Garfield: Radical Nose-Thumbing Pacifism, Or Sheer Ignorant Bad Timing?

Garfield (with Garfield!) celebrates Armistice Day today:

UPDATE: Jim Davis swears he meant no offense. "You can bet I'll have a calendar that lists everything by my side in the future.”

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Holy cow, I think Davis is serious.

  • Southerner||

    I took it to mean: "Taking on someone way more powerful than you is stupid."

    Or as Patton (allegedly) said, the objective of any war is to get the other poor bastard to die for his country.

    Garfield understood this point very well; the spider did not.

  • JSinAZ||

    Completely incorrect analysis. The spiders celebrate Day of the Stupid because only through Garfield's swallowing of the lies the spider tells, does the spider get to live and breed and found the holiday.

    So Davis had nothing to apologize for: Spiders are Nazis, Garfield is an alternate history FDR, and the newspaper is clearly the effect of strategic bombardment of German cities.

    This comic was a brilliant counterfactual metaphor for WWII - and you clods missed it!

  • ||

    yeah the meaning hinges on if the spider lives or dies.

    I find it hard to think the spider died because if it did then the idea of a stupid day gets muddled.

    I mean the spider would have died in either case...if it talked or ran or just stood there silent or whatever...therefor if it died and the teacher in the spider class was calling the spider stupid because he talked does not make sense.

  • JSinAZ||

    The spider-nazi lived and founded it's third reich nest and now teach the young mites about the weak democracies run by poltroons like Garfield the Stupid, who spared the Hitler-Spider at the moment of the great leader's greatest peril.

    I tell you, this is a pean to the Will to Fight the Good Fight!

  • OO=======D||

    I'm going with the former, Brian.

  • Dude!||

    Why can't it be both?

  • BlueBook||

    Intentional or not, that is one of the funniest Garfields ever. Maybe the only one.

  • PIRS||

    I was in elementry school during the 1980's and I loved Garfield at the time. I honestly have not followed the cartoon since then. It may be Davis' intended audiance is [or was] elementry school age kids. If so, it worked for me when I was a kid. I don't know if I would still like Davis' 1980's vintage cartoons if I saw them again.

  • BlueBook||

    Fair point. I used to watch the animated series.

  • Law Student||

    I agree there are many comics that were funny as a child that aren't now. The exception is Calvin & Hobbes which I still think is hilarious.

  • Pope Jimbo||

    I graduated in 85. A friend of mine created a fairly humorous pic of Garfield and our school logo for the yearbook.

    Because the yearbook editor was fairly responsible, she sent Davis a pic of the cartoon and a letter asking for permission to run it in our yearbook. Davis (or his agent/publisher, can't remember which) sent back a snotty reply saying no f-ing way.

    Compare that with Watterson never giving a crap about who Calvin was peeing on. Also Watterson left the biz while he was still funny.

  • marlok||

    I always wanted to get a sticker of Calvin peeing on a chevy symbol for the back of my rickety chevy 2 door.

  • Beatle Bailey||

    Calvin peeing on Cathy would be funnier.

    Cuz she's fat.

  • Cathy||

    I'd like that!

  • Dave||

    I have some similar stories. One had to do with the folks defending "intellectual property" for Charles Schulz and "Peanuts". Turns out they were jerks.

    The other story had to do with the estates of several notable Christian authors. I might have expected it from one or two, but when I realized that every single one of them didn't give a crap about expanding the kingdom of God until they had received their cut ... well, it wasn't the main reason, but it certainly made it easier to stop believing in religion.

  • SFC B||

    Watterson did give a crap about who/what Calvin was peeing on, that was why he never gave his media syndicate permission to license C&H for merchandise. Any depiction of Calvin you see is pirated. The artist never got a penny for those items.

  • PIRS||

    I think it is likely Davis is serious. Being in the comic strip biz as long as he has, he must know something about timing cartoons for a particular holiday.

  • Joe Biden||

    Comic strip? I always assumed that Garfield was filmed in front of a live studio audience.

  • ||

    Me, too. Why else would they have the laugh track?

  • Juice||

    I'm going to pretend that it means what I want it to mean.

  • BlueBook||

    Davis apologizes for the timing, but not the content. Interesting.

  • T||

    Davis can't afford to apologize for content. He wouldn't have time for anything else. His day would consist of "Sorry for turning out crap again".

  • Syd Henderson||

    The only reason it could be offensive is the timing, not the comment. Unless you're an arachnophile.

  • anarch||

    A dyslexic who loves me?

  • ||

    Whoa. My whole worldview is upside down. Is Davis a major radical political figure? Must we review all of his previous cartoons to extract this message we have heretofore been innocent of?

    Nah.

  • PIRS||

    His worldview may have changed since our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mine have. I used to be "conservative" in my foreign policy views. If being opposed to young men and women risking their lives for the sake of establishment politicians is "radial" you may now call me radical.

  • ||

    I can't even make a joke without getting criticized? I blame the malaise created by the Obama administration.

    And my Davis' cartoons.

  • ||

    Not sure where that "my" came from. In fact, what word was it supposed to be?

    The interdimensional rift, where Jim Davis is a political cartoonist, is screwing with my mind.

  • PIRS||

    Pro L,

    I was not criticizing you. I was critizing my former self :)

  • ||

    Is opposing war radial? In what way is such opposition spoke-like?

    Violence should be something we avoid, not our go-to option. I think that's been a problem. On the other hand, for whatever reason, we have plenty of enemies to either deal with or get off of our backs.

  • T||

    Might have something to do with violence being our go-to option.

  • ||

    Ah, our violence radiates from us in all directions. I now understand.

  • PIRS||

    "Ah, our violence radiates from us in all directions. I now understand."

    Do you know how many countries we have military bases in? We even have a military presense in Australia [Alice Springs] for God's sake! So, in answer to your comment: Yes, it does.

  • PIRS||

    I now view war itself as radical. It is a very radical position to want to drop bombs on people. The very reason we [the USA] have so many enemies is because we have been sticking our nose where it does not belong.

    Damn Woodrow Wilson! We should exhume his body and try his corpse for treason.

  • ||

    There is something weird in the human psyche that we're okay with people getting killed for often dubious reasons. Especially when we don't have to see the killing.

  • PIRS||

    I do not think this is natural to the human psyche. We are not carnivors. We are closer to the peace loving bonobo.

    The problem is government. Governments use violence for everything they do. This warps the natural human psyche.

  • ||

    It's true. My neighbors don't come over very often asking me to bomb the crap out of the neighborhood down the street.

  • Law Student||

    "We are closer to the peace loving bonobo."

    Um chimps go to war dude. There are some pretty sweet documentaries following them including in the Planet Earth series.

    Violence is natural to us but not to the "huaman psyche" (I guess it depends on how you define that term).

  • PIRS||

    Law Student,

    You may find this article interesting.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine......the-world/

  • ||

    The problem is government. Governments use violence for everything they do. This warps the natural human psyche.

    The 3 inch stone spear head embedded in Kennewick Man's pelvic bone says different.

  • ||

    Plus don't forget what Hobbes said about the natural state of man:

    "Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of Warre, where every man is Enemy to every man; the same is consequent to the time, wherein men live without other security, than what their own strength, and their own invention shall furnish them withall. In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short."

  • ||

    Then of course you have Plato saying 2500 years ago:

    "Only the dead have seen the end of war"

  • PIRS||

    Joshua,

    It is simultaneously fitting and ironic that you cite Hobbes (I assume you mean Thomas and not the 20th Century cartoon character) who wrote Leviathan in which he argues in favor of absolutism. And you also cite Plato who wrote “The Republic” in which he argues in favor of a dictatorship by philosophers over the commoner. Such great friends you have.

  • ||

    Then what did Calvin say?

  • ||

    For true wisdom, seek the words of Calvin's dad.

  • PIRS||

    "The 3 inch stone spear head embedded in Kennewick Man's pelvic bone says different."

    You do realize that governments of one form or another have been around for quite some time, do you not? A "primitive government" is still a government.

