The Comics Curmudgeon

Main content:

Puppies are cute, corpses are not

Non Sequitur, 4/25/05

I’m not going to beat around the bush here: I think Wiley, of Wiley fame, is going insane. I think we can all agree that his Sunday strips have slowly evolved from tepid, ham-handed satires (e.g., “Esme in the Land Before Time” or what have you) into completely whacked-out text-heavy Jules Verne pastiches involving floating Victorian cities, mustachioed balloon-sized men right out of a Thomas Nast cartoon, and pterodactyls being shot out of the sky by evil harpoon-wielding Germans. This has been alternating with weekly strips that have for months now focused relentlessly on Danae, the most evil little girl who has ever lived, who is apparently supposed to represent the horror that is modern American life, only without the charm. Today, however, we’re taking things in a new direction, as we’re apparently going to be treated to a series about a dead hobo’s adorable puppy finding his own way in the world. I’m sure it will be uplifting and won’t make you once want to shoot yourself in the head. Hopefully.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 26, 2005 at 01:29 am and is filed under Non Sequitur.

66 responses to “Puppies are cute, corpses are not”

meep
April 26th, 2005 at 4:20 am [Reply]

Let’s face it — all comics writers are insane.
Firegoat
April 26th, 2005 at 4:53 am [Reply]

I hope it shows the puppy eating him for food soon.

Teaser ad: Next! Puppy Porkout!
WoodrowFan
April 26th, 2005 at 6:08 am [Reply]

But Wiley is a GENIUS! Just ask him, he;ll tell you!
Joe
April 26th, 2005 at 6:54 am [Reply]

Cool! A reverse Mr. Bojangles, where, instead of the ‘dog up an died’ Mr. Bojangles up and died.

Maybe the hobo should have ‘learned to dance a lick’ to make ends meet.
Lassie
April 26th, 2005 at 6:54 am [Reply]

Every Sunday the title panel in the strip features, I don’t know, a pterodactyl? or big bird of some sort, in a nest, with a long neck, and a sharpened pencil for a head. This creeps me out no end.
Jiggles
April 26th, 2005 at 7:01 am [Reply]

I’m usually in the modd to make fun of the comics, but never Non Sequitur – it is the unfunniest comic there is.

It makes B.C. look like Monty Python’s Flying Circus.
TwoClubs
April 26th, 2005 at 7:09 am [Reply]

I hate to sound too non-satirical, but I just looked over the last few Sundays of Non-sequitur (have never seen it before), and I was quite impressed with the illustration. This guy seems like a frustated children’s book writer.
Firegoat
April 26th, 2005 at 7:18 am [Reply]

Off topic. Can someone explain the cherry pie slice and dynamite stick in the Bizarro comic?
Monkeys Uncle
April 26th, 2005 at 7:43 am [Reply]

I have seen more corpses in the comics latley then usual (usually I see none). Mary Worth, Non Sequitur, and maybe Rex Morgan, I belive we saw Tres Smarts corpse in Brenda Starr an eternity ago (about two weeks). This combined with the sex and scratching at FBOFW seems to indicate the end of the world. You know the apocalypse, the rapture, the end of… Or I guess it could be just a gross coincindence. Yeah I’m going with coincidence, sorry about that end of the world stuff the coffee maker is broke.
MaryAnnTheRest
April 26th, 2005 at 8:01 am [Reply]

Oh, man, I am so glad to find other people who think that Non Sequitir is painfully unfunny. I was beginning to think it was just me. Yeah, if I want to read that much text on a Sunday, I’ll look *inside* the newspaper. There’s nothing more funny than a hungry stray dog, either. Oh, well, maybe he’ll get rabies and go on a rampage.
Ken
April 26th, 2005 at 8:02 am [Reply]

I like this, new stuff can be good party people.
ComicsFan
April 26th, 2005 at 8:13 am [Reply]

