Satire

Victor

Maybe I'm out of line here, but there seems to be a crackdown on satire in 'Politics' / 'Humanities'. Satire isn't 'Humour', it is more serious, more fundamental than that. It can't exist independantly of the items it is satirising and must be part of these boards. While 'The Slate' isn't a serious piece, there is the risk of boards doing some book-burning.

DadaKopf

I agree, Victor, but that tension's always been there. Sometimes, it's difficult enough to separate satire from stupidity in real life and on television but on these boards, it's even harder. Just how do you tell whether someone's taking the piss or is making a real point, albeit a side-swipe?

The Slate is one such example. It was a serious thread about a satirical magazine [which, personally, I don't think should have been closed] but what about the times it's the other way around? Serious topic, silly thread? Often times, they're just as poignant.

We should definitely open up a discussion about this whole thing.

Ri-ra

I don't think that *everyone* involved in the Boards site is unable to appreciate satire, but there have been times when it has been missed. I think a case in point might be the Onion link that was posted and then deleted in a discussion on guns. Pastiche seems alive and well, though...

gandalf

Well The Slate one was closed because he was asking people to go in and disrupt a University. If that was traced back here and if someone was hurt, well you know where I'm going. I never went to UCD so I obviously do not know the meaning of The Slate to those of you that did.

If he wants to come on here and post a serious thread explaining what the grivences are then cool, as long as he (or she) doesn't ask people to go into UCD and blow stuff up and doesn't libel any1 by name.

As for editing out the Onion article I felt it wasn't adding anything to the arguement in that thread and I felt at the Victor was doing nothing more that adding to his post count because he wasn't expressing his opinion (You did post to a hell of a lot of boards at the same time Victor). A bit harse maybe but there you go.

Gandalf.

Victor

OK, the slate is 'like' a 'teen / twenties' (not necessarily 'college') version of 'The Phoenix', with the Business / Politics emphasis moved to Entertainment, Humour and other non-serious matters. I have only seen it in the internet cafes around town. www.theslate.ie is 'under construction' so I can't provide any links.

Of the couple of copies I've seen, there was only one reference to UCD that I saw (girl offers a bj in the college bar to anyone who will give her a Fresher's Ball ticket). I don't know if this has anything to do with the dispute with the UCD authorities or not. However, I do know that various parts of UCD are prone to banning things (including all Nestle products at one time).

When I read the rant that Von copied, it did not take it as a serious (or any) attempt to foment violence. In fact, if there was any reason to reprimand, it should be on the grounds of boards.ie's advertising ban. "Boards.ie bans custard-pie throwing" the headlines will read.

In the week that Channel 6 (the last independent TV national station) was shut down in Russia, I find it difficult to understand boards mods taking a stand against satire. And lets face it a bit of satire is a lot better than "The USA is Evil" type-content which seems to occupy too many threads. Blatant insults and trolling are acceptable, but satire isn't.

---

Regarding the 'theonion' piece, at the time I thought it was a perfectly valid piece and did not necessarily need further elaboration, as I agreed with both it' superficial and satirical content. I still do. It demonstrated the uneasy balance between the politics, morality, sociology, science and 'boys with their toys' aspects of the gun debate.

---

Perhaps politics and humanities need to move away from the stolid model of secondary school debating and show a little colour.

---

As regards the number of times I post, I didn't realise there was any absolute or time-based limits. Yes, I probably post too much. I spend too much time on boards, some of the stuff is serious, some of it isn't. I spend too much time on the internet. I spend too much money in DNC - in the last few weeks I have probably paid most of the wages of a staff member. So I'm a sad git who was forced out of work on mental health grounds. Maybe I'm so sad that I communicate to my flat mate on boards. So I come from a cynical, bitter, conniving, angry background where a bit of humour is one of the few things that can brighten up my life.

It may not be my 'right' to post here, but no one has told me that 'privilege' has been revoked.

DadaKopf

About the Slate thing:
Don't worry. I think the locking of it was a little premature but nevermind; I've set out the facts here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=359080#post359080.

Overall, though, I think the standard of argumentation has gone downhill, down in quality. I think a lot of it has to do with the amount of people now using the boards but also the amount of frivolous posts being made (but some of these are good biting satirical comments).

I've noticed that the longest threads aren't due to thrilling, engaging topics and focused arguments but by people who go completely off topic. Victor, you mentioned the need for some people to get out of their Leaving Cert mode of argumentation. Well, in part I agree but at least the LC taught people how to stay on topic!

Perhaps moderators in Humanities and Politics could attempt to steer threads back to the topic when needed? At least in the more serious threads. Do you think this is an option?

Certainly, in a practical sense about the satire aspect, moderators should cut out the frivolousness but endeavour to always be open to renaging on their action if whoever did it puts forward a fair argument to keep it.

Von

Ahhh....Such irreconcilable enemies are overweight, corpse eyed, swivelly chair squares to the outlandish concepts of irony, satire and humour.

Originally posted by Victor
OK, the slate is 'like' a 'teen / twenties' (not necessarily 'college') version of 'The Phoenix', with the Business / Politics emphasis moved to Entertainment, Humour and other non-serious matters.

As Ben Kingsley playing psychotic slaphead Don Logan in criminally underrated brit gangsta movie Sexy Beast put it:

“NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.....NO!!!!”

Holding the celebrity worshipping culture, indefensibly pretentious sh*te like Objecthaus and accepted notions of journalistic acceptability up to ridicule IS a serious business and a political, not to mention potentially highly litigious, act.

And no-one else is doing it.

The Phoenix has about two readable pages. The Dublin Event Guide is an awful turgid chore churned out by dole sponging scenesters. The Dubliner is a yuppie tosswad. Hot Press is a hypocritical rag run by sad old 50 year olds which whinges on and on about every right on issue in the world and then sticks Esso sponsored cd’s on its front cover. In Dublin got good under Declan Lawn’s editorship but when he left for Magill, Mike “tightfist” Hogan got rid of its best writers to save money. Result? It’s unbuyable again. I won’t even mention trendy rubbish like Sixmag or the inexplicable “for the south dublin area” yoke called Suburb or something.

It is surely an intriguing insight into the computer game and cyberporn addled mind of the hopeless lard-assed nerd that inciting people to go make nuisances of themselves outside foreign consulates at the behest of militant peace activist groups like Sinn Fein is tolerated and in fact encouraged, but an announcement that people are needed to have some fun distributing a free listings magazine is deemed unacceptable.

In increasingly oppressive times like these - when all avenues of the arts, culture and media ‘industry’ are clogged with dumb dumb dumbed down bottom-feeder plop plop, (Louis Walsh products, christian rock combo U2, The Cassidys, Gerry Ryan, Joe O’Connor books, racist fascist propaganda like Black Hawk Down et bloody cetera), and when the twin spectres of religious fundamentalist global terrorism and Preznit Dubya’s evil corporate buddies’ plan for world domination hover spookily over our heads like the Sword of Damocles – we should welcome that at least one tiny booze fuelled beacon of hope exists to illuminate some sad grey wind lashed, rain soaked little lives for a few fleeting moments and maybe... just...maybe serve to signify a paradigm shift in Irish youth’s attitudes towards provocative creativity and thoughts about the nature of our mediated environment.

Conflict, insolence and ridicule (NOT sterility, boredom or unconditional obedience) are among the essences of progress.

The Slate is an example of Irish youth engaging in a productive activity which challenges the stultifyingly dull conventions of Irish media in ways some people cannot be expected to understand, never mind have the talent, wit or daring to attempt for themselves. I would compare it in some ways to Blather, the magazine produced in the 1930’s by Brian O’Nolan aka Myles na gCopaleen aka Flann O’Brien, who the less illiterate will recognize as being Ireland’s greatest ever comic writer. The Slate’s swagger and irreverence is reflective of Blather’s manifesto.

*Blather* is here. As we advance to make our bow, you will look in vain for signs of servility or of any evidence of a desire to please. We are an arrogant and depraved body of men. We are as proud as bantams and as vain as peacocks.

"Blather doesn't care."

A sardonic laugh escapes us as we bow, cruel and cynical hounds that we are. It is a terrible laugh, the laugh of lost men. Do you get the smell of porter?

*Blather* is not to be confused with Ireland's National Newspaper, still less with Ireland's Greatest Newspaper.

*Blather* is not an organ of Independent opinion, nor is Ireland more to us than a Republic, Kingdom or Commonwealth.

*Blather* is a publication of the Gutter, the King Rat of the Irish Press, the paper that will achieve entirely new levels in everything that is contemptible, despicable, and unspeakable in contemporary journalism.

