About reader reactions
It’s often impossible for me to predict the reaction of readers to a new strip. For example, I expected a massive backlash when I posted the short story arc where Larisa dressed up as a pedophile for Halloween. I wrote the story already in 2011, but postponed it for a year since I was afraid it would upset too many readers. However, the comment sections of those strips remained completely calm. In contrast, I had absolutely no negative expectations when posting the current strip Ruthless?. But at least two readers have now vocally expressed their intention to stop reading Sandra and Woo because of it. Which I find strange and unjustified since the strip has unquestionably a positive message. It also already has almost 100 comments, a feat usually reserved for strips specifically about Christianity (the only certain hot topic apparently) or Sandra kissing Cloud ;).
In other news, I removed the social media widget which was used very rarely. I also made visited links turquoise so that you can see more easily which pages you have already visited.
Those two readers who’re ending their reading experience? STUPID. Not worth your tears.
Don’t worry about those quitters. Sandra and Woo obviously still has a strong and thriving fanbase. Those who are sensivitve enough to let this one arc end their reading experience… probablly aren’t worth trying to please.
Keep it up!
I was disturbed by the strip, but a lot of good writing/art disturbs me. I expect to be challenged, not coddled. There’s a lot of art that disturbs me that I just love.
I’m rather surprised you didnt anticipate some kind of large feedback on that last strip. That is a huge thing. It could potentially put impressionable children off eating meat.
Which may be your goal if you are a vegetarian… but that will piss off a LOT of parents (and some doctors) who view a vegetarian diet as unhealthy for children.
When I first read the comic, there weren’t many comments. So I went back and read them. It’s surprising to me that someone would quit reading a comic just because it makes them sad. I recently discovered that I read somewhere around 50 webcomics (that I can subscribe to), and I know if I had quit them because there was something offensive in them for one strip, I wouldn’t have been able to have as much enjoyment as I have. Many comics, especially those that explore a story narrative instead of one-off jokes, will go through times that are offensive, sad, frustrating, or any other emotion.
And as far as the most recent strip goes… I was shocked. And saddened. I think I must’ve stared at the strip for several minutes and re-read it several times. I know I didn’t expect that direction. But I’m glad for it, as I see some important character development in her future.
Also, thanks for making this (and Gaia). They have, together, provided many hours of entertainment and enjoyment. Plus, I printed out a copy of the strip where Woo is inside the painting and attached it to my fridge, because it’s so awesome
I didn’t find them offensive but it was very heartbreaking and a bit unexpected. That being said, it only improved my disposition to this comic and I look forward to the next strips. Keep up the good work!
Personally I can see why the Ruthless strip made someone uncomfortable but in truth it shows more depth into the character and how life is. If the lynx killed a mother animal and saw the animal’s babies crying over her would she put the meat back and ear nuts? No or rather probably not so it makes sense. If the readers just throw their hands up to leave before seeing where you are going with this then they have issues outside the internet and should go take care of those first.
I will keep on reading your comic as long as you continue to stay unaffected by your readers personal opinions 😉 (who am i kidding, i will be reading either way ;x)
Keep up your work, it’s awesome
The problem with “talking animal” cartoons is that it’s very very difficult to combine natural animal behavior with semi-human behavior without running head first into contradictions. Why, exactly, would a squirrel feel remorse for killing the mother of two kits, when we all know full well that mother has orphaned more then a few baby animals of her own? It only makes sense if you recognize it as a projection of the authors morality (or at least of the morality that the author has choosen to express). And therein lies the reason for people getting bothered by it. There’s a perception of preaching to it, and while that might not have been the author’s intent, it’s hard to control what people will choose to read into what you write.
The only thing I found disturbing about the strip, was that only a single steak was taken. Not that I would eat predators like a bobcat, but I don’t waste meat of game animals.
Just wondering–did anyone quit the first time Ruth appeared with the pistol ( 370-372), saving Sid?
Circle of life. Yes, we react strangely when it comes to ‘cute’ in stressful situations. Which doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen nor that it should not be discussed. Thank you for taking this step. Keep up the good work!
The message that the world isn’t unicorns and butterflies is a very good message. Yes, even for children. Well, it isn’t ONLY unicorns and butterflies.
If you set out to please everyone, you will end up pleasing no one. S&W is one of the few web comics I follow regularly and enjoy thoroughly. Do not change a thing.
@ XMinusOne:
I just realized that while in this context “S&W” stands for “Sandra and Woo,” it also stands for “Smith & Wesson,” a major builder of handguns in the U.S. 🙂
@ John:
Today she has an entire knapsack full of neatly-sliced steaks. She’s pretty good with a sharp stone.
Waste not, want not.
I laughed. It was effective subversion and this is primarily a gag strip.
The message from the ruthless strip was harsh, but to quit your entire viewing of the strip entirely, that seems like a stupid overraction. Whoever thinks like that has obviously lived a rather sheltered life or must not have been very big fans to begin with. No loss on your part either way.
Please don’t declaw the series just for their sake, I love your comic series and it would be a complete waste to see it censored or halted for a few pathetic complainers.
Love and appreciate the work, I look forward to every new piece of content ^.^
@ John:
Well, let’s not forget Ruth is just a squirrel, so she can only take quantities that are her size. She probably would have eaten the rest, too, but the recent comic makes me doubt so.
In fact, I like Sandra&Woo better when it is funny. And I have a -very- hard time laughing at this arc. In addition, I clearly recal you scoulding an other web artist for propagating vegetarism in their comic, although admitedly “Ruthless” does so in a much more adult, less schoolmasteresque manner.
That said, I stil like this turn of events, because it makes people think, or at least -should- make people think. IMO this comic is not about not eating meat, its about killing being a bad thing. Everyone has a family. Gang violence is bad. War is bad. Think about their kids, no matter how different you may think they are.
Seen from an other perspective, this is deeply ironic. After all, Ruth is a meat eating squirrel, not for survival but because she is feeling smug over other animals. She is kind of an inverted vegan human. And now she is feeling doubts about her way of life… think about that!
@ AbslomRob:
The problem is that Ruth’s actions are, if not abhorrent, certainly aberrant.
Yeah with all due respect, if the critics have substance to their criticism, then you should at least take it into consideration.
But if it amounts to nothing more than “It’s dark, therefore it sucks” or a common one “It doesn’t have Woo in it, therefore it sucks”, those are just meaningless words.
People.. actually got upset over that? The guy up with the first comment is right, you don’t need readers like that.
I thought it was an interesting point of morality. The squirrel wouldn’t have shed a tear if she hadn’t seen the lynx kits, and her reaction to them adds depth to her character that she wouldn’t otherwise have – having to actually be faced with the full consequences of her actions is something a full predator wouldn’t generally care about. The lynx would’ve eaten her AND her children, but the reverse is not true.
Introducing conflict to your strip is not a bad thing. Unless you handle it really, really poorly. Like.. y’know. Ctrl + Alt + Del.
I’m not sure I want to join in the conversation at large, but suffice to say-
Thanks for publishing this arc, please don’t be put off publishing other challenging on controversial material. So far Sandra and Woo has been wholly enjoyable and I have never once thought it dealt irresponsibly with any subject it touched upon.
And even if it did, I’d still prefer an irresponsible effort to shying away from trying.
I found nothing wrong with the strip and certainly don’t think two readers are worth fussing over. People will always find offense at something.
I really don’t understand what the big deal is. First it’s a comic , as in not real. Second this would never happen in real life. Third it was not even slightly gorey. Why all the hubbub bub?
Personally I’m far more offended by the insinuation that squirrels can arbitrarily decide to manufacture the proteases, lipases, and whatever other proteins they would need to not be violently sick on consuming that quantity of animal meat
But then again this is a squirrel with a gun in a comic about talking animals so eh willing suspension of disbelief and all that
Also the fact that Sid is the infinitely superior red squirrel gives +10 brownie points
When I was Theater Major in college, we did a run of “Man of La Mancha.” Two weeks into the run, the director read a letter in the preshow cast meeting from a lady who was deeply offended by the rape scene at the end of the first act.
I will say to you what he said to us: Well done.
The essence of good art is producing an emotional reaction in the reader. Sometimes that reaction is a positive one, and sometimes it’s a negative one. Sometimes it’s the reaction that the artist intended, and sometimes it isn’t. This arc has been both heart-rending and creates depth in a previously one-dimensional character. That makes it good art.
As far as suitability for children is concerned, Sandra and Woo has touched on a variety of subjects that are more adult in nature over its entire length. The social and political commentary woven into an otherwise light comic gives it a delightful combination that’s hard to find elsewhere.
Damn if it don’t. Maybe they crafted Ruth’s pistol for her. Just imagine the design specs … ‘Minimal recoil, very light trigger pull, easy to load, grip to accommodate small paws … :D. b>@ Iron Ed:
Personaly, I considered taking a week break for this storyline to end after i read the previous one, because I am an old softy when it comes to kids. However, I also came to the conclusion that there was a story to be told here, and that I should respect it enough to at least try and see it through to the end.
I’ll admit i find these latest strips disturbing. It is thought provoking but it is just too dark and sad for my liking. I have enough dark and sad stuff in my life without adding to it by reading a comic. Like one of the previous people to comment – I prefer the strip when it was funny.
And I’ll admit it. I prefer a happy ending. Real life is depressing enough for me. I honestly don’t know if I’ll keep reading much more. I’ll see what happens in the next few strips.
Sounds like two people are upset about being reminded where meat (and in this case, ribeye steak) actually comes from…
Or perhaps they wanted Ruth to remain a remorseless, amoral psychopath (by human standards), killing largely just because she can, rather than because she needs to…
(…and no, this isn’t meant as a lead in to a discussion about vegetarianism vs omnivorism etc. Rodents have a somewhat different digestive system to hominids for a start.)
Unknown wrote:
And also let us not forget that she is indeed a squirrel, and but for a fraction of a second might well have been dinner for the Lynx instead of the other way around. The meat gained in THIS encounter was just a side effect of acting in self defence. Which is what makes her realisation of the domino consequences of her actions even more poignant. Previously she was firing from a place of safety up in a tree (…though, again, she saved Sid that time).
Previous to this she may well have shot the kits as well – or instead, if coming across them without their mother.
MishaFox wrote:
Welcome to S&W, I’m afraid you’ll find the authors do this from time to time (trawl the archives). Super safe and happy fluffy animal fun time it is not. Things generally have a positive outcome in the end but the storylines in between aren’t always sweetness and light.
Incidentally, to futher help your condition, I recommend avoiding most other works of sequential art that aren’t cookie cutter superhero or kids’ books, and most pieces of worthwhile literature in general. Some of the best written and most culturally important stories out there will break your heart into a hundred jagged pieces even if you were already having a good day.
wait, she was a pedo on that strip? i didn’t even notice, i think it hilarious
These two readers also boycot Disney due to Bambi and Old Yeller.
Moving right along…
Enough of these endless droning debate. This could go on endlessly.
I’ll be blunt. To the author of the strip – ignore all this crap and go with what YOU WANT. It’s your strip do what feels right to you. If you like it keep it. If you don’t like it – change things. and never mind what others think – it is your strip.
Given the horrific things that happen in the real world, what wimps.
A carnivorous squirrel having to come to terms with the results from her actions? It’s an interesting allegory about realizing there are consequences for bad decisions we’ve all made at one time or another.
If you want dark and sad, I have a few dystopian comics I can send you to. I found the story arc to be kind of light-hearted in its own way.
One must wonder how many other predators contribute to why there’s a shortage of lynxes about.
I find it rather hilarious that both squirrels are upset about the poor lynxes. Not nary a lynx would have turned a hair over eating squirrel, and hang it all if they had young starving to death back at the tree. Moral quandaries are for people who have the time and leisure for it. Nature is not for the faint hearted.
