You have a date, because Chick “dresses up” old tract!

First, here’s a hint. If you’ve been trying to find the latest bi-monthly tract, you can no longer go to chick.com. You must go to http://www.chick.com for the site. To keep this up-to-date after the next tract comes out, here’s the specific “You Have a Date” link:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1072/1072_01.asp

Again, if you leave out the “www.” for the site or an individual page you will no longer be able access. I don’t know why, and it took me quite a while to figure out what was going on.

This is a “redress” of one of JTC’s earliest tracts. He’s done several variations for different ethnicities, but always with males. It’s a bit odd that now he wants to finally do one with a woman. (English-speaking, white, and probably an American/Canadian “WASP”.) When he finally updates the Battle Cry page, perhaps he’ll say why.

The most obvious difference in treatment is that Everyman in “This Was Your Life” was apparently naked, although he didn’t seem to care, or even notice. Naturally, that-other-Jack puts a robe on Everywoman, or rather her soul. Can’t have any naked female spirits running—I mean, floating, around.

Much of the framing is true to the original. BOTH focus two early Judgment Day panels on sxual sn. In the original, our guy is shown to the entire universe telling a (horrors) dirty joke to his buddies (This something Chickie himself learned to deeply regret and be ashamed of, just going by the descriptions of his pre-saved early life.) This is quickly followed by our man very sneakily ogling a hot chick (hmmm…) from a vestibule. (I’ve always thought that JTC made this deliberately ambiguous. Is it really a matter of only covertly ogling a fully-dressed woman on the street? Or is the woman about to shed clothes and the character is an out-and-out voyeur? Maybe that’s a stretch, but the combination of crude B&W artwork and the implied deep shamefulness of the revelation give that effect. In one of his foreign language variations, a man is peeking at some cute tribeswomen bathing-- outdoors, but in apparent intended privacy. And while topfreedom, and perhaps even casual mixed-company nudity, may be normative to the culture, it may well still considered hostile, even criminal, by the same culture, to peek at the women bathing nude in a relatively secluded site. The taboo against staring at women in traditional Japanese mixed-company bathing may be germane here. I’ll look up the variation through a fan site and link up to it next time.)

ETA: Here it is, the Creole version: http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1602/1602_01.asp

In the remake (panels 12A and 12B-- in the tract convention of counting the cover) we have a little more spiciness to the corresponding sins, with the second one being about divorce-and-remarriage with indifference to a pleading daughter. The first panel is the killer, though, with a bisexual theme.

“Stop!” she pleads, “Don’t show what we did next!” Indeed. I don’t think it’s a stretch that a threesome follows. And since this is the Chickiverse, no doubt everyone gets to see some porn while waiting for their turn to be damned.

Sickie Chickie seems to have some axes to grind, and wants to keep up with the times as well, because the laundry list of time-stamped sins includes …pornography! Probably “only” viewing it, although considering the bi-scene prelude, perhaps she was in production as well. (I guess it’s only a sin to show, produce or view it if you don’t have a lightbulb head.) And, of course, one of Hackin’ Jack’s other favorite items to harp on… she dabbled (or more) in … brrrr! …witchcraft!

Well, of course, it could be worse. Our waspish-looking gal at least has a rap-sheet free of (cue for even more ominous music ) … CATHOLICISM!

That’s enough for now. There are a few tidbits that show either unknowing or indifferent sexism in master Jack’s thinking, especially in the alternate timeline, but I’ll end here, and wait for comments.

The OTHER Jack (FNA True Blue Jack)

Huh, she did Witchcraft on October 31st. Probably at a party or something.

Gosh, I missed that! JTC has been… interesting… about dates before. In a fairly early tract, The Assignment (1972), the ping pong man between the forces of good and evil, Charles Bishop, is slated to die on November 22. Guess who else met his end on a November 22. :dubious:

Ahh, just some Catholic.

Heaven needs to streamline. Why waste time having God go through the whole “This Was Your Life!” thing and watching a movie? Just check in the Book of Life for her name and proceed accordingly.

Unless He just happens to like watching bicurious young women, and if He does- why’s it a sin?

One of Chick’s weaker efforts in my opinion. This was relatively sane.

Aldous Huxley?

Right. Although some of the variations are interesting, and even more interesting than the cultural variants (IMHO), he really breaks no new ground here. Even the added theme tidbits are mostly present in previous tracts.

And to top it off, we get an “updated” *** The Attack.*** I have a pretty good eye for changes, yet the only difference I have spotted so far is a plug for “Look What’s Missing” by one of the Chick-approved authors. Page 22, panel A (tract page convention used). Or, simply, third-to-last page, counting the “altar call” page.

One new edition of a title, and a new title that is essentially a “clone” … Jackhat must be taking it easy these days.

What was the whole, “My professor would flunk me” crap about?

CS Lewis?

Why, because of course, college professors will take reprisals against any student who publicly shows signs of being a practicing Christian.

I’ve seen the old tract so many times that I read

It crossed my mind that perhaps the professor held a course titled “Religious Tolerance” or somesuch.

Although her fear was probably an exaggeration in her mind, Chick was no doubt essentially serious, and I think this is one of many examples as to how he views women.

Everyman was put off by the idea that he needed outside help for something in life (including afterlife). (Although he seemed bored by the whole subject, he shows no actual skepticism ***at the time ***to afterlife/salvation/damnation.) Panels 14A-B and 15A of the original TWYL.

Our gal Everywoman is concerned instead about what people would think of her, with a view to abstract “fairness” to other religions. We must not be intolerant. Of course, religious tolerance is just another of Satan’s tricks, according to JTC. At least when it stops people from yelling at the unsaved.


In the alternate timeline, you can see some more example of the different treatment.

Alternate Jack

I’m sad they didn’t “show what we did next”. :frowning:

In one of his tracts- this one- a student mentions the Bible and the professor yells “I could have you jailed for that!”

My favorite part from that one is where the professor goes batshit insane and just screams “FACTS! FACTS FACTS!”

I wish I had had a crazy ass professor like that. I so would have messed with his head – coming up with all kinds of fucked up theories.

Which sucks, because we the sicko sinning tract readers desperately want to see what happened next.

Note that the “saved man” at the end was “not only one of our best workers, but a fine Christian”, whereas Saved Woman was “not only a great wife and mother, but a fine Christian”. Chick World is no place for non-traditional gender roles.

She sure was an ugly baby.

Yes! That was one of the examples I was going to bring up if no one else did.

Our guy (whom I call “Everyman”) in the “saved” alternate time-line is shown as happily dropping a contribution into the collection plate.

Our gal Everywoman is shown with her husband (presumably) making the contrib, while she looks on with approval. Was part of the money hers? If so, did she take some from an allowance, or perhaps a part-time job?

Mr. Chick probably has never even heard of the woman often managing the household finances. This no doubt occurs with dual income couples, the woman working only part time outside the home, and, I’d wager, even when the wife in a typical year brings in no official income.

Second, check out the mini-scenes wherein a little girl gets treated to Bible stories (and boy, could I go off on a tangent here!!!). Only in the one with our gal does the reader seem emotionally overwhelmed by the contents. (Page 21 in each tract.)

Oh, and on the same page the woman she is showing a Bible page to seems shocked whereas the man he shows a Bible page to merely seems to be studious.

WTF, Jack?