In regard to politics, all our rat-like cunning will be directed towards making Ireland fit for the depraved readers of *Blather* to live in...

We have probably said enough, perhaps too much. Anyhow, you have got a rough idea of the desperate class of men you are up against. Maybe you don't like us? A lot we care what you think.

Figures as disparate as writers from The Day Today and a very senior Fianna Fail person (not Liam Lawlor mind) have intimated to me that The Slate is top quality stuff “because it attacks the right people”. The only people who seem to disagree with this analysis are humourless scrotal sacs such as Gavin Lambe-Murphy, Keet Duffy, Stereophonics fans and of course pug ugly virgin nerds who take themselves, their bloody computers and their bloody boring “push icons round desktop for half of day” economy driving non-jobs, far too seriously.

bonkey

Originally posted by DadaKopf
The Slate is one such example. It was a serious thread about a satirical magazine [which, personally, I don't think should have been closed] but what about the times it's the other way around? Serious topic, silly thread? Often times, they're just as poignant.

The Slate piece was closed by Gandalf - a move I support having read his reasons.

If that piece was (as you say) serious, then it deserved to be closed, because it is little more than an anti-establishment incitement to riot, with no factual background offered.

If, on the other hand, its meant to be taken as a joke, then it has no political content and therefore is irrelevant to the forum.

We should definitely open up a discussion about this whole thing.

Absolutely.

Here's my thoughts on the subject.

Satire and humour have as much a place here as anywhere else, with one proviso.

This is supposed to be a discussion forum. Posting a URL/image or quoting an article is pretty much worthless if you dont offer any personal opinion yourself. I cant remember the last time I saw a satirical piece referenced with anything more than "says it all" added to it.

If it says it all, then there's not much to discuss is there

Put a slightly different way - if you want to post satire or humour, feel free. If its devoid of personal content, then its more than likely going to get killed as inappropriate. Course, that happens to stuff which isnt humourous or satirical as well, so its not like we're just picking on the funny posts.


As for :

Overall, though, I think the standard of argumentation has gone downhill, down in quality.

I see the problem slightly differently. I think the problem is that people view these threads as arguments or debates, and not as discussions. There's a massive difference : Discussions are never won or lost, arguments and debates are only about winning or losing.

Anyone posting here who sees the politics threads as being about winning and losing way should honestly leave now. We'll all be better off without you.

Discussions are about exchanging points of view, and correcting errors in the other people's stances. It is not about beating them over the head repeatedly with words until they cave in and give up, or insulting them to distract from the point in hand.

Its not about jumping to conclusions, or completely dismissing something out of hand because its posted by a "leftie" or a "tree hugger". I've lost track of the number of threads which get derailed by someone comign in and basically levelling accusations the like of "communist corporate-hater" or "lefty US-hater" without even having researched anything on the subject, but assuming that the lefties/commies must be wrong, and that the line you want to believe in must be right. If you're not going to try and become informed on an issue, then please dont try to bring those who are down to your level of ignorance.

I've learned a lot from my time on these fora. I've broken my own rules more times than I can count, but I've also stopped so many times and deleted that 2-page rant I was writing, because it was nothing more than an attempt to score points in some way.

So - how about we all try and sit back and use our brains a little more? Lets remember we're here to discuss, not to browbeat. And we're here to comment, not to serve as a message-forwarding service.

Just my 2c

jc

mike65

On a wider point, has true politcial satire ever prospered in Ireland, apart from the odd flourish I think not, Halls
Pictorial Weekly and The Pheonix are not excatly at the summit
of the genre, though I did like HPW quite alot at the time,
RTE should repeat it as social history!

Mike.

Victor

'Scratch Saturday' was good and 'Father Ted' changed the country entirely in the space of 3 years.

And 'The Slate' is viscious.

DadaKopf

Bonkey:

I'm in agreement with you there alright. When I said 'argumentation', I wasn't implying that it's about winning and losing - that's just about egos. What I was actually inferring was a climate in Humanities/Politics that allows people to take positions and discuss a particular topic. What I don't want to happen is for any policy (or for people to think they're obliged) to enter into the whole "well, let's just say you're both right" stance. That's not a productive attitude.

What people should do is to draw a distinction between egos and discussion. Egos should be left at the door but differing styles of argumentation should, of course, be encouraged.

Arguments are always about being right and wrong, and discussions/debates if you make such a distinction. However, I would expect people to be open to others' points of view and willing to explore them, in spite of their own convictions. One thing that has to stop are these broad generalisations and prejudiced, dismissive comments you mention ("communist corporate-hater" or "right-wing fascist") have to stop.

mike65

Originally posted by Victor
'Scratch Saturday' was good and 'Father Ted' changed the country entirely in the space of 3 years.

And 'The Slate' is viscious.

er Scrap Saturday methinks! True I forgot that one, ah the
Madeline Taylor-Quinn controversy, Limerick and its phone box, those were the days.

Mike.

Gerry

Originally posted by Victor
'Scratch Saturday' was good and 'Father Ted' changed the country entirely in the space of 3 years.

And 'The Slate' is viscious.

Eh, if you reckon it was called Scratch Saturday, you don't remember it very well, do you?

I've only read the slate once or twice, but what I did see was excellent. I'd advise Von to post a new thread asking for peoples support, without the points that Gandalf disagreed with.

Victor

Sample of the front page of "The Slate"

joey D

von: you couldn't have put it better. O'Nolan was the king of them all. The Slate is great. I was at the UCD 'protest' and it was a laugh; we just ran around looking like idiots handing copies of the mag to bemused students and academics.
hurray for satire, down with crackdowns or whatever.

Twomey

- Was this meant to be satirical? militant peace activist groups like Sinn Fein
Well it made me laugh anyway.

I am surprised no one has mentioned it, but The Portadown News is a weekly pisstake on northern politics. It made its claim to fame when the Andersonstown News tried to shut it down by outing the previously anonymous PDN editor in print and giving his (at the time) West Belfast boss a log of his internet activity, which resulted in the PDN editor losing his job (3 days before Christmas, too!). Now he is a regular contributor to BBC Radio Ulster's Talkback and the Sunday People contracted him to pisstake every week. Every cloud has a silver lining, yada yada yada. Some of you may like it.

shotamoose

Yeah the Portadown News is great alright. A guy I know wrote to the editor of the Andersonstown News asking why he tried to get the PN editor sacked, and he replied that it was because there were threats against his family on the site. I looked this up, and discovered one thread on the PN discussion board asking where this guy lived and what schools his children went to. This was immediately and clearly condemned by the PN editor and everyone else. So that was pretty much a lie.

Didn't know he'd been picked up by the BBC and Sunday People. Good news indeed.

swiss

Soz Twomey, that link doesn't work for me at least (

Anyway, I love satire. One of the reasons why I like it so much is because it manages to dispell so many allusions to political correctness to which much of society aspires. The cover of the slate is an excellent case in point. If I saw a restaruant with that notice, I would immediately figure out that it's a joke, and have a good laugh about it, rather like an old work notice I saw in a pub

The beatings will continue until employee morale improves!

This makes me, at least, think of the kind of "morale boosting" endeavours many organisations undertake which often have the effect opposite to that intended. While I do agree that some satirical items do pass the borders of taste, which are to some almost indecipherable (and it is the moderators discretion in this forum at least to decide what constitutes satire and what does not) I would say that satire should provoke thought and rational discussion about an issue in a humorous way. If it does not, then for me that defeats the purpose of satire. If a piece is billed as satirical but is instead offensive to reasonable opinion, then it is not satirical, it is offensive.

I can only remember seeing a few sketches of 'Halls pictorial weekly' (reruns of them) during the 80's and 90's, but from what I saw I thought it was brilliant. A cabinet 'Minister for Hardship' rang all too true for the era, and I believe was a means of waking the country up to it's piteous condition whilst maintaining a good natured humor.

Clintons Cat

Satire is probally more appropriate in humanities than politics.
The politics forum is for Discussion,if the satire embargo is lifted threads will degenarate into long streams of cartoons and counter cartoons looking for ownage.
Also i remember a thread from the slate where people were quoting the Articles basic assumption (that people were working on gratuities only) to justify their position without checking wether this was indead the case.Intresting from a purely observational point of veiw but not really helpful for genuine political discussion.
Satire is more about media manipulation and suverting psycological expectations.I Propose Satire belongs in Humanities.In humanities Satire can be disected,and broken down into its composite parts so there can be greater analysis of what the creator was attempting to achieve and the tools he selected.In other words made unfunny.

Victor

Originally posted by swiss
Soz Twomey, that link doesn't work for me at least (

The correct link is http://www.portadownnews.com/

The Slate also includes a 50% discount voucher for a certain brand of petrol.