This is going to be a short post because, well, there's not much to say. This comic doesn't offend me or enrage me, but sure as fuck doesn't amuse me or make me laugh. I think the joke it just kind of dumb. I agree with the people who say it seems like a joke you'd find on bash.org, but I don't think that should detract from it - bash.org is funny, so emulating it can be funny as well. The difference is the humor there comes from the fact that they print real conversations (or at least ostensibly real ones - all I know is I sent them a fake one and they never printed it) where Randall makes up stuff and when you are making up stuff, a funny quip or humorous event needs to be a lot funnier than in real life.
Here, try it at home: Imagine something really funny that someone once improvised. This could be like at an improv comedy show or just in real life, something clever someone came up with on the spot. Now go tell the joke to someone else, and see what they think. Probably they will not think it was nearly as good as you did when you first heard it. There's something about knowing it was improvised, knowing it was in some way real, that adds a lot. And that's why today's comic fails to amuse me. TRY AGAIN.
Something Nice To Say: He took the time to draw stuff today! that is nice. Though do you see how the chair is twice as tall in panel 2 as it is in panel 3?
Here, try it at home: Imagine something really funny that someone once improvised. This could be like at an improv comedy show or just in real life, something clever someone came up with on the spot. Now go tell the joke to someone else, and see what they think. Probably they will not think it was nearly as good as you did when you first heard it. There's something about knowing it was improvised, knowing it was in some way real, that adds a lot. And that's why today's comic fails to amuse me. TRY AGAIN.
Something Nice To Say: He took the time to draw stuff today! that is nice. Though do you see how the chair is twice as tall in panel 2 as it is in panel 3?
96 comments:
598 - Hm. I actually thought the joke was decent. The execution seemed stumbly, but eh. I also liked the drawing of the modem.
CONS: Yet more obsession with sex. The thing he does where he draws people floating above chairs bugs me. I'm not sure why the porn site's logo is just a scribble.
Because turning off a monitor is the same as going without internet.
I mentioned this on the couldbebetter post, but frame two of the new comic looks like it has a streaming flash-video in it. I'm pretty sure embedded flash video didn't become widely available until the youtube era started in 2005 (way after the 14.4k days).
Even if we're assuming he had dialup until last week, when given the option, who the hell would *stream* porn over dialup? You always just set a bunch of downloads and go to sleep. Everyone knows that. Thus the porn *collection* that we had to archive on our hard drives and hide from parents and siblings. Jeez. Sometimes I feel like Randall was born yesterday.
(the anon post above this one is also mine. Carl, what's up with the comments section? I can't post using my GoogleID)
um try harder? I am succeeding at it, apparently.
Guys you all missed the worst part of 598: more horrible stick figure oral sex. ewwwwwwwwww
Eh, this one isn't funny, and there's no saving it.
Today's however actually had an original . . . wait is it? I swear that I've heard this one befo- OH.
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1547#comic
Alt-text almost, NEARLY saved it from being totally unenjoyable. If I hadn't noticed the ripoff, it might be a mildly appealing comic.
Long time reader, first time writer. I just wanted to say that XKCD has just disgusted me with its recent incessant depictions of sex. Can Randall go two days without using sex as a crutch for jokes?
Hunter Barry: God, it used to be that he could. I don't know what the hell his deal is. But I really want to know. This isn't a fluke. And as much as I hate to admit it, I really doubt this is Randy just discovering sex. Maybe he's just discovering casual sex, but even then, it seems unlikely.
Maybe he read something that talks about sex a lot, and decided "That sounds fun, I'll take six." I mean, it isn't entirely implausible. But usually when you do that, it's not because you think "man, I need more SEX JOKES." Usually it's like "man, these are so raw/honest/human/whatever, I want to do that too."
So it's a weird thing if you read one of those and it's like "man, sex jokes. GOTTA HAVE THE LIVING FUCK OUT OF THEM."
Since Randall seems to have sex on the brain, I decided to do some erotic fanart of everybody's favorite xkcd character, Mr. Hat!
Who the fuck starts a conversation with "Constant novelty saps my initiative."
Please, just call me Hunter. The kicker is I was one of the late converts to XKCD, picking it up in March. And, within three months, he's utterly lost the creative spark he had in his earlier works.
I think the problem is success got to his head, so rather than talk about things that are commonplace in a unique way (like funny way of walking on colored tiles or the fear of Jurassic Park velociraptors), he only talks about obscure things he likes (like Firefly and Linux and incredibly open depictions of sex).
On an unrelated note, which do you find more offensive: the attempted portrayal of graphic sex in stick figure form or the frequency with which it occurs?
Hunter, I would say the graphic sex in general is creepy- but it seems like Randy thinks he can get away with it because they're stick figures. Truth is, graphic sex is graphic sex. And furthermore, why is it so often cunnilingus?
I'm really not sure. They're both really damn disturbing.
Previous to this it was just joked about here and there, maybe something under bedsheets. How many times have we seen oral stick sex in the last month or two?
Hunter: That would be my diagnosis: he was doing well, then he basically got a bunch of rabid fans who told him everything he ever thought up was brilliant, and he came to believe them.
Re sex, I'm mostly bothered by the frequency and the generally tawdry and unnecessary nature of it. These comics are not improved and the sex is just not adding any value. At all.
(ps guys I am totally calling Crandarl out, he has just run out of ways to troll us so he is just going to keep using sex until we give up I AM ON TO YOU CRANDARL)
I liked today's comic. This fills me with self-loathing.
@Malethoth
That's epic. Please post it on the xkcdcouldbebetter.proboards.com messageboard!
Re: Sexy Mr. Hat
My eyes burn. They burn for I have no tears left with which to cry.
RANDALL MUNROE STALKS MEGAN
http://imager.cc/page18/takethismylove/
"Though do you see how the chair is twice as tall in panel 2 as it is in panel 3?"
...What? The chair remains about the same basic size.
Measuring fail.
TRY AGAIN
The chair is clearly taller in panel 2. Is Carl exaggerating? Yes. Is he mistaken? No.
@ Malethoth
There's no semicolon in Python
@Cuddlefish: Meh. I just Googled "python tutorial" to see if I could find basic commands, and then tried to remember which ones xkcd mentioned. Then I used >>> and semicolons because they look program-y.
CARL GET OUT OF MY HEAD
JACK GET OUT OF CARL'S HEAD
@Malethoth
Well, I guess it's fine enough, it's more like the fake olde englishe used for humorous effect (which of course does irritate some people). Just had to nitpick. :P
ROB GET OUT OF CARL'S BLOG
>:(
BLOG GET OUT OF HEAD'S RANDALL?
598's redeeming qualities are variety in the drawings, and a halfway decent joke. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since it's likely that he came up with that without seeing the SMBC one, but it doesn't speak for him that yet again, he's doing a joke that another webcomic did a few days earlier, like the Papyrus one.
The reason it's always cunnilingus, by the way, is because Randall wants to make it obvious to the ladies that he's there to service -them-.
am i reaching when i say that Randy often depicts cunnilingus to appear more attractive? in a "oh hey you guys i do this and am into it" kind of way?
Mal: omfg. That is the funniest thing I have seen all day. I mean I just woke up so I guess that is not saying much but OH MAN
Timofei: I stand corrected. /That/ is the funniest thing I have seen all day (sorry Maletoth!). GOD I CAN'T STOP LAUGHING
oh man Fred you took my point before I even read your comment rawr
why am i up at 2am
anyway 597 was just very blah. An obvious joke, and as you said it would have been better as a real-life convo.
Malethoth, you made me vomit into my mouth a bit. Mission accomplished?
Well, I've personally never read any self-aggrandising motives into Randy's depictions of cunnilingus. Maybe it was because I was too busy graoning I read the first panel. I'm tired of Randy's obsession with sex lately. No, I'm tired of how horrible the sex jokes are. If they were remotely fresh, original or funny it would be worthwhile reading. No, we get stick figure Randy going 'I have a bizarre fetish and I asked my gf to go along with it, hurr hurr'. Also, adding the internet into jokes doesn't not automatically = funny. Puh-lease.
As for the art, the stick figures in 598 were very weird looking, what with the respective women in what were presumably the video and a banner ad both had their arms sticking up in the air. Like they were in a 'yay!' kind of position.
Sorry I made this into a comment on 598 instead of 597 but the latter was so boring it's not even worth commenting on, if I could find something to comment on about it, anyway.
I found 598 alt text amusing.
Wait, what? Bash.org is funny? Huh, I don't know who to trust for comedy insight any more.
Don't mind me, just posting so I can subscribe to comments.
@Mal that hat man art is incredible haha
"This comic wasn't funny because it wasn't improvised!!" is yet another entry to my imaginary list of "completely inane and pointless criticism of xkcd". Thanks.
"No, we get stick figure Randy going 'I have a bizarre fetish and I asked my gf to go along with it, hurr hurr'."
That's not a "bad joke" problem; that's simply a "not a member of the target audience" problem.
GET OVER IT.
598 would be great if there hadn't been so many sexual comics lately, but there's just so much oversaturation of dirty, unfunny stuff lately on xkcd that it's hard to appreciate a good one with a dirty joke.
Who, exactly, is the target audience of this latest group of horrid sex jokes?
That kind of argument takes me way back, to http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/24/ even.
I'd be perfectly satisfied if Randall came out and sad that his comic is no longer for people expecting effort, art, good humor, etc. But until he does, I think we're all still the target audience.
ROB GET-
wait, what?!
!
???
?
Fernie Canto's Response to Criticism:
1. Claim everyone who dislikes a joke isn't part of the target audience
2. ???
3. Profit
""This comic wasn't funny because it wasn't improvised!!" is yet another entry to my imaginary list of "completely inane and pointless criticism of xkcd". Thanks."
That's not a "bad statement" problem; that's simply a "not a member of the target audience*" problem.
GET OVER IT.
* Target audience = People who hate xkcd.
Also, FWIW, I don't find FML amazing like everyone else seems to because I have the sneaking suspicioun that most to all of them are fake. The idea that these are real things that happen to real people is what makes them good. The reality that most of them are made up makes me not enjoy it at all.
That is what Carl is getting at. This comic, being basically a bash log, holds to the rules of bash logs. Namely, they're supposed to be funny because they are actual conversations. It's not really funny that imaginary stick person can't control themselves, but it might be funny if this was a log of actual events.
So I don't really see how it's an inane or pointless criticism of this particular comic. You can disagree with it, but that doesn't make it an unfair point.
@Fernie -- Seriously, who IS the target audience? Who would find it funny to listen to a guy simply say "Here are the ways that my girlfriend and I are quirky! (P.S. these ways are sexy hot.)"?
The fuck, Fernie. Your comment doesn't even make sense.
YOU DNOT FIND IT FUNNY BECAUSE YOUR NOT IT'S TARGET AUDIENCE
Gee, Bill. Then what is xkcd's target audience?
PEOPLE WHO FIND XKCD FUNNY YOU IDORT. GET OVER IT
ANONYMOUS STOP STROKING RANDALL'S COCK
John what the hell is FML?
But it's so TINY! He must be so lonely, me being the only one who can give him the love he needs.
I think he's referring to fmylife.com, stories of sad teens or something.
My Life Is Average is way better.
Fernie Canto:
That's not a "bad criticism" problem; that's simply a "not a member of the target audience" problem.
The target being people sick of this shit.
GET OVER IT.
Also hahaha my last comment's captcha was "mishon"
you know like Fernie-boy appears to be a man on a 'mishon': to white knight until Randy cares about his meager existence. Maybe he should email him offering disappointing blowjobs.
I always imagined Fernie to be a woman. And by always I mean for the past two weeks I've been following this blog.
Fernie's bullshit excuse sounds like just another variation of the No True Scotsman argument.
You don't think xkcd is funny? Then you're probably not its target audience; nerds! Oh wait, you say you're a nerd? We'll you're not a real nerd.
Because as we all know, Randall Patrick Munroe the First is the infallible God-Emperor of Nerdkind. The God-Emperor is flawless, and thus incapable of making bad jokes.
The fool hath said in his heart, xkcd is unfunny. If a person is found saying xkcd is unfunny, as he would say CAD is unfunny, it is an abomination upon him. He shall surely be put to death; his blood shall be upon him. Amen.
I've been thinking about making a "CAD sucks" blog...
@Tim: no need, it's already widely acknowledged.
It would still be fun.
It wouldn't be fun. After all, you'd have to read CAD.
At least xkcd is not as horrid as CAD.
But CAD IS funny.
In that it's so unredeemably awful.
@tim: if you are into torture yes.
What's all this then?
It's a blog criticising you, obviously.
shame that's not the real Randy
How do you know he's not really randy?
(HAHA I MADE A SEX-RELATED PUN. Maybe Randall can turn that into a comic and get a few more mouths arc-welded to his crotch.)
It's kinda funny, because what does the front page of XKCD say? PORN. That's all it is. We got porn, people.
Randall Munroe tells s about his life: http://i43.tinypic.com/c2qs3.png
Randcarl, could you stop doing the "i'm going to say one nice thing" if you're just going to use it to be passive aggressive? Just go "i hate b", not "i like a, although it reminds me of b, which i hate". That's not what we're paying you for.
Captcha: "ballsgus". Hmm.
lookie, the xkcd people are still going at it trying to include xkcd in this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_(typeface)
That is just so sad.
We're paying him?!?!?
Crap! I never got my bill! No one tells me these things (grumble, grumble)
Googling "site:en.wikipedia.org xkcd -user" yields sad results.
Consider:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanket_fort
Tim! Awesome! Post it to the xkcdcouldbebetter.proboards.com message board!
I feel like nobody even knows about it.
Choof: Maybe that is because Carl has still not added a link to it on the sidebar
Ch00f:
I will start making a point of doing at least one edit of every comic. I've been meaning to for a while. But sometimes the funny just don't flow, nah mean?
I salute the anonymous user who removed the xkcd link from the blanket fort page.
It had no business being there.
Oh man! It's him!!!
Can I get your autograph?!?!
this is why I'm an alcoholic
I actually liked the 597 comic....except for the ridiculous fucking wording at the beginning...god what kind of douche bag says shit like that. Constant novelty saps my initiative. Shut the fuck up and write a god damn comic please. UGH.
"I'm not sure why the porn site's logo is just a scribble."
Easy - because Randy wouldn't want anyone to think he actually knew any porn sites, God forbid!
@ Dave
...Unless the porn site's title is... XKCD???
The Apacolypse one was surprisingly decent to the small group familiar with the Bacon-Erdos number.
Emphasis on SMALL.
599 - This is really obscure. There's a sort of math thing called the "Erdos number," which refers to how many degrees of separation you are from a really prolific mathematician, Paul Erdos. The guys are reducing their Erdos numbers.
Alt-text confirms by linking it to the more common Kevin Bacon game.
CONS: Too many panels for a non-joke that's just an incredibly obscure reference. That beret guy returns. The math in the fifth panel is completely irrelevant. It used to be that Randall prided himself on including correct math, right? Like, 54 is an actual physics equation and graph. 599 is just random math-y symbols.
PROS: That first panel is pretty cool.
PROS:
Also, HEY, 597 fans, how do you think it compares to 77?
Also, 599 is the same joke as 567 and 102, re: Nerds take advantage of something really incredible and significant to do something idiosyncratic and nerdy and haha! At least this one switched up the formula a bit by using the apocalypse instead of time travel, although it would've been reformulated really easily into a joke about mathematicians travelling back in time to work with Erdos instead of stopping the Spanish Inquisition.
Damn I just tried to comment about it, but I guess I got too late. It is the same joke indeed.
Also, the detached heads offense here is FAR beyond acceptable. In the second to last panel, it seems like the head will just roll, and Erdos is getting some brainz.
I didn't think the idea of an Erdos number was all that obscure among math people. As in, xkcd's target audience.
I guess it's less well-known than I thought?
It's the sort of math thing that you'd never really learn just taking courses in high school or even pre-reqs for something in college, the way you might learn some of the other stuff. You pretty much have to be a math major, and a math major who spends a lot of time shooting the breeze with faculty.
I liked 599 too. what is wrong with me
Pros: Art. Actual, not informed, wackiness. He didn't copy-paste the running frame.
I interpreted the non-math as the Randall avatar just making a bunch of crap up because, you know, it's the apocalypse and nobody's going to seriously peer-review shit.
In which case it wouldn't really count for the Erdos number at all, would it? I mean, the Erdos number is based on collaborative publications that link you to Erdos, not random scribblings that he signed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paul_Erd%C5%91s&action=history
sigh
I was vaguely aware of what the Erdos number was referring to, but for the reason Malethoth K mentions I didn't get it.
Wikipedia has
"It is jokingly said that Baseball Hall of Famer Hank Aaron has an Erdős number of 1 because they both autographed the same baseball when Emory University awarded them honorary degrees on the same day."
So I have to know the reference AND have to know some trite wikipedia trivia?
Seriously, get an editor
holy shit why does every fucking xkcd inspire a retarded wiki edit war
maybe randall could make a comic about THAT shit
Like this? http://xkcd.com/446/
Sort of.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqifx0wwHL8
3:06
Post a Comment