The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Is Satire Redundant?
Absurdist
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I was reading this hilarious article in Wired magazine, wherein a Nebraska state senator files a lawsuit against God, and I couldn't help but be reminded of this lovely Onion article, wherein the Israelites sue God for 'breach of covenant'. I looked up and re-read said Onion article, smirking at the resemblance to reality.
Then, at the bottom of the Onion article, I found a link to this lovely bit of satire. "Ha ha," I thought. "Taking porn stars seriously. It is to laugh." But then I recalled, to my sudden chagrin, this piece of horrifying but true news, and suddenly I got to feeling a bit...well...weirded out.
If we can't even tell the difference between satire and real news, if our society has got so absurd that any attempt to lampoon it can't help but sound plausible, is satire still meaningful?
When does satire cease to be meaningful, and are we headed that way?
Then, at the bottom of the Onion article, I found a link to this lovely bit of satire. "Ha ha," I thought. "Taking porn stars seriously. It is to laugh." But then I recalled, to my sudden chagrin, this piece of horrifying but true news, and suddenly I got to feeling a bit...well...weirded out.
If we can't even tell the difference between satire and real news, if our society has got so absurd that any attempt to lampoon it can't help but sound plausible, is satire still meaningful?
When does satire cease to be meaningful, and are we headed that way?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Absurdist on
0
Posts
yes we need it, if only as a compass to tell us when things get truly weird.
Jesters were there for a reason man.
Right, agreed. But what I'm trying to say is this: Satire is a form of social criticism that takes a problematic social phenomenon and depicts it in an exaggerated, absurd caricature. That's what satire is. But for satire to work, you need:
1) a problematic social phenomenon
2) room to exaggerate.
What if you don't have #2 simply because all of your society's problematic social phenomena are already horrendously exaggerated and utterly absurd? How can satire have any meaning in that situation?
Then satire will evolve to understate it.
An example (albeit bad)
"Today the US decided to invade another country... I forget which one, but I probably couldn't pronounce it anyway"
So, I guess what I'm saying is that its not always exaggerated.
When reality begins to look like a particularly uninspired SNL Weekend Update skit, the jesters need to take a nap.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
Sounds like everything is in order to me.
A fucked up order in some spectrums, but still an order.
Er, I think your problem here is that you don't know much about Oxford University, have the dreaming spires impression of most Americans, and are assuming that Ron Jeremy is being taken seriously by some of the best minds in the world. The OU Union talks are independent of the university, run by students, and often invite crackpots & minor undeserving celebs largely to make fun of them. It's not really an example of life being stranger than satire, it's more an example of just satire.
I don't disagree that often life takes the piss better than the professionals, but that's not much of an example.
From the WSJ Law Blog
There was another suit like this entitled Mayo v. Satan and His Staff.
It's pretty much the Daily Show for radio. Hell, it even has Moe Rocca on there like every week. Their catchphrase is "As much as we try, we could never come up with funnier stuff than the real news."
See, yeah, this. A lot of the people that deserve our ridicule and derision are already doing it to themselves for us. Like, all of the religious right every single day of their collective lives. Especially when they protest.
Especially when they protest.
I didn't initially realise that O'Reilly guy on Fox wasn't satire.
This topic just makes me miss NTK, with it's semi-regular "Life imitates Onion" sections.
All the fricken time. I rarely catch it on air because I can never remember what time the local station plays it, but I always get the weeks episode out of the archives.
I just wish I hadn't missed it for about 4 years when I went to college, before I found the web archive.
I guess that's the problem. The real news is not really much more credible than the comedy news.
But satire will always have a place. The Daily Show and Colbert Report are great examples of satire having a place.
XBL: QuazarX
One of the greatest radio shows on the air right now, right behind This America Life.
Has Oreilly ever even been on The Daily Show? I know he has been in Colbert, but I don't know about TDS.
Of course, he also asked Kerry if he went to Cambodia, but no one remembers that part of the program.
I think Stewart recognizes the box he's in: can't be too serious/tough on people, or they'll stop coming onto his program. But he's a pretty talented interviewer, and he often finds ways to raise tough issues without being confrontational about it.
His interview with Cheney's biographer right after the "we didn't overthrow saddam in 1992 cause it would've been a quagmire" video was being kicked around.
I think the Daily Show should be taken as seriously as any other "talk show news" program on modern television.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat