1d ago

This Cartoon was Rejected 6 Years ago for being Unfair and Alarmist

By Professor Marc Murphy of the Brandeis School of Law

You're viewing a single thread.

96 comments

It's kinda tasteless and doesn't really say anything.
I'd have rejected it 6 years ago for not being good
- Doesn’t say anything? It clearly implies that Trump’s actions are deliberately trying to sabotage US stability and democracy.
  
  If this guy could read he would be very upset with you
  
  You guys have a really low bar to think this is a clever cartoon
  
  I don't think it's that clever, I just think it is making a good point.
  
  Sounds like you agree with me then! It not being clever is what makes it a bad cartoon. It doesn't bring new perspective, it just says "Trump is bad like this other thing was bad"
  Agreeing with the point (which I do) doesn't make a cartoon or meme good.
  
  It's a pretty fucking simple concept, it doesn't need to be "clever".
  
  It's a political cartoon. The cartoon part is supposed to add something that words couldn't.
  You're implying this cartoon is good enough to publish which tells me you either haven't seen many political cartoons or you're letting your opinion on the message define if it's good or not.
  
  You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how political cartoons work. It's a format for making a statement, there is no requirement for it to "add something that words couldn't". But even in this case, it does. It adds a direct and visceral comparison between what Trump and his Republican cronies are doing to America and what was felt on 9/11.
  
  It's a mediocre cartoon. It's good enough to post on social media but if I'm paying someone to make a cartoon for my paper/website, I'd expect something better than this.
  
  OP says it was rejected for the message being "unfair" and "alarmist", not for any quality reasons. You are entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't have any bearing on why it was rejected.
  
  I never claimed otherwise, though. I said I would have rejected it for being bad and all of my comments have been my opinion on why it's not good.
  
  I think the gold airplane really adds to it, and making it about the twin towers, an event that is solemn and almost untouchable adds to it.
  The fact is, if someone has just said, "trump is an airplane, and the Rule of Law/Constitution are the twin towers", we wouldn't be here discussing it. The existence of this thread and anaylsis kinda undermines your point that the cartoon didn't add anything.
  
  trump is an airplane, and the Rule of Law/Constitution are the twin towers
  If I was the artist's friend and they just pitched that idea to you with that description... I'd suggest workshopping it a bit.
  And we're discussing if it's a good cartoon, not the content of it.
  
  The cartoon part is supposed to add something that words couldn’t.
  Yep. Seems like it did add a lot of things. Glad that is cleared up.
  
  There are lots of interpretations. Maybe it says that... in the most offensive and irrelevant way possible.
  
  Political cartoons are supposed to be clever and this is not. "9/11 was really bad. Trump is also really bad." Wow... Never thought about it like that...
  And it's in bad taste, using 9/11 almost as a punchline. Replace the twin towers with any tragedy and it's the same "joke." How about a cartoon in Uvalde? The kids can be wearing that text on their shirts.
  Agreeing with the message doesn't blind me to how r/im14andthisisdeep this is. It's just not a clever cartoon.

96 comments