Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
I wonder what would have happened if Jughead had used his Time Police Beanie to go back to that moment in the park where Betty and Veronica were talking, and used a camcorder to record Veronica's comment about "I'll stick to goldfish! They're less work!" and showed it to Mrs. Jones? I'm pretty sure Mrs. Jones would have gone ballistic on Veronica if she could have seen THAT.

OH MY GOD. THAT B**CH!!

I doubt Mrs. Jones would have batted an eye at that. Veronica acknowledging at 16-18 she's not ready to be a mother and better suited to caring for goldfish is actually reasonable and I find it strange you thought that statement was alarming.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
What was the proper ethical course of action for Jughead to take when he learned of the situation?

Uh, let Veronica bring Jellybean home like she and Mrs. Jones agreed upon? Furthermore, Betty just assumes that Veronica has male company and she and Jughead set her up with no proof. How can he go to Mrs. Jones before the fact when there is no evidence she's keeping company with someone else?

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AMThe REAL crime here is that Veronica has deceived Mrs. Jones into believing that she's leaving her daughter with a responsible and loving caregiver.

She did, it just wasn't her.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
How would YOU feel if it were your child?

Don't have any. Don't want any. I'll stick to goldfish myself. If you're a parent, can you weigh in?

Quote from: Thrillho on July 01, 2016, 02:41:53 AM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
I wonder what would have happened if Jughead had used his Time Police Beanie to go back to that moment in the park where Betty and Veronica were talking, and used a camcorder to record Veronica's comment about "I'll stick to goldfish! They're less work!" and showed it to Mrs. Jones? I'm pretty sure Mrs. Jones would have gone ballistic on Veronica if she could have seen THAT.

OH MY GOD. THAT B**CH!!

I doubt Mrs. Jones would have batted an eye at that. Veronica acknowledging at 16-18 she's not ready to be a mother and better suited to caring for goldfish is actually reasonable and I find it strange you thought that statement was alarming.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
What was the proper ethical course of action for Jughead to take when he learned of the situation?

Uh, let Veronica bring Jellybean home like she and Mrs. Jones agreed upon? Furthermore, Betty just assumes that Veronica has male company and she and Jughead set her up with no proof. How can he go to Mrs. Jones before the fact when there is no evidence she's keeping company with someone else?

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AMThe REAL crime here is that Veronica has deceived Mrs. Jones into believing that she's leaving her daughter with a responsible and loving caregiver.

She did, it just wasn't her.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 01:26:25 AM
How would YOU feel if it were your child?

Don't have any. Don't want any. I'll stick to goldfish myself. If you're a parent, can you weigh in?

No, what you said is pretty self-explanatory. No need to belabor the point any further.

I don't know what happened to the comments I posted on this thread yesterday, I should have checked it afterward I guess, but anyway. The ending doesn't bother me because Veronica did make the mean crack about the Joneses so it wasn't TOO much worse for Jughead to lie about her, and in this story Betty does seem close to Jellybean more than Veronica (and Veronica uses Jellybean even though she should be able to see Jellybean doesn't like her) so even though she's just as underhanded as Veronica here it's okay with me that she comes out ahead.


But I don't agree that Betty's ethical violations are usually treated more harshly than Veronica's, if anything it's the other way around especially in Dan Parent's stories, maybe because he likes Veronica more he holds her to a higher standard or something, I also don't see anything wrong with Veronica's goldfish remark and it's the EXACT kind of thing Jughead would say so I think Mrs. Jones would just laugh if she heard it. Besides Jughead's pulled so many uncalled for stunts on Veronica that Veronica has obviously never told her own parents about, I think he must appreciate that in a reciprocal way.

Quote from: Thrillho on June 30, 2016, 12:35:29 PM

Quote from: daren on June 30, 2016, 04:33:15 AM

Yeah, and even stranger that Al Hartley wrote it. I think that MUST be miscredited, I can't believe he would put that in there!

I wondered if it was him; it looked like his art. I'm not that surprised that he would give Veronica the bird. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he usually go out of his way to portray Reggie and Veronica negatively or find a way to punish them?

Al Hartley? Not from what I've seen, of course most writers of that era portrayed Reggie and Veronica very negatively but Al Hartley wasn't extra bad, the main writers George Gladir and Frank Doyle were much worse than him about it. Frank Doyle most of all, Al Hartley never portrayed Reggie as a racist or borderline sexual predator and Frank Doyle is the one who made Veronica an evil villain in the '60s. And George Gladir made them do some real crap, I just read a story where he had Reggie trying to spear a dolphin, lmao, because he wanted to catch something fishing. Actually some of their dirty rotten evil stories were funny and I'm glad Fank Doyle made Veronica a bad girl just because I like villains even if he took it too far, but yeah, Al Hartley was tame by comparison, I think only Joe Edwards and maybe Bob Bolling wrote them more mildly than him out of that era of writers.

Quote from: daren on July 01, 2016, 05:41:53 AM
I don't know what happened to the comments I posted on this thread yesterday, I should have checked it afterward I guess, but anyway. The ending doesn't bother me because Veronica did make the mean crack about the Joneses so it wasn't TOO much worse for Jughead to lie about her, and in this story Betty does seem close to Jellybean more than Veronica (and Veronica uses Jellybean even though she should be able to see Jellybean doesn't like her) so even though she's just as underhanded as Veronica here it's okay with me that she comes out ahead.

But I don't agree that Betty's ethical violations are usually treated more harshly than Veronica's, if anything it's the other way around especially in Dan Parent's stories, maybe because he likes Veronica more he holds her to a higher standard or something, I also don't see anything wrong with Veronica's goldfish remark and it's the EXACT kind of thing Jughead would say so I think Mrs. Jones would just laugh if she heard it. Besides Jughead's pulled so many uncalled for stunts on Veronica that Veronica has obviously never told her own parents about, I think he must appreciate that in a reciprocal way.

If she were made aware of everything that happened in this story, I think Mrs. Jones would agree that Veronica is better suited to taking care of a goldfish than she is to taking care of Jellybean. I don't think Mrs. Jones has any particular proprietary feelings about the goldfish, though. If Veronica fails to take care of her goldfish, well then, she just flushes it down the toilet and buys a new one, the same way she does with most things she tires of. You may say that's a ridiculous analogy, but let's bear in mind who it was that made the analogy in the first place.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 06:34:03 AM

I think Mrs. Jones would agree that Veronica is better suited to taking care of a goldfish than she is to taking care of Jellybean. I don't think Mrs. Jones has any particular proprietary feelings about the goldfish, though.

Mrs. Jones let Veronica take care of Jellybean here and in other stories and Veronica never shows that trust to be misplaced, if Jellybean's mother doesn't know then who does, besides like I said it's just what Jughead (and most teenagers) would probably say, but just because you think you don't want kids of your own doesn't mean you can't take good care of someone else's for a few hours. (I see you edited your response so I'm editing mine; no I don't think Mrs. Jones would get upset that Veronica used Jellybean to meet a hot guy because Ronnie never mistreated Jellybean apart from making her take part in this silly ploy, but that's no different from things Jughead has done with his sister. And may I remind you again, Mrs. Jones probably has some idea of how tolerant the Lodges are of her son so she'd have some patience if only for that.

Quote
If Veronica fails to take care of her goldfish, well then, she just flushes it down the toilet and buys a new one, the same way she does with most things she tires of.

Well if failing to take care of pets disqualifies you as a baby sitter I guess Jughead shouldn't take care of Jellybean either, did you ever see the story where he ate the pet caged bird Archie gave him? I can't think of a story where Veronica killed a pet but if that goldfish is the only thing to eat when Jughead gets hungry it's swum its last lap. 

Quote from: daren on July 01, 2016, 06:48:02 AM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 06:34:03 AM

I think Mrs. Jones would agree that Veronica is better suited to taking care of a goldfish than she is to taking care of Jellybean. I don't think Mrs. Jones has any particular proprietary feelings about the goldfish, though.

Mrs. Jones let Veronica take care of Jellybean here and in other stories and Veronica never shows that trust to be misplaced, if Jellybean's mother doesn't know then who does, besides like I said it's just what Jughead (and most teenagers) would probably say, but just because you think you don't want kids of your own doesn't mean you can't take good care of someone else's for a few hours. (I see you edited your response so I'm editing mine; no I don't think Mrs. Jones would get upset that Veronica used Jellybean to meet a hot guy because Ronnie never mistreated Jellybean apart from making her take part in this silly ploy, but that's no different from things Jughead has done with his sister. And may I remind you again, Mrs. Jones probably has some idea of how tolerant the Lodges are of her son so she'd have some patience if only for that.

Quote
If Veronica fails to take care of her goldfish, well then, she just flushes it down the toilet and buys a new one, the same way she does with most things she tires of.

Well if failing to take care of pets disqualifies you as a baby sitter I guess Jughead shouldn't take care of Jellybean either, did you ever see the story where he ate the pet caged bird Archie gave him? I can't think of a story where Veronica killed a pet but if that goldfish is the only thing to eat when Jughead gets hungry it's swum its last lap. 

But you can't take into account other stories that came AFTER this story, whether you consider there's any continuity there or not. Either you treat the story as standalone, or as having taken place before the others, where she becomes friends with Jellybean. Veronica really doesn't show any concern for Jellybean in THIS story. She doesn't mistreat her, but at the same time, how do we even know she's paying attention to her? Jellybean is just a prop here, so Veronica can meet the male nanny. The effect of her goldfish remark is to indicate she couldn't be bothered to attend to the more complicated needs of a tiny human. I don't think she would have made it in front of Mrs. Jones, at least not after she'd gotten the idea to use Jellybean to spend time with Brad. Nor do I think if she'd said that prior to asking to take Jellybean, that Mrs. Jones would have let her. In Veronica's phone call to Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones already seems hesitant, as if she senses something's not quite right. If she'd heard that remark of Veronica's, I think her reply would have been more along the lines of "Well, you're certainly welcome to drop by and visit Jellybean whenever you'd like. Just let me know."

The real irony is that all of this skulking around and being less than forthcoming with Mrs. Jones was completely unnecessary. How about "Hi, Mrs. Jones, this is Betty. Yesterday when I took Jellybean down to Pickens Park, we met a nice boy named Brad. He's studying to be a pediatrician, but in the meantime he's earning money by hiring himself out as a male nanny. He gave me his business card. I wonder if I could invite him over to meet you, and he could spend a little time with Jellybean and me. I'm sure he could teach me a lot about pediatric emergencies, and he'd make an excellent substitute babysitter in case you ever needed one and I wasn't available, if you approve of him." How could she say no to that? Of course, if Veronica made the same call, it might seem like she was trying to cut Betty out of a job. It does make for a dull B&V story, though.

Quote from: daren on July 01, 2016, 05:41:53 AM

But I don't agree that Betty's ethical violations are usually treated more harshly than Veronica's, if anything it's the other way around especially in Dan Parent's stories, maybe because he likes Veronica more he holds her to a higher standard or something, I also don't see anything wrong with Veronica's goldfish remark and it's the EXACT kind of thing Jughead would say so I think Mrs. Jones would just laugh if she heard it. Besides Jughead's pulled so many uncalled for stunts on Veronica that Veronica has obviously never told her own parents about, I think he must appreciate that in a reciprocal way.

I agree that in modern stories, Betty doing something underhanded isn't really addressed, but if someone can find me an example, I'll shut my mouth. Likewise with Jughead, he sets people up for self-indulgent reasons, and I know as a reader, we are supposed to cheer for him and find him clever. I remember one story where Veronica tells Jughead she will either invite Jughead or Reggie to her party, so Jughead sets up Reggie to get beat up by Moose immediately as Reggie enters the story.

Quote from: daren on July 01, 2016, 05:57:31 AM

Quote from: Thrillho on June 30, 2016, 12:35:29 PM

Quote from: daren on June 30, 2016, 04:33:15 AM

Yeah, and even stranger that Al Hartley wrote it. I think that MUST be miscredited, I can't believe he would put that in there!

I wondered if it was him; it looked like his art. I'm not that surprised that he would give Veronica the bird. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he usually go out of his way to portray Reggie and Veronica negatively or find a way to punish them?

Al Hartley? Not from what I've seen, of course most writers of that era portrayed Reggie and Veronica very negatively but Al Hartley wasn't extra bad, the main writers George Gladir and Frank Doyle were much worse than him about it. Frank Doyle most of all, Al Hartley never portrayed Reggie as a racist or borderline sexual predator and Frank Doyle is the one who made Veronica an evil villain in the '60s. And George Gladir made them do some real crap, I just read a story where he had Reggie trying to spear a dolphin, lmao, because he wanted to catch something fishing. Actually some of their dirty rotten evil stories were funny and I'm glad Fank Doyle made Veronica a bad girl just because I like villains even if he took it too far, but yeah, Al Hartley was tame by comparison, I think only Joe Edwards and maybe Bob Bolling wrote them more mildly than him out of that era of writers.

I just remember Al Hartley wrote a story where Veronica and Reggie were evil Germans and Betty, Archie, and Jughead were the good Americans in a WWI story. He also wrote the Spire Christian Comics were Reggie date raped a girl. That made me think he might not like them much.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 07:38:08 AM
The effect of her goldfish remark is to indicate she couldn't be bothered to attend to the more complicated needs of a tiny human.

Her goldfish remark was in response to Betty, "I can't wait to be a mother one day!" She can wait on being a mother, that's all that statement meant. Not wanting children at 16-18 is not a character flaw.

Quote from: Thrillho on July 01, 2016, 12:55:47 PM
Her goldfish remark was in response to Betty, "I can't wait to be a mother one day!" She can wait on being a mother, that's all that statement meant. Not wanting children at 16-18 is not a character flaw.

Even Jellybean understood exactly what Veronica meant. Note that out of the entire story, these are the only three panels where we can see her face where Jellybean appears unhappy or anxious. In the rest of the panels where we can see her face she's smiling, but in all those other panels, there's someone else around to protect her from Veronica. And there's no doubt exactly what Jellybean thinks of her. She clings to her mother as if to plead, "Please don't leave me alone with her!" Some children may be naturally shy or apprehensive that way, but clearly Jellybean isn't one of them. She recognizes Betty, Jughead, and even BRAD as people she can trust to care about her, but not Veronica.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 07:38:08 AM

But you can't take into account other stories that came AFTER this story, whether you consider there's any continuity there or not. Either you treat the story as standalone, or as having taken place before the others, where she becomes friends with Jellybean.

I'm not counting continuity from any single story here, I thought you might be so I mentioned other stories just in case. Veronica just tells some lies to get some time with a hot babysitter, she doesn't harm Jellybean especially since as Thrillho pointed out she makes sure Brad is there to help. The only really bad thing she does is telling a mean lie about the Joneses (a lie Betty and Jughead couldn't hear so it's not like their payback was really justified as far as they knew, only from our Gods eye view) and ignoring the fact that Jellybean doesn't want to go with her, although Jellybean hardly shows it, just a few expressions and grabbing Mrs. Jones once so maybe I can't even blame Veronica TOO much for that.

Quote
Veronica really doesn't show any concern for Jellybean in THIS story. She doesn't mistreat her, but at the same time, how do we even know she's paying attention to her?

We have no reason to think she's not, besides she hired Brad to pay attention to Jellybean.

Quote
Jellybean is just a prop here, so Veronica can meet the male nanny.

Again so what, this is what Jughead would do with Jellybean if he wanted to meet some babysitter whose family owns an all you can eat restaurant, he HAS used her to get things in other stories.

QuoteThe effect of her goldfish remark is to indicate she couldn't be bothered to attend to the more complicated needs of a tiny human.

She said she doesn't want to have children of her own because it would be too much work, sensible enough, that's not the same as saying you won't take care of any kid ever.

Quote
I don't think she would have made it in front of Mrs. Jones, at least not after she'd gotten the idea to use Jellybean to spend time with Brad. Nor do I think if she'd said that prior to asking to take Jellybean, that Mrs. Jones would have let her. In Veronica's phone call to Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones already seems hesitant, as if she senses something's not quite right.

No Mrs. Jones might not let her take Jellybean in that case because then she'd know Veronica was probably lying about why she wanted to borrow her and Mrs. Jones is already suspicious because Veronica's fake excuse is stupid, if she knew the real set up Veronica had planned she probably wouldn't mind because Jellybean would be in good hands, and since Veronica has done her son so many favors in spite of Ronnie and the rest of the Lodge household putting up with so much from him and still Ronnie usually never asks him or the Jones family for ANY payback, I think Mrs. Jones would be happy to do her this one favor. But as you point out Ronnie chooses unecessary skulking around instead.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 02:36:02 PM

Even Jellybean understood exactly what Veronica meant. Note that out of the entire story, these are the only three panels where we can see her face where Jellybean appears unhappy or anxious. In the rest of the panels where we can see her face she's smiling, but in all those other panels, there's someone else around to protect her from Veronica. And there's no doubt exactly what Jellybean thinks of her. She clings to her mother as if to plead, "Please don't leave me alone with her!" Some children may be naturally shy or apprehensive that way, but clearly Jellybean isn't one of them. She recognizes Betty, Jughead, and even BRAD as people she can trust to care about her, but not Veronica.

Toddlers arent the best judges of character, Jellybean doesn't like Veronica because of the goldfish remark, but Veronica was just tactless not insulting or showing some evil flaw. Like I said Jellybean doesn't show much reaction besides looking sour, if she was afraid to go with Veronica she'd be whining or screaming, so its not a big deal.

