I would have understood this if the word ‘it’ hadn’t been there, and would have thought it fairly amusing. Possibly a typo?
As it is, I haven’t a clue.
Stan has it. There’s an extra word that derails the meaning. The joke is supposed to be that HR monkeys are simple-minded nitpickers who ask about any gap they find on a resume because they can’t ask anything useful. That’s why one should always lie and not leave any gaps. I hate HR monkeys.
Yeah, I think Stan is right. Otherwise it’s incomprehensible.
I took it as another time travel joke, or extreme sarcasm (obviously, then, she doesn’t really want the job she’s interviewing for).
Either that or a missing period after “in.”
The problem might not be a (superfluous) “it“, but a “missing” word: if you place a “with” right after the “in” that TedD wanted to decorate with a period, the whole sentence scans pretty well.
P.S. It would have been interesting to see if there were reader comments about the grammar on the PMP website, but since it’s King Features, you can only go back one week before hitting the paywall.
Just reciting her memorized excuses.
TedD – but then the second sentence becomes really poorly constructed.
I imagine the artist was caught in two minds as to whether to write “I’ll fill in the bus ride over &c” and I’ll fill it in with the bus ride over &c” and whichever he decided on he didn’t tidy up the rest of the phrase correctly. I often do that when going backwards and forwards in with forming the formation of a written sentence and end up leaving a pig’s ear all over the place.
beckoningchasm, I don’t think there’s an interpretation where it’s not.
Of course you can always use the old Red Skelton joke to explain the gap in employment:
“What were you doing during these six months?”
“Six months.”
I’m with Kilby’s take on this. She’s treating the Experience section of her résumé as though it’s supposed to be like a total moment to moment live-blogging project. (Or *maybe* sarcastically attacking the expectation of what “being up to date” requires. But I don’t see that in how her character is usually conveyed.) d
mitch4: Isn’t that everyone’s take on this?
Maybe. But I see a difference between the “extra word” and “missing word” premises.
What’s the difference? I thought everyone agreed that she was talking about filling in her resume with a lot of tiny details. The different extra word and missing word premises all seem to me to result in the same meaning.
Okay I’m contrasting it with a reading that was not really being proposed, but did occur to me. That was about her doing the update WHILE riding on the bus, i.e. “I won’t even wait until I’m home [or at my home-base coffee shop] and have a chance to work carefully — no, I’m so eager to satisfy your request for an update that I will start on it the moment I’m out of here and at least seated.” But of course that is wrong by the timeline, and wouldn’t account for her including other past steps.
So instead, second try, she is offering an excuse: “I know it’s not quite up to date, but that’s because I was trying to fill [it] in while I was riding over here on the bus — and couldn’t do a good job of updating under the circumstances”.
But if it matters, amend my first comment to something like this: “Okay, I’m on board with what everybody has been suggesting”. Really that’s fine with me.
I understand now, thanks for explaining!
Cartoonist has trouble Englishing.
Okay – as I read it she exaggerating the up to date aspect. The only way, she is saying, for it to be completely up to date is for her to keep updating as she travels to the appointment and is waiting for him and is talking to him, so she says she will do that.
While I am riding on the bus here – I add that – while I am waiting for you – I add that – while I am sitting here with you – I add that…
Comics I Don't Understand 
I would have understood this if the word ‘it’ hadn’t been there, and would have thought it fairly amusing. Possibly a typo?
As it is, I haven’t a clue.
Stan has it. There’s an extra word that derails the meaning. The joke is supposed to be that HR monkeys are simple-minded nitpickers who ask about any gap they find on a resume because they can’t ask anything useful. That’s why one should always lie and not leave any gaps. I hate HR monkeys.
Yeah, I think Stan is right. Otherwise it’s incomprehensible.
I took it as another time travel joke, or extreme sarcasm (obviously, then, she doesn’t really want the job she’s interviewing for).
Either that or a missing period after “in.”
The problem might not be a (superfluous) “it“, but a “missing” word: if you place a “with” right after the “in” that TedD wanted to decorate with a period, the whole sentence scans pretty well.
P.S. It would have been interesting to see if there were reader comments about the grammar on the PMP website, but since it’s King Features, you can only go back one week before hitting the paywall.
Just reciting her memorized excuses.
TedD – but then the second sentence becomes really poorly constructed.
I imagine the artist was caught in two minds as to whether to write “I’ll fill in the bus ride over &c” and I’ll fill it in with the bus ride over &c” and whichever he decided on he didn’t tidy up the rest of the phrase correctly. I often do that when going backwards and forwards in with forming the formation of a written sentence and end up leaving a pig’s ear all over the place.
beckoningchasm, I don’t think there’s an interpretation where it’s not.
Of course you can always use the old Red Skelton joke to explain the gap in employment:
“What were you doing during these six months?”
“Six months.”
I’m with Kilby’s take on this. She’s treating the Experience section of her résumé as though it’s supposed to be like a total moment to moment live-blogging project. (Or *maybe* sarcastically attacking the expectation of what “being up to date” requires. But I don’t see that in how her character is usually conveyed.) d
mitch4: Isn’t that everyone’s take on this?
Maybe. But I see a difference between the “extra word” and “missing word” premises.
… and she’s not alone in having some confusion about how to write a résumé : https://assets.amuniversal.com/88196210240c0138e2f8005056a9545d.gif
What’s the difference? I thought everyone agreed that she was talking about filling in her resume with a lot of tiny details. The different extra word and missing word premises all seem to me to result in the same meaning.
Okay I’m contrasting it with a reading that was not really being proposed, but did occur to me. That was about her doing the update WHILE riding on the bus, i.e. “I won’t even wait until I’m home [or at my home-base coffee shop] and have a chance to work carefully — no, I’m so eager to satisfy your request for an update that I will start on it the moment I’m out of here and at least seated.” But of course that is wrong by the timeline, and wouldn’t account for her including other past steps.
So instead, second try, she is offering an excuse: “I know it’s not quite up to date, but that’s because I was trying to fill [it] in while I was riding over here on the bus — and couldn’t do a good job of updating under the circumstances”.
But if it matters, amend my first comment to something like this: “Okay, I’m on board with what everybody has been suggesting”. Really that’s fine with me.
I understand now, thanks for explaining!
Cartoonist has trouble Englishing.
Okay – as I read it she exaggerating the up to date aspect. The only way, she is saying, for it to be completely up to date is for her to keep updating as she travels to the appointment and is waiting for him and is talking to him, so she says she will do that.
While I am riding on the bus here – I add that – while I am waiting for you – I add that – while I am sitting here with you – I add that…