Seriously, Folks...
Nov. 27th, 2001 12:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackofallgeeksA friend of mine tonight commented on an earlier post of mine, and presented me with this question:
"Don't You Want (Emily) To Take You Seriously?"
She tagged it as food for thought, and of course, I ate it right up. Rachel'll give me a hard time for saying this, but I do rather enjoy thinking, even when (typically) it turns down the dark corridors of my mind (dark as in uncomfortable, not unused ^_^). And so, being me (and you guys may find this hard to believe) I thought about it.
She was refering to The Letter, which may yet turn out to be not so regrettable as it appears, but one can never say. That's aside the point. She refered to the letter, asking if I wanted her to take me seriously in the matter. Granted, it's quite simply "yes" - I'd be a fool or worse if I wanted her to take it as a joke. And yet, I retain that, given the subject matter, I don't think it could be mistaken, though I could be wrong. That's as far as my thoughts went on that issue, but I didn't stop there. I never stop at an obvious ending point. No, not I.
Of course, the topic turned broader, from if I wanted HER to take me seriously, to wether I really wanted ANYONE to take me seriously. Again, it would follow that, yes, I do want to be taken seriously, but maybe that's not the issue after all. It may well be an issue of wether I want to....'seem' isn't the right word, but seems to fit well enough. Wether I want to seem serious...no, that's not even the right word.
I guess it's not so much "seriousness" that I'm concerned with. Or rather, maybe "seriousness" itself is what should be under scrutiny, as opposed to being TAKEN seriously. No one would argue the point that a stand-up comedian is nessisarily serious, though they may be BEING serious, to an extent, and one could alsoi take a comedian seriously. Comedians, like anyone else, typically have something to say, and comedy is their medium. Be it rediculous or exagerated, true humor revolves around truth - if there's no truth in it somewhere, even if it's a blatant LACK of truth (or perhaps, more an opposite to truth) that's where true humor is.
Which, of course, leads to an interesting observation. Much of what passes for comedy these days doesn't qualify, really, as humor. No, I would greatly argue that point, and it's my personal conviction that much of the comedy out there is rather insulting to my intellegence, and I should hope insulting to others.
A kid throws a brick at a robber's forehead, who subsequently staggers back onto a rollerskate and falls down the stairs and out through the front window. At first glance, yes, maybe it's almost humorous, but I would say it's humorous in the implausibility of the chain reaction, not in the act itself, and upon closer inspection, I would say it lacks most any humor.
Now then, many out there would argue with me. Or, at the least, disagree with me if they couldn't formulate an argument. They would try to show that throwing bricks at people is funny, but I digress, and so would they. The fact remains, as I asserted, that comedy revolves on truth. This argument sheds doubt on classic Roadrunner cartoons, which would earn me the animosity of many Americans today. I would almost argue with myself on that point - I grew up with those cartoons, as well.
And now here's another interesting observation - you have seen on a small scale how my thoughts flow. It seems to follow, like most anything else, and at the same time doesn't quite seem to fit. Ironically, also, I do believe this post began with me argueing that I'm not completely serious, ever, and yet I ended up with a reasonable debate within my own mind.
And yet, even at that, it's a debate on COMEDY of all things. Really, can one argue that a serious debate on the nature of comedy is wholly serious? Wheels within wheels, my friends. Wheels within wheels.
"Don't You Want (Emily) To Take You Seriously?"
She tagged it as food for thought, and of course, I ate it right up. Rachel'll give me a hard time for saying this, but I do rather enjoy thinking, even when (typically) it turns down the dark corridors of my mind (dark as in uncomfortable, not unused ^_^). And so, being me (and you guys may find this hard to believe) I thought about it.
She was refering to The Letter, which may yet turn out to be not so regrettable as it appears, but one can never say. That's aside the point. She refered to the letter, asking if I wanted her to take me seriously in the matter. Granted, it's quite simply "yes" - I'd be a fool or worse if I wanted her to take it as a joke. And yet, I retain that, given the subject matter, I don't think it could be mistaken, though I could be wrong. That's as far as my thoughts went on that issue, but I didn't stop there. I never stop at an obvious ending point. No, not I.
Of course, the topic turned broader, from if I wanted HER to take me seriously, to wether I really wanted ANYONE to take me seriously. Again, it would follow that, yes, I do want to be taken seriously, but maybe that's not the issue after all. It may well be an issue of wether I want to....'seem' isn't the right word, but seems to fit well enough. Wether I want to seem serious...no, that's not even the right word.
I guess it's not so much "seriousness" that I'm concerned with. Or rather, maybe "seriousness" itself is what should be under scrutiny, as opposed to being TAKEN seriously. No one would argue the point that a stand-up comedian is nessisarily serious, though they may be BEING serious, to an extent, and one could alsoi take a comedian seriously. Comedians, like anyone else, typically have something to say, and comedy is their medium. Be it rediculous or exagerated, true humor revolves around truth - if there's no truth in it somewhere, even if it's a blatant LACK of truth (or perhaps, more an opposite to truth) that's where true humor is.
Which, of course, leads to an interesting observation. Much of what passes for comedy these days doesn't qualify, really, as humor. No, I would greatly argue that point, and it's my personal conviction that much of the comedy out there is rather insulting to my intellegence, and I should hope insulting to others.
A kid throws a brick at a robber's forehead, who subsequently staggers back onto a rollerskate and falls down the stairs and out through the front window. At first glance, yes, maybe it's almost humorous, but I would say it's humorous in the implausibility of the chain reaction, not in the act itself, and upon closer inspection, I would say it lacks most any humor.
Now then, many out there would argue with me. Or, at the least, disagree with me if they couldn't formulate an argument. They would try to show that throwing bricks at people is funny, but I digress, and so would they. The fact remains, as I asserted, that comedy revolves on truth. This argument sheds doubt on classic Roadrunner cartoons, which would earn me the animosity of many Americans today. I would almost argue with myself on that point - I grew up with those cartoons, as well.
And now here's another interesting observation - you have seen on a small scale how my thoughts flow. It seems to follow, like most anything else, and at the same time doesn't quite seem to fit. Ironically, also, I do believe this post began with me argueing that I'm not completely serious, ever, and yet I ended up with a reasonable debate within my own mind.
And yet, even at that, it's a debate on COMEDY of all things. Really, can one argue that a serious debate on the nature of comedy is wholly serious? Wheels within wheels, my friends. Wheels within wheels.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2001-11-27 08:48 am (UTC)He's debating comedy...do you think he's cogniscant of how baaaaaad he's got it? Let's hope not. Poor baaaastard.
Doom doom doom doom, go home now!
no subject
Date: 2001-11-27 06:35 pm (UTC)Anywho... I won't give you a hard time for saying that. With all the thinking you actually do do (and don't give yourself credit for), I know you must like it at least a little! I mean, even if you sit there and tell me that thinking and talking etc. late at night is a bad idea... you must not think its that bad, or you simply wouldn't do it! I know you do a lot of thinking because otherwise I wouldn't ask you for your advice. It's that simple. I think I know and accept more about you than you think I do!
I only give you a hard time with your forgetfullness and such because you have found so much to tease me about, and I only have a few things. :-) So I take what I can get.
About your comedy spiel. I'll revert to what I know best... theatre. When we are working on characters, the first thing we are taught is that every character has something crucial that they have to say, or else they wouldn't be talking for that 1 and a half minute monologue. If they didn't have something pertinent and necessary to say, they wouldn't be there in the first place. Every character has a need to get across. When it comes to comedy, its the same. Another definition of comedy that I have heard, and really like to use, is that comedy is simply people finding humor in how serious someone may take themselves. For example... Let's take "Sally". Sally is a normal everyday person. But we find her absolutely hillarious because she's at the top of Mount Everest, in a massive snowstorm, and she is worried that her hair is getting messed up. Its humorous BECAUSE she is being dead SERIOUS. Does that make sense? I hope so.
Just thought I'd throw my two or ten cents in. :-)
The truth of the matter...
Date: 2001-11-28 06:27 am (UTC)