Quote from: Thrillho on July 01, 2016, 12:55:47 PM

Likewise with Jughead, he sets people up for self-indulgent reasons, and I know as a reader, we are supposed to cheer for him and find him clever. I remember one story where Veronica tells Jughead she will either invite Jughead or Reggie to her party, so Jughead sets up Reggie to get beat up by Moose immediately as Reggie enters the story.

Yeah if he did the things Veronica does here he probably wouldnt be punished as badly or criticized as much, hell even I wouldn't be mad at him, I hate to say it but he has charm that's like a get out of jail free card sometimes.

Quote from: Thrillho on June 30, 2016, 12:35:29 PM
I just remember Al Hartley wrote a story where Veronica and Reggie were evil Germans and Betty, Archie, and Jughead were the good Americans in a WWI story.

I don't see any wrong with Al making R and R German WWI villains, I think I read that story and it was no worse than the roles George Gladir and Frank Doyle gave them in their history spoofs. If it had been World War TWO that would be something else.

QuoteHe also wrote the Spire Christian Comics were Reggie date raped a girl. That made me think he might not like them much.

Okay I think I found the site that might have given you that idea. http://80pagegiant.blogspot.com/2011/09/archie-metaphors-sex-and-al-hartley.html Are those the panels?


I also found the page they come from.






In context it doesn't look like date rape. The Jughead oranges story is more like a metaphor for a guy who tells girls he loves them to get them to sleep with him, it doesn't work as analogy for rape. Besides it would make more sense for this sermon to tell girls "don't put out just because a guy says he loves you" (standard Christian warning) than to say "don't get date raped," there's no way a girl can avoid that unless she doesn't go on dates or doesn't kiss boys in cars, the other story on that site shows Al wasn't against girls going on dates and kissing boys in cars. It DOES look skeevy that Reggie's jumping on her with a sneering smile but he always drew Reggie sneering and always put characters in that pose when they're going after something they want, it probably symbolizes Reggie's a predator in the emotional not physical sense.


I just found another site where this story is discussed: http://www.toonzone.net/forums/threads/archie-goes-there-talkback.5224681/


and someone else says the same thing I'm saying, he also points out the lipstick marks on Reggie's face and the girl's appearance are probably meant to show it wasn't rape, a good point. (Then another guy says date rape victims don't always look raped and that kiss marks are just comics shorthand for sexual activity of any kind, well actually, they're just shorthand for CONSENSUAL making out, what comics would use them to convey rape? I mean you might see them in real life date rape and yeah, real victims don't always look victimized but in cartoons they do, the cartoonists tend to make sure we know what happened. Al Hartley's drawn rape victims in other stories and they did not just look bewildered with messy hair like this girl. Then this guy tries to claim Al mixed his metaphors (why?) and was "too stuck in the 50s to understand that date rape was what he was portraying", er, if he didn't understand he was portraying it then it's probably not what he was portraying. At this point I just can't take him seriously, for some reason he's hellbent on seeing the worst in Al no matter how weak his arguments are, same for the site that took those two panels out of context. I guess they're venting in revenge for all the Spire comics or something.  )


I think the most important point the other guy makes is that Al Hartley wasn't the kind of guy who would show Reggie raping someone (if ACP even would have let him, unlikely). Frank Doyle is the one who came closest to writing Reggie as an in-context date rapist, Al's portrayals of him weren't that bad.

Quote from: daren on July 03, 2016, 04:41:11 AM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 01, 2016, 02:36:02 PM

Even Jellybean understood exactly what Veronica meant. Note that out of the entire story, these are the only three panels where we can see her face where Jellybean appears unhappy or anxious. In the rest of the panels where we can see her face she's smiling, but in all those other panels, there's someone else around to protect her from Veronica. And there's no doubt exactly what Jellybean thinks of her. She clings to her mother as if to plead, "Please don't leave me alone with her!" Some children may be naturally shy or apprehensive that way, but clearly Jellybean isn't one of them. She recognizes Betty, Jughead, and even BRAD as people she can trust to care about her, but not Veronica.

Toddlers arent the best judges of character, Jellybean doesn't like Veronica because of the goldfish remark, but Veronica was just tactless not insulting or showing some evil flaw. Like I said Jellybean doesn't show much reaction besides looking sour, if she was afraid to go with Veronica she'd be whining or screaming, so its not a big deal.

You give too little credit to toddlers as human beings. In THIS particular story, Jellybean turns out to be a better judge of character than her own mother, who really should have paid attention to what Jellybean was trying to tell her in that second panel above. So let's break down exactly what going on with Jellybean in this story, in each of the panels above. In the first panel, where Veronica makes the remark about children being too much trouble, so she'll stick to goldfish, she's not just talking about her own personal feelings about marriage and children. No, she's talking from her usual selfish perspective. She'd rather not acknowledge that children exist in her world and have needs -- there's one sitting right next to her when she makes that insensitive comment. Isn't that the kind of chore that we usually have servants for? The expression on Jellybean's face could be somewhere between "HEY! I'm sitting RIGHT HERE!!" and "YOU'RE not my FRIEND!" Jellybean doesn't really understand the analogy Veronica's making with her goldfish remark, but she does pick up on the visual and verbal clues that tell her all she needs to know. Jellybean appears to be a happy, sociable child in all those other panels where she's smiling, and the people around her like Jughead, Betty and even Brad respond to her, and engage with her. They smile back at her, or talk to her, or hold her or play with her. What Jellybean is responding to is Veronica's complete indifference to her presence -- Veronica doesn't interact with her and acknowledge her presence, she acts like she isn't even there. Jellybean isn't happy with her, because Veronica is not nice to her. Of course she doesn't mistreat her -- until she finds something that Jellybean is useful to her for (i.e meeting Brad), she doesn't even bother with her at all. Jellybean is a good judge of Veronica's character IN THIS STORY. You don't agree with that because you and Thrillho, despite the fact that you're insisting that there's no continuity between this story and "Beach Blanket Babysitters" are paradoxically insisting that there IS continuity between Veronica's character in THIS story, where she shows us (and Jellybean, who's forming a first impression of Veronica in this story) no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and OTHER stories where Veronica displays redeeming qualities that go into making up your composite mental picture of Veronica's character. So mentally, what you're saying is "That's ridiculous! We ALL know that Veronica isn't AS BAD AS SHE SEEMS in this story, so she can't possibly have done anything here to warrant making Jellybean not like her." Jellybean has NO composite picture of Veronica's character. All she knows of her in this first story where the two appear together is what's in THIS story, and NOTHING else. Not all the stuff YOU know about Veronica's character from other stories. All Jellybean knows is that Veronica has not been nice to her, she doesn't respond positively to her the same way other people do. Her feelings are hurt by this. If Veronica is paranoid that Jellybean's mind has been "poisoned against me" in "Beach Blanket Babysitters", she need look no further than that panel there. If she wants to know the name of the person who poisoned Jellybean's mind against her, her name was Veronica Lodge.

Moving on to the second panel above, once again, Jellybean is put off and alarmed (the look on her face is frantic) by Veronica's over-the-top phony performance as she rushes towards her, for the benefit of impressing Mrs. Jones with her affection for Jellybean (which doesn't exist in this story, she admitted to it with the goldfish remark). The expression on Mrs. Jones' face in that panel is bewildering, and the fact that she doesn't recognize Jellybean's silent cries for help, her pleas to keep Veronica away from her. Jellybean looks very scared by this sudden unexpected turn of events. The expression on Mrs. Jones' face is bizarre. She looks kind of blissed-out on medication or something, especially when you take into account the expressions on Mrs. Jones' face during her phone conversation with Veronica -- doubt and concern, that something doesn't seem quite right here about this situation. But I guess you have to chalk it up to the fact that there's no way to explain Mrs. Jones' lapse in parental judgment here logically, in letting Veronica take Jellybean anyway, despite what she both seemed to suspect, and should have confirmed for her by Jellybean's reaction to Veronica's appearance. It's simply something that has to happen for the sake of the plot in this story. Were it not for the fact that the story has to continue to its conclusion, Mrs. Jones should be listening to her parental instinct and coming to the conclusion that Veronica is an irresponsible teenager (not a responsible and caring babysitter like Betty). As an aside, Betty's lapse in ethical judgment in this story can be put down to (as most of her infrequent lapses in good judgment can) the way that her competition with Veronica sometimes causes her to use poor judgment -- in this case, seeing Veronica's display of hubba-hubba goo-goo eyes when she spots Brad causes Betty to lose her better sense (knowing that once again, it looks like Veronica is going to try to grab Brad before Betty can even have a chance with him), and not to think things through. Her conscience usually tells her better, but in this case, she's a little too weakened by her attraction to Brad (with whom she otherwise seems to have a good deal in common) to pay attention to it. But I digress. Really, what this story comes down to is not the overall quality of Veronica's character, as composited from what you and I and Thrillho know about her from reading other stories. This is one of those stories where she's in her selfish "It's ALL about ME!" moods, and unfortunately, there's no balance here where she shows both positive and negative sides of her character. It's pretty much a wash, with none of her more redeeming traits on display in this story. The reason that's important here, is that's ALL she's showing of herself to JELLYBEAN, it's all that forms Jellybean's impression of Veronica in THIS story. Jellybean doesn't LIKE her, and why should she? Veronica doesn't do a single thing to MAKE Jellybean like her in this story, and she doesn't even TRY. She barely interacts with Jellybean at all, and the entirety of that in this story is shown in JUST those three panels above. Veronica has several stories like this, but she gets away with a lot because boys will give her a pass on her actual behavior due to her beauty, her wealth, and how impressive she looks to them in her expensive clothes. None of those things mean a thing to Jellybean. She's only impressed with people who are NICE to her. It doesn't matter that Veronica never actually mistreats her. That's completely beside the point. The only time she actually speaks to Jellybean in this story is in that second panel above, where she puts on a badly-disguised phony performance of niceness, and Jellybean isn't fooled by it for a second. Veronica isn't even actually talking TO Jellybean, she's talking AT her -- solely for the benefit of Mrs. Jones.

The third panel has the only time that Veronica and Jellybean are actually in physical contact with each other, and it's clear that Jellybean isn't too happy about being held by her. Note that in the other panels where Veronica and Jellybean are together before Brad arrives, Jellybean is ALONE on the floor, playing BY HERSELF, and again not interacting with Veronica at all -- Veronica sits a discreet distance away from her on the couch, not even in physical proximity to Jellybean, well outside the boundaries of Jellybean's personal space. In these panels, we can't see Jellybean's face. So again, in this third panel where Veronica is actually holding Jellybean, she's simply using her as a prop, as if to convince herself of the very lie that she's trying to sell to Brad over the phone -- "Oh look, Jellybean has her frowny-face on. It's a crisis! I MUST get help from Brad!!"

So in conclusion, when Veronica says "I'll stick to goldfish! They're much less work!", she's NOT talking about how she's going to feel about the idea of motherhood when she's say, 25 years old, and possibly more mature and accepting of responsibility. There's NO possible way she can know that. Veronica is speaking solely about how she feels about responsibility RIGHT NOW, at age 16. She couldn't be bothered with it. She's got money, so she doesn't NEED to bother with it. It's an admission that she knows that she's irresponsible, but she just doesn't care. THAT's why it should have/would have been a bad thing to say in front of Mrs. Jones, before she was about to release her child to Veronica's responsibility. Betty's comments about motherhood also reflect how she feels right now, at 16. She may not exactly be ready for the responsibilities of motherhood, but she's already preparing herself, learning about how to be a good care provider for children like Jellybean, and Jellybean clearly appreciates that quality in Betty, as she appreciates the obvious love and concern that Jughead shows to her.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 03, 2016, 06:50:41 AM


You don't agree with that because you and Thrillho, despite the fact that you're insisting that there's no continuity between this story and "Beach Blanket Babysitters" are paradoxically insisting that there IS continuity between Veronica's character in THIS story, where she shows us (and Jellybean, who's forming a first impression of Veronica in this story) no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and OTHER stories where Veronica displays redeeming qualities that go into making up your composite mental picture of Veronica's character.

Saying an Archie story has continuity with the events of one story isn't the same as saying it has continuity with characteristics repeated in many stories. Thrillho and I only denied that one story was supposed to be a sequel to another, the dates don't match up, they read well that way so I can see why it'd be your headcanon but headcanon is not canon. This is why I said earlier "I'm not counting continuity from any single story here." But characteristics that have been shown in MANY stories (like the fact that Veronica has almost never been shown to be mean or iresponsible with children, in fact the opposite) do count. Are you really suggesting we should look at the characters as total blanks in this story with no memory of their repeat characteristics, thats silly. And then why are you saying things like "If Veronica fails to take care of her goldfish, well then, she just flushes it down the toilet and buys a new one, the same way she does with most things she tires of" and "No, she's talking from her usual selfish perspective. She'd rather not acknowledge that children exist in her world and have needs -- there's one sitting right next to her when she makes that insensitive comment. Isn't that the kind of chore that we usually have servants for?" Those are ideas you formed from other stories than these.

QuoteSo mentally, what you're saying is "That's ridiculous! We ALL know that Veronica isn't AS BAD AS SHE SEEMS in this story, so she can't possibly have done anything here to warrant making Jellybean not like her."

I didnt say Veronica can't possibly have done anything to warrant making Jellybean not like her, I said Jellybean disliked her just because of the goldfish comment which is not proof of Veronica being mean or irresponsible, if Veronica did anything else to justify Jellybean not liking her it's in your head not in the story.

QuoteJellybean has NO composite picture of Veronica's character. All she knows of her in this first story where the two appear together is what's in THIS story, and NOTHING else. Not all the stuff YOU know about Veronica's character from other stories.

Well yeah in fact less than that, she's judging Veronica on one comment, that's why I pointed out toddlers are not the best judges of character. Adults know it doesn't make a person bad just to say "I'll stick to goldfish instead of having children, they're less work." If you were able to tell good people from bad when you were two years old you were a lot smarter than me, at that age I thought almost any stranger was scary as hell and my doctor must be a mad scientist because he wanted to stick a needle in me. The only reason Veronica shouldn't have taken Jellybean out is because it made Jellybean unhappy, that's enough reason not to make a kid do something unneeded even if their reasons for being unhappy are based on poor judgment, as they VERY often are in toddlers. but like I said Jellybean didnt show her feelings much about it.




Oh and if saying you don't want children (now or in the future) because bringing them up is too much work makes you rotten and irresponsible then that might include me.

QuoteAs an aside, Betty's lapse in ethical judgment in this story can be put down to (as most of her infrequent lapses in good judgment can) the way that her competition with Veronica sometimes causes her to use poor judgment -- in this case, seeing Veronica's display of hubba-hubba goo-goo eyes when she spots Brad causes Betty to lose her better sense (knowing that once again, it looks like Veronica is going to try to grab Brad before Betty can even have a chance with him)

What was that thing you said earlier?


Veronica is expected to be imperfect, so the severity of any ethical violations she commits is reduced, while Betty, on the other hand IS expected to be perfect, so the severity of any ethical violations SHE commits are treated that much more harshly.


Wow I did not think you would prove your own statement wrong so soon. So almost anything Betty does wrong is because Veronica manipulated her into doing it? Oh and then this:

QuoteVeronica has several stories like this, but she gets away with a lot because boys will give her a pass on her actual behavior due to her beauty, her wealth, and how impressive she looks to them in her expensive clothes.

You keep repeating this near groundless statement, the fact is Veronica hardly gets away with anything because her wealth and expensive clothes are partly what CAUSE a lot of people to magnify anything bad she does out of proportion, you being the prime example, I even remember seeing you said once you couldn't feel sympathy for Veronica because she's too rich. Well I guess I understand that, if I had read Archie comics growing up I would have found it hard to sympathize with Betty, Archie and Jughead because as middle class kids their families had far more luxury and money than mine and I would have wondered what they were whining about when they called themselves "poor" comparing themselves to Veronica. A teenagers family having more money than yours isn't a good reason to not give them sympathy though so I would have warmed up to them as I matured. Oh and name me these stories where boys excuse Ronnie because she's rich, I see far more where they bring up her money when they talk crap about her.

Seriously I don't know what it is with this hate-on you've got for Veronica, you so many times love to read the worst into her. Or you keep insisting she's at fault for every bad thing that happens or you say she deserves some punishment when she doesn't, for instance, when you thought that "Beach Blanket Babysitters" was a sequel to "Oh Nanny Boy" you crowed about Jellybean teaching her a lesson in "Babysitters" because of Veronica's actions in "Oh Nanny Boy" but Veronica was already punished in "Oh Nanny Boy," she doesn't need to be punished AGAIN for the same thing, but in your mind somehow she does. I wonder why, it can't be because she's mean because you dont have these issues with even meaner characters like Cheryl or Reggie and "they're only minor characters" cant be the reason because they're not so much more minor than Ronnie, especialy Reggie, that it would explain why you never talk this way about them and constantly do about Ronnie, it can't be just because she's rich either because their families are too. Frankly you remind me a little of those guys in my other post who talked about Al Hartley like he was the antichrist. 

If there's NO continuity, then the Veronica in this story is NOT the same as the Veronica in any other story, Daren. No matter how much you'd like to believe it.  Because just the idea of having SOME continuity of character is there does NOT mean that that character cannot or does not ever change.  You're saying that whether there is continuity between the stories or not, the characters remain unvarying, they have consistency and never ever change, not even in context with the events of the story that surrounds them, and that's complete BS. Where there is conflict between the behavior of a character in one story and the behavior of the same character in another story, the character in relation to the events of the story being considered takes precedence over any other characteristics that character might have in another story, because the characters are allowed to change. The nature of continuity of character in Archie Comics is this -- the aggregate of common characteristics of any character is subordinate to any specific characteristic, which is always subordinate to the needs of the plot of the particular story under consideration. That's why there can be 12 different stories where Veronica's character experiences changes in exactly the same way, 12 different variations on "A Christmas Carol" where she starts out Scrooge-y and ends up a changed person.

On the other hand, sometimes she can just behave badly, and NOT learn a lesson in the story, where in another similar situation in a similar story she DOES learn a lesson about the exact same thing. The lesson that she learned in the second instance (or the specific aspect of her character that was changed for the better) does not retroactively apply to her character in the story where she didn't learn a lesson, but just behaved badly. The character is always subordinate to the actual story under consideration, and what that story is about. In other words, the aggregate of common characteristics from other stories only applies contextually to what they DIDN'T tell or show in the story itself. Information in the individual story supersedes that of the composite characteristics, unless the common characteristics are merely supporting what the story is showing or telling you. If they appear to be contradictory, the immediate story under consideration takes precedence. The characteristics can change for the specific story, but it might fall into a pattern for a particular story trope, like "Veronica behaves selfishly" or "Betty shows poor judgment because of her desperation to compete with Veronica". Well, you might say why isn't it "Veronica shows poor judgment because of her desperation" or "Betty behaves selfishly" instead? Don't ask me, I didn't write them. In most stories, Betty is the underdog. Even in the stories where Betty does something stupid, she's rarely portrayed as entirely unsympathetic, she's usually shown with some redeeming aspects to give it some perspective. Veronica doesn't always get that in a story. Sometimes she's just bad, and no contrasting redeeming qualities are shown to balance that. Blame the writers. And you know what, now that I think on it a little more, the trope about Veronica that's being reiterated here in this story isn't so much "Veronica behaves selfishly" or "Veronica is spoiled", although it overlaps that trope somewhat. It's a little more specific than that, and it doesn't just apply to how Veronica relates to children. It's more like "Veronica has poor interpersonal communication skills" or "Veronica has poor social skills" or "Veronica is not a people person". That shows up over and over in Veronica stories, whether it's how she treats her cousin Marcy that idolizes her, or Betty in some stories, or Archie in some stories, or some random character written into a one-off story. There are many stories that show she's capable of being charming and likable when she wants to be (and before Jughead shows up here, she's almost got Brad charmed), but she's just not motivated to be charming to Jellybean or Marcy. And then in the "Sisters" story, she IS motivated to be charming and have good interpersonal communication skills with Jellybean. Like I said -- I don't write them. But most of the B&V stories are about showing how the two girls contrast and are opposite in some way, so here it's that Betty has good interpersonal communication skills with children and Veronica doesn't. They're alike in the way that their competition with each other and weakness for cute guys causes them both to try to take advantage of Jellybean (although that in itself isn't hurting Jellybean) to get close to Brad, but Betty and Jellybean actually DO have a relationship and a friendship here, and Veronica and Jellybean do NOT, and that doesn't change for either of them in this story. What's hurting Jellybean as far as Veronica is concerned is that Veronica won't bother with Jellybean for herself, only to get close to Brad. So she's trying to deceive both Jellybean and Brad into thinking she likes children, when she doesn't. That isn't the case with Betty, who genuinely LIKES Jellybean, so she's not deceiving Jellybean OR Brad into thinking that she does, solely for the purpose of meeting him. Betty would have been deceiving Mrs. Jones though, if Veronica hadn't beaten her to it first. So there's the ethical difference -- Veronica is attempting to deceive 3 people, while Betty is really only deceiving 1 person (or would have been, if she had succeeded in asking Mrs. Jones first). Although, who knows? Since Mrs. Jones told Betty that Veronica had already taken Jellybean, we don't get to read what she would have said to Mrs. Jones if Jellybean had been home. Maybe she would have gone into an explanation of Brad, but we don't get that far, so we don't know. We also can't presume to know that Betty would have called Brad and told him the same lie that Veronica did about having a crisis that required his help. We just don't know that. We can probably presume that she would have called him I guess, but what she would have said is complete speculation. There's simply no proof that she would have lied to him. She might have called and told him that she was sitting with Jellybean that night, and asked him if he could come over to teach her something about pediatric emergencies, so she could become a better babysitter. There's no reason to think "Yeah right, that's a load of bull, what does Betty care about pediatric emergencies?" even if it DOES serve the purpose of getting Brad to spend some time with her.


On the other hand if there IS continuity of character, then not only IS this the same Veronica as exists in the other story, but she's allowed to change her behavior over time, and to be mean, cold, aloof and irresponsible sometimes, and then to learn a lesson and become more responsible. In another story, but not here. In this story she doesn't do that. She doesn't do anything nice at all. There's absolutely no proof in this story that she cares one iota about Jellybean, except to use her for her own selfish purposes. It's not anything negative in particular that she does to Jellybean, it's the lack of anything positive, the fact that at no point in this story does she ever acknowledge that Jellybean is any different to her than a goldfish, by her treatment of her. There is a distinct lack of evidence in this story that Veronica thinks of Jellybean or treats Jellybean as a person, that's what I mean. That's entirely an assumption on your part, and the goldfish comment, in which she acknowledges her own lack of responsibility or lack of any desire to take on responsibility (which is what a babysitter is really for) is saying something about that lack of any positive interaction between Veronica and Jellybean in this story. That makes Veronica irresponsible as someone who is supposed be the guardian of a small child. That's not to say she'd mistreat a goldfish she owned either, but is she really that concerned about the goldfish? I don't think so, because the preference for goldfish over human children is based on "less work" for Veronica, and that's exactly the qualifications she brings with her in her role as Jellybean's babysitter -- she does nothing, she makes no effort.  She simply sits far away from Jellybean on the couch, and leaves Jellybean to her own devices. No different than a goldfish she might own. Dan Parent might as well have drawn a goldfish bowl around Jellybean sitting in the middle of the floor by herself. If the goldfish remark is simply some topical humor, a bit of commentary about Veronica's future plans regarding having children of her own, and otherwise has no bearing on the rest of the story, and specifically the part of the plot that requires Veronica to babysit Jellybean, then the removal of that panel should result in a story that reads exactly the same. However, if you remove that panel, then very little about the story makes sense, at least as far as Jellybean not liking Veronica goes.

