1966: In Character Garfield
In Character Garfield |
![]() Made by: Lubaf |
Explanation[edit | edit source]
The author writes:[edit | edit source]
Because the original ignored previous canon (from as recently as 2012-09-09).
Admin note: Colin Foster submitted an almost identical strip less than two hours after Lubaf (showing below).
I saw the original strip and was shocked that Garfield didn't use the "we're bachelors, baby!" punchline that Jim Davis mysteriously thinks is funny. So I fixed it for him.
Also, are there really washable napkins? And why would you wash them in the laundry? Wouldn't that get gross bits of foodstuff on your clothes? Oh, wait. They're bachelors, baby.
Original strips: 2006-11-06, 2006-11-07, 2006-11-08, 2006-11-09, 2006-11-10, 2006-11-11, 2008-03-27, 2009-04-23, 2010-05-05, 2012-09-09, 2014-03-16, 2014-06-06.
Transcript[edit | edit source]
Jon: {holding a pot} All we have is noodles, so we're having noodles tonight.
Jon: {holding pencils} The forks are still dirty, but we can use these pencils like chopsticks
Jon: {holding a sock} And the napkins are still in the laundry, so...
Garfield: We're bachelors, baby.
Trivia[edit | edit source]
- Unlike a number of other multiple-similar-strip examples run in a single space that give strip credits to all authors to make the submissions, only Lubaf formally received a strip credit; Colin Foster was not given a strip credit despite the format suggesting he should have been.
- The current crediting system credits several strips that were implied to not have been intended as such; the transition between the old and current crediting systems looked at the entire author's notes, not just the parts actually crediting strips, and interpreted links to Garfield strips as strip credits and credited them accordingly. Only 2014-06-06 (from both contributions), 2010-05-05 (from Lubaf's contribution), and 2014-03-16 (from Colin Foster's contribution) have cases for being intentional strip credits; the others were detected from author's note sentences.