I don’t see what Wiley’s getting at…

Cidu Bill on Jan 29th 2013


Filed in Bill Bickel, CIDU, Non Sequitur, Wiley Miller, comic strips, comics, humor | 27 responses so far

27 Responses to “I don’t see what Wiley’s getting at…”

  1. Lost in A**2 Jan 28th 2013 at 11:19 pm 1

    Wouldn’t a painter be expected to be recreating the scene before him, not something from memory?

  2. minorannoyance Jan 28th 2013 at 11:30 pm 2

    He’s ignoring the glorious landscape before him to think about sex.

    Recall an actual commercial from my youth: A father is trying to show his kids natural wonders on vacation, but they’re watching 8mm cartoons on little viewers. It was a commercial for the viewers, and the gag was smart kids outwitting dopey dad by ignoring the world in favor of a minute-long Flintstone loop.

  3. Harold Jan 29th 2013 at 12:00 am 3

    Full moon rising?

  4. mark d Jan 29th 2013 at 12:11 am 4

    Painter looks at a scene which looks like the opening part of the creation myth and paints a scene which looks like a later part of the creation myth. Wiley is getting at creativity.

  5. James Pollock Jan 29th 2013 at 12:13 am 5

    “I paint what I see…”

  6. Stan Jan 29th 2013 at 12:28 am 6

    Did anyone else do a double-take when they first looked at the painting of the woman? The shading under her belly looked like some other part of her anatomy to me on first glance. However, this wasn’t listed as an Arlo, so I took a closer look, and it all makes sense now.

  7. Singapore Bill Jan 29th 2013 at 12:55 am 7

    It’s a comment on the nature of art. All art is a mediated experience. We own our interpretations of the art, but the artist mediates between us and the true scene, idea, or feeling. Our interpretations are only on what the artist gives us.

    Plus, fat chicks are hot. Just ask Freddie and the boys.


  8. Proginoskes Jan 29th 2013 at 02:04 am 8

    “I paint what I feel, and the other way around.”

  9. Kilby Jan 29th 2013 at 02:34 am 9

    The monsterous round belly (or thigh, depending on how you interpret the perspective) has some vague similarity to the rounded sun on the horizon (and the colorist enhanced that by using similar shades for both). The mountain looks like the draped negligee. This artist could easily have used Rorschach ink blots for his subject, but chose to get some fresh air instead.

  10. Kilby Jan 29th 2013 at 02:36 am 10

    P.S. @ Proginoskes:

    Realism is painting what you see.
    Impressionism is painting what you feel.
    Socialist realism is painting what you read (in Pravda).

  11. Terry Jan 29th 2013 at 05:55 am 11

    I would go with Shakespeare: “Shall I compare thee to a summer day.” Otherwise, I got squat.

  12. Bob Jan 29th 2013 at 08:08 am 12

    “Crack of Dawn,” people - “crack of dawn.”

  13. John Small Berries Jan 29th 2013 at 09:09 am 13

    Okay, mark d, I’ll bite. Which creation myth contains both a sunrise over the Grand Canyon and a diaphanously clad Rubenesque woman holding a bunch of grapes?

  14. Daniel J. Drazen Jan 29th 2013 at 10:57 am 14

    “Any excuse to paint nekkid broads.”

  15. Frank the curmudgeon Jan 29th 2013 at 11:27 am 15

    Is he painting where the sun don’t shine?

  16. J-L Jan 29th 2013 at 11:32 am 16

    At the bottom there’s this text:

    “A Non Sequitur 20th Anniversary Edition”

    Maybe this is nothing more than just an archtypical non-sequitur: From a picturesque scene of nature, the painter is creating an image of pure decadence.

  17. Roy Jan 29th 2013 at 12:19 pm 17

    The crack of Dawn?

  18. Dyfsunctional Jan 29th 2013 at 01:11 pm 18

    I can’t quite parse what’s going on with the woman’s lower half. There are some pink oval things and–God help me–a dark area which seems to be somewhat hirsuite. The more I look at it, the more salacious it seems.

  19. mark d Jan 29th 2013 at 01:52 pm 19

    John@12: The cartoon first reminded me of Magritte’s painting La Clairvoyance where a painter looks at an egg and paints a bird. Images for magritte la clairvoyant - The egg, being part of some creation myths, brought me to Genesis. The Grand Canyon scene in the cartoon led me to think of it as an illustration of God creating light and letting the dry land appear. I figured this was also what the cartoon painter was thinking as he jumped to the creation of Eve as a creative sexual force to which he gave his own Rubenesque spin. Artistic license is mandatory here as for Magritte and any illustration of The Bible, e.g. Rubens and Robert Crumb.

    But–on another interpretation. The painter sees a gorgeous landscape and wants to share it. But no one is near. The next best thing is to paint a gorgeous sexy companion. Perhaps she, like Fellini’s Anita Ekberg, will step out of the canvas.

  20. Keera Jan 29th 2013 at 03:58 pm 20

    I like Bob @17’s take. :-)

  21. DPWally Jan 29th 2013 at 04:11 pm 21

    The artist is looking at one still-life cliche, but painting another.

  22. fuzzmaster Jan 29th 2013 at 04:22 pm 22

    I was thinking what J-L said. Will this be one of a series of visual non-sequiturs?

  23. jp Jan 29th 2013 at 07:54 pm 23

    He’s painting Mother Earth, folks. Gaia.


  24. Lost in A**2 Jan 29th 2013 at 08:45 pm 24

    I don’t see the ‘crack of Dawn.’ Her left knee is casting a shadow on her right leg. The drape comes from the top of her left hip to about half way down her right thigh.

  25. Proginoskes Jan 30th 2013 at 01:27 am 25

    John Small Berries wrote: “Okay, mark d, I’ll bite. Which creation myth contains both a sunrise over the Grand Canyon and a diaphanously clad Rubenesque woman holding a bunch of grapes?”

    You’ve never heard of the Winslow sect of Discordianism then?

  26. Jen Jan 30th 2013 at 08:40 pm 26

    My initial idea was that this was a reaction to art: in a world full of awesome natural beauty, artists paint naked fat chicks. Charlotte Bronte made some similar statements in Vilette.

    However, Miller isn’t writing in the early Victorian period, so this reaction really doesn’t apply.

  27. Larry Heart Feb 14th 2013 at 06:57 am 27

    He loves fat chicks and he sees them whatever he’s looking at

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply