Talk:78: Garfield - Revision history

2A05:6E02:1113:D510:D826:B6F4:564C:9ADD: Added direct link to paywalled material

2026-01-14T09:46:26Z

Added direct link to paywalled material

42.book.addict at 04:05, 18 September 2025

2025-09-18T04:05:19Z

Yorkshire Pudding at 23:26, 17 April 2025

2025-04-17T23:26:05Z

Yorkshire Pudding at 23:21, 17 April 2025

2025-04-17T23:21:49Z

172.70.163.48: Undo revision 339991 by Z1mp0st0rz (talk) Clearly an aborted edit.

2024-04-18T21:28:38Z

Undo revision 339991 by Z1mp0st0rz (talk) Clearly an aborted edit.

Z1mp0st0rz at 20:04, 18 April 2024

2024-04-18T20:04:30Z

Calion at 11:30, 28 February 2023

2023-02-28T11:30:42Z

172.70.230.3 at 13:47, 15 October 2022

2022-10-15T13:47:48Z

108.162.229.240 at 16:37, 27 August 2019

2019-08-27T16:37:14Z

Fabian42 at 11:16, 11 June 2018

2018-06-11T11:16:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:46, 14 January 2026
Line 23:		Line 23:

	i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)		i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
		+	:Gocomics now has a paywall, here is a direct link to the image in the aforementioned comic: https://featureassets.gocomics.com/assets/ca927d00999b013655f7005056a9545d [[Special:Contributions/2A05:6E02:1113:D510:D826:B6F4:564C:9ADD\|2A05:6E02:1113:D510:D826:B6F4:564C:9ADD]] 09:46, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 I disagree with the original author of the article, I don't think Garfield is poorly written. However, to avoid any greater conflict, I decided to keep it as it is. Does everyone else think it is "poorly written"? --[[User:Pnariyoshi|Pnariyoshi]] ([[User talk:Pnariyoshi|talk]]) 21:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
-:There was certainly controversy sparked within the comic writing community when Bill Watterson, the creator of Calvin and Hobbes, quit early because he felt that cartoonists targeted their comics at too wide a market to be meaningful and funny. This was at the gestation of the internet, when the only funding that a cartoonist could find was from newspapers looking for something to fill the back page, and had to follow the newspaper's guidelines for neutrality to avoid offending anyone. Watterson called other cartoonists "sell-outs" for dumbing down their work for the mass-market, and he quit in disgust at his own newspaper's attempts to cull the philosophical speeches that were ever-so-common in Calvin and Hobbes. Since then, widespread corporate culture has made Dilbert a hit, and we ourselves are discussing XKCD here. Watterson would be smiling right now. '''[[User:Davidy22|<span title="I want you."><u><font color="purple" size="2px">David</font><font color="green" size="3px">y</font></u><sup><font color="indigo" size="1px">22</font></sup>
+:There was certainly controversy sparked within the comic writing community when Bill Watterson, the creator of Calvin and Hobbes, quit early because he felt that cartoonists targeted their comics at too wide a market to be meaningful and funny. This was at the gestation of the internet, when the only funding that a cartoonist could find was from newspapers looking for something to fill the back page, and had to follow the newspaper's guidelines for neutrality to avoid offending anyone. Watterson called other cartoonists "sell-outs" for dumbing down their work for the mass-market, and he quit in disgust at his own newspaper's attempts to cull the philosophical speeches that were ever-so-common in Calvin and Hobbes. Since then, widespread corporate culture has made Dilbert a hit, and we ourselves are discussing XKCD here. Watterson would be smiling right now. '''[[User:Davidy22|<span title="I want you."><u><font color="purple" size="2px">David</font><font color="green" size="3px">y</font></u><sup><font color="indigo" size="1px">22</font></sup></span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 He wouldn't. In an interview with the curator of the Billy Ireland Cartoon Museum in Cleveland, he explained that webcomics, while boundary-pushing, are 1) not as easy to access and 2) a solitary experience, as opposed to a family passing a newspaper around the table and offering different interpretations. (Let me point out that while we do share our comments, we get no immediate feedback, and our conversations are anonymous, not as casual as a family talking). It is interesting to note that Calvin and Hobbes has now run more than twice as long in repeats as in first-run. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.255.92|172.68.255.92]] 14:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 ::If those were his reasons, then his argument wouldn't stand much scrutiny any more. "Not as easy to access" is pretty obviously completely false now – smartphones vs. print media? That's not even a competition. And the solitary nature of being online is rubbished by smartphones too. You can hand your phone to someone to look at. My wife and I do that with webcomics all the time. You can instantly send a link over WhatsApp or somesuch to your friends and/or family anywhere in the world, then converse with them about it. My sister and I  share XKCD that way – we live about 100 miles apart. Watterson's luddite view may have been valid (although I'd challenge that) when you had to make a point of switching on a desktop computer and using a browser to navigate to a webcomic. Those days are gone though, and with them, the argument. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 23:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
 :Wow, that was incredibly instructive. I'm actually very excited about this discussion. While I do agree "dumbing down" something that was originally intended for a specific niche is what ruins a lot of media (besides comic strips, I feel it commonly ruins TV shows, Movie adaptations etc), I think it would be unfair to call it "poorly written". I think a better word would be "unexciting", "lacking passion" or "having lost it's first love". Making a strip appeal to a wide range of people is not always as easy as it seems, especially without making it come down to bathroom/sexual jokes. While I do feel that Randall sometimes gets very close to the border of "distasteful", I think xkcd still maintains its roots and it is pretty funny and smart. --[[User:Pnariyoshi|Pnariyoshi]] ([[User talk:Pnariyoshi|talk]]) 02:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
@@ Line 21: / Line 20: @@
 :Wow! That definitely counts as exactly what Randall was suggesting! Thanks for the link!--[[User:Calion|Calion]] ([[User talk:Calion|talk]]) 11:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
-Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon
+Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon {{unsigned ip|108.162.229.240|16:37, 27 August 2019 (UTC}}
 i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 </span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 ::If those were his reasons, then his argument wouldn't stand much scrutiny any more. "Not as easy to access" is pretty obviously completely false now – smartphones vs. print media? That's not even a competition. And the solitary nature of being online is rubbished by smartphones too. You can hand your phone to someone to look at. My wife and I do that with webcomics all the time. You can instantly send a link over WhatsApp or somesuch to your friends and/or family anywhere in the world, then converse with them about it. My sister and I  share XKCD that way – we live about 100 miles apart. Watterson's luddite view may have been valid (although I'd challenge that) when you had to make a point of switching on a desktop computer and using a browser to navigate to a webcomic. Those days are gone though, and with them, the argument. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 23:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
-::Wow, that was incredibly instructive. I'm actually very excited about this discussion. While I do agree "dumbing down" something that was originally intended for a specific niche is what ruins a lot of media (besides comic strips, I feel it commonly ruins TV shows, Movie adaptations etc), I think it would be unfair to call it "poorly written". I think a better word would be "unexciting", "lacking passion" or "having lost it's first love". Making a strip appeal to a wide range of people is not always as easy as it seems, especially without making it come down to bathroom/sexual jokes. While I do feel that Randall sometimes gets very close to the border of "distasteful", I think xkcd still maintains its roots and it is pretty funny and smart. --[[User:Pnariyoshi|Pnariyoshi]] ([[User talk:Pnariyoshi|talk]]) 02:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
+:Wow, that was incredibly instructive. I'm actually very excited about this discussion. While I do agree "dumbing down" something that was originally intended for a specific niche is what ruins a lot of media (besides comic strips, I feel it commonly ruins TV shows, Movie adaptations etc), I think it would be unfair to call it "poorly written". I think a better word would be "unexciting", "lacking passion" or "having lost it's first love". Making a strip appeal to a wide range of people is not always as easy as it seems, especially without making it come down to bathroom/sexual jokes. While I do feel that Randall sometimes gets very close to the border of "distasteful", I think xkcd still maintains its roots and it is pretty funny and smart. --[[User:Pnariyoshi|Pnariyoshi]] ([[User talk:Pnariyoshi|talk]]) 02:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 :::Hi there, I'm the original author of the page in question.  I do not mind if it is changed or even removed. [[Special:Contributions/98.162.150.124|98.162.150.124]] 02:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 He wouldn't. In an interview with the curator of the Billy Ireland Cartoon Museum in Cleveland, he explained that webcomics, while boundary-pushing, are 1) not as easy to access and 2) a solitary experience, as opposed to a family passing a newspaper around the table and offering different interpretations. (Let me point out that while we do share our comments, we get no immediate feedback, and our conversations are anonymous, not as casual as a family talking). It is interesting to note that Calvin and Hobbes has now run more than twice as long in repeats as in first-run. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.255.92|172.68.255.92]] 14:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 </span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 ::Wow, that was incredibly instructive. I'm actually very excited about this discussion. While I do agree "dumbing down" something that was originally intended for a specific niche is what ruins a lot of media (besides comic strips, I feel it commonly ruins TV shows, Movie adaptations etc), I think it would be unfair to call it "poorly written". I think a better word would be "unexciting", "lacking passion" or "having lost it's first love". Making a strip appeal to a wide range of people is not always as easy as it seems, especially without making it come down to bathroom/sexual jokes. While I do feel that Randall sometimes gets very close to the border of "distasteful", I think xkcd still maintains its roots and it is pretty funny and smart. --[[User:Pnariyoshi|Pnariyoshi]] ([[User talk:Pnariyoshi|talk]]) 02:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 :::Hi there, I'm the original author of the page in question.  I do not mind if it is changed or even removed. [[Special:Contributions/98.162.150.124|98.162.150.124]] 02:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:28, 18 April 2024
Line 23:		Line 23:

	i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)		i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
−
−	~~run~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:04, 18 April 2024
Line 23:		Line 23:

	i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)		i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	run

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 What is happening in the last picture of Garfield? I mean the line across its face. As if there were two different photos on top of eah other, where the upper one was half removed. Maybe a suggestion from Randall that it is time to reveal the true Garfield...
 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.221|141.101.96.221]] 16:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 Davis did this once, a long time ago.  You can read it [http://popzeuscomic.blogspot.com/2007/03/disturbing-garfield-comic-strips-from.html here].  Of course, they kept the series running after that, though Davis has stated multiple times he's indifferent about Garfield and only made it as a way of making money. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17|141.101.104.17]] 14:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 :In my mind, the Twilight Zone narrator spoke the text boxes... [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 11:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon
 i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 15 October 2022
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon		Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon
		+
		+	i find it possible this was inspired by the garfield strip that aired on january 7th 2002: https://www.gocomics.com/garfield/2002/01/07 . very similar pose and weird half-different face--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.3\|172.70.230.3]] 13:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:37, 27 August 2019
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Davis did this once, a long time ago. You can read it [http://popzeuscomic.blogspot.com/2007/03/disturbing-garfield-comic-strips-from.html here]. Of course, they kept the series running after that, though Davis has stated multiple times he's indifferent about Garfield and only made it as a way of making money. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17\|141.101.104.17]] 14:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)		Davis did this once, a long time ago. You can read it [http://popzeuscomic.blogspot.com/2007/03/disturbing-garfield-comic-strips-from.html here]. Of course, they kept the series running after that, though Davis has stated multiple times he's indifferent about Garfield and only made it as a way of making money. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17\|141.101.104.17]] 14:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
	:In my mind, the Twilight Zone narrator spoke the text boxes... [[User:Fabian42\|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42\|talk]]) 11:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)		:In my mind, the Twilight Zone narrator spoke the text boxes... [[User:Fabian42\|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42\|talk]]) 11:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	Funnily enough, these kind of surreal Garfield comics recently rose in popularity on places like reddit.com/r/imsorryjon

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 11 June 2018
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Davis did this once, a long time ago. You can read it [http://popzeuscomic.blogspot.com/2007/03/disturbing-garfield-comic-strips-from.html here]. Of course, they kept the series running after that, though Davis has stated multiple times he's indifferent about Garfield and only made it as a way of making money. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17\|141.101.104.17]] 14:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)		Davis did this once, a long time ago. You can read it [http://popzeuscomic.blogspot.com/2007/03/disturbing-garfield-comic-strips-from.html here]. Of course, they kept the series running after that, though Davis has stated multiple times he's indifferent about Garfield and only made it as a way of making money. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17\|141.101.104.17]] 14:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
		+	:In my mind, the Twilight Zone narrator spoke the text boxes... [[User:Fabian42\|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42\|talk]]) 11:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)