Firegoat, visit bizarro.com. They and several other objects are hidden in the strips nearly every week. Kind of like a Highlights magazine Hidden Objects puzzle, only more pointless.
Alex
April 26th, 2005 at 8:27 am [Reply]

Oh darn. Before reading the commentary, I thought the dog was picking the homeless guy’s pocket while he was asleep or passed out. That would have been pretty funny.
Gwen
April 26th, 2005 at 8:38 am [Reply]

We’re revisiting the Victorian age. Start making jewelry with the hair of your loved ones now.
Leons Petrazickis
April 26th, 2005 at 8:39 am [Reply]

You people are all blasphemers. Non Sequitur is too funny for your puny minds to grasp. I have spoken.
Wiley
April 26th, 2005 at 9:03 am [Reply]

but I am a genius, I am. I swear, I am. Don’t you all know anything? (with the exception of #15) I freakin’ brilliant!
daChipster
April 26th, 2005 at 9:28 am [Reply]

Many of you are probably too young (and unable to stand black and white syndicated shows) to see where THIS one is going!

Petey, the flop-eared pooch with the circle around one eye, will head for the freight yard and nose his way onto a westbound train (the dead old man having frequented such hobo havens in the past.)

In sunny California, he will be taken in by our gang of little rascals, be fattened up on Depression-era scraps and find immortality:

http://salathekennels.com/images/history/PeteyAndOurGang.jpg

He’ll also do cameos as Buster Brown’s dog. Eventually, Alfalfa, jealous of Petey’s superior acting skills, will surreptitiously feed the pooch to Spanky, Buckwheat and Darla in a Chinese New Years’ feast, as immortalized in Our Gang episode #41: Dog-gone Good Chow!
Semi
April 26th, 2005 at 9:57 am [Reply]

I don’t think “Non Sequitir” is all that polarizing. Sometimes it gets a chuckle, sometimes not… a few times it’s made me laugh. I don’t know… just like “Close to Home” I look at it as a very very poor imitation of “The Far Side”. And occasionally as a very very VERY poor imitation of “Bloom County”.
Irina
April 26th, 2005 at 10:03 am [Reply]

Althought it’s condescending and pedantic, I often get a chuckle out of his “Obviousman” adventures.

Have to side with everyone else on Danae and the Horse, and the text-heavy sunday strips of late, tho.

And in the third panel, Firegoat, I think you’re already seeing it. It appears the pooch is takin’ a big ol’ bite outta back of the guy’s thigh.

Tomorrow’s episode: From Jack Russel to St. Bernard — or the Nutritional Value of Bums (or thighs)
Cynthesizer
April 26th, 2005 at 10:06 am [Reply]

Petey the Pooch: “More hobos, mule!”
Blog Jones
April 26th, 2005 at 10:24 am [Reply]

This story reminds me of this:
Blog Jones
April 26th, 2005 at 10:26 am [Reply]

Huh. No images then. How about hyperlinks? Lil’ Brudder
Irina
April 26th, 2005 at 10:44 am [Reply]

I can’t believe I sat through that, BJ. You get paid for every hit that site gets?
Shaun
April 26th, 2005 at 10:48 am [Reply]

Non Sequitur is at its best when it does one panel jokes. These extended storylines are horrible. When I skip over the strip on Sunday mornings, I used to console myself by looking forward to Monday and the start of a non-extended storyline strip. Now, even that joy has been taken from me. But I have to admit, I do like Danae. She’s like a more jaded and manipulative Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes. Unfortunately, her horse is a pointless waste of ink and serves no purpose. The horse nowdays seems to exist only to provide a counterpoint to Danae, something that her friend (or is it her sister?) is quite capable of doing.
DrBear
April 26th, 2005 at 11:24 am [Reply]

Having seen today’s episode – the cops haul the bum away, call animal control and Petey hits the road – I can see this is going to move with the whiz-bang pace of a Benji film in slow motion.
Joseph J. Finn
April 26th, 2005 at 11:25 am [Reply]

Hell, it’s even unoriginal. It’s a ripoff of Paul Auster’s fine novel “Timbuktu.”
Robotskirts
April 26th, 2005 at 11:39 am [Reply]

Did anybody see checkerboard nightmare’s strip. Like most webcartoonists he hates Wiley. http://checkerboardnightmare.com/d/20050425.html
Here is a Wiley strip jabbing Scott Kurtz ( http://www.pvponline.com/ )
http://www.websnark.com/archives/2004/12/wiley_blinks.html
and another nightmare strip.
http://www.checkerboardnightmare.com/d/20050107.html
Blog Jones
April 26th, 2005 at 12:02 pm [Reply]

Irina: No, but it’d be nice…
johncomic
April 26th, 2005 at 12:40 pm [Reply]

More necrophagy, mule!
Honey
April 26th, 2005 at 1:55 pm [Reply]

Non Sequitur was occasionally funny ten years ago. Now the art’s still good, but it sucks.
gershwin
April 26th, 2005 at 2:39 pm [Reply]

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the pup DID eat him. This strip takes the lead with a theme I have never found funny: anthropomorphised* characters consuming each other.

*(did I spell that right? and Can you say it three times fast?)
The Most Hilarious Site Ever
April 26th, 2005 at 3:05 pm [Reply]

You didn’t spell it right in AMERICAN, gershwin. We don’t reckamonize no foreign variants around these parts!

USA!!!!!111one
Mel
April 26th, 2005 at 3:37 pm [Reply]

Man, this guy keeps doing strips and they’re always, alway boring. He had one with a ferret about 7-8 years back now, and he even made THAT boring.
Chris Durnell
April 26th, 2005 at 3:41 pm [Reply]

Isn’t Non Sequiter essentially the only anthology series in comics today? The strip is merely a vehicle for Wiley to tell whatever story he wants. Sometimes he does a one panel funny like Far Side. Other times he goes for a Pogoesque storyline. Or whatever.

I think he deserves kudos simply for pulling it off.
Peaches
April 26th, 2005 at 4:40 pm [Reply]

I was depressed before the cute little lost puppy storyline. Now I’m suicidal. Thanks, Wiley. I really needed this.
Incident
April 26th, 2005 at 5:18 pm [Reply]

I haven’t seen Non Sequiter in years. Back then, it was just another of the cookie-cutter Mother Goose and Grimm knockoffs. Apparently, at some point the artist read ‘Understanding Comics’ and ‘Contract with God’ and ‘Little Nemo’ and the sudden crushing realization of his own mediocrity drove him mad. I’m sure in his own twisted fantasy world, this is his Eisner-award story.
2fs
April 26th, 2005 at 5:28 pm [Reply]

I’m onomastically challenged: how the hell is “Danae” pronounced?
Monkeys Uncle
April 26th, 2005 at 5:35 pm [Reply]

Hobo master fall over dead?

Run for high ground!
Ali
April 26th, 2005 at 6:15 pm [Reply]

“DUH-NAY”
JG!
April 26th, 2005 at 6:23 pm [Reply]

2fs: I think it’s pronounced “DAH-Nay.”
JG!
April 26th, 2005 at 6:24 pm [Reply]

I’m close enough :)
Shaenon
April 26th, 2005 at 6:47 pm [Reply]

Wiley’s artwork is always gorgeous, but I am hella not grooving on the homeless-puppy storyline. Obviousman annoys the crap out of me, too. In fact, he annoys me more when he’s making a point I actually agree with. I hate having to be on the same side as that pompous twerp. Yeah, teenagers should pull up their pants, and “ATM Machine” is wrong, but you don’t have to be a jackass about it.

I like the Danae strips the best, mainly because of the incredibly cute way Wiley draws kids. Even those strips have a way of wandering off on some vague sociopolitical tangent only of interest to middle-aged bachelors who sit indoors drawing cartoons all day. It makes me nostalgic for the heavy-handed social allegories set on the Titanic.

I agree with the person who said that Wiley seems like a frustrated children’s-book artist. Part of me is kind of glad there’s still something this peculiar in the newspapers, but the modern syndicated comic strip doesn’t seem like the right venue for this guy’s talents.
rozencrantz
April 26th, 2005 at 7:55 pm [Reply]

You’re both wrong: It’s obviously [d@'ne]
spiderbaby
April 26th, 2005 at 8:03 pm [Reply]

I am sort of rooting for Wiley. It seems like he’s trying to single handedly bring back the majestic old Funny Pages, the ones that Bill Watterson and etc. get all misty eyed for. It brings to mind old coots in propeller trick planes going after alien spaceships.

Granted, his meanspirited cluelessness where webcomics are concerned kind of wrecks it for me.
Adouble
April 26th, 2005 at 9:08 pm [Reply]

Shaenon wrote:
he annoys me more when heâ€™s making a point I actually agree with. I hate having to be on the same side as that pompous twerp.

This reminds me of something in “America: The Book” about how annoying Sean Penn is. Ok, I’ll give a cyber-dollar for anyone who can come up with a good name for this phenomena of hating it when someone makes a point you agree with because they still sound like a total douche-sicle.
simulacrum
April 26th, 2005 at 10:19 pm [Reply]

Adouble:
self-righteousness
(on the part of the douche-sicle)
evilwaldo
April 27th, 2005 at 12:01 am [Reply]

Have all of you not been reading this site for the past few days??? People, people, people. Josh gave us zombie warnings on Sunday. Now what happens on Monday? A person dies in Non Sequitur. That can only mean sometime later this week (or next year if it was Mary Worth) this person will rise as a zombie. Be prepared people. You have been warned.

Off to Wal-Mart to get my zombie fighting materials.
Sokudo
April 27th, 2005 at 2:46 am [Reply]

I like Non Sequitur only because I’m obviously mad.
Bookman
April 27th, 2005 at 4:02 am [Reply]

Adouble,

After the literalist in me struggled with what exactly a douche-sicle might sound like, I came up with what may be the expression.

I would call the reaction an ANTINARCISSIAN RETCH. It’s a bit unwieldy in the mouth, but I think it captures the essence of what you were discussing, and hopefully, this post doesn’t give you one.
Nate Birch
April 27th, 2005 at 6:25 am [Reply]

I actually quite like Non-Sequitur. Good art, it’s quite original, and yes…it’s sometimes fairly amusing. At least it’s better than 90% of the trash cluttering up the comics page.
Moesy
April 27th, 2005 at 12:41 pm [Reply]

I was gonna try to give adouble a term, but Bookman’s “ANTINARCISSIAN RETCH” is way better than anything I could put out there.
Joe Cabrera
April 27th, 2005 at 8:11 pm [Reply]

Wiley is turning into a helluva crotchety old coot, isn’t he? crab crab crab — it’s getting to be as whiny as Mallard Fillmore
jazon
April 27th, 2005 at 9:41 pm [Reply]

Check it out – Obviousman – the movie!
http://images.ucomics.com/images/nq/medium.html

Wiley’s trying to break into “flash animation”!
cbrubaker
April 27th, 2005 at 10:04 pm [Reply]

The song in the Obviousman movie rules, man.

Anyway…wow, this week’s Non Sequitur is DARK!

It kinda reminds me of “Mutts”, but darker and freakier.
Jowdygirl
April 27th, 2005 at 10:46 pm [Reply]

Pisses me off when the comics depress you to the point that you think of taking your own life,,, dayum,, poor Petey alone and homeless for the first time,,, I can’t sleep,,, can’t eat,,, late for work (again)

but at least I have a good excuse for being late for work
WoodrowFan
April 28th, 2005 at 8:43 am [Reply]

I confess that Lucy the horse amuses me. I haven’t read the Sunday strip in months, however. And I’d still rather read a month’s worth of Wiley than a single day of BC or the “Wizard of Id”
Grisam
May 6th, 2005 at 11:33 am [Reply]

