Quotes of the day

November 25, 2015 • 9:45 am

We have two quotes today. The first is from a reader who, commenting on the pervasive campus movement to restrict “offensive” speech, said this, which I see as pretty profound:

If we ban offensive speech, how will we know who the assholes are?

The second is from an interview in the New York Times with Bob Mankoff, who holds the very important post of cartoon editor for The New Yorker, which of course has the world’s best cartoons. Among other things, he says this in the Q&A:

This might get you in trouble: Do dogs or cats make better cartoon material?

No question, cats. We can project so much more onto cats. If you look back at the history of New Yorker cartoons, in the ’20s and ’30s, the cats and dogs don’t talk. And once they really start talking, in the ’40s, they don’t shut up.

Now why do you suppose, dear readers, that it’s possible to “project so much more onto cats”? Because they don’t express emotions as much as dogs do?

40 thoughts on “Quotes of the day”

  1. Did anyone else hear about a group of students at Princeton who organized to counter the demands of a speech-suppression group? I was so encouraged to read about this, but it has not received much press. I believe they are called the Princeton Open campus Coalition.

        1. Even more sadly, while the whiners got lots of press coverage, this did NOT appear in the Princeton newspaper.

    2. I wonder how many do the students calling for the removal of Wilson’s name have Che Guevara t-shirts. (He was a brutal killer with a hatred of gays)

  2. Of course in America we could not ban offensive speech. Otherwise, how could Donald Trump run for President, not to mention, lead the pack.

  3. Yes, cats leave more to one’s imagination, whereas dogs are better at making their “thoughts” and needs known to other members of their social group or “pack” in an explicit, straightforward manner.

    And of course, with our impressive ability to imagine and believe all sorts of bizarre things with no evidence (see religion), humans will often imagine cats are “thinking” all sorts of complex thoughts and “feeling” all sorts of complex emotions. In this way, folks can connect with their cats more closely. Meanwhile, cats are actually wondering why their servants are so consistently obedient …

  4. Cats are aloof, and that “I don’t give a shit” attitude has more comedic worth. The complicity of d*gs doesn’t make good comedy. I’m sure there are more reasons, but that’s the one that first occurred to me.

    That could have been a good argument during your debate. “Cats make for better cartoons than d*gs!” And funnier websites for that matter.

    1. Like the joke (have I told it here before?) about the chap who’d just decorated his living room.

      The d*g walks in and thinks, “I don’t know what you’ve done, but I love you!”

      The cat walks in and thinks, “I don’t like the colour.” (Maybe the walls are fucking brown.)

      /@

  5. Is it off topic to answer the cat question?

    I think it’s a combination of things. Cat faces are flatter and more human like. Their eyes have visible pupils, which makes them more human like.

    Cats are less obsequious, which makes them capable of evil. And evil is funnier than toadyism.

  7. In line with your first quote, I’ve often argued that the legal restrictions against people with problematic biases just covers thier bad attitudes.

    Is it not better to KNOW if a person or business is racist or otherwise offensive so you can avoid them? Why should my money go to someone whose attitudes I dislike?

    1. Aside from other issues, if we were to ban offensive speech, we could never effectively address the bigotry that causes it, nor know the extent of the problem.

  8. I don’t get the “cats are aloof / empty” perspective. Every cat I’ve known has been quite passionate. Yes, they often retreat like tortoises into their shells when something unfamiliar and potentially dangerous presents…and, I suppose, if you only have rare interactions with them, that might be all you ever experience. But once you actually know a cat, it’s simply incomprehensible to suggest that they’re emotionless automata. Might as well claim the sky is boring black because that’s what it looks like on an overcast moonless night in the middle of nowhere, and ignore the twice-daily explosion of color we get to enjoy at sunrise and sunset.

    b&

    1. Both cats and dogs are part of my life and they each have their appeal.

      Dogs and cats differ because of their evolution. Cats are relatively independent solitary hunters. As such, they may like you, but basically take care of their own issues. That’s why cats are easier to care for.

      Dogs, descended from wolves are almost the exact opposite. The pack is everything, cooperation is everything. Wolves as hunters are second only to humans in the complexity of hunting. Whereas a cat needs to take prey that is weaker, wolf packs can bring down prey much larger and stronger than any individual wolf. When dogs are pets, your family is thepack. That’s why they don’t do anything without you. Their social bonds are a lot like ours.

      The pack bond is so strong, that we tend to have a different personal feel with dogs. My 80 lb dog sleeps in our room, or may go and join my grand daughter when she visits. I couldn’t imagine doing that with an 80lb bobcat.

  10. Most dog cartoons involve ongoing characters like Peanut’s Snoopy, Scooby Doo, or Huckleberry Hound.

    Cats seem to play more as anonymous characters in one-panel cartoon strips. (Unless you count tigers as in Calvin and Hobbes or Tigger in Winnie-the-Pooh).

    Not sure if this sheds light on the manner, but this From Camille Paglia’s “Sexual Personne”:

    Cats are prowlers, uncanny creatures of the night. Cruelty and play are one for them…They live by and for fear, practicing being scared or spooking humans by sudden rushings and ambushes. Cats dwell in the occult, that is, the “hidden”…the cat really is in league with chthonian nature, Christianity’s mortal enemy…Compared to dogs, slavishly eager to please, cats are autocrats of naked self-interest. They are both amoral and immoral, consciously breaking rules. Their “evil” look at such times is no human projection: the cat may be the only animal who savors the perverse or reflects upon it.

  12. I love the “If we ban offensive speech, how will we know who the assholes are?” quote. Who said it? I want to use it!

    2. The idea that you shouldn’t drive the “bad guys” into speaking underground and encourage them to speak openly so we know who they are and what they are on about is actually due to J. S. Mill, though this is a slightly “cruder” version, which might be more effective these days.

      1. Cheers. 🙂

        I think there are lots of other reasons to encourage free speech too.
        Among them, it gives you the opportunity to counter bad ideas and get people to think about what they think.

        Also, I think laws like those in France and Germany that make denying the Holocaust a criminal offence just give the nutters (with apologies to those with genuine mental illness) fodder for things like conspiracy theories.

  13. Ah, the cat/dog question brought back good memories of George Booth’s cartoons:

    imagecache5d.allposters.com/watermarker/65-6599-3CP2100Z.jpg?ch=774&cw=774

    imgc-cn.artprintimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/60/6065/33AD100Z/posters/george-booth-all-you-really-need-in-life-is-the-love-of-a-good-cat-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg

    imgc-cn.artprintimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/60/6063/CSED100Z/posters/george-booth-i-feed-the-cat-nothing-but-veggies-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg

  14. “If we ban offensive speech, how will we know who the assholes are?”

    And, then the assholes will just *think* it.

    So what we need is…. the Thought Police!

    cr

  15. The trouble is, is it the arseholes trying to bannish the other arseholes that we all want to recognise or both… am I just confused?

  16. The cat

    Felicitous and duplicitous
    Green eyes slit lengthwise
    Imperious intense, serious
    And then it pounces at flies

Comments are closed.