Does Happy’s patronizing comment in panel 4 reflect Rivera’s own general opinion of the male of the species? Of course, it is completely unfair of me to make that observation, since writers/cartoonists are under no obligation to make characters adhere to their own social, political, or religious viewpoints. And rightly so! In fact, I’ve often advised people to not try to learn about the private lives of their musical, artistic, or thespian favorites. Just enjoy their work and create your own private view of the artist. But Happy’s comments are still embarrassing. 

Can we say that Happy’s statement was made in order to cast a negative view on the readers of this comic strip, by assuming they (we) are a bunch of old, chauvinistic, out-of-touch males? 

Or do we just accept it at face value that Happy Trail, himself, is some obsolete relic of the 1950s?

However, I think this whole ending sequence, suggesting that their article’s success was based primarily on a little girl’s prodding, is unfortunate. This is not a swipe against granddaughters (even though I only have grandsons). It’s just that it comes off as some kind of deus ex machina. It trivializes what was supposed to have actually happened (or what would have happened) if the story had been given any degree of gravitas.

I’m puzzled by Mark’s motivation about getting justice for Rusty. I mean, it seemed he was initially concerned about the source and effects of pollution on the lake, itself, which is proper, not so much assuaging Rusty’s feelings. I must have missed something along the way. As for any influence of an article published in an online teen magazine, who knows, in spite of Happy’s optimism. Shouldn’t Mark also be sending his research on to the regional and state pollution boards (or whatever they call it over there)? Well, the comic strip world and the Trailverse have their own laws of reality that we, in the real world, can only marvel at. Or laugh at.

Art Dept. I think the composition in panel 1 is an interesting departure from the closed-in, eye-level layouts we’ve been seeing. Having Mark talk a walk outside with Happy behind him is a cinematic trope that reinforces Mark’s doubts as he airs his feelings. It would have also been nice to get some advice from his old confidant, Ralph the rat snake.

On the other hand, I am physically put off by Happy’s facial expressions in panel 3 and panel 4. The “smile” looks positively lecherous, and the heavy-handed inking of the mouth doesn’t help. 

Well, as I suspected, Bill did turn to one of his other magazines and went with Teen Girl Sparkle. Of course, Mark should not be surprised (panel 4), given his publishing history with that magazine. So, why does Rivera go the route of causing Mark (never mind Happy) to look gobsmacked? Maybe it was to continue her joke (ha-ha) about Mark Trail—the macho wildlife writer and fisticuffs aficionado—publishing articles in a magazine dedicated to adolescent and teenage girls (like the old 16 magazine).

I suppose that we could also be puzzled by Mark and Happy’s seat swapping that happened between panel 1 and panel 4. Or maybe it was an unconscious transfer of position by Rivera that happened between panel 3 and panel 4, instead. Having drawn Mark and Happy from the point of view of the monitor, Rivera could have absently maintained the left-right seating when she composed panel 4. Some conspiracists might argue that there was a time warp caused by an occurrence of the chrono-synclastic infundibulum that allowed Mark and Happy to go get refills on their coffee and sit down in each other’s seats, all at once.

We’ve all been there, right? I say that in jest but consider those Tik-Tok (Bik-Bok in the Trailverse) vids where the videos are published “backwards”, in mirror image of the originals (e.g. all text is backwards). Is that relevant? Maybe, maybe not; but it’s what popped into my head while searching for something actually useful to say. And it just takes too much effort to come up with anything more clever at this point.

Well, this is a side of Mark Trail that we don’t see too often, and possibly never saw in the pre-Rivera iterations: that getting articles accepted sometimes took a lot of work or just got rejected out of hand. Mark offers an unsolicited article, of course, so it has a steeper acceptance hill to climb over. Regardless of how we feel Rivera has portrayed this situation, it’s a noteworthy expansion to the Trailverse Tradition. 

This is the second time Mark’s work has been rejected. His earlier rejection happened at the end of his New York visit, where he sat in on an AI roundtable discussion (“AI-AI-Oh!”). But it would certainly get tiresome to see this become a regular bit. 

I think we also have here a situation in which Rivera satirizes the current trend of corporate influence in mass media. Bill Ellis is the “man in the middle”, trying to keep afloat between Boardroom Pressures and the writers who just want to have their work criticized on their professional merits, not for adherence to the owner’s political agenda.

As far as the plot, itself, goes, I’m wondering whether this golf criticism excuse is going to be the end or whether Rivera will have Ellis come back to say that not all of the magazines have golf sponsors, so Mark should start checking his bank account for a deposit. 

Art Dept. Okay, I’m not sure what the specific animal is in panel 4 (other than some kind of rodent) and I’m especially bothered by that strange black patch. But after studying it, I’m thinking this “rodent of unusual size” is staring up at a great horned owl, based on the shape of that black patch on his body and worried that he is about to become its dinner.

