“Life can only” “be understood” “backwards”
vs.
“But it” “must be” “lived forwards”
If you can’t see how that’s inconsistently formatted then I don’t know if an in-depth grammatical analysis will help you, so I’ll just point out that one is “3 words” “2 words” “1 word” and the other is “2 words” “2 words” “2 words”
Beyond that, look at the position of the subject and the modal, the “be” and the main verb, and the directional adverb.
No it’s not. Good boy for trying, bad dog for shitting in reverse in the fourth panel. Where did it learn how to do that? I’m never going to be able to sleep again
I don’t think the point is how many words are in each bubble, but the direction they are going, and I don´t think butchering the dialogue to make it symmetrical would improve the comic at all.
If I had a complaint, it’s that the man’s backwards speech bubble begins in the middle, when I think it would flow better if it started at the far right and we did a full C-shaped route around the comic, ending where we began.
The point is the direction, yes, but the formatting is inconsistent. In what situation is the formatting ever “the point”? And yet it’s important nonetheless.
The way it is is what seems butchered. Using consistent formatting isn’t “butchering the dialogue”
I guess I’m confused because “formatting” to me means how text is presented: font, typeface, spacing, kerning, etc; and you are complaining about the text itself (words per bubble). You can say the rhythm isn’t symmetrical or satisfying.
It matches the speaker: The man is going backwards, the dog is going forward.
I get that part, but it doesn’t match.
“Life can only” “be understood” “backwards”
vs.
“But it” “must be” “lived forwards”
If you can’t see how that’s inconsistently formatted then I don’t know if an in-depth grammatical analysis will help you, so I’ll just point out that one is “3 words” “2 words” “1 word” and the other is “2 words” “2 words” “2 words”
Beyond that, look at the position of the subject and the modal, the “be” and the main verb, and the directional adverb.
It’s inconsistent formatting.
The dog is trying its best OK
And he’s a good boi, yes he is!
No it’s not. Good boy for trying, bad dog for shitting in reverse in the fourth panel. Where did it learn how to do that? I’m never going to be able to sleep again
I don’t think the point is how many words are in each bubble, but the direction they are going, and I don´t think butchering the dialogue to make it symmetrical would improve the comic at all.
If I had a complaint, it’s that the man’s backwards speech bubble begins in the middle, when I think it would flow better if it started at the far right and we did a full C-shaped route around the comic, ending where we began.
The point is the direction, yes, but the formatting is inconsistent. In what situation is the formatting ever “the point”? And yet it’s important nonetheless.
The way it is is what seems butchered. Using consistent formatting isn’t “butchering the dialogue”
I guess I’m confused because “formatting” to me means how text is presented: font, typeface, spacing, kerning, etc; and you are complaining about the text itself (words per bubble). You can say the rhythm isn’t symmetrical or satisfying.
The words per bubble is how the text is presented, ergo it’s the formatting…
Congratulations, now it’s bothering me too.
Success?
Resoundingly
Yeah. Verbs in the middle, everyone.