9/9/10

Religious Tit for Tat



I'm trying something new with this cartoon. I'm going to add some explanation below the strip. As a cartoonist, that's called cheating.  For if the cartoon can't tell the whole message by itself, then it failed.  However, this is not a newspaper, which some call a dieing medium anyway.  My 2 favorite online political comics are Hope and Change and DryBones, which have a big "2 cents" added beneath their comic.  Sometimes the comic even serves supplementary to the comment below it, almost as an into! So let's see how it goes. Your comments appreciated as well!


Guess what recent news I'm talking about:

Although it's legal, it's wrong.  It's divisive.  It does nothing to unite Muslims and the Western World.  What does this act really mean?  Is it truly nefarious?  All should oppose it.  All should condemn it.  Those who don't.... frankly are morally questionable.

Koran burning or the Ground Zero Mosque?

Put me down for almost LIKING what this vile Pastor is doing.  He IS a nut-job.  A truly disgusting individual.  But within his Constitutional rights.  (I think of the comical Neo-Nazis in "The Blues Brothers" who had the right to march, holding up the Blues Brother's quest and certainly not winning any popularity award.  "I hate Illinois Nazis!")  This Pastor is calling to attention Liberal hypocrisy... not that that's some extraordinary feat.  NYC Mayor Bloomberg, not a Liberal but certainly acting hypocritical, rightfully calling the Koran burning "distasteful", yet oddly championed the Ground Zero Mosque or the politically benign term "Park 51".  (Sounds like a place to bring the kids and have ice cream.  Now THAT'S not distasteful.)

BOTH are legal acts.  BOTH can't be stopped.  But BOTH are vile demonstrations.  BOTH call into question their underlying message's significance.  Thus BOTH need condemnation by the representative Religion and Constitution supporters.

What say you?

2 comments:

  1. Posting additional commentary with cartoons isn't cheating. Using clip art, now that's cheating! (grin)

    A good cartoon should be able to stand alone if its successful...but that doesn't mean that it has to tell "the whole message by itself," it just needs to clearly make a statement about a single salient part of an issue.

    Which means that there will probably be additional subtleties worth discussing...but as the news cycle moves on, it's very difficult (if not counterproductive) to do 4 or 5 cartoons to really exhaust a subject in a purely visual way. And so "cartoon plus commentary" is a great way to hit a moving target and then continue to the next issue.

    Mind you, I'd only recommend this for cartoons that are making topical political/social commentary. If "Marmaduke," for instance, coupled a cartoon about a Great Dane hiding under a doily with a half page of text explaining why it's supposed to be funny, that would be cheating and a big old "fail."

    So what you're providing is bonus content...and a high-quality bonus at that. Your written insights are interesting and IMHO add to the value of the strip.

    And all without using clip art!

    ReplyDelete
  2. What? "Marmaduke" is the creme de la creme of cartoon humor!
    (Now THAT's cheating!)

    As an blogging editor mentioned, it's not breaking the rules. On the internet, we're making the rules.

    You're an inspiration of mine, so I'm ripping you off a bit. Hope you don't mind!

    ReplyDelete