Monday, October 04, 2010
Well.. That Convinced Me...
We talk about Freudian slips but Freud was of the belief that there is no such thing as an accident, that stuff we say then retract out of embarrassment or as a result of being shamed is usually a window into what we're really thinking. Please, tell me what you think about Freud's belief in comments, and whether you agree with me, or not. No pressure, of course...
But seriously, I don't fantasize about how nice it would be to kill the folks with whom I disagree, not even people who I think have very dumb arguments. I maybe feel like yelling a bit, but as for fantasizing like this... No, I can't go there, and don't. I have to wonder if the people who made this ad have ever been in a fistfight much less anything more serious. They are pretty casual about the notion of eliminating political 'enemies.'
There are days when I wonder if my cringing at an ad like this doesn't put me in an archaic and outmoded little minority whose time has passed. Probably. Social standards almost never improve, and we're becoming increasingly coarse as a society, so if you made me bet $20 on it, I'd say this little ad is the wave of the future. That's depressing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
They're Brits.
The Monty Python is still strong.
Yeah, that must be it. It must be that I don't get Monty Python.
That's the worst imitation of Monty Python I've ever seen, then.
I think you're right to feel dread about the future, Jim. There is a thread over on Arlnow.com about Arlington County's recent resolution to "opt out" of a federal immigration enforcement program. Predictably, the comments have become a cesspool of ad hominem attacks, cherry-picked facts, and angry yelling.
What really jumped out at me, though, was that several people trotted out, "Arlington. Love it, or leave it."
Maybe those folks are too young to remember the late 60's and early 70's. Maybe they never saw an, "America. Love it, or leave it," bumper sticker. Would they be the least bit embarrassed to realize they've adopted the same catchy, but unbelievably simplistic, slogans people waaaay on the other side of the spectrum used forty years ago? Do they really want to "improve" Arlington by shipping everyone who dares disagree with the County Board to Fairfax and Loudoun?
It's rare to find an actual discussion of an idea. Arguments are dominated by strident jerks on the left and the right. People are attacked, not ideas. Dissenters are marginalized by being associated with the weirdest, most conspiratorial wackos on their side of the argument. Nobody is interested in respectful disagreement. Things are dominated by left- and right-wing extremists who, in the final analysis, really just get off on telling other people what to do.
This "kill the doubters," "comedy" sketch is dark, chilling stuff. It's not funny, and the makers said exactly what they meant to say.
RTW - I hadn't thought about it as humor really carefully until you mentioned that. But... if it is meant to be an imitation of the Mr. Creosote scene, then you have to ask who is the object of the humor. Mr. Creosote was funny because his explosion was self-inflicted, and he was an asshole who barfed intentionally on the charwoman. It mocked gluttony, and consumerism and piggishness - he couldn't say "no" to that final, "waaafair theen" mint. It's funny because Mr. Creosote is the object of the joke and he gets his comeuppance, courtesy of consumer culture and the French waiter, who plays a perfectly courteous, unwitting straight man.
But what's the object of this series of ads if it is a joke? Is it meant to make fun of the seemingly innocent kids & employees who refuse to don the hair shirt in response to invites to join a voluntary program? I don't think so because they're told, "no pressure, don't worry about it" and they are unsuspecting that anything foul is afoot. They are the straight men - then they are summarily executed. You can't kill the straight man, because the straight man is the tool of exposition, not the brunt or the object of the joke. That means if there is a joke here it is satire skewering the preening, glib totalitarian people pressing the button. But this still doesn't work right because the exposition is supposed to do something to the object of the joke, not to the straight man. This would be like punishing Laurel for pointing out that Hardy's plain is cockamamy. To make these work as a joke, you'd need another straight man to function in exposition of the joke here - "Well, that were a bit extreme, weren't it Guvna?" Bad hypothetical but it doesn't work as a joke without that.
No, I don't think it was meant as a joke, my sense is it's a political wank video for people with totalitarian leanings in their green philosophy, or maybe totalitarians who've latched onto green philosophy in the wake of the failure of so much of the red and brown stuff. Wouldn't it be cool if we could blow up the denialisters...
Just my thought. It's possible I really don't get British humor in which case all those hours spent watching MP, The Young Ones, Fawlty Towers, Mr. Bean, Blackadder, Only Fools and Horses, and reading all those Wodehouse novels, was just wasted time. If it is a joke I'm still open to the possibility I just don't get it, in which case I'm hoping a reader can explain the joke to me.
Unfortunately, I think this IS the wave of the future. For the most part, it is a win or win situation for the 10:10 folks. For the most part there will be two reactions to the ad:
1) Like-minded enviro-bullies who clap and say "hell yeah"..it's unthinkable for people not to be involved (win).
2)People are shocked and repulsed by the graphic blowing up of children [wtf?], but now are aware of 10:10 and their message (win). Since they are for reducing carbon emissions, they will ultimately be forgiven.
It is proven again and again that any publicity is good publicity. We are just becoming more "Idiocracy" by the day.
Great. It's okay though, Dr. Brett. I hear that Christine O'Donnell either is a witch or isn't, so depending on whether she weighs as much as a duck, maybe she can save us...
I am too lazy to do research on this "ad." I will say marketing with the purpose of causing negative emotion such as fear is a terrible strategy. Remember that car commercial with the people driving home and getting hit by a drunk driver and it was pulled because too many folks were left with less than ideal feelings.
Anyway, no idea what that "ad" represents. Leaves me with no interest in paying attention let alone participation.
Here's an interesting take on the ad by a guy named Warren Meyer. The article is from Forbes. He authors the, "Coyote Blog."
Post a Comment