I love it. They work! At first, I began to think of imagery associated with the words, but then realized that was unnecessary and just appreciated the captions for themselves. And there’s also something very soothing about listening and the space you put between them. I should go look at the cartoons now, though!
As a playwright, I especially enjoyed ". . . an exciting new bad play." I've got my current New Yorker, but have yet to read it. (It's the annual issue with What's-His-Name on the cover. What's his name?) I've been a subscriber since 1974 (or so). Good thing I'm not a hoarder! Love your column, Liza.
To be honest, while I love spoken word renditions, particularly for poetry and a good book, I don’t think it works for cartoons or captioned illustration. The artwork of a drawing includes so much little (or WILD !) details which express inference elucidated by the caption that, to me, they are inseparable. I have been an ardent competitor in the New Yorker ‘Caption Contest’ since it started and am, sadly, a serial loser. Can’t imagine if you tried to verbally describe a drawing, (don’t get me wrong… I love your live drawing tutorials), intended for a cartoon without including the caption or a comment on your mind’s eye or a hint of what motivated it!! Pure illustration is different. It can communicate without words. Ugh… probably more than anyone wants to hear!! Keep drawing !!
Thanks for your words! I agree that we really need the art. But I find it a fun exercise to hear how the captions are writen. Someday soon I plan to read captions by James Thurber. Stay tuned, it will be a treat.
Re the captions... best stand alone is re Great Artists and office supplies. But the reading also shows how much the image and caption are necessarily together.
I love it. They work! At first, I began to think of imagery associated with the words, but then realized that was unnecessary and just appreciated the captions for themselves. And there’s also something very soothing about listening and the space you put between them. I should go look at the cartoons now, though!
As a playwright, I especially enjoyed ". . . an exciting new bad play." I've got my current New Yorker, but have yet to read it. (It's the annual issue with What's-His-Name on the cover. What's his name?) I've been a subscriber since 1974 (or so). Good thing I'm not a hoarder! Love your column, Liza.
His name is Eustace Tilly! Thank you, so glad to have you here.
To be honest, while I love spoken word renditions, particularly for poetry and a good book, I don’t think it works for cartoons or captioned illustration. The artwork of a drawing includes so much little (or WILD !) details which express inference elucidated by the caption that, to me, they are inseparable. I have been an ardent competitor in the New Yorker ‘Caption Contest’ since it started and am, sadly, a serial loser. Can’t imagine if you tried to verbally describe a drawing, (don’t get me wrong… I love your live drawing tutorials), intended for a cartoon without including the caption or a comment on your mind’s eye or a hint of what motivated it!! Pure illustration is different. It can communicate without words. Ugh… probably more than anyone wants to hear!! Keep drawing !!
Thanks for your words! I agree that we really need the art. But I find it a fun exercise to hear how the captions are writen. Someday soon I plan to read captions by James Thurber. Stay tuned, it will be a treat.
The passenger one made me laugh out loud but they almost all made me smile inwardly. Wasn’t sure what flattened meant.
Happy Valentine’s Day, Liza! Thanks for the chocolates collaboration! 💕
You are welcome! You got some??
😋
Re the captions... best stand alone is re Great Artists and office supplies. But the reading also shows how much the image and caption are necessarily together.
Absolutely agree!
Yes. Still funny with no pictures. Fun to visualize what the image could be. Thanks for the laughs. 😊
I wasn’t sure at first, but I find listening to the captions. Quite fun. Some of them can’t stand alone and are funny.