If every Garfield was like this one, I'd be a fan

From a few days ago…

It seems to me that something very, very un-Garfieldish happened between these first and second panels. Someone please tell me that my warped mind is just misinterpreting this. Or if not, how in the hell this made it to print.

Heh, I read that one the other day but I didn’t interpret it as him eating the bird. Just that he was treating himself and mocking the bird for not having any. Like saying “Here’s to you, starving Chinese kids” as you throw away half-eaten food. Or something.

But I like your interpretation better. That’s awesome.

It looks like Garfield ate Polly. Is that what you’re thinking or you have something dirtier in mind?

Garfield has killed many many other animals in his lifetime. The correct interpretation is pretty straightforward, and it’s not that un-Garfieldish.

(I basically learned to read by looking at Garfield books)

Nothing dirtier, just that.

In what little Garfield I’ve read over the years, it’s always seemed like he never eats other animals, even mice. So this strip came as a bit of a shock to me. Talking animals eating other talking animals is a bit beyond your average sunday comics fare.

That is, without question, the bestest Garfield ever.

He totally ate Polly.

I dunno, I think it’s both more cruel and more funny if he’s just gloating and eating the cracker that the bird wants but can’t have.

Authorial intent does seem to involve the bird being eaten, though.

The true tragedy of this art piece is that “Polly” was actually a highly trained research parrot who had spent the past 30 years assisting scientists in understanding the true cognetive abilities of parrots. He had a 300+ word vocabulary, and could carry a reasonably intelligent conversation.

Fuck that cat.

I am not sure how else you can interpret this one other than he ate Polly. He eats the cracker because that is also where Polly is now.

What’s the Jack Handy thing about “I hope Jesus likes burritos, cause that’s what he’s getting”?

What, seriously? Jim Davis is a simpleton, that the bird was eaten is the only logical choice for a man of his limited intellect.

THIS is my fave Garfield strip:
http://www.retrojunk.com/details_articles/997/

I see subtle sometimes does get lost.

It’s obvious that he ate Polly and him eating the cracker was the punchline. There’s a hint of sarcasm\irony because Polly got his\her cracker. It totally gave me a giggle.

What the heck did you think it meant?

Many variations of it out on the net, but the theory I like best with respect to Garfield only works if you delete all of the cat’s lines from the strip. Leaving a deranged, lonely man to talk to himself. This is handy for seeing how radical the change can be.

Some of them get positively surreal:

Silent Garfield is even better when you combine it with the Garfield randomizer, which generates new Garfield strips by randomly choosing panels from old ones:

There’s also a variation where they take out Garfield altogether. Those strips just become sort of sad. I particularly like the B&W one. That’s comics-page gold, right there!

Wow, that is good. If I ever have the kind of job where you put up your favorite cartoons like a tacky moron in your office, I would definitely throw some of those up there. I can picture children crying after reading them, like with the Fight Club snips of porn.

To quote one of my favourite lines:

“You don’t want to eat me, Mr. Cat?”
“Eat you? No offence, but yuck…”

My favorite line by a cat in a comic strip comes from Hobbes, when Calvin asks him what the meaning of it all is.

“We’re here to devour each other alive.”

So what is the problem with Garfield? I guess I never spent much time reading the strips (I loved the cartoon when I was younger, but yeah). By the favorable reaction to the strip in the OP, is it that Garfield generally doesn’t act very cat-like?