Patrick House's caption -- "O.K. I'm at the window. To the right? Your right or my right?" -- was good, but I think even he'll admit that it wasn't as good as the one I submitted: "O.K. I'm at the window. My right or your right?" Brevity being the soul of wit, my shorter caption (which was substantively identical to the winning entry) should have been selected over Mr. House's. Why wasn't it? I can't be sure, but since I've already won two caption contests (nos. 92 and 123), I think The New Yorker is reluctant to give me a third victory. Or maybe it's because I'm Jewish. The New Yorker is a notoriously anti-Semitic publication.

Not bad, since the idea is the same, but I actually think the author's caption edges out yours. His just sounds more natural to me. It has the rhythm of that kind of repetition we engage in when we talk to people. I can hear the guy saying "To the right?" as placeholder words because he's processing other things (like why his friend is getting him to do this). Yep, that's some "theory of mind" for you.

I could have sworn I had read a similar caption in a Ziggy cartoon.

J. Peterman

I'm with Haysoos. The winning caption better captures the naturalistic rhythm of speech and is thus marginally funnier.

Sorry.