And I’m back again! Filled with drive and inspiration for a new Frivolesque chapter. I guess I should take such a break every year. It really did me good, I swear. Once again, I really want to thank all of my guest artists who made Frivolesque much less boring during those four weeks. You guys are awesome.
So, without further ado, we start this new chapter with another flashback into Flore’s childhood.
And yes, the young puppeteer sitting on her bed is her father, Laurent Bougainville.
So I’m back, and Frivolesque has now officially been running for two years. This is gonna be a good week, I’m sure.
As always, if you like Frivolesque, don’t forget to comment or like the Facebook page!
And thank you for waiting!
is that laurence doll?
Sure looks like it.
Mmmaybe… Or is it… the other way around?
aah… :D
I take it that you will be adding hovertext to your comics from now on Dez?
Seems like everybody’s doing it now, so I thought I could try it.
It didn’t take long for someone to notice though!
I have learnt to watch out for any possible hovertext when it comes to comics thanks to xkcd and DoA.
Ah, but how long till it invades the comments section…
I wonder when a thing like that would happen…
Help
<abbr title="Hovertext"≥Words</a≥
LOL only took 5 days…
Which means you’ve been checking if I had hovertext 101 times already to no avail!
Ha ha ha, that would be something pretty silly to do, right? *blush*
It’s not like moving your pointer over the comic for a couple of seconds is hard work or anything as I use a PC not a smartphone or tablet.
I don’t even know how to see it on a phone…
I think DEZ was talking about frustrated expectations rather than work :)
I often was like “stop looking for, you know he is not using it”, and still… obviously that’s cause I find the hover text very appealing, sometimes it can actually change one’s take on the strip.
And it was cause xkcd for me too ;)
Anyway it seems that the watching paid off, let’s enjoy it :)
Yup!
And I can’t promise I’ll be entertaining though.
just joining in, whole archive has hover text now
Uh?
aqua, all of the comics had hovertext but until this one, they have all just been titles not comments/author notes.
Young Flore looks adorable!
She’s a tiny little thing, but I’m not super good at drawing her consistently…
I’ll have to practice drawing her, especially since she could be a recurring feature.
Qu’est que putain de quoi ? Mais je suis d’accord elle est adorable comme ça ^^
Oui!^^
C’est la deuxième fois qu’on la voit en petite fille dans la bédé.
“Frog” heh. If only Mr.Toad were that low class. Shame Flore. The disrespect is real.
For sure, yo.
“Would you like it if I called you a monkey?”
Of course not!
I’m an ape.
That was his point.
You know? I actually had the doubt but I thought he could be meaning “instead human”, cause people using “monkey” in that way is pretty common.
Sorry for the misunderstanding :)
I’d be curious to see Marie-Neige’s defining moment that made her into the person she is today :)
You know, that’s an excellent topic. I’m definitely going to do this someday. Kid Marie-Neige would be cute too.
+10
…And we’re back. Thankyou for once again joining us on our regular Frivolesque. We hope you continue to enjoy… :P
So that’s her father with the toad? Interesting, looks pretty young. That said, not that unusual…
It is indeed mr. Bougainville himself. And he looks pretty young because he is, considering Flore is just a little girl in this strip.
And there’s also the fact Flore also looks much younger than she is. She had to take those genes somewhere.
True, fair enough. Now you got me wondering how often Mrs Bougainville got asked if the guy she was with was her kid…
All the time. Especially since she’s much taller than he is.
Ha :) then it seems that Liliane has her mother’s body and her father’s eyes, and Flore the other way around ;)
Actually, Flore mostly has everything from her father.
I tried to draw their eyes the same way, but he’s got smaller pupils.
Hah :) that explains a lot… maybe?
Aww, she keep it all these years.
Welcome back DEZ!
Happy birthday Frivolesque!
Welcome aboard Laurent!
PS: Laurent, Laurence, Laurier… Frivolesque: free tongue-twister for all :P
kept… kept… she kept it…
*sigh*
Don’t be so hard on yourself. It was a minor mistake.
You are very kind, thank you :)
I wish I could take some more english lessons. I used to be (slightly) better but reading almost only technical stuff really rust your knowledge.
