Geezer Driving

Cidu Bill on Aug 7th 2017

B.A.: Apologizing for the fact that this isn’t a comic strip: If you’re not familiar with this iconic WW2 poster

driving1.GIF

Does this

driving2.GIF

work at all?

Filed in Adolf Hitler, Bill Bickel, CIDU, Hey Geezers! Comics! | 25 responses so far

25 Responses to “Geezer Driving”

  1. Winter Wallaby Aug 7th 2017 at 02:59 pm 1

    I don’t think so. That said, I think the original poster is pretty well known.

  2. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 03:37 pm 2

    I was not aware of the original poster, and yes, the second one works just fine without Herr Adolph.

    It would work just fine with no graphic at all.

  3. Cidu Bill Aug 7th 2017 at 03:50 pm 3

    Love it: perfectly opposite responses.

  4. Minor Annoyance Aug 7th 2017 at 03:55 pm 4

  5. Winter Wallaby Aug 7th 2017 at 04:26 pm 5

    Bill #3: Sesnopser etisoppo yltcefrep: Ti evol.

  6. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 04:53 pm 6

    Not perfectly opposite; I certainly have a high opinion of myself but I don’t believe that I’ve never seen/heard of something then nobody else has, either. It may well be well-known to 99.9999% of the population and somehow missed me.

    The thing is, being pro-carpooling isn’t just a WWII thing. Lots of people are pro-carpooling who have no interest in WWII at all. (See also female empowerment; Rosie the Riveter probably lost her job after the war but not because she was suddenly incapable of doing it.)

  7. Kamino Neko Aug 7th 2017 at 05:14 pm 7

    It works fine alone, but it works better if you know the original poster.

  8. narmitaj Aug 7th 2017 at 06:16 pm 8

    There’s been a woman-driven-off-in-”trunk” story here in the UK (where it’s a car boot) just in the last couple of days… a bizarre mix of the modelling world, hoax job, drugging, kidnapping, and slavery auction sales on the dark web. Pretty international: the victim was British, it all took place in Italy, a Polish man in the UK has been arrested. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40838224

    But as to the “joke”… well, if you drive alone presumably you can still hear the screams coming from your trunk. And possibly so can passers-by while you’re waiting at traffic lights.

  9. larK Aug 7th 2017 at 06:25 pm 9

    Which is why you never stop at traffic lights! When you stop for a red, you’re stopping for STALIN!

  10. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 07:54 pm 10

    “When you stop for a red, you’re stopping for STALIN!”

    Russia was our ally in WWII, and is again popular with some parts of the country. That’s why they’re called red states… those are the states that welcome Russia’s influence in elections.

    (disclaimer: Not really, the Russia sanctions bill for tampering with our elections passed the house like 430-2, and passed the Senate 95-3.)

  11. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 07:56 pm 11

    “There’s been a woman-driven-off-in-”trunk” story here in the UK (where it’s a car boot) just in the last couple of days… a bizarre mix of the modelling world, hoax job, drugging, kidnapping, and slavery auction sales on the dark web. Pretty international: the victim was British, it all took place in Italy, a Polish man in the UK has been arrested. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40838224

    This was a big enough deal in years past that cars are now required to have a way to open the trunk from inside.
    https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/10/20/00-27038/federal-motor-vehicle-safety-standards-interior-trunk-release

  12. Cidu Bill Aug 7th 2017 at 07:58 pm 12

    James (6), I think “I know the original and I don’t think the second one works without it” and “I don’t know the original and I do think the second one works without it” are pretty much as opposite as two consecutive responses can get.

  13. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 08:12 pm 13

    Bill, @12, says
    “I think ‘I know the original and I don’t think the second one works without it’ and ‘I don’t know the original and I do think the second one works without it’ are pretty much as opposite” (as possible)

    Yeah, those two DO sound opposite.
    But comment @1 isn’t “I know the original and I don’t think the second one works without it”. It’s “I don’t think so. That said, I think the original poster is pretty well known.”
    I didn’t say anything at all about whether or not the poster is well known, therefore I didn’t say the opposite of “the original poster is pretty well known”, therefore the correction @6

  14. Cidu Bill Aug 7th 2017 at 08:32 pm 14

    Okay, granted, “I was not aware of the original poster” is not the opposite of “the original poster is pretty well known.” BUT… I generally assume that if something’s pretty well known I’m going to know about it, and I suspect you have the same self-expectation, hence my interpretation that you were saying the opposite of Winter Wallaby.

