A highbrow investigation into LOLcats vs. FAILdogs

Some people are of the opinion that LOLcats are stupid. And they’re technically right. They are stupid. They’re also extremely funny. It was only a matter of time until the heathen dog-lovers of the world came up with a canine alternative.

Enter FAILdogs. Even if you think that LOLcats are stupid, I think we can all agree that FAILdogs are worse.

What makes LOLcats funny is the absurdity. The pictures themselves need not possess any innate humor; they’re just normal cat pictures. The captions add the humor. The concept of a cat that wants a cheeseburger, or baked you cookies, or is a monorail – therein lies the humor. They succinctly transform the mundane into the bizarre.

FAILdogs are not funny in the same way. The captions add nothing; the gag lies in the hilarity of the picture. What value does the caption provide, then? It is simply wasted effort, the same joke repeated ad nauseam. The failure is already apparent, it does not need to be illustrated. With LOLcats, your perception is confined to the real, whereas the gag lies in the realm of the surreal.

And what of FAILdogs such as this? Is this some sort of existential meta-joke? There is no failure depicted, the only failure belongs to the creator.

2008/03/07
Previously On Atomized:

Participate