Slate's Bizbox
the chat room: Real-time discussions with Slate writers.

Wit's EndTroy Patterson takes readers' questions about the unfunny state of political comedy.


Posted Thursday, April 10, 2008, at 3:21 PM ET

Slate television critic Troy Patterson was online at Washingtonpost.com on March 10 to chat about the state of satire and political comedy on television. An unedited transcript of the chat follows.

Troy Patterson: I'm Troy Patterson, the television critic at Slate, and I'm pleased as punch that the Post has invited me discuss "The Satire Recession," my recent piece about political comedy. The article concerns late-night TV in general and Saturday Night Live in particular, and it is heavily indebted to a new book titled Strange Bedfellows: How Late-Night Comedy Turns Democracy Into a Joke. The book, written by an American Studies professor named Russell L. Peterson and published by Rutgers University Press, is excellent—essential reading, I believe, for everyone who takes funny business seriously.

_______________________

Chicago: I have to agree that the state of political satire in the county is anything but strong, with, as you say, the startling exceptions of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Listening to the Capitol Steps radio special last week, I found it mildly clever but kept thinking, why should I spend time on this when The Daily Show and Colbert Report and both funnier and much, much smarter on a daily basis? As you indicate, what makes those shows work is that they talk about issues and spend a lot of time talking about what political leaders say, instead of the manner in which they say it.

Troy Patterson: Hi, Chicago. You make an excellent point about Stewart and Colbert. I'd add that it's important to realize that those shows are able to indulge in genuine political satire—as opposed to topical jokes about political personalities—because they air on Comedy Central. Appealing to a niche market of about one million households a night, they're able to present sharp and substantive material. In contrast, Jay Leno, David Letterman, and SNL are trying to reach four or six or eight million people, and that necessitates making a lot of jokes that merely say, "John McCain is old," or "Bill Clinton likes the ladies."

_______________________

Houghton, Mich.: Hello Mr. Patterson. As Tommy Smothers likely would ask: Does the TV industry avoid witty, biting, satire because such content could scare advertisers desperately courting the couch-dwelling middle-class (who readily laugh at the "she's such a shrew" or "he's so dumb" jokes that are older than Bob Hope's crib)? I mean, let's face it, ultimately Lorne Michaels is just another vendor in GE's supply chain, right?

Troy Patterson: Hello, Houghton! The answers, as I hint at above, are yes and yes. As the great playwright George S. Kaufman once said, "Satire is what closes on Saturday night." If that's true, then it follows that SNL is, to use Peterson's term, pseudo-satire: "Satire nourishes our democracy, while the other stuff...is like fast food: popular, readily available, cheap; tasty in its way, but ultimately unhealthy."

_______________________

Washington: Troy, One small quibble with your article, which was fantastic overall. You draw a distinction in the response to John Kerry's botched joke, with Conan O'Brien engaged in "pseudo-satire," while Jon Stewart is engaged in "real satire," but I personally find that Stewart is among the worst practitioners of "pseudo-satire" and "personality jokes"—witness his sniveling laughing Bush imitation, the repeated "Dick Cheney is evil" trope, the "Indecision" election coverage, etc.

I think Stewart should take a lot more blame than he does—both from you and other critics—in terms of shirking comedy's watchdog role. "The Daily Show" is at its best when it fulfills that role, such as when it finds year-old clips of politicians contradicting what they said yesterday, or points out the ridiculousness of Alberto Gonzalez's testimony with a "cannot recall" counter. All too often, though, it just devolves into Stewart pulling his shtick, and contributes little comedy of any depth. Your thoughts?

Troy Patterson: Good point. I might have taken care to mention that Stewart is less consistently satirical than Colbert. For instance, in addition to his more pointed line about Kerry's botched joke, he also did a pseudo-satirical bit imagining a Jeff Foxworthy-type CD titled The Botched Comedy Styling of John Kerry: "Under certain conditions, you might be a redneck. Unfortunately, I can't think of any at the moment." I happen to think that line is kinda funny, but I agree that it's pretty shallow.

_______________________

Philadelphia: What do you think might have happened had Stephen Colbert seriously entered a presidential primary? Even if he meant it as a stunt, I remember thinking it actually could have had an impact, as any serious candidate who received fewer votes than him could have been politically hurt by his running.

Troy Patterson: Well, he was only seeking to appear on the ballot in South Carolina, so I don't think it would have had any real impact. On the other hand, it would have another dagger in the reputation of the 107th mayor of the City of New York had Colbert drawn more votes than Rudy Giuliani.

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: Are you familiar with Morris Udall, the joke-telling presidential candidate in 1976? If so, how do you think Udall would have been in today's environment?

Troy Patterson: I'm only slightly familiar with Rep. Udall, but I do think there's some truth to the title of his autobiography—Too Funny To be President. That said, I'm sure he could have enjoyed a wonderful Huckabee-like tour of the talk shows. Amazing how powerful humor is: I find a number of Huckabee's positions morally offensive, but, after seeing him play air hockey with Colbert, I love him dearly.

_______________________

Virginia Beach, Va.: Do you have any thoughts on the possible misuse of the term "satire" in referring to modern comedic parodies? That is to say, it's my understanding that an important component of satire is that you are employing comedy to poke fun at something with the specific goal of "changing" the public's opinion, or pointing out some specific social ill, and by doing so you hope to evoke change. I guess I'm suggesting that to refer to Saturday Night Live's comedy as satire gives credit for a sophistication that does not exist.

Troy Patterson: You hit the nail on the head, Sweet Virginia, and you did so in a way that encourages me to keep shilling for Strange Bedfellows: "While he genuine satirist and the psuedo-satirist are both joking, only one of them is kidding. Real satire means it."

VIEW AS SINGLE PAGE
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Slate television critic Troy Patterson also writes the movies column for Spin and contributes to publications including the New York Times, Entertainment Weekly, and Men's Vogue.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES