Difference between revisions of "807: Connected"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Rewrote. The previous explanation was focused on defining music [something that could be done with a wiktionary link] and didn't provide much insight into the comic. I've done my best to offer an improved explanation.)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
==Explanation==
 
==Explanation==
 
{{incomplete}}
 
{{incomplete}}
A "song," as mentioned by [[Megan]], is a common form of music. Songs typically contain vocalizations (in some cases, singing) and are distinct from symphonies and larger works of music. It can be inferred from the punchline that, these two characters being young humans, might be referencing a song in the popular music canon. Popular music typically has pleasant orchestration, a simple time signature (being the measuring of how many beats there are per measure in the song) such as 4/4 and topics about romance or everyday life.
+
This comic points out the absurdity of our ideals about "Young Love" through an exaggerated snippet of a conversation between [[Megan]] and [[Cueball]]. Randall suggests in this comic that most idealized versions of romance are unrealistic, and that expecting these ideals [as young lovers often do] can damage real relationships.
  
Because popular music is widely enjoyed by a young (and, in the case of this particular scene and its characters, possibly naive or immature) audience, it is a logical fallacy to assume connection because of mutual enjoyment of a song. This is the humor of the situation: Megan is making a tremendous leap in judgement by assigning unscientific importance to what is, quite possibly, a 3-minute piece of sound about something both characters enjoy.
+
'''Background:'''
  
[[Randall]] further highlights the humouressness of the comic by reiterating the paradox of the woman's logic and broadening his observation to human culture at large with the caption (the text beneath the artwork).
+
"True Love" and "Love at First Sight" are common tropes in western books, plays, and movies.  These tropes present love as occurring passionately, spontaneously, and immediately, between two previously unacquainted people who are "destined" to be together in a story-book romance.  The more these people learn about each other, the more they realize how perfectly they are suited for each other, and their relationship never experiences any serious internal conflict thanks to their perfect compatibility.  Think of Romeo and Juliet, Titanic, or [nearly] every Disney Princess movie.  This version of love is idealized in popular culture.
  
The title text of the comment continues his argument against the illogical nature of love and vies for a post-love existence.
+
The realities of developing a relationship are a lot more complicated, of course.  Relationships depend far more on each partner's ability to adapt to each other than they do on being a "perfect match" to begin with.  Relationships grow more substantial with age as people get to know and work with each other better.  And people who enter into a relationship expecting a story-book version of events, where they don't have to change and neither does their partner, often find themselves feeling confused or disappointed.  Young lovers who get all of their knowledge about romance from popular culture are much more likely to expect a story-book "true love" style relationship than people with more experience.
 +
 
 +
'''The Comic:'''
 +
 
 +
This comic shows a young [[Megan]] discovering that she and [her boyfriend] [[Cueball]] share an interest in a particular song.  The ridiculous conclusion she draws from this coincidence ["I bet no two people in the history of the world have ever been so connected!"] suggests that she naively imagines herself to be in "true love" style storybook romance.  The evidence for her conclusion is laughable, of course, since any given person likes dozens or even hundreds of different songs, and there is inevitable overlap between the musical tastes of any two given people [even moreso when both people are in the same culture, region, and age-group].  Furthermore, liking a single song, or even an entire genre of music, has almost no bearing on romantic compatibility–it's the sort of ridiculous thing one finds in a storybook, not in real life.  The conversation in the comic is representative of a lot of the flaws with young love.
 +
 
 +
The caption for the comic questions why anyone would romanticize young love, given how many young lovers behave like Megan does here, making exaggerated claims about how "connected" they are based on terrible evidence while failing to show any real compatibility with their partner.  The implication of this question is that we *shouldn't* idealize young love, because most of the "perfect connection" young lovers often profess comes from self-delusion [as in the comic] rather than actual depth.
 +
 
 +
The alt-text broadens this criticism to apply all forms of idealized romance, stating that idealizing love "just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'." In other words, expecting your relationship to be perfect at the outset is absurd, and it leads to dissatisfaction when reality fails to match up.  Love is something that should grow from time spent together and effort invested, rather than springing out fully formed the moment two people meet.
 +
 
 +
The comic is funny because it highlights the absurdity of the "young love" and uses an exaggerated conversation to point out the flaws in our popular narrative of romance.  It also makes a thoughtful argument against idealizing love in general.
  
 
==Transcript==
 
==Transcript==

Revision as of 16:25, 15 November 2013

Connected
Or love in general, for that matter. It just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'.
Title text: Or love in general, for that matter. It just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'.

Explanation

Ambox notice.png This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect:
Please include the reason why this explanation is incomplete, like this: {{incomplete|reason}}

If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

This comic points out the absurdity of our ideals about "Young Love" through an exaggerated snippet of a conversation between Megan and Cueball. Randall suggests in this comic that most idealized versions of romance are unrealistic, and that expecting these ideals [as young lovers often do] can damage real relationships.

Background:

"True Love" and "Love at First Sight" are common tropes in western books, plays, and movies. These tropes present love as occurring passionately, spontaneously, and immediately, between two previously unacquainted people who are "destined" to be together in a story-book romance. The more these people learn about each other, the more they realize how perfectly they are suited for each other, and their relationship never experiences any serious internal conflict thanks to their perfect compatibility. Think of Romeo and Juliet, Titanic, or [nearly] every Disney Princess movie. This version of love is idealized in popular culture.

The realities of developing a relationship are a lot more complicated, of course. Relationships depend far more on each partner's ability to adapt to each other than they do on being a "perfect match" to begin with. Relationships grow more substantial with age as people get to know and work with each other better. And people who enter into a relationship expecting a story-book version of events, where they don't have to change and neither does their partner, often find themselves feeling confused or disappointed. Young lovers who get all of their knowledge about romance from popular culture are much more likely to expect a story-book "true love" style relationship than people with more experience.

The Comic:

This comic shows a young Megan discovering that she and [her boyfriend] Cueball share an interest in a particular song. The ridiculous conclusion she draws from this coincidence ["I bet no two people in the history of the world have ever been so connected!"] suggests that she naively imagines herself to be in "true love" style storybook romance. The evidence for her conclusion is laughable, of course, since any given person likes dozens or even hundreds of different songs, and there is inevitable overlap between the musical tastes of any two given people [even moreso when both people are in the same culture, region, and age-group]. Furthermore, liking a single song, or even an entire genre of music, has almost no bearing on romantic compatibility–it's the sort of ridiculous thing one finds in a storybook, not in real life. The conversation in the comic is representative of a lot of the flaws with young love.

The caption for the comic questions why anyone would romanticize young love, given how many young lovers behave like Megan does here, making exaggerated claims about how "connected" they are based on terrible evidence while failing to show any real compatibility with their partner. The implication of this question is that we *shouldn't* idealize young love, because most of the "perfect connection" young lovers often profess comes from self-delusion [as in the comic] rather than actual depth.

The alt-text broadens this criticism to apply all forms of idealized romance, stating that idealizing love "just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'." In other words, expecting your relationship to be perfect at the outset is absurd, and it leads to dissatisfaction when reality fails to match up. Love is something that should grow from time spent together and effort invested, rather than springing out fully formed the moment two people meet.

The comic is funny because it highlights the absurdity of the "young love" and uses an exaggerated conversation to point out the flaws in our popular narrative of romance. It also makes a thoughtful argument against idealizing love in general.

Transcript

Megan: Seriously? I like that song too!
Megan: I bet no two people in the history of the world have ever been so connected!
I'm not sure why we romanticize "young love."


comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!

Discussion

Either the incomplete tag is because the explanation is too long or the other way around. 108.162.212.206 21:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

What's the other way around? That the explanation is too long because of the incomplete tag? --Ricketybridge (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

As the Nurse points out in Act 2 of Romeo and Juliet, though Juliet may only be 13, according to 16th-century standards she's nearing the end of her prime marriageable age. 108.162.250.223 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

No wonder she was suicidal.

I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait (talk) 00:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

What the heck is "mercurial gale" supposed to mean to anyone? 172.70.147.91 15:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Mercurial: Having a lively or volatile character; Gale: A periodic payment, such as is made of a rent or annuity A very strong wind, more than a breeze, less than a storm.
...seems pretty obvious to me. 162.158.159.125 18:20, 29 October 2022 (UTC)