I assume the patron ahead of Burl and Joy is complaining at the invasion of his personal space based on their proximity to him. In point of fact, at first glance it appears as if Burl is rubbing something very inappropriately against this man's buttocks, though it is possible there is a gap between them that just isn't well represented by the artwork. At any rate, for our purposes, let's leave the specifics aside and just assume that the complaint is about an unspecified breech of personal space.
The patron, thus offended, requests that Burl and Joy step back a bit in a fairly standard, though oblique, manner. However, the point is missed entirely by our narcissistic couple, who take his words as a literal offer to help. Apparently the emphasis placed on the word "help" and the additional question mark are not enough to clue them into the possibility that the man may not be actually offering to help him shuck corn.
Furthermore, Burl hasn't noticed that no supermarket since 1950 has had an employee available to assist customers with tasks like this.
In the marginalia we find the following:
- The offended patron's shorts are apparently from the clothing manfacturer "Adoodas" or "Adoodos" which is among the most childish plays on "Adidas" imagineable. And what comment is even made by mocking the man's brand-name apparel? Perhaps the mere fact that he wears brand-name apparel is the joke for our Midwestern couple? Or are we supposed to draw a nefarious parallel between the sweat-shop labor in China employed by Adidas and the missing store employee...you know, the one who would actually have been available to "help" in 1950? Either way, of course, the space and lettering are cramped, and whatever comment is being made is hardly worth the effort to notice it.
- Burl's shirt, with it's Wal-Mart smiley face on one side and a Wal-Mart frowny face on the other is curious. Is this another comment on corporate America and the outsourcing of labor for which Wal-Mart is famous?
- Compare the images reminding us of corporate avarice with the gentle reminder of bygone craftsmanship employed in individually lettering each and every shopping cart with a warning. The message may or may not be different on each cart (it's not clear if the word "may" is just out of frame on the patron's cart). But even if we allow for that, then the warning signs have placed the word "may" on different lines ("No one / under / two / may stand up" versus "No one /under / two may/ stand up"). Of course, the artist also reveals unwittingly the potential downfall of craftsmanship--shoddy workmanship--because the craftsman forgot to leave enough space for the word "up" in the second cart and was forced to cram it in at a weird angle.
- And what to make of the oddity of a policy stating that it's OK for someone "under 2" to stand up in a cart? Anyone under 2 suffers from a fairly serious lack of balance and are more suceptible to falling out of the cart when standing.
- In the category of tantalizingly incomplete detail, we are given the barest hint of what is in Burl and Joy's cart. If I had to guess, I would say it is "Scott's Bathroom Tissue" which, when coupled with the suggestion of buying corn, is a detail that probably should have been omitted.
- In an unrelated vignette, some poor patron in the background is being doused by a sprayer above the vegetables. Note, however, that only one sprayer is activated and it is the one over the patron's head, so you have to suspect this is a novetly system designed to annoy patrons or dissuade them from pawing the produce.
- The plaid pants on this particular shopper are reason enough to hose him down, of course, with no questions asked.
- Whatever the story on the sprayer may be, the obvious irony in the scene cannot be ignored. A garish warning about the sprayer's tendency to "spray at any time" is juxtaposed with the fact that this sprayer is aimed outward and spraying at such volume that the floor will soon be a lawsuit waiting to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment