting her attraction to them. However, the whole thing is not real, but just an impression. So, we will only have an impression that someone cannot resist being attracted to Elly, while we will only have an impression Elly can resist being attracted to them. In reality, the situation is quite different. Maybe, no one is attracted to Elly and she is completely taken by them. It's confusing.
Of course, thanks to the extra information of the new-runs, we know how to interpret the story. “You can go fishing – but, you don’t have to keep the fish” said Connie as she looked at Elly Patterson with her bedroom eyes. Perhaps this is Lynn’s sly reference to the old slang term use of the word “fish” to mean “The scent of females who wash their private parts infrequently.” Ick! I hope not.
There are several good reasons why that strip was skipped:
a. The word “feminists” would date the strip. I know the word is still used today, but AMU reprints tells me the word hasn’t been used in For Better or For Worse since before 1996, the start year of the AMU reprints archives.
b. Elly is shown to be dependent on John to make her feel safe.
c. The usual – it doesn’t make John Patterson look bad.
The strip that follows shows Elly thinking the line, “Now to give the impression of being irresistible – yet able to resist.” This line does go along with Connie’s lines from yesterday, where she tells Elly to wear “something sexy and flirty” and the dreadful catch-and-release fishing analogy, on how to handle men.
Elly’s line today is a little confusing. Elly is trying to give an impression. That impression is of being irresistible, meaning someone can’t resist her. That impression also includes being able to resist, which I presume means that she can resist the someone who can’t resist her. In other words, someone will be unable to resist being attracted to Elly, while Elly will have no trouble resisting her attraction to them. However, the whole thing is not real, but just an impression. So, we will only have an impression that someone cannot resist being attracted to Elly, while we will only have an impression Elly can resist being attracted to them. In reality, the situation is quite different. Maybe, no one is attracted to Elly and she is completely taken by them. It's confusing.
Of course, thanks to the extra information of the new-runs, we know how to interpret the story. “You can go fishing – but, you don’t have to keep the fish” said Connie as she looked at Elly Patterson with her bedroom eyes. Perhaps this is Lynn’s sly reference to the old slang term use of the word “fish” to mean “The scent of females who wash their private parts infrequently.” Ick! I hope not.
posted by howard at 9:59 PM
8 Comments:
If Lynn could write more clearly, we'd know what it was that Elly was trying to say. If I were to have written the fourth panel, Elly would thought-bubble that the point would be to look good while still indicating to passers-by "Sorry, fellas; I'm taken!" That would deliver the message Lynn seems to want to have sent without the ambiguity her questionable writing style causes.
dreadedcandiru2,
It is at moments like these where I realize exactly why it is that Lynn Johnston did not write all those Who's Who biographies herself. Imagine how convoluted and confusing they would be with Lynn writing. I think Lynn wanted Elly to have aspirations to write as a career, because Lynn had so much trouble doing it.
howard,It also makes me think that she was the person who wrote all those selections from Stone Season that we saw in the retcons. Both are examples of convoluted bushwa written by a disorganized mind.
It also makes me think that she was the person who wrote all those selections from Stone Season that we saw in the retcons.-
The Michael monthly letter Stone Season selections reminded me so much of the overwrought style of the Who's Who biographies, I was convinced it was Beth Cruikshank who wrote Michael. However, I will admit the fact that the main character's name "Sheilaugh Shaugnessy" was spelled differently from monthly letter to monthly letter is more like Lynn Johnston.
I think Lynn wanted Elly to have aspirations to write as a career, because Lynn had so much trouble doing it.
Yesterday, I was thinking, "Elly did NOT major in English; she majored in Lynnglish." This was a thought that popped into my head just before I went to bed. Lucky for me, no nightmares. ;)
I vote for mostly c. The usual – it doesn’t make John Patterson look bad with a touch of b. Lynn doesn't care about dating the strip or having continuity, so a's out. I think she also wouldn't mind showing Elly to be dependent on John if she could explicitly show him letting her down. But to show Elly missing John at night, through no fault of his own (in this particular strip), would show that she cares for him, and we can't have that.
clio_1,
But to show Elly missing John at night, through no fault of his own (in this particular strip), would show that she cares for him, and we can't have that.-
I agree this was probably the crucial element which led to this strip being eliminated. Based on this method, of the 4 strips that are left in this story sequence, I would bet we see both of the Cafe Chez Louis strips and none of the strips where the kids or Elly talk about how they miss the missing John.
aprilp_katje,
Yesterday, I was thinking, "Elly did NOT major in English; she majored in Lynnglish." This was a thought that popped into my head just before I went to bed. Lucky for me, no nightmares. ;)-
You are lucky. I remember in my university days, my French professor proclaimed that she knew she was truly immersed in French, when she started to have dreams where the people in the dreams spoke French. If you start having dreams where the people start speaking Lynnglish, then I would say it was time to take a little break from all things FOOB.
Post a Comment
<< Home