  • ||

    A "primitive government" is still a government.

    You mean family?

    Go back to the commune hippy

  • PIRS||

    Joshua,

    No, I do not mean the family. I mean tribal governments.

    Ad hominems do not help you win arguments with mature adults.

  • ||

    Tribal government 9000 years ago in the Americas was family.

    Ad hominems do not help you win arguments with mature adults.

    you may have noticed this sub thread began from a joke by Pro Libertate and is in a thread about a comic strip.

    If you want mature adult arguments then you came to the wrong party.

  • PIRS||

    "Tribal government 9000 years ago in the Americas was family."

    I assume you were there then? When Europeans arrived in the Americas they found many tribal governments. Is there any reason to believe that no government of any sort existed when Kennewick Man was alive? I do not believe he was alive to be interviewed at the time of his discovery.

    Jokes are fine. Calling someone you never met a Hippie is insulting.

  • ||

    When Europeans arrived in the Americas they found many tribal governments

    Europeans showed up 8500 years after Kennewick man died....there is ample evidence of prior large governments and settlements going back a few 1000 years before Europeans showed up...there is no evidence of such settlements or governments when Kennewick man was walking around. In fact there is very little evidence such settlements or government existing at the time world wide.

    But I do love the fallacy embedded in your argument. Oh look a dead guy from 9000 years ago with a spear in his hip....that proves that government was here.

    Funny stuff.

    Calling someone you never met a Hippie is insulting.

    What is wrong with hippies? I imagine quite a number of libertarians who read Reason were/are hippies.

    Hell I was born well after Kennedy was shot and even I have gone to a grateful dead show.

  • PIRS||

    "But I do love the fallacy embedded in your argument. Oh look a dead guy from 9000 years ago with a spear in his hip....that proves that government was here."

    That was not my argument. You claimed that there was no government when he was alive. I made no claim one way or the other. The burden of proof is on you, not me. One cannot prove a negative.

    Enjoying the Grateful Dead does not make one a Hippy any more than Enjoying Jack Kerrouack poetry makes one a Beat or practicing Yoga for exercise makes one Hindu.

    What is wrong with the Hippies? It was a self-destructive lifestyle.

    Many people remember Woodstock. Young people often view it as a positive experience - if perhaps a bit messey. Fewer people remember that many would have died if they had not been rescued by - ironically - military copters.

    Even fewer remember the Altamong Free Concert:
    http://www.associatedcontent.c.....tml?cat=33

  • PIRS||

    Here is more information about the oh-so-wonderfull Woodstock:

    http://www.jems.com/article/major-incidents/ems-woodstock

  • ||

    That was not my argument.

    Yes it is your argument

    A "primitive government" is still a government.

    And you are right I cannot prove a negative.
    Is government = positive
    No government = negative

    It is not up to me to prove the negative that there was no government.

    You postulated that government is against man's nature and causes people to war and be violent and be big fat meanies. I proved your positive claim wrong by showing 9000 year old skeleton of a hunter gather who lived without a government in his natural state that had a 3 inch spear head in its hip.

    I do not need to prove the negative that there was no government you need to prove that there was a government. If you cannot then your hypothesis is disproved.

  • PIRS||

    “Yes it is your argument”

    Actually, I never argued one way or the other. You were the person who argued with certainty that there was no government at the time. You have cited no evidence other than the writings of long dead philosophers who also argued in favor of tyranny.

    “It is not up to me to prove the negative that there was no government.”

    You were the person making a claim, I was not.

    “I proved your positive claim wrong by showing 9000 year old skeleton of a hunter gather who lived without a government in his natural state that had a 3 inch spear head in its hip.”

    You proved no such thing because you did not prove that he lived sans government.

    “I do not need to prove the negative that there was no government you need to prove that there was a government. If you cannot then your hypothesis is disproved.”

    This is the height of absurdity. I was not the person making a claim, you were making a claim. You were the person using this person as evidence to prove your point. You cannot prove this point without proving that he had no government.

  • ||

    This is the height of absurdity. I was not the person making a claim, you were making a claim.

    PIRS|11.11.10 @ 6:34PM|#

    I do not think this is natural to the human psyche. We are not carnivors. We are closer to the peace loving bonobo.

    The problem is government. Governments use violence for everything they do. This warps the natural human psyche.

    Just to be sure...Are you Pro Libertate spoofing PIRS just to fuck with me?

  • ||

    sigh...

    You proved no such thing because you did not prove that he lived sans government.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer

    Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have relatively non-hierarchical, egalitarian social structures. This might have been more pronounced in the more mobile societies, which generally are not able to store surplus food. Thus, full-time leaders, bureaucrats, or artisans are rarely supported by these societies.[17][18][19] In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well.[17][20] Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership.[20]

  • ||

    Not me. I'm a non-spoofer, dude.

  • Arf?||

    Joshua, PIRS original claim was that absent the influence of government, man is not prone to violence. That is a negative that he cannot prove.

    Yes, it is true that you cannot prove there was no government in Kinnewick man's life. But that's the point - it makes your rebuttal against PIRS original argument very weak.

    Note that I'm not saying PIRS is necessarily right, just that you've missed something in the argument there.

    No one is asking you to prove there was no government. What's being asked of you is to show where PIRS is necessarily wrong, and your Kinnewick man example cannot do that without at least some support showing that there was no government in his life.

    In other words, you're not asked to prove your case, just to make one.

  • ||

    your Kinnewick man example cannot do that without at least some support showing that there was no government in his life.

    9000 years ago America had no written language and had no agriculture....and the negative is to prove that government does not exist?

    Give me a fucking break.

    I may as well be trying to prove government does not exist on Venus..

    "You have never been on Venus...how would you know there isn't a government there."

    You have fallen for a logical fallacy.

    Joshua, PIRS original claim was that absent the influence of government, man is not prone to violence. That is a negative that he cannot prove.

    the debate is not over the violence of man with or without government the argument is weather Kennewick man had a government.

    PIRS "original" argument may not be able to be proven true but i can be proven false with the positive of violence occurring without government influence. The existence of a 9000 year old skeleton of a hunter gatherer with a 3 inch spear stuck in his hip in the Americas proves PIRS's hypothesis false.

    In case you are confused here is PIRS's argument about the presence of government:

    That was not my argument. You claimed that there was no government when he was alive. I made no claim one way or the other. The burden of proof is on you, not me. One cannot prove a negative.

    As you can clearly see PIRS's claim "One cannot prove a negative" was about the existence of government and not about the nature of man's violence.

    The claim that violence is created by government resembles a negative. For all intensive purposes it is my burden to disprove it...and not PIRS's burden to prove it.

    But the claim that Kendrick man had a government is a positive so it is PIRS's burden to prove it if his original claim is to hold up.

  • ||

    For all intensive purposes

    Fixed

    For all intents and purposes.

  • Arf?||

    The existence of a 9000 year old skeleton of a hunter gatherer with a 3 inch spear stuck in his hip in the Americas proves PIRS's hypothesis false.

    No, it doesn't. You haven't shown any evidence at all that Kinnewick man did not have a relationship to a government. It doesn't matter whether that is possible: it's still arguing from ignorance.

    But the claim that Kendrick man had a government is a positive so it is PIRS's burden to prove it if his original claim is to hold up.

    No. Kinnewick man is your argument against PIRS original claim, but you have not substantiated that argument. PIRS doesn't have to respond to an unsubstantiated claim that does not prove or at least suggest his original claim is wrong.

    PIRS hasn't really made any case at all. He's made essentially an unsubstantiated statement. You should be asking him to substantiate his claim rather than attacking his argument on these grounds.

    I may as well be trying to prove government does not exist on Venus.

    Yes, exactly. Try a different tack.

  • ||

    Yes, exactly. Try a different tack.

    What?

    That is bullshit.

    Look if we cannot agree there is no government on Venus then we can't agree on anything and there is no point in discussion as nothing is provable or true.

    PIRS hasn't really made any case at all. He's made essentially an unsubstantiated statement. You should be asking him to substantiate his claim rather than attacking his argument on these grounds.

