0709: "I Am"

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

Moderators: Magistrates, Prelates, Moderators General

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby snowyowl » Wed Mar 03, 2010 11:54 am UTC

mystichobo wrote:Is that the Yggdrasil is the background?


No, that is the Burning Bush. With lines coming off it that presumably signify divine radiance.

Anyway, I'm going to go with the interpretation that the joke is comparing Moses seeing the Bush with the Ewoks seeing C-3PO. Not too bad, actually.

EDIT: It does rely on the assumption that we have memorised both the Bible and the entire Star Wars franchise. It's also possibly that Randall made a random comic strip with no intended purpose just to see what people would come up with.
The preceding comment is an automated response.
User avatar
snowyowl
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby jacog » Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:45 pm UTC

It's also possibly that Randall made a random comic strip with no intended purpose just to see what people would come up with.

He might be a Cylon. They mess with your head.
User avatar
jacog
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:55 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby ApocryphalAuthor » Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:01 pm UTC

Milna wrote:And also, LO-M is a make of protocol droid in Star Wars, not unlike C-3PO. SO C-3PO and God share a name?


This was the missing link for me. Thanks for posting!
ApocryphalAuthor
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:33 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby jacog » Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:09 pm UTC

User avatar
jacog
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:55 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby eviloatmeal » Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:35 pm UTC

And by the last panel...
Spoiler:
Image
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage
User avatar
eviloatmeal
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Monika » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:10 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:For those not getting it: recall in Return of the Jedi, when they're captured by the Ewoks, and 3PO is worshipped as some prophesied god "the Golden One". And they carried him around in a fancy wooden throne. Remember? So 3PO is God, to the Ewoks at least... and R2 is his own personal Jesus Christ.

Oh, thanks. Didn't recall that part.

snowyowl wrote:It does rely on the assumption that we have memorised ... the Bible

Well, remembering that there is a burning bush that is God in there somewhere is not exactly memorizing the Bible.
#xkcd-q on irc.foonetic.net - the LGBTIQQA support channel
User avatar
Monika
 
Posts: 3377
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:03 am UTC
Location: Germany, near Heidelberg

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Quicksilver » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:23 pm UTC

mystichobo wrote:Is that the Yggdrasil is the background?
I was thinking the same thing.
User avatar
Quicksilver
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:21 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Czhorat » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:30 pm UTC

I got both references, but they didn't seem to gel into an actual joke for me. *shrug* They can't all be winners.y}{
Czhorat
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby knowman » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:46 pm UTC

xkcd is the only comic I read where half the time I have to go and do research to get the joke. And that's one of the reasons I love it.

How many other comics can you laugh at multiple times on multiple levels. The forums are fantastic too, providing additional insight and potential meanings I hadn't thought of. My thanks to everyone who chimes in with a tidbit of info or possible other angle.

Randall, please continue to only use your brilliance for good. Or intellectual amusement, that works too.
knowman
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:51 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mutterc » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:48 pm UTC

I assume that Randall's building just got new lightning rods, and he wishes to test them.
mutterc
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Czhorat » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:50 pm UTC

knowman wrote:xkcd is the only comic I read where half the time I have to go and do research to get the joke. And that's one of the reasons I love it.

How many other comics can you laugh at multiple times on multiple levels. The forums are fantastic too, providing additional insight and potential meanings I hadn't thought of. My thanks to everyone who chimes in with a tidbit of info or possible other angle.

Randall, please continue to only use your brilliance for good. Or intellectual amusement, that works too.


What's the joke? Can you explain it as more than a Seth McFarland-style mash-up of two references? There've been thousands of beings given the title "God" - either earnestly, in jest, or deliberately dishonestly (and we'll leave aside for a moment the question as to whether any ofthem "really" exist). Is this anything more than grabbing two incongruos ones and sticking them together for no apparent reason? I doubt that the Ewoks thinking of one of the big human monotheistic religions when they worshipped C3P0
Czhorat
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby jqavins » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:15 pm UTC

First reaction: "Now that's just damn weird! And what's with LO-M? And how come I never noticed that God is Popeye? But does that make C-3PO Popeye?"
Pfhorrest wrote:Hahah, "[e]L O[h] - [i]M". I lol'd.

New reaction: "Yes, of course. Thanks."
Pfhorrest wrote:For those not getting it: recall in Return of the Jedi, when they're captured by the Ewoks, and 3PO is worshipped as some prophesied god "the Golden One". And they carried him around in a fancy wooden throne. Remember? So 3PO is God, to the Ewoks at least... and R2 is his own personal Jesus Christ.

New new reaction: "Ah, yes. Now it makes a little more sense. But it's still damn weird."
-- Joe
"[Some people don't believe in coincidence, but] I believe in coincidence. Coincidences happen every day. I just don't trust coincidence."
Elim Garak
User avatar
jqavins
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:50 pm UTC
Location: Eastern panhandle, WV

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Zylon » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:18 pm UTC

Hoo boy.

I usually get XKCD's jokes, and I usually find them funny. And when I don't get them, I usually find them funny after doing the necessary research.

But this one? Wow. I have no idea what the joke is even supposed to be. The theories presented thus far are... unsatisfying.
Zylon
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Red Hal » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:30 pm UTC

Damn, I was so sure this was going to be an invisible swordsman joke.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."
User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
 
Posts: 1437
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby gtkarber » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:44 pm UTC

I don't understand people not getting this joke. (Except for clanders, whose post history reveals that all he's ever done is say the most recent comic sucked.)

The joke is that God gives this huge introduction for himself, and it's all big and grand and all, and then he adds, "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2," suddenly changing all the grandeur and the such into a Star Wars joke. The joke is the change in tone and substance. Jokes about LO-M are awesome, but unnecessary for the core joke.

I mean, I'm not sure what else people want. When people ask, "Why is this funny?" do they want a psychological analysis?
gtkarber
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:57 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mullitover » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:53 pm UTC

[rant]
Alright, so I've been an xkcd reader since http://xkcd.com/37/ and I've only lurked in the forums occasionally to make sure I was getting the more obscure comics on every level. Along the way, I've seen Randall make use of a variety of styles of humor and unique ways of looking at the world. I always appreciate the unique intellectual complexity offered up in simple stick figure drawings. I am, therefore, a little dismayed by the prevalence of comments like this one:
Czhorat wrote:What's the joke? Can you explain it as more than a Seth McFarland-style mash-up of two references? There've been thousands of beings given the title "God" - either earnestly, in jest, or deliberately dishonestly (and we'll leave aside for a moment the question as to whether any ofthem "really" exist). Is this anything more than grabbing two incongruos ones and sticking them together for no apparent reason?

This and other comments like it seem like an attempt to define humor in some pre-formatted way, so that someone without a sense of humor can decide what counts as a joke and what doesn't. (A very C-3P0 thing to do, ironically enough.) The fact is that both Star Wars and the Bible are widely and deeply known enough to make this one of the less obscure comics that Randall has produced. The symbols and dialog make the joke pretty clear. If the nature of the joke requires definition for the humor impaired, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_humor#Incongruity.

[/rant]

Sorry to introduce myself on such a serious note... Just wanted Randall to know that there are silent supporters who disagree with claims that he is somehow slipping whenever a couple of people don't get a comic. Keep up the good work.
mullitover
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Czhorat » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:02 pm UTC

mullitover wrote:[rant]
Alright, so I've been an xkcd reader since http://xkcd.com/37/ and I've only lurked in the forums occasionally to make sure I was getting the more obscure comics on every level. Along the way, I've seen Randall make use of a variety of styles of humor and unique ways of looking at the world. I always appreciate the unique intellectual complexity offered up in simple stick figure drawings. I am, therefore, a little dismayed by the prevalence of comments like this one:
Czhorat wrote:What's the joke? Can you explain it as more than a Seth McFarland-style mash-up of two references? There've been thousands of beings given the title "God" - either earnestly, in jest, or deliberately dishonestly (and we'll leave aside for a moment the question as to whether any ofthem "really" exist). Is this anything more than grabbing two incongruos ones and sticking them together for no apparent reason?

This and other comments like it seem like an attempt to define humor in some pre-formatted way, so that someone without a sense of humor can decide what counts as a joke and what doesn't. (A very C-3P0 thing to do, ironically enough.) The fact is that both Star Wars and the Bible are widely and deeply known enough to make this one of the less obscure comics that Randall has produced. The symbols and dialog make the joke pretty clear. If the nature of the joke requires definition for the humor impaired, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_humor#Incongruity.

[/rant]

Sorry to introduce myself on such a serious note... Just wanted Randall to know that there are silent supporters who disagree with claims that he is somehow slipping whenever a couple of people don't get a comic. Keep up the good work.


Serious is fine, offensive isn't. One can not like a joke without being somehow "humour impaired". By attacking those who disagree with your opinion of this, you are engaging in exactly the behaviour you mean to attack - display of the belief that your opinion over something subjective like humor is the only valid one.

Yes, I get the ncongruouty, but find it funnier if the incongruous elements ahve a reason for being together. This reminded me a bit of the sex-photos in a Friday's strip in that the elements were completely incongruous, but had not enough reason to be together ot adequately set up the joke. The entire point seems to be "hey - I recognize the burning bush. And R2D2 from Star Wars." That, to me, is a reference, not a joke.

Your mileage, of course, may vary.
Czhorat
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby OmerMor » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:04 pm UTC

I think you all missed the LO-M bit. Here's my take on it:
I Am = I M = High M (the entity which is high in the sky)
LO M = Low M (the entity which is low on the ground).

Omer.
OmerMor
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:01 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby SolkaTruesilver » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:10 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:For those not getting it: recall in Return of the Jedi, when they're captured by the Ewoks, and 3PO is worshipped as some prophesied god "the Golden One". And they carried him around in a fancy wooden throne. Remember? So 3PO is God, to the Ewoks at least... and R2 is his own personal Jesus Christ.


Don't forget that R2D2 died for Luke's sins in ANH, and came back to life.
SolkaTruesilver
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:30 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby SolkaTruesilver » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:12 pm UTC

mutterc wrote:I assume that Randall's building just got new lightning rods, and he wishes to test them.


Are you kidding? God probably is laughing his ass off at the moment. Up-thumbing it.
SolkaTruesilver
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:30 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mszegedy » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:17 pm UTC

Drooling Iguana wrote:I find this comic offensive as it implies that R2D2 is God's counterpart, when all True Believers know that he is God.


I just find this offensive in the conventional way. This is strange, because I did not find that one about lisp or "God's Lament" offensive.
mszegedy
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:29 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Jake2 » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:17 pm UTC

OmerMor wrote:I think you all missed the LO-M bit. Here's my take on it:
I Am = I M = High M (the entity which is high in the sky)
LO M = Low M (the entity which is low on the ground).

Omer.


I don't know if we missed it. I think it's just far too contrived to be funny.

I subscribe to the simpler explanation someone mentioned above, that it's just a play on C-3POs usual mild-mannered 'I am C-3PO, human cyborg relations, and this is my counter-part, R2-D2' introduction, and God's rather more impressive 'I am the Lord, Yahweh, God of Jacob and Joseph, blah blah blah' introduction.

In that light, it's kind of funny. Not great, but amusing enough.
In any other light, it's just pretty contrived.

And honestly, to whoever said that they like the fact that they have to research a joke before they laugh at it... really? Really? I tend to find that by the time I've done the research to 'get' the joke, it's pretty much killed it.
Jake2
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:12 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Czhorat » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:19 pm UTC

mszegedy wrote:
Drooling Iguana wrote:I find this comic offensive as it implies that R2D2 is God's counterpart, when all True Believers know that he is God.


I just find this offensive in the conventional way. This is strange, because I did not find that one about lisp or "God's Lament" offensive.


Really? I'm curious as to why this is offensive to you. I didn't know that the burning bush was, to most, that core a symbol that this would be particularly blasphemous.
Czhorat
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Lascivious » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:22 pm UTC

I'm not sure I "got" this comic. I just found the wierd juxtaposition and the idea that R2D2 was God's sidekick hilarious. Moses also has a very underwhelmed expression in the second panel.
Lascivious
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:15 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby ttremblay » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:25 pm UTC

Czhorat wrote:
mszegedy wrote:
Drooling Iguana wrote:I find this comic offensive as it implies that R2D2 is God's counterpart, when all True Believers know that he is God.


