Big Couch or Small People?

K. Ivan Ruppert · Post by **K. Ivan Ruppert** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 12:26 pm

You know, I don't think I've ever in my 24.5 years seen two people successfully share a couch that way...

-K

ZOMBIE USER 5169 · Post by **ZOMBIE USER 5169** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:49 pm

They really should move that jug and plate and stuff from the Falling-Fox Zone.

The stippling was interesting and effective, but I'm glad to see the special AF-brand shading again. As well as being wonderfully atmospheric it gives the strip's world feel very solid. It's also very distinctive - I can't think of anything quite like it elsewhere.

JimRob · Post by **JimRob** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 3:49 pm

I don't think either of them are particularly large people. In any case, I have seen it done.

Hortmage · Post by **Hortmage** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 6:00 pm

Back before I packed on so much bulk, I used to be able to cuddle quite comfortably with my sweetie on our couch. Although being the gentlefur that I am, I would take the precarious position at the edge of the couch, to avoid pushing her off if I sneezed.

My goal is to lose enough weight to be able to do that again by the summer solstice!

ZOMBIE USER 6611 · Post by **ZOMBIE USER 6611** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:31 pm

If the couple seems couched in a whim,
Look to JimRob and blame it on him.
Can two folks thus defined
Share a couch if inclined?
Sure, if they, like their chances, are slim.

Ahayweh · Post by **Ahayweh** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:59 pm

It's pretty easy, though it would be a whole lot easier if one of them was lying on their (that feels clunky. Curse English for its lack of a gender-neutral pronoun!) side. It must be a fairly short couch, though, for Alex's head to be so high on the armrest and his feet sticking out that far over the other side.

ZOMBIE USER 6611 · Post by **ZOMBIE USER 6611** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:49 pm

Well, they're laying supine as could be
And positioned just adjacently
It is fitting, this notion
That they could share a cushion
For they are not "hippy", you see.

Now when bigger, this trick is demanding
And requires "face right" or left handing.
But it works for these two
that "straight up" they can do,
For they've only a broad understanding.

But the potential problem here pales
When compared to what "sideways" entails.
For someone can get hurt
And they might miss dessert
If they aren't enough careful with tails.

JimRob · Post by **JimRob** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:30 pm

Very true. (The more I think about it, the less enviable a proposition a tail seems. But I suppose you'd learn to account for it without thinking.)

If you want to compare other instances of the sofa for relative dimensions, you can (but there are perhaps better ways to spend an evening). In my mind it's half based on an ancient one my family used to keep in the attic: fairly narrow when viewed from the front, but surprisingly deep. And uncomfortable.

Gloria · Post by **Gloria** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 8:50 pm

Personally, I prefer to spoon. ;D

Tek Roo · Post by **Tek Roo** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:15 am

I've certainly seen some sofas at IKEA that were uncommonly deep, and seemed that they would be murder on your lower back when seated in a forward-facing position, if didn't have really short legs you could keep straight out in front of you.

Gloria wrote:Personally, I prefer to spoon. ;D

Shush Gloria! You are supposed to be thinking about college! Not "spooning!"

Sheesh! Kids these days!

ZOMBIE USER 6611 · Post by **ZOMBIE USER 6611** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 5:34 pm

Tek Roo wrote:I've certainly seen some sofas at IKEA that were uncommonly deep, and seemed that they would be murder on your lower back when seated in a forward-facing position, if didn't have really short legs you could keep straight out in front of you.

Though it seems like a poor place to sleep,
And contributes to "lower-back creep"
The main point of this was
that like Abion Fuzz
The couch that they're sharing is ... deep.

Big Bad Al · Post by **Big Bad Al** » Mon Jan 06, 2003 3:58 pm

Also, why is one of Alex's feet on back backwards (said a guy who should NEVER criticise anyones artwork)

JimRob · Post by **JimRob** » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:47 pm

Perspective.

...okay, okay...

K. Ivan Ruppert · Post by **K. Ivan Ruppert** » Tue Jan 07, 2003 7:45 am

Hmm. I figured Alex just had his ankles crossed...

-K

ZOMBIE USER 6611 · Post by **ZOMBIE USER 6611** » Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:04 am

K. Ivan Ruppert wrote:Hmm. I figured Alex just had his ankles crossed...

Yes. And James just had his nose tweaked.

All in good fun. Considering the nature of toes and art, I think that at worst we can ascribe this to a "digital sequencing problem" and move right along.

Big Bad Al · Post by **Big Bad Al** » Tue Jan 07, 2003 12:36 pm

K. Ivan Ruppert wrote:Hmm. I figured Alex just had his ankles crossed...

-K

Still wouldn't work! Both big toes would be on the outside! This is where cheeting and using only three toes comes in handy (the "big" toe is in the center and is hard to screw up)