Advertisement
i'm sure most of you have seen this already but it's a nice length clip of his routine on the subject of religion...
www.youtube.com/watch
www.youtube.com/watch
posted by:
|
New York
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: george carlin
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 6:52 PMA few thoughts:
Strange that she seems to equate Christianity with 'religion." Many of his comments don't apply to other religions (e.g. on Hell). Perhaps that's the only religion he's had much experience with.
It's always problematic when a comedian tries to address a serious issue. Since the people who pay to see the comedian came to laugh, he has to make the discussion funny. But when that becomes of primary importance, since serious, nuanced discussions of complicated subjects don't tend to be funny, the comedian's discussion almost inevitably involves the straw man and appeal to ridicule, which aren't terribly rational approaches to anything.
Listen to Carlin's bit and pay attention to how many times people are actually laughing. It's not too often, particularly if you set aside the cheering (rather than laughing) which is just ideological cheer leading.
While I try to appreciate humor at the expense of any and all sacred cows, as comedy this just wasn't that funny, Though again, maybe its appeal was as ideological cheer leading, like a preacher taking overly simplistic cheap shots at the irreligious to amuse his congregants.
As serious discussion, it wasn't much either, since it relies on the Appeal to Ridicule fallacy rather than thoughtful reasoning, which isn't a surprise coming from a comedian.
It's like a movie that tries to be both a drama and a comedy but failing at both. -
-
-
Re: george carlin
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 7:23 PM>> Strange that she seems to equate Christianity with 'religion." Many of his comments don't apply to other religions (e.g. on Hell). Perhaps that's the only religion he's had much experience with. <<
Right, like Mickey said, its comedy. He made fun of the religion his audience knew. He wouldn't have gotten many laughs ridiculing an obscure variety of Buddhism. Duh! You need to work harder at finding fault.
>> While I try to appreciate humor at the expense of any and all sacred cows, as comedy this just wasn't that funny, <<
Or maybe it wasn't funny because they're your cows.
>> Appeal to Ridicule fallacy
OMG!! How dare a comedian engage in ridicule!! Next thing you know people will be using sarcasm in discussion threads! -
-
-
Re: george carlin
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 8:00 PMAnd why would we expect not to criticize christianity, especially when they criticize us…including Ron.
-
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 12:12 AM"Or maybe it wasn't funny because they're your cows. "
I've laughed at my cows being skewered. But if it was just me, why was there so little laughter coming from the audience for the amount of time he spent on the subject?
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 12:18 AM"OMG!! How dare a comedian engage in ridicule!! "
You're missing my point. Of course comedians appeal to ridicule. Was Carlin only going for laughs? There were awfully long stretches of no laughter from the crowd if he was only going for laughs.
So the problem for comedians addressing serious topics is that either they engage in straw man appeal to ridicule, which is what comedy does and can be funny, but which jettisons any legitimate claim to intelligent discussion of the issue, or else they deal with serious issues intelligently and thoughtfully, in which case they're likely to be not funny.
Carlin seems to have wanted it both ways, which explains the paucity of both laughter and serious analysis.
Can say the same thing about Bill Maher. In his talk shows, he brings on people to talk about serious issues, but when pushed against the wall, on an issue, he slips into appeal to ridicule to try to win the point through comedy, but that doesn't win any points rationally.
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 12:10 AM"Ron? It's comedy. "
Was it funny? Why was there so little laughter from the audience?
Serious issues typically aren't that funny -
-
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 12:53 PMJust making the point that when you try to be funny at the same time as trying for a serious critique of something, it's very difficult to do both well simultaneously, so one or the other, or both, likely suffers.
There was a show in the early 80s that tried to be a Saturday Night Live clone called "Fridays." It was during the Reagan era and someone in control of the show thought that they would use the show to attack Reagan's proposed welfare cuts. There was a skit with the entire cast singing "You gotta fight the changes!" It was very unfunny. The show didn't last very long. -
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 2:25 PM>>Just making the point that when you try to be funny at the same time as trying for a serious critique of something, it's very difficult to do both well simultaneously, so one or the other, or both, likely suffers.
Speak for yourself. I find Carlin's rant to be both funny AND effective criticism. His classic take on Xtianity is spot-on. And the audience was laughing the entire time.
