0794: "Inside Joke"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Platypodes » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:02 am UTC

Um... Why would anyone ever think that people in the old days wouldn't have inside jokes and catchphrases? I mean... literally... why would that ever even occur to anyone? The caption makes as much sense as if it said, "There's no reason to think that people throughout history didn't have just as many cases of the hiccups as any modern group of high-schoolers."

Hazman wrote:Wow, a lot of you guys are having a lot of trouble discriminating between cultural references and inside jokes.

Well, the comic did say "and catchphrases." The modern cultural references people are posting here, and many of the ones that turn up in Shakespeare and the like as people have discussed, are catchphrases though not inside jokes. I don't think anyone here said they were inside jokes.

Are pop culture references "outside jokes"?

tenseiga wrote:oh k. Can someone explain this one to me? I dont understand the 9 silvers or the monk ladder reference.

I'm pretty sure this post was meant as an inside joke for our forum. :mrgreen:
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

User avatar
SpringLoaded12
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 1:58 am UTC
Location: Guarding the Super Missile
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SpringLoaded12 » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:50 am UTC

I don't find the pop-culture references in classic books so much shocking as they are annoying. You're sitting there reading and saying to yourself, "What the hell is he talking about?!"
Paradise Lost and Don Quixote seem to have a lot of this. On the other hand, The Odyssey and The Great Gatsby are very easy reads.
And, as a side note, I remember a masturbation joke in Gulliver's Travels.

Okay, now that that is out of the way, someone has to complain about the implications surrounding the woman working on the right.
"It's easy to forget what a sin is in the middle of a battlefield." "Opposite over hypotenuse, dipshit."

wiserd911
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:26 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby wiserd911 » Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:01 am UTC

Bach and Mozart were pop music at one point in time.

Dracula, also, was supposed to be one long inside joke.

It'd be interesting to see a book on pop culture references of past eras. I wonder if memes lasted longer then or not.

Also, a lot of biblical commandments make a lot more sense as responses to the problems of the day. (I.E. "You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk." was from a time when people
actually performed such a ritual, cutting flesh from a living kid (young goat) and cooking it in its mothers milk to symbolize the changing of the seasons. But the commandment been generalized within Judiasm to the point that some Jews (ashkenazi) won't even eat a chicken sandwich with cheese.)

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Platypodes » Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:10 am UTC

SpringLoaded12 wrote:Okay, now that that is out of the way, someone has to complain about the implications surrounding the woman working on the right.

OHMIGOLLYDOGBOLLOCKS, what's the bun lady doing back in time? And we all know she's a white-collar, educated person who'd never be working in a butcher shop. I used to think Bun Lady was a great character, but Randall had to go ruin it with inconsistencies like that. That's why xkcd isn't funny anymore.
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

Crosshair
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:45 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Crosshair » Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:57 am UTC

Hazman wrote:Wow, a lot of you guys are having a lot of trouble discriminating between cultural references and inside jokes. Protip: If you post it on here and expect anyone to find it funny, it's a cultural reference and not an inside joke. Unless it's an inside joke to this forum.

Yup, most of the ones here are not inside jokes, these are inside jokes.

I think it's the hydrocillator.
Don't worry, we'll get the contract back in three years.
Damn Norwegians.
Let's take my car.
We're Canada's Mexico.
Remember the time you walked out of the police station?

99.999% chance that nobody here finds any of those funny. Only to me and a relatively few people are do those phrases elicit laughter and even then only during certain situations. The police station one is REALLY funny, but it takes forever to tell the story behind it.

Soliloquy
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:38 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Soliloquy » Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:11 am UTC

All right, I love Randall and all, but I'd say that this comic deserves ridicule.

Therefore, I bring you this:

Image

And this:

Image

Konterfei
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:16 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Konterfei » Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:27 am UTC

Ok! I solely registered to post this reply.

Another interpretation for the inside joke would be a reference to the church of the ressurection, since there is an old ladder on the outside, that was used for centuries by a christian sect (I think it was the Armenian church, but I'm not sure and too lazy to look it up) to enter the church through a window instead of paying the entrance fee like everybody else.

But we're probably only falling for the old "If it does not make sense, we will create sense!" trick since that is the way the human mind works. ;)

The1exile
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:02 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby The1exile » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:32 pm UTC

Jeez, I've heard of "nerd-rage" but never have I witnessed such a potent unleashing of it by liberal arts students until, this thread was made with their "oh I totally knew that already and can't appreciate the fact that when other people read old works of literature they're not as equipped as me to handle the social and historical context in which it was written".
mosc wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:The military wrote custom PS3 software and bought a bunch of them for some very specific application.

A modern warfare lan party, duh.

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SirMustapha » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:46 pm UTC

The1exile wrote:Jeez, I've heard of "nerd-rage" but never have I witnessed such a potent unleashing of it by liberal arts students until, this thread was made with their "oh I totally knew that already and can't appreciate the fact that when other people read old works of literature they're not as equipped as me to handle the social and historical context in which it was written".


Actually it seems many people expressing their distaste here aren't even "liberal arts students" -- for one, I'm a computer science student.

And the message here is not "oh, I certainly am a very smart person and I am putting Randall down because he's so much inferior than me", but "wow, is Randall that stupid to have never realised this?". See, they're different points.

mric
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:17 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby mric » Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:09 pm UTC

wiserd911 wrote:Bach and Mozart were pop music at one point in time.

Not quite. The pop music of their time, and of the entirety of European history until music hall, was the oral tradition of folk music - fiddles, voice, bagpipes, tambourines.

Bach was comparable in the view of society perhaps to Arvo Part, i.e. highly regarded by the cognoscenti, and in great demand for his church music. Mozart probably gets closer to a mid-point between George Gershwin and Benjamin Britten, or a cross between Sondheim and Shostakovich.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Kalos » Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:50 pm UTC

The1exile wrote:Jeez, I've heard of "nerd-rage" but never have I witnessed such a potent unleashing of it by liberal arts students until, this thread was made with their "oh I totally knew that already and can't appreciate the fact that when other people read old works of literature they're not as equipped as me to handle the social and historical context in which it was written".

It's not a potent unleashing of nerd rage by liberal arts students, it's that humor like this has to be done with something interesting, or something that wouldn't be immediately apparent to anybody who has either taken a Freshman literature course at their local college or university, or is vaguely aware of culture in the slightest. Hell, we touched on stuff like this in High School when studying Shakespeare.

As an above poster points out, this is about as witty and original as realizing that people in the past breathed or had eyes. It's saying "there's no reason not to think that something everybody with two neurons to spark together and form a thought already knows is untrue." For a comic that's supposedly for nerds, where the most common defense of people not like it is that they can't understand it, you seem to be rather rabidly embracing ignorance.

not baby Newt
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:30 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby not baby Newt » Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:45 pm UTC

felix wrote:
chrth wrote:
felix wrote:The cool thing to remember is that when you think of people in "history", think "kids". Consider the median age way back in the olden days. We're talking numbers like 17 rather than the late twenties or early thirties of today's 1st Worldia.


That's not actually true. The reason the median age was so low (relatively) prior to the 20th century is due to high incidences of death at childbirth and from early childhood diseases. If you could make it to 20 and survive a bout of smallpox, you had a fairly decent chance of making it to 70.


That seems inverted. I'd expect dying young and in childbirth to raise the median age. Ah. OK, it's quick-write program time:


I suspect the surprisingly low figures you're thinking of isn't really median age but instead Life expectancy (at birth). This fits the early childhood death thing but doesn't at all agree with your figures above, so I dunno. The wikipedia entry mentions 28 as life expectancy in classical greece and rome.

felix
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:19 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby felix » Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:48 pm UTC

not baby Newt wrote:I suspect the surprisingly low figures you're thinking of isn't really median age but instead Life expectancy (at birth)


It's median age. An interesting number. Look at the pyramids at http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/country.php

Ah. Sad. They used to be animated and included the median age number. Example: In 2050 the median age for quite a number of countries will be above 50, which is a bit like the demographics of a US national park on a weekday after school starts. As opposed to the historical norm: that of a city park with playground on a weekend.

wOlfLisK
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby wOlfLisK » Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:58 pm UTC

I'm a high schooler and me and my friends have loads of inside jokes. 99% are forms of innuendo however, so aren't really 'inside'. Although they will still make people go 'wtf. Why was there a referance to sex and a tree?' (no joke, we have a tree, and that tree has a sexual nickname. Don't ask why).

wiserd911
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:26 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby wiserd911 » Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:18 pm UTC

<i>That seems inverted. I'd expect dying young and in childbirth to raise the median age. Ah. OK, it's quick-write program time:</i>
Lets say a couple has 10 kids and 2 survive to old age while the rest die between 6 and 28 (infectious disease and complications related to childbirth) with an average death for those who don't make it of 16 or so. It's true that "adulthood" is longer than childhood. But given the large number of kids you'd have to have just to achieve replacement the numbers there's a multiplier effect for the younger years.

10 * 16 = 160 years below 16 versus the 2 that survive to adulthood may have 50 years over 16 = 100 years total over 16.
Compare to two parents that have two kids that live to adulthood.
32 years below 16 versus 100 (or more, in modern times) years above 16.

These are very very rough calculations, but I think they show the general trend.

felix
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:19 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby felix » Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:56 pm UTC

wiserd911 wrote:These are very very rough calculations, but I think they show the general trend.


I agree, those calculations show a general, post-industrial trend.

But they are a very different measure from "median".

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26531
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SecondTalon » Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:42 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:And the message here is not "oh, I certainly am a very smart person and I am putting Randall down because he's so much inferior than me", but "wow, is Randall that stupid to have never realised this?". See, they're different points.

So, this thread, then.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

herbys
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:46 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby herbys » Sun Sep 19, 2010 10:48 am UTC

Cal Engime wrote:
Steve the Pocket wrote:I was just talking about this the other day, after looking at old music videos on YouTube and the comments that "back then they made REAL music, not the Justin Bieber/Miley Cyrus crap they're churning out nowadays." I realized that most of the popular stuff from our era will fall through the cracks, just like the dregs of the "good old days," but I did find myself wondering what "REAL music" is being produced nowadays that will be regarded as classics, and why I clearly haven't heard any of it.
Allow me to make some suggestions.

"My Old Ways" by Dr. Dog - Like Steely Dan, King Crimson, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull, and Abe Vigoda, not one person.
"Snookered" by Dan Deacon
"Also Frightened" by Animal Collective - Yes, that album cover is a still image.
"Just Got to Be" by the Black Keys
"In the Sun" by She & Him
"Wake Up" by (the) Arcade Fire - I'm not really sure whether you use a definite article with this band's name or not.
"Skullcrusher Mountain" by Jonathan Coulton
"Cannibal Resource" by the Dirty Projectors
"Chicago" by Sufjan Stevens - From his album about Illinois, part of a project to make an album about each state.


You got it all wrong. The question wasn't about what good music is being produced today, but what are the "classics of the future". None of your examples fits that bill because none of them are ever going to be considered classics. And that's not because they aren't good, but because they are completely unknown to the vast majority of the population. And the same thing likely happened in other decades, there were some great tunes from that time, better than most of what we consider classics from that era, that no one knows or remembers. So going back to the original question, maybe some stuff by Coldplay, Mika or The Killers, but most likely this will not be a decade particularly remembered by it's music.

maycelestia
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby maycelestia » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:21 pm UTC

This comic wasn't particularly funny, but I did enjoy it. Of course I know that people have always had in-jokes, but why would I ever think of that? Upon encountering an in-joke in the present, I never feel that it is something crazy and exclusive to modern times — but I don't automatically think of how they were around in the past too.

Similarly, my initial surprised reaction when my grandparents tell me stories of the mischief they got up to when they were younger isn't because I never realised that my grandparents were children once, but because nothing usually brings the fact to mind.

So even though this comic isn't exactly funny, I think the reaction of "Randall must think everyone is stupid for not knowing that people in the past were people too" isn't really warranted. Someone made a good point further back — when we learn history it's never about the humanity of everyday people, so it's easy to forget that all those generations throughout history were people mostly like us. I like to be reminded of it.

Azshade
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:47 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Azshade » Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:13 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Half of Shakespeare was in-jokes, double entendres, plays within plays with plays on words, and/or self-references. Oh, and sex jokes. "That's a fair thought to lie between a maid's legs!" "Do you think I meant country matters?" Both from Hamlet.


I've always liked the start of The Tempest, in particular the line.
...though the ship were no stronger than a nutshell and as leaky as an unstanched wench.


And yes, that's as disgusting as it sounds.
I've often said to friends that if shakespeare were alive today, he'd be more American Pie or Michael Bay then, say, Judi Dench.

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SirMustapha » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:39 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:And the message here is not "oh, I certainly am a very smart person and I am putting Randall down because he's so much inferior than me", but "wow, is Randall that stupid to have never realised this?". See, they're different points.

So, this thread, then.


So much potential for webcomics in there:
1. Take a banal observation;
2. Blandly, bluntly put it in a webcomic;
3. Sell T-shirts.

Or the fact that Grouch Marx's quote "Time flies like an arrow; Fruit flies like a banana," can be read as "fruit flies like a banana [if you throw it]", or alternatively, "fruit flies like [to eat] a banana".


I hope you're taking notes, Randall! There are so many people who'd love to see a strip like that!

Flectarn
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:29 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Flectarn » Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:28 pm UTC

felix wrote:The cool thing to remember is that when you think of people in "history", think "kids". Consider the median age way back in the olden days. We're talking numbers like 17 rather than the late twenties or early thirties of today's 1st Worldia.

Put another way, they were all a bunch of teenagers. So the teen-joke factor would have been real high. Or bleary, 'cause they were also a bunch of lushes.


somebody probably already corrected this but...

That's not how life expectancy works AT ALL.

once you get past about 5 your projected life expectancy jumps right up to the 60's and it's always been like that.

cptjeff
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:42 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby cptjeff » Sun Sep 19, 2010 8:14 pm UTC

atomfullerene wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:
I can just imagine all the complaints about the downfall of society that have been said in ages past. In "Wealth of Nations", people were complaining that education was declining rapidly due to poor standards. I'm sure many playwrights would complain about how the Theatre Industry was churning out mass-produced rubbish that existed only to inflate the egos of the stars involved, or people would complain that the Orchestra Industry had a lack of talent and that all modern songs sounded bland and identical.


Oh, it's much, much older than that. There are complaints about the decline of culture going all the way back to cuneiform tablets.


"What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"
-Plato

seablood
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:14 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby seablood » Sun Sep 19, 2010 8:59 pm UTC

I get it! The joke is that this is an inside-joke, and it shows that inside-jokes are hard to understand if you are not an insider and that the ancients also had inside-jokes.
But doesn't ANYBODY know what the meaning of the punchline, translated into terms we moderns would understand, is? In other words: what was so funny about the ancient joke?

SocialSceneRepairman
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:17 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SocialSceneRepairman » Sun Sep 19, 2010 10:58 pm UTC

Nothing! That's the point! Inside jokes aren't funny unless you're privy to something personal! That's what an inside joke is! Presumably, something funny happened in the past involving a monk, a ladder, a price of nine silvers, and/or a ham. It's nothing we know of, because these are people who did nothing memorable in the long term, referencing an incident with no lasting consequences.

Jesus, all the people asking this question or trying to parse the joke, what is wrong with you?

felix
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:19 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby felix » Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:12 am UTC

Flectarn wrote: once you get past about 5 your projected life expectancy jumps right up to the 60's and it's always been like that.


Not true.

Look at a population tree graph for, say, Nigeria. That's what the trees for any Western European country (or US or, etc) was a couple hundred years ago. You will observe that there's a steady culling of the herd, so to speak, as the herd-members' age rises. Population trees for pre-industrial populations are not a column sitting on a wide base, which they would be if everyone died under 5 or over 60.

Industrial populations' trees are columns without notable bases to distinguish them from your "always been like that". If the tree picture for a modern population is maxed-out low at the top, they tend to have ledges at the top, like a toadstool. Look at the 2050 projections for countries like Italy and Japan with the top bar being 80+. The female side stretches way, way, way out. Those countries are projected to be filled with old ladies!

Again, the point is that when thinking of historical people, it's really easy to fool yourself if you think that they were "just like us" in age terms. They weren't. Jump in a big silver bird and go to Ethniclashnistan. Look around. There you have it.

Retsam
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:29 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Retsam » Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:13 am UTC

Gamer_2k4 wrote:You know, Randy, if you don't have something funny to say (and how could you not? It's literally ALL YOU DO), it's perfectly acceptable to not post a comic. There's no reason to think people didn't have inside jokes back in the day? Okay, who said otherwise? Was someone trying to convince you that humor only began recently? "It's okay that you're not funny, Randall...humor is a pretty new invention, after all." Was it something like that?

You're a horrible excuse for a "cartoonist."


I can't stand people who post like this. This guy has posted exactly 5 times on this forum and all 5 of them are condescending criticisms of certain comics. I'm sorry, but is the only reason you made an account here so that you can rip on someone elses hard work? Look, if you honestly have an issue with a comic, you've got every right to not enjoy a particular comic. But, blatantly ripping on someone who clearly has a good thing going and who many people enjoy is just pointless, if you've got no other purpose.

Gamer_2k4, if you think you're so much funnier, (and you're not, based on your posts so far) then feel free to make your own webcomic, and when "Gamer_2k4's comic of awesomeness" is the worlds greatest webcomic, I'll formally apologize. But, until then I think Randall can be forgiven if he chooses to ignore the ranting of an individual poster on his forums.

So, if you don't have anything positive to add to this discussion, (and there's nothing positive in any of your posts; you can't even call them constructive criticsm, you're just bashing him) then please, feel free not to post.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5591
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Eternal Density » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:07 am UTC

JohnTheWysard wrote:... and the parrot started shrieking, "AWWWWK! Pieces of nine! Pieces of nine!"

"Shouldn't that be Pieces of Eight?"

"Just a one-bit parroty error..."
But... there were nine pieces of eight!
Steve the Pocket wrote:Justin Bieber/Miley Cyrus
HEY!
You owe me the price of a megalitre of brain bleach. :(
Cal Engime wrote:A message to the people of the future: Ni! 42! Inconceivable!
Is it sad that I get all those without having seen/watched/seen any of the source material?
Also, withthisherring/puffoflogic/hellomynameisinigomontoyayoukilledmyfatherpreparetodie
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

Orual42
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:32 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Orual42 » Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:15 pm UTC

This is probably just a raven-like writing desk, but I have a guess all the same.

First, I want to ignore the "Ha, Ha, Ha" and the italicized "with a ladder!" as being mere distractions here. One of the contributing factors to the obscurity of written jokes from a forgotten era is the difficulty of conveying anything like tone (if you've ever failed to communicate with a sarcastic email, you'll know what I'm talking about). It is also the case that laughter, emphasis, and inflection are by no means universal in the implication they lend to a dialogue.

Okay, that said...I'm going to assume that this is a conversation between two Arab Christians because the first man is wearing a turban and neither a Jew nor a Muslim would buy or sell pork. These people may or may not be a religious/ethnic minority (depends on where and when the conversation is set), but they're probably the only people group in their region that would be interested in the product in question (this probably isn't relevant to the joke, but it could explain why the ham is expensive).

Perhaps the men are bartering. If this is the case, perhaps it could be rewritten thusly: "It's too much!" "What do you mean, 'too much'? Do you know how hard it is to find a supplier for pork around here? [I.e., the monk is the middleman, procuring ham from heaven...]" In this vein, it could be a weak allusion to Acts 10:9-14, or to a contemporary homily or extrabiblical story about it.

And...that does it for this Bible student's two cents...

