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

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly 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