In your comic you always had some occasions were animals were used as food, that’s the way how nature works. But to quit reading a comic just because of ONE strip that was emotionally too touching / disturbing is wrong. “Sandra and Woo” had SO many great moments and memorable storylines over the years that I would never give it up just because of a single strip not match the way I want things to be.
Actually, the only thing *I* disliked in all your comic strips so far was when you killed off Sid’s mother way back when, because she looked so *happy* when she jumped from tree to tree a few comic strips earlier… an undeserved ending for her, but as I wrote before, that’s how nature (and life) sometimes can be. Your stories wouldn’t be half as good if everything were just ‘happy and colorful’ all the time. 😉
So, keep on the good work.
I think this arc is great. When Ruth was like, “I ate a nut .. and I liked it!” I was like, aahahahha Ruth! Then when we started finding out why, I was like, aw snap Ruth, you made orphans! She eats meat, she could always go back and adopt them and raise them Lion King style. Would make life easier – her kids could hunt and bring her back part of their kill. Though, they’d prolly be eatin’ squirrels … so that could go the same way as if the babies ate their mom. Lol. I’m diggin’ this arc so far.
Anyway it’s a comic – I don’t know any good, strong comics with an actual story and depth to its characters that doesn’t have ups and downs.
Keep on keeping on, Powree and Oliver!!! LOVE it!!!!
@ Phil:
Why, because it tells them that their meat was once alive? How dumb do you think kids are? I mean kids are dumb, yeah, but not THAT dumb. By five I figured that out already. And I was late on that fact.
“Please, protect kids from simple facts! Won’t someone PLEASE think of the children!”
Seriously, what are you going to say when your kid asks where meat comes from? Same place as babies, the stork?
@ Nick/Tyrong:
Pressed Submit by accident.
Also what general age group do you think reads this comic? Need we forget the story arc that was a giant boner joke? You’re worried about impressionable children with MEAT? I really hope you complained about the boner joke, too. I really, really do, because otherwise you’d just come off as a hypocrite. It’d still be really stupid, considering I guarantee the average age of the readers here is likely 20-30, but you wouldn’t be a hypocrite.
Sorry did it AGAIN.
Okay, maybe as low as 14 years old, but still, if by 14 you haven’t figured out where meat comes from, or that animals are living things with babies and the ability to feel some sort of pain, might I suggest a therapist, because you seem to be out of touch with the ability to feel empathy. On the other hand, welcome to the world, cave dweller! You’ll enoy this internet thing!
I have read the comic until there, but seriously I wasn’t able to read all the comments of this page.
I felt shocked by the comic, I’m depressed and I don’t want this illness to get worse, ok. I’m leaving.
But I felt OFFENDED by some comments, particularly from Timber Wolf and Jordan. It’s like they’re denying the impact some strips can have on someone mentally fragile (no, don’t bring the crybaby comments, I don’t need these).
I would prefer leaving Sandra and Woo on a sad, yet very grateful note (grateful towards the authors for the quality of their work and the good times I had reading their comics) than leaving Sandra and Woo being very angry because of some poorly thought and narrow-minded comments. Tschüs und Küsse!
SIDE NOTE TO MY PREVIOUS COMMENT — I said “particularly” but I wanted to say “for example”. Other comments, especially among the very last ones, made me feel like I was reduced to a crybaby living only in a world full of pink candy. I don’t want to insult anyone.
Actually, it is very childish to threaten or do a “I’ll stop reading” statement. If you don’t like what an author has to say, merely express (politely) your opinion and if the author agrees after thinking your statement over – then it will have a positive effect on both the author and the strip.
For myself, I must admit that I did NOT find a positive message in the killing of any creatur, especially a mother. Again to me, today’s strip encouraging the idea that killing wolf cubs is a nice thing is not a good message either. Wolves, at least here in the States, are just beginning to make a comeback from near extinction and they do play their part in the much lauded “Circle of Life.”
BTW there are actually no recorded honest records of wolves actually attacking humans or children unless attacked first – believe it or not.
I do enjoy the strip and will add my voice to those who enjoy seeing Sandra get a few kisses.