The Satire Paradox
In the political turmoil of mid-1990s Britain, a brilliant
young comic named Harry Enfield set out to satirize the ideology and politics
of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. His parodies became famous. He wrote and
performed a vicious sendup of the typical Thatcherite nouveau riche buffoon. People
loved it. And what happened? Exactly the opposite of what Enfield hoped would
happen. In an age dominated by political comedy, “The Satire Paradox”asks whether laughter and social
protest are friends or foes.
To learn more about the topics covered in this episode, visit www.RevisionistHistory.com
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Harry Enfield was wrong about Loadsamoney making no difference; it made him into a rich man sneering at other rich people.
there is a big difference between humor and satire, which I think has been rather overlooked here.tina fey and her piece on Sarah Palin was hilarious and funny - and hardly satirical. good satire has a hard point it is trying to make - if that isn't evident, it is just humor. or that the examples of stellar satire fawned about in this podcast are actually absolutely terrible satire.
"Lord help us if an even more unqualified candidate comes along." Well, he did, and he won and spent 8 years eroding our country thanks to these same people, which is why their satire was meaningless. It's their hypocrisy that makes their satire meaningless.