That Joke isn’t Funny Anymore

Some jokes always strike too near the bone. Almost any joke will offend somebody, but where should we draw the line? How far is too far? It seems arguable that we are perhaps living in the greatest age of satire since Ireland’s native son; Jonathan Swift, wrote his satirical pamphlet “A Modest Proposal” in 1729. In this ironic treatise Swift wrote that the best way for the poor of 18^th century Ireland to create economic stability for themselves would be to sell their children, who they themselves were unable to feed, to the rich as a kind of delicacy, thereby creating food at a highly effective cost to benefit ratio.

Naturally, it shocked and appalled many who read it and yet critics of the time could do little to argue with the validity of Swift’s argument, or they just didn’t get it. By pricking at the moral consciences of a great many people Swift made a serious point about the hypocrisy of the offended upper classes and the English occupation who were unable to come up with a better solution themselves to counter his own proposal of an industry based around cannibalism.

The lesson we can take from Swift that seems to have been carried right through and literally exploded here in the 21^st century is that any subject matter is fair game for comedy. Its arguable that things have always been this way, when the “people’s princess” Diana died there was huge public mourning on a scale that few monarchs have enjoyed previously, or ever will again, but I remember as a school kid hearing jokes in the playground a few days after the details of the crash began to come to light, surely this was in completely bad taste?

However, I can’t help but feel that with the rapid growth of the internet that this kind of “sick” comedy has gained a much stronger public platform than it had previously enjoyed, and not only that, a firm foothold in our popular consciousness. Behaviour that was once the reserve of schoolboys huddled in playgrounds or people crowded around pints in the pub, all carried out in relative whispers, is now broadcast world wide and seems to be much funnier and more acceptable than it be used to be. Its as if great a levee of rigoursly santised taste broke overnight, washed the archaic bones of Mary Whitehouse, and hopefully Margaret Thatcher, down the river, and all of a sudden everything can be made funny.

What’s interesting here is that we can trace a line from the gentle nudging and winking of the Simpsons; mocking celebrities, presidents, and current political blunders (attacking both Democrats and Republicans in equal measure) through to South Park, releasing a tide of swear words onto middle America and stepping up the political and personal attacks of the Simpsons to a whole new level. And now we have Family Guy, not quite as funny as it used to be, but still pushing the boundaries of comic taste to breaking point as to what is allowed to be shown on television.

What interests me is whether can we make anything good out of this? Can we salvage any kind of grace from laughing at disabled people (see Family Guy’s “Joe” in his wheelchair) and the plight of starving nations (South Park’s “Starvin’ Marvin”). What seems worst about the kind of humour we find in satire is that it is always steeped in self-indulgence, for both the audience and its creators. Modern satire is not quite as smart as it seems or as it could be, so much of it has become point-and-laugh humour typified by the newest series of Family Guy where most of the jokes consist of people falling over really quickly. or getting hit by something and then falling over, really quickly. There’s nothing wrong with these kinds of jokes necessarily but when they comprise the majority of the show and no longer say anything about society or government then they have stopped being useful and entertaining. Satire at its worst simply descends into witless cruelty and I can’t help feel that that’s really best left to the school kids.

However let me make a defence of satire, even as it is now. Satire’s greatest strength is its ability to provoke argument and controversy that serves to spark debate of current issues people are often just too afraid to bring up without being gently oiled by humour first. Admittedly this can have a very a negative effect on the topics at hand as the controversy of the way the shows in question present their point of view can swamp the issues we are trying to discuss. But on a more positive note satire both raises awareness of often ignored issues but more importantly it gets the viewer to revaluate their own position. Even if they only become more deeply entrenched in their current point of view it is better for them to still think about it. The benefits are more keenly felt in other people who find themselves forced to take a particular stand on issues of political and social change. Arguably it is much better to occupt some kind of position than to be apathetic as it is only through voting by numbers and public pressure that governments, and supposed “world leaders” can be made to stand accountable for their actions now, instead of merely judging them through the benefit of hindsight, by which time it is too late to change anything.

Another reason modern satire is so important is that it acts as a buffer to the harsher realities of life. Humour colours our view of life and enables us to cope with tragedy, it can even help us to heal in the aftermath of disaster. Whether satire is the best way to do this is debateable, too many people find it insincere, almost destructive in its cruelty, but as I mentioned before it can be one of the most accessible ways to open discussion and get people talking again. By contrast the over-sentimentality of films such as World Trade Centre, only seek to crystallise a nation’s pain, standing like awkward monuments to their own self-importance, thereby overshadowing the tragedy they were trying to honour.

On a perhaps an even more controversial strand I also feel that modern satire has the greatest potential as it is right now. Free speech is a right too many of us take for granted and all too often forget to exercise. But it is characteristic of Western Liberal Democracies and it has the ability for us to question not only our own values but those of countries and their leaders, and as such we can stand as a mouthpiece for the dissent and unhappiness of nations less fortunate than our own. Satire can enable us to do this, even when we stand on the outside, by highlighting the comic absurdity of regimes who seek to prosper through tyranny and war.

Lastly I should like to say that not only is satire freer than ever before, and stands on the precipice as voice of positive of social change on a global scale, but it is also more fitting for the ironically bad times we live in. For me Peep Show is one of the best representations on television of what its like to live and be alive in 21^st century Britain (or perhaps just Croydon) because it highlights the decadence and hypocrisy of a nation that seeks to make the world a cleaner, more peaceful, place that meanwhile allows crime, racism, and social alienation to flourish on its’ own doorstep. And on that note I should like to end with a quote from the voice of infinite reason himself; Mr. Mark Corrigan:

“There are systems for a reason in this world, economic stability, interest rates, growth. It's not all a conspiracy to keep you in little boxes, alright? It's only the miracle of consumer capitalism that means you're not lying in your own shit, dying at 43 with rotten teeth and a little pill with a chicken on it is not going to change that. Now come on, fuck off.”