2505: News Story Reaction
|News Story Reaction|
Title text: Unless the next line is, "After we broke up, she blamed the painting and spent years planning her revenge, so my sorrow is mixed with relief that the dogs at least denied her that triumph."
In this comic, Cueball is at his computer, likely typing a comment after reading a shocking news story where the Mona Lisa has been attacked and shredded by a pack of wild dogs. The Mona Lisa is one of the most famous paintings in human history. At the time of this comic, the Mona Lisa has not been attacked and is unlikely to be shredded in this circumstance at least by dogs as it is painted on wood, rather than canvas.
At the beginning of his comment, Cueball describes his reaction and disappointment about the event, describing the event as "a loss for humanity." Cueball is then reminded of his first kiss, which occurred inside of a JCPenney, where a picture of the Mona Lisa hung on one of its walls. He adds this to his comment, explaining that this is why the news hits him hard. However, his story has almost no relation to the Mona Lisa, other than that the picture was at the scene as well as being unnecessary.
After posting the comment, Cueball reflects on this and mentions that not every news story is, or needs to be, about himself.
The title text describes an exception to this, where his experience IS directly related to the affected painting, as his ex seemingly planned to get revenge on the painting itself. The title text suggests that the dogs destroyed the painting before Cueball's ex could do so. (But perhaps it could be that she let the dogs in, and so this extra information could lead to the police finding the person who was responsible.)
- [Cueball is sitting at a desk, typing on his laptop. What he types is shown above Cueball, as indicated by the line going from his hands to the text.]
- Cueball: Devastated to hear that a pack of wild dogs got into the Louvre and shredded the Mona Lisa.
- Cueball: What a loss for humanity.
- Cueball: My first kiss was in the aisle of a J.C. Penny[sic] that had a poster of the Mona Lisa on the wall, so this is hitting me especially hard.
- [Caption below the panel]
- Sometimes I have to remind myself not to make every news story about me.
- ↑ "Mona Lisa | Painting, Subject, Meaning, & Facts." Britannica, December 4, 2020. Accessed August 20, 2021. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Mona-Lisa-painting
add a comment! ⋅ add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ refresh comments!
It's worth mentioning that unless we're talking an industrial shredder, the Mona Lisa can't be, since unlike most stereotypical paintings, it's actually on glued together pieces of wood and not on Canvas.
Not to say that it wouldn't be damaged heavily by a band of wild rabid dogs, but not "shredded".
Why yes, I am using my art degree, why do you ask?
184.108.40.206 19:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC) Steve
- Nothing in the original says the dogs are rabid. Mind you, I would expect rabid dogs to go directly after people, not inanimate paintings. Nutster (talk) 22:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
- Re “glued together pieces of wood” — No art degree here, but I thought the “Louvre” Mona Lisa was done on a single poplar panel (with later bracing and butterfly inserts on the reverse); I know warping and cracking have been concerns. If it is glued (I assume edge-to-edge), I wonder why? Wide panels would have been quite common then, and the only glues available would have been hide glue, or perhaps fish glue. Miamiclay (talk) 14:28, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't have an art degree but knew that the painting was on wood. Also, it's "J.C. Penney". I'm guessing Randall was in a hurry on this one.
Pete 19:31, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
It make much more sense if the wild dogs didn't get in there by coincidence. Making it about himself would be acceptable if he was the indirect cause of the situation. Revenge successful? 220.127.116.11 22:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Just checking - I'm not the only one who saw this and immediately googled to see if it was an actual news story, am I? I'm so not plugged into the news that I could honestly have believed that I missed it. 18.104.22.168 22:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
- I also cannot find anything about this. As mentioned above, the painting also cannot really be shredded, as it is on wood, rather than canvas. Edit: Can be shredded, but not really by a pack of dogs. theusaf (talk) 23:55, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Uhh, WHAT? Wood can't be shredded?? Huh/ Tha's news to me . . . . 22.214.171.124 00:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not convinced it would be THAT big loss for humanity. Sure, the original has some emotional value, but I'm sure we have plenty of backup copies. -- Hkmaly (talk) 06:01, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Any fule know the Jagaroth made Da Vinci paint six versions and the one in the Louvre is one of the five with Fake written on the back in felt tip by the Doctor. 08:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't know if it's a coincidence, and if it's worth mentioning, but the Mona Lisa was stolen on 21 August 1911, almost exactly 90 years before the publication of this comic. --126.96.36.199 07:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that 2021 - 1911 equals 110 years instead of 90. 188.8.131.52 09:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
So, the most likely news story this is referring to is the Notre Dame burning down, and then, people uploading photos of them posing in front of it in the past, and then acting as though this was a personal loss for them. Dunno why it's only being made into a comic now, though. 184.108.40.206 13:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- While they're similar in being about historic items in Paris being damaged, that seems like a pretty tenuous link, especially since that was almost 2.5 years ago. Barmar (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
It's just a coincedence, but popular Youtube comedian Ryan George made a video with almost the same subject matter just a few days ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv69kcMcavg
Shouldn't we make a new 'list of all comics' page? It's another 500, but 2501 to 2505 are using the same page as 2001 to 2500. --GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e (talk) 21:41, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Glad to see that that has been done. GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I'd tend to remove the very first paragraph of the current explanation. Doesn't make any sense in my opinion. Like, at all. I'm saying this with the authority of a nineties kid (I'm actually only a few days older than Randall). Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
- The new wording is even worse. I removed it. You may add it again if you can provide any evidence for this. Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 08:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- And as it was added again I removed it again. Until you can provide any evidence for this - I'm open to facts - I consider this just as some generalized prejudice. Maybe I and all people of my age I know are the exception... Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 07:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Rabid dogs can go after objects, too - haven't you ever read/seen Cujo when he goes after the telephone?? Hmmm?!!
Does anyone else think this is a stab at reporters that use the personal angle a bit too much? I doubt the Notre Dame story other people mentioned is the only example of reporters trying a bit too hard to make stories personal/relatable. This seems more like a general trend (to use personal angle) that often go overboard, more than a one-off. MigB (talk) 07:07, 8 April 2022 (UTC)