One of the first cartoons I ever submitted to the New Yorker was this one. Apparently, they didn’t think that an unfinished waiter asking a cross-eyed Mike Ditka a stupid question was going to work. Ah, they were probably right. I remember Bob Mankoff, the carton editor, asking me to explain it and I’m pretty sure I just shrugged my shoulders and said “I don’t think I can.”
Which brings us to the cartoon this week’s issue, which is here. I still had the remnants of this setup swirling around in my caffeinated brain when I thought of this idea. It would have worked if it had taken place on a desert island, as I had originally imagined, but then it might have gotten confused with that other piece of cartoon context, so it’s just the great generic outdoors.
As far as what it means, I’m still not sure, but I think the pictures below will explain it comprehensively.
Have you ever been in a police lineup? It’s a stressful thing. That’s what my friend told me, at least. And since humor often works best when it’s derived from tension, I thought I’d draw something about it. It appears in this week’s New Yorker.
I had been trying to fit a “Peeping Tom” into a cartoon for a while. It makes me laugh that there’s this specific nickname for a voyuer, because there’s no Jaywalking Sam or Shoplifting Linda. But those cartoons never worked out. One day, though, as I was thinking about somebody trying to identify something unidentifiable in a police lineup, I swerved right into the abandoned Peeping Tom idea. And it’s creepy, too!
You can see that in my original notebook sketch, I had the alleged perpetrators peering over a wall. This doesn’t make as much sense as having them look through a set of blinds, which in the end is what I decided was the more appropriate scenario. I don’t have those kind of blinds, though, so I had to find some to draw from. But it was pretty easy! All I had to do was secretly peer into my neighbor’s window.
My cartoon in this week’s New Yorker originally started out, I think, as a wealthy couple deciding they didn’t want to spend money on each other. I’m not even sure I know what I meant by this sketch below: “We need to see cheaper people.” Evidently, I realized that having no money is a lot funnier, which is something I’m sure we all can attest to. I laugh about it all the time. And so you can see how I changed it up to what you see in the current issue.
It wasn’t until I sent in the finished art for this cartoon that I realized that it was kind of a sequel to this cartoon by my friend Matt Diffee. Of course, his idea in no way influenced my drawing in the first place, because us cartoonists produce 100% original ideas that are completely without precedent and are singularly unaffected by anything else in the culture. Except when they’re not, which is basically all the time. But you knew that already.
Whenever a new James Bond movie comes out, there’s always the tiresome talk about how he’s merely the projection of a typical male fantasy, running around the world combatting evil dudes with amazing weapons and effortlessly scoring the hottest chicks. There’s a lot to like about that, but that’s not every male’s fantasy. After all, he’s always got to wear suits and keep track of his aliases and I don’t even know if he even has a place to go home to at night to watch Parks & Recreation. Sometimes I wonder if the ideal male fantasy character isn’t Godzilla. For one thing, he doesn’t have “M” checking up on him all the time. But you can decide for yourself: here’s how the two compare in the “male fantasy” department.
My cartoon in this week’s New Yorker is about a subject which I consider myself to have a lot of expertise in: napping. The great part about napping is you can do it anywhere: home, work, on the train, a Congressional hearing, playing third base for the Yankees in the playoffs. I wish America was as advanced in napping culture as Europe. They say New York is the city that never sleeps, but I wish they would go curl up somewhere and just stop saying that for five minutes. It would make them feel a whole lot better.
Here is how this drawing evolved:
Here is the sketch that was approved for the magazine:
And here is the preparatory sketch for the final version. If at this point you’re thinking this isn’t just a cartoon but it’s like a James Audubon field guide to all the different kinds of nappers and their native positions, you’re right. Why is there a picture on the windowsill in the previous drawing but not in this one? It’s part of the realism of the situation. People steal stuff from you when you’re napping. But we wouldn’t have it any other way.
And, here is the final version.
This is a thing Jason Mustian and I did for Happyplace.com. Enjoy, unless you see yourself here.
Filed under Art, Cartoons
I’ve never been to Burning Man, but my cartoon in this week’s New Yorker asks whether the festival has turned from a small countercultural freakfest into a corporate theme park of an event, as cited by this New York Times article from last year. Then again, all of these events are starting to feel the same, as the below pictures from this year’s Goldman Sachs annual board meeting show.
The original idea for the cartoon in this week’s New Yorker was this, captured roughly in my sketchbook some time last summer. I’ll be the first to admit: the idea is terrible. Or, at least it was terrible. I thought there was something funny about a guy riding a bike on a treadmill. And there is something funny about it, but it’s not a guy standing to the side saying “There are places for people like you.” I drew it up and assumed I’d figure out a better caption to go with it, but I didn’t.
I kept running across the image in my sketchbook, because that’s what happens with sketchbooks. And at some point I realized that it was probably funnier to have the biker sharing the treadmill with a runner. I still had this same unfunny caption in my head, though, even as I started laying this out. But I couldn’t shake it: I wanted the runner to be expressing his surprise at discovering that there was someone else there with him.
As I struggled to find something punchier, I realized that you could change the game, so to speak. Instead of trying to force something witty into the mouth of the runner, it was going to be the bicyclist talking. And it instead of it being a surprising situation, what was funnier was the idea that it would be perfectly normal for a biker and a runner to be sharing the exercise equipment. You make a silly scenario mundane. There eight even be a sign at the gym saying “Please Use Caution When Entering Someone Else’s Workout.” So here’s the sketch I submitted, and then the final image as published.
The fact checkers at the New Yorker magazine are famous for their thoroughness, but they might have (spoiler alert: football analogy coming) dropped the ball on my most recent cartoon, which I think I drew during a power outage. I’ll detail these errors so that you, the readers, don’t have to. Where to start?
1) If you are an art student who has been instructed in the correct use of linear perspective, you might notice that the table kind of disappears at the far end. In fact, if you trace the edges of it, you’ll find that the table has this shape:
2) It’s pretty hard to drink a glass of wine through a football helmet’s face mask. They are just posing with them.
3) Oops! No silverware.
4) Nobody is Tebowing in the end zone, which means that it’s pretty obvious that the cartoon was drawn in early October, and therefore not in touch with the current national zeitgeist.
5) There are 12 men at the dinner table, which is one too many according to NFL rules, and clearly a penalty. This touchdown should have been called back. What’s ironic is that there’s no delay of game penalty. Because there’s no silverware, the meal is over pretty quickly.
6) You would never know this by looking at the cartoon, but it’s the 4th quarter, and the team that is celebrating is still behind in this game, 31-10. There is no reason for them to be celebrating.
7) This is also very self-serving of me, but the players aren’t actually talking about the game (maybe because they’re behind 31-10). They’re trying to think of captions for my last caption contest cartoon with the hippo. It’s so meta!
We did this a few weeks ago, so let’s try it again just for fun. Here’s what I sketched when I had the original ‘a-ha’ about a guy whose couch was so filled with leftovers from previous dinners that he had to get gutters installed. It’s about somebody else, naturally.
It needed a bit more fleshing out to be understood. Who is that person looking over his shoulder?
This is the last step in getting it to be a submission-worthy sketch. Yes, I sometimes sign my sketches. Why? No idea.
So, this is how it looks when I originally hand it over to the editor for consideration:
And this is what it looks like in this week’s issue of the New Yorker. Page 80 if you have one of the printed thingys.
And this is what my drawing desk looks like. WHY CAN I MAKE JOKES ABOUT SOMEBODY ELSE’S COUCH BUT NOT MY OWN DESK?
Filed under Cartoons, Photos