So, question for the group: Why the quotes around “save” in panel one? Let’s not beat around the bush, here…had this been a young John, or Pete, we’d be told how these comics were saved, no quotes, from destruction. Chester, however, has his actions quoted, implying that they weren’t saved at all. But we see him carefully putting them away in boxes.
Again, I’m not condoning petty thievery, but this seems remarkably harmless. I’m shocked that Batiuk didn’t have Chester’s actions bankrupt Danford’s store.
It’s exactly what a commentor pointed out here a couple of weeks ago–all of Tom Batiuk’s good characters are impossibly good, and all of his bad characters are impossibly bad, so even though they do the same things, those things must be judged “good” or “bad” on the actor, and not the act. Chester could save orphans from a burning building, and we’d be told how “naturally, after Chester ‘saved’ the orphans…” he was still a bad guy.
I don’t know what this is called, but “writing” it ain’t.