From Ooten Aboot, with an illuminating commentary:
In 1874, a similar culture clash happened in real life when Montreal’s McGill University challenged Harvard to a two game “football” match. To McGill, “football” meant Rugby, while Harvard followed “Boston Rules”, a version of Soccer with limited catching and carrying of a spherical ball. The solution was to play one game under each set of rules. Harvard won the “Boston” game, while the Rugby result was a 0-0 tie. Nevertheless, Harvard apparently liked the McGill style and adopted similar rules, so that encounter with McGill may have been the origin of American Football as it known today.
Okay, maybe something of a CIDU-LOL. Google Translate is not as helpful as one would like — I don’t trust “cable castanets” . I do rather trust “box castanets” but why “light box castanets”? That’s not a “light box” as used in graphics arts, anyway. And I think the primary joke is our stand-in character enjoying “vulgar castanets” instead of “common-or-garden castanets”.
Is her expression already reacting to this irritating oversight?
As we have asked a few times before, Does this Bliss cartoon work better in b/w or in color?
(As we probably have not asked before, Would this comparison slider presentation work better in this side-by-side format or in a vertical division?)
Our own Zbicyclist mentions the resemblance of the b/w paintings above to some works his family saw on a visit to the Fundació Joan Miró (Museum) in Barcelona, which features work by Miró as well as other 20th and 21st Century artists. This shot from the #FundacióMiró Foundation’s Instagram shows a work which was also shown in Zbicyclist’s family visit photo; the dot in the museum is either black or a very dark blue.
But then, don’t you also think “Such peacefulness”?
Perhaps a bit CIDU-LOL?
And another food-centered cartoon (older – you may have seen before):
I can forgive mispelins in comic strips, but the sloppy editing in the regular news (and the sloppy headlines) depress me.
Andréa sends in this update about Mutts:
Patrick McDonnell’s Mutts has a new look: “MUTTS might look a little different to you this week and in the future. If so, it’s because I’ve loosened up my art style, using very little preliminary pencils (in some cases none) and going straight to drawing in ink. It gives the strip more of the power and intimacy of a preliminary sketch, which I love. I’m also freehand lettering the dialogue”
I think this counts as a pun, even without doing a pun-joke.
The above sent by Andréa, who particularly notes Tom Waits getting mentioned, saying “Never thought I’d see HIM in a comic – made my day!”. And one of your editors had the pleasure of taking a couple classes from Professor Lance Rips, who liked to point out that his name constitutes a complete sentence.
Meant to post this earlier.
I learned the word prodigal in the context of the Parable of the Prodigal Son, and thought it meant something like all the characteristics of the guy in the story – wandering, absent, returning after a long absence and acting all entitled, etc, all packaged in that one word. Only much later did I start seeing contexts that wouldn’t support all of that meaning, and learned the base sense spending money or resources freely and recklessly; wastefully extravagant.
And then discovered that was what it meant in the Parable, too. But there had not been enough help from the context to make that choice clear! And this fits the philosopher’s point that, if your informant points to a rabbit and says gavagai, maybe they are telling you the word means rabbit — but maybe it means finger.
Sender Dana Kand I were in minor disagreement over whether the word-play element here is pun-like enough to count as an OY. “Neg/Q Scope Ambiguity” is certainly there potentially in the 3rd panel; but it’s not clearly intentional, and even less the point of the gag.
This Moderately Confused sent in by Rob is in what we might dub the “foibles funnies” genre:
Out of season
Two funny bits that seem like they might belong more to winter publication. The Kliban of course is a reprint from ages ago, so that makes sense. And the Liz Climo is funny any time. Also noticed by Andréa and used in a comment!
Afterthought. — This had already been in the queue for about a week, with the title “Whatting their whats?” as still shown, when I happened on this Frog Applause and wanted to postscript it for the wording.
Sources say that either the exclamation “Great Scott” is not attached to any particular person with that name; or else may be associated with Sir Walter Scott, or with U.S. General Winfield Scott. But here, with the talk of Antarctica and the South Pole, surely they intend some kind of glance at famous and unfortunate polar explorer Robert F Scott?
And another from Andréa, who calls this “Barely an oy”. Also fodder for you dialectologists out there.