Great comments about the article - will reply later.

Joseph
x

I’m sure that anyone reading this blog will be mature enough not to take advantage, so you may not be bothered. But I thought it was worth mentioning in case you weren’t aware. You never know when ‘Chortle’ minions might come along and engage in press-release-vomiting agit-prop.

Best wishes,
– J.

References both in ‘The Sun’ and by the MWE team to the Rushdie Affair seem rather reactionary. (Moreso in the former case than the latter, but that’s obviously to be expected). I’d recommend that anyone interested in this aspect and/or period of history read Tariq Modood’s contribution to James Donald and Ali Rattansi eds., ‘Race, Culture, Difference’ (’British Asians and the Rushdie affair’). Even on the ‘Left’ there does seem to be an unthinking acceptance of the idea that British Muslims represent an alien wedge that ‘just doesn’t understand’ those classically Western Liberal notions of free speech. I think Modood’s article is excellent in attacking, qualifying and contextualizing that idea.

That might seem like me just trying to show-off by pulling bibliographical rank on Newman and Baddiel, but the rightism which is observable in elements of the apparent MWE philosophy do disturb me. I can’t buy into the notion that anti-Left comedy can ever be truly ‘radical’ (or disdainful/oppositional to the status quo, if you like). Sure, it can react against dominant trends within the comedy industry itself. But by confirming the orthodox ideas that pervade throughout culture (and, indeed, society as a whole), it remains conservative and pro-status quo. It’s the big picture that matters, rather than the comedy industry considered as a sub-sector. We should expect a pro-Left bias within comedy, because it is a strand of culture which must subvert and offer ’shocking’ (because rarely expressed) explanations / world-views.

I appreciate and absolutely agree with SOTCAA’s desire to see comedians attacking (or at least speaking openly, honestly and without concern for which way the wind is blowing, regarding) other comedians. But for me, attacking progressive/genuinely Leftist comedy out of a simple desire to ‘redress the balance’ is beyond the limits of that.

Thanks,
– Jed.

I think you under-estimate Peep Show, too, in all honesty. What you see as lack of ambiguity / subtlety, I see as the sort of terseness you need to make its claustrophobic little world function. Its flaws are few but I’m not keen on its reliance on profanity instead of punchline- which definitely *is* a sop to moronic yoof, the drum rolls, the pushes it makes towards darkness (the first series is particularly guilty of this), and the fact that Armstrong and Bain can rarely think of funny lines to fill the last minute of their episode. But these I can forgive- each 24 minute period is filled with enough to old my attention.

As for subtlety, lines like “here I am wrestling with the white working class” hints at the Mark relishing his sole victory over teenage yobbos but being too possessed of too intelligent a social conscience to use the “chav” epithet- it doesn’t have to hit you over the head with this fact. You didn’t get that in “Game On” - yes, that felt bleak, but mainly because there was nothing to laugh at - and the trad gag that you quote up there is *terrible.* The opening two minutes of the Christian Rock episode of Peep Show (5.5) is crawling with jokes - every line is quotable - Superhans being sceptical of the internet in 2008, him outlining the basic set-up of record deals as though it were cause for suspicion (needs to be seen to be appreciated), the blink-and-miss-it implication that A&R is safeguarded because it’s the start of the financial year. As dextrously set up as Fawlty Towers or Ever Decreading Circles, I’d say - or, dare I say it, “Sorry!” which fits my remit of flawed yet peculiar, childish but incongruous humour that proceeds with its own peculiar set of rules.

To this day, I cannot get The Young Ones. I’ve tried because of its near-universal accolades but, bloody hell, it leaves me cold. Oh, I get it, it’s funny ‘cos he’s being hyperactive and talking in a shrill voice… oh, a talking puppet, yes…look, he’s been hit by an object. In complete contrast to your article, I feel I’ve grown beyond laughing at straight grotesquerie. And Wonder Showzen is worse still - it’s “Round the Bend” with gynaecology jokes.

But I agree in essence - the idea of disposable, laugh ‘n’ go comedy, seems here to stay, more’s the pity. Very little that warrants re-watching.

No thanks to crap like this:

http://noisetosignal.org/2008/08/comedy-lab-school-of-comedy

I wouldn’t attempt to argue that it has the same quizzical & sometimes double-edged aspect of Absolutely S1-3 - it’s a million miles from the frankly astonishing “dinner party OD” Don & George sketch - but it has a pleasing lunatic momentum & some wonderful payoffs, & should’ve been an extra on the Absolutely boxset, damn them!

PS
Funny you should mention the discomfort you feel at finding yourself defending Game On - skimming past the show on the Freeview the other night, I was saying to my other half how much I remembered enjoying the episode where Ben Chaplin decides to join the band who move in upstairs, & ends up having a huge, screaming public panic attack when they physically drag him out to play live. I got a v-e-r-y raised eyebrow, & felt unclean…

All the best for the continued existence of this blog, BTW.

Mob Bunkhaus - a CaB poster - has pointed out that the winners of this year’s Iffies (David O’Doherty and Sarah Millican) both had radio pilots commissioned prior to the Fringe. What a surprise to find out that two influential BBC Radio Comedy types sat on the judging panel:

http://chilled.cream.org/boards/index.php?topic=19092.msg951933#msg951933