It's an old Looney Tunes short that you'd need to know to get the context; the little dog is a sycophantic Lickspittle to the bigger dog.
Motion to pull
Yeah, I don't think that the little dog looks like he's hero worshipping the big dog. At all.
Reaction Image RepositoryWe're allowed to use captions. A statement like "The image doesn't work without the caption" is mildly interesting in the abstract, but irrelevant, because it has a caption.
I really wish we could drive a stake through the heart of the notion that any image that includes text or a caption is somehow inherently inferior to one that doesn't.
Jet-a-Reeno!Seconding (uh, the pull I mean). If you don't know who these people are, it'd just look like 2 dogs shaking hands (paws?).
edited 22nd Oct '11 7:32:12 AM by Bookyangel2438
Alt account of Angeldog 2437.![]()
That's not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that the caption can't do all of the work. It's fine if you need the caption to understand the image, but the image has to contribute something. What I'm saying is that in this specific case, the image doesn't contribute anything. There absolutely no indication of Hero Worship taking place in that image. It's just two dogs. The caption does all the work. It's JAFAAC. It's a picture of two dogs with no apparent connection to the trope, with a caption saying "this is an example, really".
edited 22nd Oct '11 8:52:27 AM by JapaneseTeeth
Reaction Image Repository
I think that's a good suggestion, but the current image doesn't contribute nothing. You have two dogs with different sizes, attitudes, postures, etc. To me, the little dog's posture suggests "Don't ya just love this guy?"
Wow, GIS for those two characters is horrible...this
◊ is the only good quality pic I could find that gets close to the trope. No time to look at the actual shorts right now for screencaps or dialogue.
edited 23rd Oct '11 10:09:28 AM by Willbyr

I see no Hero Worshipping whatsoever.