I HATE the strip. Either its ripping off Calvin and Hobbes or its making some ham fisted liberal sob-fest sermon.
Dennis in Atlanta
July 3rd, 2005 at 9:03 am [Reply]

Wiley’s “Ordinary Basil” storyline is trite and insipid. As draftsmanship, it’s a second-rate ripoff of Edward Gorey. As literature, it’s a ghostly pale Roald Dahl impostor. There’s nothing compelling or original about the plot; the characters are weak (a German villain? does Wiley’s worldview come from 1940s Hollywood? And why does the wise old pacifist Professor McFrink (or whatever) wear military trappings like epaulets?) The storyline is so tiresome and plodding, there’s no way to imagine it taking a sudden turn into inspired originality. It will simply drag on and on until it reaches some hackneyed conclusion we’ve seen in a million other banal “adventure stories” about innocents abroad and their boring relationships with other two-dimensional cardboard cutouts.

This week, I see the green-faced hunchback henchman (henchback?) is feebly being built up into something of a more-than-tertiary character; I imagine he’ll find his heart of gold and betray the evil Doctor at the end, perhaps cutting his hand off with a light saber and throwing him into a pterodactyl-shaft before perishing himself in the fires of Mount Doom.
rachal
August 15th, 2005 at 2:26 pm [Reply]

I love Wiley and everything he does. He deals with the harshness of reality and questions everything. Just because it isn’t a “cute” or “adorable” comic doesn’t mean its not brilliant. And of course the puppy is not biting the man’s thigh, whoever said that has shown me the climax of stupidity and ignorance.
David
August 24th, 2005 at 3:32 pm [Reply]

Comics don’t have to always be funny. Some of you people are missing that point. I missed that point for a long time. That’s why it took me so long to come around to For Better Or For Worse. But now I recognize it as the great strip it is. Great, but rarely funny.
Werner
September 5th, 2005 at 8:13 am [Reply]

I used to get some of these cartoons in my e-mail. I like Danae and Lucy but lately there has been less of these. Lucy is constantly holding up a mirror to Danae’s deviousness. ” You get an idea and I do all the work.” Apparently Wiley’s wife owns horses. W is just looking at an area of personal interest from the view of an outsider … in a satirical but friendly way.
Obviousman is not that great although the Petey the dog is alright. Maybe Wiley is trying to make a point. People do die on the streets and that isn’t funny. No kidding…
Scott
February 27th, 2006 at 2:56 am [Reply]

That’s one not-even-in-the-ballpark description of Non-Sequitur.

Precocious and devious? Absolutely. But Danae evil? I think YOU must be insane. She’s no more “bad” than Calvin (of with-Hobbes fame), the “Family Blues” kids, or almost any other comic child.

I’m not real fond of the big long tales as i think a strip is a rotten place to tell a text/plot heavy story of any kind. But when the strip sticks to Danae and Lucy doings it’s great.

And to the bloke who called Mallard Fillmore crotchety, i’d say: sometimes the truth ain’t pretty.
kevin
March 20th, 2006 at 10:39 pm [Reply]

anyone know how i can get a copy of Close to Home cartoon where big bird is eating out of the bird feeder?
cg
April 28th, 2006 at 4:27 pm [Reply]

Danae Rocks!
Duncan
June 20th, 2006 at 1:24 pm [Reply]

I think puppies are cute. Not sure what the comments on Non-Sequitur are about, do the puppies even know what it means? :)
Anonymous
November 9th, 2006 at 2:02 pm [Reply]

hey thats gay

Please read the posting and discussion policies before posting. You are not required to supply an e-mail address to comment; however, doing so decreases the likelihood of your comment being flagged as spam. E-mail addresses will never be made public or seen by anyone but the site writers, who may use them to communicate with commentors.

Archives:

Comment of the week:

Main navigation:

Main content:

Puppies are cute, corpses are not

66 responses to “Puppies are cute, corpses are not”

Leave a Reply

All the cool kids…

Randomly Selected Post O’ Mystery