« From an e-mail sent about my last post | Main | Yeah, there's no way anyone could find fault with this essay. None whatsoever. La la la.... »

Eric: In other news... um... oh heck. Back to KISSINGS!

So, we have the second part of... I guess you would call it Weds's guest appearance in Shortpacked? Yeah. Anyway, part two is up.

Three quick comments, rather than doing a "submitted without comment" thing two(ish) days in a row:

1. David Willis has really nailed Weds's hair. I know that's a weird thing to focus on, since her whole demeanor and face and all are right. But still. That's nailed hair, right there, and somehow it seems harder to do.

2. Galasso's reaction has been surprising me. I mean, on the one hand, he's clearly into it. But he's also clearly not comfortable being into it. It is outside his experience. And very, very little seems to shake his ineffable sense of confidence.

2.1. Not really a separate comment from the last, but still: dude. Ninja costumes.

3. Daaaaaaaaaaamn.

Thank you, and good morning.

Posted by Eric Burns-White at March 7, 2006 10:15 AM

Comments

Comment from: Doug [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 10:50 AM

Ninja costumes would be overkill. You'd get a much more acceptable effect by accessorizing with whipped cream, jello and string bikinis.

Can't go wrong with the classics!

Comment from: 32_footsteps [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 11:02 AM

Silly Rick. You didn't see this coming at all. This obviously means they are ninja, so they're already wearing ninja costumes.

Now, if they were dressed as pirates, now we're talking.

Comment from: Ford Dent [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 11:34 AM

I think its safe to say that this is one of the better Shortpacked! moments.

Now are you going to pony up that $60?

Comment from: PatMan [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 12:52 PM

The hair was definately dead on. I recognized her right away. The face seems a bit odd, but that might be from looking at her self portraits. I guess I've come to expect a goofier mouth on cartoon-Weds.

Oh, and the kissing. The kissing is nice.

Comment from: Abby L. [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 1:00 PM

This would be even funnier if they all left together. Suddenly Amber gives up on her Internet Dream Man and moves to the other side. The other side being kinky three-ways! BAM!

On a more serious note, I am impressed with the way that Willis can work in this incestuous (webcomics community-wise) cameo without really losing anything for people who don't know who Eric and Wednesday are. Plus, it's HILARIOUS.

Comment from: Botswana [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 1:04 PM

I just love the defense. "THIS TOTALLY RANDOM CHICK". Riiiiight.

The funny thing is, I've never seen Ms. White, but I did recognize Mr. Burns, so it didn't take much to figure out.

I love Shortpacked. Even the drama is pretty funny.

Comment from: jurijuri [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 2:02 PM

Woah, that DOES look like Weds. XD

Comment from: Phil Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 2:15 PM

"David Willis... nailed Weds..."

That son of a bitch.

Comment from: quiller [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 6:23 PM

I knew it was her, but mostly from the strong resemblance to the pictures of her that accompany her comments in Gossamer Commons (I'm not sure if that is a self-portrait or Holkan's work). So if Willis got it right it must be that those are accurate too.

Comment from: Aerin [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 7:51 PM

I second that the joke on both days still completely works even if you didn't recognize Eric or Weds, which makes it even more brilliant.

Comment from: Tangent [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 7:54 PM

Meh.

Comment from: Fletch [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 8:28 PM

$20 ($60?) says Rob's so unimpressed because no artists draw his girl getting it on with webcomic hotties.

Comment from: Wednesday White [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 8:41 PM

Quiller: The GC usericon is Holkan's work.

Comment from: Wistful Dreamer [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 9:10 PM

"I second that the joke on both days still completely works even if you didn't recognize Eric or Weds, which makes it even more brilliant."

I would say that that is vital. If the strip only works for the uber-fans (those in depth enough to have heard of webcomic critics, or in this role simply webcomic celebrities), then you have lost your focus on your base audience.

Comment from: Paul Gadzikowski [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 7, 2006 10:06 PM

If the strip only works for the uber-fans (those in depth enough to have heard of webcomic critics, or in this role simply webcomic celebrities), then you have lost your focus on your base audience.

Well that makes me feel better.

Comment from: Josh C [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 12:44 AM

Lost your focus on your base audience? I'd say this highly focused his very, very base audience.

Comment from: miyaa [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 2:33 AM

Next proposed cameo: Wednesday getting a dental checked up by Dr. Ninja. "See, Miss White, that's why you can't sleep well. You have a homing device lodged in your nose."

Comment from: Bahimiron [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 8:31 AM

Or Eric in a panda costume attacking Brent Sienna.

Comment from: Tangent [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 8:36 AM

$20 ($60?) says Rob's so unimpressed because no artists draw his girl getting it on with webcomic hotties.
No. I'm unimpressed with a storyline that's played a joke (and indeed a story itself) into the ground.

Willis can do (and has done) better.

Comment from: Violet [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 12:55 PM

No. I'm unimpressed with a storyline that's played a joke (and indeed a story itself) into the ground.

It would be churlish of me to point out your tendency to loudly congratulate Eric's mentions and appearances elsewhere. (Narbonic held a recent example. The comic has deliberately invoked Eric more than once, and at the author's acknowledgement.) It is difficult to dismiss suspicion.

Was Faz's Kinsey rating not redemptive? I was greatly amused by it.

Comment from: Violet [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 12:58 PM

(Strike the superfluous "and" in the above parens, please. Limits of 6A's commenting mechanism, et cetera.)

Comment from: Tangent [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 1:47 PM

Perhaps I'm just in a sour mood of late.

Or it could have something to do with the fact I've not been enjoying Shortpacked all that much and wondering if I should put it in my "read you again in 30 days" folder.

But to be honest, I found the first bit with Eric and Weds on Monday to be amusing. But to follow through on it just lost me. Even the Ninja costume joke did little to increase the amusement value. And today's Shortpacked with the Kinsey chart left me completely unamused, seeing that the punchline was part of Faz's humiliation back when we first learned he was trying for Ethan's job.

Shortpacked works best when showing the intrinsic humor of the store rather than continuing the humiliation of its cast or secondary characters. With the recent shift to working over the cast on the rack for the sake of laughs, the comic has lost much of its appeal.

Tuesday's comic just continued this pattern with an ongoing degradation of Amber by Robin in some Machiavellian plot to get Ethan more interested in her than Amber (despite the fact that Amber and Ethan are only friends).

If this is considered humor... then obviously I've been wrong about humor all along, seeing that I thought it was supposed to be about making people laugh (and not a nervous laugh that people make when uncomfortable about a situation).

Rob H.

Comment from: Eric Burns [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 2:36 PM

If this is considered humor... then obviously I've been wrong about humor all along, seeing that I thought it was supposed to be about making people laugh (and not a nervous laugh that people make when uncomfortable about a situation).

Isn't it somehow more likely, however, that not everyone finds the same things funny?

Seriously. Quite a few people thought all of this was funny. I certainly laughed at the Kinsey scale thing today. And... well, yeah, I found Faz's humiliation funny. Because Faz is so over the top confident that seeing him humiliated about anything -- anything -- is funny. That's what the character was designed to do.

So... maybe you felt uncomfortable about the situation, and didn't laugh. That's legitimate. However, the fact is, other folks did laugh. That doesn't make you "wrong about humor." That means your personal tastes are natural laws. Just like mine aren't.

Only Jeffrey Rowland's personal tastes are natural laws.

Well, and Burt Reynolds's tastes, but that goes without saying.

Comment from: 32_footsteps [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 3:28 PM

What about Chuck Norris's? Oh, you said tastes, not testes. Total mistake on my part.

To be fair, I also didn't laugh at the Kinsey joke today. Maybe because I thought the implication (that Faz is homosexual and rather ashamed of it) to be more sad than anything else.

Comment from: Robert Hutchinson [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 4:42 PM

I thought the implication was that Faz's ever-present need to explain everything completely and prove that he is a clever bastard caught up with him. "Oh, crap, I just revealed my entire (and very short) sexual history in my eagerness to show the world how to average the numbers 6 and 0."

Comment from: 32_footsteps [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 4:55 PM

Except that Faz admits that part of his impetus is to shift his own Kinsey profile towards heterosexuality - which implies shame in being a homosexual.

Comment from: Wednesday White [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 5:06 PM

I don't think it's so much that he's a homosexual as that his only sexual experience has been homosexual, and he has no way of confirming for himself whether or not he's bisexual because of his interpersonal ineptitude. We also don't have any way of knowing whether he enjoyed the limited experience.

Comment from: Eric Burns [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 5:28 PM

Also, Faz is all about the career path. And he may have decided his career path wouldn't be served by his being gay. Ergo, he must become heterosexual. And therefore, he shall seduce Amber, and prove his virility with her, also proving his heterosexuality, which will be one more step up the corporate ladder for him.

It's very keeping in character, really.

Comment from: Eric Burns [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 5:31 PM

Seriously. Quite a few people thought all of this was funny. I certainly laughed at the Kinsey scale thing today. And... well, yeah, I found Faz's humiliation funny. Because Faz is so over the top confident that seeing him humiliated about anything -- anything -- is funny. That's what the character was designed to do.

Also, consider. He is standing butt-naked in the store. Butt naked. This, he is shameless about.

However, having accidentially statistically revealed he is currently a 6 on the Kinsey scale in an effort to prove he's smarter than everyone around him? That embarrasses him.

Interesting thought processes inside that head of his, mm?

Comment from: 32_footsteps [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 6:12 PM

All good points about it being in character. But being in character does not automatically equal funny.

Comment from: mckenzee [TypeKey Profile Page] posted at March 8, 2006 7:40 PM

a nervous laugh that people make when uncomfortable about a situation

That's favorite kind of laughter. That, and the kind where they figure out the joke three days later, at a funeral, and can't fight back the snickers.

Time delayed laughter and uncomfortable laughter, those are my favorite kinds.

And dead frogs.

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?