Quote: sootyj @ July 2 2011, 10:47 PM BSTI'd agree but I think truly good humour rarely offends.
Stuff like In Sickness & Health is just too sharp to really offend.
I think part of the problem is how the audience interprets material.
An audience can always misinterpret a joke, that's not the responsiblity of the joke teller.
By the same token, there's nothing duller than somebody desperate to offend.
I imagine someone desperate not to offend would be much duller.
Absolutely.
I'm increasingly thinking it's the audience who's the problem not the comic. I mean most people read the Bible and give to charity and act nice to poor and that sorta shit.
But some people read it and cut prostitutes up or burn hospitals.
It's not God's fault.
Quote: Vader @ July 2 2011, 10:50 PM BSTI imagine someone desperate not to offend would be much duller.
And what's so inherently amusing about offence?
Quote: sootyj @ July 2 2011, 10:47 PM BSTAn audience can always misinterpret a joke, that's not the responsiblity of the joke teller.
Very true, just look at Frankie Boyle.
Quote: Vader @ July 2 2011, 10:56 PM BSTVery true, just look at Frankie Boyle.
I'd rather not. He's a bit tiresome.
Quote: sootyj @ July 2 2011, 10:54 PM BSTAnd what's so inherently amusing about offence?
I didn't say it was inherently amusing, but desperately trying not to offend is inherently dull I'd say.
Quote: Vader @ July 2 2011, 10:56 PM BSTVery true, just look at Frankie Boyle.
Poor example. His show was a rather rotten example of just going for shock factor, in my opinion.
Quote: sootyj @ July 2 2011, 10:54 PM BSTAnd what's so inherently amusing about offence?
There's nothing inherently amusing about offence, but tastes are so varied - as played out on these forums on a daily basis - that there'll always be someone to take offence. The more desperate a comic is not to cause any offence, the duller and more watered-down the material.
Well to big up my least fave sitcom, Terry and June seemed to manage it.
Or Harry Hill. (when he doesn't make bizarre comic songs about single mums)
He was a perfect example of an audience misinterpreting jokes and it not being his responsibility. Like idiots who don't undestand satire making out he's racist. Most of the people who were offended didn't even watch it of course, they just read about it and get offended by what they don't understand and wasn't aimed at them.
Harry Hill makes quite a few near the knuckle jokes, actually. It's just that his family friendly style makes them easy to miss.
Who? What joke?
If you mean the Frankie Boyle Harvey gag. It was a shock gag, in that I suppose it worked. But it was cheap and rather pointless.
As audience members it's not so much we should condemn him, but rather expect more of both him and us.
I think a comedian who goes out to push boundries and an audience's expectations can be a good thing; a comedian who just tries to get laughs/gasps as he delivers a joke about bumming children is a boring thing.
Quote: chipolata @ July 2 2011, 10:48 PM BSTBy the same token, there's nothing duller than somebody desperate to offend.
Quote: Vader @ July 2 2011, 10:56 PM BSTVery true, just look at Frankie Boyle.
It seems rather unfair the way people dismiss FB after 6 episodes of Tramadol Nights when he was awesome for 54 episodes of Mock the Week. Some people have short memories.