The difference is that here the characters appear to have chosen poverty in order to embrace a simple, ascetic lifestyle; they are not forced into it by circumistances outside their control, or at least the artist makes no effort to imply so.
There is a difference between choosing minimalism and being forced into it by lack of options. If these two characters had steady income or a safety net, and chose to live like this, then good for them. But they don’t; they are unemployed with a leaky roof and inadequate heat and presumably do not have the means to address those issues. This is an unstable situation to which nobody should aspire.
Yeah, no. Let’s not romanticize poverty.
The difference is that here the characters appear to have chosen poverty in order to embrace a simple, ascetic lifestyle; they are not forced into it by circumistances outside their control, or at least the artist makes no effort to imply so.
Where is the poverty? The author explicitly stated that they “get by”.
This comic is condemning consumerism, not romanticizing poverty.
I dont see it as romanticising poverty, just trying to be happy with what you have. Looking on the bright side of everything.
There is a difference between choosing minimalism and being forced into it by lack of options. If these two characters had steady income or a safety net, and chose to live like this, then good for them. But they don’t; they are unemployed with a leaky roof and inadequate heat and presumably do not have the means to address those issues. This is an unstable situation to which nobody should aspire.
…until one of them gets a toothache
Or drug addiction.