Strange as it might sound here, home of classic A&J, I’m never very comfortable revisiting artwork. If I see something I could have done to make a cartoon better, why should I tell you? You’re perfectly happy the way it is. If I tell you what I think is wrong, the best result I can achieve is, “Yes, you are right–you could have done better.” And what would be the point of that? However, we have to talk about something here. I probably was in a hurry when I drew this. I usually am. I like the joke. I think it’s clever and an unusual take. If I were drawing it today, I would arrange things so Janis’ devilish nature would appear in the second panel and her angelic nature in the third. There’s plenty of room to set this up, and it would greatly improve the flow and the look. See? I shouldn’t have told you.
21 responses to “We’ll Never Know”
The effect, I think. is good either way: In the original way, we Janis standing and contemplating in panel 2–some real sympathy! She loves the man!
In your suggested way, that is elided and we are right away presented with her arguing with herself, improving the flow, as you say.
But I admire (also) the flow in the original. It’s like that when I am improvising music–I have to hurry and choose a way *right now,* and although I could do a number of different things, I choose one and it turns out well. No, not always: Sometimes I slip. That’s why composing–on paper (as with cartoons!)–is enjoyable in a different way. One can plan it ahead of time, as it were!
Oh, rats, I forgot to use three hyphens to make my dashes! Doesn’t work with just two. Too late—
I think it’s better the way it is. If you had put the devil in P2 and the angel in P3, we’d conclude that her first impulse was bad but it was overridden by her good side, and that’s why she woke Arlo up.
The way it is now, the good and bad impulses were simultaneous and there’s no telling which won out.
As someone who grew up on Saturday morning cartoons, I can say that the original drawing is consistent with what we saw as kids. And frankly we often think of both thoughts at literally at the same time, so I think that you did good.
I can’t remember the last time that I fell asleep for a nap. Maybe a couple of weeks ago when I walked 20 miles on Saturday and dosed off for maybe 5 minutes on Sunday.But unless I am sick, I don’t take naps. I need to remember to tell my sleep doctor that next time that I see her.
I prefer Janis’ two “selves” together in one panel, as shown. It points out better the conflict she apparently feels. In separate panels, a sequence is denoted, and seemingly less conflict.
I finally finished my federal taxes yesterday! Yay!. I don’t mind the outlay of funds, but I absolutely dread all the forms and the excessive going back & forth amongst same. No way I will do this on line, given the tendency towards hacking in this era. State forms remain – just made more complex, darn – but will be faster.
As the others have said, I prefer the empty dialog in panel two. That allows room for all the possible musings _before_ we get to the good/bad dichotomy on waking him up. The best part of the joke is that she woke him up, and we don’t know which reason prevailed. If the thought-action were in separate panels then there would definitely be an implied sequence and we lose the ambivalent motivation.
I have to echo the others… The consideration of the second panel, followed by the simultaneous debate in the third, is telling of Janis’ personality. I can see where the strip may appear to be word-heavy in the second half, but I feel the characterization rings truer here. But today, your milage varies.
Yes, Jimmy, you got it right the first time… which isn’t to say your instincts are failing you now! But the two thoughts have to be simultaneous to make it completely unclear which side won… a devil on one shoulder, or an angel on the other. BTW, the amusing and wild ambiguity makes this one of the finest strips you’ve ever done, in my opinion.
My 2 cents is this way works best – otherwise you would have had to
put Janis in panel 1.
And as has been said – this makes a better effect of conflict.
Re 3-1-19 cartoon: I’m with Ludwig. I also prefer meals that cost more than a dollar.
See, Jimmy? This is what happens when you ask the peanut gallery!
We once had a church service at the state hospital where a lay brother started talking about the devil/angel on the shoulder scenario and upset several patients with auditory hallucinations. He wasn’t invited back.
When I was at school I rarely got full marks for an essay or artwork. I used to wonder — I still do — at what point after school one stops doing “could do better” work and begins to create the “ten out of ten” book or painting.
For a hilarious examination of good and evil and how they can often be similar, I suggest reading “Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch.”
British humor at its best.
Should I ever come into possession of a racehorse, I shall definitely call it Footer Widget.
Should I ever invent an accessory for push-up bras that makes them push up even more spectacularly, I will call it the Hooter Widget.
Or perhaps I will devise a device that allows one to perambulate as stealthily as a cat and patent it as The Pussyfooter Widget.
And would not a device that permits one to dispatch thieves be a Looter Shooter Widget?
I shall refrain from discussing a Cooter Widget. You’re welcome.
Is a Cooter Widget the baby of a Coot and Widgeon? Or is it just an adorable version of a baby widgeon?
Nice Lion King reference in the Sunday (Mar 3) comic!
Here’s the source: https://youtu.be/9GNJfb9kb5Y