    Doing that would have been way less cool then my awesome sentence:

    "The 3 inch stone spear head embedded in Kennewick Man's pelvic bone says different."

    If one cannot argue in the comment section of reason Hit & Run with flippant retorts then life has no reason.

  • JSinAZ||

    Actually, wrong. The ratio of human testicle size to body mass would place us somewhere between the peaceful bonobo and the vicious chimps in terms of agression - actually more toward the chimp side. Warfare is likely the most primal human group activity after singing, and my bet is that it is one of the oldest and most important in terms survial among competing tribes.

    Violence is at the heart of nature and the natural world. Or did you think polar bears only ate baby seals that had died of natural causes?

  • Modern Guy||

    Ladies and gentlemen, I give you: Primitive Man.^

  • ||

    Have you seen the well-to-do
    Up and down Park Avenue
    On that famous thoroughfare
    With their noses in the air

    High hats and narrow collars
    White spats and lots of dollars
    Spending every dime
    For a wonderful time

    Now, if you're blue
    And you don't know where to go to
    Why don't you go where fashion sits
    Puttin' on the Ritz
    Different types who wear a daycoat
    Pants with stripes and cutaway coat
    Perfect fits
    Puttin' on the Ritz

    Dressed up like a million dollar trooper
    Trying hard to look like Gary Cooper
    Super-duper

    Come, let's mix where Rockefellers
    Walk with sticks or "umberellas"
    In their mitts
    Puttin' on the Ritz

    Tips his hat just like an English chappie
    To a lady with a wealthy pappy
    Very snappy

    You'll declare it's simply topping
    To be there and hear them swapping
    Smart tidbits

  • Mad Max||

    'Damn Woodrow Wilson! We should exhume his body and try his corpse for treason.'

    I know (suspect?) that your proposal isn't completely serious, but allow me this comment:

    Trying Wilson is a nice concept in principle, but check out Art. III, Sec. 3 of the U.S. Constitution: '. . . no attainder of Treason shall work corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.'

    The language is archaic, but the suggestion seems to be that, if you want to try someone for treason, you need to do it when he's still alive.

    Why not a Commission of Historical Inquiry into the Crimes of the Wilson Regime?

    Or a contest with a cash prize: "Identify all the Constitutional principles and cherished American traditions which Wilson trampled on and defiled"?

  • prolefeed||

    If being opposed to young men and women risking their lives for the sake of establishment politicians is "radial" you may now call me radical.

    Is "radial" the new "tubular"?

  • ||

    Obligatory linkage to Garfield Minus Garfield.

  • Name Nomad||

    Obligatory link to Lasagna cat.

  • robc||

    I prefer the versions where Garfield is there but doesnt speak and/or think.

  • snortimer||

    Wow. I actually enjoy that more than the original strip. It's very disturbing and also has something to say about single men who own cats.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    I read this in the morning...nary a synaps flickered with any recognition of timing offenses.

  • ||

    That is because you were not seeking to be offended.

  • Dude!||

    Catbert would kick Garfield's ass.

  • No||

    Catbert is HR - a director at that. No way in hell he'd do any actual work. He'd just set the policy that requires Garfield's ass to be kicked.

  • ||

    All he has to do is give him a solid line to Odie and a dotted line to Nermal on the org chart.

  • Dude!||

    I stand by my assertion. Catbert has never been tested. They say this Catbert is a bad mother...

    Shut your mouth!

    I'm talkin' 'bout Catbert.

    Then we can dig it!

  • Mad Max||

    Man, if Jim Davis Enterprises and Scott Adams could collaborate on a Garfield v. Catbert cartoon - with alternate endings for the fans of each - and a contest to see which ending is more popular.

  • ||

    So Jim Davis either wrote this knowing that it would run on Veterans' Day, or doesn't know when Veterans' Day is. Either is grounds for patriotism-questioning.

    Certainly worse than the chimp shooting/stimulus cartoon.

  • snortimer||

    Or he severely underestimated people's desire to be offended by things.

  • alan||

    ^this one. It was just another take on his usual spider smashing jokes except for the bad timing.