Also comics are lots of fun but there are so many bad examples between us english-illiterate doing comments (*), and characters using (intentional) bad grammar and phonetic distortions, that is kinda english-suicidal for someone like me :P
Hey, I guess today’s must be a touchy topic for you as well. Bad Flore! you was being mean the other way too, give thanks that our friend here is quieter than Mr Toad :P
(*) that’s partly why I try to correct my errors when I catch them :)
Uh… about the touchy topic joke, I think I took the wrong “Phil”, sorry.
You totally lost me, there. sorry. .____.
How did that comma sneak in there? Great.
Yes, I messed it up a bit, sorry, let’s clarify.
You had been using two nicknames to comment: “Phil Munoz” and “Phil”, but so far the both have been linking to your web page (http://philrmunoz.zz.mu/).
When I saw your reply I took you (rightly) as… you :) and the “touchy topic” joke in my reply intended to mean that calling Mr Toad “frog”, Flore was being annoying also to the frogs ;) and then I referenced to you due to your deviant user “aquietfrog” :P
So far so… good? Anyway, after posting my reply I noticed that this time (and only this time) the “Phil” nickname was NOT linking to your site but to gmail (*) so I thought that it could be another “Phil” instead you, which caused my last post apologizing.
Is it confusing enough?
Sorry for the mess, hope that it make a bit more sense now. If you decide to do not reply me ever again I… totally support you :P
(*) I was seeing it on android and for some reason the browser do not show the address name, just the “gmail” link. Firefox now do is showing the address name 0_0
Okay, I get it now. I don’t find it that touchy. I personally think toads don’t want to be called frogs, and frogs don’t want to be called toads much in the same way, a man doesn’t want to be called a woman, and a woman doesn’t want to be called a man. I think that’s a close enough analogy. Both don’t want to be confused for the other.
Wow, nothing gets past your radar, huh? :)
And thank you, thank you, and thank you! :)
Now I am expecting a teddy or a holidays story next :P
http://frivolesque.com/archives/comic/96-protection
Doh… almost nothing :)
I didn’t do the connection at the time either, and it sunk into the “minor things” box. I suppose a teddy in a girl’s arms attracts my attention less than a frog in a woman’s apartment :P (well, I guess it
depends)
A toad! A toad! Sorry!!
You know what I find strange? That he’s a toad and he calls himself Mr Toad, I mean would I call myself Mr Human? Probably not, being a human is such a default thing that it wouldn’t occur to me to use it as a defining characteristic.
Also toad is a subtype of frog, so I guess it’s like calling a human a primate, technically true, but still a bit offensive.
Well, I know a couple persons that if they were the only human being living between frogs I could easily imagine them asking to be called Mr. Human with a very big uppercase “H” :)
About toads I thought the same. However, according Encyclopedia Britannica It seems that there is something called “true toads” which belong a specific family inside the order. So from this point of view call a toad “frog” would be like call a human “monkey” (same order but different family) and Mr Toad would be right.
That’s a fair point about being the only one of the species among the other, but it still feels a little off that someone would identify so strongly with an outsider’s concept for themselves. But who knows, maybe frogs and toads are like that.
You know what I find strange? The fact you’re actually trying to make sense out of Mr. Toad.
And aren’t toads and frogs two subtypes of amphibians?
…actually, I just read about it, and wow. The two terms don’t hold much scientific value, they’re all members of the same family.
I’m just trying to understand an anthropomorphic amphibian puppet controlled by a human from a point of view of an actual amphibian, is that so wrong?
I’ve been totally spoiled by the guest month, Dez. I was looking for an update on Frivolesque today. T_T
I’m sorry. :(
Do you like Frivolesque that much, Phil?
I wish I could do two updates a week for real. T_T
Excuse me sir, but you seem to have your throat in a frog…er, toad. :-)
If one assumes the standpoint that paraphyly is complete nonsense… we ARE monkeys.
Which is to say that Catarrhines (i.e. “Old World Monkeys” and “Great Apes”) have a common ancestor distinct from the Platyrrhines… For instance, baboons are more closely related to us than they are to spider monkeys…. SO it seems rather bizarre for monkeys to be “all the platyrrhines and just the catarrhines that are not also apes”.
Incidentally… we’re also fish.
Toads and frogs are another matter though… though they’re also fish.