Then the author wouldn’t have had the chance to make a point. The point being about not fitting in and being laughed at by the majority. It’s not just being uncomfortable for not fitting in. It’s about being actively mocked for not fitting in.
FWIW, I agree with you, partly because the last panel is uncomfortable to look at the anxiety of getting ragged in the public and also because recirculates the stereotype that “X for Humanities” courses are somehow inferior.
I didn’t change the subject; I broadened it slightly. You were talking just about humor, I’m talking about all of the choices the author has to make. Both the humor and the point of the comic are under the same umbrella.
Dude, I wasn’t even arguing against your point. I was providing an alternative view in the same space: that of the author’s choices. I literally wasn’t even arguing. Chill out.
You’re looking for a fight like a bad troll. “Bad faith argument”? The reply you got addresses your point but you don’t seem to understand the discussion.
I re-read it that way and I agree. The sudden realization that he was in a class for windshield wipers, attended by actual windshield wipers was quite funny and the point (not belonging) was still conveyed, IMO.
This would have been funnier without the last two panels. Leaving the conclusion to imagination is usually better.
Then the author wouldn’t have had the chance to make a point. The point being about not fitting in and being laughed at by the majority. It’s not just being uncomfortable for not fitting in. It’s about being actively mocked for not fitting in.
I’m talking about comedy, you’re talking about making a point. Why did you change the subject?
FWIW, I agree with you, partly because the last panel is uncomfortable to look at the anxiety of getting ragged in the public and also because recirculates the stereotype that “X for Humanities” courses are somehow inferior.
I didn’t change the subject; I broadened it slightly. You were talking just about humor, I’m talking about all of the choices the author has to make. Both the humor and the point of the comic are under the same umbrella.
To claim you’re broadening you’d have to have engaged with my point, not sidestepped it. You’re arguing in bad faith.
Dude, I wasn’t even arguing against your point. I was providing an alternative view in the same space: that of the author’s choices. I literally wasn’t even arguing. Chill out.
I think you might be in the wrong class.
You’re looking for a fight like a bad troll. “Bad faith argument”? The reply you got addresses your point but you don’t seem to understand the discussion.
I re-read it that way and I agree. The sudden realization that he was in a class for windshield wipers, attended by actual windshield wipers was quite funny and the point (not belonging) was still conveyed, IMO.