For sure, and while his reviews have some flaws (like technical mistakes, too much plot summary, and lack of attention to the artwork), they make up for it by having a lot of personality. He's funny, he's likable, he engages with readers well, he's both prolific and consistent, and he cleverly ties the webcomics to seemingly irrelevant subjects. His "Know Thy History" posts are also very unique and show a deep understanding and respect for the medium. So, it's no accident that his blog's as popular as it is.
I have to admit I am put off by comments he made on Ullyses so I avoid reading him.
My concern's that it'd get boring never reviewing bad or mediocre webcomics.
Nah. Unlike families, every good comic is good in it's own way. And I think I personally feel better when I'm writing about things I like. But I don't think I would hold up for too long, cause there's a crank in me who's just crave to write about one of those crappy comics that are just about everywhere these days,
To be honest, watching those cartoons as a kid I always kind of rooted for the two of them to end up together. I think a big part of this is that while Pepe may be clueless, too forceful, and too self-absorbed, there's absolutely no malice there. He clearly means well, and I think it's clear that he would be very kind to her if she ever actually gave in to him. I also don't think there's any chance he would ever force himself on her, since he's all about "le wooing", as pushy as he is he clearly wants her to give in to him of her own free will.
To be honest, I think a lot of the modern ire towards him comes as a result of the oversimplification of dating that is the "no means no" mantra.
No way. My impression of Pepe as one of the most annoying characters in Loony Tunes cannon dates way back before political correctness was a thing. How exactly do you think that he would be "very kind to her" when he doesn't pay a single bit of attention to what she wants.
Pepe doesn't love, he lusts. He's a character who is so self-absorbed that rejection doesn't register to him because to him, the idea that someone might not want him isn't there. He's in constant state of self-denial that she's just "playing hard to get" even though there's nothing playful about how she acts.
Pepe is a caricature of that ladies' man type who believes that by pushing enough, he'll bring any girl enough, but how he is represented is much more of oblivious buffoon who can't see anything from the haze of lust surrounding him. If there is no malice, that's only because he's too stupid to be malicious. This might not be how those casanovas are in real life, but Loony Tunes was never actually a satire, and they'd gladly depart from their source of inspiration if they thought it'd be funnier.
Even though women's rights advocates are loathe to admit it, in like 99% of relationships the partners do not develop feelings for each other at exactly the same time and one usually has to win the other over, often having their advances turned back numerous times. And when this occurs in media or whatever, people often find this to be extremely heartwarming, there's an "aww she finally recognized his inherent goodness that's so sweet" sentiment to it.
There's a big difference in how a person acts if she's, let's say, leaving the door cracked from when she shuts them down completely. There's a communication through non-verbal means, body language, signals. The best of us at reading body language know if a woman is subconsciously giving them signals to proceed. The most buffoonish of us don't register those signals so when this occurs to other people, they just conclude that any woman can be "worn out" if you're persistent enough, which is an awful thing to think, and also not true.
You know how some couples first seem to hate each others and always bicker, but then start a relationship? Well that's very different from when two people actually do hate each other. To a casual onlooker maybe it doesn't look different, but non-verbal language is completely different, and a pair recognizes this on a subconscious level.
You know there's a lot I could say about lines like "in like 99% of relationships the partners do not develop feelings for each other at exactly the same time"... noone develops feelings that early in relationship. There's chemistry in your brain telling you it's feelings but it's not... and people rarely if ever step into a relationship with already developed feelings... the mechanism of falling in love is completely different from what you described there, it doesn't even apply... don't get me wrong but what you've described has more to do with vision of "love" that movies are trying to shove into our heads than any actual psychology.
Clearly stalking does still exist and is still a problem, but I think in most cases if the pursuer actually cares about the feelings of the pursued (and not just their own desires), they wouldn't do anything that would really hurt them.
It's hard to even begin to explain what's wrong with this.
Look, a stalker/stalkee relationship goes beyond mere disregard of someone's wishes spoken outloud, it's complete disregard of another human being, disregard of their free will; Stalkee is not just put off by a threat of physical violence but also by thorough objectification and denial of freedom of choice. A stalkee is essentially psychologically caged by a stalker and psychological damage goes beyond mere fear. So not only would stalker not "do nothing anything to hurt her", he is actively hurting her as we speak. You are mistaken if you think that stalkers are driven by genuine love, in most of cases stalkers don't even know a person they're stalking enough to love. Obsession, lust, pathology, yes, but those are not things that tend to make you care about other person's well-being.
It's been shown a number of times that if he was to lose his stink or Penelope was to lose her sense of smell, they'd be inseparable.
I really don't think that creators of Pepe were so big on continuity that you could make overreaching conclusions based on what happened in a few cartoons.
Pepe le Pew specifically was designed as a parody of the charming "Cassanova" lover and on those rare occasions he did succeed they were parodying the ladies who fall for that bullshit despite glaringly obvious flaws. A bit sexist yes, but we've all seen it happen in real life (and we've all seen a guy put up with a bitch for similar reasons).
The main difference between Pepe and those rape comics is that the creators of Pepe understood what they were writing whereas (besides the genuine sickos) the rape comics writers are generally teenage girls with no comprehension of the real world.
I think that neither were meant to represent anything from real world. Pepe is a caricature, but a caricature taken very far from the original source for the sake of humor. On the other hand, I don't think that teenage girls are writing their rapey comics to represent what they think rape looks like in real life, I think that they are indulging a fantasy which they very well know has nothing to do with reality. (I also doubt that genuine sickos draw or read those comics. They simply get off on different things from what is displayed in those comics.)
Beyond all the analysis, a reason why Pepe cartoons are harmless is very simple: it was made in different times, when sexual harassment wasn't seen as a problem. By the time it became a problem people took note of, Pepe was so ingrained into collective consciousness that it takes an effort to put him in a more modern context. I do believe that if such character was made these days, he'd be very controversial, far from children's icon that he is now.
Now, Pepe is a good cartoon. It relies on more that one joke, in fact there's a dozen of good absurdist gag in that scenario, starting with the fact that Pepe has this glaring flaw, but still maintains himself a lothario, possibility that he is actually desirable to male skunks, the fact that the cat only becomes desirable to him after she's painted, arguably a shoddy disguise, then there's the corny things he says, and so on (and I'm wondering if the stereotype that americans have of frenchmen as having poor bathing habits was perhaps a source of inspiration). Undeniably there's a lot of funny things in that cartoon even if you don't find the chase all that funny.
But when we're talking about a basic scenario, it's problematic. It's not problematic because times have changed, it's always been problematic. Perception has changed because we are finally acknowledging something that is a big problem, and it's fair to say that this scenario could pass as harmless only back when we were collectively oblivious about the problem. If anyone suggests that we're too sensitive about these matters, I'll respond that this is only a reflex reaction to centuries of being completely desensitized.
Of course, I also think that it's completely normal, even necessary to joke about things that bother us, convroversial things, even dark things. In different context, Pepe cartoons only get more texture.
What's catchier: The Reviewer Review or The Critic Critique?
The first one just doesn't roll of the tongue easily,
I guess his review is one of the biggest reasons I decided to do a reboot, and I hope I'm doing it better this time.
