Join the Basic Instructions Subscription Service!
Or, please consider donating just a little something to help keep Basic Instructions going.
I'd like to take a moment to reimind you to please consider using my Amazon Affiliate links (US, UK, Canada). Anything you purchase will send a little cash my way without costing you any axtra money at all.
On a similar note I've often explicated on the difference between an excuse and an apology - an excuse means that the person felt justified in what they did and in a future similar situation would do the same again; thus a good reason not to trust them. On the flip side of course, apologies are not even needed if they have paid in advance!
Dang, another comedy gold! Love the punchline at panel 4!
Does the company actually have any other clients? I think Angry Customer is the only one I've ever seen.
Is this the only client ? (He is always referred to as THE client.)
Does he stay with them because he paid for a lifetime's worth of projects in advance? Why was he so stupid? Is he related to George Bush?
Sure, but he won't ever pay you in advance again in the future for work you're not going to do.
I was just thinking how the interactions between Scott and Angry Customer are always a bit Abbot and Costello-like. Panel 3 only reinforces my assessment.
I've noticed that the last balloon (Scott's) in panel 3 is oddly linked to the client's balloon. Is that on purpose? They're both saying the same thing?
4th panel reminds me of the US government. Their lack of motivation to compromise on the budget doesn't make their inaction okay, the fact that they've already been voted in does.
"Does he stay with them because he paid for a lifetime's worth of projects in advance?"
Would explain why Mullet Boss' company isn't bankrupt yet...
The connected word balloons in panel 3 bugged me. I assume the intention is that Scott and Angry Customer (AC) deliver the last line in unison. But following all the connected balloons leads me to be able to ascribe all the lines to Scott...or to AC.
Then I thought maybe it's intentional. Maybe Scott is AC, in a Jekyll and Hyde sort of way. He had a psychotic break with reality (long ago, at the time of AC's first appearance) and has been arguing with himself ever since. This isn't comedy, it's actually a Kafkaesque portrayal of a descent into madness where personal identity has lost all meaning. Brilliant!
"This isn't comedy, it's actually a Kafkaesque portrayal of a descent into madness where personal identity has lost all meaning. Brilliant!"
I like your thinking, puppymeat...
I often find myself having to point out this same distinctions, so it's great to see the concept covered by a comedic genius such as yourself.
@Rafael Cavalcanti It's an entirely different kind of flying... altogether.
The fact that the person would do the same thing in the same situation makes the person trustworthy. Someone who consistently does the 'wrong' thing may be annoying but reliably annoying.
All clients turn into Angry Customer after dealing with Scott's company. As puppymeat has noted, it emphasizes the dehumanizing, Kafkaesque experience of dealing with Mullet and Sons, Inc.
I just realized how much Angry Customer looks like General Zod from Man of Steel
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.