The above quote is from Mark Twain. But it's quite relevant today, isn't it?
Satire isn't easy. It takes brains and it takes guts to write. Satirists are able to take difficult subject matter and turn it into comedy. It's all about laughing at people's stupidity (folly) and their indiscretions (vice). It's about laughing at the most awful things in the world because what else can you do. I mean, you can cry. You can cry forever at all the terrible shit that is taking place in the world today. Satire makes fun of the problems (and those responsible) and in the process addresses these problems. The great thing about the Daily Show is that it takes the real news and by satirizing it and/or parodying current events draws attention to just how ridiculously absurd these serious subjects such as war, terrorism, or Lindsay Lohan's DUI really are.
This class isn't going to be easy. It's going to be tough, actually. Everyone in this class is going to have to think. What? Yes. You will have to use those brains of yours. These books, plays, and films were created for those that think. This material is difficult. It's irreverent. It's subversive. It's dangerous.
Ok. So what is it? What is satire? Satire is defined in the Merriam-Webster's dictionary as being:
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
This definition sounds good to me. I like it. I want us to refer to this definition while we are reading. Keep this definition in mind when we are looking at books, short stories, plays, TV shows, and films that 'expose and discredit vice or folly'.
I think after 9/11, things got a little serious and irony apparently died. Things are slowly getting back to normal. And by normal, I mean that we Americans are getting back to our cynical, jaded selves. Tom Perrotta released Little Children and it sold millions (and was later made into a film). The Onion is still going strong. The Simpsons are going into their 19th season (and they just put out a movie--finally). South Park has been offending viewers for 10 years--and they were renewed for another three years. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report may be the funniest hour of television in the history of ever. And then there was Borat. Who I think surprised everyone by banking this much at the box office.
This class is going to examine and explore satire's past and present--and through this journey I'd like for us to think: what's next?
13 comments:
If irony is integral to satire, in that it plays contradictions against one another to reveal the humor and absurdity of a situation, then wouldn't irony also be an essential part of kitsch?
I feel like 'high kitsch' is universally ironic because it uses contradictions and confusion to poke fun. Kitsch is high-v-lowbrow, trashy-v-classy, affected-v-natural. It deconstructs our preconceived notions about culture and society and art and whatever.
But then what's the difference between kitsch and satire? Am I making sense? Kitsch is usually more associated with queer culture.. so does that just make it queer satire?
I do see the irony in kitsch. It's an imitation of something. Take something quite cheap or gaudy trying to be something expensive and lovely. It's really quite funny. Especially when the end result is in bad taste. Or you have something like Thomas Kincaid which is just awful.
Is it satire? I don't think it's smart enough. Does that make sense? I hate to say it's dumbed-down, but it's lacking. But you can appreciate the effort that went into a velvet painting.
I think it's part of queer culture in that kitsch isn't taken seriously. It's all that you say: the lowbrow, the trashy, the affected. I can't help but think Divine in her cha cha heels. I wonder if queer culture takes kitsch because nobody else wants it. It's like the Island of Misfit Toys. You have a Charlie-in-the-box instead of a Jack. Or a train with square wheels. They're not your typical toys, but they still do the same things. There is beauty in the flaws. The flaws are beautiful. It sets them apart. I have no idea how I got into referencing Rudolph, but I did. I honestly don't have the answer, but I like the questions. I'll keep pondering this.
i think that kitsch is still satire of` good taste. kitsch mocks the standards of beauty and culture like "little murders" mocks the social institutions and attitudes of modern america. "little murders" exaggerates societal attitudes toward violence in the same way that drag queens exaggerate the societal attitudes toward how a woman should dress and behave. the extreme amplification creates incredible ridiculousness that is hilarious and stems from some kind of truth. i think the feeling that kitsch is "dumbed down" or "lacking" comes from its inherent superficiality. to me its still valid. perhaps no one else wants kitsch because it can be so vulgar and disgusting, even with no reference to the graphic, violent, or sexual. but that's why it's so great.
Kristian, I like the Island of Misfit Toys analogy. The concrete imagery is easy to grasp, it helped me see what you were saying. Kitsch is something I'd really like to study further. I hadn't even thought about how it related to what we're covering until I saw Polyester on the movie list.
I'm a big Waters and Warhol fan, I like their films and art a lot, a lot. They've both had a huge influence on me. Oscar Wilde too. These are the guys who got me through junior high and highschool in a tiny podunk town
(think quiet, midwestern, lakeside town. conservative. more churches than parishioners. but with a bizarre and seedy underground of "boozers, losers, and users"--but this isn't my biography)
Anyway...I guess I might have some things to think about for my final paper. I can't believe it's the beginning of the semester and I'm already thinking about the final paper. That's a first
This is what is exciting about the blog. Dialogues like this one.
Erin, you are so right on with what you are saying. But I'm not sure if I agree with the kitsch mocking the standards of beauty. At least, not intentionally. I think so-called artists (such as Thomas Kinkade--which I spelled wrong earlier) believe they are creating great works of art. I may be wrong. I love the idea of mocking the standards of beauty. And I love that you brought drag queens into the mix. Drag queens get criticized for poking fun at women. But really, aren't they just celebrating women? Is it parody or is it just performance? I mean, then we get into the whole performance of gender and aren't we all doing that.
Aaron, glad the analogy helped. And, yeah, this is all worth exploring in a paper. Kitsch, camp, drag. I have to think about literature or essays to refer you to. Definitely the films of Waters, particularly Female Trouble and Polyester.
kristian, i have to agree with what you are saying. i don't think the artists behind kitsch and camp attempt to create "great works of art." this is the superficiality i mentioned before that sets it apart. i appreciate any form of art--visual, audial, literary, fashion--that doesnt take itself too seriously. i do believe that drag queens celebrate women. i think if they wanted to poke fun at the roles and rules of women the outcome could be far less fun and more disturbing (im envisioning drag queens in aprons and draw-on stretch marks singing slave songs on stage while mopping up their own trail of menstrual blood. wouldn't that just be a riot?). instead, drag queens mimic what should be celebrated about feminimity (whatever that really means): glamour, glitz, power and presence, to name a few more interesting ones. it is at once ugly and beautiful. it's also funny and tragic. as a girl, i dont think ive ever seen a drag queen and not felt jealous, giggly, in awe, and that funny, gagging feeling in my throat i get when i see three-legged dogs, newborn infants, and kevin bacon. i could talk about drag and gender bending for hours. its so fascinating.
on a different note, i'm not sure i quite understand what i should be blogging about. i get that we have to blog in response to the readings for class, but if we find something interesting that is relevant to discussion, can we blog about that? im sure writing about mark twain will be amazing or whatever, but i think it would be interesting to dissect the things i see everyday that amuse and confuse me. im not suggesting DEAR DIARY/LOVE ERIN. i want to write satirically and tie it into class. i suppose i could start a blog outside of class, but i dont think i would write in it if i was the only one reading it or thought that no one would respond. maybe im just bs-ing because im a needy writer. any thoughts?
also, it has become increasingly apparent that i "dont get" irony. ive had friends show me examples to help define the concept. i laugh and laugh, but i dont actually understand exactly why its ironic. i dont even think, out of four possible answers, i could identify which is irony if i were on "who wants to be a millionaire?". im feeling stupid and i need the money. help? im going to read those handouts again.
"Drag queens are a living testimony to the way women used to want to be, the way some people still want them to be, and the way some women actually still want to be."
--Andy Warhol
It's like they're curators of past, antiquated views on womanhood and femininity. They document and sustain these preconceived notions we have. But they simultaneously break them down.
"The American Drag Queen, keeping the American Dream Woman Alive (for not-too-close inspection) for 50 Years and Still Going."
But something about it still strikes me as satire. I guess because they're celebrating a false image of womanhood? The glitz and mystique of womanhood isn't real. It's a fabrication of Medieval Romanticism or something. Or something like that.
I mean drag queens work double-time to erase all the tell-tale signs of manhood and draw in all the female signs. But the female signs they draw in aren't real. They're way-too-big boobs, cha cha heels, arched brows, a peroxide wig, and Monroe mark.
I'm not sure how that's celebrating womanhood. It's celebrating an illusion. A way of being that the sexual revolution and feminist's abolished, or tried really really hard to. About as hard as the drag queens try to maintain it.
I guess I don't know where I'm going with this. There's just something really ironic in the confusion of it all. Something that's funny, and kinda sad, but really really great.
It's sort of the same kind of feeling I get when I'm watching good satire like Dr. Strangelove. Drag Queens are funny, because they're a put-on, a fake, a fake imitating a fake. Like Dr. Strangelove was a fake (read: movie of a) nuclear war imitating a fake (read: cold) war.
But now I feel like I'm putting drag queens down. I'm not. I'm not saying it's a bad idea (or a good one), I'm not saying it's not self-creative (or self-destructive), but I am saying it's hard work and a helluva lot of it.
And I can always admire hard work, but who can't?
A fake imitating a fake. Well said, Aaron. The performance of drag (queens and kings) really is a fascinating one. Because they are performing those stereotypes of what men and women are or should be. The kings are very masculine. They wear mustaches and suits. They talk in a deep voice. It's what 'men' should be. The drag queens and kings, in their 'performance', are critiquing the gender roles.
Erin, this is a lit class, so I need for you to blog about the lit in the class. Yes, you can also comment on the films--but try to bring in the readings. I know you're a creative writer and it's tough. The blog is good in that it's a looser format. I don't expect 'scholarly' responses.
Irony is not easy. I think you know what it is. It's just hard for you to put it into words. And it doesn't help that term is mis-used by everybody. I'm guilty of mis-using it. It happens. It's difficult. I believe that by the end of the semester, you'll have a better understanding of the term.
aaron, you know i absolutely agree with you. but i still believe what i wrote before. REALLY really, the feminine mystique is about as nonexistent as candy darling's vagina. however, the belief has been around and forced into actuality for so long that it might as well be real. despite what the "feminists" (do the quotation marks make me look like an asshole?) have done to erase the ancient standards of womanhood, there is still an enforced set of guidelines that females are expected to follow from birth. i mean, we (i suddenly hate that word) can vote and say the word "masturbate" in public, but we're still encouraged to buy tiny, bite-sized tampons with silent, discreet wrappers so no one else knows what's going on when it's time to take care of business. ugh, what am i doing?! what i wanted to say before i started being a douchebag is that even though i think womanhood is an illusion, it's been so carefully crafted and strictly enforced that it virtually exists. ERGO, it does. and thats what drag queens are mimicking. i dont know what im talking about anymore. it is a lot of confusion. whatever.
drag kings are so boring.
i like the andy quote.
kristian, okay, okay. i wont "fun blog."
Ashleys furniture
Occasionally it may be a sensible idea to select reputable brands to design your house. You will radiate confidence with the environment you encounter.However, it is not just for this purpose that you really want the greatest brands to purchase. Each is distinctive and provides your house a different type of décor. The choices you choose rely on your own particular requirements and needs.
Best content & valuable as well. Thanks for sharing this content.
Approved Auditor in DAFZA
Approved Auditor in RAKEZ
Approved Auditor in JAFZA
i heard about this blog & get actually whatever i was finding. Nice post love to read this blog
Approved Auditor in DMCC
trailer aluminum extrusions
Post a Comment