ChatterBank1 min ago
Is Frankie Boyle the new Bernard Manning?
Is there now a strong case for getting Frankie Boyle off the telly in the same way that broadcasters turned their backs on Bernard Manning and Jim Davidson?
http://www.dailymail....nd-The-Buzzcocks.html
Or does his 'bleeding edge' style of comedy push the boundaries in a way that actually advances comedy?
http://www.dailymail....nd-The-Buzzcocks.html
Or does his 'bleeding edge' style of comedy push the boundaries in a way that actually advances comedy?
Answers
I think ludwig has hit on the main point about Boyle's controversy.
As ludwig says, genuine satire - which is designed to make you think as much as laugh - of the sort produced by Chris Morris - is genuinely pushing the boundaries, rather than Boyle's somewhat smug attempts to upset people.
As ludwig says, genuine satire - which is designed to make you think as much as laugh - of the sort produced by Chris Morris - is genuinely pushing the boundaries, rather than Boyle's somewhat smug attempts to upset people.
10:46 Thu 06th Jan 2011
joeluke,
Well said, Manning was capable of telling all kinds of jokes, and his audiences were normally from the same roots as himself. The snobs who objected were the usual shrinking violets who probably find themselves in the W.I./Neighbourhood Watch ranks, the Mary Whitehouse/Victor Meldrews of this world. Quite a few have found their way onto AB, actually.
A bit like the PC Brigade who won't anymore accept words like "spastic" or "mongol", but instead seem to find little made up acronyms somehow acceptable, i.e. "ADHD", or sanitised little words like "Autism" which I guess must feel "alright to use" instead of "horrible" words, as described.
Well said, Manning was capable of telling all kinds of jokes, and his audiences were normally from the same roots as himself. The snobs who objected were the usual shrinking violets who probably find themselves in the W.I./Neighbourhood Watch ranks, the Mary Whitehouse/Victor Meldrews of this world. Quite a few have found their way onto AB, actually.
A bit like the PC Brigade who won't anymore accept words like "spastic" or "mongol", but instead seem to find little made up acronyms somehow acceptable, i.e. "ADHD", or sanitised little words like "Autism" which I guess must feel "alright to use" instead of "horrible" words, as described.
I can't stand gay 'comedians' like Alan Carr who are one dimensional, all they do to get laughs is make comments about male to male gay contact, things going up rear ends etc
So I make a point of never watching them because I know what to expect, point being if you don't like it then don't subject yourself to it, it's not rocket science is it?
You wouldn't go to a restaurant and order a meal which you disliked and then complain to the chef that you didn't like it would you?
So I make a point of never watching them because I know what to expect, point being if you don't like it then don't subject yourself to it, it's not rocket science is it?
You wouldn't go to a restaurant and order a meal which you disliked and then complain to the chef that you didn't like it would you?
eyethenkyew - in a more enlightened society, which moves forward in its appreciation of concepts like handicaps and mentl illness, it is surely better to use correct medical terms - which is what ADHD is, as opposed to a 'made up acronym', or autism, which again describes a specific range of mental impairment.
It has nothing to do with being PC, it simply demonstrates a wilingness to understand certain previously little-known conditions, and describe them with appropriate terms.
It doesn't feel 'alright', it just feels appropriate.
It has nothing to do with being PC, it simply demonstrates a wilingness to understand certain previously little-known conditions, and describe them with appropriate terms.
It doesn't feel 'alright', it just feels appropriate.
Eyethenkyew
The phrases you use are not even synonyms!
You have to remember that we now live in an 'information age'. People simply want to make sure that others understand them, which is why you would be considered a bit thick if you used the term 'mongol' in conversation, to (say) describe someone with a certain mental handicap.
It's a sign of the times really - if you use terms which people haven't used since the 70s, then there's a good amount of people who will assume you left school with the minimal number of CSEs.
It may not be true, but that's what people will think.
The phrases you use are not even synonyms!
You have to remember that we now live in an 'information age'. People simply want to make sure that others understand them, which is why you would be considered a bit thick if you used the term 'mongol' in conversation, to (say) describe someone with a certain mental handicap.
It's a sign of the times really - if you use terms which people haven't used since the 70s, then there's a good amount of people who will assume you left school with the minimal number of CSEs.
It may not be true, but that's what people will think.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.