Dirk The Daring found this in The New Yorker. Of course a statistically significant percentage of New Yorker cartoons are CIDUs, but this one seems close to making sense. Something about her big ears and the ENT in the window?! Anyone? Bueller??
Le Vieux Lapin also contributed the following, also from the September Funny Times:
I assume this is an Oprah reference, but beyond that??
Le Vieux Lapin offers this, from the September issue of Funny Times:
I keep thinking I almost get it: perhaps if someone recognizes the ?badger? it will become clear?
Phred sends:
Is that a 9- or 13-digit silly?
Thanks to Phred for sharing:
He adds, “I truly have no idea what this is getting at without Google.”
Jack Applin asks, “Which wall is this? Berlin? Separation of Church & State? Pink Floyd’s? Shakespeare’s, with the chink? Garry Trudeau’s?”
A friend pointed me at this, saying “Straight to CIDU — it’s ghost of sea creature? Very weak if so”.
I have to agree. I’ve enlarged it to the point of serious pixelization and still don’t get it at all.
From Chemgal:
She notes:
“Probably a CIDU for some. It was for me, but, it turns out it was easily Googled.”
Certainly was a CIDU for me!
(Title is an anagram, left as an exercise for the readers)
Leigh Rubin has been on a roll lately, slipping almost-NSFW strips in:
Toomey had one, too
I’m marking these Arlo even though I’d suggest it’s arguable that they don’t need it.
Findus shares
And notes: So the customer looks nothing like the models but is still pleased with the make-up. So what? Or is she buying a distorting mirror? Should I recognise the customer or the person the make-up is evoking?
What is she* taking? And why did a commenter on GoComics make a reference to TinTin? (OK, we have a theory on that one, but is it related to the comic?)
*Based on necklace and shoes; not intended as sexism, though I suppose even making an assumption based on necklace and shoes could be considered sexist. Sue me, I’m 62.
Comics I Don't Understand 