I really don't like that the narration is telling me about the character instead of the character doing the talking. I can sense he's thinking people suck really bad in that first panel. The next ones would have been an opportunity for some exposition on where he stands on helping others. It is hard for me to peg this guy as completely alone with no moral compass. His heart is or was in the right place and he's accomplished much. I may be idealistic but he's running for office and you can't do that well without a history of helping people or having some positive accomplishments over one's lifetime. His scheme at this point has to be super evil for me to feel like he's worth defeating or killing.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I don't think Flush is without a moral compass. I don't really think anybody is. People just get lost sometimes.I'm torn a bit about the narrative. I'm not a fan of overt exposition, but this is another device that I think is integral to this particular form of storytelling. I don't like character narration as a rule, and Flush doesn't have anyone else to tell his story to, so I think I like having the objective narration tell his story to the audience. The pictures tell the story better, I think, but I'd be worried that telling the story only with pictures would be a little too conceptual. It's funny, because the way I do it is sort of how the old Marvel model used to be, where the artist would tell the story in the pictures and the writer would just fill the space left for captions with narration and dialogue. That's sort of an automatic writing approach, which is basically what I'm doing here.