Comments on: Glee: The Good, The Bad and The Funky

By: Amanda Ann Klein

Amanda Ann Klein — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:17:04 +0000

I think you make a great point here–part of Glee’s problem is that it tries to be so earnest one moment and then completely offensive the next. The tonal shifts just aren’t handled well.

By: Amanda Ann Klein

Amanda Ann Klein — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:15:10 +0000

Ugh, yes. That exchange between Mercedes and Quinn was uncomfortable to say the least.

By: Will

Will — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:17:53 +0000

I thought the scene that earnestly and unironically suggested a pregnant woman knew what it was like to be African American for nine months was at least as embarrassing to watch as the scene which suggested losing your voice was similar to being permanently paralysed.

By: Will

Will — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:27:33 +0000

Amanda, I wonder what you make of these jokes as part of a camp aesthetic? So much of the eclectic song choices throughout this and other episodes — the only song I expected *Glee* to bring back that it hasn’t yet is Charlene’s “Never Been to Me” — and so much of the Sylvester humor is really camp-saturated, it seems to me, yet so often, the camp elements fall flat, which suggests some interesting conflicts among writers, directors, and producers. I thought the “Jew joke” fell flat because it was supposed to. Sue’s the only racist who gets to be clever (and camp); the rest show how ridiculous such “jokes” are. Enjoyed your review …

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 06:52:47 +0000

I think the creators started out with something that was intended to be reverent, tongue-in-cheek, and (most of all) satirical. For added charm it was bathed in a well fermented bath or nostalgia and irony. They are simply not armed to tackle thought provoking discussion. They need to stick to the parameters of a soap opera.

By: Kelly Kessler

Kelly Kessler — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 18:25:09 +0000

Nice post. Sorry to join in so late. I think some excellent points are being raised re: the type of humor commonly used in the show (perhaps post-PC, as Amanda said). I’m not sure I have anything incredibly insightful or new to say about that, but today’s brand of television comedy (or dramedy) does either ask us to (or beg us not to) further consider this issue. Does it matter what the show is? Can you get away with something on South Park or 30 Rock (which are both SO tongue in cheek from the get go)? Is it harder for the audience to accept something similar on a show that is at times seemingly so genuine (e.g. Glee)? When do our twinges of discomfort rise in these moments? As this form of humor becomes more prevalent on TV, are writers testing the waters to figure out when they can get away with it and when it’s just icky? Are we in the middle of a creepy process of trial and error? After all, it’s much weirder to have such comedy next to a serious as a heart attack subplot about a paralyzed teen than it is in South Park.

By: Amanda Ann Klein

Amanda Ann Klein — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:00:32 +0000

I should also add that I think the funniest jokes about race, sex, religion, etc. are those that do offer a critique of structures of power.

By: Amanda Ann Klein

Amanda Ann Klein — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:58:56 +0000

These are all such good questions because I find it really difficult to be critical of humor. I do think it is possible for humor to be politically incorrect and also critical at the same time–Chappelle’s Show was a great example of that–the black white supremacist, the racial draft, etc. Although Chappelle himself later questioned whether the laughter his jokes were receiving were the “right” kind of laughter and abandoned his show and lucrative contract. My feeling–and I know many people will disagree with me on this–is that you can get away with a lot if your material is funny. As a Jew I was not offended by the “Jew joke” in this most recent episode of Glee–I was more annoyed that it was such an unfunny joke. If you’re going to offend people, at least make them laugh.

By: Amanda Ann Klein

Amanda Ann Klein — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:51:35 +0000

I wish I had been reading those tweets! Because yes, I do think the song was a poor choice for Dianna Agron, whose voice is not big enough to tackle James Brown. But, the song itself works so well for Quinn and her dilemma–she has become a social outcast, lost her spot on the Cheerios (not to mention her teenage figure), and will have to go through the pain of childbirth–while Puck endures none of this. It’s a man’s world. And I actually liked the panting pregnant teens-bizarre as they were. They’re practicing their Lamaze breathing alone, rather than with a partner, which is often the plight of the pregnant teen. Plus, Quinn had such anguish in her face while she sang (even if her voice couldn’t quite convey the true “funk” of the number).

By: Amanda Lotz

Amanda Lotz — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:48:53 +0000

Thanks for so specifically anchoring your critique of the racist, heterosexist jokes–I think you are right on about the politics of this one not at all working and why. A few Glee posts back, Kelly Kessler noted Puck’s reference to Mercedes as “Weezie,” and I was less certain of what to make of it. These lines, as on 30 Rock, often fly right by and the narrative and dialogue move so fast as to not really allow engagement with the politics. It seems a question of “do I get the reference”; “I do, I’m so clever” instead of probing what is supposed to be funny, is it funny, why, and with what politics. (Plus you have characters like Sue Sylvester, who like many of the male characters on Ally McBeal, are set up to be outrageous or farcical and all the more difficult to gauge). Are there cases when this humor also is posing an effective critique of structures of power? How do we make sense of the politics of a show when you have critical uses mixed in with clumsy or failed? I know a number of you think a lot about this type of humor I’ve been thinking about as “post-PC”. Any ideas?