Tynan's Anger

In the new decade, I am looking to overcome masking my cynicism and resentment in jokes and contrarianism, and starting to apply my need to stay with the news of the world while not getting aggravated. Contrary to popular assumptions, the depressing state of news doesn't make me so exhausted that I have to lie down; it normally gets me riled up to go marching on the streets for some cause that doesn't really exist. Suffice to say, the nightly ritual of Daily Show/Colbert, the nightly wind-down activity for so many people of my generation and mindset, hasn't worked for me.

Nonetheless, I need that kind of daily summary of the news with the same kind of fothrightness mostly lost in authoritative sources, but less on the cheap stuff and scatalogical. The Rachel Maddow show isn't perfect, but as far as nightly rituals goes, it's probably the best way to wean myself off my nightly irony fix.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Jon Stewart: A Decade in Review [Retrospective] (gawker.com)
• A Cheat Sheet for Keeping Resolutions (wsj.com)

Labels: colbert report, daily show, humor, irony, new years resolutions, politics, Rachel Maddow, tv

A sarcasm detector, that's a real useful invention!

Is this article being sarcastic?:Brilliant: Advertisers Pay To Drive Traffic From One Place On Facebook To Another Place On Facebook

I've read it several times, and still I cannot fully tell if it's legitimately saying that Facebook is making a brilliant move, insulting a Facebook sales rep for her ploy to boost Facebook traffic, or a cynical combination of both. Either way, the post does give me the information I need to know: there is a growth in the market of social media advertising, and Facebook is now offering Facebook fan pages advertising in other Facebook platforms. I am still unsure of whether Michael Arrington likes that or not, or whether he is resigned to it.

With my knowledge of social media and affinity for subtle humor, it's problematic that it took me so long to get a sense of the post's tone. If Arrington were to read this aloud in a sarcastic tone, I would know what his take on the issue was. If he were to read it aloud with a sincere tone, I would also know his take. But even with the strong, slanted language generally used on TechCrunch, I have a lot of difficulty determining the way in which this post is being sarcastic. Imagine what more casual readers would assume.

TechCrunch's information is way too valuable to ignore, and the site's more blogger-centric tone doesn't diminish that fact. What is more frustrating to me is that this kind of tone really doesn't work as well in a written blog post. If it's happening at one of the premiere tech blogs/websites/journalistic source, imagine how confusing a sarcastic tone would be on lesser sites and online conversations.
I've seen this confusion constantly online, and usually attempts at sarcasm online produce only produce more confusion and noise. If it breaks down into obscene jokes and spurious use of capitalization, you can tell it's joking. If it's a blog that has a predetermined humorous tone, you can tell it's joking. But with a site like TechCrunch, I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to tow the line between valuable information and subtle sarcasm.

Labels: humor, sarcasm, techcrunch, tone

Sarah Silverman's Great Schlep video was the darling of press over the high holidays. It was new media savvy, it featured one of the most recognizable celebrities of the last decade, and it make a point on how crucial the Florida Jewish vote may be in swinging this election. Problem is, it's increasingly looking like less of a contest in the Sunshine State. The supposed Hillary-supporting old Florida Jews are now nearly universally voting for Obama (thank you Sarah Palin). The biggest issue, pointed out by Adam Hanft at the brand spanking new Daily Beast, is that Silverman has created the assumption that old Jews in Florida are right wing bigots, blind to Obama's support of Israel and progressive record. These Jews are ignorant of Jews' history at the helm of the Civil Rights movement, never mind that they were of the generation that voted for JFK and marched for civil rights.

I'm not sure if Hanft was right to put the blame solely on Sarah Silverman. But he does speak to a popular misconception that exists among most Jews. Most large Jewish families have at least one relative who will be voting for McCain because they don't trust Obama on Israel (for the record, my extended family is either Canadian or intermarried, so it doesn't plague me as much). Those are the relatives that infuriate us, the ones we will argue with until our faces turn blue. These are the mythical "bubbes and zaydies" Silverman speaks of. What we tend to ignore, however, is that for every relative voting for McCain because of Israel, there are 9 to 10 other relatives voting for Obama who have the record straight.

What troubles me more about Hanft's article, which is a point that touches on something very true and very dangerous, is the way Jewish humor has changed. Previous generations of Jewish comedians used the ridiculousness of Jewish life as a method of examining the funnier side of life in general. They were respectful of the conventions as a part of their identities, even as they realize how ridiculous Judaism could be. Conversely, Silverman and contemporary Jewish comedians use it for cheap laughs and ironic statements. For the new Jewish comedians, it's an empty vehicle for comedy, as opposed to a branded part of their identities. In addition to Silverman, I've seen this problem in Judd Apatow, Seth Rogan, Jon Stewart (née Leibowitz) and Lewis Black. Last year, I saw Black perform on erev Yom Kippur, where he proceed to repeat his famous routine about how crappy Hannukah is. This year on Yom Kippur, Silverman shot a clip with Katie Couric. During Rosh Hashanah, John Stewart angered many Jews by insulting congressman delaying the economic bailout bill due to the holiday. How far will this trend go?

To be fair, Knocked Up had a scene where a character defended the muscular Judaism in Munich; perhaps the comedians that Hanft and I are criticizing think more seriously about Judaism than they let on. I should note that I generally find these comedians hilarious, and am a huge fan of Sarah Silverman. But if they do think about Judaism in a manner more than as a vehicle for comedy, I'd like them to show it a little more.

Labels: daily beast, humor, israel, jews, jon stewart, judd apatow, lewis black, politics, sarah silverman, seth rogan

Self-referential humor writing, making fun of McSweeney's and the plights of freelancing, and somehow working in a Yankees angle? It's like someone at The Onion has a John Malkovitch-style portal to my brain.

Labels: humor, mcsweeneys, meta, mike mussina, the onion, yankees

So this is pretty much the funniest thing Ive seen all day. An article fro August imagining Ingmar Bergman and Michelangelo Antonioni meeting in Purgatory. Kudos to my friend iend Anya over at for sending me the link.

Labels: humor, ingmar bergman, michelangelo antoniono, the death of american political theater