Friday, May 15, 2009

Comic 583: Reproductive Wrongs

creepy, not realistic
Aaaaahhh, it is good to be back. And man, what a crazy week I missed: that Race series was just disgustingly horrible. Jay did a most admirable job taking it down, and I'm not sure how much there is to add - we all know you like firefly, we're all sure that it shouldn't have been cancelled, but you just wrote some fan fiction - crappy fan fiction mind you - forgot the backgrounds, and didn't even write a cogent story. GOOD JOB.

Anyway Jay has now been relegated to the dank prison below the castle of my Comedy Empire so now it is just you and me.

Today's comic is so close to being something easy to deal with. It's so close to just being another pun (a half-decent one, I'll admit) and developer nerd type thing. But right around the second panel, it just turns into some terrible monster and so I have to deal with that too.

"Hey, can you do me without a condom?" What the fuck randall. This is not how human people speak. Not even close. And the proper response is not "OK" but "Holy lord, what did you just say?" I guess they are supposed to be hilariously casual about the matter but still, "do me" ? And then just tacking on the "without a condom" detail? That makes me feel dirty, way more than xkcd usually does.

And even ignoring that there are issues: I'd hope that a funny funny man like Randall could have thought of a funnier (and faster) way to acquire a young child than "doing me without a condom." Sometimes I feel like Randy just forces himself to add sex to his comics just to show that he can, that he isn't tame like Garfield or Blondie.

That said, I made the mistake of reading the newer one - 584 - before I wrote this, and that is so horrible it makes this look a lot better by comparison. I should have waited.

54 comments:

  1. I think he had a lot of opportunity for a much darker joke, like that she's barren or something. I probably would have laughed? I am not really sure and now I am feeling like a horrible person.

    Also I feel like 584 is a hearty "welcome back!" to you, Carl.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 584 is bad. I don't know what else I can add.

    Anyway, there might not be sex in Blondie, but there is creepy romance (specifically, "One Way or Another").

    ReplyDelete
  3. i.e. "That joke was nearly good; the only problem was the whole joke sucked."

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think I would have liked it if it was just 1,3,4

    ReplyDelete
  5. Haha, Anonymous2, I agree with you there.
    The second panel pretty much ruined it.. we don't necessarily need to know who she had sex with.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The third row of panels in 584 may just be the creepiest XKCD has ever gone. Randall broke some barrier today in stick figure sex, making it disgusting and weird.

    584 represents a new low, in terms of funny and creepy. I mean, Randall, what the fuck.

    ReplyDelete
  7. if she just said "...so, you busy tonight?" it would have been pretty sweet

    ReplyDelete
  8. Carl, could you please make these posts the same day each comic is released, instead of two days later? If you don't have time to write about it immediately, you can edit the post later.

    As things are, at least half of the comments for each comic end up in the previous comment's post.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 584 is horrible, no doubt, but I reckon 583 is pretty good as far as xkcd's recent output goes.

    People speaking/acting in a realistic way isn't necessary for the joke.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sometimes I feel like Randy just forces himself to add sex to his comics just to show that he can, that he isn't tame like Garfield or Blondie.After today's comic (584), I definitely agree with you. If I never see stick-figure-oral-sex again, I think my purpose in life will be fulfilled.

    As for today's comic, I agree that it would be a much tighter joke if the second panel was just omitted completely. Or if the programmer was seen at a bar or other spot where people have one-night stands. But then, Randy would have to be able to draw backgrounds...

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am somewhat disappointed with the brevity of this entry, as it is Crandarl's triumphant return.

    There's nothing good to be said about 584. Even the alt text is stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  12. First matter of importance: it is my birthday today! And Randall celebrated with a shitty comic.

    I don't even know if 584 is to be humorous or another one of those deep relationship comics, but it's not good. And stop with the sex, Randall. Seriously. We get that you'd had sex. We didn't know you in high school, and anybody that did isn't reading xkcd.

    Make more like yesterday's! Without the second panel. More good puns and jokes and observations. Or start that illustrated picto-blog Carl (you?) talked about.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just you and me, Carl? Just you and me?! THEN WHO ARE THESE OTHER PEOPLE CARL. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST US. HOW CAN YOU DO THIS CARL I THOUGHT WE HAD SOMETHING SPECIAL.

    *throws pots and pans*

    ReplyDelete
  14. 584 was made specially for you. He wanted something real easy for you to tear into after your break.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't even think there's anything special about 584! He's made the "People never really love each other, they are always jealous, relationships are an abyss of failure" at least a dozen times. And he's drawn graphic stick figure sex and cunnilingus at least once (487, IIRC). The main new things are that 1.) He for some reason saw fit to duplicate each panel nearly exactly, creating a vast redundancy, and 2.) He included a weak computer programming joke in the alt text.

    While it's obviously terrible, it's frankly a bit run of the mill.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Throw in a reference to an old meme and 584 would be an xkcd that exemplifies almost everything bad about xkcd.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "People speaking/acting in a realistic way isn't necessary for the joke."

    I'm pretty baffled that someone had to point *that* out.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think Randall was going for the shock value so much as the "this is how literal a computer-minded person would do it." Instead of "I wonder what would happen..." or "hey let's perform an experiment..." it's just "do me." at least, I'd like to think so, and hope that it's not the play at edginess you predict.

    Is 584's next-to-last layer supposed to be each couple in old age? Cause they're drawn normally. He could've at least given them canes/walkers, or shown each couple holding a different-haired baby with the guy imagining what the other baby would've looked like.

    Randall's bipolar streak toward romance continues -- "Women can do anything!" vs. "I am unworthy trash." Oh wait, those fit together into one magnetic region. QUIT STROKIN' YER POLE RANDALL

    ReplyDelete
  19. EW GROSS STICK FIGURE ORAL IN TODAY'S xkcd

    regurgitated lasagna all over my keyboard

    ReplyDelete
  20. In case you missed it in the #582 comment thread, I did a parody of 583.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Your criticisms of 583 are more of the incomprehensible "this comic isn't enough like real life" variety. Dinosaurs don't actually speak English.

    583 and 582 are fine comics, in the tradition of classic xkcd (so you won't like it if you don't like classic xkcd). Obviously, this means they must be sandwiched in between the unspeakably bad firefly sequence and 584, which is just really stupid, to ensure that the overall downward trend of xkcd continues.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ah, great. Furfag humor w/o the humor. Splendid.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I like xkcd but I despised the race series and this comic. I found them just awful.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I like that that race series succeeded in bringing together xkcd haters and lovers alike in its crappiness.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Cuddlefish PrimeMay 15, 2009 at 2:20 PM

    I still say that there's no replacement of the dialogue in panel 2 that would make the strip better than if you just got rid of panel 2 altogether. So we see her pondering a software bug involving young children, and then a pregnancy test, and the reader mentally fills in the rest. Thus, the humor comes from figuring out the absurd connection between two seemingly unrelated images. Even if that's not all that funny by itself, it catches the reader's interest so that they get more out of the PUNchline in the last panel. It's like the most basic format for a joke, and Randall decides to forgo the opportunity so that he can use the words "Hey, can you do me without a condom?" in all seriousness. Just wonderful.

    Anyway, glad you're back, Carl (which is not to say that I didn't enjoy Jay's incisive commentary as well). Can't wait for the 584 shitstorm to roll in.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Igloo McCoy, I'm going to assume you are a normal person, and thus despise #584 also. So now we have you despising all but one of the last eight xkcd... how big does that number have to get before you stop liking xkcd?

    ReplyDelete
  27. when i said i was done with xkcd with 583, i lied.

    i dont know how i stomached 584, i can't bear myself to look at it again.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Amanda is right. This joke had a lot of potential. If the comic elaborated on the woman's attempt to become pregnant and presented the tragedy of her barenness, and then revealed that all that tragedy was all for the sake of a pun, this comic would have been amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Same thoughts on this as everyone else. Good idea, but failed execution.
    The blog for 584 is going to be worth waiting for.
    I mean, stick figure sex was okay that one time. 584 is just creepy and eeuugh.

    ReplyDelete
  30. You know, when Randy draws his stick figures getting sexual, it creeps me the fuck out. Because now they ALWAYS LOOK NAKED.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Erm... you are missing the whole point. It was both a pun and a satire on programmers that programmers can't have babies. I thought this one was actually the best one in ages.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Erm... you are missing the whole point. It was both a pun and a satire on programmers that programmers can't have babies. I thought this one was actually the best one in ages."

    I'm a programmer. My wife is pregnant. What are you talking about?

    "Best one in ages" means a whole lot less right after the Race series.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Also, anyone else notice Randall edited this one? The second panel didn't have that second sentence initially.

    The second sentence doesn't help matters much.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Yeah, that second sentence is definitely new, and if anything it makes it WORSE because it's spelling out what the joke is.

    Randall, the problem with the joke wasn't that people didn't get it, it was that it was clumsy and creepy and dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Wait, really? I'm pretty sure the second sentence was there when I read the comic... I guess I read it later than everyone else?

    ReplyDelete
  36. "I'm a programmer. My wife is pregnant. What are you talking about?"

    What does that have to do with the joke? Randall could joke about raptors attacking him and it wouldn't have to be true.

    ReplyDelete
  37. You know, the text he was referring to was RIGHT ABOVE IT.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "What does that have to do with the joke?"
    Maybe the fact the anon above the comment had said the joke was "Programmers can't have children." Thus implying that *anyone* who programs cannot have children. Saying something like that isn't normal. But on meth it is.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Since you seem to have lost yourself, here it is again.

    "satire on programmers that programmers can't have babies"

    This doesn't make sense. How are programmers less fertile or more sterile than any other human beings? If it was a "programmers never get any sex" joke, yeah, I could see where you were coming from. As it stands, I have no idea what you're talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yes, it's a "programmers never get any sex" joke. How could you possibly take it as anything else? Again, you are a programmer who had babies, so what? How is this a more ridiculous joke than anything else in a comic?

    "Hey, can you do me without a condom?" What the fuck randall. This is not how human people speak. Not even close. And the proper response is not "OK" but "Holy lord, what did you just say?"

    If your going to say that, you might as well criticize Garfield for having talking cats, normal people would be freaked out.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Actually, it's just stiff and awkward.

    And Garfield doesn't actually talk, and even if he did, that'd be part of the premise, not bad dialogue. So yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Yes, it's a "programmers never get any sex" joke. How could you possibly take it as anything else? Again, you are a programmer who had babies, so what? How is this a more ridiculous joke than anything else in a comic?"

    What in the world? It's a comic about programmers having sex, unironically. How is it a "programmers never get any sex" joke? Are you in some bizarro world? Is it opposite day? Because here in Normal World, what you said does not make any sense.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Hey, Carl, if you're that much of a comedy genius, make your own comic so I can make a blog about how terrible it is ;D

    ReplyDelete
  44. You must suffer badly from mental retardation to rehash one of the most stupid arguments ever. You're not even original! I wonder what Randall would say about having stupid fans? (Probably not much when we consider how talentedless he is.)

    Bingo!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Better go tell Ebert to make a movie, too, while we're at it, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "You must suffer badly from mental retardation to rehash one of the most stupid arguments ever."

    Dude, what kind of a sentence is that? "You must be retarded, rehashing one of the most stupid arguments ever." Four words shorter and more graceful. You need an editor as well.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Seriously? I know this is used a lot, but why don't you tell a movie critic to make a movie since they know what people like to see?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Sorry, Kurt, we already had an anon say that. Try another thread.

    ReplyDelete
  49. This comic translated:

    "Look, they fix bugs and have sex! Now all the readers of this comic who fix bugs can feel warm inside in the knowledge that there are infact girls out there who also fix bugs and will have sex with them! They'll even be as flippant about it as to say 'hey do me without a condom'!!"

    ReplyDelete
  50. Rast, I have a very high tolerance for shitty webcomics as long as I don't get the sense that the writer is a moron. As long as I think that the writer is still being creative or whatever I can tolerate it. I don't know why, maybe just because the majority of web comics suck.

    ReplyDelete
  51. But why bitch about this one? There are no forced geek in-jokes. It's not a schmaltzy non-joke about relationships.

    It commits none of the crimes you hate XKCD for.

    It's a simple setup/pun delivery plus a ludicrous situation.

    ReplyDelete
  52. BUT IT'S NOT FUNNY.

    ReplyDelete