• wjrii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You need to read it in the context of the other strips. Normally, someone in the first panel defies Everett’s sense of decorum and general decent behavior (e.g. describing a way they took advantage of another person, or being unecessarily), and in the second panel Everett cartoonishly attacks them in a fit of righteous rage. It’s all meant to be a wish fulfillment for someone struggling with the stresses of “modern” urban living. I feel like Larry David would probably have been a fan if he were around during its run, if that helps; just imagine the Seinfeld gang if they looked and acted like Kingpin from the Marvel stuff. I think the audience is invited to sympathize with Everett’s sensibilities and to laugh at the catharsis of someone actually indulging their rage.

      This one subverts the trope. It invites the audience to suppose the beggar will be destroyed, especially with the foreshadowing. However, simply existing and hoping for a little generosity does not violate Everett’s personal code, so going against the perceived rational choice, he listens to his better angels, leaves a coin, and moves on. I can almost imagine the cartoonist starting to become a little troubled at how sincerely people, possibly total assholes, professed to admire Everett and so wanted to turn things around a bit.

    • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      He tried his best to ignore the beggar but couldn’t because he has a heart of gold. It’s more wholesome than funny this time.

      I guess the humor is also that he’s frequently violent in all of the other comics but can’t help that he’s actually a big softie.

      • dvlsg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I read it as “the only method to discourage is to ignore them so I better not ignore them so they do not become discouraged”.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending how you look at it), basically every street beggar (at least in the UK) has some form of drug or alcohol problem that you’d be funding.

        (For context, I say fortunate as there are ways for people who don’t have these problems and are homeless to survive)

        • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          If funding an alcohol problem is necessary in order to fund a life, then I want to fund an alcohol problem.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            The alcohol problem is what’s destroying their life

        • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’ve done a lot of work with the homeless, and it’s sadly true here in the US too. Still, I think it’s normal for the average person to want to do something, even if it’s not without its drawbacks.