# Explain this New Yorker cartoon **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 8, 2005, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743 "2005-12-08T19:38:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/1 "2005-12-08T19:38:42Z")
Well it finally happened. I’m stumped by this cartoon that appeared in a recent copy of the New Yorker. [Link.](http://www.cartoonbank.com/product_details.asp?mscssid=785T3K1H5WGC8N97SQUP6U8PQH8B86NF&sitetype=1&did=4&sid=121653&pid=&keyword=vacation§ion=orig_cartoons&title=undefined&whichpage=40&sortBy=popular). (For those who don’t want to go to the link: A couple is depicted standing at a railing looking over a body of water. It looks like they’re either it some resort or perhaps aboard a cruise ship. One says to the other: “Next vacation, let’s leave the chicken at home.” The aforementioned chicken stands alongside them…_headless_. Why is the chicken headless? Is the point of the cartoon that something bad happened to chicken this trip, so they don’t want to bring it next time? Is there something in the picture that I’m missing that would account for Clucker’s recent decapitation? What say ye? ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/2 "2005-12-08T19:40:06Z")
:smack: If I ever remember to include the closing parenthesis run for cover because it’ll mean that the world is about to end. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/3 "2005-12-08T19:41:06Z")
I think it is just poorly drawn. There is a little beak like thing on the front. ---
**Author:** ![MadPansy64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/dc4da7/32.png) [@MadPansy64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MadPansy64)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/4 "2005-12-08T19:50:21Z")
They’re implying that they run around like a chicken with its head cut off, instead of relaxing on vacation? I hope it means something else, but that was my first thought. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/5 "2005-12-08T19:54:46Z")
I went back and forth, and decided it wasn’t headless. I still don’t get it, unless the entirety of it is “isn’t that a weird idea?”. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/6 "2005-12-08T20:02:51Z")
> [@Zebra](#): > > I think it is just poorly drawn. > > There is a little beak like thing on the front. That’s my guess too. The “joke” is the silliness of bringing a chicken on a cruise in the first place. It also indirectly lampoons the (recently fashionable?) practice of keeping chickens as pets. Remember, this is a _New Yorker_ cartoon. It is intended to strike the reader as mildly amusing, perhaps even inspire a silent chuckle; but laughter would be in bad taste. (It also serves the secondary function of separating the cognoscenti who “get it” from the common horde who look at it and say, “WTF is so funny?!”) ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/7 "2005-12-08T20:05:18Z")
Why did the chicken cross the road? 'Cause it was stapled to the Feldmans. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/8 "2005-12-08T20:08:04Z")
It’s an absurdist twist on the “Let’s leave the children home next time” mantra that all vacationing parents say to each other at some point. ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/9 "2005-12-08T20:10:34Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > It’s an absurdist twist on the “Let’s leave the children home next time” mantra that all vacationing parents say to each other at some point. This is my take on it. And the “headless” chicken is just poorly drawn. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/10 "2005-12-08T20:18:49Z")
Either that, or they’re auditioning for replacements for Charles Addams… ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/11 "2005-12-08T20:20:19Z")
Poorly drawn?? What are you all talking about? That chicken ain’t got no head, ma! ---
**Author:** ![bouv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@bouv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bouv)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/12 "2005-12-08T20:21:39Z")
Am I the only one who thought of Mike, the Headless Chicken? ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/13 "2005-12-08T20:29:29Z")
I think the New Yorker does an annual feature where it reprints its least understood cartoons from the previous year and explain what the joke is supposed to be. (Or, at any rate, they did that in one edition that I happened to be reading. The least understood cartoon of that year, IIRC, showed one palm tree with a word bubble saying “You made me love you,” to which another group of palm trees respond “I didn’t wanna do it, I didn’t wanna do it.” The explanation was that it was just an absurdist take on the old 30s song.) Anyways, keep an eye out for that cartoon to be explained if they do that feature again. My thought was along the same lines as what people have been posting above – spin on the “let’s leave the kids home next year” thing. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/14 "2005-12-08T20:31:54Z")
> [@Smeghead](#): > > Poorly drawn?? What are you all talking about? That chicken ain’t got no head, ma! No, no, maybe they’re right. Perhaps the artist was going for a Winslow Homeresque effect by having us see the chicken’s face in a three-quarters hind view, as it gazes longingly out to sea. That’s probably why they regret bringing the chicken along with them, because they’d been hoping to spend their time playing Hearts with the chicken. But all it wants to do is mope around and gaze longingly out to sea, and two handed Hearts is a dull game. If only they’d brought a Cribbage board. Yeah, I think I get it now. ---
**Author:** ![middleman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9a140/32.png) [@middleman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/middleman)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/15 "2005-12-08T20:46:58Z")
Cartoons are like gossamer and one doesn’t dissect gossamer. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/16 "2005-12-08T20:47:45Z")
I don’t know what it meas but there is absolutely no head on that chicken. My vote so far goes to **MadPansy64’s** explanation. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/17 "2005-12-08T20:58:56Z")
I think the chicked is supposed to have a head, and is merely badly drawn. I looked at the cartoon before reading the thread, and it never occurred to me that the chicken was headless. ---
**Author:** ![Harmonious\_Discord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/74df32/32.png) [@Harmonious\_Discord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonious_Discord)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/18 "2005-12-08T21:03:45Z")
It’s a pigeon, known as a New York Chicken! You disagree, while what is it then? Yes I too first thought of Mike the headless chicken. ---
**Author:** ![bouv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@bouv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bouv)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/19 "2005-12-08T21:04:58Z")
> [@middleman](#): > > Cartoons are like gossamer and one doesn’t dissect gossamer. You don’t have to discet it, just tell me why it’s funny. (I got your email 😛 ) ---
**Author:** ![Plynck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Plynck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plynck)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2005, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743/20 "2005-12-08T21:08:33Z")
All is explained; it was the wrong caption. It should have read: “We’re both adults. If you want to give the chicken head, then give the chicken head.” [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-new-yorker-cartoon/334743.md?page=2)