In "Beach Blanket Babysitters" Veronica's behavior is different. It starts out with her behaving towards Jellybean much as she does in the earlier story. She just wants to nap on the beach, and leave Jellybean to play by herself, as long as Jellybean is quiet and doesn't disturb her nap. Once again in that story, she's just not even paying attention to Jellybean. Jellybean could be choking on a lego block, as long as she did so quietly. All of Jellybean's pranks and teasing of Veronica is Jellybean trying to get some attention from her, and she's testing her a little to see what kind of attention that will be. Will Veronica lose her temper, and be upset with her, or will she show patience and her better nature by putting up with it? The beginning of the change in her relationship with Jellybean is signaled in the story when Veronica says "See? Now we're getting along." At least she's showing that she's paying attention to Jellybean now. As the teasing goes on, Veronica does start paying more attention to Jellybean, and wins Jellybean's approval as a good sport by enduring her pranks. By the end of the story, Veronica has changed. As a result of the fact that she's changed her attitude towards Jellybean, Jellybean becomes Veronica's defender against her own brother. Jellybean doesn't just change her mind arbitrarily, it's in response to the changed relationship between Veronica and Jellybean.

I'm saying that the characters do not exist as some immutable prototypes that never ever change any of their characteristics. They are capable of doing bad things and good things, sometimes in two different stories -- which makes them seem like two different people, and sometimes in the same story, where they start out one way, and can change by the end. Veronica is capable of being a good person, but she doesn't always ACT like a good person. That is the difference. It's not some Veronica "hate campaign". I dislike Veronica's treatment of Jellybean in the first story, and like her behavior towards Jellybean in the later stories.

Quote from: daren on July 03, 2016, 05:09:59 AM


[/size]

QuoteHe also wrote the Spire Christian Comics were Reggie date raped a girl. That made me think he might not like them much.

Okay I think I found the site that might have given you that idea. http://80pagegiant.blogspot.com/2011/09/archie-metaphors-sex-and-al-hartley.html Are those the panels?


I also found the page they come from.






In context it doesn't look like date rape. The Jughead oranges story is more like a metaphor for a guy who tells girls he loves them to get them to sleep with him, it doesn't work as analogy for rape. Besides it would make more sense for this sermon to tell girls "don't put out just because a guy says he loves you" (standard Christian warning) than to say "don't get date raped," there's no way a girl can avoid that unless she doesn't go on dates or doesn't kiss boys in cars, the other story on that site shows Al wasn't against girls going on dates and kissing boys in cars. It DOES look skeevy that Reggie's jumping on her with a sneering smile but he always drew Reggie sneering and always put characters in that pose when they're going after something they want, it probably symbolizes Reggie's a predator in the emotional not physical sense.


I just found another site where this story is discussed: http://www.toonzone.net/forums/threads/archie-goes-there-talkback.5224681/


and someone else says the same thing I'm saying, he also points out the lipstick marks on Reggie's face and the girl's appearance are probably meant to show it wasn't rape, a good point. (Then another guy says date rape victims don't always look raped and that kiss marks are just comics shorthand for sexual activity of any kind, well actually, they're just shorthand for CONSENSUAL making out, what comics would use them to convey rape? I mean you might see them in real life date rape and yeah, real victims don't always look victimized but in cartoons they do, the cartoonists tend to make sure we know what happened. Al Hartley's drawn rape victims in other stories and they did not just look bewildered with messy hair like this girl. Then this guy tries to claim Al mixed his metaphors (why?) and was "too stuck in the 50s to understand that date rape was what he was portraying", er, if he didn't understand he was portraying it then it's probably not what he was portraying. At this point I just can't take him seriously, for some reason he's hellbent on seeing the worst in Al no matter how weak his arguments are, same for the site that took those two panels out of context. I guess they're venting in revenge for all the Spire comics or something.  )


I think the most important point the other guy makes is that Al Hartley wasn't the kind of guy who would show Reggie raping someone (if ACP even would have let him, unlikely). Frank Doyle is the one who came closest to writing Reggie as an in-context date rapist, Al's portrayals of him weren't that bad.

Yeah, that was the story I am referring to, and I know Al Hartley probably didn't intend to make Reggie a rapist but that's definitely what it looks like, and at the very least it looks like sexual assault as the girl never looks willing. I don't want to get too into here but I agree with that poster you're talking about even if Al Hartley didn't intend to portray sexual assault, that's exactly what he did. It's just like the Game of Thrones controversy where the audience interpreted a scene as rape though the creators denied it but honestly where is the ambivalence if the woman in question is constantly saying no, trying to fight him off, and then crying for him to stop? The girl in question looks terrified that Reggie is coming at her and the other panel we see her in she is upset.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 04, 2016, 03:41:39 AM

In "Beach Blanket Babysitters" Veronica's behavior is different. It starts out with her behaving towards Jellybean much as she does in the earlier story. She just wants to nap on the beach, and leave Jellybean to play by herself, as long as Jellybean is quiet and doesn't disturb her nap. Once again in that story, she's just not even paying attention to Jellybean. Jellybean could be choking on a lego block, as long as she did so quietly.

How dare she do her own thing as opposed to watching the child her friend (who left to go swimming) is being paid to babysit. What the hell is wrong with her? Instead of enjoying herself at the beach she should clearly be watching any and every child at the beach like a hawk. How heartless can she be?