    Besides, with the Sukis of the world trying to take every holiday away from civies including July 4th and turning it into Veteran's Day, it tends to lose some significance.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Anyone offended by this non-issue suffers from being in the category P.J. O'Rourke called "the perennially indignant".

  • ||

    Yep, this one would make joe show up just so he could leave again.

  • ||

    Did that happen?

  • ||

    He left because of the chimp cartoon. That was his excuse, anyway.

  • ||

    Hey, that's funny, because I posted it at Urkobold. He commented there with some ire. I told him to lighten up, Francis.

    He was wrong about the racism bit, too, since his premise was that Obama was the monkey. Obama didn't write the stimulus bill.

  • ||

    http://reason.com/blog/2009/02.....go-berserk

    This is a great thread.

    joe does go out with style:

    joe|2.19.09 @ 9:43PM|#

    @ Courtjester:

    So...would I show this to a colleague that you would identify as African-American

    Oh, isn't that precious?

    Yup. Out of here.

  • Bill O'Reilly||

    Jim Davis: Pinhead or patriot?

  • ||

    Racist!

  • ||

    This is possibly the best Garfield strip ever written.

    Seriously those spiders should get their own cosmic strip.

    It could be like Dilbert but instead of just one straight man misanthrope there could be a whole culture of spiders that mock all of humanity.

  • kf||

    Who in Dilbert is not a misanthrope?

  • ||

    Catbert. As mentioned above, Catbert is HR director.

    HR directors are evil for evil's sake, not merely because they hate people.

  • alan||

    Wally is one of the great optimist in fiction, if you read his actions in the right light.

  • ||

    Wally is my hero. I strive to be like him in all ways.

  • ||

    Who in Dilbert is not a misanthrope?

    It took me at least 5 hours to understand this sentence.

    I bet you hate me now.

  • ||

    Of course, the point Davis would be trying to make if he were trying to make one would be better served by a cartoon on Memorial Day, as Veterans' Day is in remembrance for surviving veterans as well as those who died in battle.

  • Johnny the boy||

    Anne Armstrong, the most beautiful woman in the world who also was in my 7th grade class in 1987, had a Garfield notebook.

  • ||

    Was she your wife? Do you still know her?

  • ||

    Also, is she your wife?

  • ||

    Hey, I have a question for Brian: Why didn't you post this as a Friday Funny?

  • ||

    Maybe becuase it is sort of funny?

  • ||

    Tough crowd.

  • ||

    Seeing as how Veteran's Day was originally meant to commemorate Woarld War I, Stupid Day sounds like a very appropriate name.

  • ||

    Well, to be fair, it was Armistice Day, which commemorated the friggin' war being over. Hard to argue with that being worth celebrating.

  • EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy||

    This.

    I get funny looks for sticking to that name, but I shall persist. It is the day the Great Power decided to stop slaughtering their populations even though neither side was in existential danger in the short term.

    In that---small---respect it was one of the great moments of the twentieth century: a triumph of enlightened self interest over machismo.

    Predictable, it didn't last.

  • ||

    a triumph of enlightened self interest

    I'm gonna call you on that.

    The armistice was signed because both sides were nearing exhaustion. The Germans were closer to it, but when the armistice was proposed, the French and English simply lacked the will and ability to carry the war forward to an invasion of Germany.

  • EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy||

    Executives, diplomats, and planners are notorious for carrying on with wars despite that. Possibly because they are not the one doing the bleeding, and sitting in the freezing rain.

    This time they had the sense to say "Holy, shit! We're really hurtin' here."

  • ||

    That, plus the fact that the troops were damned near mutiny while the civilians were ready to revolt. (Both sides were watching what was happening in Russia.)

  • ||

    I call it Armistice Day, too. It deserves to be stand as a day when something in particular happened, not just a lazy catch-all for patriotism and supporting the troops.

  • DRM||

    No, it commemorated the war being put on a 20-year hiatus, which is a very different thing.

  • Mad Max||

    Then the term "Armistice Day" is quite apt, because an armistice does not legally put an end to the state of war.

