The internet loves XKCD musical!

[Least_Original_User_Name_Ever]

Right, because that’s the point that’s being made.

[filling_pages]

@Least_Original_User_Name_Ever

I’d compare XKCD to The Far Side written by Gary Larson. Larson was obscure in a myriad of ways, and also in many disciplines. Munroe is obscure as well, but turns it up. For Munroe, the joke is the obscurity, and it fails when it tries to be so obscure, that only a tiny fraction of people can get it. Again, this isn’t to say that XKCD isn’t funny. I’ve seen some pretty funny and clever strips from him, but when he dials it up more, the point is lost. If the point of comedy were to talk over your audience so only a few people in the back get your joke, Dennis Miller would be the greatest comedian of all time. Actually, I think that’s an apt comparison: XKCD to Dennis Miller’s comedy routine.

The point is lost to you. Making it not funny to you. This ain’t Garfield. It seems that you are not the intended audience of xkcd. The intended audience either gets the jokes right off or enjoys taking steps to figure out what he’s talking about.

If the point of comedy was to make sure every single person in the crowd gets the joke, Raffi would be the greatest comedian of all time.

[Simplicio]

@filling_pages

The point is lost to you. Making it not funny to you. This ain’t Garfield. It seems that you are not the intended audience of xkcd. The intended audience either gets the jokes right off or enjoys taking steps to figure out what he’s talking about.

If the point of comedy was to make sure every single person in the crowd gets the joke, Raffi would be the greatest comedian of all time.

Eh, I’m a physicist who spends most of my time working with computers, and as a result, I don’t think I’ve ever missed an XKCD reference, but I can get what Least Original is saying. Sometimes in XKCD there isn’t really just a joke, he just makes an obscure reference, and expect the readership to feel warm and fuzzy because they’re “in the know” (random example).

I still like XKCD comics and look forward to reading, since in most of them he does make a joke. But sometimes he just kinda phones it in. A few months ago it started to feel like he was just flipping to a random page in an undergrad physics text book to find something to make a lame pun off of, but happily its been more innovative since.

(And I enjoyed the OP’s links, FWIW)

[Chronos]

The difference between XKCD and a stand-up comic’s routine is that, with the entire Internet to draw from, a webcomic can cater to an extremely narrow demographic, and still draw a large audience from it. Of course it’s not funny to anyone outside that demographic, but it doesn’t need to be. For all those folks who don’t find XKCD funny, I’m sure there are things you find hilarious that I wouldn’t get, too. And that’s fine.

[Mister_Rik]

I’m a daily xkcd reader, though I’m certainly not a “scientist” and I don’t always understand the details of the science behind the jokes, I can usually grok the intent and appreciate the humor. For example, I couldn’t quote Ohm’s Law for you, but I still found the strip Simplicio linked quite funny because I understand the point of the joke. It’s similar to that joke that says, “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the precipitate”. Again, I can’t explain the science, but I can appreciate the concept.

The xkcd strips that usually completely go over my head are the ones that reference TV shows (the Boom-di-yada strip that started all this is a prime example; that one completely lost me when it first came out until somebody here linked to the Discovery Channel promo), because I don’t watch television.