Cidu Bill on Jun 25th 2013

Okay, these came out 18 days apart, but I’m going to count it.

June 7:




Filed in Bill Bickel, Non Sequitur, comic strips, comics, humor, synchronicity | 26 responses so far

26 Responses to “Tackronicity”

  1. Folly Jun 25th 2013 at 04:53 pm 1

    I thought that close to home was a rerun. I must have just been remembering the non-sequitur.

    This has to be deliberate doesn’t it? The identical storefront. The football player leaning around the corner. One is numbered 74, the other 75?

  2. Jeff S. Jun 25th 2013 at 05:26 pm 2

    Those are so close to each other, I can see why you are calling them as synchronous… even though they are several days apart. They are close enough, I might even say they were synchronous if they came a year apart!

    I’m with Folly… I think it was deliberate.

  3. Cidu Bill Jun 25th 2013 at 05:35 pm 3

    If it were going to be deliberate, who not run them on the same day? And what’s gained by two artists running the same joke?

  4. Treesong Jun 25th 2013 at 06:01 pm 4

    And what’s gained by the second artist doing it badly drawn and less funny (no bait)?

  5. James Pollock Jun 25th 2013 at 06:21 pm 5

    It must be badly drawn if you can’t see the bucket of worms flying through the air.

  6. minorannoyance Jun 25th 2013 at 07:15 pm 6

    Comic rule of thumb:
    anticipated violence (Man directly beneath falling safe is mildly puzzled by growing shadow around him);
    unseen violence (Oliver Hardy falls off a roof and out of sight; we hear the yell and see the water from the pond he landed in),
    and the not-quite obvious aftermath of violence (Far Side’s piranha in a bowl with a wooden-legged cat in the background),
    are all usually a lot more amusing than the actual violence.

  7. Jeff S. Jun 25th 2013 at 07:27 pm 7

    Maybe “deliberate” isn’t exactly the right word… but I do believe the second artist got the idea from the first artist. Perhaps “stolen” works better, or maybe “I can do that joke better”.

  8. James Pollock Jun 25th 2013 at 08:29 pm 8

    Or perhaps both of them stole it, but one had more ideas from elsewhere and didn’t get around to using it until later.
    Or, maybe the copying was the other way around, but someone at the syndicate actually rushed one of them into print before the other one. This sometimes happens with movies and TV show premises.

  9. mitch4 Jun 25th 2013 at 09:13 pm 9

    Yes, there is that bucket of worms … but it isn’t bait for the victim in quite the same sense as the money-on-a-string is supposed to be. It’s just bait for fish.

  10. Molly J Jun 25th 2013 at 11:23 pm 10

    The first one was a LOL for me. The second one not so much.

  11. furrykef Jun 26th 2013 at 07:36 am 11

    Not very plausible for one of the artists to have stolen the joke from the other, since 18 days just isn’t long enough. Most comic strips have a lead time of three to four weeks. Bill Amend says he gets away with two weeks, but 1) he’s Bill Amend, and 2) he said this some years ago and it might no longer be true.

  12. Bob Jun 26th 2013 at 09:52 am 12

    How do #72’s little, spindly legs hold up that body?

  13. Dyfsunctional Jun 26th 2013 at 10:26 am 13

    I wish I could search for them now, but there was a Sunday Curtis strip that was essentially, panel for panel and word for word, plagiarized from a Calvin and Hobbs that had appeared a year or so before. It was the one where Hobbs tags Calvin with a snowball and they get into a name-calling loop that ends in a physical tussle. They’re interrupted by Calvin’s mom calling him in for dinner, and the punch line in both strips was something like, “Leave it to Mom to interrupt our witty repartee.” I can’t imagine there wasn’t legal action.

  14. DPWally Jun 26th 2013 at 10:34 am 14

    Half synchronicity, the second one only managed one of the possible puns - the store sells tackle, but it’s the other kind of tackle! It missed the other - the store doesn’t actually sell bait, it baits tackle victims.

  15. NotAL Jun 26th 2013 at 11:20 am 15

    Easily explained, Wiley Miller and John McPherson are the same person. Hey, have you ever seen them together?

  16. Kilby Jun 26th 2013 at 12:11 pm 16

    @ Dyfsunctional (13) - Watterson has been very reticent about filing plagiarism lawsuits, probably because there’s not much to be gained, and it would only make him look bad. Nevertheless, the Calvin and Hobbes you referred to must be this one: http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1987/01/18

    P.S. Can anyone else find the Curtis strip?

  17. D McKeon Jun 26th 2013 at 04:55 pm 17

    The similarity of numbers may be a rules artifact - linemen are
    likely to be in the 50..79 (NFL) or 70..79 (NCAA) range:

    The esoteric level of the rules reminds me of the comment
    of why Americans like (their form of) football so much:
    it consists of committee meetings interspersed with
    outbreaks of violence.

  18. Lola Jun 26th 2013 at 07:23 pm 18

    I was just about to add this to the former discussion, came to search for it, and her it was at the top of the page.

  19. Mark in Boston Jun 26th 2013 at 10:01 pm 19

    Curtis usually plagiarizes only itself. In September, look for: Panel 1: aerial view of city, Panel 2: Row of apartment buildings, Panel 3: Window of apartment building, Panel 4: Interior, bedroom, Curtis’ mother pulling him out of bed to get ready for the first day of school.

  20. minorannoyance Jun 27th 2013 at 05:39 am 20

    Another possibility: Gag writers who either swipe and sell a published joke, or peddle an original to different cartoonists.

    The old Dick Van Dyke show had its comedy writer hero creating a sketch based on an idea from his small son. Only after the sketch airs does Rob find out the boy was describing something he saw on a kiddie show. One suspects creator Carl Reiner was writing from experience.

    Finally, it’s perfectly possible both cartoonists saw signs reading “Bait and Tackle” and thought, “football player.” I doubt either cartoonist would have gone ahead if he had spotted toe other’s version.

  21. James Pollock Jun 27th 2013 at 05:47 am 21

    “I can’t imagine there wasn’t legal action.”
    First off, it might have been an homage. Secondly, and more importantly, you can’t copyright an idea, only a specific expression of that idea. Otherwise, the first guy who said “two guys walk into a bar” would still be getting royalties.

    “The similarity of numbers may be a rules artifact - linemen are likely to be in the 50..79 (NFL) or 70..79 (NCAA) range”
    But linemen aren’t the only players who can make tackles. Any player on the field (offense and defense) may be called upon to make a tackle.

  22. Morris Keesan Jun 27th 2013 at 01:29 pm 22

    minorannoyance’s first suggestion at #20 sounds like the plot of a cheerleader movie.

  23. Elyrest Jun 27th 2013 at 10:55 pm 23

    “Otherwise, the first guy who said “two guys walk into a bar” would still be getting royalties.”


  24. Cidu Bill Jun 28th 2013 at 12:35 am 24

    Wow. Somebody got paid for that??

  25. Elyrest Jun 28th 2013 at 11:40 am 25

    It is rather a sorry mess, isn’t it, Bill.

  26. Lola Jun 28th 2013 at 01:38 pm 26

    It got a chuckle out of me.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply