Hope you all had a nice Labor Day weekend.… (Cheers) As you know, yesterday all the banks were closed. But today several of them reopened. (laughter)-September 7, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #47
Hope you all had a nice Labor Day weekend.… (Cheers) As you know, yesterday all the banks were closed. But today several of them reopened. (laughter)-September 7, 2010
Netflix Instant Nudge: Comedy Central Presents
Let's go back to the well for this one. Go watch Big Jay Oakerson (#14 on the list) do a solid 20 minute set.His delivery is calm, indifferent, confident, sarcastic, and consistent. It's a little bit Dave Attell, a smidgen Ron White, a splash of Robert Schimmel. And he's putting out good stuff. He throws a lot of very quick jabs into his material getting laughs along the way without breaking rhythm.
Oakerson has a following, and it's gotta be growing. He did some writing for Chappelle's Show, he has toured with Korn, performed at the Just For Laughs festival in Montreal, and in the last few weeks he's been jumping across the country headlining. A New York comedian, he's headed out west for some shows on that coast. He'll be at Punchline, this week in San Francisco, next week in Sacramento.
There's an interesting moment in his CC set, towards the end, where he makes a claim and someone in the audience disagrees with it unnecessarily, simply saying "No" while Oakerson's in the middle of the bit. And it's one of those ridiculous Nos that's obviously false, and not intended as an actual belief, but put out only for the sake of making a stubborn little joke. It's barely a heckle.
Oakerson brushes the comment aside, unfazed, and plows thru the bit as if the opinion didn't matter at all. He doesn't argue, pursue, or acknowledge any minimal value of the dissent. He stays in charge and does his act from his perspective. He moves so forcefully and smoothly thru it, that I probably wouldn't have noticed it if my OCD for marking each line hadn't been kicked up a notch by a pot of coffee. The word to hold on to: unfazed. That's how I'd describe his act. With all the benefits it implies.
Still. They should spray that type of audience member with a permanent dye to mark them and keep them out of any more shows.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Advocating Satire: Purdue and the Prestige [Updated]
(Updated below)
In the circles I roam, this cartoon has gotten a lot of attention the last couple of days:
(Click to see the bigger image.)
It was published in The Exponent, the paper run by Purdue students.
There are a few things we can react to here: 1) an incidence of rape 2) a plan to commit rape 3) a joke about rape 4) indifference about rape 5) indifference about a joke about rape.
The people around me who are mad about this haven't said #1 occurred (well they believe it has, but they're not saying that this cartoon is an incidence of rape). They're also apparently not saying that #3 occurred. So they're mad about #s 2 and 4. And if they read this and believe what I say here and they get mad at me, we can add #5.
Mxrk writes:
So we can assume that he is either OK with all jokes about rape, or OK with jokes about rape when he figures the victims deserve it. What's the golden rule there? Do unto others what you think you can make a pretty good argument they deserve? No. It's irony. Mxrk isn't OK with rape. And because it's a joke, I'm not mad that he said it.*
And a cowboy without a cause writes "I tend to enjoy a raunchy joke" but explains that this one is not OK because "There doesn't seem to be a trace of irony to be found" and if you look around the paper's website for other cartoons, looking for misogyny, "there's plenty of other evidence."
This is an interesting claim: If someone hasn't earned the right to make a joke, we can take the joke literally.
So "earned the right" probably isn't quite it. Our wrangler friend is looking for irony, and I'm assuming evidence of that irony could be apparent in the joke itself, even if it's not found in the newspaper's archives or in the life of the writer/cartoonist/editor.
Well how about the fact that it's a fucking cartoon and it's referencing an overrated melodramatic movie about magic tricks and murder. Oh Shit! I knew it! Michael Caine is a psychopath! All those accents should have been a clue.
It seems to me very obvious–and so I really don't think it needs much more argument–that this isn't a literal statement of belief. Then next step, and this one does deserve more discussion, is how the joke might affect the values of the readers. And in the context of a Big Ten school with a population full of drunk frat boys that were weened on moonshine and grew up eyeing their cousins and goats, this cartoon could sound like tame round of truth or dare. So we can't trust this population to hear this kind of joke no matter what the writer's intention.
Thank god we don't base policy on that sort of well-intention distrust.
But the angry reaction to the joke can lead in a few directions that do make perfect sense. The newspaper can hear from the readers that this joke made them angry. And if the editors don't atone for it, pissed-off readers will go somewhere else for dumb jokes and typo-riddled stories about local pizza.
Or the complaints will escalate and move to the advertisers, and the power of money will lean on them. Repent and sin no more, or you'll have to find advertisers that don't care.
That's fair.
Both of these skip over the argument of "is my anger justified." Because really, who cares of your anger is justified? That's a self-evident belief. When Jerry Falwell claimed his emotional distress was worth some of Larry Flynt's money, part of his claim was obviously justified–if all we're looking for is evidence that some emotional distress occurred. But is that where we are? 'Don't make a joke that I have a problem with'?
Do we have to cross ourselves and kneel before every mention of rape too?
There's nothing inaccurate about taking offense. There's nothing silly about being very sensitive about rape.
Disagreements about this joke have to be very precisely set. So I have to make a few things clear:
Here's the trump card that can get thrown at me for not being upset by this cartoon: What if one kid sees this cartoon and thinks it sounds like an awesome idea and plans it with his friend and a girl ends up a train victim?
Yeah. That's always there. It's the same argument my youth pastor made about Ozzy and Marilyn Manson. And you could nudge a lot of comics away from satire if you got them to be afraid that any joke might be taken seriously and acted-on by idiots. But even if you're going to make that argument, what you're really saying is 'Make a joke, as long as you make sure to spell it out for the audience that you're just kidding, so that if anyone thinks you're serious, you and I will know you did your part.' Because there are always idiots out there that don't understand things. And our job is to make sure we've been reasonably clear.
So we're arguing about "reasonably." Fine. Because if that's not good enough, then you're forced to argue that all satire is dangerous. Either that, or that your sense of jokes that get 'too close' is good enough to measure the morality of a piece of satire. And if we're outraged because a joke doesn't work well enough, where's our petition to get all Geico ads banned?
Well, I guess I've been working on an important jump here: that the cartoon was satire. So let's start back there. Convince me that this cartoonist or editor is advocating rape. Convince me that they'd be ok with this little switcheroo on their sister, and I'll sign your petition telling them it's not OK.
And I'll probably start a bunch of others too.
UPDATE:
The Exponent has published an apology by EIC Zoe Hayes. It sounds sincere. I believe she too is anti-rape and respects people's sensitivity about it. And she makes an interesting admission.
So that adds a whole new wrinkle to the situation. Is is possible that this trick would work if all three were consenting? Not unless we create a backstory and the girls says 'Hey, if you ever want to do that Farinelli flipflop on me I'll be cool with it. But don't tell me, because I want to be surprised.' And that hardly ever happens. It almost sounds like I have to eat my words here and bail on my argument, because I did say "Convince me that they'd be ok with this little switcheroo on their sister and I'll sign your petition."
I'm not sure what Zoe means by "meet our criteria" or even "everyone involved." I doubt she means only the two guys. At any rate, it's a boneheaded explanation for the decision to run the joke. If it's all consensual then sure, an orgie isn't rape. But then the surprise falls apart. I stand by my assertion that the people who wrote and published this would not be OK with the prank as an actual surprise.
Hayes adds:
Of course I agree. And I never said anything like that. Defending this joke doesn't mean you think the girl was asking for it. And besides, if she actually did ask for it, it wouldn't be rape, would it?
Look, they stumbled on this joke. It failed miserably. And my point here is that if I'm going to attack a joke for being in poor taste, I'm not going to say it's the subject matter that made it fail. It's the delivery. And these kids are hacks.
UPDATE #2
* Let me unpack the reason I don't call Mxrk a hypocrite. He's obviously OK with jokes about rape, as long as he believes that the person telling the joke isn't advocating rape. His complaint about the cartoon is not that it's a joke, but that it's advocating rape. Now he might not even believe it's a joke. That makes his anger even more understandable. Even if I don't share that anger. Even if I poke some fun at it. Because I'm willing to be an insensitive prick. And he's told me he likes that.
In the circles I roam, this cartoon has gotten a lot of attention the last couple of days:
(Click to see the bigger image.)
It was published in The Exponent, the paper run by Purdue students.
There are a few things we can react to here: 1) an incidence of rape 2) a plan to commit rape 3) a joke about rape 4) indifference about rape 5) indifference about a joke about rape.
The people around me who are mad about this haven't said #1 occurred (well they believe it has, but they're not saying that this cartoon is an incidence of rape). They're also apparently not saying that #3 occurred. So they're mad about #s 2 and 4. And if they read this and believe what I say here and they get mad at me, we can add #5.
Mxrk writes:
To me, the only thing funny about this comic is that once dudes 1 and 2 are convicted of felony sexual assault and sent to big boy prison, their cellmates are going to have a high old time pulling “The Prestige” on them.
So we can assume that he is either OK with all jokes about rape, or OK with jokes about rape when he figures the victims deserve it. What's the golden rule there? Do unto others what you think you can make a pretty good argument they deserve? No. It's irony. Mxrk isn't OK with rape. And because it's a joke, I'm not mad that he said it.*
And a cowboy without a cause writes "I tend to enjoy a raunchy joke" but explains that this one is not OK because "There doesn't seem to be a trace of irony to be found" and if you look around the paper's website for other cartoons, looking for misogyny, "there's plenty of other evidence."
This is an interesting claim: If someone hasn't earned the right to make a joke, we can take the joke literally.
So "earned the right" probably isn't quite it. Our wrangler friend is looking for irony, and I'm assuming evidence of that irony could be apparent in the joke itself, even if it's not found in the newspaper's archives or in the life of the writer/cartoonist/editor.
Well how about the fact that it's a fucking cartoon and it's referencing an overrated melodramatic movie about magic tricks and murder. Oh Shit! I knew it! Michael Caine is a psychopath! All those accents should have been a clue.
It seems to me very obvious–and so I really don't think it needs much more argument–that this isn't a literal statement of belief. Then next step, and this one does deserve more discussion, is how the joke might affect the values of the readers. And in the context of a Big Ten school with a population full of drunk frat boys that were weened on moonshine and grew up eyeing their cousins and goats, this cartoon could sound like tame round of truth or dare. So we can't trust this population to hear this kind of joke no matter what the writer's intention.
Thank god we don't base policy on that sort of well-intention distrust.
But the angry reaction to the joke can lead in a few directions that do make perfect sense. The newspaper can hear from the readers that this joke made them angry. And if the editors don't atone for it, pissed-off readers will go somewhere else for dumb jokes and typo-riddled stories about local pizza.
Or the complaints will escalate and move to the advertisers, and the power of money will lean on them. Repent and sin no more, or you'll have to find advertisers that don't care.
That's fair.
Both of these skip over the argument of "is my anger justified." Because really, who cares of your anger is justified? That's a self-evident belief. When Jerry Falwell claimed his emotional distress was worth some of Larry Flynt's money, part of his claim was obviously justified–if all we're looking for is evidence that some emotional distress occurred. But is that where we are? 'Don't make a joke that I have a problem with'?
Do we have to cross ourselves and kneel before every mention of rape too?
There's nothing inaccurate about taking offense. There's nothing silly about being very sensitive about rape.
Disagreements about this joke have to be very precisely set. So I have to make a few things clear:
- I'm against rape.
- I think rape should not happen
- I believe date rape is "rape rape."
- If I saw a rape occurring, I might go so far as to disembowel the rapist to stop it. Definitely if I've had my coffee.
- If I heard someone actually planning a rape, I would say "Don't try it." If necessary, I would follow them and stop them forcefully. It could get messy.
- I believe the cartoon is meant ironically.
- I don't think the joke is all that funny.
- I believe those who are complaining should say everything just as they've said it if it's what they believe.
- I believe if the paper wants to make absolutely sure that every meathead realizes this trick would be prosecutable as rape, a simple statement to that effect would help a little bit.
- I believe if the student paper cares about these petitioners feelings, an apology and a promise to be more sensitive in the future is a good way to make that clear.
- I don't really care if the paper cares about those feelings.
Here's the trump card that can get thrown at me for not being upset by this cartoon: What if one kid sees this cartoon and thinks it sounds like an awesome idea and plans it with his friend and a girl ends up a train victim?
Yeah. That's always there. It's the same argument my youth pastor made about Ozzy and Marilyn Manson. And you could nudge a lot of comics away from satire if you got them to be afraid that any joke might be taken seriously and acted-on by idiots. But even if you're going to make that argument, what you're really saying is 'Make a joke, as long as you make sure to spell it out for the audience that you're just kidding, so that if anyone thinks you're serious, you and I will know you did your part.' Because there are always idiots out there that don't understand things. And our job is to make sure we've been reasonably clear.
So we're arguing about "reasonably." Fine. Because if that's not good enough, then you're forced to argue that all satire is dangerous. Either that, or that your sense of jokes that get 'too close' is good enough to measure the morality of a piece of satire. And if we're outraged because a joke doesn't work well enough, where's our petition to get all Geico ads banned?
Well, I guess I've been working on an important jump here: that the cartoon was satire. So let's start back there. Convince me that this cartoonist or editor is advocating rape. Convince me that they'd be ok with this little switcheroo on their sister, and I'll sign your petition telling them it's not OK.
And I'll probably start a bunch of others too.
UPDATE:
The Exponent has published an apology by EIC Zoe Hayes. It sounds sincere. I believe she too is anti-rape and respects people's sensitivity about it. And she makes an interesting admission.
When we conceived of the position, we assumed that everyone involved would meet our criteria for consent, which are conscious, coherent, and into it. When we saw the graphic, that’s what we, in retrospect mistakenly, assumed was taking place – consensual, albeit kinky, sex between three adults.
So that adds a whole new wrinkle to the situation. Is is possible that this trick would work if all three were consenting? Not unless we create a backstory and the girls says 'Hey, if you ever want to do that Farinelli flipflop on me I'll be cool with it. But don't tell me, because I want to be surprised.' And that hardly ever happens. It almost sounds like I have to eat my words here and bail on my argument, because I did say "Convince me that they'd be ok with this little switcheroo on their sister and I'll sign your petition."
I'm not sure what Zoe means by "meet our criteria" or even "everyone involved." I doubt she means only the two guys. At any rate, it's a boneheaded explanation for the decision to run the joke. If it's all consensual then sure, an orgie isn't rape. But then the surprise falls apart. I stand by my assertion that the people who wrote and published this would not be OK with the prank as an actual surprise.
Hayes adds:
And to those defending us: While we appreciate some of your arguments on our behalf, ladies and gentlemen, suggesting that someone was “asking for” rape is misguided and precisely the problem here.
Of course I agree. And I never said anything like that. Defending this joke doesn't mean you think the girl was asking for it. And besides, if she actually did ask for it, it wouldn't be rape, would it?
Look, they stumbled on this joke. It failed miserably. And my point here is that if I'm going to attack a joke for being in poor taste, I'm not going to say it's the subject matter that made it fail. It's the delivery. And these kids are hacks.
UPDATE #2
* Let me unpack the reason I don't call Mxrk a hypocrite. He's obviously OK with jokes about rape, as long as he believes that the person telling the joke isn't advocating rape. His complaint about the cartoon is not that it's a joke, but that it's advocating rape. Now he might not even believe it's a joke. That makes his anger even more understandable. Even if I don't share that anger. Even if I poke some fun at it. Because I'm willing to be an insensitive prick. And he's told me he likes that.
This Week On The Shows: Sept 20-24
Thursday, September 16, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #46
The economy is so bad, Glenn Beck had to speak to a hundred thousand people today about Herbalife! That's how bad— that's how bad it is! (applause)-August 31, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #45
-August 12, 2010
Video Bit of the Week: Kyle Cease Talks Feelings
Kyle Cease is determined to sound driven, confident, positive, and stable. The more I hear him talk about his boot camp, the more it sounds like a support group. It's a community that reminds you to avoid "stinking thinking" and tells you to "Keep It Simple Stupid" and warns that "expectations are premeditated resentments." Kinda like a Comics Anonymous meeting.
Some notable quotes from this half-hour piece:
It looks like Cease is primarily interested in making comics feel good about their work and themselves. I guess that's nice.
Some notable quotes from this half-hour piece:
And if you look at Richard Pryor, you look at George Carlin, you look at— They were thinking about making the crowd realize something.
When you realize you get to do this, it naturally shifts you back into excitement. And you're appreciative of that you're doing it. And you're excited about it and you're passionate about it. And you naturally lose fear. You naturally lose…stage fright. It just goes away.
When you're in the future, the crowd is in the future. So they can't laugh at the setup. So you'll be like 'So I'm driving down the street' and right there you're saying 'Hold on—' versus giving the street its own story. What kind of of street was it?