BradyDale
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 8:31 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby BradyDale » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:33 pm UTC

Hmm... you know, I appreciate the sentiment here, but I don't really think it's right. The whole concept of the teenager is a pretty modern idea. It wasn't until there was enough leisure going around in the world that teens were able to go to school till they were 18, many of them had social freedom and lots and lots of them didn't have jobs they had to do and their parents had some money to give them that anyone really thought of anyone as a "teenager."

You can say, well, just because we didn't have the word doesn't mean that they didn't exist and I'd say, "Well, maybe..." The thing is, the modern "teenager" is a distinct group within society. The reason they have their own jokes and their own language is because the life of the teenager is so notably different than anyone else. They are old enough to function independently but young enough that they don't really have much in the way of responsibilities.

I don't think this was true for most of history and therefore I don't think teenagers really stood out from everyone else other than just being low on the social totem pole.

But maybe.
<a href="http://www.thistoowillpass.com">This Too Will Pass</a>

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Steve the Pocket » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:58 pm UTC

SocialSceneRepairman wrote:Of those, I would only say "Wake Up," "Chicago," and "Skullcrusher Mountain" are at all likely. Something the people touting obscure "real music" as future classics need to remember is that Van Gogh and Leonardo were the exceptions, not the rule; most of what's endured was at least moderately popular in its own time, and more than you'd think was considered vernacular trash by educated critics.

Bingo. I don't doubt there's tons of great indie music out there; it's just that I don't see most of it being remembered by anyone except the hipsters who are into it now and then maybe rediscovered by their kids (many of whom will have the added advantage of having a physical record collection to root through, like we did).

That said, I still intend to give a listen to Cal's suggestions sometime when I'm bored and in need of music. Thanks!
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SirMustapha » Mon Sep 20, 2010 3:14 pm UTC

Retsam wrote:I'm sorry, but is the only reason you made an account here so that you can rip on someone elses hard work?


Hard work? HARD WORK??

Randall draws stick figure comics that could take about 2 minutes to make featuring jokes that could take 2 minutes to think through, and you call it HARD WORK? That's, what, an insult to all the people who actually work, for example, to support their family.

Besides, Randall is an artist (whether good or bad is an entirely different discussion), and everything he puts out is prone to support and panning. That's the life of the artist: if you feel sorry for Randall, then maybe you should advise him to quit the business. An artist's life is exactly that: if you can't take it, quit it. And maybe you should quit your miserable position of "fanboy". That's pretty degrading.

Retsam wrote:Gamer_2k4, if you think you're so much funnier, (and you're not, based on your posts so far) then feel free to make your own webcomic, and when "Gamer_2k4's comic of awesomeness" is the worlds greatest webcomic, I'll formally apologize.


You realise that's the most pathetic rebuttal you can EVER make to a critic, right? That's the equivalent of Godwin's Law to art criticism. If you have a single braincell in your head, with about 10 seconds of hard thinking you can see why. But if you wish I'll explain: you DON'T NEED to be an artist to be able to tell between good art and bad art. All you need, basically, is A BIT OF BRAINS. Put it in another way: I haven't seen your godawful webcomic, so how can you be so sure that Randall is all that great?

Retsam wrote:But, until then I think Randall can be forgiven if he chooses to ignore the ranting of an individual poster on his forums.


So you have missed out the alarmingly high number of people here who are expressing disappointment with the comic, huh? And notice: I'm talking only about people IN THIS FORUM who are disappointed with the comic. Try to imagine how many people who are NOT in this forum who disliked the comic. Hey, did it occur to you that maybe Randall REALLY missed the mark here? Or does your fanboyism blind you that much?

Retsam wrote:So, if you don't have anything positive to add to this discussion, (and there's nothing positive in any of your posts; you can't even call them constructive criticsm, you're just bashing him) then please, feel free not to post.


I haven't seen anything positive in YOUR post either, but I think you have all the right to post. Something called "freedom of speech", as far as I can tell.

I mean, I always thought "America" was all about liberty and freedom and all that stuff.

User avatar
Ghavrel
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:51 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Ghavrel » Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:10 pm UTC

The1exile wrote:Jeez, I've heard of "nerd-rage" but never have I witnessed such a potent unleashing of it by liberal arts students until, this thread was made with their "oh I totally knew that already and can't appreciate the fact that when other people read old works of literature they're not as equipped as me to handle the social and historical context in which it was written".


By way of analogy, Randall's comic is like me saying "HEY GUYS DID YOU KNOW YOUR COMPUTER GAEMZ ARE ZEROES AND ONES?" Yes, it's that mind-bogglingly ignorant. No, there's absolutely no excuse for anyone with a high school diploma not to realize this.

It occurs to me to ask if you know what "analogy" means. I figured that knowledge was a given, but given that you're defending this comic's insight as being the exclusive domain of liberal arts majors...
"Si ad naturam vives, numquam eris pauper; si ad opiniones, numquam eris dives."
Live rightly and you shall never be poor; live for fame and you shall never have wealth.
~Epicurus, via Seneca

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:14 am UTC

Ghavrel wrote:It occurs to me to ask if you know what "analogy" means. I figured that knowledge was a given, but given that you're defending this comic's insight as being the exclusive domain of liberal arts majors...

Around these parts "liberal arts major" carries the same connotations that "gay" might carry elsewhere: it's evolved past its literal usage in describing someone's {academic major|sexual orientation} and become a generic insult. See the disclaimer at the bottom of the front page for etymology.

But then you'd know that already if you weren't such a liberal arts major...
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SirMustapha » Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:32 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Around these parts "liberal arts major" carries the same connotations that "gay" might carry elsewhere: it's evolved past its literal usage in describing someone's {academic major|sexual orientation} and become a generic insult.


And it's equally idiotic, amirite?

AntEater
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 3:01 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion #974

Postby AntEater » Fri Sep 24, 2010 3:05 am UTC

myrcutio wrote:am i the only one that sees a problem with a possible muslim buying a ham from a possible jew? My observations are based entirely on a TV-educated stereotype of what muslims and jews look like btw.

Yes if I may say, What the hell you politically incorrect fool

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:48 am UTC

SirMustapha wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:Around these parts "liberal arts major" carries the same connotations that "gay" might carry elsewhere: it's evolved past its literal usage in describing someone's {academic major|sexual orientation} and become a generic insult.


And it's equally idiotic, amirite?


I dunno, as a bisexual philosopher I don't consider either to be especially offensive. Then again, bi isn't quite gay, and in my book philosophy isn't quite a liberal arts subject either.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby SirMustapha » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:02 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:And it's equally idiotic, amirite?


I dunno, as a bisexual philosopher I don't consider either to be especially offensive.


I'm not saying offensive, I'm saying idiotic, in the sense that it's absolutely dumb and stupid to call someone "gay" as an offense. It speaks a whole lot more about the attacker than about who's being attacked. That's what I mean.

User avatar
littlelj
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:40 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby littlelj » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:55 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:And it's equally idiotic, amirite?


I dunno, as a bisexual philosopher I don't consider either to be especially offensive.


I'm not saying offensive, I'm saying idiotic, in the sense that it's absolutely dumb and stupid to call someone "gay" as an offense. It speaks a whole lot more about the attacker than about who's being attacked. That's what I mean.

Yes, equally idiotic. And, at the risk of getting back on topic, an inside joke.

I get that people don't like the comics. There are comic series I don't get. So I've stopped looking at them.

For people who don't like any of the comics to keep looking at them and then blasting out criticism seems a bit ... weird. I don't watch soap operas because I find them banal. I spend my evenings doing something more interesting instead (frankly, cleaning out the oven is more interesting).
Dudes, I'm a woman.

tlbs
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:23 am UTC

Re: ''Inside Joke'' Discussion (#794)

Postby tlbs » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:17 pm UTC

jacog wrote:But... Who shot J.R. ?


I never cared who shot J.R. when J.R. was shot, and I still don't know who shot J.R. even though I have been told who it was (but that was 15+ years ago so I don't remember, now).

See? There is one pop-culture bit-o-knowledge that has already started to fade into oblivion.

-Tom


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 88 guests