> I mean this one is just reality. I’m not sure Garfield is a figment of Jon’s imagination

It's not reality. Hobbes it's not unambiguously stated to be a figment of Calvin's imagination either.

That's a fine interpretation but it's not canonical. Watterson wanted the ambiguity, as Wikipedia mentions (sorry, I don't have the interview with the direct quote where Watterson states this):

> "[Watteron] gave an example of this in discussing his opposition to a Hobbes plush toy: that if the essence of Hobbes' nature in the strip is that it remain unresolved whether he is a real tiger or a stuffed toy, then creating a real stuffed toy would only destroy the magic."

Garfield is certainly (meant to be) real, but I've never seen a strip that confirms that Jon can actually hear Garfield's thoughts. I think that's why Garfield minus Garfield works so well.

I feel like removing it removes some noise, but doesn't affect the tone. Story is, the MASH showrunners didn't want a laugh track, but the network insisted, so they used the lowest-fidelity one they could get away with.

Thankfully it was broadcast in the UK without the laugh track.

Obviously it still wasn't as darkly observant as the movie, but it did have a edge.

Alan Alda has mentioned in interviews that he prefers it that way.

To each their own! When I watch Ross ask how to beat up a woman in the street with eyes bugging out of his head there's a pretty big difference between a laugh track and no laugh track. Just like Garfield comics hit very different when you realize that John is actually talking to himself.

I don't "reflexively dismiss" all shows with a laugh track. Some of Friends is genuinely hilarious. But a lot of it is only funny, to me, when surrounded by others laughing.