Discussion (12)¬

1. av411 says:

   January 18, 2009 at 7:48 pm

   B Rhodes–Not to beat this to death, and no personal animus felt here, but I knew I was raising liberal dander (I’m neither con nor lib). There always seems to be somebody, more importantly factions in each camp, ready to enable the faithless.

2. B Rhodes says:

   January 18, 2009 at 10:10 am

   Well, that IS another debate, particularly since I don’t think conservatives are blameless when it comes to the existence of C-Dogs.

   I think we basically agree that the point here is to compare Douglass and his solutions with C-Dogg and his solutions. I’m not sure I agree they’re antithetical, though. I think they’re antithetical when it comes to their efficacy, but not their motivation. That’s not an “excuse,” that’s just understanding what motivates him. If someone’s caught stealing wallets, I’d still want them to be punished for it.

3. av411 says:

   January 18, 2009 at 9:54 am

   I was casting C-Dog in a broader and truer historical context. Yeah, in a narrow context the ref is to the Master here, but try casting it into a broader social and historical context on race in this country: the slippery slope between justice and virtue vs. justiifying common criminality in people like C-Dog, whcih many are all too willing to excuse, blur the line on, and serve as apologists for–particularly academics the liberal persuasion. Conservatives? Well, they have a world sins to atone for, but the C-Dogs of this world are not one of them. That’s another debate. In the end, and to be melodramatic about it, I see a virtuous symbol, Douglass, compared to his antithesis.

4. Carol A. says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:42 am

   By the way, I’ve LOVED this entire series. Really well done. Thank you for tying this momentous time we’re living in into the history that matters in a really profound and ironic way.

5. Carol A. says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:41 am

   Oopsy, that should be “panel 3,” not “panels 3.” Sorry!

6. Carol A. says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:39 am

   I think B Rhodes is half right. C-Dog’s solution IS wrong, because stealing the Master’s wallet wouldn’t help Douglass. THAT’s why it’s funny. But where B Rhodes and av411 are wrong is that C-Dog is CLEARLY refering to the Master in his punchline, not to “everybody.” Look at panels 3, where he also refers to the Master (& presumably whoever else is oppressing Douglass) as “them” and “they.” It’s obvious then that the panel 4 “they” is referring to the same people.

7. PeaceZGood says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:34 am

   Can’t we all just get along? Hahahaha. 🙂

8. B Rhodes says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:28 am

   Hi av411…

   I think maybe you’re not familiar with C-Dog. He’s pretty good at being both right and wrong at the same time. Stealing everyone’s wallets can’t be justified, but that’s why it’s funny. C-Dog, like a lot of real-life people, has the right motivation but the wrong solution.

   Thankfully, as we all know, Douglass goes on to only steal from his masters (food, IIRC), so he obviously learned the right lesson from C-Dog’s sketchy advice.

9. av411 says:

   January 16, 2009 at 7:36 am

   The grammar isn’t the point, Davrash…stealing the master’s wallet can be justified, stealing anyone’s and everyone’s can’t…

10. Davrash Sani says:

    January 16, 2009 at 7:14 am

    So, we have C-DOG to thank for Frederick Douglass escaping slavery?!! LOL!

11. Davrash Sani says:

    January 16, 2009 at 7:13 am

    C-Dog’s not a stickler for proper grammar. “They wallets” is how he’d say “their wallets.”

12. av411 says:

    January 16, 2009 at 7:02 am

    Re: today’s punch line “they wallets”…don’t you mean “everybodies wallets?”