Analysing comedy Page 2

Quote: gappy @ 27th January 2025, 6:14 PM

Alright, gents, I acknowledge the difference, you make a fair point. But I think "why am I funny?" and "why is what I say funny?" are pretty closely intertwined:

View original

Yes but note the agent was talking to two performers who had their own writer, and referenced another who was also written for. Thinking about the artists with their career ups & downs I'm guessing the agent was probably trying to keep them with a successful setup and not attempt to change things by wanting more control of the material, using Hancock's demise as a warning. But that's just my own little interpretation after thinking about the context of who the artists were in that timeline. Herc's book will possibly say if that's so or not.

Quote: gappy @ 27th January 2025, 6:14 PM

so Tommy Cooper might have clocked that he was a naturally hilarious person, but it didn't stop him working incredibly hard on complex routines and honing his stage persona to maximise the laughs, and I'm sure he thought about why some things landed better than others.

View original

Very true, as I saw recently on a doc prog on him, very hard worker on and off stage, but's that's developing and perfecting his act, as all writer-performers do, not so much worrying if he or it were funny enough as I'm sort of assuming that's where this agent was really going with his comment to the duo who didn't have control of their own material. And as a top agent of the time he'd undoubtedly have handled artists who weren't as popular and successful as them who had unsettled sets of writers and agents. 🤔

I could be reading more into it than it was, but that era was choc full of acts competing for valuable air time, leading to insecurity or even over confidence in some artists, and consequently became known as the age of the agent.