Invention Exchange flaws: "The Cartuner"

[Mike Flugennock]

I'm just kicking back to enjoy Experiment 424 yet again, and noticed some flaws in the Invention Exchange, Joel's "Cartuner". The premise is that modern newspaper comic strips aren't really funny anymore, but most of the strips he cites are strips that have been around for decades: Blondie, which originated in the early 1930s, is on its second or third set of artists and writers (I forget when Chic Young died), as is longtime fixture Mark Trail; Family Circus is also a couple of generations or so old as well, and The Lockhorns has been published since the mid '60s, at least. At the time that Experiment first aired (1992), the newest strips cited in that bit were Ziggy (1970s), Garfield (1970s), Cathy (1970s), and The Far Side (1980s).

I wouldn't have normally noticed this except that I'm a designer, illustrator and cartoonist by profession, and have been a big comic-strip geek since high school. Nonetheless, it's still one of my favorite Invention Exchanges.

Yeah, yeah, I know -- it's just a show, I should really just relax.

[brandonakaxerxes]

I think Joel's comment was just a subtle Take That at comics. A lot of them really, really, are not funny anymore.

Although Crow's implication that The Far Side wasn't funny was pretty damning.

[Torgo]

I don't understand what "flaw" you're pointing out is. Are you saying Joel shouldn't not laugh at comics because they're old? And that's a flaw of the Invention Exchange itself how?

For the bit, they just named well-known strips that were popular. That's why they used the ones they used, because the audience would be familiar with them.

[GarrettCRW]

I'd hardly call Mark Trail or The Lockhorns popular, even in the context of 1992-1993. Cathy, Ziggy, and Garfield were all certainly in full backlash mode (although the latter was still popular enough to support a very good and successful Saturday morning cartoon). Now, Blondie and The Family Circus are valid targets, but I'll bet you that BBI got some letters scolding them for implying that The Far Side wasn't funny anymore.

[Mr. Atari]

Jul 29, 2012 10:59:34 GMT -5 Torgo said:

I don't understand what "flaw" you're pointing out is. Are you saying Joel shouldn't not laugh at comics because they're old? And that's a flaw of the Invention Exchange itself how?

I think Fluggenock's point was that the premise of the bit was the idea that TODAY'S comics aren't funny, but then Joel used the comics of YESTERDAY to make his point.

Had Joel said, "Comics used to be funny, but they're not anymore. Look at this Sally Forth or Zits or Bloom County, for example..." it would have made more sense than citing Blondie or Ziggy as an example of "today's comics".

[Torgo]

From what I understood of the Invention Exchange, the premise was "Funnies aren't funny anymore." I don't think it had anything to do with when the strips first started, the fact that they were still in print meant that technically they were "today's." They were just wearing down in their old age. The idea of the "Cartuner" was to create something new with these established strips. Whether or not you want to chalk that up to poor wording on Joel's part is up to you, but I don't see why it's that big of a deal.

[msmystie3000]

Nonetheless....it's still GOLD!

"ZIGGY HAD GARFIELD NEUTERED?! NOW THAT'S FUNNY!"

[Mike Flugennock]

Jul 29, 2012 10:59:34 GMT -5 Torgo said:

I don't understand what "flaw" you're pointing out is. Are you saying Joel shouldn't not laugh at comics because they're old? And that's a flaw of the Invention Exchange itself how?

For the bit, they just named well-known strips that were popular. That's why they used the ones they used, because the audience would be familiar with them.

No biggie, I suppose; I was just noticing that the sketch cites some really old strips -- which, for the record, are actually pretty stodgy and bland -- and only a few more recent equally bland strips (although I always thought Far Side was a stone-cold riot).

I also remember, about that time, Calvin And Hobbes was just reaching the peak of its popularity, which I thought unusual as even in the early '90s, when you'd have thought that peoples' tastes and sensibilities were more mature, the daily newspaper comic strips were still really, really bland, and the ostensibly humorous strips weren't really all that funny. Then, in the middle of all that, here was edgy, quirky, slightly insane, beautifully-drawn Calvin And Hobbes, whose Sunday strips were like a throwback to the golden age of Sunday comics pages.

Then, around '95 or so, Bill Watterson retired from cartooning to move to New Mexico and paint, and the daily newspaper comics have been pretty much back to crap ever since. Here in DC, the Washington Post still runs old Peanuts strips even though Schulz is long dead. That's how bad it is.

But, anyway, back on topic... I guess my initial impression of the Cartuner sketch was that it was taking a whack at the then-current (early '90s) state of newspaper comic strips, but picked some strips that have been published since my parents were kids. No great shakes, really, it's still one of my favorite Invention Exchanges. The Cartuner fusion of Far Side and Family Circus was priceless.

[angilasman]

It just so happens I'm reading Bill Blackbeard's 1977 book The Smithsonian Collection of Newspaper Comics.

It's an incredible eye-opener! I've already got a few old Popeye collections and I bought the first Pogo book Fantagraphics just put out, but this expansive survey shows just how many great comic strips their were in the first half of the 20th century: Krazy Kat, Polly and Her Pals, Barney Google, Little Nemo, The Kinder-Kids, Dick Tracy, Wash Tubbs, Mickey Mouse, King Aroo, Skippy, Barnaby, Gasoline Alley, Little Orphan Annie, Terry and the Pirates, etc. ect.

The stuff today pales in comparison. Calvin and Hobbes was the last truly brilliant one, and the best one these days in the crummily drawn but funny Pearls Before Swine.

[mrsphyllistorgo]

You can see where a pack of anthropomorphic dingos have chased little Billy!