Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 62 posts

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#11

Post by sp332 »

Rallerbabs wrote: post #4
carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

As a kid, I always thought Garfield was absolutely hilarious. I'd cut the comic out of the newspaper and glue them into a book. Loved the cartoons. The Halloween one is my favorite. Up to my 40th birthday, I was given Garfield comics. I love what a gluttonous, selfish and slightly malevolent pig Garfield is. I especially love it when he kicks Odie off the table. I can't stand Peanuts, though.

Some Garfield strips are really funny. The first couple years had a higher density of actual jokes I think.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#12

Post by LeoPanthera »

Rallerbabs wrote: post #4
carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

As a kid, I always thought Garfield was absolutely hilarious. I'd cut the comic out of the newspaper and glue them into a book. Loved the cartoons. The Halloween one is my favorite. Up to my 40th birthday, I was given Garfield comics. I love what a gluttonous, selfish and slightly malevolent pig Garfield is. I especially love it when he kicks Odie off the table. I can't stand Peanuts, though.

I don't have anything to add except that I wanted to make it clear that you're not the only one. As a child (80s/90s) I thought Garfield was hilarious. I'd always ask for Garfield books for birthday/christmas presents and I would often re-read them.

I don't find it quite so directly funny anymore, but it does feel very nostalgic. Read Garfield is very comforting.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#13

Post by [deleted] »

carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

[deleted]

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#14

Post by InfiniteRand »

I mildly enjoy the Garfield comic strip, it gives a chuckle or two every now and then but is mostly forgettable (This article is a bit over the top though, written for commercial reasons does not mean not intended to be funny, I find it kind of silly to measure something by the purity of the artist's intentions)

I did greatly enjoy the Garfield and Friends TV show as a kid, I still remember the bit about "Wyoming" meaning no state here.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#15

Post by tgv »

alisonkisk wrote: post #7

Smithsonian Magazine (!) Is just blog spamming a Quora post. https://www.quora.com/Garfield-comic-strip/Is-Garfield-suppo... And this Garfield Isn't Funny meme is absurd. Newspaper comics aren't "funny". Daily comics aren't "funny". reddit.com/r/funny isn't "funny". Newspaper comics are for kids, and kids think Garfield is hilarious, 30 years ago and today. The idea that Davis would create an intentionally bad comic…

And they say journalism is dead.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#18

Post by coldtea »

carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

I mildly like Garfield.

Never particularly cared for Calvin and Hobbes (always found it somewhat preachy, tacky, and emotionally kitch, the "I think we've learned something today", going-for-the-feels type), though the writer is nonetheless very talented (and a lot of its strips are great).

The post also mentions the New Yorker cartoons. Never cared for them either, not because I "missed the joke", but because I dislike their faux-high-brow attitude to humor, given that the content is more often than not trite observations about society.

I also like lots of webcomic strips (Cyanide and Hapiness, Dinosaur Comics, SMBC, The Parking Lot is Full, etc), and comics like Gosciny, Mafalda, Mortadelo y Filemon, and so on, besides "serious" comics.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#19

Post by carls »

polka_haunts_us wrote: post #10
carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

>Were there in fact legions of people who _did_ find it funny, or entertaining? I'm sorry ahead of time if this comment comes off as strong, but I'm always confused by people who can't comprehend that there must be people who like thing it's popular to not like . I hate Adam Sandler, I think he's among the least funny human beings on the planet. I also don't question whether anyone actually enjoys his movies, because…

My question in the original comment is not meant to mock or poke fun at those who enjoyed it. I, myself, found it somewhat entertaining to read as a kid.

Rather, my question is more in reference to what seem to be incongruous facts: the article points out that the comic was not written with the intention to be funny, so then what explains its popularity as a comic strip?

I don't doubt that there are some (many!) who thought it funny. What I'm trying to understand is the discrepancy between its immense fame AND its apparent lack of humorous intention.

It'd be a little bit like if there was a famous band that was incredibly popular, yet in multiple interviews they reveal that they don't put a great deal of effort behind making appealing music. As such, I would be curious to understand what instead may be the other driving sources of their appeal (ex. good looks, marketing etc.).

For example, here are some other possible candidate reasons the Garfield comics may have been popular. I don't know if any of these are true, rather I would consider them hypotheses that I would be curious to hear others confirm/debunk:

* it was marketed very well and gave people the perception that it was _supposed_ to be funny, and if you didn't find it funny that was perhaps a result of _you_ not getting something. * there was a more limited selection of sources of comic strips, so the standards for what passed as an entertaining comic strip were lower than in our Internet age. * most people knew it wasn't funny, nor that it was meant to be funny. Rather they read it because it was the cultural meme of the day to do so.

Re: It’s Not Just You: Garfield Is Not Meant to Be Funny (2013)

#20

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

polka_haunts_us wrote: post #10
carls wrote: post #2

I didn't know how much of Jim Davis' motivations were commercial ones. It seems very at odds with folks like Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson: > For years, Watterson battled against pressure from publishers to merchandise his work, something that he felt would cheapen his comic. He refused to merchandise his creations on the grounds that displaying Calvin and Hobbes images on commercially sold mugs, stickers,…

>Were there in fact legions of people who _did_ find it funny, or entertaining? I'm sorry ahead of time if this comment comes off as strong, but I'm always confused by people who can't comprehend that there must be people who like thing it's popular to not like . I hate Adam Sandler, I think he's among the least funny human beings on the planet. I also don't question whether anyone actually enjoys his movies, because…

I don't find Adam Sandler that funny either. But as a dad, I recommend the movie Fast Forward to other dads.
Post reply on HN