Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the British Are Better at Satire

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 115 posts

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#71

Post by throwawayaway »

SeanDav wrote: post #59

At times my work has brought me into contact with Americans and in general they just do not get sarcasm and satire. Obviously not true of everyone but in general in my experience, Americans (not sure about Canadians) take things that you say very literally. Take my advice, when dealing with people from the USA, as a default, avoid irony/sarcasm/satire and even humour until or unless you know they will appreciate it.…

I've heard people attribute the failure to perceive humour to the influence of ancestral, puritanical European emigrants to America. With whom "your word" was your bond.

I would lay a very large bet that the "/s" tag is an American invention. I find people pleading for unambiguity in sarcasm on the internet amusing, "sarchasm" being one of the better words invented over the last few decades. (Also an American invention?)

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#72

Post by pluma »

mcjiggerlog wrote: post #57
r00fus wrote: post #41

Could it because the BBC (state owned television) effectively nurtures small series and lets them run for far longer than you would have in the US market, which suffers from both viewer and producer short attention span? Essentially, not trying to have a hit for every show results in a far greater overall success rate. If so, the analogy between the TV show market and startup scene could be instructive (i.e., nurture…

I think you've got it the wrong way round, actually. British shows typically run for a 6 episode series and then might go several years before a new series is produced. The Thick Of It has had 24 episodes since its inception in 2005, whereas its US adaption has already had 28 since 2012. Armando Ianucci (the writer) has straight up stated that he won't write any more The Thick Of It until he feels he has material wor…

What's more, the British seem to have no qualms about simply ending a series when they think there's nothing more to add.

Consider Spaced: the cast and the audience loved it, but the story had come to a conclusion after the second series and the circumstances that originally gave birth to the ideas had changed, so they refused to consider another series.

Contrast this with American shows which typically only end if they get cancelled and where success is measured in how often you can get a new series funded.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#73

Post by rmc »

femto wrote: post #37

Maybe it's driven by the UK's libel laws, and lack of a First Amendment? In the US, the media can report on powerful people, then claim protection from the US constitution. In the UK, there is no such protection, so reporting facts about powerful people is a dangerous business. Instead, the strategy is to turn the events into a satire. One has to walk a fine line with the satire. It has to be realistic enough that th…

I dunno. In many cases it's quite clear who is being referred to. House of Cards opens with Thatcher being deposed. A later season has the Princess Diana character (who like in real life, divorced her husband) saying that she was threatened with being murdered if she spoke out.

The main character in The Thick of It, Malcolm Tucker, was based on the spin doctor for the Labour government at the time. Later seasons reflected the current UK government structure.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#74

Post by throwawayaway »

pluma wrote: post #70
bad_user wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for what is worth, many Europeans, like the Germans, are even worse at satire and humor than Americans are.

As a German, I have to agree. My favourite comedians are British, Irish or Australian, not one of them is German. I find most German comedy unwatchable at worst or unfunny at best.

This guy is pretty funny:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henning_Wehn

Anecdotally, plenty of Germans have a wicked sense of humour - maybe it's a Berlin thing. Not sure their humour would get airtime on TV though.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#75

Post by laumars »

r00fus wrote: post #55
laumars wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there maybe some truth to that, it's also worth noting that we see the same with all our (British) terrestrial TV networks. Particularly channel 4, which has given us classics such as The IT Crowd, Father Ted, The Inbetweeners and Black Books. Edit: and Brass Eye. How could I forgot Brass Eye when this topic is specifically about satire? Awesome show.

Let's regress this a level further - creating lots of small shows with potentially longer runs could result in a better talent pool (both actors/directors/producers), benefiting even private networks. How often do BBC actors work with other networks? If there's any cross-pollination there is an argument that the BBC's reach goes beyond it's own productions.

It would be hard to dismiss BBC's influence on the format of British television since the BBC (channels 1 and 2) were originally the only TV channels on British TV. And, as you rightly pointed out, there's always going to be cross-pollination with TV talent as well. However I don't think it pays to look at the BBC as a unique model in the way that you are (ie "The BBC is different from American networks therefore it's the BBC that has uniquely shaped British TV"). I don't consider the fewer episodes per series/season model to be unique to Britain let alone a BBC invention. In America you tend to refer to these runs as "mini-series", but even them aside it's pretty common to have popular shows only run a dozen episodes a season.

I think the differences might be down to writing styles more than anything though. In the UK it's common to only have a 1 or 2 writers behind a popular series (or guest writers who handle individual episodes), where as in America you can have an entire team of writers. I would imagine having more writers might allow for a larger pool of ideas.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#76

Post by arethuza »

estefan wrote: post #65

It's not just satire: Irony, sarcasm, comedy above the level of a 5 year old (i.e. where there's more than just a setup immediately followed by a predictable punchline: "Don't open the box Tommy!" Tommy opens the box, etc.). Classic quote: Speaking to an American about not having ridden a motorbike in years, my brother said "I'm sure it'll come back to me - it'll just be like riding a bike". The girl replied in all s…

"We aren't as good at being loud though"

In what context? I can think of a few situations where the British are world leaders in being loud and obnoxious - one of our main summer exports I'd have thought?

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#77

Post by PMan74 »

conradfr wrote: post #63
SeanDav wrote: post #59

At times my work has brought me into contact with Americans and in general they just do not get sarcasm and satire. Obviously not true of everyone but in general in my experience, Americans (not sure about Canadians) take things that you say very literally. Take my advice, when dealing with people from the USA, as a default, avoid irony/sarcasm/satire and even humour until or unless you know they will appreciate it.…

You can see that if you look at U.S adaptation of Britain or French series or movies, they often lose the tongue-in-cheek humor (if that term makes sense) in the process. The Office U.S became great when they stopped copying the U.K version and I don't think it's just a difference of bleakness as the article states.

Office U.S. and U.K. are really different shows, US Office dropped all pretence of the reality/mockumentary, veering toward more unreal set-ups. Apples and oranges. Both are great, just different.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#78

Post by JimmyM »

stupidcar wrote: post #19

As a Brit, I think this rather overstates the case. Take The Thick Of It. The article says there's no likeable protagonist, but Hugh Abbott, Nicola Murray, Peter Mannion are not unsympathetic characters, even if they're generally incompetent. I don't find the tone of Veep to be particularly less excoriating than The Thick Of It. If anything the members of Selina's team seem to be even more abusive to one another. Whe…

Bojack Horseman in particular has a tone and style close enough to British satirical cartoon Monkey Dust that it's a fantastic counter-example to a significant America-Britain disconnect. It also fits the bill in terms of being actual satire, however soft the target might be.

In turn, Metalocalypse - another spot-on satire of an off-beat target - is American. So is Best In Show, and for that matter This Is Spinal Tap is American.

Always Sunny is another great example, and I'm thinking of ever more now - I mean, Seinfeld would be the quintessential example of unlikeable losers losing, no? Or Frasier?

The remake of House of Cards is hilarious for a different reason, in that it resembles a telenovela set in the White House. "Push her down the stairs! Push her down the stairs!" as the cast of Friends might chant.

I don't necessarily believe in a huge gap between America and Britain in terms of satire, but I do think there's some structural difference that enabled a particular class of Britons to criticise the establishment with impunity - primarily disillusioned public schoolboys, and later Oxbridge types. My impression (it may easily be wrong) is that it is this class from which most of our overtly political satire has come from.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#79

Post by arethuza »

femto wrote: post #37

Maybe it's driven by the UK's libel laws, and lack of a First Amendment? In the US, the media can report on powerful people, then claim protection from the US constitution. In the UK, there is no such protection, so reporting facts about powerful people is a dangerous business. Instead, the strategy is to turn the events into a satire. One has to walk a fine line with the satire. It has to be realistic enough that th…

Worth noting that the laws aren't the same throughout the UK - you can have situations where Scottish newspapers publish stuff that can't be published in England.

We don't have the concepts of libel and slander here in Scotland, it's defamation and works fairly differently (IANAL) so we don't have the crazy cases you see in English courts.

Re: Why the British Are Better at Satire

#80

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

cmdkeen wrote: post #66
lucozade wrote: post #64

I think our friends across the pond are doing themselves a disservice. We need satirical TV because our politics is largely inanity e.g. Question Time or slapstick e.g. PMQs. The US has a system that allows them to have Sarah Palin run for VP. You can't write that stuff, it's comedy gold.

Armando Iannucci said he stopped writing The Thick Of It because too many of his mad plot lines were coming true and he was afraid to predict even madder things.

Conversation with a friend who works at the heart of (UK) Government:

Me: "Is it really like the Thick of It?" Them: "No. It's worse. Much, much worse."

Post reply on HN