Sorry Joel for nicking your thread!
Maddy audition Page 4
Re: controversial subjects - often time and distance are the most important moderators on whether a subject is fair game. For example, the Holocaust was a shameful episode in world history with millions of Maddy McCann style children-torn-from-parents cases, millions of degrading psycopathic grisly murders, rapes, beatings, but the facelessness of the victims, and time, seem to trivialise their pain. In comparative terms, the Holocaust is many millions of times worse than this single case, yet one is considered fair game, one is controversial.
Has a sketch about the Holocaust persuaded, through the cutting art of satire, one single tyrant to mend his ways since 1945? I suspect not. Rather than the betterment of society (as is the often promoted justification), the only other reason for the existence of such sketches is that of entertainment. That the misery of so many is considered less than that of a single girl seems a very top-heavy logic.
I'm not proclaiming either for or against here. I'm staying in the middle. 
Just wondering why such incomparable cases of human misery can be treated so differently. Anyone?
For example, how many people see through controversial subject matter (such as the Brass eye infamous show) to see the (alleged?) TRUE targets? How many people in Cardiff are eating their curry-and-chips and saying "Oh, yeah, it's not about a laugh at paedophilia; it's to do with the media and the way it treats paedophilia." Many proponents of such shows might argue that the audience 'gets' it but the vast majority of people don't even comprehend crimestoppers without the broadcaster having to flash up 'reconstruction.' C'mon! 
Quote: SlagA @ February 2, 2008, 8:07 PMFor example, how many people see through controversial subject matter (such as the Brass eye infamous show) to see the (alleged?) TRUE targets? How many people in Cardiff are eating their curry-and-chips and saying "Oh, yeah, it's not about a laugh at paedophilia; it's to do with the media and the way it treats paedophilia." Many proponents of such shows might argue that the audience 'gets' it but the vast majority of people don't even comprehend crimestoppers without the broadcaster having to flash up 'reconstruction.' C'mon!
Part of the role of comedy surely is to address those issues, however laterally, which the rest of society fails to want to think about. Hypocrisy is everywhere in the media. It sets up controversies, like racism and Jade Goody in the Big Brother house, only to condemn it afterwards.
We consume Maddie stories voyeuristically, and are directed constantly to false conclusions.
I've met numerous paedophiles in my work over many years, and I can't think of one who hadn't themselves been abused as a child. They may have committed horrifically damaging acts, but they themselves were exactly the same child victims in the past, and their abuse was clearly related to the distorting of their sexuality as children. We rush to condemn to distance ourselves from crimes that we find horrifying, because no-one will run the risk of being associated with such behaviour. It's a modern-day witch-hunt.
Comedy is not going to change the world, but it can surely be a safety valve that enables us to consider those kind of issues that otherwise no-one else will go near.
This sketch didn't really work for me, but I think it would be ludicrous for comedy writers not to be able to address this kind of issue when acres of newsprint are used up reporting and commenting on the story, often completely speculatively and mindlessly.
well as hitler said 1 death is murder, a 1000 is a statistic
chaplin, mel brooks all worked to make hitler look ridiculos and in the countries where they're part of the cultural language these dictators haven't come back
saw a very interesting documentary on comedy in nazi germany, it's worth remembering how terrified they were of it, and how many comics they killed
jokes are misunderstood, and the point missed, and taken out of context
it doesn't stop them being important and vital.
we have a duty as comics to attack hypocrisy, and humbug, and bullshit when ever we enounter it
and again what happened to maddy is not funny, profoundly, deeply, seriously it is not funny
but the idea that some film producer saw what happened, and said thats my next mercedes and villa in spain, is in the truest sense a sick sick joke
and a joke that needs to be made
and yes people will get it wrong, and misinterpret it, but the foolish will do that anyway
and frankly the fact that maddy went through something so awful should protect the portugese police from being mocked for their incompetence that is also wrong
Quote: Frankie Rage @ February 2, 2008, 2:31 PM
Yeah I was replaced by these guys
Quote: SlagA @ February 2, 2008, 8:07 PMoften time and distance are the most important moderators on whether a subject is fair game.
Bastards! 
Quote: sootyj @ February 2, 2008, 8:55 PMbut the idea that some film producer saw what happened, and said thats my next mercedes and villa in spain, is in the truest sense a sick sick joke
and a joke that needs to be made
By targeting, or using, the victim?
and yes people will get it wrong, and misinterpret it, but the foolish will do that anyway
So, because I see (not 'get'!) a 'joke' as offensive means I misinterpret it therefore I am a fool? Codswallop!
and frankly the fact that maddy went through something so awful should protect the portugese police from being mocked for their incompetence that is also wrong
Then mock the incompetent police, not the innocent who have suffered.
Don't use an easy target as an excuse for justifying the 'right' to make light of it. I thought comedy was meant to bring about laughter, not be used as a weapon in some fight to bring home a message. Looks like I'm wrong.
Quote: ajp29 @ February 2, 2008, 10:12 PMYeah I was replaced by these guys - time and distance.
Bastards!
Far when!
what easy target?
and making light? who siad comedy should be light?
I'm with ben elton on this, if you take serious, and funny, you get seriously funny
how many jokes are there with out some sort of target, or victim?
i certianly haven't targetted maddy or her family in any of my jokes, are you implying that I can't even joke in the general area
that's a degree of moral cowardice that's really sad
should we drop jokes about madonna in case she gets mistaken for maddy
there's serious issues in media treatment of this incident, and what it says about our society, we can't turn away from that
i'm glad some one else mentioned the brass eye paedo special, and southpark,
comedy is never just funny in a vacum, that jsut isn't how it works
Quote: John Kelly @ February 2, 2008, 8:52 PMPart of the role of comedy surely is to address those issues, however laterally, which the rest of society fails to want to think about. Hypocrisy is everywhere in the media. It sets up controversies, like racism and Jade Goody in the Big Brother house, only to condemn it afterwards.
We consume Maddie stories voyeuristically, and are directed constantly to false conclusions.
I've met numerous paedophiles in my work over many years, and I can't think of one who hadn't themselves been abused as a child. They may have committed horrifically damaging acts, but they themselves were exactly the same child victims in the past, and their abuse was clearly related to the distorting of their sexuality as children. We rush to condemn to distance ourselves from crimes that we find horrifying, because no-one will run the risk of being associated with such behaviour. It's a modern-day witch-hunt.
Comedy is not going to change the world, but it can surely be a safety valve that enables us to consider those kind of issues that otherwise no-one else will go near.
This sketch didn't really work for me, but I think it would be ludicrous for comedy writers not to be able to address this kind of issue when acres of newsprint are used up reporting and commenting on the story, often completely speculatively and mindlessly.
You make a good argument and I do see your reasoning - but there's a very simple question at the heart of this debate, that question being "Is the general public ready to start laughing at the whole Maddie thing yet?" The answer of course is "no".
I think there's a lot of pomposity and chest-puffing about comedy, as if it's somehow beyond reproach and above the constraints of acceptable social behaviour. In my opinion it's not. Yes, it can be a brilliant tool for bringing the plight of others to attention - you only have to look at Comic Relief for that - but the whole Maddie thing is still very much a raw open wound for most people, and - rightly or wrongly depending on your viewpoint, that is where the crux lies. Comedy is meant to make us laugh, and a missing baby who has very probably been murdered just is not funny.
Quote: sootyj @ February 3, 2008, 12:57 AMwhat easy target?
and making light? who siad comedy should be light?
I'm with ben elton on this, if you take serious, and funny, you get seriously funnyhow many jokes are there with out some sort of target, or victim?
i certianly haven't targetted maddy or her family in any of my jokes, are you implying that I can't even joke in the general area
that's a degree of moral cowardice that's really sad
should we drop jokes about madonna in case she gets mistaken for maddy
there's serious issues in media treatment of this incident, and what it says about our society, we can't turn away from that
i'm glad some one else mentioned the brass eye paedo special, and southpark,
comedy is never just funny in a vacum, that jsut isn't how it works
What sort of claptrap is that?!!
You are advocating the use of any subject (to try) to raise a laugh at their expense.
I just cannot see how anyone can look upon the suffering of children as reasonable behaviour, and that is what you are doing, don't try to cover it up with some pathetic moral justification that everyone/thing is fair game because either we live in a free society or, we don't live in a free society so we must use the power of the word to make a point.
And bugger who gets hurt in the process!
The misreporting of events by the media is something entirely different to trying to squeeze humour out of an extremely delicate and hurtful (for some!) subject.
Anyway, I've obviously hijacked this thread with my individualistic moral high ground so should take my leave of it, before I say what I really think!
can comedy not be a scalpel must it always be a cudgel?
mel brooks expertly found the campness, and ridiculosness in nazism without touching the memory of the killed
brass eye got the queaziness, hypocrisy and paranoia at the heart of peado-phobia, without belittling the victims
i don't claim to be anywhere as near as good as either
but thats what i aspire to be like one day
we need to remember theres a universe of difference between bernard manning, and black adder goes 4th
Quote: sootyj @ February 3, 2008, 1:22 AMbrass eye got the queaziness, hypocrisy and paranoia at the heart of peado-phobia, without belittling the victims
You reckon?!! What planet are you on?!!!
I was outraged by the programme and if Mr Morris had been within reach...!!
Quote: Perry Nium @ February 3, 2008, 1:11 AMYou make a good argument and I do see your reasoning - but there's a very simple question at the heart of this debate, that question being "Is the general public ready to start laughing at the whole Maddie thing yet?" The answer of course is "no".
I think there's a lot of pomposity and chest-puffing about comedy, as if it's somehow beyond reproach and above the constraints of acceptable social behaviour. In my opinion it's not. Yes, it can be a brilliant tool for bringing the plight of others to attention - you only have to look at Comic Relief for that - but the whole Maddie thing is still very much a raw open wound for most people, and - rightly or wrongly depending on your viewpoint, that is where the crux lies. Comedy is meant to make us laugh, and a missing baby who has very probably been murdered just is not funny.
I'd agree with that. Like I said before, no offence to Sooty as it is a fine piece of sketch writing IMO, as an experiment, but I would not even have thought of THINKING about a Maddy gag.. why would you?
Jamie Bulger was a long time ago, but I wouldn't have thought there's a gag there either. With the sketch I wrote about serial killers in a house-share I quickly made them ficticious in an attempt to lighten it because, as you say, I was trying to write something to make peeps laugh!
It made me laugh but I ran out of what I considered to be acceptable or semi-acceptable gags pretty quickly.
It seems to me we're in danger of assuming a very narrow definition of comedy here. That's comedy which is for a general audience and just aimed to get laughs. Comedy has a very long tradition of doing more than this. There've always been writers using comedy or satire to draw attention to controversial and difficult subjects.
Look at Swift's "Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Ireland from being a Burden on their Parents and Country" where he advocates eating the thousands currently starving there, and gives a range of ideas as to how children could be prepared for consumption.This was hugely tasteless, pardon the pun, but is now seen as a brilliant satire not on the horror of the conditions in Ireland but on the mad ways governments behave.
exactly, and was tributed to in a fantastic episode of 2021,
i remember before blackadder goes 4th the controversy of was this how to handle world war 1
this thread is starting to become my ginger, pug nosed step child,
at first i was ashamed of it, but i'm finally starting to accept it as my own