Sometimes, you write and publish a comic strip, and sometimes, you find out later that you got something wrong. Since files on the internet are impervious to change, please find instead, below, a comprehensive list of our errors, omissions, and misstatements of fact in 2014.
#1023; The Counsel of the Expert (Part 3)
Clearly, Darren also benefited from networking.
#1034; A Masterpiece in every Router
Craig does actually have a choice in the matter; he is just choosing to ignore it for dramatic effect.
#1053; The Star So Softly Said Hello
Later reports indicate that the star was probably billions and billions and billions of miles away, rather than simply hundreds of millions. Whether the bird knew this at the time the strip occurred is unclear.
#1074; Le Roman à Crybaby
This strip originally used the word “twats”, which I have since learned is more offensive in some places than I had realized. It has been corrected to “twits”, which still basically gets the bloody point across.
#1062; The Terrible Sea Lion
It has been suggested that the couple in this comic, and the woman in particular, are bigots for making a perjorative statement about a species of animal, and then refusing to justify their statements. It has been further suggested that they be read as overly privileged, because they are dressed fancily, have a house, a motor-car, etc. This is, I suppose, a valid read of the comic, if taken as written.
But often, in satire such as this, elements are employed to stand in for other, different objects or concepts. Using animals for this purpose has the effect of allowing the point (which usually is about behavior) to stand unencumbered by the connotations that might be suggested if a person is portrayed in that role — because all people are members of some social group or other, even if said group identity is not germane to the point being made.
Such is the case with this comic. The sea lion character is not meant to represent actual sea lions, or any actual animal. It is meant as a metaphorical stand-in for human beings that display certain behaviors. Since behaviors are the result of choice, I would assert that the woman’s objection to sea lions — which, if the metaphor is understood, is read as actually an objection to human beings who exhibit certain behaviors — is not analogous to a prejudice based on race, species, or other immutable characteristics.
My apologies if the use of a metaphorical sea lion in this strip, rather than a human being making conscious choices about their own behavior, was in any way confusing.
As for their attire: everyone in Wondermark dresses like that.
#993; In which a Party is supposed
It actually was a pretty good party.
Wondermark regrets the errors.