Instead, it seemed to me to be a dark glance into the disgust and anger this man felt against the world near the end of his life. I haven't seen the whole show, so I can't comment on a cohesive theme here, but he was speaking from a giant graveyard. It seemed to me that Carlin was trying to put some perspective on the life he'd seen and make it all make sense. The end result: it doesn't. As we discussed in class, it's impossible to be a modern man (one made up entirely of taglines) and still have substance. What starts out as clever wordplay and amusing oppositions in the first clip ends up as the rantings of an angry old man.
Sure, there's some humor in this rant, but rather than glimpses of the American condition highlighted through humor it seems to be the other way around: glimpses of humor shining through an otherwise bleak view of the American condition.
He did bring up a point that interests me, though.
I have a rather unhealthy fascination with reality TV. Not an attraction, mind you, but a fascination. I don't understand it, and I occasionally watch it in awe, like I would observe a lion killing off the slowest gazelle: wincing, feeling for the gazelle, a little disgusted, and a little embarassed at watching this carnal display.
When I heard Carlin talk about the suicide channel, it didn't strike me as funny at all. It struck me as true. Our culture has become so obsessed with reality TV that people just might be willing to throw themselves over the edge of the Grand Canyon for their fifteen minutes of fame.
Now, I realize that there are different types of reality TV. I'm not so much thinking of Survivor, American Idol, or the Biggest Loser. I'm thinking of a spectrum that at best is America's Next Top Model and at worst is something like Flavor of Love or the Bad Girls Club. Shows where people line up (literally) to audition for the chance to make complete fools of themselves on syndicated television. Shows that revolve around acting as uncouth, promiscuous, cruel, shallow, or just plain stupid as possible. And we line up to watch them. Don't believe me? VH1 and MTV certainly seem to think we watch them; their entire line-up is hour after hour of this self-loathing.
Which brings me to wonder, is it comedy? I think that most of the people I know watch it for a good laugh. Maybe it's comedy in the way that Thomas Hobbes describes humor: "sudden glory arising from some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others." Do we watch because it makes us feel superior? This seems reasonable to me, but then why do the shows exist at all? Why are there people willing to go on them? It seems to be that the participants feel superior by going on the shows in the first place. This creates a confusing paradox. How can both the specator and the spectacle be superior? What outlet does reality TV really serve and does it fit into humor theory?
I find your categorization of reality TV interesting. I'm sure that no one would put Flavor of Love in the high end category, but some might reorganize America's Next Top Model. And is The Biggest Loser really the high end of reality TV? I know many people who watch it with the second meaning in play (that all these people are losers) and just make fun of them. Do we like Survivor because we respect the people or because they make choices we never would? Hmm, it is interesting trying to categorize this type of show, because we are let in the dark as to what the producers are aiming for, and how the audience reacts. Is some of it supposed to be ironic or satiric? How much is staged? How many takes do they actually have?
ReplyDeleteI've only recently begun watching reality TV, and these questions plague me.
Hm, I guess I need to think more deeply about why I categorize them this way, because it is a little arbitrary.
ReplyDeleteAmerica's Next Top Model has a noble goal: get one lucky girl ahead in a dream career. But, to me, that's not what the show is about. Instead it's about highlighting superficiality and instigating cat fights.
I guess in my categorization the lower end would be shows that are primarily about highlighting people acting foolish. We don't watch Flavor of Love because we want to see who gets to be the lucky date at the end; we watch to see them act ridiculous.
I think that many of the viewers of the Biggest Loser do legitimately care about who wins. They want them to succeed. I guess that's the (rather shaky, I realize) classification I was using.
I think it's interesting that you bring up producer goals. Ultimately, I would bet they don't really care why people are tuning in, as long as they do.
Not sure that the category of reality tv is even of interest--mainly because I see no redeeming quality or learning that goes on in them. Watching Losers and laughing at them seems to me a strange pastime, fitting Cicero's idea that some things aren't funny because they violate ethos. That said, Carlin is working from hyperbole when he posits the suicide channel. It's the absolute worst reality tv he can imagine.
ReplyDeleteSo does that mean that comedy has to have a teachable or redeeming quality in order to qualify as comedy? I certainly feel that it has to have that for me to enjoy it, but I do think that some people watch this type of reality TV for comedic entertainment. Also, some of those earlier theorists discussed humor as being able to feel superior to others, and it certainly seems to fill that role. (Perhaps that's why those earlier theorists didn't seem to think humor was worthwhile.)
ReplyDelete