WAke Up, L'il Susy (is here). Chick's newest for your pleasure!

No, you read the sentences in the wrong order. It is misleading, because in that panel Cathy’s talk-balloon is on the left. But Susy’s is above Cathy’s, indicating that she speaks first. In the previous panel, Cathy had asked, “Did your mom leave home?” That’s what Susy is responding to when she says, “No, she loved me.” Then Cathy asks if Susy’s parents are divorced, and Susy replies that her mom died when she was born.

What I like, though, are Cathy’s mood swings.

Cathy: :confused: You got a new father?

Susy: Oh, yes…I’m SO happy…and he loves me and watches over me.

Cathy: :mad: THAT’S NOT FAIR!!

Susy: But Cathy, he can be your daddy too!

Cathy: :o Oh Susy…that would make me sooooooooooo happy!

“Who art thy Daddy? WHO ART THY DADDY, BEEYATCH? Verily, I say unto thee!”

Truly, the LORD hath humbled the proud and confounded the wicked by confounding their coding, sevenfold, thousand upon thousand, to the third and fourth generations. Amen.

Grr, and I meant to type “struck down the wicked!” Curses, Dr. Jesus! Foiled again!

D’oh! I actually read them right and quoted them wrong. But my complaint stands. Parent move out of the family home? Parent doesn’t love you, kid!

Chick tracts would be so improved if they really used the smiley technique.

[disclaimer] I’m not at all defending anything Jack Chick says, ever has said, or will say in the future. [/disclaimer]

But while I thought the idea that God says Daddy sinned by getting remarried kinda sucked, I figured the “Daddy didn’t love me” thing was just her perception of the divorce, and showed how muc she was looking for some other father figure in her life.

And was therefore ripe to be plucked by any cult that came by.

I just want to be a pain in the butt and point out the blonde girl Cathy bares her teeth like a pit bull in p16, right panel.
Also note that Cathy appears to be straight outta Whosville (next to Compton) in p6, right panel

I got the idea that Daddy got divorced TO get remarried with another woman- and also that since he doesn’t have anything to do with his daughter, that’s fair cause for her to think he doesn’t love her.

JTC can be a butthead but there’s not buttheadery on these points.

The tract is designed to witness to children-- and specifically to witness to children of divorced parents. Whether or not it is supposed to cater to children who have indeed and actually been abandoned by a parent, or children who are hurting from their parents’ recent divorce and feel abandoned by one or both parents is irrelevant. Those little digs re parental love=living in the same house could reinforce some bitter and unhealthy feelings. I feel that the real meaning behind the “She loved me” remark, subtle as it is, is to urge children of divorce to accept Chick’s God–no matter what their parents teach them. After all, why should you accept Mom or Dad’s belief system when Mom or Dad moved out and doesn’t love you? Why reconcile your feelings toward the divorce or the new stepparent when you could just be a child of God?

Literature aimed at children, no matter what its purpose, should not undermine the family unless there’s a damn good (plot-based) reason.

I love it. I’m scouring a Chick tract for subtext. Have any English Literature students done a Master’s thesis on Chick tracts?

Boy, now that you’ve brought it up I’m thinking there’s a PhD in there something.

That’s a dissertation begging to be written.

Satan’s dissertation!!!

Um. The chick website’s disappeared!

I’ve been away from my PC for a while and decided to skim the last week of topics and when I clicked on the link to the tract it had disappeared.

Try it for yourselves, it truly is a miracle!

gothelen

Could be that some heathen hijacked the site.

And God said unto Jack…

WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING?

… and yanketh forth the plug…

It’s there, guys. I think it was just a temporary glitch.

On the topic of the tract – yes, I think that this one is targeted to kids – thus no “Bob”(*), no faceless God throwing Good-but-not-Christian people into the Lake of Fire, no Whore of Babylon, no denunciation of sodomy, no HAW HAW HAW. Methinks the new artist, however, does suffer from an overdose of art-technique books – e.g. the gratuitious odd-angle zoom-in-and-out panel transitions, the stock poses, and yes the weird-ass facial expressions. As someone mentioned above, it’s almost like “make it manga-like but don’t make it look manga-style”…

I’m hoping this is the “next generation” set – maybe later on, as Cathy and Susy grow up, they’ll progress to learning that their Muslim schoolmates are evil; telling the nice, sweet, generous lady next door she will go to Hell anyway; get the chance to say no to drugs, sex, rock’n’roll and RPGs; witness another classmate die horribly in a Hallowe’en pagan sacrifice; and probably NOT get molested by a Catholic priest but just tell him off about the true version of the Bible.

(*)But really, folks, probably even Chick would figure having Bob in this one would have just thrown this one into full-on creepiness. (As it is, brothers and sisters, we’ve been a bit quick to pick up on the potential Lolicon angle, haven’t we? We’re SO going together :wink: into the flaming lake…)

That one caught my eye too. The way she’s posed makes her look like a pony girl - she even appears to be wearing a little saddle!