#even by cheap comedy's standards. they had the opportunity to have him live in some crazy Mega Build skyscraper

[kil9]

docm77 should be playing steve. if he said he yearned for the mines i'd actually believe him

[dwellordream]

“...Cautious young women came from all classes and backgrounds; so did those who proved most daring, experimenting, or free-spirited. Because young women of all classes had limited spending money, their most popular forms of public entertainment consisted of a variety of free, outdoor activities. For young women who lived in towns and cities, walking up and down shopping streets, looking at the window displays, evaluating the goods, discussing prices and styles, and occasionally making minor purchases while keeping an eye on other strolling shoppers provided a particularly popular form of entertainment. 

In many towns, local choirs, musical ensembles, and military bands gave free Sunday afternoon concerts in public squares and parks, attracting especially young men and women, but also many working-class and lower-middle-class families whose budgets did not afford them other, more expensive forms of leisure activities. Without provisions for seating, these concerts provided ample opportunity to parade one's Sunday best, mingle, meet old friends and new acquaintances, chat, and exchange flirtatious glances. 

Similarly, ice skating, another conventional pastime that attracted both young people and their parents, remained firmly within the boundaries of respectable behavior. Despite mixed-gender audiences, the participation of older adults in such activities contributed to their respectability, and even the most old-fashioned parents rarely objected to such outings. After all, shopping had long been a central component of middle-class women's leisure, and ice skating and military music hardly incited raucous behavior. 

Equally popular among young women were new forms of commercial leisure activities that catered particularly, if not exclusively, to a cross class and mixed-gender clientele of adolescents and young adults. Movie theaters, for instance, attracted swarms of working-class and middle-class youths. Although many older contemporaries remained uncomfortable with the inappropriate mingling across gender and class lines and with the cheap thrills and seemingly loose moral standards of Hollywood films, young moviegoers found that the darkened auditorium offered hours of exciting, inexpensive, and easily accessible entertainment as well as a convenient place for meeting with friends and possibly engaging in courtship.

Enclosed swimming areas and public beaches also became increasingly important sites for fun, relaxation, and mixed-gender sociability in the 1910s and 1920s. While the immodesty and physical intimacy of "undressed, scantily dressed, and fully clothed people mixed together in one big confusion" often shocked traditional sensibilities, warm summer Sundays nonetheless brought such large crowds of young men and women to public beaches that popular wit soon dubbed them "flypapers." 

Other popular arenas for spending leisure time included cafes and restaurants. Because of their limited resources, young women typically sought out places that served coffee and dessert rather than full meals. Yet because they were generally inclined to spend more time than money in such places, young women were often made to feel unwelcome. "If you knew the waiter, he would sometimes let you sit over the same cup of coffee all night long," Inger-Marie Rasmussen recalled, "but most often that was not possible. When a haughty waiter came by and asked if 'there was anything else?' for the second or third time, you knew it was time to go."

Besides, the presence of men who might be willing to pay the bill in exchange for female companionship made such places more precarious arenas for young women concerned about their sexual reputations. While straining limited budgets, an afternoon or evening in an amusement park was often easier to negotiate. Having paid a small entrance fee, visitors were free to stroll around, look at the various booths and rides, and enjoy free musical and theater performances, occasional fireworks, and other attractions without additional expenses. 

Although some amusement parks were scorned by middle-class families because of their rowdy working-class clientele, others—such as the Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen—were entirely respectable sites of entertainment for families as well as young, single people. Various forms of theatrical entertainment also appealed to young women. In community halls and neighborhood theaters, they enjoyed cheap slapstick comedies and amateur performances starring local talent and would-be actors. 

In addition, hotels and restaurants frequently sought to lure customers into their businesses by offering some kind of stage performance as the opening act to an evening of dancing. The most popular form of theatrical entertainment was presented by the revue and vaudeville theaters that flourished in the 1910s and 1920s. Featuring evening programs of comical sketches, singing, and dancing, replete with chorus girls, lavish costumes, and elaborate stage settings, vaudeville shows attracted both young men and women looking for a good time, an easy laugh, and a spectacle of glamour and luxury. 

Yet young women's participation was generally more limited than men's. Often the price of admission precluded them from attending, and sometimes the sexually suggestive character of songs and acts made them feel uncomfortable. Nonetheless, most young women managed to stay remarkably well-informed about the glamorous costumes, the musical hits, and new dance steps they generated. However, given the opportunity to choose freely among all available forms of fun and entertainment, most young women would probably not have opted for any of the amusements just mentioned. In the vast majority of cases, dancing topped their list of attractive recreational pursuits. 

When, for example, the popular women's magazine Vore Darner in 1925 queried its readers about their favorite leisure activities, fully 72 percent of the respondents listed dancing as their first choice. Similarly, of the fifty-nine women interviewed for this project, at least fifty-four mentioned dancing as the favorite leisure activity of their youth. It is hardly surprising, then, that the rapidly expanding numbers of restaurants, cafes, hotels, inns, night clubs, and other establishments that offered dancing attracted vast numbers of young women. Nevertheless, public dance places remained highly controversial public settings for young women throughout the 1910s and 1920s. 

Like other forms of entertainment that did not encourage community-based, intergenerational sociability, these settings were viewed with suspicion by older generations. The fact that crowded dance floors and lively music facilitated, even encouraged, easy and spontaneous physical intimacy between young men and women only heightened this suspicion. As a result, public dance places constituted an exciting, but also an especially dangerous and difficult terrain for modern young women eager to have fun without jeopardizing their reputations. 

The tension between excitement and respectability was not unique to public dance places. The mixed-gender clientele and unsupervised mingling of city streets, skating rinks, public beaches, movie theaters, amusement parks, and variety shows could also throw into question the respectability of female participants. Therefore, public dance places merely represented the end point on a spectrum of controversial arenas for female leisure activities, simply heightening the conflicts young women experienced individually and in groups whenever they entered public space. 

Although the companionship of female friends provided some measure of protection against potential dangers and missteps, it did not provide them with an inviolable safeguard. Even if young women trusted and depended on each other, there was always the nagging doubt that judgment calls of female friends might be wrong. As Meta Hansen poignantly remarked, "Having a girlfriend meant that you wouldn't get into trouble by yourself. It didn't mean you wouldn't get into trouble." Without female companionship, the likelihood of getting into trouble was simply too great for most young women to risk venturing out, but even the presence of female friends did not ensure safety. 

To avoid making mistakes and more permanently minimize the risk of getting into trouble, young women therefore eagerly sought to determine what constituted appropriate and inappropriate behavior and activities. Throughout the 1910s and 1920s, they continually struggled to define the difference between the two, hoping to establish a set of rules that would ensure protection from moral reproach without sacrificing newfound possibilities for fun and excitement. Determining what constituted acceptable public behavior and activities was complicated by the fact that only a few public places and activities were entirely off limits for respectable woman. 

Therefore, simply determining the respectable from the disreputable—and placing oneself on the right side of that line—was not an easy task. Going alone to a restaurant in the afternoon might be perfectly acceptable, for example, but enjoying a cup of coffee in the very same location at ten o'clock at night would be considered highly inappropriate. Waltzing with a young man on the skating rink was one thing; tangoing with him in a night club quite another. Similarly, if watching the latest movie release in a local theater or enjoying oneself in an amusement park in the company of girlfriends provoked only few raised eyebrows, going there alone or in the company of a man to whom one was not officially engaged was likely to generate both gossip and criticism. 

"It wasn't so much what you did," Gerda Nybrandt declared when asked to explain what constituted proper behavior in her youth in Aarhus in the 1920s. "It was whom you did it with, and where you did it, and when you did it." Offering an almost identical explanation, Anna Eriksen remarked that "as long as it was daytime, people seemed to think that nothing immoral could take place. Doing the exact same thing when it was dark—now that was a different matter." Agnete Andersen recalled the code of conduct to which she adhered in a very similar way. "Well, how should I explain it?" she mused. "It was just like—you couldn't do this, but you could do that. It all depended on circumstances, whom you were out with, where you were and so on."

While in retrospect these three women maintained that "you just sort of knew" the boundary between acceptable and inappropriate public behavior, other evidence suggests that many young women at the time found determining that line an exceedingly difficult task. The fact that reliable sources of guidance were hard to come by only compounded the problem. Certainly, given their already contentious relationship, most young women did not turn to their parents for advice, and those daughters who did seek their guidance often found the older generation as confused and uncertain as they were themselves. 

Since the vast majority of young women were already out of school, advice from teachers was rarely an option available to them, and adult leaders of youth clubs, concerned about their standing with parents, were generally cautious and restrictive in their counsel. Writers, intellectuals, and newspaper editors steeped in older traditions of female domesticity also seemed unqualified to guide their path. And especially in urban areas, where organized religion already had lost much of its grip on young people, the prospect of going to a minister for advice never seemed to enter their minds. 

In this void, young women tended instead to look to self-proclaimed etiquette experts and advice columnists for suggestions on how to negotiate public behavior and city life. The sheer quantity of letters to women's magazines and advice columns about proper behavior speaks both to the uncertainty women felt and to the significance they attributed to knowing the limits of their new freedoms. In letter after letter, young women consulted these self-proclaimed experts both about the appropriate nature of planned events and about the specific restrictions they ought to place on their escapades. 

Could a young woman go out alone at night, they wondered? If so, could she casually stroll city streets without being taken for a street walker? Could she smoke cigarettes in public? Could she wear makeup? What about high heels? Could she go to a movie theater? If so, how late? And how frequently? What about an amusement park? A restaurant? What if the restaurant featured live music and dancing? Could she go out alone if she returned home before a certain time? If so, at what time ought she be safely indoors? In response, editors of women's magazines and advice columnists generally offered very specific guidance, usually in the form of strict, inflexible directives.

"No, a young lady may not go to a restaurant alone at night," one columnist warned. "A nice girl should always be home by 11 P.M.," another enjoined her female readers. And no, a respectable young woman could "absolutely not under any circumstances" wear makeup in public—aside from "lipstick and perhaps a touch of rouge." Often, however, the logic that guided advice columnists' directives seemed incoherent, even arbitrary, and frequently their answers seemed to lack a systematic pattern. When, for instance, one advice columnist maintained that "it is perfectly acceptable for two young girls to go for an evening walk, but a group of girls strolling the streets after dark is an unfortunate phenomenon," she might very well have added to the confusion and uncertainty her readers already felt.

Moreover, while generally encouraging women to avoid being alone in public and being out too late, the advice columnists frequently differed among themselves in their assessment of what constituted proper behavior. When asked almost identical questions in 1928, Sondags B.T. declared that a young woman could absolutely not go to the theater alone, while Ugebladet found it perfectly admissible "as long as [she] makes sure to sit in the front of the theater and leaves immediately after the show." 

Such disparate pieces of advice in publications that did not otherwise represent different political and cultural perspectives underscore how confusing and unsettled the standards for women's public behavior remained throughout most of the 1920s and how difficult it was for young women to find the kind of guidance they were seeking. Paradoxically, the only rule constantly reiterated was the one young women already knew and worried about—namely, that there was a boundary between respectable and disreputable behavior and that stepping over that boundary would have consequences that even young women who insisted on being "modern" and leading "modern" lives were not willing to risk.”

- Birgitte Soland, “Good Girls and Bad Girls.” from Becoming Modern: Young Women and the Reconstruction of Womanhood in the 1920s

[popculturebuffet]

The Critic Valentine’s Day Double Feature (Pilot/Sherman, Woman and Child)

Vivia Jay Sherman! Viva Quebec! Viva Valentine’s Day! And Viva WeirdKev who as happens for a good chunk of my content payed for this wonderful double feature for one of my favorite shows.  The Critic was created by Al Jean and Mike Reis of The Simpsons fame, a comedy team supreme. While I knew the two wrote for the simpsons, more on that iin a minute, I had no idea just how many classics the two churned out: There’s No Disgrace Like Home, Moaning LIsa, The Telltale Head, The Way We Was, Stark Raving Dad (Sadly tainted by it’s guest star being a horirble monster but that’s not their fault), Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington, the treehouse of horror segments The Bart Zone and Clown Without Pity (The second of which may be my favorite treehouse of horror segment), and later coming back to write the story for one of my all time favorites Round Springfield and to outright write the classic “SupercalfragalisticexpalliDOHcious”.  And to his credit Jean would later go on to write some classic post-golden age simpsons episodes during his tenure as producer: Lisa’s Sax, Mom and Pop Art, and Children of a Lesser Clod, which is notable if nothing else for this gag. 

So yeah the guys are legends and were right to start their own show under Simpsons producer James L Brooks over at ABC. The show followed the adventures of film Critic, Jay Sherman, a parody of film critics with high brow tastes, impossibly high standards, and a huge opinon of himself, having won the pultizer at least once.  Despite this he was also constnatly spat and shat on by society, divorced, lonely, depressed and eats like a thousand pigs combined in some horrific science accident. And given the last three parts describe me, as well as my profession of b eing a critic, naturally I love the guy and this show. I’ll get into his cast as we go as the first episode does an excellent job of introducing the entire cast so there’s no sense repeating myself.  But the show’s style I can and will talk about: It’s basically Golden Age, i.e. season’s 1-10, simpsons, but with more pop culture refrences and movie parodies, since the show would often feature multiple on Jay’s show coming Attractions and took place in the celebrity hot spot of new york and was a love letter to the city.. and sometimes a hate letter but only when those digs at the city would be funny, which to be fair depsite never having been to or lived in new york most really are. That’s the series key asset: while a LOT of the jokes haven’t aged well as a lot of the celbreity refrences are dated as are some of the movie parodies, most are hilarious wether you get what their making fun of or not and to me tha’ts a good parody: where knowing what their making fun of HELPS, but you can laugh regardless. The show had the charm and pace of the Simpsons while having it’s own unique style and cast that was just as charming and I love it dearly.  The show sadly only lasted two seasons, with ABC canceling it after one, and Brooks having it moved over to FOX, which was a good idea and lead to what’s probably my faviorite simpsons episode, a Star is Burns. Ironically despite you know, the show being created by two simpsons writers, backed by one of their producers and perfectly in line, creator Matt Groening was against the idea, publicly ranted about it to the press, and generally was an ass about it. Look I love the guy and even Brooks, Jean and Reiss were all nice enough in thier criticsim of the guy, but sitll very much understandably pissed off. .and i’m with them. 

It gave what’s again, my faviorite episode and what is not a “30 minute add” but an episode that easily stands on it’s own and also you know, pokes fun at itself for being a crossover a few times. You don’t need to see the critic to enjoy it, and episodes most iconic gags, Boo-Urns, Man Getting HIt by a Football, Senior Speilbergo, all don’t involve jay. And again the shows were not at all dismilar: While the critic was it’s own thing it still had the simpsons sense of humor and pacing so I saw it more as a petty rant against having a crossover in general more than a legit critcisim. Especially since Groening had no such complaints decades later with the family guy crossover after both shows had all tehir talent surgically removed and had the gall to NOT remove a cheap shot at Bob’s Burgers. And yes i’m still bitter about seeing that in a promo for the special, Bob’s Burgers is fantastic, to the point that now, in a fabulous case of history repeating itself, it’s got it’s OWN show like the critic made by talented former crew members using a similar but sitll throughly unique comedy style , The Great North. My point is that controversy pisses me off, and The Great North is spectacular go watch it while you read this. 

So yeah the Critic is awesome, me and Kev are both fans, and there are plenty of romantic episodes abound as the show digs into Jay’s love life quite a few times and has episodes about his son’s first love, his boss finding a wife towards the end of the series, his parents rekindling their spark and in what’s easily my faviorite episode, his sister dating a grunge rocker. So there was no shortage of choices but the choice made was brilliant.. and i’m not saying that because i’m being paid to, as my review of splatter phoenix’s first episode in darkwing duck and woops should show, paying me does not guarantee that I have to LIKE what your paying me to review. But here I did and he pointed out the first episode of each season, with season two being a soft reboot that while keeping the premise and supporting cast changed a few things around and added two new main characters, and both involve jay finding a new love intrest and intorduce a lot of the cast. I found him to be right, so where we are and after the cut i’ll dive into the good and bad of both episodes and see what changed inbetween seasons. 

That gag will make sense.. later. Right now it’s time for our very first episode, the show’s very first episode as you could probably tell by the title. 

Pilot:  The pilot starts with Jay getting touched up by his Makeup Person Doris. Jay is played by legendary comedian John Lovitz, who this show gave me a deep and lasting appreciation for. Lovitz was at the time best known for his 5 year long stint on SNL, and film wise is best known for Three Amigos, the Brave Little Toaster, The Wedding Singer and Rat Race. Sadly while I do geninely love the guy.. he has been in enough crap to destroy the New York Sewer system, as everyone needs money and sadly not everyone appricates the talents of John Lovitz like I do. 

So naturally he’s also been in The Stepford Wives remake, Grown Ups 2, The Ridiculous 6, Eight Crazy Nights, North, Benchwarmers and Benchwarmers 2: Breaking Balls. Yes that’s an actual movie, though it’s already better than the first one for virtue of not having Rob Schnider and David Spade starring in it despite.. that title. The irony is not lost on me that Lovitz has essentially made his money starring in the kinds of films Jay was forced to see for his job.  Still a VERY talented, very lovely man.

Before we get to our next voice actor up, no profile of Jon would be complete without mentioning that time he slammed Andy Dick’s face into a bar. To make a very long story short, Lovitz was friends with the late great Phil Hartman, who even did some voice work for this very show, whose wife who had severe drug and mental ilness killed them both. Phil had told Lovitz he saw Dick give his wife cocaine, so after Phil’s tragic murder when Lovitz and Dick ended up on the same show, Lovitz ended up exploding at the guy out of grief and blamed him for her death, but later apologized like a gentleman.  Living up to his name though Dick later went up to Lovitz at a restraunt Lovitz owned and said “I’m giving you the Phil Hartman curse, you die next”. Granted he was drunk but still...

Naturally Lovitz banned the guy and Lovitz later demanded an apology when the two ran into each other when they ran into each other at Lovitz regular gig at the comed store. Dick not only refused to apologize even when Lovitz put him against a wall, but said it was because “you blamed me for her death”... which was a decade ago with change by this point, the actions of a man GREIVING for his best friend whose wife’s relapse you caused which inadveradntly lead to her and her husband’s death, and something HE APOLOGIZED FOR. Naturally Lovitz took this how you would and did what we’d all like to do in general and broke the shit out of his face and only didn’t do more because they were seperated. IN short this man is a hero and I wil lbring up this story at every opportunity.  Doris was played by the late voice actress Doris Grau, a script supervisor who worked on a LOT of films as one , the most notable I could find on wikipedia being Clue. This is a fact I just learned today but boy if it isn’t neat. Grau mostly did aditional voices for shows, most notably Ducktales and the Simpsons, where she played Lunchlady Doris, and of course this show. Still she seemed like a very funny and talented woman and it’s sad she’s gone.  The two start the series mostly sniping at each other and while that never ENTIRELY goes away, Doris gets more supportive after a spotlight episode where she and Jay bond and Jay thinks she might be his mom. And while she’s not this surprisingly sticks and for the rest of the series while still not above making potshots at him on occasion, she’s far more supportive. She also informs him she’s out of spray on hair “I’m bald and ugly, get more!”. This show is naturally comedy gold and a lot of it relies on Lovitz sense of timing, though the rest of the cast aren’t slouches but we’ll get to them as we go.  She ends up putting a hat over him and we get our first film parody, Rabbi PI starring Anuld, which is alright. Not one of the series best but passable and gets the gimmick of having film parodies on jay’s show across, which was a nice way to set it apart from the Simpsons. Jay reviews it on the Shermometor, a gimmick jay hates and that disappeared by season 2, giving it a bellow zero to the ire of his boss Duke Phillips.  Duke is one of the best parts of the show, an unhinged southren billlonare who was a modeled after Ted Turner, down to the mustache, who built up his fried chicken franchise into a multimedia congrlomorate and is also mildly nuts, though that part would be more of a thing in season 2. In season 1, he’s mostly there to make Jay’s life hell, with about half of the seasons episodes having him either fire jay or put his job in jeapordy versus 2 the next season. He’s still not unfunny, but most of his best stuff is in season 2 when Charles Napier’s allowed to cut loose a little more and the character wasn’t shoehorned into just being a clueless executive.  Charles Napier is a longtime character actor who showed up in TONS of films and tv shows too many to list.. and trust me with some of the lists of credits before and after this that’s saying something, his biggest voice rolls being in this series and Men and Black the Series as Zed. But needless to say he was ALWAYS this awesome and sadly passed in 2011.  Jay’s guest for the day is Valerie Fox, an up and coming actress whose first film kiss of death is coming out soon.. and whose age is an engima and it’s only a problem because if she’s 20, like the episode mildly suggests giving her starting career and her voice actress being that age, then this gets really gross as jay is 17 years older than her then. But given she looks older than that and sounds certainly older than that, i’m going more with 30, since she looks more like it, and sharon stone, who she’s mildly based on given she stars in a basic instinct knockoff and does the leg thing, was 32 at the time of basic instinct.  Valerie is voiced by Jennifer Lien, aka Kes from star trek voyager who I only know about because of reviews done by SF Debris and Allison Pregler. She was the childlike love intrest of Nelix, the ship’s resident pain in the audience asses who made them BEG for early seasons wesley crusher and who once, and I saw footage this wasn’t SF Debris exagreated, lunged at a crewmate in a jealous rage, unfounded by the way since Tom was AVOIDING kes depsite being attracted to her as he just wnated her to be happy and to not mess up her relationshpi, and screamed “i’ll kill you!”. Point is she hasn’t had a huge career, but was still worth noting and does a fantastic job here. Again I did not realize she was that young at the time by her voice, and that means she did a great job. 

So Jay’s smitten with her, finds her super attractive and she asks him out.. but to the show’s credit, and Jay’s he does try to rebuff her because he knows ther’es a conflict of intrest there.. but ends up giving in. However at least the show not only is upfront that there’s an issue here but that ends up being the thrust of the last act. Granted there’s still some.. questionable stuff like when she does the basic instinct leg cross and he says “can we get a shot of that”, which no.. Jay.. no you can’t. Ewwww. Seen far worse, like It’s Pat, which was a VERY real SNL sketch about people trying to guess the titular pat’s gender because that’s not creepy or invasive even for the time. And they made a movie out of it because Wayne’s World was popular forgetting that Wayne’s World, one of my faviorite movies by the way and one I need to cover here sometime this year now the thought’s occured to me, was a labor of love, with a talented director and actual ideas from it’s two leads who actually fleshed out the character versus a concept that was NEVER funny to begin with and has gotten down right horrifying with age. And wasn’t I talking about the Critic? Not the abusive jackass mind you, Jay Sherman. 

Ah yes so Jay takes Valerie to a date at Lane Riche, the rich jackass where we meet Vlada, a vaugely european man whose your typical hollywood suckup. As Jay puts it in a later episode  Vlada: I love you too Jay: You only love my money Vlada: That’s true but it is a love that will never die.  He also naturally scoots Jay to a less nice table in the Critic’s section once Conan O’Brian shows up... which WAS supposed to be a different kind of joke, as at the time Conan was just a writer on the simpsons and SNL, but now given he has a decades long career in late night and famously said fuck you to NBC during that whole Tonight Show debacle, which netted him his own show on TBS, it comes off more as the kind of self deprciating gag Conan makes about himself. So in other words it’s actually funnier now? 

As for the critic’s section that’s a part of the series I’ve neglected to talk about so let’s do that: The kind of critic Jay is, one who plays clips of the movie and reviews them.. on television. And were usually academics who looked down on popular film, the kind Siskel and Ebert popularized, and both suprisingly had a huge guest apperance in season 2 and even reviewed the show on their show. This kind of film criticism just dosen’t exist on tv that i’m aware of anymore, and mostly lives on with internet reviewers , many of whom were inspiried by critics like this, and who range from acadmeics to average joes to some mixture of both. It never went away just simply went to a younger generation. Some of which squandred it and somehow still have a career like certain abusuive jackasses i’ve mentioned enough with that one gag a few paragraphs ago. Point is it’s a much more varied and different game now so the critic ended up as one of those shows or movies where the main characters very job feels like an artifact of it’s time, like our heroes in Wayne’s World hosting a public acess show, when nowadays they’d just put it up on youtube or the entire idea of a UHF station in well.. UHF. It’s not a BAD thing, just something to note. 

But the date goes well as Valerie shows she’s really into jay and even takes him oggling her in stride, though we do get an utter classic of a gag when Jay says something about women being drawn to him.. and cue an old woman asking to rub his nonexistant hump for luck “You hunchbacks are all alike”. She does so anyway to his understandable annoyance. 

But the two go back to Jay’s place, talk about his acomplishments including a pulitzer and then well.. the obvious happens they go to bed together and the next day after Valerie is horrified at his just woke up fac,e he gives her an easy out but she’s fine with it. It honestly shows just how low the poor guy’s self esteem is that he just.. assumes a woman will regret having slept with hima nd walk out and while played for laughs it really gives a clear look into Jay’s mental state: He’s so full of self loathing, not helped by the world being out to get him, that it’s really oddly endearing. And VERY releatable.  The two are interupted by Jay’s son Marty. Marty is played by the very recognizable and very wonderful Christine Cavanagh, who sadly passed away in 2014. She voiced Chuckie Finster, Gosalyn Mallard, Oblina, Dexter from Dexter’s Lab and the titular pig from Babe. She decided to retire in 2001, so while her career was only about a decade she made quite the impact and is sorely missed. Unsuprisingly her usual voice is perfect for the very awkward Marty, who Jay asks to tell eveyrone about the beautiful woman in his bed especially his unfaithful and utterly loathsome ex wife ardith. 

This scene demonstrates two problems. The first is just the pilot as Jay’s kind of sleazy. While Jay being thirsty wouldn’t go away, especially in the episode Lady Hawke, it’d be made more awkwardly endearing. Here there are moments of him just plain being creepy like the aformentioned oggling, which while not bad in itself, if a bit awkawrd, also has him creepily muttering to himself while doing so which removes any charm or relatability and just sends it straight into needing 10 showers just to wash this scene off. The rest of the series would just turn him into a bit desperate at worst.  It also explains why the only other romantic story the guy has in the season is a pastiche of misery. Thanfully this would be GREATLY adjusted next season but we’ll get to that. 

The other problem is just the tone... we get a good half a minute of Marty talking about how he calls Ardith’s boyfriend “Uncle Al” because he likes him a lot.. to his dad’s face. And granted his dad is being creeptastic this episode but the early episodes just pile on the Jay hatred by the world a bit thick, to the point one episode puts him as “worse than hitler”. Granted the audience is full of idiot teens who have no idea who hitler is, and the gag is kinda funny, but it makes my point: Jay is just utterly shat on by the world, and while he does get a few wins, most are undercut by something awful and it gets taxing sometimes. The guy is just too loveably pathetic to hate, too relatable even as a teen and not snobish enough to be really loathsome or WANT to see him knocked down by the world. It’s not overwhelming enough to ruin the first season, it still has good episodes but this episode does highlight a LOT of these problems.  He does get to spend the day with val though, dancing outside the trump buliding, seriously even back then he was a joke and his lack of money half the time was well known.. how did the last four years happen, and they tell each other they love each other. I’d aww if I didn’t know how this ended.  So jay relates the good news of how he feels to his best friend, Jeremy Hawke, played by Maurice LaMarche. LaMarche is one of the most talented voice actors alive, a master of impersonations paticuarlly orson welles, who was naturally brought on board because they knew they were going to need a lot of celebrity voices for the film parodies and needed one or two guys to do them to keep it cheap. The guy is like most of this cast a legend in the industry, having voiced the Brain, Squit, Dizzy Devil, the Human Ton, Big Bob Pataki, Egon Spengler, Sleet,  Kiff Kroker, Headless Body of Agnew, Morbo, Various other Futurama characters because that list is long, Mortimer Mouse, Blue Falcone, Father, Yosemite Sam, Vincent Van Ghoul, Doctor Doom, Abradolf Lincler, and Odval. Point is the guy has been engranged in my childhood and adulthood and will probably even after he’s gone come back from the grave to do some voices. He even got the part of Jeremy Hawke here because he happened to do a REALLY good australian accent depsite not being australian. Jeremey was a combination of paul hogan, the star of the Crocodile Dundee movies and at the time sex symbol and at this time known anti semite Mel Gibson. Obviously neither of those refrences has aged paticuarlly well, but since hollywood ALWAYS has room for a super hunk from australia, just ask Chris Hemsworth or before him Hugh Jackman, the character still works and his breakout role, Crocodile Ghandi is so ludcrious it works. I.e. a white australian man playing the mahtma and saying before he brings peace “First a tasteful shot of my bum for the ladies. Jeremy, while sometimes increidbly oblvious, is still a fairly nice easygoing guy and an extremley loveable character. And whie Jay worries about Valrie meeting him because he’s sex on a cracker she ignores him and jay gloats for a bit, paticuarlly with the great bit “take your genatalia right back to australia”. And while Jeremy’s happy for him he tries to reign Jay in when Jay talks asking her to marry him.  As Jeremy later relates on Jay’s fire escape “Bubala, i’ve learned there’s two things you should never do: Marry an actress and wear blackface to the naacp image awards. Two things I found out the hard way. “

So Jay takes her to meet his parents and finds out he’s adopted.. and their also rich. Jay’s waspy parents are his cold and overly honest mother Elanor, played by  Judith Ivey, his kooky dad and THE best part of the series Franklin played by Gerrit Grahm and his loving and free spirited teenager sister Margo played by Nancy Cartwright.  Okay (cracks knuckles) here. we. go. Judith Ivey is a tony wining stage actress and has also directed numerous plays and is mostly known for her stage work but I know her from Designing Women where she played BJ in the last season. Garret Grahm apparently shows up in a lot of brian depalma movies, including Beef in phantom of the paradise, a lot of tv work and to my shock the asshole dad from Child’s Play 2. Another thing I genuinely love I wasn’t aware an actor or actress from this series had a part in.  Finally there’s Nancy Cartwright, who you DEFINTELY know from the Simpsons, where she plays Bart, along with Nelson, Ralph, Kearny, Database, and Maggie, and Kearny. Other credits include Pistol Pete, Mindy from Animaniacs, Chuckie Finster picking up for Christine Cavanagh ironically enough, Lu and Rufus from Kim Possible. She’s a talented lady and i’m glad sh’es still around. Whew. 

Okay so yeah I do love the shermans and fraknlin is again easily the best part of an already excellent series and unlike Duke that’s in full display here, with him saying, when his wife mentions they were going to give jay back at one time, “Son if I’ve said it once I said it a thousand times.. who are all you people. “ and he’d only get better. Sadly he’s NOT in sherman woman and child. Our loss really. But he’s in pretty much every other episode of season 2 thankfully and most of this season so eh, fair trade off. Also we get the classic line, after Jay says he’ll love valrie even when he’s decaying in the ground, his mom quips “Cna’t we go one meal without talking about your rotting corpse?” Though Eleanor understandably thinks Valarie is using jay for a good review. Margo suspects her of the same and takes her on a horse ride, though all she can gleam is that Val genuielly loves jay and welcomes her to the family.  Jay however does decide to duck out of the inteview by faking sick, which leads to a really sweet moment where Valerie visits him and they dance, in a hilaroius but oddly sweet parody of Beauty and the Beast, Beauty and King Dork. Despite the title and the song insluting him a LOT it’s still just endearing. This is a problem but we’ll get to in just a moment WHY all these touching moments are a problem.  So naturally things don’t go that well for Jay as Duke has a tape of the film sent to him “My shrink was right: GOd does hate me!”

Naturally kiss of death is bad and valrie is bad in it and Jay is left uncertain what to do, but eventually decides he has to do what he feels is right,.. though he does take a picture of her while she’s sleeping. “In case you do leave”

So in a tender and heartbreaking moment Jay is honest, the movie does suck and she’s not good but he does compliment her, for her personality not her body despite his skeevy behavior and say she could get better. Instead when he arrives home.. she dumps him to his face and leaves never to be seeen again while he assumes she’ll come back. And that’s the issue it’s GENUINELY hard to tell if we’re supposed to side with Jay. On one hand he genuinely loves her and does the right thing and on the oth er he’s kinda creepy. It’s a mixed tone that just sorta hurts thing and something the series DID fix after this, as it found a better ballance of the guy being pitable while also still being an ass and ONLY usually being punished when he does something actually wrong, the only exception being Dial M for MOther which is easily the weakest episode of the series. The episode does close on a really funny moment as Jay’s dispondent because “I’m sitting on top of a volcano of rage and I don’t knwo where to direct it”. Marty mentions a new Sylvester Stallone movie where “He plays a concert pianst who” And jay dosen’t even need the rest of that to shout “To the multiplex!” The man is back

Final Thoughts for Pilot: This episode is not bad. It has it’s flaws as I said, mostly in tone, but the series would iron that out and it’s still a great pilot that organically introduces the entire main cast in one episode and really gives us the full idea of who Jay Sherman is. It’s also REALLY funny, as the series should be and it would get better, but i’d still put it over some more awkward first episode like Letterkenny’s “No Reaosn to Get Excited”, even with it’s brilliant ending or Bojack Horseman’s first episode  whose title is way too long to put here in an article that’s already long as hell about about to get longer. But like those series this pilot worked pass the awkwardness and the result is a damn good series. but if you want a better idea of what it became.. wellllllll

Sherman, Woman and Child: So yeah as you can tell JSUT by contrasting images a few things were changed up between seasons, part of it at network instance. The designs were softened , the color palette was brightened with jay being the most noticably alterted between seasons. 

The execs wanted jay a bit warmer, so his face was given wider more expressive eyes and was also scrucnehd down a bit. He was also made slightly less of a jackass, with his elitisim toned down a bit and his creepeir moments gone. For instance he no longer had a split personality/imaginary secretary named ethel. That was actually a thing. It didn’t even really change Jay as a person, this very episode mentions him not liking the Lion King, and he’s still snooty, he’s jusst not as punchable about it and that was for the best.  But the cringe comedy in general was taken down a peg and replaced with more fun weirdness, which wihle present in season 1 really pops more here, especially with Jay’s dad who sadly dosen’t show up in this episode, but at various points dresses up like El Kabong, puts on the mask from the mask (”He did the same thing at Nixon’s funeral”), and blows up famous works of art while babysitting. But yeah things get a bit more surreal like the simpsons from season 4 onward, ironically enough given these guys left to make their own show, and it’s to the show’s benefit. 

But besides a lighter tone, they also wanted two things to hook viewers in: A permenant love intrest for Jay, and an adorable kid character. The former.. was acutlaly quite resonable, as i��td both give jay a “win” as it were, allow the cast to have another femlae character and give him someone else to confide in besides Doris or Jeremy, to give those characters a break. The other was less so and we’ll get into why when we meet her. 

This episode really is a second pilot, reintroducing about half of the main cast. Marty, Elanor, Margo and as I said Franklin are all absent. But their reintroduced soon enough with the fourth episode in both broadcast and dvd order, and my personal faviorite “A Song for Margo, is entirely focused on Jay’s parents and sister, while Lady Hawke has marty breifly at the start for broadcast order and he’s in the frmaing device for Sherman of Arabia in dvd order. So the characters all get a proper reintroduction to new audiences, but it was the right call to NOT shove them into this one, still introducing new people to the new cast, but letting the two new additions to it breathe and get properly intergrated into this universe.. well more Alice than Penny but we’ll get to that. It’s part of why, besides the genuine extra coat of polish aand seasonal changes I feel this is the better episode. 

So we open with Jay on his show and two parodies in a row. The first is a few good men but with Jack Nichelson making fun of Christan Slater for sounding like him even though. they honestly aren’t too similar other than both doing that pause thing a bit. So yeah not their best but the second segment makes up for it “The Nightmare Before Channukah” a parody of the nightmare before christmas that was so beautifully animated and funny, that they actually bumped it up to the season premiere.  But while the parodies are good Jay’s show is once again, this happened a LOT in season one, in jeapordy, being beaten by the Benedictine monk variety hour. Which while the Bendictine Monks are VERY much an artifact of the 90′s a choir of monks that somehow went mainstream, the whole segment is so absurd and wonderful it stands on it’s own and is still funny to me in 2021. Duke comes in anda fter trying to softball things shows the change I mentioned: He’s actually sorry the show is in danger and is genuinely sincere that he’s sad he’ll probably have to cancel it versus season 1 where he was ready to cancel it what felt like every other episode. And I prefer this, where he can still mess with jay or flex his power over him, but is more cordial with the guy and it allows more jokes between the two. 

So Jay’s not doing so good.. and during his crappy day he spots a 30 something woman and her young daughter struggling in the rain and stops his cab to help. And gets maced for it “MMM, Jalapeno”. Though Alice does apologize and Jay does understand as it is New York and she graciously takes the offer. It’s in the cab their properly introduced. Aliice thompkins and her daughter penny who in a great bit punches jay in the nose for not liking the lion king (”rex reed did the same thing”) and then kissing him on the nose in apology (”Rex did that too” And he acompanies them in.. and also gets conked on the head by a potted plant and put in a materinity dress. 

So we get to know Alice and what her deal is: Alice was once married to and supported the career of country star Cyrus Thompkins who was.. less than subtle in his music about how faithful he was

Easily one of my favorite gags of the series if in part for Pat Overall’s delivery. So she moved from Knoxville to New York to prove to her daughter a woman can make it on her own, and proves she’s smart, talented and driven she just needs a break. She seemingly gets one in a man in a bright white outfit who says “this is your ticket out of this rundown flophouse” only for him to cheerfully exclaim “Your being evicted!”... PFFFTT. Cue where the commerical would be

So during this lull in the action let’s talk about Alice and Penny’s voice actresses: Alice is voiced by Park Overall, though for some weird reason I thought she was voiced by Hollly Hunter. Dunno why. Park is an outspoken liberal, supporting my boy bernie sanders in 2016 and in general seems like a fascenating lady. Naturally like with Jay’s parents I know her from something more oddly specific, the sitcom Reba, as I did not realize she voiced alice depsite using a similar voice for her character there, Reba’s best friend Lori Ann.. And while Park TRIED her best.. the character didn’t work out: a combination of it being simply funnier that barbra jean tried to wedge herself into the roll and the fact Reba really didn’t need a horny abrasive sidekick meant the charcter had a very short shelf life and the audience had very low patience for her.  I did like her constnatly insulting Brock as he was not a good person andi t was nice SOMEONE besides Reba actually got to roast him on a regular basis. 

Penny was voiced by the one and only Russi Taylor, who sadly passed in 2019. She voiced Huey Dewey and Louie, Webby Vanderquack, Minnie Mouse, Fantasma, the imcomprable martin prince...

Among tons of smaller rolls. She’s sadly missed. We’ll get more into what they add or subtract from the show in a minute, as the next day at work Jay wonders how to help, though Duke’s interjection gives us two great gags: his “30 second workout” which involvees throwing jay around like a medicine ball and.. well this. 

The man is a legend for a reason. He earned that golden statue. So Jay TRIES slipping alice the money only to give it “To my good friend crazy postman”, and Alice refuses the money due to pride.. even if you know, she has a small child and new york is expensive but Jay finds a better solution, hire her.. even if it’d make it impossible for them to date. For all of one episode. What keeps the power dynamics from feeling EUGUUUUGGHH here is that Jay treats alice like an equal partner at work and dosen’t let their relationship really impact things outside of one episode, and dosen’t use his position to get into a relationship with her nor does she use being responsible for a turn in his fortune for hers. 

And yes turn in fortune, as a makeover and a change of attidue under Alice’s direction, which is utterly amazing to watch and wow’s duke and hte audience, wins back his fans and his job is secure. Duke meets alice and we get more great duke stuff. including something truly iconic...

I want bears who sing for me, doo dah, doo dah. But yeah things are well though Jay ends up admitting to Jeremy he can’t stop thinking about her “Her merest smile is like pedals of the empreror’s bathwater, BATHWATER I TELL YOU BATHWATER. “ So Jeremey encourages him carpe canum “Seize the dog”. He does so.. and the day but instead finds Alice with her ex Cyrus whose trying to win her back. Wuh oh.  Once the asshole leaves, and agrees to give her the night to think, Alice admits the only reason she’s considering it is she has a weakness: his singing melts her like butter on a bagle (”God i’ve been in new york too long”. )  Jay tries to talk her out of it at the critics meeting for “Dennis the Meance II Society” which involves Dennis pulling a drivebye on mr wilson.. why wasn’t this the second live action dennis the meance movie? WHY I ASK YOU. But Jay gets a good idea, as Alice TRIES to tell the asshole to get to stepping (And to see penny often, she’s not a monster), he works his evil song magic.. only for Jay to undercut it with his own amazing song on acordian. “Cyrus is just a virus, he wants to tie you down while your still young. Your potetial, is what’s essential, you could someday be another connie chung!” And that ultiamtely shows WHY jay is the better man. He just wants what’s best for her and dosen’t care if it’s him, he just wants it not to be THIS asshole. He’s not even trying to win her over, which a lot of these gestures creepily lead to. He just wants to help her be who she’s MEANT to be. And that’s why this works better: Instead of a fake relationship built on lust and someone conning the other person, it’s a real one built on genuine chemistry. Also Alice you know dosen’t just.. vanish after an episode but is a permenant part of the cast. I mean she does for the webisodes but we don’t talk about those. 

So our hero undercuts Cyrus one more time  Cyrus: “Loverrrr, without you there’s no other” Jay: Give him a chance he’ll do your mother....

I mean he’s not worng, So Cyus is sent packing and we get a nice romantic moment between the two. 

Final Thoguhts: Sherman, Woman and Child This one is truly excellent. It relaunchs the show on all cyllanders. And frankly Alice was a fine addition to the cast: her own fully fleshed out woman with her own personality outside of jay, who was tough, smart and a good counterpoint and confidant to Jay and it felt like she’d always fit. Penny on the other hand, apologizes to the late Russi Taylor who tries her best, just dosen’t work and feels ultra cloying and out of place in the series and unspurisingly is barely used after this. But overall a better pilot than the actual pilot was already pretty good and a fine pair of episodes. Check em out whenever the series eithe rgets on a streaming platform or pops back up on youtube as Sony’s struck it down... despite not putting it up anywhere i’m aware of. Seriously sell it to HBO Max or Disney I want a reboot. But for now this series is awesome check it out and until the next rainbow, it’s been a pleasure. 

[theinbisibleman]

“I thought I was white”

When I was a kid, I thought I was white. I woke up and ate the sugary white people cereal for breakfast, I watched the idyllic families on white people TV, listened to the nonsense lyrics of white people music (this one is @Hanson for MMMBop and @LFO for their entire discography), and then went to school with my white friends. It never occurred to me that I was different. Sure, my name was not as easy to pronounce as “Chase” or “Rob” or another name that is also just a verb. My name is Jerwin Gabriel Santiago, which roughly translates to my parents are lazy, Catholic, and racially confusing to white people. We can break this down a little further.

First, lazy. Let me qualify that my parents are the hardest working, most ambitious and determined people I’ve met in my whole life and that would hold true even if I met either Serena or Venus Williams. However, my father’s name is Erwin and my older brother’s name is Erwin Jr. My parents, like a college student who started their twelve-page midterm paper on civil disobedience at 11:30pm when it’s due at midnight (@me during my first year of college), hopelessly scrambled for a name. Out of literally infinite amounts of names, they decided to tactfully pluck the “J” from “Jr.” and delicately place it onto “Erwin”. My brother inherited the legacy of my father’s name almost monarchically and I was left with the off-brand version of it. You know when Aldi is trying to come up with a name for Fruit Loops so they just change it to Fruit Rounds and hope no one notices? Yeah, that’s what my entire existence felt like. I was so embarrassed by the obscurity of my name until I started shopping at Aldi and realized that, just like me, Fruit Rounds were more reasonably priced, more accessible, and (I’ll say it!) WAY TASTIER than Fruit Loops (mostly due to the reasons listed before)!

Next, Catholic: my parents are Christmas-and-Easter Catholics who will occasionally lecture me about how God is the most important force in our lives a propos of nothing. We could silently be eating at a Cheesecake Factory and my mom will set aside ten minutes to remind me that God blessed us with overpriced cheesecake and fake Italian food. The name Gabriel is derived from the angel Gabriel who served as God’s messenger, relaying important and formative pieces of information to various biblical characters. Now, I am not very religious because at the early ages of me attempting to memorize prayers, I had already filled my entire brain with Kelly Clarkson lyrics. However, I feel like I carry on Gabriel the Angel’s legacy after one glass of wine and a quick listen to any song off Carly Rae Jepsen’s Emotion album. I often find myself delivering almost Shakespearian monologues to people (close friends and complete strangers alike) whenever I am within 5 feet of a bottle of cheap wine (Aldi’s Winking Owl Bordeaux is my go-to) (and yes, this is me begging for an Aldi sponsorship). Often times I will deliver a 20-minute monologue with these phrases strung together in a random order: “you are a powerful force that deserves love”, “you inspire me with your joy”, and “you’re gonna go so far”. So, despite my lack of saliency to my Catholic upbringing, I believe the name Gabriel is entirely fitting (and, honestly, kind of hot).

Finally, racially confusing to white people. Countless white people read my last name and become visibly confused upon their first look at my face. I’ve got a Spanish last name, several “Asian” facial characteristics, and a skin color I could only describe as “Liberal Studies College Pamphlet-Brown” (i.e. a sort of panethnic skin tone meant to encompass all people of color to convince you a college “cares about diversity”) which is synonymous with “Would Be Asked to Portray Any Ethnic Person in Pop Culture on SNL-Brown”. I had a grade school friend of five years once say to me “Wait, you’re not Mexican?” so shocked that I heard a record scratch like in a 90’s rap music video. This was just one of the many times of my early adolescence that I had to confront my racial identity. I am Filipino; meaning, I mark “Asian” on all my forms, my entire family is 100% Filipino, and am thrust into all the sociopolitical standards and implications of my Asian identity.

At home, I was constantly reminded of my Asian-ness and, as a byproduct of my predominantly white surroundings, my overwhelming Other-ness. My mom is a powerful woman who carries herself with admirable strength and poise. My dad is a loud-talking, lively man full of passion and authority. The strong guidance of these two taught me work ethic, perseverance, and hope. On paper, these qualities sound perfect. There was one flaw though: we weren’t white. We weren’t what I saw in practically every direction I turned. So, I tried running from that.

Every opportunity I had, I would beg my parents to buy Lunchables at the supermarket or pack me a ham and cheese sandwich instead of rice and some traditional Filipino dish out of fear of being made fun of in the cafeteria. I hated being asked if I “ate dog” when I pulled out chicken adobo and rice. I hated looking to my left and right and not seeing a single Ziploc Tupperware container that looked like mine. Even worse, I hated looking to my left and right and not seeing a person that looked like me.

I thought I was white. Grade school Jerwin was crushed the day that his mother sat him down, looked him right in the eyes, and said, “Mommy gets paid less than white men who do less work at her job. We are different. We have to work twice as hard to get half as far.” I felt like a mutant in the X-Men cartoons I would watch every day. I felt like a blue little monster that just wanted to teleport away or change how I looked or do whatever Beast did. Smash things and grow chest hair? Besides the point. I felt defeated and now there was no running from it. No matter how much Lucky Charms I ate, or how many episodes of Full House I watched, or how many Rivers I Cried (sweet Justin Timberlake reference, you don’t even have to tell me), I was still Asian.

As I’ve grown up, I’ve received and will continue to receive several rude awakenings. I read about psychological experiments done that prove names are sometimes the key factor in who employers choose for a position, mostly at the detriment of the more ethnic sounding name. I learn about the toxicity of the “Model Minority” standard that many Asians are forced into and how its presence in Western culture is destructive to all people of color. I am “pretty funny for a brown guy”. I get labeled “the brown friend” like I’m some kind of one dimensional supporting role in a mid-2000’s romantic comedy. I get asked if I “tark rike dis”. I get confused for other brown people. I get called “Mocha” or “Japanese-Chinese-Caramel-Man” (both actual things I was called by actual humans). I am referenced as “the crazy little Asian boy” or “the oriental one” at work. I get talked over by white people in academic or professional spaces. I am minimized and silenced in predominantly white comedy venues.

However, as I’ve grown up, I’ve also grown stronger. No longer am I the seven-year-old weeping in the aisle of a Jewel-Osco, asking for a pizza Lunchables, which were horrible anyways. Does it still hurt to get microaggressed? Absolutely. Will I and all other people of color continue to face discrimination? Absolutely. But now I stand taller, ready to put in the work my mother warned me about.

I am not white. I am proudly Filipino. I am proud of my skin. I am proud of my Tupperware full of Sinigang and rice. I am proud of my Asian-ness – my Other-ness. I am Jerwin Gabriel Santiago, and I am not white.

[joel-furniss-blog]

Anti-Taste

During my project I’ve often described my work as being anti-taste. Why? Honestly, I saw it in one of my assessment feedback tutorials and like it enough to adopt, something about it ringing true to me and sounding like a highfalutin professional artist phrase or some such.

My only problem is I struggle to understand the exact definition of ‘taste’, let alone how to be opposed to it. For this is why I’m researching, to see the meanings of taste, it’s societal standings, its spectrum of good/bad, and its relevance to my art practice. In my ignorance I often associate taste with humour, where jokes are often categorised into good taste or bad taste, but when jokes are highlighted for their taste its often done by calling out those that are bad taste. A joke in bad taste is recognised as inappropriate, mean-spirited, ‘punching down’ ethos or otherwise being cheap, lacking substance or comedic weight. Naturally, this leads me to believe that good taste jokes are the opposite end, they are appropriate, good-hearted, they punch up, they are rich, and substantial. But I’m not talking about comedy, we’re talking about the far less serious artworld.

From dictionaries we can define the taste I want to tackle as ‘a person's tendency to like or be interested in something’, ‘the ability to discern what is of good quality or of a high aesthetic standard’, and conformity or failure to conform with generally held views concerning what is offensive or acceptable’. This information is certainly contradictory as it displays taste as being individual and social, both dependent on singular intake and expression but also a cumulative collection that dictates the wider society and culture. This is ‘good taste’, a collection of agreements and reinforcement that certain aesthetical aspects are pleasing while others are not.

So aesthetically what is good taste? It’s mainly contextualized as a broadly defined standard of beauty, a set of angles, tones, colours, and lines that, for some reason, appeals to us and please our minds Philosophers have discussed aesthetics for centuries, from the ancient Greeks who saw aesthetics as purity and beauty, that which pleases the emotional side of a person. However, into the modern era thinkers began recognising pre-deemed culture as effecting sociology, the decided values and traditions built around us and our personal interpretations of those influence us and our taste. German philosopher Immanuel Kant recognised this and formulated in his Critique of Judgement a more inclusive approach to aesthetics, seeing that there exists both a personal taste as well as an objective beauty, which he specifies is empirically impossible to define.

This presumes that there is a cultural or societal consensus on taste, a lofty standard that all visual creations are to be judged by. Kant says this faux-consensus enables the judgement of taste, essentially a template which others are judged upon and that this base ‘good taste’, and that this base taste is actually good for aesthetics, as it gives us freedom to appreciate other aesthetic pursuits.

If good taste is less of a guideline for artistic elements and more of a base to judge art upon, then what is or makes bad taste? Bad taste is often conflated with vulgarity, a lack of sophistication and emphasis on the crass, or it is bombast, all style and no substance, or kitsch, a mass-produced item lacking artistic merit. Much like good taste, it is difficult to describe wholly as there exists no definite indicator of it, only examples. A quick example would be to compare a rustic cottage to a busy city street, the cottage is minimal, quaint, and elicits a feeling of comfort, it would be classed as good taste whereas the city street is overbearing, monolithic, and might feel dangerous, thus bad taste. However, this speaks only to aesthetics, the emotional aspects of each example are as equally important. While a cottage is secured it is also isolated and potentially boring, whereas a city street is less secure but rife with a humanistic presence and opportunity. Surface level they might seem either flawless or flawed entirely but when observing them removed from labels ‘good’ and ‘bad’ we can see each having negatives and positives. In that sense taste is just more dichotomising rhetoric, boiling down complex and multi-dimensional examples as being one or the other, good or bad.

There’s also an argument to be made on the intersection between class and taste. Historically, good taste has been decided by the ruling classes, those in power who are either rich or powerful enough to appreciate aesthetical status. For example, a field peasant is not concerned with the colour of their tunic as its strictly utilitarian, it keeps him warm, whereas a king who is able to afford bespoke clothing can consider its aesthetical importance. Eventually this became a way to separate oneself from the working classes, by focusing on aesthetical abundance it created a clear divide that both protected the ruling class as sophisticated and oppressed the working class as vulgar. While attitudes have shifted slightly more toward equality, elements of classist taste are still prevalent in society, for example we still appreciate colours for their ‘richness’ like royal purple and burgundy, colours which were reserved and used by those in power. It’s why we see opera as classy and sophisticated, an aspirational event of glamour, even though the average J. Doe would probably get little out of watching people sing in foreign languages for hours.

However, like I said, attitudes have shifted away from good taste as wealthy maximalism, which we now recognise as gawdy and shallow. The Palace of Versailles, home of the French monarchy, is famous for its baroque interiors laden with gold and mirrors but is not seen as desirable to the common person, instead it’s a relic of a bygone time, an example of the hubristic decadence of funny kings.

But perhaps the class effect on taste hasn’t dissipated but has simply shifted from bawdy maximalism to quiet minimalism. Designer homes show this, with their minimalist approach to exterior and interior, white walls, slender furniture, hidden storage, espoused as the environment of the intellectual and the reservedly powerful. It may be appreciated by many for its cool, pleasing design but how many in their lifetime will be able to afford a Kevin-McCloud-approved white countryside cube? Despite being a stylistic and theoretical response to baroque styles, minimalism is held with similar unreachable regard as its ostentatious counterpart.

Not everyone has adopted minimalism as the new ‘good taste’, as the garish design policy of the western aristocracy still lives on through small bubbles. Take for example the home décor of Russian celebrities laden with rich materials and animal prints, or the Dubai attitude of excess having people drive Lamborghinis with pet cheetahs in the side seat, or look at the Manhattan penthouse of the current US president shining with marble and gold. The gawdy still exists in the contemporary era. The reasoning for this is theorized as compensation for a past trauma or inadequacy. For example, the recent adoption of baroque styles by the Russian elite is maybe making up for the decades of the culturally deficient brutalist and sickeningly grey Soviet design. The excess of Emirate nobles is perhaps a statement response to western imperialism that effected their past, a supposedly deserved oil-funded ‘fuck you’ to the powers that were. And I’ll let you decide whatever Donald is compensating for.

This take on taste is quite interesting to me. For long I had thought of taste as a hidden order unconsciously decided and enforced by wider society, and that individual taste exists but only plays into and is ultimately trumped by the societal taste, but perhaps taste is less of a metre on which we measure things but more of an aspirational insecurity for which we try to atone for. Often I’ve looked at an artists work and thought ‘Wow that’s great… I wish I did that’, I feel like it’s par for the course of all artists, it can hearten us to resolve our work or just as easily depress us into a state of creative dearth. Our individual parameters of taste are a reflection of what we lack and aspire to be, it is a cathartic response to ourselves.

So then what does it mean to be anti-taste? The ‘anti-‘ implies rejection, but a rejection of what? Is it a rejection of society’s understanding of a standard good taste, so that individual taste is supreme to the individual? A Marxist denouncement of taste as aesthetical class oppression? Or is it a more personal dismantling of insecurity and a want to create without the constraint of doubt? If there’s one thing I’ve noted in my research it is that binary thinking is ultimately reductive, sorting, labelling, and pigeonholing such a vast term is equivalent to intellectual bondage and only serves to maintain the confusing aspects of the term.

I see anti-taste as an adoption of deliberately unseemly aesthetics, what would be bad taste, as simply that, a demonstration of perceived bad taste. By adopting the unaesthetically pleasing I attempt to demonstrate the key foundation of taste, that ultimately it is subjective opinion and subject to scrutiny. Hopefully my denouncement of taste is not mistaken for simply being in bad taste, but then again perhaps that’s what I want. I suppose it ties into my other themes of self-destruction as not many artists seek to make deliberately bad work, a representation of worse as better.

Egotist, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.

[moontowercomedyblog-blog]

Old Radio Comedy Classics

Free comedy appears to be the exception to the old adage, 'You get what you pay for'. The LA comedy scene is brimming with talented rise up comedians who are continually on the lookout for an viewers to carry out in front of. There could also be loads of humorous video clips of stand up comedy on-line, but nothing beats the experience of having fun with funny exhibits in individual.

When in search of free get up comedy in Los Angeles you'll often instances must keep away from the standard comedy clubs. It is powerful to search out free get up comedy on the main golf equipment like the Improv, the Laugh Factory or the Comedy Store. Arise comedians typically occasions produce and perform comedy exhibits in LA at bars, restaurants, theaters, backyards and different unlikely venues. Casey's Bar & Grill, Westwood Brewing Firm, Impartial Theater, Hollywood Studio Bar & Grill and three Clubs are all houses to Los Angeles comedians who perform free comedy there on a weekly basis. These venues supply free get up comedy and no drink minimum which makes for a cheap night time out. These non-traditional venues typically instances create an intimate atmosphere for the comedians to perform and interact with the audience.

Los Angeles' comedians quantity in the hundreds, and finding ones that make you chortle is vital to having fun with your free comedy expertise. Kyle Kinane is a arise comedian who's well known and nicely revered within the LA comedy scene for constantly delivering humorous shows. Kyle has opened up for Patton Oswalt all around the nation, he not too long ago launched a comedy cd out 'Death of the party' and you can typically find him at one of the many free comedy shows in LA. Whenever you consider Los Angeles comedy, Kyle Kinane is without doubt one of the names that you just first consider. Johnny Pemberton, one other rising star within the LA comedy scene, is unquestionably worth seeing live when he isn't hosting his MTV show MEGADRIVE.

Johnny Pemberton is among the Los Angeles comedians that is always performing, and there are plenty of probabilities to see him do some free get up comedy. Even established profitable stand up comedians like David Koechner, could be seen doing free comedy shows in LA. David Koechner typically appears in Will Ferrell films and is best known for his position as Champ Form in Anchorman. Watching comedy in Los Angeles means having an opportunity to look at David Koechner work on new characters at one of the many free stand up comedy exhibits in LA.

Not each free comedy show in LA is worth checking out. Basically you'd need to keep away from open mics, until you might be certain one in every of your favourite stand up comedians is performing. Open mics are an example of free stand up comedy, that often occasions disappoints due to among the much less experienced stand up comedians who are engaged on material. Westwood Brewing Firm has free rise up comedy on Tuesday nights, and the show features a few of the funniest comedians Los Angeles has to offer.

The Independent Theater downtown also has a Tuesday night time show that options some nationally identified get up comedians performing free arise comedy in the distinctive setting of a movie show. Monday evening is known for football, and within the LA comedy scene it's also the same night time the popular free comedy present 'Tiger Lilly' may be seen at the Hollywood Studio Bar & Grill. A present that is the epitome Moontower Comedy Festival of great free comedy, combined with a private enjoyable environment is 'The Comedy Storage'. Stand up comedians residing collectively as roommates starting internet hosting a month-to-month free comedy show in their storage in Burbank. Half home get together, half comedy club, 'The Comedy Storage' is a superb place to see free rise up comedy and meet a number of the coolest comedians Los Angeles has to offer.

Minneapolis Comedy Golf equipment are an ideal option for social outings, whether or not it's a group of individuals or a pair's night out. This text may be especially useful for those that like a number of good laughs as a type of leisure, and have an appreciation for the enjoyable environment of a comedy membership. This article will delve into the comedy scene in Minneapolis and provide help to take away some ideas for the comedy choices that play a large role in the leisure and nightlife of Minneapolis. Many prime identify acts make their manner from the East coast to West Coast, and well-known comedians make frequent appearances at a few of the Minneapolis comedy golf equipment.

Minnesota comedy acts have additionally had an opportunity to perform at a comedy club in Bloomington, called the Joke Joint, the place comedy is finally taking off, after a 12 months of building the venue. Comedy acts perform three to 4 nights every week, and most exhibits don't exceed $15, which makes it an inexpensive evening out. A number of the local comedians, like Wayne Burfeind or Diane Ford have carried out among a long record of native Bloomington comics.

Humorist fans can also count on to see some Nationwide comedy acts make their way into the Bloomington, and the Twin Cities area. Totally free leisure in the Minneapolis/Twin cities area, there's free comedy offered at Acme Comedy Company, which is likely one of the finest Minneapolis comedy golf equipment. They offer a local mic night weekly, so you may attempt your hand at stand-up comedy, in case you think you have got a expertise for it. Acme Comedy Club has been also referred to as Sticks Restaurant by a number of the locals, however they are higher known for comedy than they're their food.

Minnesota comedy has grow to be a form of leisure that's in style with the 25-40 year outdated target market, and is making a comeback as that crowd has gotten burnt out with Karaoke nights and Texas Maintain'em video games, as a type of leisure. Within the hectic and worrying on a regular basis grind, comedy golf equipment generally is a refreshing supply of leisure that can make you're feeling higher and permit you to have a good time with buddies. Jokes that make enjoyable of everyday life are popular humorist materials that many of the viewers can relate to and take a humorous view of.

Comedy Sports Twin Cities is one of Minneapolis comedy golf equipment that have a funny, clean improvised and completely interactive comedy present that is suited to the entire household. This Minnesota comedy experience is the place two groups of actors compete for the most important laughs and a referee calls fouls and takes the viewers's recommendations. Their slogan is "Enjoyable enough for a bachelor party and clean enough on your Grandma". They offer shows on Thursday and Friday nights at eight:00pm, and offer two exhibits on Saturday night time at eight:00pm and 10:30 pm, with scholar discounts with a sound pupil I.D.

Comedy would not simply are available stand-up comedian shows. There are musical comedies and theatrical comedy experiences that include Vaudeville acts and dinner theater shows. The Courageous New Workshop is internet hosting several shows every week, and this week's occasion is "Find out how to Make Love Like A Minnesotan II: Love Is In Bloomington". This is one of the Minneapolis comedy clubs that have theatrical offerings, however other Minnesota comedy venues may include the Plymouth Playhouse in Plymouth, Minnesota or the Fitzgerald Theater in St. Paul, the place they've a variety of shows that usually include comedy, for instance.

Comedy is making a comeback as a well-liked form of entertainment, and the Twin Cities space boasts the 2nd largest number of theaters within the United States. That leaves lots of venues for different acts, and there are many local skills that moonlight as stand-up comedians. It doesn't matter what time of year, there are comedy exhibits going on someplace in Minnesota, though almost certainly on weekends.

This article has highlighted among the extra established venues and data might be discovered readily on the Web. We hope that you have discovered about some new comedy entertainment selections and piqued your curiosity into studying more about how comedy fits into the nightlife of the Twin Cities area. You'll want to go to one of many Minneapolis comedy clubs we've got mentioned, or any of the other Minnesota venues that are near your area to enjoy a break from everyday life or possibly simply get fun or two out of it.

There has been humor in the United States for as long as it has been a country. In any case, life was robust and laughing was one essential method to cope and survive. Nevertheless, standup comedy as an art type took a while to evolve and catch on. The history is rich and entire books have been written on the subject. This article will function a really annotated model in order that the reader can use it for a "jumping off place" to review more deeply these parts which might be of interest.

One of many first forms of organized standup comedy within the United States was the minstrel show that came on the scene within the early 1800s. It was generally referred to as "black face comedy". Although appalling by 21st century requirements, this brand of comedy was extensively common when it started. The all white casts would paint their faces black and start utilizing the the stereotypical mannerisms of the blacks for his or her material. It has at all times been said that comedy reflects the times. And like it or not, this was the state of the country within the 1800s. The minstrel show remained well-liked through to the mid nineteenth century and started to free favor because the United States views on racism and slavery began to vary.

Because the minstrel show's reputation waned, vaudeville began to be a popular form or standup or pre-standup comedy. Along with comedy, vaudeville acts included dancers, magicians and actors. Some shows even included clown-like acts. Just some of the primary comedians of this model of comedy are - Fred DuPres, George Burns and Gracie Allen, Groucho Marx and the Marx Brothers and Ezera kendall. Vaudeville comedians relied much less on the spoken word for laughs and as an alternative used, props and bodily comedy. This is because they did not have microphones and as a substitute needed to rely on the bodily type of comedy.

Vaudeville though fashionable for a long time gave approach to comedic performances on the newly invented radio. This was the start of "comedy for the masses". However while this was excellent information for most people, it got here with a value for the performers. They could not depend on the physical side of their comedy, they now solely had their material and timing to get their audiences to laugh. Some comedians were capable of make the transition from Vaudeville to more of a spoken word sort of comedy. A few of the notable comedians that made this transition are: Jack Benney, Bob Hope, Milton Berle and George Burns.

The addition of the radio was not the one improvement that was groundbreaking for standup comedy. The microphone was additionally available for the comic to apply their craft. And again, the comedians from Vaudeville had to modify their reveals to more spoken phrase comedy than physical comedy.

Now, comedians had been capable of carry out standup comedy as we now realize it. It is at this level within the historical past that they modifications in standup comedy is more content material associated as an alternative of the physical means that it's carried out. Standup comedy all through the next decades was a mirrored image of the what events have been occurring at the time and likewise the morality and accepted subjects within the nation during those decades.

The decades of the Fifties and 1960s noticed the rise of comics comparable to Don Rickles, Johnny Carson and Phyllis Diller. As the nation started breaking down the walls of racism, several notable black comedians started to make audiences laugh. They had been Dick Gregory, Bill Cosby and Redd Foxx. As the racial bounds have been being pushed, the bounds of acceptable humor began to check the boundaries. Most notably, the comedy of Lenny Bruce set off what some say is the beginning of an something topic goes model of comedy. He pushed the envelope to this point that he was arrested several times for things that he mentioned on stage. It's at this level that comedians tried to push boundaries to see just how far they could go along with their comedy.

One other necessary development for standup comedy began in the Nineteen Fifties and Sixties - tv. With the advent of the television, comedians could have the perfect of both worlds: the physical kind of comedy found in Vaudeville and also the spoken word. This saw the development of selection reveals similar to The Tonight Show and the Ed Sullivan show on tv.

The Seventies had been big for standup comedians! That is after they turned superstars. They moved from being seen on television and in small comedy golf equipment to promoting out massive arenas. Comedians similar to George Carlin, Cheech and Chong and Richard Pryor thrived within the new settings. Along with their stay appearances, they made recordings of their exhibits and offered them (as LPs) to the public. And naturally the topics coated were always pushing the boundaries of what society would settle for. Because the sexual revolution and anything goes mentality became prevalent in society, the comedic subjects did also.

The Eighties, 1990s and 2000s primarily adopted the patterns within the previous a long time, extra exposure and pushing the envelops. There were nonetheless a number of notable developments from these decades. MTV and Comedy Central made comedy extra accessible to more people. Not solely have been the general public getting to see the massive title comics, they have been being exposed to up and coming comics through the new television networks. A recent phenomenon is a comedy based mostly reality present called "Last Comedian Standing". This show gives the tv viewers exposure to extra inexperienced comics that might one day make it to the large leagues.

[recentanimenews]

Invaders of the Rokujouma!?, Vols. 1-3

By Takehaya and Poco. Released in Japan as “Rokujouma no Shinryakusha!?” by Hobby Japan. Released in North America digitally by J-Novel Club. Translated by Warnis.

This series has an unusual history, at least in terms of translation. It’s 24+ volumes in Japan, so no one was seriously considering it as a possible license. Plus it had a fan translation already. But J-Novel Club reached out to the fan translator and made a deal, and so what we have here is that translation, newly edited for published release. It’s available for free on J-Novel’s site, or you can buy it on Amazon and the usual suspects as a normal light novel. As for why you’d want to? Well, do you like Strike the Blood? Do you enjoy its blinding obvious cliches but wish that it was less action oriented and more of a harem comedy? If so, then Rokujouma may be the series for you! It’s cliched as heck, but rarely actively irritating, and at times even can be heartwarming and amusing.

If you are wondering what Rokujouma means, well, I’m a little unclear on that myself, but the basic premise is that this young man, living alone as he starts high school, has found a dirt-cheap apartment. It’s dirt-cheap because, as the landlady tells him, it’s haunted and everyone’s been driven out of it. This does not bother our hero, though, as he’s a deep sleeper. After an accident he gets into while at work (which is, somewhat frustratingly, never followed up on in any of the three books), he comes home and finds he can now see the ghost, a cute young girl trying to get him out as this is HER apartment. And then suddenly we get a self-proclaimed magical girl, a member of an underground tribe, and an alien princess and her retainer, all of whom have designs on the room for their own reasons. And it’s not even a big apartment! Hijinx, as they say, ensue.

The author notes in the afterword of Volume 1 that this is only his second book, and his first series. It shows a bit – the flaws in this series are the sort you see in a new writer’s work, with some stuff explained too much, some not explained enough, and the occasional reliance on stereotypes to take the place of characterization, though that improves as the series goes on. The first book is the weakest, since it has to introduce the cast all at once and can’t really do much else. Stronger was the second book, which involves a school athletic festival and is filled with lots of opportunities for wacky comedy – the anime version of this is likely quite amusing. The best reason to read the series is Yurika, the magical girl who absolutely no one believes. I suspect the author was watching Haruhi Suzumiya when he wrote her, as she’s basically Mikuru, but the sheer amount of abuse and contempt heaped upon her by our hero, the other girls, and even the narration is so overblown it becomes hilarious.

This is absolutely a standard harem comedy, and doesn’t really do much of anything to set itself up above the pack so far. That said, it also doesn’t really do too much to really make it horrible, either. The ghost girl gets a lot of character development in the third book, and I suspect future books will do the same for the others. If you like this genre, and haven’t already read the series online, Rokujouma is worth checking out.

By: Sean Gaffney