Stephen Colbert for Dog Catcher
First off, I must confess that I'm not a huge fan of Stephen Colbert. Before some of you start screaming at this post, let me say that I greatly appreciated his brilliant and daring performance at the 2006 White House Press Correspondents Dinner--as well as a few of his other bits and creative interventions in pop-media techno-culture. But frankly, I seldom watch "The Colbert Report." About twenty seconds after The Daily Show ends, I scramble for the OFF button on my remote. I don't think I've ever made it through a complete airing of The Report. It's like a "concept band" whose erudite music just doesn't work as music. I love that someone hates Bill O'Reilly so much that he has built an entire show, an entire on-screen persona, around the idea of mimicking and mocking that blowhard. Yet, to my particular viewing sensibilities, mock insufferable is still insufferable. Maybe even worse in some ways. Because a person who knows the difference, and plays upon it, should also know better than to subject us to an unrelenting version of it, even under the ironic covers of comedic relief and satirical resistance.
Now Stephen Colbert is taking his on-screen character off-screen in a bid to run for president. He's trying to make the ballot in South Carolina, and there are early indications that he'll try to get on other state ballots, too. He'll certainly draw attention. Wow wee--how far can he get? I'm not all that amused by such a spectacle. In fact, I think this new campaign of his is regrettable. He should stick with Jedi green-screen shenanigans for YouTube.
Hey, I've written books on the politics of irony--of which I generally approve, by the way; and I teach a course on the politics of comedy--of which I generally approve, by the way. And I do--really I do--have a funny bone, a sense of humor, an abiding fondness for caustic wit. And I often think our national politics are a big joke. I applaud Al Franken's serious candidacy for the U.S. Senate, though a comedian he may be. But I cringe at Stephen Colbert's buffoonish entry into the presidential arena, tongue-in-cheek though it may be.
Previous comedians who pretended to throw their hats into the U.S. presidential ring seemed to do so, I want to say, in order to make a larger point, in addition to providing giggles along the way. Pat Paulsen (who ran in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1988, 1992, and 1996) reminded us that speechifying politicos can be bombastic, bumbling, soporific and tone-deaf--lessons that Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, and John Kerry should have taken to heart. Wavy Gravy, in his cross-country "Nobody for President" campaign (in 1976, 1980, and 1984), gave humorous voice and a protest alternative to the frustration many citizens felt and still feel about our national politics, namely that few candidates of genuine worth offering genuine alternatives seem to be showing up on our ballots.
But what's Colbert's larger point, or what's the point that cannot be accomplished by remaining on the satirical sidelines? Oh sure, he seems ready and poised to spoof arrogant and self-centered politicians, a natural spillover from his Bill O'Reilly act. But mock self-centeredness is still, in his case, merely self-centeredness. His ostensible exposé of others seems hardly more than a ruse for self-serving self-aggrandizement, for both his on-screen and off-screen characters. Yes, he might provide a few amusing and welcome diversions from the parade of stiffs, rogues, and freaks who are currently running for higher office; and in contrast, he'll surely make more sense at times. The fool is often revealed to be the wise man, and vice versa--thank you, Shakespeare. Thank you, Mark Twain. Thank you, Will Rogers. Thank you, Bill Maher.
But no thanks to Stephen Colbert. We have a war-cum-occupation going on. Legacies of torture, governmental illegality, and rampant corruption that need to be addressed. Environmental ruin. Spiraling deficits. Children's (and others') health care at risk. And other mounting and pressing problems. Maybe now is not the time for a smart-ass wise-guy blurred-persona shtickster to step into the political limelight in order to poke fun at our already degraded political system. I don't want Bill O'Reilly to run for office, crossing some all-too-real threshold between reality TV and reality. Nor do I want his fake alter-ego to cross that threshold, either.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Like running for President IN 'ONE' STATE can affect the outcome of anything.
Your opinion comes off as jealous, petty, dweebish and way too parochial.
You need to get over yourself and whoever the candidate is that you think will be harmed by Stephen's laugh. His PHONEY candidacy's a shot at a system that's gone long beyond being a joke to becoming just plain criminal. ANY candidate harmed by what he's doing is either seeking zero criticism, like the preznutz and Hillary do, or doesn't stand a chance anyway.
Expressing a political opinion is one thing, but unless it's bigoted humor, telling people what they can laugh at is stepping over the line.
He is trying to sell his book. I read the first chapter at the bookstore and would not waste my money on it. But every one has to have a gimmick to get ahead in this world.
Colbert's candidacy is a joke. It's aimed at deflating the egos of the people who run for office and exposing politics for the shame that it has become. Will Colbert take votes away from "real" candidates? I expect no more so than Pat Paulsen did in the 1970s. In the mean time, I intend to enjoy watching how the serious candidates interact with Colbert if they have the courage to try. Humor can be a powerful weapon in the hands of a skilled individual and Colbert could well help expose some of the candidates for the frauds that they are.
I believe that what Colbert is doing is extremely socially relevant. It so often, in our culture, falls to comedians to point out the absurdities of reality. Satire seems to be the only "safe" route for making a massive point.
I love Stephen. He's got balls. I'm watching and applauding. If I was in South Carolina I'd be signing that petition and voting.
When I watch Stephen take that nightly run from his anchor desk to his interview room with his own supersplendid portrait on the wall, I am delighted by the rocket-glaring bomb-bursting star-spangled joy of it all. He's like the flag personified, nothing shy. He gives proof through the night that my country is still there. GOD BLESS AMERTICA!
Um, Stephen, that's God Bless Amertica TM... see my people.
Plus also that resemblance to Clark Kent -- it's uncanny! Superman turned inside out. I am still in awe of what he did at the White House Correspondents Dinner. My hero! Hell yes, run for President. Just don't stop in South Carolina. Give me a chance to vote for truth, justice and the Amertican(TM) way.
I would fight to the death for your First Amendment right to have an overly sanctimonious, self-righteous opposition to Stephen's hilarious, yet serious move to become President of South Carolina from both parties while exposing, for a new generation, the hypocricy, self-interest promotion, pomposity, stupidity and dishonesty of the current crop of low-life, priviliged front-running politicians in both Parties.
To paraphrase Stephen -- America cries out for a White, middle aged, Jesus-trumpeting candidate for the Presidency of the U.S.
He is much better situated to speak truth to power about the exact massive problems of "a war-cum-occupation going on. Legacies of torture, governmental illegality, and rampant corruption that need to be addressed. Environmental ruin. Spiraling deficits. Children's (and others') health care at risk. And other mounting and pressing problems" and expose that the politicians of both parties have no intention of doing anything about them. And he will excite a younger generation -- many of whom do not really remember Pat Paulsen and others like him -- to more critically judge this crop of politicians.
And it sounds from your description of your academic credentials that someone really needs to negate what you are teaching to your students. Stephen does more to expose the incalculable harm the O'Reilly's of the world have caused than anything you might teach, even when you're being brilliant, if your post reflects what you're teaching your students.
Also, just because you don't like what he's doing, or think he's minimizing important matters does not mean he should not do it. Many who have academic credentials more prestigious than yours disagree with you and want Stephen to become President of South Carolina -- from both parties.
Maybe in these times a clown is appropriate to help us level out some and stop being so stupidly serious in matters that could be solved without bloodshed and ego tripping.
I do admire Stephen Colbert, but I find that his show can be tedious. It is also worrisome that his fans don't always seem to get the irony, but instead support the character Colbert is portraying. My favorite segment, "The Word," is the part of the show where the real Stephen Colbert can send his message of ironic sarcasm and it is almost always spot-on. I'd like to see his show morph into something that allows the real Stephen, who is smart, sexy, & charming, some space to be himself.
I'm concerned that Colbert's candidacy in South Carolina will take votes away from John Edwards, the only viable candidate who is a strong progressive. I like Obama, too, but Edwards has a strong platform and he could be a strong candidate for the Dems if the MSM hadn't already decided that the road to the nomination is a two person race.
Hilary has been anointed, something that I think the Republicans are licking their smirky, little lips at, because she has such negative factors that they will be likely be able to manipulate those negatives into another, disastrous Repug win, rigged or not.
I think if she does win, she will be a one term president because she doesn't have the ability to bring together the coalitions that will be necessary to dig this country out of the mess Bush and his thugs leave. It would be great to have a female president, I just don't think that Hilary is the person to do it well. I am not proud of her candidacy because she is one more woman politician who has used the popularity of her husband to become a candidate. Lureen Wallace used George's popularity, too. I don't doubt that she is intelligent, but she doesn't have the warmth, grace, or charisma that we need to address the enormous problems that will need to be confronted. So many people are supporting Hillary because of their love for Bill Clinton. Hillary doesn't have the right stuff, Bill did and does.
"I'm concerned that Colbert's candidacy in South Carolina will take votes away from John Edwards"
I think Stephen likes Edwards and thought of this, too.
Many people don't get Mark Twain either, believing him to be a racist of all things. Following what Twain is doing with irony can make your head explode.
Colbert works four nights a week and treads very close to the edge. Sometimes he misses, but often he's very funny indeed. The recent "Cheating Death" installment from a pharmaceutical sponsor made me laugh until tears rolled.
"There's no art to the slovenly butchering of a man. Satire separates the head from the body and leaves it standing in its place."
Enjoy, folks
maybe just maybe he is pointing out our own short comings we all had a hand in electing the last group of crooks when will we learn that they ain't going to do what they promise. they take the money and run. we need to get the government back in the hands of the "people" lobbyists are bribing our public officials. and we are powerless to do anything. because congress has changed the rules to fit the situation. how much of congress earns their pay? .03% we keep reelecting the same crooks time after time their is a way to take it all back but, the sheep don't want to get involved so we have to email our elected officials and tell them what we want,( so they can do what they want. )
People. He's not really running. You were not listening to what he said.
1. Running for President of S. Carolina
2. Running only in S. Caroling
3. Running as both the Democrate & Republican
His whole spoof is to fool the audience. His humor requires that you pay attention. Thats the gag.
Quick question, at least I hope it's quick.
Why does SOME political/topic humor have a longer shelf life than others? For instance,
I went back and read some of Will Rogers's stuff and it really sounds creaky and quaint today, yet Mark Twain's works are truly timeless. We remember Pat Paulsen -- I may be wrong, but I think he has since gone to the Great Prime Time show in the sky -- but Pat's stuff wouldn't be quite as funny today, would it? Nor would the material from the Smothers Bros. Show on which Pat was a regular. My point is:Colbert may be funny today, but will we still love him tomorrow?
And a previous poster was right -- it's difficult for satirists in an era when the "real" politicians already have made fools of themselves, they're all buffoons. Ezra Pound: "We choose a knave or a eunuch to rule over us." And remember the maxim from Plautus: He either wrote "It's hard not to write satire" OR "It's not hard to write satire." That word order in Latin always messes me up!
"My point is:Colbert may be funny today, but will we still love him tomorrow?"
Maybe, just maybe he becomes historic like Ed Murrow.
Murrow took on McCartyism, and helped to end this mania, Colbert takes on the modern talk radio-Fox-Karl Rove rightwing propaganda machine.
I accept your apology.
I'd vote for anyone who isn't a politician, lawyer or lobbyist at this point. They're all bent and to blame for the situation we are in, Repubs and Dems alike. Give me anything new.
i'm with you the only one who has a clue is........
Oh . . . my . . . God . . .
Is it possible for someone to miss the point SO completely?
This blog would have been bad enough coming from ANYONE, but coming from someone who claims to be an expert on political humor. . . .!!!
Unbelievable!! It's like a professor of Peace Studies writing a blog about how he just doesn't "get" Gandhi and Martin Luther King.
Stephen Colbert is a MASTER of political irony, but it appears his skill goes -- whoosh -- right over the head of too many people, judging by some of the supportive posts of this blog. That is unfortunate for so many reasons. You people are really missing out on a chance to laugh hard at some beautifully subtle and advanced humor.
I'm so glad to see that many folk understand Colbert's obvious point: what is the difference between his phony run for office and the candidacies of any other Democrat or Republican?
Answer: NOTHING
Our elections are a farce, and people just keep waiting for the next election, the next batch of politicos, to "fix" the problems caused by the last, praying this time we won't get lied to.
When will we ever wake up?
maybe we are grasping at straws to have someone with real values to vote for. he's not running but, still the best choice. the other party favorites are all business as usual. we need to change the system. they are supposed to represent the people until that happens we better get a good grip because when this hits the fan its going to be messy
Trinity:
"Our elections are a farce, and people just keep waiting for the next election, the next batch of politicos, to "fix" the problems caused by the last, praying this time we won't get lied to.
When will we ever wake up?"
Since you are allegedly "awake" what constructive remedy do you offer to the rest of ussince you eschew elections?
traditionally, i believe the choices have been delineated as The Ballot or The Bullet. we weren't exactly founded on the former.
Get yourself a DVR or Tivo setup. You can fast forward past the commercials and much of the lame material plus many of the uninteresting parts.
After a while you will find out where to begin and stop the multiple speed fast forwarding. The 30 minute Corbert (pronounced like Core-bert as in Delbert and Dogbert) show can be reduced to a 5 - 8 minute viewing.
Perhaps the best part in the interviews at the end, provided Corbert does not interrupt the guest too much with his alter ego driven interjections that aim to bring the topic back to himself. Yeah I get it.
This recording and fast forwarding applies not only to the Colbert formulaic filler material but any show you record. After a while it makes watching live TV un-bear-able.
OK here are some suggestions for the Colbert show. There is no charge at this time, provided some serious efforts are put in place to improve the show.
1. Do a real news spoof with a CAST of characters instead of one who constantly wants 100 percent of the face time. A cast of six or seven mainstays would be much better. They too could be as overly outrageous as the current camera hog. The Daily show can do it fairly well.
2. Take scenes from the actual field far more often. The green screen stuff is rather weak. The Daily show can do it, just hire some more writers and actors.
3. Eliminate the Corbert Nation wristband, and Colbert book sales promotion. There is no need to rehash the same old material repeatedly ad nausium.
4. Periodically let other actors fill in for Steve behind the desk. Let them mock and parody the MSM pundits from the Right and Left.
5. Have some behind the desk or at a podium debates between multiple mock pundits.
6. Do a voice of the people segment, similar to the Leno Jay walking bit, but use current events and not historical references.
7. No not spend another dime on the comic book super hero animation trash. It is not at all funny or interesting. The same can be said of the other obsessions such as the bear phobia.
8. Eliminate all use of laugh tracks. If the material is actually funny, the public will laugh without prompting.
9. A thirty-minute show 4 times a week is probably draining and taxing on the cast and especially the writers who are showing signs of very unimaginative material. Drop the cookie cutter approach. Try a one-hour show once a week or two thirty minute shows in a week. The producers will not get as many commercials in that time slot but the quality might improve. Right now they are milking it for all it is worth.
colbert has a laugh track?
I'm glad to read someone phrase SO WELL how I feel about Colbert.
>> Yet, to my particular viewing sensibilities, mock insufferable is still insufferable.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
