As we know, Harry Enfield’s character is an exaggerated stereotype cast well adrift from real life. Yet it could have been much closer to real life and possibly more amusing.
Instead of I’m considerably richer that you we could have had –
I’m considerably more caring than you
I’m considerably greener than you
I’m considerably more progressive than you
Maybe the audience would have been smaller though. A vast amount of popular comedy is clearly written to parody safely exaggerated stereotypes. Comedy where an existing stereotype won’t usually do because popular exaggeration is the basis of the comic effect and wide appeal.
Maybe what we learn from it all is that there must be lots of absurd stereotypes left lying around by comedians, writers and pundits. They lodge themselves in the culture. Cultural junk we might say. Does TV create cultural junk and leave it lying around for decades? It certainly seems so.
2 comments:
I've been disappointed by how poorly Monty Python seems all these years later - perhaps absurdity is no longer funny when the absurdity of Real Life is visible for all to see. And yet other dated comedy is still funny - such as the Two Ronnies or Dad's Army. Even Allo Allo has it's moments even if(!) it pokes fun at our "friends and partners" on the Continent.
I suspect very little entertainment travels through time well. After all it was written for a different society and we don't remember that different society very clearly.
DJ - I've been disappointed by the way Monty Python has aged too, although I recall thinking at the time that some sketches didn't really work and others went on too long. At the time the best sketches made up for it, but I wouldn't watch any of it now.
You are right, entertainment doesn't travel through time well, although some films still work and fiction often wears well. That may be a minority view though.
Post a Comment