Maybe it's less funny when you're the object of ridicule. But maybe it's also worth asking yourself what about your beliefs might make you an object of ridicule. -
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 11:49 PM"His classic take on Xtianity is spot-on"
Only if appeal to ridicule and straw man attacks constitute a rational critique, which they don't
His critique of the usefulness of prayer was legitimate though, if simplistic; it just wasn't funny.
"And the audience was laughing the entire time. "
That's just demonstrably false
"Maybe it's less funny when you're the object of ridicule. "
Only if one can't laugh at one's self. I've seen comedy at the expense of what I believe that I found funny. Self-effacing humor can be fun. Have you seen Julia Sweeney's talk on atheism and God? I saw her at an LA Skeptics Society talk and I found her both funny (at times, when she wanted to be) and thoughtful. I found Carlin to be neither smart in his comments nor did the audience find him very funny, based on the amount of time he spent on the subject versus the amount of laughs he received. He just wasn't smart nor funny.
"But maybe it's also worth asking yourself what about your beliefs might make you an object of ridicule. "
Sorry, but that's a silly question. Anybody can make fun of any beliefs they disagree with. A simplistic preacher can make fun of evolution and atheism but the fact that he can make fun of them doesn't mean that his ridicule is either funny or intelligent or that there is thus something ridiculous about either atheism or evolution -
-
Re: george carlin
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 10:52 AMyou don't find it funny, we do.
yawn.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: george carlin
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 11:21 PMlogically speaking he used it as an exceptional example of a con job religions pull, not a feature of all religions.
"Strange that she seems to equate Christianity with 'religion." Many of his comments don't apply to other religions (e.g. on Hell). Perhaps that's the only religion he's had much experience with. "
-
Re: george carlin
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 11:24 PMmany of us here think that serious, nuanced discussion of religion is a waste of time.
at least on the terms of the religious. i find serious, nuanced discussions of the psychology and cultural evolution of religion fascinating. but the starting point for any such discussion has to be that religion is a cultural product like any other. taking claims of prophecy seriously isn't serious or nuanced.
"serious, nuanced discussions of complicated subjects don't tend to be funny" -
-
Re: george carlin
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 12:20 AM"many of us here think that serious, nuanced discussion of religion is a waste of time. "
Fair enough, but Carlin seemed to think that religion as an issue warranted a significantly long stretch of quasi-comedic discussion. -
-
Re: george carlin
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:02 AMummm, yeah, it's kind of funny, but different people have different tastes... so what?
I can dig a discussion, but you're finding fault or problems where there are not any. It's cool you don't find it funny or effective, sometimes its better just to leave differences in taste as differences, no need to argue your taste.
why isn't this thread dead yet?
oh yeah, I'm still posting... -
-
Re: george carlin
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:44 AMPeople have differnet senses of humor. Some of us like the Carlin bit on religion. If you do not like it it does not mean you are better informed or have better tastes. It just means your opinion is different.
-
Re: george carlin
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 3:52 PMHow did Michael Jackson Die?
Food poisoning. He put 10 year old nuts in his mouth.
How will they dispose of Jackson's corpse?
By melting him down into lego, so kids can play with HIM for a change.
Did you hear that in tribute to Michael Jackson, McDonalds is offering the limited time only "Jackson Burger"? Pickles, onions, ketchup, and 50 year old meat between 8 year old buns.
"why isn't this thread dead yet?
oh yeah, I'm still posting... "
-
-
-
-
Re: george carlin
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 6:14 PMStrange that she seems to equate Christianity with 'religion." Many of his comments don't apply to other religions (e.g. on Hell). Perhaps that's the only religion he's had much experience with.
Clearly you're not a Carlin fan, or you wouldn't wonder about this. I've been buying his albums and 8-tracks since I was young enough that some checkout people refused to sell them to me because I was obviously underage. No matter, keep trying, and you'll find the oblivious drones.
George Carlin went to Catholic school when he was growing up, and got his start fooling around as a class clown there. It's only natural that Christianity should play a heavy role in his humor. His fans, the kind of folks who would shell out good money to see him live, understand this. He was inspiring in person.
