Dan Piraro also (as he does) used this in the headers of his weekly blog post, with a nice short commentary on familiar cartoon tropes and several examples of his use of the desert island.
Patience!
This reads as though she’s hinting he let the dog lick the bowls clean. Only, I don’t recall them having a dog?
Two Andertoons for the price of one.
Well that’s getting down to the point!
Nice to see the secondary characters getting featured on their own.
Here’s that “LOL-Yikes! (horror)” you saw category-tagged and wondered about.
Actually I think this is making a pretty deep point about the relativity of relativity.
(I.e., the fourth batch of these.)
This Argyle Sweater is from BillR, who joined with your editors in debating what is going on in the absence of a typical Hilburn Oy.
Their name could suggest they are of Polish extraction. And the weather suggests a northerly climate. But that wouldn’t be enough for a map to show the home as “North Pole”. Is there anything beyond red herring to noting they are at a mailbox and there is a tradition about letters to Santa getting delivered to some place the USPS designates as North Pole? Or … what?
This was a quite good three-panel joke cartoon. And then …
Hard to put a finger on it, but something about the “deflation punch” in this Brevity seems off. Like offers advertised as “BOGO” and you wonder is that a hip way of calling something Bogus? If CONVO means conversation, and RECCO means reccomendation…
Ah, so young to be falling into the essence of Meta!
And thanks to Shamie F who sent it in and says: “I think it has something to do with a flying cup looking for a flying saucer. If that’s the whole point then OY! I’m thinking I must be missing something though.” We think the default tag here would be LOL moreso than OY (a flying saucer is called that just because of resemblance to an ordinary saucer), but how does the gang weigh in on the “is that all there is?” factor?
Here’s one from BillR:
Very smart to use Peter’s name – the others are more easily identifiable.
But on the griping side of things, the wolf I think did not emerge a winner from any of their encounters. Maybe it depends on versions of the stories.
Thanks to Michelle for this LOL bit of pained irony:
Do they have something backwards, tho?
Hmm, the status as an OY may be slightly dubious, but it’s worth it.
After seeing this cartoon for a few weeks now, this character is the one who most pointedly clarifies for us the intent of the title Adult Children.
And yielding to the impulse to be a language complainer, we are happy to note that here the writer has stuck to the traditional term and called this an invitation, not the ugly newer form an invite. Good on ya, Maritsa Patrinos!
And zbicyclist kicks off a little debate by saying: Since Bliss has many cartoons in the New Yorker, he’s probably frequently asked to explain OTHER obscure New Yorker cartoons — which would make the sitting, bearded guy some sort of stand-in for the cartoonist. But to our eyes, the standing guy with the red sweater looks like the figure who appears again and again in Bliss cartoons.
But then zbicyclist rebuts with this example of an apparent Bliss stand-in (or a comic artist at any rate) with a beard:
But we have to ask: OK, there’s a beard, but which of the guys in the upper cartoon does this guy most resemble, to you?
Contributed by zbicyclist, who asks “Isn’t the guru giving him the answer he wants? Why is he arguing with the guru?”
Comics I Don't Understand 