Let’s not be so po-faced
I'm a grumpy shit at the best of times, but I wish people wouldn't be so po-faced about a lot of things. Whatever happened to fun?
Firstly, Derren Brown. That was a great magic trick last week - a great magic trick. It made you sit there and think: "How the fucking hell did he do that?". It was ace. But it didn't take long for po-faced types to come snarling out from underneath their rocks, sighing: "Oh well obviously it's X, Y and Z, what a silly magician, obviously he didn't really predict the lottery numbers, did he." Of course he fucking didn't. I know that and you know that. He didn't do it. It's a bloody trick, and a clever one at that. There's no need to smugly declare it's a trick because it's obvious to everyone in the entire world that it's a trick. We all know. You have not revealed something amazing. You have not descended from Mount Olympus disguised as a big orange porcupine. You have merely told us what we already know.
Now the hour-long programme on Channel 4 on Friday wasn't the most scintillating thing in the world I've ever seen, I'll give you that. But there were a couple of new tricks in there to keep you occupied, and something else: I think the whole point wasn't to try and convince you that he picked the numbers by the 'wisdom of crowds' bollocks. I have a feeling, and I could be wrong in this, that it was a tongue-in-cheek demonstration of the pointlessness of the 'wisdom of crowds'. You're meant to sit there and say "That couldn't possibly work" - because it couldn't. Confronted with that, how do you feel about crowdsourcing? Is it a valid way of reaching conclusions or is it just as much mumbo-jumbo as other management-speak gibberish? Maybe that's the point he was making. Whatever it was, he had that room of number-pickers fooled by a bit of sly misdirection - quite impressive.
So anyway, Brown's all right by me. It's a trick, we all know it's a trick, it's a bit of fun, enjoy it or don't. No need to be so bloody angsty about the whole thing. It makes bloggers look like arses. Now I'm not saying we're not, because I can be a tremendous arse quite a lot of the time, but Jesus Christ. Let's try and have a bit of fun, shall we? Why not! Might as well. Life is too short to be upset by magicians doing magic in the way magicians have always done magic.
Secondly, Mark Watson. Now I like Mark Watson as a stand-up comedian, I think he's very good. I saw him at a gig earlier this year and the audience was delighted (apart from the poor old duffer sitting next to me who thought he'd booked tickets to see Russell Watson, and left during the interval).
Those cider adverts, as we all know, are shit. There's no point pretending they're not because they are. But so what? The man's got to make a living. I don't dislike him for doing adverts per se. It's his prerogative to go and earn money in whatever way he likes. He's not ruining his artistic integrity by flogging a bit of cider on the side. Who cares? Well some people do, and have been extraordinarily snotty about the whole affair. I have to disagree with the idea that comedians are there as revealers of some wider truth. Some are, some aren't. If I pay a ticket, just make me fucking laugh. If you do it by discussing the wider world, then fine, if not, then I don't give a shit. Don't enrich my life; just make me piss myself. I don't want a bloody lecture.
The only slight sadness I have about it is a personal one: that when you like someone for doing something, and then they piss you off every single day during every bloody ad break you sit through, the pans on the scales begin to tip a bit - you see one great stand-up gig and 5,000 irritating adverts, and it's hard to balance that out. You begin to think: Please don't there be one of those awful Magners pear cider adverts, I'm going to cry. And then you think: I might just buy 5,000 cases of Brothers just to praise them for their (still pisspoor but) marginally less irritating commercials.
I mean, look at Lenny Henry. His adverts for those crap hotels are actually quite good. But he's a fucking terrible stand-up. Good adverts and shit comedy, or good comedy and shit adverts? I think we all know which one we'd rather be remembered for.
I think what I'm trying to say is: why must bloggers be such miserable bastards? I know, I know, I'm a fine one to talk...
No related posts.
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
- Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio…
- Children died
- The letters you never get around to sending
- Applying again
- I just sent Robin round – 2
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Iain on Applying again
- Roger on The letters you never get around to sending
- Dave Hodgkinson on The letters you never get around to sending
- droid on The letters you never get around to sending
- Rogue_Leader on The letters you never get around to sending
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
September 16th, 2009 - 09:52
From the Ivor Dembina link you posted:
"Sorry, when you operate as a comedian your first responsibility isn’t to your family, it’s to your audience."
Er, no it's not, it's a job.
I get irritated by adverts too, but Dembina's even more irritating within two paragraphs.
September 16th, 2009 - 09:54
Not far into that chortle article you see the quote "when you operate as a comedian your first responsibility isn’t to your family, it’s to your audience" Fuck off! Any job you have your first responsibility is will it earn me money so I can feed myself/my family. What a twat
September 16th, 2009 - 10:24
I went to see Derren Brown live a few weeks back and loved it. If you get the chance drop everything and go.
September 16th, 2009 - 11:10
Let's be honest: Ivor Dembina is so far up his own rear end that he's auto-parodying.
Try this:
"Today comedy is one grisly advertisement for itself, a marketing march into banality and cretinism, held together by crap PR, cynical sponsorship and corporate tripe."
As for Derren Brown, I like the fact he's updating what magician's have always traditionally done: come up with mystical explanations for what they present. At the end of the 19th Century it was Egyptian secrets, into the 20th Century new scientific discoveries. These days it's "deep math".
As long as the average punter doesn't know about it, it works.
September 16th, 2009 - 11:15
Those articles about Mark Watson have been driving me insane. They talk about comedy like it's the answer to all of the world's ills and that if it wasn't for people like Mark Watson, we'd all be living on Mars in a peaceful community free of war and pain sipping champagne and eating strawberries. Comedy isn't about curing the world's ills and speaking the truth at all costs. It's about making people laugh. Preferably for cash.
And Mark Watson's good at it! He signed up, once, to make a dull advert. Who cares?
The Derren Brown issue I've found less annoying. I've rather enjoyed watching the various attempts to explain how he did it, and I like the fact that his explanation was so intentionally vacuous the mystery remains.
September 16th, 2009 - 13:32
I think with the Derren Brown thing the issue is the contrast between this and the style of his previous shows.
Contrast this with "The System". Brown has set up a reputation for himself as an illusionist who exploits psychological bias, proceeds to do something perfectly mundane yet seeming spectacular. In the case of "The System" or the famous chess scene or so many other of his best stunts, the trick is performed by the view's own mind, not Brown himself.
With the lottery trick, people had been hoping for some grand naturalistic explaination like we got for the system and the chess game but all that was given was seemingly nonsense and misdirection. This was for a very good reason – That was the only thing possible as there is not grand system for pulling off such a trick, and certainly no system for genuinely predicting the result.
September 17th, 2009 - 01:00
"Whether you see comedy as art, entertainment or political activity, it’s one of the few places left for sharing truth."
What a complete load of horseshit. I don't think I've ever seen a comedian who didn't bend, distort or ignore some aspect of the truth because there was a joke in it. And you know, that's just fine. Unless Ivor Dembina turns up, feebly protesting your lack of activism, like that nosy cunt at the supermarket who feels entitled to comment on your purchases.
Dribbling on about why adverts are evil on a page covered in banner ads is particularly pathetic.
Jesus, knowing him must be like having herpes.
September 17th, 2009 - 08:57
"There's no need to smugly declare it's a trick because it's obvious to everyone in the entire world that it's a trick. We all know."
I only wish that were true. For the rest of my life now I will probably have to listen to how Brown has 'proved' psychic powers exist, if you only believe enough.
It was a good performance though.
September 17th, 2009 - 10:59
I think the only reason people are annoyed about his explaination for the lottery thing is greed. he didn't really explain how you can predict the lottery and peole feel cheated because now they can't all be millionaires
September 17th, 2009 - 11:13
i've been quite enjoying reading the "badscience" forums in the wake of the derren brown "incident".
the amount of really genuine anger there is pretty amusing. people have complained to ofcom and everything.
September 17th, 2009 - 14:46
Gotta love Derren. The only time I've been disappointed by him was his Russian Roulette stunt, which just seemed a bit obvious and too drawn-out. I think he realised that though, cause it was a while before he came back, and since then he's been rather excellent.
The explanation was a bit overlong, and far from riveting, but rarely dull. By providing the heads/tails thing (which really is a clever bit of "deep maths" probability work), he encouraged a nice bit of suspension of disbelief for the whole 'power of crowds' nonsense, and the reveal that he'd actually just cheated was brilliant. I'm surprised he's not got into trouble for it though…
As for Watson, it does peeve me a bit when people who are already making money feel the need to cash in even more on adverts, but I seriously doubt whether Mark Watson makes that much money, (unlike James Corden and his bloody Orange adverts…). Ed Byrne got similar stick for doing carphone warehouse ads though.
I think comedians perhaps feel that successful comedians pursuing advert revenue is a bit of an admission that comedy simply isn't a way to make a decent living, and that obviously rankles because it highlights how undervalued their (very highly skilled) trade really is. They dress it up in the question of artistic integrity, but it's really about the fact that even the wealthiest of comics would rather do an advert than continue to struggle by on a modest income.
Ivor Dembina's opening gambit gives it all away "Like Carl Donnelly, I’ve never done an advert, but I’m sure if I needed the money I would do." I doubt very much whether Ivor Dembina is successful/likable/popular enough for the likes of Magners to offer him an ad, and it's much easier to turn down an offer of a few hundred quid to help hawk double glazing than whatever Watson was offered.
I think like you said, it boils down to what sort of comedian you are, whether you're looking to 'enlighten' your audience with your perception of 'truth' or you're just looking to make people laugh and get paid to do so. Watson falls into the latter, and fair play to him. It doesn't particularly enamor me to him, but he's a comedian, not a role model/guru, and it certainly won't stop me laughing at his jokes, as and when they're funny.