Slideshow: The Best (Rejected) New Yorker Cartoons

A new collection of twisted, offensive, and/or hilarious rejects from cartoon editor Robert Mankoff’s wastebasket.


The single-panel cartoons peppering the pages of The New Yorker are renowned for timely wit and laugh-out-loud captions. And while creating a winning cartoon is notoriously difficult—just ask anyone who has brainstormed for the magazine’s weekly caption-writing contest—most contributing cartoonists have developed a good feel for what cartoon editor Robert Mankoff is after. Even so, they often miss the mark. By a lot. Cartoonist Matthew Diffee, who has been published more than 200 times in The New Yorker, helped Workman Publishing gather up some of the most spectacular failures for The Best of the Rejection Collection, out this week.

There’s no set criteria for what makes a New Yorker cartoon, Diffee explains, but most are 86ed for being one (or more) of the following: too lowbrow, too politically incorrect, too dark, too weird, too political, too difficult to get, too dumb, too bad, or too dirty. “This collection is yet more proof that bad taste and humor are not strange bedfellows but intimate partners whose down-and-dirty doings often delight us against our better judgment, our scruples, and our politically respectable attitudes,” he writes. Without further ado, meet a selection of the progeny of that intimate partnership. If your sensibility or taste are offended, well, welcome to Mankoff’s daily hell.

 

Excerpted from The Best of the Rejection Collection: 293 Cartoons That Were Too Dumb, Too Dark, or Too Naughty for The New Yorker. Copyright 2011 by Matthew Diffee. Used by permission of Workman Publishing Co., Inc. New York. All Rights Reserved

 

Harry Bliss

P.C. Vey

Alex Gregory

Pat Byrnes

C. Covert Darbyshire

Danny Shanahan
 

Mike Twohy

P.S. Mueller

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate