These come from suggestions by Usual John and Jack Applin, both of whom call the 12 December one a cry for help!
From 5 December
From 12 December
Note that, the way the Six Chix rotation works, two comics a week apart will be by the same artist – in this case Bianca Xunise.
Is there a way to interpret these that isn’t dark?
From 19 December
From 26 December
Or to better adapt the question, Is that supposed to be a real gadget (that one of us might recognize), or an invention of the fantasy brain only?
And while we’re wondering, would a library help desk (or even moreso, a reference desk) offer to help patrons work their own devices? (Beyond providing the netname and password if they offer free wi-fi on the premises.)
OK, I see there is some sort of getting-even irony here. But how is it performed? Is there really a diamond bracelet? Who is getting it, if there is one, and how is that a revenge? Or if the oddity is merely due to an omitted “not”, would that mean the husband was expecting to receive a bracelet?
The elevator call button scenario is a familiar trope for Horace :
But others are not banned from exploring a similar idea:
\
An OY!
I didn’t realize how far back Eyebeam goes! But while puzzling over this comic in its November 2023 recycle appearance, it seemed that finding the date of original publication might help. In 1988 simultaneous streaming release was not yet a standard practice ; heck, they didn’t have streaming at all. Distribution for private home viewing was, as shown, mostly tape rentals ; and yes, tape, as DVDs weren’t around until the mid 90s!
And is that what the joke is? That somehow Joe’s Rentals has this title as tape even though it’s just now opening at the theater? Or is it funny-surprising that all these people prefer to see it at the theater rather than in the comforts of home? Or even — but now we’re working too hard — or even that the ice cream shop is a clue that they’re having hot weather, and that gives an answer to “why is everybody going to the movie theater?” : that they are seeking air conditioning?
In case you would like either an introduction or a refresher on Searle’s Chinese Room argument, that link to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy may be of interest.
That’s what this cartoon on Daily Nous recently seems to be about:
Okay, is it funny, to general audience? Is it funny, to an expert? Is it a good response to the Chinese Room Argument? Is trying to ridicule Searle what finished off Derrida?
P.S. It’s natural for comics fans to try illuminating philosophical point by consulting Existential Comics. But the only archive entry I can find there for Searle does not touch on the Chinese Room Argument at all.
The GoComics comments for this 21 November Strange Brew seem to not hit the target until they start asking if it’s Fortran or what programming language it’s in, or what the backslashes are for. Well, it’s not Fortran! But I am ready to accept remarks from one commenter (with a posting name that makes me think of one regular CIDU commenter!) explaining that This is in TeX or LaTeX or MathTeX. They use backslash all the time, for various things including, say , names for symbols. So the “\\in” you see in the top line produces an “element of” symbol…
Whether we can then go on to say that the represented math might be defining “line segment” or something like that, I can’t venture. We can’t go further, it looks like we’ve reached, erm, reached the terminus …
Thanks to Usual John for sending this in.
John points out “Some commenters on GoComics suggested that this strip refers to Charles de Gaulle’s practice, at this time, of exchanging U.S. dollar reserves for gold. While the timing works for this 1966 strip, I don’t see how it leads to a joke.”
My question back then was, always if you can buy bouillon cubes at the supermarket in chicken or beef, why not gold?
There is an excellent pun behind this, which requires just a bit of Disney to recognize. But then there is the sub-question of whether Liniers (the Macanudo creator) is coming up with it spontaneously on their own, or is making an allusion to 1960s U.S. avant-garde theater where a famous campus-set domestic melodrama of psychological cruelty used the pun as its title — as would be familiar to theater and movie fans of a certain age [geecoughzers!].
(BTW, de paso, here for completeness is the version in Spanish, which does not attempt to re-create the pun. Leaving the question, is there then any joke left at all?)
Sometimes she’s just so brilliant … even if not actually funny (nor trying).
For the longer-term fans than I have been, has she previously made this much use of photos and photo-realism in drawing?
The sense made of the Memory Palace idea here is more loosely evocative than a strict adherence to the traditional prescriptions for a mnemonic tool (or modern self-help and DIY expositions). It’s a bit more in the direction of emotionally evocative recollection, though not going as far into that mode as, say, Nate DiMeo’s The Memory Palace podcast on Radiotopia. Nor is it madeleine-sniffing. But it’s somewhere in that territory. But jumps back to face its original speculative-fictional premise in practical-level terms.
Comics I Don't Understand 