Comments on: Chop

By: Trish

Trish — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:13:03 +0000

the phrase in there was supposed to be “nothing in the rules that says you can’t look upon a “”"reflection”"” of said personage…” I think I accidentally learned some syntax rules.

By: Trish

Trish — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:06:47 +0000

Whether urban legend or actual royal laws of the land, I still don’t get the funny. Best I’ve got: maybe the joke is related to nitpicking the rules - real or not. You’re not allowed to gaze directly upon the countenance of royal personages but there’s nothing in the rules that says you can’t look upon a of said personage. After all, you’re not breaking the rules if your gaze is downcast as it should be. Ha ha! Smart guy! Off with your head anyway!

By: Cadillac Rancher

Cadillac Rancher — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:03:15 +0000

I’m not familiar with this strip, but it seems as if “Henry” has grown up to become king.

By: rob

rob — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:25:40 +0000

actually this comic probably would have gotten the author/artist executed 300 years ago, haha. i’m with brien though, that taboo is not some falsified urban legend, there have been many cultures who required servants and commoners to look away from royalty. however EVEN IF IT WERE an urban legend, the joke could still be funny to someone who recognized it either as an urban legend, or was one who believed it to be true. I could see how the joke would be missed for one who wasn’t aware, but it would not be mocking someone who knew it was just a legend (even though it isn’t a legend).

By: brien

brien — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:17:34 +0000

Well, it’s not an “urban legend” at all. I can’t understand why that phrase keeps coming up.

It’s a custom, and it is EXTREMELY widespread. Virtually every empire in the world, from England to Japan, followed this custom at some point in their history. It’s hard to get more widespread than that.

You people just don’t know your history. That’s YOUR fault, don’t blame the custom. All that being said …

This comic would have been funnier about 300 years ago.

By: Mark Jones

Mark Jones — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:06:39 +0000

Yes, I agree that this particular concept is *not* a widespread urban legend, and so the comic doesn’t quite work. But I disagree with Charlene’s assertion that comics based on popular misconceptions can’t be funny.

BTW, did anyone else think “Members of the public may only gaze upon the Duke of Manhattan with written permission of the Senate of New New York!” upon hearing the explanation?

By: Powers

Powers — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:15:36 +0000

It’s a new one to me. Never heard it before.

By: brien

brien — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:48:22 +0000

The custom of averting your gaze from the monarch IS very well known (except, apparently, by people who read and don’t understand comics). The origins of the custom are thought to be from 3rd century Persia, where it was said the emperor’s aura was so pure and bright it might blind an onlooker. The custom was borrowed by the west beginning in the late medieval period, where it continued up through the late Renaissance.

By: Winter Wallaby

Winter Wallaby — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:42:45 +0000

Mark, I agree that sometimes a comics can play on an popular incorrect perception. But is this a widely circulated urban legend? I’ve never heard of it before.

I guess it sort of makes sense. I know no one is supposed to look directly at Yahweh, and the king is kind of a god, so yeah. But the joke really doesn’t work if you have to spend several minutes puzzling this out.

By: Charlene

Charlene — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:18:17 +0000

No, if it’s wrong it’s not funny, not in a comic. It can work in prose or in dialogue because you can build a world where the narrator or speaker is ignorant of the fact, but not here.

So the joke falls flat for anyone who knows the legend is false. Worse, the reader who does know and who doesn’t laugh feels as if he or she is being mocked for not being ignorant enough to get the “joke”.

It’s simply unfunny and can never be funny.