20 Comments

  1. I think this is about the seafood being bad, and killing him. The food just killed him, it’s other (unmentioned, pre-existing sins) that sent him to he-ll.

    I don’t think it’s related to keeping kosher. There’s nothing in the comic to indicate any relationship with Judaism, and if it was referring to kosher rules, the author would be much more likely to mention pork.

  2. Isn’t this like the exact same comic we discussed a little while back, only with a different caption? The artwork looks VERY familiar.

  3. i was wondering if was supposed to be a joke that we say things are sins and god won’t like them but to consider them objectively it’d be absurd in the cosmic scheme of things. I mean nobody can really believe someone will actually go to hell for eating shellfish (which would be annoying because nobody *claims* we go to hell for not keeping kosher). This could be vaguely related to the conservative fundamental opposition to homosexuality– the objectors keep quoting that single passage in Leviticus while wearing their polyblends.

    But…. Given all things, WW’s makes more sense.

  4. Cripes! How on *earth* could a simple “Save Image Location” Ctrl+V key stroke mess up like that. Especially as I *never* highlighted to copy the web page url????

    Andy way

    Bleh….

  5. Mr. Lee seems to use a lot of recyclable art (possibly more than most cartoonists, but he’s certainly not alone).

    And why not? If he keeps revisiting “Satan talking to two guys” or “two women talking in a restaurant” scenarios, why start over again every time?

  6. I’m with Oliver. This is about keeping Kosher. Or, rather, not… He could resist the temptation of the lobster thermidor and shrimp Louie. The paella (often served with shrimp, or sometimes snails, or other creatures of the sea that hath not fins or scales) proved irresistible, but he has no regrets.

  7. Even though Bill already exposed the red herring in his caption, another factor that makes it extremely unlikely that unkosher seafood would have anything to do with this comic is the typically “Christian” depiction of the “Hell”.

  8. Bill was joking, but since the kosher interpretation has its defenders, I’ll add a little more to what I was saying earlier. Not only is there no hint of Judaism here, this seems like a Christian hell. While Jews can believe in Hell, it’s not a strong or widely held part of Judaism. As woozy indicated, the idea that you would go to hell for breaking some rule isn’t really a good fit with Judaism, even as a joke premise.

    Now you could say that maybe the author doesn’t know this, or doesn’t expect his audience to know this. But to those not familiar with Judaism, I’d expect that the kashrut rule against shellfish is semi-obscure, so in that case it would be strange for the author to expect that alone to trigger an “I bet this is about Jews” reaction.

  9. The theory that the seafood was bad, and thus would kill him, would have been plainer if one of the choices had been salmon mousse.

  10. I guess without the Kosher aknowledgement this becomes like the “chemical warfare” outbreak; “run” cartoon. What an earth could “possibly” be the joke? As I am aware of the the shellfish taboo and the food is *all* about shellfish it was the only thing to go for that I could see.

    Although in no-way does it make sense. The “oh I knew rich food would kill me” simply didn’t occur to me and now that it does it seems to make more sense.

    … except it doesn’t. Lobster Thermador is “sinful” I suppose but Shrimp Louie isn’t particularly, and when it comes to “sinful” food aren’t desserts usually the standard? And although Pealla is considered “to die for” it’s not considered decadent in any way or sinful. (Unless you have a *severe* protestant/catholic streak that *all* enjoyment is somewhat sinful.)

    So… I guess the is like the “chemical warfare” cartoon. It’s people in a drawing saying things. … Yeah, what’s up with that?

  11. To me, it seems that this cartoon is poking fun at the phrase “[This food] is to die for!”

    Because he tried the food, he is literally dead, and now he’s recounting what he thought of the food he ate.

    He could have ended up at the Pearly Gates, I suppose, but that kind of defeats the purpose of sacrificing something important to eat something “to die for.”

  12. Could it be a reference to a seafood allergy? Serious allergic reactions to shellfish aren’t that uncommon.

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s