Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Frank's Funny Four Eyed Theme Post

It's probably a bad sign for me that Frank is doing posts inspired by posts I don't even remember doing. Seriously, every time he mentioned me I had to follow the link to find out what he was talking about.

Saw this on BoingBoing and just had to link to it. It's just so incredibly hard to look at.

We've had a bit of hassle over the latest funny cartoon and I keep meaning to do a couple of serious posts addressing both issues raised. Well, kind of. I mean the second issue raised wasn't really an issue, it's just a complete misreading of the cartoon. But, I suppose, it does raise issues of creative freedom and so on. And, yes, I guess I'd like to talk about that some time. However, looking at my notebook, where I jot down all my ideas, I'm guessing I'm going to get plenty of opportunity to talk on that particular subject. The first issue raised interested me. Not just because it's been raised before but, also, because at first it could seem quite valid. Are our funny cartoons formulaic?

This is how the commentor sees our formula:
1. Find random phrase/cliche.
2. Put a spin on it.

Now, on the face of it, it could be taken to be true. Alot of our funny cartoons are based around common phraes, sayings or cliches. Except it kind of over-simplifies it. I don't just pick a saying out of the air and work at it until I find a twist. These are things I hear or think of that strike me as being funny. Think Tank was inspired by, I think, an episode of Law And Order. Even then, I often spend weeks refining the idea until it works and plenty of ideas are rejected outright. I also like to think that we don't just put a spin on it, I like to think that we create a little story around the toons. I think you could take alot of our cartoons and write a story around them. Whether it be what happened to Clive to lead him to this point or what happened that night as Rudolph staggered out drunk to lead Santa's sleigh or what was about to happen when Eddie first lost his nerve. I'll admit that maybe we don't always pull it off but, I like to believe, it's there more often than it isn't.

My second problem with this commentors point is whether this actually works as a valid criticism at all. We play with words, puns, phrases, sayings, cliches, stereotypes etc etc. It's what we do. Why should that be a criticism? If you buy a newspaper one day and happily read the news, you don't go back to buy it the next day and expect to get a 400 page essay on particle accelerators. If you turn on the telly every day at the same time to get the sports news, you don't one day hope that they'll be showing a documentary on 16th century art. If you go to see a Farrelly Brothers' film, you're going to be pretty disappointed if you find yourself watching a charming comedy of manners. If BifSniff Funny Cartoons were daily, I dare say we'd have to broaden our scope. But they're not and, for the time being, we'll continue to stick to the theme we've come to enjoy. If you want to call that a formula that's your business.