A club in the kennel

Stan sent this in, and says ” I don’t understand this at all. What’s the joke? Is it that he’s talking to a boxer? If so, what’s he pointing at?” . Here at the CIDU offices, the conversation has been about how the Fight Club line applies to a Kennel Club. Especially if that doesn’t mean a club organized in the kennel, with dogs as its membership, but retains the usual meaning of an organization of human dog-fanciers, that sponsors shows and pedigree registrations.

11 Comments

  1. Well, it pretty clearly doesn’t work well sing the “Westminster Kennel Club” sense of the term. So I suppose the dogs had a sort of Fight Club going on at the kennels. But no, that would be Dog Fighting, which is not at all on the radar for the world of MG&G. So it was a club for dogs, for socializing, but not fighting, but in some way needing to be kept secret. Nah, too much.

  2. Don’t overthink it.

    “Kennel Club” is a recognized phrase about dogs. “Fight Club” is a movie with a catch-phrase that is a recognized current culture reference. They are both of the form “x Club”. The joke is applying associations of one (“fight club” and its famous catch phrase) to the other (“Kennel Club” and dogs).

    That’s all it is. It’s not good and its stupid but … it’s enough and it works and there’s nothing to be confused about… unless one wants or expects more. If one wants more, one is going to be be disappointed. If one expects more one is going to be confused. But the person responsible for the confusion is not the cartoonist but the reader for have unrealistically high expectations.

  3. This is a proto-joke: “The line from Fight Club is sorta funny because it’s self-referential, and here’s another ‘club’, so it’ll be funny.” Sorry, no.

  4. “But no, that would be Dog Fighting, which is not at all on the radar for the world of MG&G”

    Why not? The dogs are sentient and talk, but they are still dogs and MG&G wallows in the ugly aspects of life so I imagine dog fights are very much in the world of MG&G.

  5. “But the person responsible for the confusion is not the cartoonist but the reader for have unrealistically high expectations.”

    I’ve heard this sentiment expressed a number of times here recently, that it’s the readers’ fault for not getting the humour, or for seeing something that is unintended. However, I think the cartoonist has some responsibility as well.

    The expectations that people generally have of a comic are that it’s humorous or that it makes some sort of wry commentary. When the comic has done neither and whatever meaning you can wring out of it is ‘not good’ or ‘stupid’, then it becomes confusing. How low should we set the bar before we are allowed to wonder, “Is this really all there is?” I don’t think the readers can be entirely blamed for this.

  6. “The expectations that people generally have of a comic are that it’s humorous”

    I’m talking about understanding a strip; not a strip being amusing. This joke is not good and it’s stupid and it irritatingly pointless. And that is entirely upon the cartoonist. But in terms of understanding what the joke here is, that’s straight forward and simple and reasonably presented: “kennel club” and “fight club” sound alike and “kennel club” is about dogs.

    That’s all and that is very very simple and not in the least bit weird or incomprehensible….

    It’s completely pointless and stupid and not in the least bit funny but what the joke is right there.

    “How low should we set the bar before we are allowed to wonder, “Is this really all there is?” ”

    Well, much lower then:

    “fight club” is a movie about people, “kennel club” is about dogs. So these are dogs mimicking “fight club” but because they are dogs they refer to “kennel club”.

    In terms of being an identifiable attempt at a joke, I’d say that bar is actually quite high.

    … in terms of being a recognizable joke. In terms of being an entertaining joke…. Not so much.

    Any talk of “I don’t understand this at all. What’s the joke? Is it that he’s talking to a boxer? If so, what’s he pointing at?…how [does] the Fight Club line applies to a Kennel Club. Especially if that doesn’t mean a club organized in the kennel, with dogs as its membership, but retains the usual meaning of an organization of human dog-fanciers, that sponsors shows and pedigree registrations” seems to be deliberately obtuse.

    “Fight Club” is a movie whose title sounds like “kennel club” and these are dogs. Have you ever expected or gotten more from Mike Peters?

  7. “Have you ever expected or gotten more from Mike Peters?”
    At one time, yes. The past year or so, no. Which is why I threw it out of my daily feed. Even to expend the bandwidth and mental energy needed just to think, ‘Meh’, became too much, IMHO.

  8. I used to like this strip, many years ago, but now it’s just sloppy dad-joke word play.
    And I agree, the OP is rather obtuse. Learn what Google is, and look up stuff, before posting.

  9. Really, you guys can be a little hard on each other. And, it’s one thing to react to comments in comments, but when someone has sent in a comic, it’s sort of out of their hands how much of their submission notes the CIDU editors quote, and what we get wrong in our own additional remarks.

    So you’all can take it up with me over the “kennel club can only mean a group of human dog fanciers” stand! :-).

  10. Yeah, that was a really unnecessary comment. If you don’t like the submissions, send in better ones.

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.