I just find this offensive in the conventional way. This is strange, because I did not find that one about lisp or "God's Lament" offensive.


Really? I'm curious as to why this is offensive to you. I didn't know that the burning bush was, to most, that core a symbol that this would be particularly blasphemous.


I find it offensive anytime someone makes fun of Zeus.
ttremblay
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:26 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mullitover » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:26 pm UTC

Czhorat wrote:Your mileage, of course, may vary.


That is exactly the point I was trying to make. I really didn't mean to insult you personally; your quote was just the most recent example of the phenomenon I was talking about. I don't know of a single comic -- print, web, or stand-up -- whose jokes are always funny to me. Usually however, the mark of the best comics is that even the jokes that aren't my favorite strike some cord of humor in someone else. What that means is that the missed humor was a result of my connection via the medium of communication to the comic. It doesn't mean the comic is inherently non-humorous. The humor dialectic is a particularly complex bit of human communication. It could possibly be evaluated somewhat empirically with a prolonged analysis, but what's the fun in that (unless you are as into the study of rhetoric as I am... actually, on this forum that is entirely possible... ) Anyway... final line is, I thought it was funny because there are so many points of contact between discussions of Star Wars and religion, the Elohim reference was nice and subtle, C-3P0 did get worshiped as a god, xkcd humor is very much about getting references, and R2-D2 makes me smile. :D

Maybe Friday will be your turn to laugh.
mullitover
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby reevey » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:29 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:So 3PO is God, to the Ewoks at least... and R2 is his own personal Jesus Christ.


Great, now I have Depeche Mode going round in my head. Replacing "Jesus" with "astromech", obv.
** Money can't buy you friends, but you get a better class of enemy. ~ Spike Milligan **

** It is no coincidence that in no known language does the phrase "As pretty as an airport" appear. ~ Douglas Adams **
User avatar
reevey
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:29 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Lareth » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:36 pm UTC

I believe the reason some people are confused is that this strip is funny in a random "that was unexpected" kind of way, when XKCD is better known for the "Oh man that is so painfully true" kind of humor. Also, when XKCD makes a joke comparing two dissimilar things the punchline usually involves pointing out an unexpected similarity or possibly a pun. The LO-M in the title text is along those lines, but really obscure, even to Star Wars fans.

I guess for most people "I am C-3PO, Human-Cyborg Relations" isn't similar enough to "I am that I am, the Lord your god, etc." to warrant the comparison.
Lareth
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:48 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mullitover » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:50 pm UTC

Lareth wrote:I believe the reason some people are confused is that this strip is funny in a random "that was unexpected" kind of way, when XKCD is better known for the "Oh man that is so painfully true" kind of humor. Also, when XKCD makes a joke comparing two dissimilar things the punchline usually involves pointing out an unexpected similarity or possibly a pun. The LO-M in the title text is along those lines, but really obscure, even to Star Wars fans.

I guess for most people "I am C-3PO, Human-Cyborg Relations" isn't similar enough to "I am that I am, the Lord your god, etc." to warrant the comparison.


Good points all around. I can see how some some of those departures might throw some people off. I certainly didn't get the Star wars end of the LO-M reference until it was brought up on the forum (but it was just a nice layer of icing on the cake for me). I do think that one additional point of humor that no-one has mentioned is the straight situational irony of it all... big God-Almighty announcement straight to an introduction of a bleep-blooping R2-D2. It's very reminiscent of the entire epic-story/absurd-characters-accepted-at-face-value nature of Star Wars. Also, for those not entirely cynical of religion (and yet not overly sensitive to religious issues), there is that strange element of humor that comes from skipping on the edge of blasphemy without crossing over.
mullitover
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Lareth » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:50 pm UTC

Or possibly Randall was trying to start a new meme. Just attach "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2" to the end of any self-introduction.

"I am Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod. I was born in 1518 in the village of Glennfinnan on the shores of Loch Shiel... And this is my counterpart, R2-D2"

"I am Ripper... Tearer... Slasher... Gouger. I am the Teeth in the Darkness, the Talons in the Night. Mine is Strength... and Lust... and Power! I AM BEOWULF! ...And this is my counterpart, R2-D2."

Etc.
Lareth
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:48 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mootinator » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:56 pm UTC

Lareth wrote:Or possibly Randall was trying to start a new meme. Just attach "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2" to the end of any self-introduction.


Probably not, but it is vaguely fun.

I am the terror that flaps in the night. I am the telephone operator that disconnects your phone call! I am Darwing Duck! And this is my counterpart, R2-D2.
mootinator
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:27 pm UTC
Location: Saskatoon, SK

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mullitover » Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:00 pm UTC

Lareth wrote:Or possibly Randall was trying to start a new meme. Just attach "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2" to the end of any self-introduction.



And that seed has just taken root permanently in my head. If I weren't entirely snowed in today, my xkcd appreciating students would be catching exactly those sort of lines thanks to you. "Hi class. Since we have missed so much school, you may have forgotten me. I'm Mr. Rice... and this is my counterpart, R2-D2." My past frequent references to myself as seeking the status of classroom deity would make it all the better. I doubt Randall intended that take-off, but I'm lovin' it.
mullitover
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby graatz » Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:01 pm UTC

Lareth wrote:Or possibly Randall was trying to start a new meme. Just attach "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2" to the end of any self-introduction.

"I am Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod. I was born in 1518 in the village of Glennfinnan on the shores of Loch Shiel... And this is my counterpart, R2-D2"

"I am Ripper... Tearer... Slasher... Gouger. I am the Teeth in the Darkness, the Talons in the Night. Mine is Strength... and Lust... and Power! I AM BEOWULF! ...And this is my counterpart, R2-D2."

Etc.


I'm still in the process of LOL'ing over this theory. I'm pretty sure every dramatic literary introduction can be made completely absurd and hilarious by adding: "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2." Completely disregarding whether or not that was the comic's intent, reading a rapid fire of these is awesomely funny.
graatz
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:24 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby SirMustapha » Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:44 pm UTC

gtkarber wrote:I don't understand people not getting this joke. (Except for clanders, whose post history reveals that all he's ever done is say the most recent comic sucked.)

The joke is that God gives this huge introduction for himself, and it's all big and grand and all, and then he adds, "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2," suddenly changing all the grandeur and the such into a Star Wars joke. The joke is the change in tone and substance. Jokes about LO-M are awesome, but unnecessary for the core joke.


And what guarantees that your interpretation of the joke is THE correct one? It may be that you are, in fact, completely wrong, and that would make your comment both obnoxious and inappropriate.

The comic seems to me like Randall had a joke that worked fine in his head, but could not deliver it in a comic medium. Just look at how many different interpretations have arised here; that's not because the comic has "multiple layers" or anything, but just because it is confusing and does not deliver its point well. It shows Randall's limitations as a webcomic writer, as many other strips have shown.
User avatar
SirMustapha
 
Posts: 1303
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby mullitover » Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:55 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:And what guarantees that your interpretation of the joke is THE correct one? It may be that you are, in fact, completely wrong, and that would make your comment both obnoxious and inappropriate.

The comic seems to me like Randall had a joke that worked fine in his head, but could not deliver it in a comic medium. Just look at how many different interpretations have arised here; that's not because the comic has "multiple layers" or anything, but just because it is confusing and does not deliver its point well. It shows Randall's limitations as a webcomic writer, as many other strips have shown.


Quite right... and the interpretation that Atlas Shrugged endorses capitalism could also be wrong. And yet it seems like most of the core elements are getting interpreted in the same way.

The thing is, the idea of multiple layers is always open to the criticism "But the author probably didn't intend all of that!" That claim doesn't matter in the face of whether the symbolic representation can be interpreted consistently as having a given meaning. Meaning is created in the space between the speaker and audience. The vast number of creative (and potentially valid) interpretations should imho be seen as a positive, whether Randall intended them or not. Also, the fact that xkcd's history and reputation spawn this degree of intense meta-analysis on any given comic says a lot for Randall's ability as a webcomic writer.

[edit] Also, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reader_response and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogism. XKCD is one of the better self-aware examples of dialogism I know of. How many xkcd readers will see certain parts of Star wars without their viewing being shaped somewhat by this comic in the future?
mullitover
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:35 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Leanan » Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:28 pm UTC

I like anything with Star Wars in it. This has now been proved.
Oh, a color survey. Fun. My monitor went *blink* in December, and since then, everything's been the wrong color online, even lolcats. Of course, this cannot stop me from answering the color survey. He asked so nicely...
Leanan
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:02 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby Zylon » Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:45 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:The comic seems to me like Randall had a joke that worked fine in his head, but could not deliver it in a comic medium.

So the proper response to this strip is, "Randall, get into my head!"?
Zylon
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby AvgNYer68 » Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:02 pm UTC

My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, Commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And this is my counterpart, R2D2.
AvgNYer68
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby KBF » Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Actually, he might have been making fun of this guy. But since we may never know his intention THE JOKE DOESN'T WORK. We must know the ONE TRUE INTENTION of a joke before it is funny.

SirMustapha wrote:
gtkarber wrote:I don't understand people not getting this joke. (Except for clanders, whose post history reveals that all he's ever done is say the most recent comic sucked.)

The joke is that God gives this huge introduction for himself, and it's all big and grand and all, and then he adds, "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2," suddenly changing all the grandeur and the such into a Star Wars joke. The joke is the change in tone and substance. Jokes about LO-M are awesome, but unnecessary for the core joke.


And what guarantees that your interpretation of the joke is THE correct one? It may be that you are, in fact, completely wrong, and that would make your comment both obnoxious and inappropriate.

The comic seems to me like Randall had a joke that worked fine in his head, but could not deliver it in a comic medium. Just look at how many different interpretations have arised here; that's not because the comic has "multiple layers" or anything, but just because it is confusing and does not deliver its point well. It shows Randall's limitations as a webcomic writer, as many other strips have shown.


Except that many people here find that interpretation funny. Therefore, the joke works and you're only being incredibly obnoxious by keeping it up, so I'm just going to call you out as a troll and hope I'm right and that no one can use so many words in so many correct ways, say such intellectual arguments, and fail so hard on the basic concept of interpretation.

The joke is a sudden change in tone, helped with references to Star Wars that work rather well, and get better the more you consider them. I don't know what you want. It's funny.
User avatar
KBF
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 5:49 am UTC

Re: "I Am" Discussion

Postby ttremblay » Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:15 pm UTC

KBF wrote:Actually, he might have been making fun of this guy. But since we may never know his intention THE JOKE DOESN'T WORK. We must know the ONE TRUE INTENTION of a joke before it is funny.

SirMustapha wrote:
gtkarber wrote:I don't understand people not getting this joke. (Except for clanders, whose post history reveals that all he's ever done is say the most recent comic sucked.)

The joke is that God gives this huge introduction for himself, and it's all big and grand and all, and then he adds, "And this is my counterpart, R2-D2," suddenly changing all the grandeur and the such into a Star Wars joke. The joke is the change in tone and substance. Jokes about LO-M are awesome, but unnecessary for the core joke.


And what guarantees that your interpretation of the joke is THE correct one? It may be that you are, in fact, completely wrong, and that would make your comment both obnoxious and inappropriate.

The comic seems to me like Randall had a joke that worked fine in his head, but could not deliver it in a comic medium. Just look at how many different interpretations have arised here; that's not because the comic has "multiple layers" or anything, but just because it is confusing and does not deliver its point well. It shows Randall's limitations as a webcomic writer, as many other strips have shown.


Except that many people here find that interpretation funny. Therefore, the joke works and you're only being incredibly obnoxious by keeping it up, so I'm just going to call you out as a troll and hope I'm right and that no one can use so many words in so many correct ways, say such intellectual arguments, and fail so hard on the basic concept of interpretation.

The joke is a sudden change in tone, helped with references to Star Wars that work rather well, and get better the more you consider them. I don't know what you want. It's funny.



Are you speaking of the Prime Directive?
ttremblay
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:26 pm UTC

PreviousNext

Return to Individual XKCD Comic Threads

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bachaddict, Google [Bot], Tenoke and 24 guests