March 16th, 2012

Snarky Candiru2

Saturday, 17 March 2012

We end the week with a reminder that John tends to need mothering because he's a whiny dimwit who thinks that other people exist to serve him.

(Strip Number 379, Original Publication Date, 19 March 1983)

Panel 1: We find John in front of the bathroom mirror whining to Elly that he's got lines around his eyes and his cheeks are sunken.

Panel 2: He then looks at the greaseburger-induced paunch, tells her that he's getting old and saggy around the middle and ooooooooooold. 

Panel 3: She tells him that that's nonsense; all he needs is a good rest after a hard day of paying more taxes than he ought to.

Panel 4: As she gives him a back rub, he thought-bubbles that a man is never too old to be mothered.

Summary: He can, however, be too old to whine about how bad his life is. I can see a messed-up teenager or some poor soul with real problems in his life needing pity. I can't relate to the need a rich idiot like him has to be comforted because he can't have everything his own way all the freaking time. 

Immigration: good. Relocating for love: bad.

So we have all these noble immigrants and refugees who are so heroic to start a new life in Canada. I guess it's okay to relocate if you're running *from*: if you're escaping poverty or a war zone. But if you're safe and fed where you are, you cannot leave. Paul can't move south to be with Liz, Liz can't stay in the north to be with Paul, Lawrence can't travel to Paris to be with Ben, and Pablo can't move to Canada to be with Connie *and their baby*. That's the most galling one, as I've said before. Check late October 1999. "I would never have survived in her world"? Seriously? Okay, so there were not as many mixed-race marriages in the 1970s as there are today. But there were enough that did survive, because both parties wanted to make it work.

Lawrence's parentage is another depth Lynn should have left unplumbed. I know she wants to make it into a tragic, doomed romance. But to me, there's no way to read it that doesn't make Pablo look jerkish. There's certainly no excuse for not sending financial support. "Never have survived" is a weak defense for "It was a quick shag...okay, many quick shags, but I didn't want to jeopardize my future."

What made me think of this was the Thursday 3/15 thread, where people were discussing the Ethiopian Cabbie. http://catalog.fborfw.com/indexkeywords2.php?q=ethiopian&Submit=Search Interesting. Hasn't seen his wife in three years; never seen his child. So how is it that he "escaped" and his pregnant wife did not? Hum? And how is he providing for them? How is he going to "bring" them to Canada, and when is "soon"? Maybe he IS fishing for tips. And maybe John will hail his cab again and hear an updated story: Egypt instead of Ethiopia, but the kid is still 2 1/2 years old.

And even if the whole story is true, *some* thing must bother this guy. The weather is below his irritation level, but what if he incurs some expense, like a ticket or the cost of his license going up? If he really is supporting his family (can you wire money to a war zone?) that might upset a carefully balanced budget. And imagine if he gets robbed. Escaped execution in his home country, only to be shot for $200 Canadian. Stick that in your hoseaphonium, Eva.