It's the mental illness jokes that really bug me.
Frankie Boyle's Tramadol Nights Page 33
Quote: sootyj @ January 5 2011, 6:20 PM GMTIt's the mental illness jokes that really bug me.
They don't bug me and that's the beauty of comedy being subjective. I don't understand why people watch it if they hate it so much, but I guess Daily Mail readers have to do something.
I'm concerned about the lives of people with mental health issues, their hard time getting jobs and being accepted.
So a couple of idiotic cheap sketches on people with mental health issues on a popular show really popularises prejudice.
I don't dislike this stuff as bad art or unfunny (of which it most certainly is in my view)
But as a steaming pile of dogshit on a rainy day.
An enviromental pollutant that's bad for society.
Quote: sootyj @ January 8 2011, 8:37 PM GMTSo a couple of idiotic cheap sketches on people with mental health issues on a popular show really popularises prejudice.
Has there been an increase in prejudice following this programme? I think there are more important factors which need addressing in society before we start censoring Frankie Boyle.
No Ben
Frankie Boyle did not lead to mass firings of people with mental illness
But it is part of a general propaganda war on which he's on the wrong side.
And wars are won one battle at a time.
The thing I don't get is this show was pretty poor. I only watched it because fellow BCGers reccomended.
Why the love?
I don't love the show, but I think it was ok. It could have been great with some better sketches, but there we go.
Wasn't referring to you there were other more enthusiastic Boyle boosters.
sootyj, as I'm sure your aware, this show is meant to be dark satire. That sketch simply highlights the prejudices you are concerned about and I thought that was the point of satire.
So what exactly is he satirising?
People with mental illness? Adverts asking for acceptance? Murder?
C'mon this isn't satire.
It's all in a similar vein to other acclaimed satirists that cover dark subject matters, whether or not it's done as well or not is up to you but it's obviously not meant to be taken seriously.
Rubbish
Brass Eye, absolutely targetted its targets.
Jam didn't bother with making fun of the vulnerable, only contentious material.
Just because it looks like dark satire doesn't make it satire.
Only a cheap joyless simulacrum.
The only place that this shit would be classified as "satire" is in a dictionary for morons. Sadly, it seems said dictionary is now the main reference material for many in the comedy industry and, indeed, the viewing public.
Sootyj is absolutely spot on with the difference between Frankie Boyle's "satire" and the work of someone such as Chris Morris. One of the reasons that Brass Eye and Jam were (imo) funnier is because there was no laziness in the writing. The writers have carefully done their homework, properly considering where the butt of the joke lies. Theirs is dark and sometimes twisted humour which has been really, really thought about before it has been used.
Many of the defenders of Frankie Boyle use incredibly similar arguments to those who used to defend Bernard Manning et al. Manning's apologists always used to claim his material was "just jokes" and that he picked on everyone equally. Except it wasn't true. Manning didn't pick on the kind of people who made up the majority of his fan base - he didn't pick on the average white British male. Frankie Boyle knows he can't get away with specifically targeting racial minorities or women in general, but he does know that the vast majority of his audience/fans will not be the stigmatised in society. They will be the able-bodied; the straight; those without the daily challenges of mental illness; those not dealing with the consequences of rape, domestic violence or child abuse etc... As long as he sides with the majority against the minority he'll always find an appreciative and enthusiastic audience for the material.
This type of comedy taps into rather a nasty, primitive animal urge that humans still possess, where the "strong" group together to attack/ostracise the "weak". Sadly, this trait will probably always be with us - but that doesn't mean it helps to legitimise or promote it within society. At the very least, don't try to wrap it up in the comfort blanket of the term "satire".
Quote: Tim Walker @ January 9 2011, 1:43 AM GMTThe only place that this shit would be classified as "satire" is in a dictionary for morons. Sadly, it seems said dictionary is now the main reference material for many in the comedy industry and, indeed, the viewing public.
Sootyj is absolutely spot on with the difference between Frankie Boyle's "satire" and the work of someone such as Chris Morris. One of the reasons that Brass Eye and Jam were (imo) funnier is because there was no laziness in the writing. The writers have carefully done their homework, properly considering where the butt of the joke lies. Theirs is dark and sometimes twisted humour which has been really, really thought about before it has been used.
Many of the defenders of Frankie Boyle use incredibly similar arguments to those who used to defend Bernard Manning et al. Manning's apologists always used to claim his material was "just jokes" and that he picked on everyone equally. Except it wasn't true. Manning didn't pick on the kind of people who made up the majority of his fan base - he didn't pick on the average white British male. Frankie Boyle knows he can't get away with specifically targeting racial minorities or women in general, but he does know that the vast majority of his audience/fans will not be the stigmatised in society. They will be the able-bodied; the straight; those without the daily challenges of mental illness; those not dealing with the consequences of rape, domestic violence or child abuse etc... As long as he sides with the majority against the minority he'll always find an appreciative and enthusiastic audience for the material.
This type of comedy taps into rather a nasty, primitive animal urge that humans still possess, where the "strong" group together to attack/ostracise the "weak". Sadly, this trait will probably always be with us - but that doesn't mean it helps to legitimise or promote it within society. At the very least, don't try to wrap it up in the comfort blanket of the term "satire".
From the Concise Dictionary for Morons (12th ed. edit. by Dr. T Walker)
satire |ˈsaˌtīr|
noun
the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
Which satirical elements of the show did you particularly enjoy, Godot Taxis? I only ask because, in my view, Tramadol Nights has no such dimension and I would appreciate some insight.
Quote: Gregor Shamsa @ January 9 2011, 3:38 PM GMTWhich satirical elements of the show did you particularly enjoy, Godot Taxis? I only ask because, in my view, Tramadol Nights has no such dimension and I would appreciate some insight.
Well your view isn't worth a tin f**k, then Shamsa, since almost all of Tramadol Nights was satire.
Incidentally, did you just misspell 'Samsa' out of ignorance or is there another reason for you calling yourself 'Gregor Shamsa'?