« Purple for Peace | Main | Graduating Class »
May 17, 2006
Is Political Satire Misunderstood?
By DEANNA DAHLSAD
I have two passions in the evenings, Monday through Thursday: The Daily Show with John Stewart
and The Colbert Report.
What makes these political humor shows distinctive from one another is the style of humor.
John Stewart and his team present the 'evening news' using humor to illustrate the stupidity
of today's political scene. No idea, ideal, platform, organization, person or icon is safe from
their scrutiny and mockery. While I laugh and clap along with The Daily Show, it's the Colbert
Report which amazes me. This is because Steven Colbert does things a bit differently;
Colbert does political satire.
Playing the role of political pundit Colbert's talk-show character ostensibly supports the
president. Note, that reads ostensibly, for in his role as host of the personality-driven
pundit show, he uses irony, sarcasm, and wit to expose folly, vice, and stupidity -- even to
the point of seeming witless himself; thereby poking fun at the President and his politics.
Colbert's form of caustic caricaturization both amuses and amazes me.
I am amused at his performance and the wicked writing of the team, but I am amazed as I
cannot imagine being able to pull it off. I can easily get up on my soapbox and preach, but
I've never been able to manage satirical writing. I think this is because I am too aware of the
number of people who would take it seriously. If I were to write a satirical piece, I would need
to include both disclaimers that read "This is humor folks -- This is satirical!" and even then I
would likely need to break out of character and return to the soapbox.
I am too afraid that people would believe it if I said "My lunch today was a bowl of starving
children, washed down with a glass of their mother's tears. And I had baby seals for dessert."
I would cringe in fear of the emails, calls and letters from folks calling me insensitive yes, but
even more than that, I fear legal prosecution stemming from the police visiting my home based
on reports of cannibalism and animal cruelty.
Do I give folks too little credit? Do I underestimate the humor of the public? I don't think so.
Recently Colbert hosted the White House Correspondent Dinner, and he was not fully appreciated.
Many seemed to feel that Colbert's hosting, in his satirical political pundit persona, was
inappropriate. Words used to describe reactions were 'bewildered', 'unhappy' and 'a little on
the edge'. But what did they expect?
In fact, how was he even selected to host? In my mind, the committee conversation went
something like this:
"Hey, this Steven Colbert's pretty popular, especially with the young
people, let's ask him."
"It says on his website that he's a Bush supporter... With the President
himself attending, he'd feel right at home..."
"He could add youth to our demographic..."
"Yes, my son in college talks about Colbert all the time, let's get him
so that my son thinks I am cool too!"
Not a one of them understanding that Colert's TV show is a character of political satire,
the decision seemed to have missed its mark. For those of us who enjoy political satire,
this only adds to the humor (and I wish I had been there to see it!). But for those of us who
fear writing and performing political satire, it only proves our point:
political satire can be so misunderstood.
Posted by photocartoonist at May 17, 2006 11:49 AM