![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Unfunny cartoons
Ducks...dogs...horses...penguins.
How many daily strips would still be read if they didn't have a "crutch" animal? These are those strips that-- for no justified reason-- stick in a talking animal to get people to read 'em.
"Prickly City" is the top Weiner in this category: a "political" strip that panders to the political wind-- not funny, not cutting or insightful and poorly drawn. Coyote (more of a cuddly doggy).
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/prickcity.gif
"Mallard Fillmore": Slightly better than "Prickly City" in that it is unabashedly right-wing. Not funny, panders to ditto-heads, not particularly well drawn. Duck.
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/MallFill.gif
"Non Sequitor": Often funny without the talking horse, I think this was a sign of desperation or falling readership when he added the horse. Pitiful.
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/nonseq.gif
I'm guessing "Peanuts" started this trend (inadvertantly). Snoopy was hugely popular...but the strip would have been funny, clever and *read* without him.
There are plenty of other stips with animals-- Marmaduke and Heathcliff/Garfield, but they're gag driven and/or actually about the animal being that animal.
What strips can you think of? That-- without the animal character they would be completely ignored? Or, better yet-- strips that use animals as characters that you would never give a second glance to if they were human? ( I can think of plenty of "slice of life" strips that would die lonely deaths if they were drawn as people).
How many daily strips would still be read if they didn't have a "crutch" animal? These are those strips that-- for no justified reason-- stick in a talking animal to get people to read 'em.
"Prickly City" is the top Weiner in this category: a "political" strip that panders to the political wind-- not funny, not cutting or insightful and poorly drawn. Coyote (more of a cuddly doggy).
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/prickcity.gif
"Mallard Fillmore": Slightly better than "Prickly City" in that it is unabashedly right-wing. Not funny, panders to ditto-heads, not particularly well drawn. Duck.
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/MallFill.gif
"Non Sequitor": Often funny without the talking horse, I think this was a sign of desperation or falling readership when he added the horse. Pitiful.
http://www.akela.com/TEMP/nonseq.gif
I'm guessing "Peanuts" started this trend (inadvertantly). Snoopy was hugely popular...but the strip would have been funny, clever and *read* without him.
There are plenty of other stips with animals-- Marmaduke and Heathcliff/Garfield, but they're gag driven and/or actually about the animal being that animal.
What strips can you think of? That-- without the animal character they would be completely ignored? Or, better yet-- strips that use animals as characters that you would never give a second glance to if they were human? ( I can think of plenty of "slice of life" strips that would die lonely deaths if they were drawn as people).
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
I'm not familiar enough with Prickly City and Mallard Fillmore to make an assessment, but I do think that Lucy serves a pretty good purpose in counterpoint to Danae in Non Sequitor. Danae's Dad seems unable or unwilling to reign in his more politically motivated offspring, but Lucy has no problems being Hobbes to Danae's Calvin. Danae and Calvin are the same on a lot of levels- Misunderstood youth who is ignored/disrespected by their peers (though Calvin is more of a gamer-geek than a politico.) The biggest difference is that Lucy is tangible to Danae's associates, versus the is-he-or-isn't-he-real Hobbes.
Previous to Lucy's appearance in mid '04, Danae could not be used as effectively since her father would only give sublime comebacks, which generally went over Danae's head. Lucy is much more direct. That being said, Watterson did a much better job than Wiley is now, but I'll still read Non-Sequitor, it's among the best comic strips out there for me.
I haven't been keeping up with Get Fuzzy in the last 2 months or so, but Bucky and Satchel would also not be as effective as humans. It almost all goes back to the old WB cartoons, where you'd never be able to get away the stuff they did with non-alegorical characters.
(no subject)
no subject
And as a follow-up to your comment about "Non Sequitor", I remember a few years back when one of the more popular strips, "For Better or Worse", gave the family a sheepdog. I think comic strips are like sitcoms in that respect - when they bring in a pet or a new baby, the writers are starting to run out of ideas.
not always
no subject
Mallard Fillmore, ewww, good example there.
Die, Prickly city. Die a horrible louse-ridden death, I say.
on stuff
no subject
This site has a small visual sample of old comic art. http://www.aktv.lt/~skrusna/istorija/istorija.htm
no subject
no subject
I think the only comics I read nowadays are Get Fuzzy, For Better or For Worse, and 9 Chickweed Lane. Those are the ones also in newspapers; I also read some webcomics like Sinfest, PvP, Penny Arcade, You Damn Kid, and some others.
good point, sir!
It's clear from the thread that people have slightly varying opinions about what constitutes a crutched character comic strip or not, but it's all in the ballpark.
And as much as I think avians are usually fun designs, I really get tired of seeing those same three Fillmore poses all the time. ;P
The sunday comics in general are vastly unfulfilling, and I wrote 'em off some years ago.
I am also drawn to enjoyable visuals (thus lured by those crutch characters now and then), but after a many many attempts to glean something of value from even a tempting strip, I just lose interest and move along, too.
Besides, there's so much good online comic stuff, I hardly have time to drop a $1 on a newspaper fulla wasted space.
Unless I need the coupons. :>