The May 26, 1975 issue of the New Yorker called…

Cidu Bill on May 15th 2012


Filed in Bill Bickel, Hey Geezers! Comics!, New Yorker, comics, humor | 9 responses so far

9 Responses to “The May 26, 1975 issue of the New Yorker called…”

  1. Jeff S. May 15th 2012 at 10:28 am 1

    Hi, I’m Gleeeeeeeeeen Jones, CPA

  2. MollyJ May 15th 2012 at 10:35 am 2

    “Where hustle’s the name of the game/and nice guys get washed away like the snow and the rain.”

    Seems like a rhinestone lawyer would make more sense.

  3. Keera May 15th 2012 at 02:35 pm 3

    I think the cartoonist is trying to tell us that this dude works for the banks, making all those hedge funds fit nicely into the debit and credit columns, just so.

  4. Pinny May 16th 2012 at 10:26 am 4

    Side question:
    What IS a “rhinestone cowboy”? I know about the hit song but my attempts to find this out using Google has only helped me understand the meaning of the song, not the source of its title.

    When the song was named the author seemed to be using an existing object as a metaphor. What was that original object? Were there really some historical cowboys who wore rhinestones? Was it a miniature cowboy made out of rhinestone? Was it something else entirely, say, slang for a type of drug?

  5. Jeff S. May 16th 2012 at 10:57 am 5

    Pinny, it is a modern convention. A true cowboy came from a ranch and dressed in typical cowboy duds. A rhinestone cowboy is typically a singer from a large city that would dress up as a cowboy, but was far flashier than a real cowboy would be. His outfit could truly have rhinestones all over it. He sings about the experience, while a real cowboy lives the experience.

  6. Dan W May 16th 2012 at 11:53 am 6

    Thanks Jeff S., this is the first time I’ve ever heard of a “Rhinestone” [anything].

  7. Lord Jubjub May 16th 2012 at 05:53 pm 7

    There is a double meaning in that rhinestones are themselves “fake” jewelry.

  8. The Ploughman May 16th 2012 at 06:28 pm 8

    A juxtaposition between two unlike concepts to create an in-frame non-sequitur. This is where the New Yorker and “Family Guy” meet.

  9. Kilby May 17th 2012 at 07:06 am 9

    The title was clearly chosen because it was the release date of the single, but it just happens that there really was a New Yorker released on the same date.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply