Farmers

Cidu Bill on Dec 28th 2008

garfield-farmers.gif

Filed in Bill Bickel, CIDU, Garfield, Jim Davis, comic strips, comics, farmers, humor | 20 responses so far

20 Responses to “Farmers”

  1. Tim Dec 28th 2008 at 12:19 am 1

    Like every scale joke in Garfield, the joke here is that Garfield is fat. In this case, it’s that he has so many multiple chins he’s eligible for a government bailout.

  2. Charlene Dec 28th 2008 at 04:03 am 2

    He must be a farmer because he has a “crop” of chins. He must have a crop of chins because he’s fat.

    He’s fat either because the scale is sentient and can see how tall he is or because the scale thinks 30 lb. is automatically fat, possibly because it’s a FHM.com reader.

  3. Sam O'Vartea Dec 28th 2008 at 09:11 am 3

    But the Garfield depicted in the illustrations does not have a plurality of chins.

  4. John DiFool Dec 28th 2008 at 11:46 am 4

    Nor is he all that fat (unlike his original depiction when the strip first started).

  5. Kevin Andresen Dec 28th 2008 at 12:51 pm 5

    he got fat FEET, wowza.

  6. Matthew Dec 28th 2008 at 12:54 pm 6

    Garfield is never difficult to understand nor is it worth reading. I recommend the “Garfield Without Garfield” strip. IT’S interesting.

  7. S.P. Charles Dec 28th 2008 at 01:28 pm 7

    “Garfield Without Garfield” is interesting once, maybe twice. The joke wears thin REALLY quickly.

  8. Laddy Dec 28th 2008 at 01:43 pm 8

    How does this strip continue to survive? Garfield hasn’t had a fresh joke in 15 years.

  9. Bill Zilch Dec 28th 2008 at 02:31 pm 9

    Is there any real way to gauge popularity of newspaper strips?

  10. Matthew Dec 28th 2008 at 02:47 pm 10

    Yes, Bill. Newspapers do occasional surveys.

  11. Knute Snortum Dec 28th 2008 at 03:20 pm 11

    Mini rant: Newspaper comics are steady, stable, but don’t (can’t) take chances — and so are accused of being bland. Webcomics are unpredictable, “out there” and therefore sometimes more interesting, but they are mostly unreliable. So you take your pick: stable and bland or radical and unreliable.

  12. Lost in A**2 Dec 28th 2008 at 05:05 pm 12

    Newspaper cartoonists “take chances,” and sometimes they get
    censored for it. Consider “Modesty Blaise” and Mort Walker’s
    navel oranges.

    As for the present cartoon: you’ve accepted an anthropomorphic
    cat. What’s wrong with a sentient scale?

  13. Lord-z Dec 28th 2008 at 05:44 pm 13

    Sam - That is because Davis’ design for Garfield is to simple to show details like that, so we have to take certain things at face value. John is somewhere between plain-looking to butt-ugly, even though he looks practically identical to Liz, who is a total hottie. Garfield is extremely fat and Nermal is extremely cute, even though they look practically identical. Occasionally, they will go the extra mile to show hot and ugly, but it is rare.

    And this is a running joke in Garfield, not that they have much besides running jokes, that the talking weight always has a creative way of telling Garfield that he is fat.

  14. Powers Dec 29th 2008 at 10:54 am 14

    I wonder if it’s possible to mention Garfield anywhere on the Internet without someone feeling compelled to mention “Garfield Minus Garfield” at some point.

    “Arbuckle” was occasionally funny and at least insightful. “GMG” is just dumb.

  15. Matthew Dec 29th 2008 at 12:34 pm 15

    Powers, you answered your own speculation. GARFIELD MINUS GARFIELD is interesting & entertaining. What was ARBUCKLE?

  16. assdad Dec 29th 2008 at 02:10 pm 16

    Garfield, often, takes risks and creates unusual humor. I love Jim Davies because he is not afraid to create dark humor and allows his audience to draw its own conclusion. This may not be clear if one reads the comic on a daily basis but read through the full archive (a nice bonus) on the official website and it will prove to be much more complex and clever than most guys assume. (10/27/08, 08/04/06, 10/04/03, 04/02/08, 09/11/88, 10/23/89, 5/14/00)

  17. Powers Dec 30th 2008 at 11:07 am 17

    “Arbuckle” was the prototype, so to speak, for “Garfield Minus Garfield”. It showed only what Jon sees and hears, following the convention that he cannot understand Garfield’s thought bubbles. By removing Garfield’s commentary, we’re left with a profile of a man reacting and speaking to his oddly behaving pets, with no snarky punchlines and often little explanatory text.

    I’m not saying it’s better than the original strip, but it provides a different perspective. “Garfield Minus Garfield” is just surreal for the sake of surreality.

  18. David Dec 30th 2008 at 01:19 pm 18

    RE: Arbuckle — look how much funnier this strip is without Garfield’s reaction–http://tailsteak.com/arbuckle/

  19. Matthew Dec 30th 2008 at 01:32 pm 19

    Thanks, Powers. I looked at ARBUCKLE. Both it & GARFIELD MINUS GARFIELD are good.

  20. David Dec 30th 2008 at 01:42 pm 20

    I felt I should link the original Arbuckle “site” for commendation–http://www.truthandbeautybombs.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=4997&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply