AccueilGroupesDiscussionsPlusTendances
Site de recherche
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.

Résultats trouvés sur Google Books

Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.

The Best of the Rejection Collection: 293…
Chargement...

The Best of the Rejection Collection: 293 Cartoons That Were Too Dumb, Too Dark, or Too Naughty for The New Yorker (Revised 2nd Ed.) (édition 2022)

par Matthew Diffee (Auteur)

MembresCritiquesPopularitéÉvaluation moyenneMentions
14612185,821 (3.62)9
The best of the worst: these cartoons rejected by The New Yorker were deemed too dumb, too weird, or too naughty--but not for lack of laughs! Every week, hundreds and hundreds of cartoons pour into The New Yorker. Most are rejected. Doesn't matter how big a deal the cartoonist is, either. Roz Chast, David Sipress, Kim Warp, Sam gross, Ed Steed, Emily Flake, Navied Mahdavian, or Mary Lawton--if the work in question is too weird, too naughty, too juvenile, or too dark, it's out. Luckily for us, Matthew Diffee has been bravely sifting through the circular file to rescue the best of the worst. Here are 297 cartoons in a revised second edition featuring more than 50 new cartoons--even better, even worse! The cartoon set-ups may be familiar--a couple in bed, a few people stranded on a desert island, a doctor and patient in an examining room--but the joke are anything but, with twists so unexpected, you can't help but laugh out loud.… (plus d'informations)
Membre:cannellfan
Titre:The Best of the Rejection Collection: 293 Cartoons That Were Too Dumb, Too Dark, or Too Naughty for The New Yorker (Revised 2nd Ed.)
Auteurs:Matthew Diffee (Auteur)
Info:Workman Publishing Company (2022), Edition: Second, 384 pages
Collections:Votre bibliothèque
Évaluation:****1/2
Mots-clés:read2024, cartoons, comics, art, humor, New Yorker, rejection, Worldcon

Information sur l'oeuvre

The Best of the Rejection Collection: 293 Cartoons That Were Too Dumb, Too Dark, or Too Naughty for The New Yorker par Matthew Diffee

Chargement...

Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre

Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre.

» Voir aussi les 9 mentions

Affichage de 1-5 de 12 (suivant | tout afficher)
Very hit and miss with some of the artwork. Not very memorable.

-

I received a copy of this book via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review. ( )
  Koralis | Jul 12, 2022 |
The Best of the Rejection Collection is a fun look at the cartoons that were rejected by The New Yorker. In addition to the cartoons there are brief Q&As with the cartoonists.

The style, if not the content, of the cartoons is pure New Yorker, so that for me is a positive. Most of the rejections were for content rather than whether they worked or not. By that I mean either too lewd or potentially offensive. So while these are rejections they aren't all because they weren't humorous. That said, there are some real stinkers in here. My guess would be that our opinions on which were stinkers and which weren't might differ, but that is the nature of humor.

The short Q&As with the cartoonists left a bit to be desired but if they had gone with a couple pages of straight background it would have been disruptive visually and flow wise, so I can live with what was done. Some were fun, some just plain pointless, but they did offer a glimpse into each artist. Maybe not what each intended to show but there it is.

If you enjoy New Yorker cartoons and don't mind topics that are a little more lewd or dark, this will likely offer more laughs than groans.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley. ( )
  pomo58 | Mar 14, 2022 |
One star off for coming after Murderbot. Yes, it's capricious, arbitrary, and unfair. Suck it up. I'm mourning my precious Murderbot's absence...rereads do not count!...until 27 April 2021. But with that out of the way, this collection of stuff that wasn't quite right for The New Yorker, and not infrequently just Not Quite Right, made me guffaw and grin and generally enjoy myself so much that I mostly got out of the megrims and enjoyed my day.


Why would The New Yorker think this Diffee toon was too weird to publish? Seems pretty hilarious to me....

The inimitable Roz Chast replied to Diffee's "Infrequently Asked Questions" feature:
What would make a really terrible pizza topping?
Stye ointment.
LOL

I mean, seriously! If this isn't The New Yorker's audience's jam, what is?!


This will offend some of you. I do not care. The New Yorker did, unsurprisingly...but Sipress had the last laugh, he still got them to publish it! Ha!


Harry Bliss's failed submission to The New Yorker made *me* laugh...so why not their subscribers? Hmm?


Well. Need one say more about Leo Cullum? It says a lot about The New Yorker that they *didn't* publish this one.


Mick Stevens...equal opportunity offender. Don't @ me.

There are hundreds more, the awfullest ones even *I* won't put up, but believe me when I tell you that this book cured my Murderbot hangover. You just can not stay mired in gloom when The New Yorker's funny folk are after your laugher. No, I didn't misspell laughter. English doesn't have a word for the thing inside you that makes you laugh. And NO, it's not your sense of humor! People laugh at funerals faGawdSake! (Although I've always found it telling that the word "fun" starts the whole thing off....)

Go forth and smile. ( )
  richardderus | May 9, 2020 |
Depending on what your threshold of enjoying bawdy, knee-jerk, occasionally dumb humor is, you’ll either love this volume or hate it. Personally, I’ve always enjoyed the off-center humor of the one-panel cartoons featured in The New Yorker magazine, and this collection of cast-offs that didn’t make the cut for that publication was hilarious. Editor Diffee sent a set of standard profile questions to dozens of the artists whose work most frequently shows up in The New Yorker. He then published their responses, along with a selection of each artist’s rejected cartoons. The responses to the profile questions, though invariably humorous, also got a bit tiresome and rather repetitive. However, the examples of rejected cartoons were terrific. Though the subtitle says “Too Dumb, Too Dark, or Too Naughty”, I’d estimate fully 50% of the cartoons here were rejected for sexual content. But, if you like the dry, somewhat urbane, and chuckle-inducing style of humor that that magazines specializes in, you won’t want to miss this collection!

Originally reviewed for my local library's website in November 2013: http://lincolnlibraries.org/bookguide/staff-recommendations/staff-recommendation... ( )
  cannellfan | Feb 27, 2016 |
Hilariously entertaining........and weird......which is a perfect mix. ( )
  ThothJ | Dec 4, 2015 |
Affichage de 1-5 de 12 (suivant | tout afficher)
aucune critique | ajouter une critique

» Ajouter d'autres auteur(e)s

Nom de l'auteurRôleType d'auteurŒuvre ?Statut
Matthew Diffeeauteur principaltoutes les éditionscalculé
Mankoff, RobertAvant-proposauteur secondairetoutes les éditionsconfirmé
Vous devez vous identifier pour modifier le Partage des connaissances.
Pour plus d'aide, voir la page Aide sur le Partage des connaissances [en anglais].
Titre canonique
Titre original
Titres alternatifs
Date de première publication
Personnes ou personnages
Lieux importants
Évènements importants
Films connexes
Épigraphe
Dédicace
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
In memory of
J. B. (Bud) Handelsman and Leo Cullum—
wonderful cartoonists and even better friends
Premiers mots
Citations
Derniers mots
Notice de désambigüisation
Directeur de publication
Courtes éloges de critiques
Langue d'origine
DDC/MDS canonique
LCC canonique

Références à cette œuvre sur des ressources externes.

Wikipédia en anglais

Aucun

The best of the worst: these cartoons rejected by The New Yorker were deemed too dumb, too weird, or too naughty--but not for lack of laughs! Every week, hundreds and hundreds of cartoons pour into The New Yorker. Most are rejected. Doesn't matter how big a deal the cartoonist is, either. Roz Chast, David Sipress, Kim Warp, Sam gross, Ed Steed, Emily Flake, Navied Mahdavian, or Mary Lawton--if the work in question is too weird, too naughty, too juvenile, or too dark, it's out. Luckily for us, Matthew Diffee has been bravely sifting through the circular file to rescue the best of the worst. Here are 297 cartoons in a revised second edition featuring more than 50 new cartoons--even better, even worse! The cartoon set-ups may be familiar--a couple in bed, a few people stranded on a desert island, a doctor and patient in an examining room--but the joke are anything but, with twists so unexpected, you can't help but laugh out loud.

Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque

Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku

Discussion en cours

Aucun

Couvertures populaires

Vos raccourcis

Évaluation

Moyenne: (3.62)
0.5
1
1.5
2 4
2.5 1
3 5
3.5 1
4 9
4.5 2
5 4

Est-ce vous ?

Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing.

 

À propos | Contact | LibraryThing.com | Respect de la vie privée et règles d'utilisation | Aide/FAQ | Blog | Boutique | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliothèques historiques | Critiques en avant-première | Partage des connaissances | 203,187,904 livres! | Barre supérieure: Toujours visible