Having just returned to my usual haunts I feel I have to deliver my two-bits: Febr.27, 1972 surely is not one of the best of Kelly's strips (or was it just the newspaper editor that screwed up...) Churchy gets more 'Albert-colored' towards the end - just compare the last panel with the one above. And what about the coloring of the right-hand tree in the starting panel: pink with blue branches switching to completely blue in the next? And why add (un-ground) surrogate coconuts if there are no bananas nor even a tiny pinch of sugar for the gumbo? Anyway: LLK / LLTHB !!
Hun, even though you warned me you wouldn't be around on Sunday, I still missed your pithy assessment of the post. In fact, it was downright lonely. So thanks for checking in when you could.
That whole last 3 or 4 years of the strip were mishandled in some way or another by pressmen, production staff, and various others. But at least under it all (with a few exceptions) Kelly's light still shone through.
Having just returned to my usual haunts I feel I have to deliver my two-bits:
ReplyDeleteFebr.27, 1972 surely is not one of the best of Kelly's strips (or was it just the newspaper editor that screwed up...)
Churchy gets more 'Albert-colored' towards the end - just compare the last panel with the one above. And what about the coloring of the right-hand tree in the starting panel: pink with blue branches switching to completely blue in the next?
And why add (un-ground) surrogate coconuts if there are no bananas nor even a tiny pinch of sugar for the gumbo?
Anyway: LLK / LLTHB !!
Hun
Hun, even though you warned me you wouldn't be around on Sunday, I still missed your pithy assessment of the post. In fact, it was downright lonely. So thanks for checking in when you could.
ReplyDeleteThat whole last 3 or 4 years of the strip were mishandled in some way or another by pressmen, production staff, and various others. But at least under it all (with a few exceptions) Kelly's light still shone through.
LLK