    Notice how we don't have a holiday to commemorate the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, which legally *did* end WWI.

    I wonder why we don't celebrate Versailles Treaty Day?

  • Mad Max||

    And the U.S. had a separate peace treaty with Germany after rejecting the Versailles treaty, so we could commemorate that.

  • ||

    Okay. You're right that ending the stupidest war in history was something worth celebrating. But on the other hand, even the way the fighting ended was stupid. They decided ahead of time that peace would begin at 11:11am on the 11th, AND THEN they continued to fight, sending men into machine-gun fire to gain an extra tiny bit of ground, until the precise moment arrived. (Not every unit did that, but some did.)

  • Lucy||

    That certainly killed Wilfred Owen and English literature was so much poorer for that. Not to mention the man's life.

  • Pope Jimbo||

    Bullshit!

    The reason there is a holiday on Nov 11th is because on Nov 10th, 1775 in Tunn's Tavern the United States Marine Corps was born.

    The only reason that Nov 11th is a holiday is because most Marines are too hung over to fight or go into the field that day, so the brass said piss on it and gave everyone the day off.

  • ||

    Why didn't you post this as a Friday Funny?

    I had a similar reaction.

    That, and, "In your face, Payne!"

  • ||

    Yeah, my immediate reaction was, "Damn! Tomorrow's Friday Funny is going to be especially sucky."

  • prolefeed||

    Why didn't you post this as a Friday Funny?

    Because this was mildly funny. The Friday Funnys are not allowed to be the least bit funny ... some kind of contractual thing, best I can figure.

  • Xenocles||

    Eh. Speaking as a vet (sort of) this isn't very offensive. There's a saying in my community that the stupid shall be punished - that spider just re-verified it. We don't celebrate the people who get killed by recklessly doing stupid things - the stupid thing should at least have some kind of noble purpose behind it.

    Given the sheer dearth of quality from Davis for about as long as I can remember, I'm willing to assume he was just ignorant on this one. I mean, the guy's most radical gag is having Garfield kick Odie off the table.

  • PETA||

    he guy's most radical gag is having Garfield kick Odie off the table.

    ...tell me more...

  • Xenocles||

    Don't you have some strays to euthanize?

  • Terr||

    I remember watching an episode of the garfield and friends show quite a few years ago. The one moment that I will never forget is Garfield slamming the door on an annoying, persistent visitor and remarking, "Some people just need to be drug out to the street and shot."

  • ||

    Probably Nermal.

  • ||

    The next step.

    http://xkcd.com/78/

  • thomas sabo||

    thank you

  • ||

    Occam's razor says Davis is a lazy fuck/hack who churns out a stack of dreck with no reference to what day it runs.

    Did I mentiom that Davis may be a lazy fuck/hack, but he's also a rich one who has figured out how to make stack of cash with (apparently) minimal effort?

  • ||

    Yes, but he produces a product that many people want to consume. The psychology of that is fascinating--do these people just like the comfort of a familiar cartoon?

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    Yes.

  • Conspiracy Monger||

    When Davis says that this gag was "in the pipeline" he means he signed off on a stack of these lameass gags and turned them over to his staff who actually draw the strip (note how different the current strip looks vs the early strips Davis actually produced by his own hand). He probably then forgot about it and didn't know or care when it would run. The real question is if some smartass artist on his staff DID intentionally time it to run when it did as his or her own statement/revenge (given that being a cog in the Garfield machine must be a soul-deadening job if there ever was one).

  • prolefeed||

    Do you actually know that Davis has staff doing his strips, or are you just making shit up that sounds good to you? Have you noticed that ALL cartoonists who have been drawing for years have their drawing style change, oftentimes dramatically, as they gain experience?

  • Modern Man||

    I should think his choice of handles would answer your question.

  • Elle||

    He wrote his name and *date* on it. Of course he knew it was going to run on "...the 11th day of the 11th month..."

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    Up until Wednesday night, I thought yesterday was Columbus Day. I knew I had the day off but couldn't remember specifically which holiday it was.

    Just saying...

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement