Madam & Eve Comic Strip
This Madam & Eve comic by Stephen Francis and Rico, about low math scores, humorously critiques systemic problems in education, such as poor teaching practices and a lack of accountability, by exaggerating the contrast between the junior girl’s seriousness and the boys’ carefree attitudes. Through characterization and humor, the comic highlights societal complacency toward academic failure, emphasizing the conflict between responsibility and apathy. The junior girl is portrayed as serious and frustrated, the boys as indifferent and dismissive, their interaction as a clash of values, and the absent teachers as symbols of systemic failure. By combining language, visuals, and humor, the comic effectively critiques the shortcomings of the educational system in an engaging and entertaining way.
The junior girl is presented as a responsible and diligent student who is frustrated by the boys’ lack of seriousness. Her sarcasm and wit stand out in panel 1 when she smirks and says, “Hey - I heard you guys scored 13% in the national maths test,” mocking their poor performance in a playful but pointed way. Her frustration becomes more apparent in panel 3 when she says, “Didn’t your maths teacher explain this? ‘13’ isn’t good,” using blunt humor to emphasize how ridiculous it is that the boys do not understand their failure. In panel 9, she attempts to simplify the concept for them by saying, “If I bought ten apples ... but only 1 and 1/3 were good ... what does that mean?” This analogy uses situational humor to make her point more accessible, but her earnestness contrasts humorously with the boys’ inability to comprehend. Visually, the girl’s confident stance in panel 1, with her arms behind her back and a smirk on her face, contrasts with the boys’ slouched postures, showing that she is more serious and focused. Her wide-eyed expressions in panels 5, 9, and 10 exaggerate her disbelief and frustration, making her reactions humorous and relatable. Furthermore, her repeated breaking of the fourth wall, such as in panels 2, 4, and 10, adds an extra layer of humor by directly engaging the audience. The junior girl’s sarcasm and exaggerated reactions not only create humor but also reinforce her role as the responsible character. Her frustration critiques the normalization of low standards in education, using humor to make a serious point about accountability.
In contrast, the boys are depicted as lazy, indifferent, and dismissive of their failure, embodying societal complacency and low expectations. However, the black boy’s behavior specifically highlights how systemic educational failures have left students with limited critical thinking and abstract reasoning skills. His reliance on counting with his fingers in panel 8, when he explains that the teacher only teaches “about 1...2...3...4 DAYS a MONTH,” humorously underscores his inability to process simple numbers or concepts abstractly. This reliance on concrete, physical gestures to explain a basic idea reflects a lack of confidence in mental math, which might point to insufficient instruction or practice. Additionally, in panel 6, his pragmatic response to the girl’s analogy about apples—“Take them BACK to the shop!”—shows that he interprets the problem in a literal and practical way, rather than abstractly understanding the mathematical concept. This response, while humorous, illustrates how his thinking is rooted in everyday logic rather than academic reasoning. Visually, the black boy’s finger-counting gesture in panel 8 adds humor by trivializing the teacher’s absenteeism, as if it were so infrequent that it can only be understood by physically counting it out. His wide-eyed expressions and casual stance further emphasize his lack of self-awareness and his inability to grasp the seriousness of the situation. While the comic uses humor to critique his behavior, it also points to larger systemic issues, such as the failure of the education system to develop abstract reasoning and critical thinking skills in its students.
The interaction between the girl and the boys illustrates the tension between a serious attitude toward education and a dismissive, carefree outlook, with humor emphasizing the absurdity of their dynamic. In panel 3, the girl’s comment, “Didn’t your maths teacher explain this? ‘13’ isn’t good,” humorously highlights the boys’ ignorance, while the black boy’s clueless response, “ooh, right!” adds irony to the situation. In panel 5, the girl’s animated gesture, her hands extended outward, indicating explaining, emphasizes her seriousness, contrasts with the boys’ wide-eyed stares and blank expressions add visual humor by exaggerating their confusion. The final punchline in panel 10, where the black boy says, “Simple as 2+2=5,” and the white boy sarcastically adds, “Have you thought about a career in education?” uses irony and exaggeration to show how little they have learned. The boys’ exaggerated body language, with the black boy laughing and the white boy pointing, uses slapstick humor to emphasize their shallow and belated realization of their failure. The girl’s repeated breaking of the fourth wall throughout the comic engages the audience, allowing them to share in her frustration at the boys’ absurdity. This interaction uses humor to amplify the contrast between accountability and apathy, critiquing societal attitudes toward education in an entertaining way.
Finally, the teachers, though absent from the comic, are indirectly portrayed as enablers of poor academic performance and a failing educational system. In panel 7, the girl asks, “Where’s your maths teacher? I’d like to have a word with him,” and the black boy replies, “He’s not here.” This statement humorously highlights the absurdity of a teacher being absent on a school day, especially during a time of such poor academic performance. The black boy then explains in panel 8, “He only shows up to teach us about 1...2...3...4 DAYS a MONTH,” using understatement to critique the teacher’s lack of commitment and responsibility. The absence of the teacher throughout the comic becomes a running joke, visually emphasizing their failure to provide consistent instruction and guidance. Similarly, the white boy’s sudden disappearance in panel 7 humorously parallels this lack of reliability, subtly critiquing the normalization of disengagement within the system. The black boy’s continued presence in the conversation could reflect a societal expectation that marginalized groups must work harder to justify or explain their failures, even in situations where others (like the white boy) disengage entirely. The white boy’s disappearance, by contrast, could implicitly critique privilege, suggesting that certain groups might feel freer to disengage without facing consequences. These interpretations depend on the reader’s perspective and cultural context.
In conclusion, the comic effectively uses humor and characterization to critique systemic failures in education, with its most striking feature being the exaggerated contrast between the junior girl’s seriousness and the boys’ carefree attitudes. However, by placing the blame primarily on the teachers, the comic oversimplifies the issue, failing to consider other contributing factors such as parental influence and societal expectations. Despite this limitation, the comic successfully engages the audience with humour while delivering a sharp critique of educational shortcomings.
(This essay was in response to an IB LangLit past paper 1 from May 2015.)
