Foodchain Irony in Inchworm?

[Saironi]

Did anyone think the Inchworm sketch was ironic?

Here is an insectivorial animal (first it was a frog, then a lizard) sitting on a wall and minding his own bussiness when a little worm taps him and gets eaten. After it happens again, the worm turns out to be the nose a monster who is either hungry himself and eats the first muppet, or just eats him for the sake of eating something (this is up for debate).

The way I see it is that the insectivore lets his own confidence in his superiority and in the end bites the nose of a monster, who apparently stayed in hiding waiting for a chance to catch his prey. I suppose I am saying it is similar to a food chain.

 

[Barry Lee]

What do you mean a frog? Kermit wasn't a frog when the sketch was performed.

 

[Giar Fraggle]

Yes, it was ironic--that's why it was so funny.

(Besides the fact that it's funny when a puppet eats another puppet.)

 

[muppetsforlife]

That scene was kind of disturbing for me to watch Kermit getting eaten. Yes I Know that he wasn't yet the kermit that we know today. But yet it was just strange to see that.