Danny contraction.. sorta... and it's ancient.

[CodeGuy]

I found this while going though the archives and transcribing comics:

http://nukees.com/d/19990611.html

He says "Up and at 'em, Suzy Gee!" So "'em" is a contraction.

Technically.

And it wasn't really Danny, it was a little waking delusion of Suzy Gee's.

And it was 7 years ago.

[miss kyri]

So in Suzy Gee's head danny says contractions? Interesting....

Btw, Gav, Can we quit with the seizure inducing adverts? I seriously started to get a headahce whilst typing this... I think it says dyson vacuum cleaner altho i'm not sure as its flashing really fast....

[towr]

He says "Up and at 'em, Suzy Gee!" So "'em" is a contraction.

Technically.

And yet you don't notice he used "don't", a real contraction, two panels later

[CodeGuy]

Nope, didn't notice that at all!

[Gav]

There are actually quite a lot of earlier strips where Danny uses contractions, because I hadn't really established that personality trait yet.

Don't know if 'em qualifies, though... Pretty sure "don't" does, however.

[Conina]

'em is not a contraction, it's an abbreviation, totally different species of kettle.

[CodeGuy]

Seems like a related species of kettle to me. A colander, maybe.

[Gav]

Seems like a related species of kettle to me. A colander, maybe.

In a sense, yes. I think if Danny were to say it today, I would have written it out: "Up and at them, Suzy Gee!"

You know, it's an interesting question... A newspaper cartoonist doesn't have the option, but a webtoonist does: How much "causality violation" is too much? Theoretically, I could go back and make it so Danny never uses a contraction in the past, even before that speech pattern was established. But is that upsetting the initial "feel" of the evolution of the strip? I'm sure there are other semi-inconsistancies from the early years as well. In general, I have no qualms over "fixing" a strip I just did, but it would somehow seem wrong to alter stuff from seven years ago, just because I do something different now.

[CodeGuy]

For the purpose of sanity, I think that most stuff should slide.

Fixing an error in the most recent comic, that's not a bad idea. Going back and reworking old comics isn't needed. It a writer wants to do it, I'm perfectly willing to help. However, it's not necessary, mainly because it could go on forever.

Old spelling errors could be fixed, art gaffs could be fixed, the amount of stuff you could do is almost limitless. You could work forever just trying to get your archives right. I don't blame anyone for not doing it.

However, balancing factors do exist. The author of Scary Go Round went back and changed some strips because his art style changed. He didn't like the big heads on the characters anymore, so he changed it. The author of It's Walky is redrawing the beginnings of the strip entirely because he wants it to have a more concise beginning that isn't bogged down by ties to another comic.

Both of these things seem unneccessary to me. However, those authors probably feel that it makes their comics more accessible to new readers. So that's something they have to balance against the work they have to do and the confusion to the old readers.

[bloodeye]

Going back over old comics I can stand, espically if it's just the artist explaining exactly what was going on. (ie Queen of Wands)

Can also understand if there was a major change to the plot/history which invalidates the earlier comics (ie Drow Tales)

But to redo the comics just because your art style has grown.... that pisses me off. Some people like the old style, let them enjoy it. Some people like watching an artistic style grow. A lot of people have already seen you do that joke, don't rehash it.
Seems to me if someone is just going to redo old comics, isn't much point in having an archve at all. Just have one comic, and revise it every day. Maybe call the comic 'what the charecters are doing now'.

...right, ranting, gonna stop now....