  15. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 09:04 pm 15

    It’s pretty close to opposite; that’s why I didn’t say “What? We’re totally not opposite!” but rather “not perfectly opposite”

    In fields I’m interested in, usually, I’m surprised when I hear something I hadn’t heard of before. In fields I’m not interested in, I’m really not interested, so I wouldn’t be surprised at all, for example, to find out that there are great holes in my knowledge of 17th-century French poetry, or Flugelhorn music, or German grammar rules. As I said before, I have a comically-enhanced sense of my own importance, but not to the extent that I would believe that just because I wasn’t interested in something, nobody else is or can be, either. I got a bit of WWII “public service advertising” because I have a degree in speech communication, with a specialization in public, group, and interpersonal communication, and I took a couple of classes on the subject of propaganda (plus, my grandfather ran an advertising business), but I find most propaganda boring and uniformative, and wish other people did, as well.
    That said, this particuloar bit is well-crafted, and conveys the intended message… which I shall paraphrase as “carpool, dummy!” quite well.

    In conclusion, I believe this experiment is poorly constructed.
    It should say “Does this make sense to you” (second cartoon displayed) If you aren’t familiar with this “propaganda poster, (click to reveal)
    I think the second one works without the first, because the text alone works without any graphics at all. But my opinion is still altered by the fact that you showed me the WWII poster first. It’s possible that just a moment’s exposure is sufficient to ground the second image.

  16. Mark in Boston Aug 7th 2017 at 09:28 pm 16

    Why is there an exclamation point after “alone”?

    If there are screams coming from your trunk you aren’t really alone, are you?

    And if YOU can hear the screams, that’s not “nobody”.

    And if you ride with your accomplices, it may not matter that they too can hear the screams.

    And if you ride with Hitler, why not put HIM in the trunk and leave him there?

  17. James Pollock Aug 7th 2017 at 09:32 pm 17

    “If there are screams coming from your trunk you aren’t really alone, are you?”

    If the screams are like the sound of the beating heart from “The Cask of Amontillado”…

  18. fleabane Aug 7th 2017 at 09:36 pm 18

    I think it *only* works if you aren’t familiar with the original. If you don’t know the original it’s basic Internet age ironic cynicism black humor. If you do know it you can get it, but if you try to compare it to the original it just won’t work.

  19. Treesong Aug 8th 2017 at 12:42 am 19

    JP@17: Ha ha
    fleabane@18: for me, knowing the original (which I didn’t) greatly enhances the pastiche.

  20. Kilby Aug 8th 2017 at 04:33 am 20

    I had never seen the original poster, but now I think it was a strategic error to place it above the reworked version. This meant that everyone who was trying to work out their reaction had already seen the original (maybe years before, maybe only seconds in advance). That said, I’m just not sure whether prior knowledge helps or hurts the sick humor.

  21. padraig Aug 8th 2017 at 09:21 am 21

    Maybe we could make it “you’re riding with Al-Qaeda”?

  22. Wendy Aug 8th 2017 at 09:47 am 22

    I agree with Kilby (20), that they should have been placed in the other order. I also think the exclamation point after alone in the second one is dumb, it should be a comma (or semicolon? I’ve never quite figured out the right use for those.) Anyway, like Fleabane and Kamino said, it works without knowing the original, but it’s better if you do, I think. But maybe that’s just me, where I like to be in on the whole joke. And no, I’ve never seen this poster prior to this discussion.

    I do like JP’s suggestion at the end of (15), but James, please stop with the nit-picking. I like to read your comments because they are usually interesting and intelligent, but it’s annoying when you start off on an extremely pedantic path that really isn’t that important. Yes, it’s nice when we all understand each other perfectly, but sometimes we have slight misunderstandings that really don’t interfere with our communication, and should just be ignored. No offense, but it’s a lesson I’m trying to teach my kids, too, so it pushes my buttons. (For example with them: “Yes, I said ‘don’t stalk back’, but you know what I meant, so don’t talk back already!!”)

  23. mitch4 Aug 8th 2017 at 10:12 am 23

    something went wrong with the art in the modernized one. I think when they removed the passenger they smeared away the shading or lines that clue the eye to the difference of the back and bottom of the passenger seat. (And it doesn’t help that the upper edge of the windscreen is about the same color.) I don’t see an empty front passenger seat, I see a hard-to-parse blur — like a bubble of orange-brown foam rubber?

  24. Winter Wallaby Aug 8th 2017 at 06:14 pm 24

    padarig #21: Click on MA’s like @4.

  25. Kilby Aug 8th 2017 at 07:59 pm 25

    In return, let me say that I agree with Wendy @22: the “!” should never have been “salvaged” from the original sentence, and left in the middle of the new one. It could have been deleted, or moved to the end (after “trunk”), but if it were changed, then it has to be either a comma, or perhaps a colon, but definitely not a semicolon. In addition, the “N” in “No” should have been lowercase. And of course the second paragraph as well.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply