3 ms·

> These entertainments are not edgy, insightful cultural artifacts. They're just assholes on TV. 20+ years of cultural commentators, the Oscars, and show ratin

by tomc1985 6y ago

> These entertainments are not edgy, insightful cultural artifacts. They're just assholes on TV. 20+ years of cultural commentators, the Oscars, and show ratings suggest that you're wrong. Stone + Parker may be assholes, but they are insightful assholes, performing the much-needed task of holding our noses to the shit we left behind

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Stone + Parker may be assholes, but they are insightful assholes "Insightful" about how people respond to messages in the same sense that a successful demagogue is, except that they are playing on "easy mode" where they don't have to produce results of their own to be judged by -- or even, in classic demagogic fashion, to distract from by attacking some other target -- sure, they are definitely that kind of insightful. Insightful beyond that...well, none of the evidence you point to is explained any better by adding that additional assumption. They don't hold peoples noses to the shit left behind, they are just masters of the clever juxtaposition of the cheap, easy, shallow (mostly recycled, but for the juxtapositions) attacks. They are also good at crafting amusing stories, and welding the shallow attacks into the stories as a delivery vehicle. So I'm not saying that they aren't talented, just that the talent has nothing to do with any substantive insight regarding the substance of their targets. Actually, I think they'd be a lot less successful at what they do if they didn't have an absolute and total lack of interest in substance, which would be a distraction from the cheap, easy bomb-throwing. EDIT: Rereading that, it sounds more hostile than I would like. I mean, South Park is great entertainment, there's certainly value to periodic, momentary escape into the kind of cheerful,shallow nihilism it wallows in. My wife and I had Stan and Wendy figurines on our wedding cake. I'm not anti-Stone/Parker, just against the idea that their work is insightful social commentary. Not only is it not, and not only is that central to its success, but, to the extent it is (personally, to me, and arguably socially) valuable, that's also central to its value. Its not intellectually stimulating, enlightening, or insightful, its an escape from being intellectually "on" at all.
- jariel 6y ago
  I think the word you are looking for is 'satire' and it's cutting and intelligent not because of the depth of their understanding of some issue, but their willingness to offer characters and comedy around simple ideas and perspectives others dare not broach. Charlie Chaplin was didn't exactly delve into ideology. 'PC Principal' is a brilliant satirization. They skewered the sometimes insufferable Tom Cruise because everyone else has to 'fall in line' to the inside censorship and only they had the courage to just 'have a go'. The bubble they've created for themselves where they can now get away with just about everything is otherwise non-existent in the industry.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > I think the word you are looking for is 'satire' Yes, that's the genre they operate in, which I thought goes without saying. No, that's no part of what I was trying to describe. > it's cutting and intelligent not because of the depth of their understanding of some issue, but their willingness to offer characters and comedy around simple ideas and perspectives others dare not broach. It's clever in presentation more than “intelligent”, and, no, almost none of it is around “ideas and perspectives others dare not broach”.
    - jariel 6y ago
      Well almost every central bit in South Park surrounds a concept others won't touch, or at least, not in the manner SP will. + Mickey Mouse as a totalitarian fascist? You couldn't breathe this outside of a writers room, anywhere, and yet, it's something that probably a lot of people, even within the industry, absolutely love. + Walmart as a cultural monster, devouring society? Possibly not an unpopular idea, but definitely not one that anyone can do, because Walmart represents too much advertising power. Many of us hate Walmart, so where's the Walmart skits on SNL? There are none, because they're shills. SNL literally exists to sell Walmart ads. + Very simple articulation of how China is able to suppress and censor American businesses? Nobody in entertainment will touch this. Hollywood exists to sell films, and China will eventually be their biggest market. + Insufferable WholeFoods/hipster gentrification culture? + Jesus snorting cocaine, depictions of Mohamed? + Wrestlers as posing, effect actors, ultra authoritarian 'PC Bro' culture, Japanese businessmen deferring to the 'large penises' of American businessmen for social favour, a 'Token' Black character ... Most of it is completely inane obviously, but the whole thing exists to satire/make light commonly accepted norms with insufferable artifacts, or to give air to the the issues nobody can talk about. That's what makes it funny. 'Man Bear Pig' was probably wrong and not in a good way, so they did another show about it ... which is great ... but really who cares? It was funny at the time.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Stone + Parker may be assholes, but they are insightful assholes "Insightful" about how people respond to messages in the same sense that a successful demagogue is, except that they are playing on "easy mode" where they don't have to produce results of their own to be judged by -- or even, in classic demagogic fashion, to distract from by attacking some other target -- sure, they are definitely that kind of insightful. Insightful beyond that...well, none of the evidence you point to is explained any better by adding that additional assumption. They don't hold peoples noses to the shit left behind, they are just masters of the clever juxtaposition of the cheap, easy, shallow (mostly recycled, but for the juxtapositions) attacks. They are also good at crafting amusing stories, and welding the shallow attacks into the stories as a delivery vehicle. So I'm not saying that they aren't talented, just that the talent has nothing to do with any substantive insight regarding the substance of their targets. Actually, I think they'd be a lot less successful at what they do if they didn't have an absolute and total lack of interest in substance, which would be a distraction from the cheap, easy bomb-throwing. EDIT: Rereading that, it sounds more hostile than I would like. I mean, South Park is great entertainment, there's certainly value to periodic, momentary escape into the kind of cheerful,shallow nihilism it wallows in. My wife and I had Stan and Wendy figurines on our wedding cake. I'm not anti-Stone/Parker, just against the idea that their work is insightful social commentary. Not only is it not, and not only is that central to its success, but, to the extent it is (personally, to me, and arguably socially) valuable, that's also central to its value. Its not intellectually stimulating, enlightening, or insightful, its an escape from being intellectually "on" at all.

jariel 6y ago
I think the word you are looking for is 'satire' and it's cutting and intelligent not because of the depth of their understanding of some issue, but their willingness to offer characters and comedy around simple ideas and perspectives others dare not broach. Charlie Chaplin was didn't exactly delve into ideology. 'PC Principal' is a brilliant satirization. They skewered the sometimes insufferable Tom Cruise because everyone else has to 'fall in line' to the inside censorship and only they had the courage to just 'have a go'. The bubble they've created for themselves where they can now get away with just about everything is otherwise non-existent in the industry.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > I think the word you are looking for is 'satire' Yes, that's the genre they operate in, which I thought goes without saying. No, that's no part of what I was trying to describe. > it's cutting and intelligent not because of the depth of their understanding of some issue, but their willingness to offer characters and comedy around simple ideas and perspectives others dare not broach. It's clever in presentation more than “intelligent”, and, no, almost none of it is around “ideas and perspectives others dare not broach”.
  - jariel 6y ago
    Well almost every central bit in South Park surrounds a concept others won't touch, or at least, not in the manner SP will. + Mickey Mouse as a totalitarian fascist? You couldn't breathe this outside of a writers room, anywhere, and yet, it's something that probably a lot of people, even within the industry, absolutely love. + Walmart as a cultural monster, devouring society? Possibly not an unpopular idea, but definitely not one that anyone can do, because Walmart represents too much advertising power. Many of us hate Walmart, so where's the Walmart skits on SNL? There are none, because they're shills. SNL literally exists to sell Walmart ads. + Very simple articulation of how China is able to suppress and censor American businesses? Nobody in entertainment will touch this. Hollywood exists to sell films, and China will eventually be their biggest market. + Insufferable WholeFoods/hipster gentrification culture? + Jesus snorting cocaine, depictions of Mohamed? + Wrestlers as posing, effect actors, ultra authoritarian 'PC Bro' culture, Japanese businessmen deferring to the 'large penises' of American businessmen for social favour, a 'Token' Black character ... Most of it is completely inane obviously, but the whole thing exists to satire/make light commonly accepted norms with insufferable artifacts, or to give air to the the issues nobody can talk about. That's what makes it funny. 'Man Bear Pig' was probably wrong and not in a good way, so they did another show about it ... which is great ... but really who cares? It was funny at the time.