I’ve written opinion pieces for newspapers or magazines, and there you have to write in somber, reasonable tones. Satire allows you to say almost anything. That’s where truth is spoken to power in our society.
Malcolm Gladwell, 4:30
The tenth podcast from Episode 1, “The Satire Paradox”, calls into question the validity and implications of comedic approaches to political issues. While comedians’ jokes do apply to the obvious groups (or individuals) being made fun of, their satirical statements can also be turned around and viewed positively by the other side of the argument. This bites satire back in the same vicious way it attempts to bite the obvious victim. This happens because of satire’s complex nature – it is different than speech, which is easy to decode. It calls for interpretation. Essentially, the issue is that the viewers/readers have to spend much of their time thinking of who the satire is about and what it means, which distracts them from thinking of counterarguments or how it can actually apply to authority in real life situations. It leaves individuals thinking solely about the nature of the satire rather than the validity of the satire and arguments being presented. “When you sugarcoat a bitter truth with humor, it makes the medicine go down.” This means that the decoding of language and actions presented by the comedian almost distracts its recipients from considering the statement’s possible counterarguments. Laughter is even regarded to as a sense of “final stand” or final fallback, as those laughing have no other way to go about the overpowering issue so they must find humor in it to help themselves cope and feel like they are above the situation. This creates a paradox of impression that causes individuals of lower power to believe they are above the situation presented and know how to fix it, when, in reality, they are a mere victim of the power above them and are helpless. This can be related to the “loadsamoney” parody posted by Harry Enfield because a similar paradox occurs in his satirical take on the mid-1990s Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher. The song he created focuses on the lyric he made, “loadsamoney”, which essentially focuses on making fun of rich authoritative figures in power at the time. He is waving huge stacks of money across the screen and lacks common respect for people, solely “shaggin’ birds” and going out drinking. “He didn’t really like the operah, but he liked it because it was expensive. So, he liked to be seen there.” Anything that proves to others he has money, he does it. This made fun of the Prime Minister as the “Thatcherite nouveau riche buffoon,” but only left viewers laughing about the humor he made, rather than thinking about its downsides, possible counterarguments, or actions that need to be taken to work towards a better authority group.
Ben's Blog 