As expected, roadblocks from Bill Ellis. So, the hoped-for publication choice, Outdoor Living, seems to be a dead end. As a reminder, Bill Ellis is no longer simply the editor of Woods and Wildlife, but more like the managing editor for F.E. and Cook, the company that acquired Woods and Wildlife, along with 16 or so other periodicals. So much for the background, as I know it. 

This must be a “dramatic point” in the story: What to do? Will Ellis simply choose another one of the magazines he represents or do Mark and Happy peddle their work elsewhere? Again, let me remind everybody that Mark is considered only a freelancer for F.E. and Cook. Oooh! The suspense is palpable.

Rivera leaves out most of the details and skips to the wrap-up of the investigation. But what are the results? Do they confirm Mark’s suspicions or point elsewhere? Maybe we’ll learn more next week.

I wonder: Would it make a more effective story if she did include more of the investigative details, other than the symbolic first day of testing and the brief interview with Ranger Shaw? I’m thinking there could be some drama with Mark and Happy sneaking around the perimeter of the golf resort at night, for example. And what about those hikes!? Where did they go and what for?

Well, this is Saturday, so Monday would be the turnover to Cherry for her face time. I got fooled the last time, thinking the story ended. This might be the end of the scene, but it doesn’t feel like the end of the story, itself. Do you have a different opinion?

Otherwise, I reckon I can’t complain much. Rivera did have Mark perform an actual investigation, even if we only saw a few highlights. I still think the golfing chapter was more or less a waste of time as it was presented. As I noted before, it should have been placed after this investigation. So who knows, maybe they’ll return to the golf resort and give Chett and Brett a copy of their article. I may say more on Sunday and try to not be repetitive about it.

Sure, for the purposes of the story, it certainly looks like the Chedderson family is going to be the guilty party. However, for the sake of honesty and journalistic integrity, shouldn’t Rivera ensure Mark maintained a more-or-less neutral position, at least until he found enough inculpatory evidence? 

As we know, Mark believed the golf course was the polluter from the moment he heard about its existence at the start of this story. A good team of lawyers could probably tie Mark up in any court proceeding for months, if not years, based on his premature accusations on the golf course and his prior relations with Chedderson. “A personal and professional grudge”, they will claim. “Obviously tainted evidence cherrypicked to cast doubt and blame, etc.”

Sorry, Mark: The Cheddersons are not brothers or “bros.” They are father-and-son. 

As for Cherry, I’ve come to believe Rivera is working on turning her into the conventional Cherry of old:  nice, pretty, but somewhat dim. A loyal wife who can’t put 2+2 together and is mildly overwhelmed by masculine exuberance. And that’s a shame.

Go ahead if you wish, and comment on the changing map topography in the first two panels. Maybe it’s a two-sided map. I don’t know. Or comment, if you desire, on how Mark aged between Panel 2 and Panel 4.

Well, will Mark and Happy start with the waterway alongside the resort for the first test? Could save a lot of time. Run several tests. If they come back negative, Mark owes the Cheddersons an apology. Then he’ll have to investigate the other sources. It would be a hoot for Mark to discover the pollution source was the Sunny Soleil Society! How would Cherry take that result!?

Speaking of maps, it would be kind of cool if Rivera produced an “official” map of Lost Forest, kind of like A.A. Milne’s map of the Hundred Acre Woods or Tolkien’s Middle Earth. Why not? None of the prior artists every produced one that I’m aware of. There is, as some of you know, an official “Mark Trail Wilderness” area along the Appalachian Trail in northeastern Georgia. It’s quite extensive, though I’ve never visited it. We don’t need a map quite that big, however; just the area around the Lost Forest community and its surroundings. Too bad E. H. Shephard is no longer around.

What was it that Ralph Kramdam used to wail after messing up once again on The Honeymooners? “Me and my biiig mouth!” Fine. I misread the tea leaves. I thought for sure that Saturday was the end of the story when Mark mentioned writing up an article with Happy. Reckon I should have waited for the dust-up to settle down.

It looks like we are moving into Part 3, in which actual work gets done. If that’s what happens, I’ll need to rejigger the story’s grade.

In any event, I’m anxious to see this investigative journalism get into gear.  Will they be checking online for filed paperwork and inspection reports? Will they wade into the river to take water samples by the resort to get analyzed by a proper lab (as opposed to going to Doc Davis)? Will they have to face off against the gator while they sneak around the resort grounds? Or does all of this palaver really just mean “Let’s write that article“, after all?

I’ve never seen an alligator yawn before. It’s an interesting sight, isn’t it? Well, he isn’t the only one …

But, wait! What’s all this father-son relationship jazz? Wasn’t there an entire family here? Or is that why the gator looks fatter than he did a few days ago? Yesterday I posited three possible reasons for this story. It seems that it really was about father-son bonding; or at least, that is what is turned into. Blech!

So now, Happy and Mark are going home, arm in arm, to write an article together. About their trip. If Kelly Welly was here, she’d probably throw golf balls at them for wasting this opportunity.

“You’re a nature journalist”, says Happy. Aren’t they the ones that write those Sunday newspaper articles about fishing for bigmouth bass with Gadabout Gaddis, hunting squirrels in the Big Woods, and taking Ol’ Blue duck hunting? But they leave actual investigative work to trained professionals.

Art Dept. You might think the giant speech balloon in panel 1 is another kind of narration box. But, no. The balloon’s tail runs up Happy Trail’s shirt, but was accidentally colored in. At first I thought Jules Rivera was satirizing the misplaced speech dialog trope of pre-Rivera Mark Trail.

What started out as an informal (that is, unpaid) investigation into local water contamination has turned into a contest of rivals to see who swings the biggest golf club. From here, it certainly looks like Rivera either lost track of the plot or simply jumped the tracks and went into a different direction. I’m only surprised (well, okay: disappointed) that the dads didn’t join in with the boys to have a more interesting and enjoyable four-way slugfest. Now that would have been an interesting sight. I think Rivera missed an opportunity for some real fun!

This being Thursday, there are still two days left in the week. What to do? That’s not really time enough to resolve this story, so there will be at least one more week. Will Rivera turn Mark back into an investigative reporter, skulking around the resort at night to get hard evidence? Will Happy Trail want to go along and relive his younger days of activist nature journalism? I’ve always wondered about Happy’s “been there, done that!” attitude, as if he simply got burned out from chasing poachers, kidnappers, arsonists, and weirdos and now wants to live out his life like a normal person, indifferent to the environment.

But maybe the Trails will just head back home and forget the whole thing, which may be what a lot of readers are doing, already. I really want to see some suspense and drama. Even for a little bit.

If I remain “in story mode”, then I blame Mark for creating this mess through his ham-fisted investigation, such as it was. Instead of going covert or at least subtle, Mark decided to confront the Cheddersons, head-on, without solid evidence.

If I look at this from an outside position, I have to wonder what Rivera had in mind moving the story in this direction. Is it getting us closer to uncovering the source of the pollution or has that already been “established” merely through Mark’s biased assumption? If Mark is satisfied the golf course is the source, shouldn’t either try to get them to clean it up or report them to the “proper authorities”?

Well, I might be asking too much. Maybe Mark will turn over his “evidence” to Ranger Shaw, who will once again hem and haw and hesitate, until Mark browbeats him into confessing that he got a free lifetime membership for looking the other way.

Mark Trail demonstrates another one of his well-known techniques on how to successfully investigate wrongdoing and solve a problem. Or maybe not.

As much as I don’t want to make this a pure snark-filled diatribe, I have to say this is pretty lame plotting; to say little of the dialog. There are a number of issues we can pick on, just today. I’m not sure I have the energy for all of it. So, I’ll pick one or two.

For one thing, it seems to be that, even now, Chet Chedderson has not made a single comment about his prior entanglements with Mark; and there have been two: the Zeeba Mussels story and the Bear Necessity story, where Chet had only a walk-on cameo at the start of the story. I’m wondering if he even remembers who Mark Trail is, and if that is a deliberate decision on Rivera’s part. That is to say, why would Rivera want to cause Chedderson to not recall Mark? Readers with better minds than mine may recall that the Bear Necessity story was when Jules Rivera made the unfortunate decision to change Mark’s face from sporting his stubbled beard to the tramp-like five o’clock shadow he now has.

The strip today reads more like comments on social media. Hey! Maybe that’s deliberate, since it’s become the standard for interpersonal communication, especially among the age group this rebooted strip is supposed to be aimed at.

Art Dept. Rivera continues to play on the “Like Father Like Son” trope, coming off like the parody she likely has in mind. And I think this is the first time we’ve actually seen a golf bag (panel 2). But more important than any of this (to me) is that I think Rivera drew this manually with pen and ink, rather than a her digital tablet. The lightness and variety of lines, and the unusual hatching on Brett’s face and especially in the tree behind Mark in panel 3 lead me to this conclusion. I’m not saying she’s using old Speedball or Gillotte nibs; it’s probably a set of technical pens with different line widths. Sorry, I’m just getting a bit too geeky here. But I’d like to see her stick to using these pens, as it might loosen up her drawing and make it more interesting. Again, I could be totally wrong. Digital tablets have come a long way since I last used them.