Lyndon Hood - in bad taste, Wellington
Friday, June 05, 2009
More from the Chaser, oh yes:
Apparently Australia has not taken kindly to this.
(And TV3's decision to cover the controversy on the six-o'clock news makes me wonder if they're planning on picking up the show.)
It is, in my professional opinion, funny. Actually, after seeing bits of it on the news I was still chuckling in the morning.
More to say on the subject of misunderstanding ironical jokes soon, but here's what I think is happening:
Some people think some things just shouldn't be joked about, perhaps because 'jokes are frivilous'. Terminally ill children are quite likely to be one of those things.
This, and the fact that terminal illness is horrible, is clouding people's judgement on the difference between jokes about something and jokes at the expense of something.
But watching it I'm still bemused the question actually arose.
Actually, I can imagine being flipped over into horror by that last line, which is pretty harsh. But very much part of the whole. It certainly didn't happen to me. I laughed.
To be tedious:
Neither sick kids nor the Make-a-Wish people are being mocked. The sketch is not supposed to be, as the psychologists put it, demonstrating appropriate behaviour. As humour, it relies on taboo-breaking (much like the eulogy song), so the whole gag is that they're doing the opposite of appropriate.
It works because Make-a-Wish is good and everyone knows it.
And the attitude to kids (and to people's dreams) is so recognisable - obvious because it's out of context - that I'll call it satire and accuse the sketch in question of having depth.
I confess to the position that just because it's in bad taste doesn't make it bad comedy. And if you're not allowed to laugh in the face of death, you may as well pack up you clowns now.
Apparently Australia has not taken kindly to this.
(And TV3's decision to cover the controversy on the six-o'clock news makes me wonder if they're planning on picking up the show.)
It is, in my professional opinion, funny. Actually, after seeing bits of it on the news I was still chuckling in the morning.
More to say on the subject of misunderstanding ironical jokes soon, but here's what I think is happening:
Some people think some things just shouldn't be joked about, perhaps because 'jokes are frivilous'. Terminally ill children are quite likely to be one of those things.
This, and the fact that terminal illness is horrible, is clouding people's judgement on the difference between jokes about something and jokes at the expense of something.
But watching it I'm still bemused the question actually arose.
Actually, I can imagine being flipped over into horror by that last line, which is pretty harsh. But very much part of the whole. It certainly didn't happen to me. I laughed.
To be tedious:
Neither sick kids nor the Make-a-Wish people are being mocked. The sketch is not supposed to be, as the psychologists put it, demonstrating appropriate behaviour. As humour, it relies on taboo-breaking (much like the eulogy song), so the whole gag is that they're doing the opposite of appropriate.
It works because Make-a-Wish is good and everyone knows it.
And the attitude to kids (and to people's dreams) is so recognisable - obvious because it's out of context - that I'll call it satire and accuse the sketch in question of having depth.
I confess to the position that just because it's in bad taste doesn't make it bad comedy. And if you're not allowed to laugh in the face of death, you may as well pack up you clowns now.
Labels: cancer kids, comedy, death, ethics, make-a-wish foundation, satire, taste, the chaser
Lyndon Hood - Will be top bloke after death, Wellington
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Only just saw this from the Chaser in '07
You might want to see Spare Room [link fixed] for context first, including more evidence of Aussie politicians' alarming tendency to weigh in on matters of taste. And the answer to Ana's question is, of course: bad taste AND good satire. Which are both good things.
If I wanted to take a lesson: when going down some paths, it's less offensive if you attack your friends as well as your enemies.
You might want to see Spare Room [link fixed] for context first, including more evidence of Aussie politicians' alarming tendency to weigh in on matters of taste. And the answer to Ana's question is, of course: bad taste AND good satire. Which are both good things.
If I wanted to take a lesson: when going down some paths, it's less offensive if you attack your friends as well as your enemies.
Labels: comedy, death, free speech, music, satire, taste, the chaser
Lyndon Hood - Restrospector, Lower Hutt
Monday, October 01, 2007
I've been carrying the programme from the RSC's King Lear and The Seagull in my bag, unreviewed. Occasionally it glares it me.
In lieu of that here's my review of the play of The Hollow Men.
I would also suggest John Lahr's profile of Ian McKellen in The New Yorker (link is to abstract). But the actual article doesn't seem to be online.
I was most struck by the way at one point he left a note for Lahr at his place in Stratford saying to come to the theatre. It turns out, the stand-ins for The Seagull were have a run-through, but the one playing his part was ill. So Sir Ian was standing in for him. This is not, as Lahr remarks, usual.
Quite a guy.
In other me news, this isn't really satirical, and it has a certain throwing stones while living in glass houses level of cheekiness:
New Hood: Richard Duthie - Shapershifter?
I'm going on holiday for a few weeks. In the meantime, if you haven't seen it, here's Helen Clark on The Chaser (who have a podcast):
In lieu of that here's my review of the play of The Hollow Men.
I would also suggest John Lahr's profile of Ian McKellen in The New Yorker (link is to abstract). But the actual article doesn't seem to be online.
I was most struck by the way at one point he left a note for Lahr at his place in Stratford saying to come to the theatre. It turns out, the stand-ins for The Seagull were have a run-through, but the one playing his part was ill. So Sir Ian was standing in for him. This is not, as Lahr remarks, usual.
Quite a guy.
In other me news, this isn't really satirical, and it has a certain throwing stones while living in glass houses level of cheekiness:
New Hood: Richard Duthie - Shapershifter?
I'm going on holiday for a few weeks. In the meantime, if you haven't seen it, here's Helen Clark on The Chaser (who have a podcast):
Labels: helen clark, Ian McKellen, media, reviews, the chaser, the hollow men, theatre
