Friday, July 25th, 2008 08:19 am

Garfield is to comics as MacDonalds is to food.

Discuss.

Friday, July 25th, 2008 01:38 pm (UTC)
Devoid of nourishment?
Friday, July 25th, 2008 01:39 pm (UTC)
Not to mention flavor....
Friday, July 25th, 2008 02:26 pm (UTC)
Consistently substandard?
Friday, July 25th, 2008 02:00 pm (UTC)
Greasy, stale and left too long on the shelf.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 02:08 pm (UTC)
Totally bogus comparison.

Other than in the humor category making the comparison.


McDonalds is a "fast-food restaurant". Implies that they serve food, quickly. They serve highly repeatable food in many categories, offering options and choice, very quickly.


Garfield is a comic. Which implies a drawn artwork that's funny. (There are some "dramatic comics", but Garfield isn't in that niche.) Well, it's a drawn artwork. But it's not funny.

So, McDonalds serves food, quickly. It's not gourmet, but it's quite acceptable across a very wide range of palates.

Garfield is artwork that's not funny.

No, not really comparable. McDonalds succeeds at serving food quickly, while Garfielf fails at providing humor via art.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 02:59 pm (UTC)
Well, that's true if you consider the product MacDonalds to be food ... I consider it "almost, but not quite, entirely unlike food".
Friday, July 25th, 2008 03:51 pm (UTC)
Again, humor aside, yeah, it's food.

Not even that *bad* of food, if you choose correctly. But if you were forced to eat nothing but McDonalds food for a year, you'd be fine. Well, at least, no worse than when you started (For the obligatory comment about Spurlock).

But humor? Totally missing from Garfield. Not even anything Ted Rall-esque that you could point to and say "Well, if you were insane or terminally stupid, that MIGHT be funny."
Friday, July 25th, 2008 10:58 pm (UTC)
insert obligatory comment about Spurlock here.

How do you figure you'd be fine?

Saturday, July 26th, 2008 12:47 am (UTC)
Egg Mcmuffin, salads, kid's meals. As [livejournal.com profile] unix_jedi said, you've got to choose carefully. But I can't tell you the last time we eat at McDonald's. I think it was in 1998 in Paso Robles, CA when I went through the drive-thru to get Goose something to eat so she'd settle down for the drive home to San Jose, CA.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 02:11 pm (UTC)
Garfield can be improved: http://garfieldminusgarfield.net/

McDonalds cannot.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 03:18 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen that. I think it says something that it's actually funnier without Garfield, albeit in a slightly disturbing way.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 03:15 pm (UTC)
Well they do both provide a very consistent product. In both cases it it is consistently low quality, but it still does an excellent job of making money.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 05:49 pm (UTC)
I haven't seen Garfield lately. Back in the late 80's, iirc, it was funny to me.

"Garfield, I know you're in my plant. I can see your tail"

Lasagna

"Okay, Monday, go ahead and do it to me." *Splut!*

"It's diet week!"

So, comparison between Garfield and McDonalds....fat?
Friday, July 25th, 2008 06:04 pm (UTC)
I think I sort of remember Garfield being funny once. But it was a long time ago. And I sorta remember when MacDonalds' fries used to taste good, and one or two of their sandwiches used to be ... well, palatable. (Not sure their burgers ever were.) But that was a long time ago too.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 10:43 pm (UTC)
When it was new, Garfield was funny. Sort of the way I expect McDonalds served something resembling real food.

Now both are predictable and...mass produced by formula. And yep, fat is a valid comparison, too...
Friday, July 25th, 2008 07:58 pm (UTC)
It's the sad state of affairs that safety and the need to not have to think is so rampant everywhere. Both McDonald's and Garfield give people that aspect. They don't have to think about what they're reading or what they're getting when they read Garfield and eat McDonald's. It's just the convenience and simplicity of thought that they choose for those moments.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 08:58 pm (UTC)
An interesting angle that hadn't occurred to me. You have a point. Looking at them that way, both are safe, comfortable and consistent.
Friday, July 25th, 2008 08:18 pm (UTC)
what does that make Family Circus? (shudder)
Friday, July 25th, 2008 08:56 pm (UTC)
Gerber strained baby food?