1. Sort of Ewww. He wants her to understand it as not a “walk” because he doesn’t want her relieving herself on the dangerous mountain path. He anticipates not being able to avoid stepping in it; let alone picking it up and bagging for disposal later.

  2. I don’t get that interpretation at all, Dana. He’s saying it because he said “let’s go for a walk” and the dog led him on a hike instead, which he wasn’t prepared for.

  3. “Think of it as being held” — aawww! Except, of course, my mind immediately goes to “being held — hostage!”

  4. I too saw it as Powers has it and not as Dana paints it… But now I can’t unsee that interpretation…

  5. I see it somewhere between Powers’s and Dana’s readings. The guy knew it was to be a hike, and he “invited” the dog to come along. But now as he sees how challenging it can be, for both of them, he reminds her not to behave quite as she would on a regular walk. That includes relieving herself, maybe, but mostly running ahead and jumping around.

  6. My initial impression was the same as Dana’s, but I see the other and might lean towards it.

  7. I guess I see it mostly as Powers does. But that makes it a half CIDU in that I thought the human was telling the dog in the number of walks being counted this didn’t count, whereas it’s so arduous and hard work I’d the the human would definitely want it to count. Maybe as two or three walks.

    But I guess if the dog initiated it as “come on just a little walk” and the guys complaining he was misled it makes sense.

  8. Dissecting a good joke does make it less funny.

    But solving a mystery or having it explained in no way diminishes its allure; it makes it more appealing to appreciate its mechanical intricacies and how it fits.

    Dissecting Frog Applause… well, that just makes you realize there is nothing there.

  9. Disagree. Dissecting a good joke does not diminish it at all. I listen and read a fair bit about comedy and great jokes are carefully constructed, regardless of the medium. I find hearing about the creative process and the creator’s reasoning just as fascinating as a director’s commentary on a great film or hearing an author speak about the choices that made in writing a book.

    Having to explain a good joke to someone who sits there like a stunned mullet, that can diminish the immediate experience, that’s true.

    It seems this frog person doesn’t like that people say the comics are lame. The solution for that is to make less lame comics.

    The guy with the dog, seems to me, could have gotten out of this much earlier. Maybe the joke is that we’ve all had friends who have said “let’s go for a little walk” and you wind up somewhere you you never intended on being.

  10. Sure; though the CIDU site is more or less predicated on the idea that explanation is perfectly appropriate and often fun!

    I’m not sure if Teresa and the fans of Frog Applause mind thinking of it as lame. That may be something they embrace, even if just in a contrarian way.

  11. “Dissecting a good joke does not diminish it at all.”

    I misspoke. I elided. I meant that the act of dissecting a good joke is not usually as funny as the act of hearing the good joke. And a joke if not understood the appreciation of it after explanation is probably less (although it is impossible to measure) than if it were understood initially. That colloquial is what is meant be “Dissecting a good joke diminishes it” which … of course… is actually an entirely different statement.

    I guees frog applause’s attempt point is that: When a person sits there like stunned mullet and you explain the joke and the end result is “so the dog is investing in the stock market, so what?” the stunned mullet gets to claim the joke wasn’t funny. And by backwards logic if you don’t understand frog applause you the fault is just you didn’t see it; “it’s gossamer and you can’t dissect gossamer” (But in an attempt to appear modest puts it in self-effacing terms”).

    But I don’t by it. The good joke and the good mystery are “good” because they have something “there” and knowing it, and identifying it, doesn’t diminish it. So I think Frog Applause is making excuses for itself.


    “Maybe the joke is that we’ve all had friends who have said “let’s go for a little walk” and you wind up somewhere you you never intended on being.”

    I think that is the joke. I certainly have had that occur. My difficulty in seeing it on first reading was that my presumed dynamics of a dog-human relation is that the dog does not get to decide the walk; the dog takes the walks offered and is glad of it. But if a dog did say “I know a good little walk…” and the human “okay, show me where” I could easily see this.

    And I do rather like the concentrated look of the dog scrambling over the rocks.

  12. Dog seems to be using front paws as one would use their hands in climbing UP (as opposed to going forward around) a mountain.

  13. Wow! I looked at some other Frog Applause and this strip is much more accessible and contains a regular joke. Not like most of the rest I saw.

  14. If you use the GoComics archive or other source that provides older strips, the visual style for Frog Applause has undergone huge changes over time; and to some extent changes also in the approach to humor (or something like it…)

  15. I first saw the Bliss as a CIDU, but I think Powers has it right. The dog has an ambitious walk in mind.

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.