JoeGP | DeviantArt | website

Transcript

Comic in 5 panels

Panel 1: a guinea pig stands in front of a barber shop sign that reads “1/2 off Haircuts”

Guinea Pig: Oh, wow!

Panel 2: the guinea pig leaves the barber shop and sees his reflection in the window. He’s noticeable shorn evenly on only half his body from nose to tail.

Guinea Pig: Hey!

Panel 3: the guinea pig turns around and reenters the barber shop.

Panel 4: the guinea pig leaving the barber shop again spies his reflection in the window and sees a quarter of his body still has hair on it

Guinea Pig: What!

Panel 4: the Guinea pig re-enters the barber shop.

Guinea Pig: This is going to take FOREVER.

  • Whats_your_reasoning
    407·
    2 days ago

    It’s also not how “1/2 off” cuts work, animals don’t go to a barber, nor do they talk.

    But the reflection being unrealistic, yes, that’s where we draw the line.

    • ladicius
      29·
      2 days ago

      The cartoonist draws the line. I’m just a dog on the internet.

    • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
      131·
      2 days ago

      Yes, that is where we draw the line, because the things you listed are all part of the joke. The reflection is not (and is almost certainly due to lack of skill because reflections can be hard).

      Should we never criticise any unrealistic aspect of something as soon as it contains one deliberate unrealistic aspect? Is the coffee cup on game of thrones unproblematic because we can just as well imagine they have Starbucks in Westeros as dragons? If someone draws a comic with a talking animal, is it no longer possible to critique the anatomy in their drawing?

      Or does this not make sense, do we recognise a difference between deliberate deviations from reality and accidental ones (or deviations from the established or expected reality)?

      • Whats_your_reasoning
        71·
        2 days ago

        You say it’s not relevant to the joke, but a realistic reflection wouldn’t show a side-by-side depiction. The way it’s portrayed here highlights the hair cut that the animal is upset about, which is key to the joke.

        It might not be realistic, but I see this as “artistic license,” along with the other absurd elements.

        • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
          3·
          2 days ago

          Since you can see what’s happened without the reflection, I don’t think a realistic reflection would hurt that prospect. In fact it might be easier (if the reflection were kept as it is, and the piggie rotated so that it would produce the reflection)

      • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        “Lack of skill” is a bit harsh… the artist used the “mirror” tool as a time saving measure. Doing anything else would require redrawing most of the creature in a new pose, and I don’t really feel like it’s necessary for this comic

        • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
          2·
          2 days ago

          It is a bit harsh but I don’t think it’s wrong. The more skillful artist would know not to use the mirror tool. If they wanted to save time, they could have flipped the other guinea pig drawing they’ve done (the one of it heading into the shop) and used that for the guinea pig looking into the glass. (The interior would need to be redone still, but not the outline, legs and ear)