ghijkmnop wrote:This is why I disagree with the premise that a club gig is not a draft--for these guys at least.
gisambards wrote:ghijkmnop wrote:This is why I disagree with the premise that a club gig is not a draft--for these guys at least.
This is where we don't disagree though. Performing at a club is absolutely a draft - it just can't be accurately described as a first draft. For the vast majority of comedians on any level, massive amounts of thought will have gone into most of any set. Much like with musicians, Western culture seems to prefer the idea that stand-up comedy is principally something you can just do, without having to practice much, if you're good at it. I think a lot of stand-ups do encourage that idea (which is understandable, some of these guys' public persona would clash with the idea of them spending hours practicing in front of a mirror) but just like for musicians, even if some great stuff does come out of a performance on the spur of the moment, for the majority of people to make it good it's got to be built on a bedrock of thought, instinct and practice.
Marcuse wrote:Why're we arguing around the mechanics of developing a joke? Isn't the thread supposed to be about this dude's supposed sexual harassment?
gisambards wrote:So all the people who are annoyed that, not only has he made such a quick comeback from sexual assault, but that it's been by spouting offensive non-jokes in the hope of appealing to a group who have a track record of a) liking offensiveness for its own sake and b) defending celebrities they see as on their side vehemently from sexual assault allegations are reactionary idiots who don't care about the sex crimes and just want to censor things, while you, who are just annoyed he made a quick comeback from sexual assault but don't care about the specifics, are a voice of reason who can dictate what's right and wrong with society? I feel like there's not enough of a distinction between those two groups to have such polar opposite opinions of them.
gisambards wrote:So all the people who are annoyed that, not only has he made such a quick comeback from sexual assault, but that it's been by spouting offensive non-jokes
Absentia wrote:I think it's fair to ask whether there's anything he could do, other than sitting on his couch and weeping into a carton of ice cream, that would please people who are upset about what he did. I mean, he's a shock comic. There's always going to be something there for people to hate if they've already made up their minds to hate him. And maybe he deserves it, but it does feel a little hollow to criticize him for making the same kind of jokes (funny or not) that made him famous in the first place.
iMURDAu wrote:I stopped taking your post seriously right there. He's on stage at a comedy club. So all the people that are laughing at his jokes in the clips I heard are what then? Laughing at him ironically?
Why are people not allowed to like offensiveness for its own sake? Find your favorite comedy shows and movies and set them on fire please. edit: Or mine at least. The South Park movie comes to mind.
Absentia wrote:I guess my question is, what does the relative funniness of his new act have to do with the sexual harassment issue? Does the fact that these jokes are "lazy" change how you feel about what he did? Would you be more inclined to forgive him if he was funnier?
Not trying to pick on you, I'm just having a hard time piecing together what the controversy is here beyond the fact that he's performing at all.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests