1302: Year in Review

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 13:47, 15 December 2013 by (talk) (Saw "such as <reason>, for example).", deleted "for example" and the unmatched parentheses.)
Jump to: navigation, search
Year in Review
All in all, I give this year a C-. There were no aurora visible from my house and that comet evaporated. They'd better not cancel the 2017 eclipse.
Title text: All in all, I give this year a C-. There were no aurora visible from my house and that comet evaporated. They'd better not cancel the 2017 eclipse.


Many news organizations will recap the major stories of the past calendar year in late December (typically before the year has actually ended). This includes specialized news outlets such as sports stations which recap major sports stories or best plays of the year. Here, Cueball expects Megan to talk about major news stories of 2013 such as the rollout of Obamacare, the election of Pope Francis or the death of Nelson Mandela, as examples. Instead, Megan only recaps one thing which was important to her: She did not see the aurora (Northern Lights) in 2013, the dazzling natural geomagnetic light display caused by the Solar wind. In 2013 a solar maximum was expected at its solar cycle, but the activity of the sun wasn't heavy as before. So, a Northern Light had been very rare in this year.

The title text refers to Comet ISON. In February, a rough estimate of the comet's behavior predicted that it would become brighter than the full moon, a prediction that was widely reported by the media even though it was based on limited data and astronomers knew that it would not reach this brightness. In the end, although it was visible to the naked eye, it was never as bright as anybody hoped and apparently disintegrated on November 28, 2013 at its closed approach to the sun.

The title text also refers to the 2017 total eclipse, which will be visible (as a partial eclipse) for a few hours throughout North America on August 21 Monday, including a 100-mile band across the United States where it will be a total eclipse for a couple of minutes in the early afternoon. Although the weather may be cloudy, eclipses are highly predictable, so Megan is being extremely pessimistic to even suggest that it might not occur.

All in all, the comic suggests that the only events of significance to Megan (and Randall) are astronomical ones; the actions of humanity pale in comparison.

The joke of Megan answering a question in an interview in a unexpected manner has been used before in 1111: Premiere.


[Cueball, the TV host, introduces Megan, the reporter.]
Cueball: We go live to our 2013: Year in Review!
Megan: Thanks! In 2013, I didn't see an aurora.
Cueball: I- what?
Megan: The northern lights. I thought this would finally be the year. But it didn't happen.
Cueball: Oh. Uh...what about the rest of the year?
Megan: What do you mean?
Cueball: Any big news stories?
Megan: Oh yeah, tons.
[Megan looks off screen to her left.]
Cueball: ...Well, that was 2013: Year in Review.
Megan: The sky's clearing up. I'll be outside.
[Megan walks off camera.]

comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!


The eclipse happened according to schedule.

"...she never saw an aurora borealis (or australis)" Australis? She specifically states northern lights. (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

True, but first she says that she never say an aurora, period; so I think that we can assume that she never saw the southern lights either. —TobyBartels (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
She should have played Half-Life 3 ... oh, wait ... (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Eclipses are so predictable I suspect that the 2017 eclipse was already predicted by Chinese before christ. I mean, they executed two astrologers in 2134 BCE for failing to predict one, so I'm sure others worked hard to save themselves. -- Hkmaly (talk) 10:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I think the joke of the comic is that she's giving an actual review/critique of the astronomical year itself, like one would review a movie. This is in contrast to the expected summary or recap of events occuring during the year. 13:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Pat

Good point; you should add that. —TobyBartels (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I added it now... --Kynde (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Coincidence that this was released the same day as rewind YouTube style 2013?--Mralext20 (talk) 16:31, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I think that another subtler point this comic raises is the idea of how ridiculous it is to critique "the year" in the first place. The idea of Megan giving the year a grade highlights this, because why would you grade an arbitrary designation of time that has no agency or animacy in the first place? The title text pokes further fun at this by implying that the people behind the "Year in Review" have the power to cancel the solar eclipse, as if the news station suddenly not only has the power to pass judgement on an entire year, but they can also take away a freaking eclipse if they feel like it. Worth mentioning? --Mynotoar (talk) 07:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't think that it's the news station that can cancel the eclipse, but a different "they" (presumably the same ones that destroyed the comet). —TobyBartels (talk) 10:31, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I mentioned these "they" that can stop eclipses and destroy comets etc. --Kynde (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Interesting to note she sat inside working on a computer during aurora back in april of 2012 in 1037[1] --Calvsie (talk) 16:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Is it a coincidence that the comic number can be rearranged to form "2013"? (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I was thinking the same. I'm not sure it is important though, but say he had this comic ready in good time planning to release it before new year, then Randall might have chosen this comic number for that reason... --Kynde (talk) 19:29, 29 June 2016 (UTC)