Do you need alcohol to be happy? Do you need smoking to be happy? Then you're saying I'm not complete enough without these things.
You should be talking to the audience the way you talk to one friend in a bar.
It looks like Cease is primarily interested in making comics feel good about their work and themselves. I guess that's nice.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #44
And one of the most popular foods at county fairs all around the country, heard about this? Deep fried butter! (groans) A stick of butter covered in cinnamon and then fried in batter. (groans) … Now that's how you know we have gotten too fat in this country. Remember when butter used to be an ingredient. Now it's the main course. What is that? (laughter) Ugh … How horrible is that?-August 10, 2010
Twitterer of the Week: Jen Kirkman
Writer and comedian Jen Kirkman is a regular on Chelsea Lately's roundtable. She's also known for drinking a bottle and half of wine, or two, and narrating two of the award winning "Drunk History" short films. In my opinion, she's the best narrator of the bunch.Reading her twitter feed leads me to think she doesn't suffer fools. She will criticize politicians and unknown tweeters with the same energy if she doesn't like what they say. And why shouldn't she? She blocks followers and lets the world know it. She's been accused of being mean because of her responses. I'd say it's really just that she writes out the thoughts that lead a lot of other people to ignore stupid statements.
Many of her tweets come in the evening, so because of my usual hours, hers is a familiar avatar on my twitter alert window.
So far, she's been on every single episode of Paul F. Tompkins' Pod F. Tompkast.
Most Recent Tweet:
Four Older Tweets:
- Bill Maher says he'll never win Emmy cuz he's atheist. How 'bout cuz he does 22 shows a year unlike Conan/Dailyshow who do almost 22/month?
- So I can RT cuz it makes me laugh. Must I explain EVERYTHING 2 U PEOPLE? RT @maviskitty @JenKirkman Why would you follow that twit (Paris)?
- Creative way of calling me fat. Awesome. Love u too. RT @Kevin_Lately @JenKirkman and by "Nana" you mean... Your Skinny Evil Twin Tweeter
- Poor Tyler Perry. Must be so cramped in that closet. Come on, Baptist Conservative moms...let him out! #downlowisso2000andlate
Monday, September 13, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #43
And lawmakers in the Catalonia…region of Spain have outlawed bullfighting. Uh, they say the bulls should be treated humanely. …Yeah, I agree. Bullfighting is a terrible sport. But you know who I feel sorry for? The matadors? I mean, what are you supposed to do with that outfit? You know, it's- (laughter) It's not like you wear it to your next job. (laughter) You know, the- "Burrito supreme?" (laughter) You know, what- I mean, what are you gonna do with it? (pretends to doff his cap) Ho ho! (pretends to wave cape) Yeah exactly. (applause)-July 29, 2010
Netflix Instant Nudge: The Kids in the Hall - The Pilot Episode
Years ago these Canucks started making me laugh and I had no idea why. I've often said that the best thing about The Kids in the Hall was that they often let the sketch end without telling you what the joke was. They didn't care if you didn't get it. There was no "ratcheting up" of the joke to make sure every possible iteration was as exhausted as the audience. Half the skits, I assumed were referring to something I didn't understand. And still I laughed.The pilot episode is 22 years old. The kids—Bruce McCulloch, Dave Foley, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, and Scott Thompson—look barely pubescent. Not one with a goatee. Not one with a gut. They introduce a few of the characters that we've since grown to love, and some that we still don't understand. Cabbage Head?
The episode isn't bleeped, and there are no frustrating black bars or blurred boxes over the butts that grace the screen. You know. Art and all that.
Who was your favorite? Who has done the best work away from TKitH? What was your favorite recurring character? What was your favourite one-off sketch? Who was the hottest in drag?
47 minutes
If you already know you like the show, and you have some patience, consider waiting for the DVD to be sent, so you can listen to the commentary track.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
This Week On The Shows: Sept 13-17
Friday, September 10, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #42
Hey, did you see Naomi Campbell testifying at the war-crimes trial of the former Liberian president Charles Taylor? You know the story? Apparently he gave her some diamonds. They were blood diamonds or something. Well the court has declared her a hostile witness. Well duh. There's a surprise, huh? (laughter) She was a hostile boss, a hostile girlfriend, a hostile limo passenger. Duh! Of course she's gonna be a hostile witness. (laughter) Is that hard for anybody to understand? I'm surprised you didn't get bonked with a cellphone. (laughter)-August 9, 2010
Podcast of the Week: The Joe Rogan Experience w/guest Dane Cook
Joe Rogan is known as a martial artist, as Joe Garrelli, and as a UFC commentator and fan, and as the guy who interrupted Carlos Mencia's act to accuse him (convincingly) of stealing jokes, and as an advocate of legalized marijuana, and as a host of The Man Show, and as host of Fear Factor, and as a proponent of vision quests induced by DMT and isolation tanks, and as a stand-up comedian. He's got the energy of a riptide.
On August 3 he chatted with Dane Cook for an episode of The Joe Rogan Experience. Dane Cook has been on what seems a bit like a redemption tour, perhaps starting back in November of 2009 when he did Howard Stern's show, which went well. He visited both Marc Maron's and Greg Fitzsimmons's podcasts in June. The latter was a bit smoother. The chemistry was better, the conversation more relaxed, with no undercurrent throwing Cook off-balance. There were some moments on Maron's show when Cook didn't roll so easily with the nudges and jabs that Maron sometimes throws.
Rogan's interviews are typically friendly and comfortable, tho he is known for speaking his mind. On this episode, he and Cook get along well, speak easily, and stay away from accusations and heavy controversy. No fireworks or blowouts, but it sustains 150 minutes of conversation on getting famous, being famous, working the Boston circuit, leaving the Boston circuit, getting rich, dropping 7K on a pool cue, 250K on a car, and looking up to superstars and unknown giants.
Cook might be doing these shows at the perfect time. He's past his peak of popularity; the controversy surrounding him is dying down; his act is moving (just perceptibly) away from the manic physical performances that got him his early attentions; his early self-promotion online is now so standard in the industry that he really can't be accused of anything but being way ahead of the game when he vaulted using MySpace; and even if he's still not your favorite comic, his longevity is more and more an indication of his respect for stand-up.
Some horrible difficulties with finances (the story is about an $11 million loss) and family (his step-brother burned the money; both Cook's parents died in a short period of time) have given him the scars and texture that can go far in comedy.
But most importantly, comedy has a new whipping boy. Cook probably suffered some for his palpably optimistic persona, coming across as a disingenuous crowd-pleaser. But the Tony-Robbins-style approach of Kyle Cease's bootcamp, combined with many accusations focusing on the bootcamp price-tag, have made Cease the new Guy Smiley that no-one wants to trust and everybody wants to see fail.
If the backlash against Cook lets-up enough, this might be his chance to reset his role in comedy. Whatever you say about his jokes, you can't say he hasn't worked at it.
Subscribe to The Joe Rogan Experience on iTunes.
On August 3 he chatted with Dane Cook for an episode of The Joe Rogan Experience. Dane Cook has been on what seems a bit like a redemption tour, perhaps starting back in November of 2009 when he did Howard Stern's show, which went well. He visited both Marc Maron's and Greg Fitzsimmons's podcasts in June. The latter was a bit smoother. The chemistry was better, the conversation more relaxed, with no undercurrent throwing Cook off-balance. There were some moments on Maron's show when Cook didn't roll so easily with the nudges and jabs that Maron sometimes throws.Rogan's interviews are typically friendly and comfortable, tho he is known for speaking his mind. On this episode, he and Cook get along well, speak easily, and stay away from accusations and heavy controversy. No fireworks or blowouts, but it sustains 150 minutes of conversation on getting famous, being famous, working the Boston circuit, leaving the Boston circuit, getting rich, dropping 7K on a pool cue, 250K on a car, and looking up to superstars and unknown giants.
Cook might be doing these shows at the perfect time. He's past his peak of popularity; the controversy surrounding him is dying down; his act is moving (just perceptibly) away from the manic physical performances that got him his early attentions; his early self-promotion online is now so standard in the industry that he really can't be accused of anything but being way ahead of the game when he vaulted using MySpace; and even if he's still not your favorite comic, his longevity is more and more an indication of his respect for stand-up.
Some horrible difficulties with finances (the story is about an $11 million loss) and family (his step-brother burned the money; both Cook's parents died in a short period of time) have given him the scars and texture that can go far in comedy.
But most importantly, comedy has a new whipping boy. Cook probably suffered some for his palpably optimistic persona, coming across as a disingenuous crowd-pleaser. But the Tony-Robbins-style approach of Kyle Cease's bootcamp, combined with many accusations focusing on the bootcamp price-tag, have made Cease the new Guy Smiley that no-one wants to trust and everybody wants to see fail.
If the backlash against Cook lets-up enough, this might be his chance to reset his role in comedy. Whatever you say about his jokes, you can't say he hasn't worked at it.
Subscribe to The Joe Rogan Experience on iTunes.
Thursday, September 09, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #41
Actually you know who else is on [Dancing with the Stars] this season? Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol Palin is on. Not to be outdone, her former boyfriend Levi Johnston, he's got a new reality show on ABC called The Slimiest Bachelor. You don't want to miss that. (laughter and applause)- September 1, 2010
Twitterer of the Week: Sean L. McCarthy
Sean L. McCarthy, writer of the comedy blog, the comic's comic, claims to be "The world's only embedded comedy journalist."Based in New York, he's typically on top of comedy news because of his connections. He knows what's about to happen, and often gets news out before official announcements. He was among the first (if not the first) to report several recent hires for the new season of SNL, and he reports well on what has happened, getting exit reactions from LCS contestants and winners, and posting a very sharp tribute to Robert Schimmel.
McCarthy is a good reporter of events. But beyond information, he's got insight.
His subheading "From the back of the room to your room," refers to the fact that while one comedian is performing on stage, several more are likely to be standing behind the audience, watching the performance and sizing up the crowd. Finding the trouble spots. Noting which pieces are killing with which groups. The back of the room is where the mind of a comic, in reaction to peers and and audience, both sympathetic and antagonistic, is likely to show itself.
Most Recent Tweet:
Four Older Tweets:
- Wikipedia keeps flipping the edits back and forth regarding Schimmel. I'm looking into it, will let you know what I find out.
- Traffic on my site is slow today because the Post and the NYC blog clique copied my scoop without attribution, but I've been told to relax.
- I'm heading out to get my trophy at the New York's Funniest Reporter thing at Gotham. Yes, it was three years ago, but who's counting?
- I know who won.
Wednesday, September 08, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #40
Well last night was TV big night. the Emmy awards were last night. (cheers and applause) And of course, the big surprise: Jersey Shore, shut out again! I couldn't believe it! (laughter) In all categories: writing, directing— It was so unfair. (light laughter)-August 30, 2010
Video Bits of the Week: Conan O'Brien on 60 Minutes
This is from a few months ago. I include two links to Conan O'Brien's interview with Steve Kroft as the segment was presented on 60 Minutes. The first video posted here is a summary presented by Funny Or Die of the interview with Conan's thoughts spelled out for us. It's stands on its own.
The second video is Conan's refreshing admission that tweeting is not so easy.
Interview Part 1
Interview Part 2
I'm almost done reading ¡Satiristas!, by Paul Provenza and Dan Dion. For now, I shall merely quote from the interview with Jay Leno.
The second video is Conan's refreshing admission that tweeting is not so easy.
Interview Part 1
Interview Part 2
I'm almost done reading ¡Satiristas!, by Paul Provenza and Dan Dion. For now, I shall merely quote from the interview with Jay Leno.
I just write jokes and try not to hurt anybody. It's like the Hippocratic oath to me: "Do no harm." Other people have different agendas.
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #39
Congratulations to Brian Cranston. He won "Best Actor" third year in a row for Breaking Bad. You ever watch Breaking B—? It's a great show. (applause) It's about— you know what it's about? Terrific show. It's about a science teacher—a high school science teacher who cooks crystal meth. And he attributed his success to working 'round the clock, 24 hours a day without a moment's sleep. That's how he accredit— (laughter) See he was making— (percussion/rattle from band) That's how he was able to do the role— Never mind. (light chuckles)-August 30, 2010
Monday, September 06, 2010
He's Known for His Monologue #38
And I love this. How sleazy is this? A hundred nuns are suing Morgan Stanley for mismanaging their investments. (light laughter) I mean, you're screwing nuns. What is that? (laughter) I mean, how many whacks on the back of the hand with a ruler is that worth? (laughter)-August 13, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)