Jimmy Carr and that joke

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

21 hours ago, Line-X said:

I asked someone today what they thought of Jimmy Carr. The response was "a privileged, tax dodging former Shell employee...who is quite funny". I disagree. He's about as funny as the holocaust. Let's be honest here. If you made his joke on twitter and on this forum, if the mods didn't get to you first - then many of the people justifying it on this thread would likely be braying for a lifetime ban alongside the police investigation you'd be facing. You wouldn't be able to argue 'context', "education, it's just a 'joke', or the fact that you're a comic genius, or that people are too easily offended. 

 

The joke was aimed at his fans? As I suggested on the 'absolute cvnts of our time' thread ...(actually, can't be bothered to re-type it, so I'll bring it across) - it is the response from the audience is what I find particularly objectional. This wasn't simply an uncomfortable ripple of nervous laughter or conforming to peer pressure, this was an immediate eruption of s amusement, whistles and whoops - disproportionate, because contrary to the insistence of some, it wasn't even a good joke. The Carr "being clever" or "educating" exemption/get out of jail card is completely mislaid in this case, where the intent was shock value. He prefaced it by basically saying it’s a bad joke and a career ender, almost a disclaimer, the end justification appearing to be that there is a lack of education concerning other groups targeted by the Nazis, which are overlooked. Pertinent point or not, it was executed through the pejorative use of the term gypsy - and that alone is what actually got the laugh. Don't kid yourself - The audience wasn't nudging each other saying "see what Jimmy did there? - what a boy"?  - "he's subtly employing his inimitable, nuanced brand of shock comedy as a formidable tool by which to lever awareness of atrocities committed towards the Roma that wider society remains oblivious too" . Oh bollocks - they laughed at face value at a 'joke' which was simply that the murder of gypsies during the holocaust was a positive. 

 

There's 'black humour', and there's places you just don't go and this is one of them. Under the banner of 'his dark materials' of course the in house audience knew what to expect, That doesn't justify it though, and for Netflix to put out something that is not fit for broadcast it to an unsuspecting audience is questionable. Outrage sells - we know that. Jimmy knows that. 

 

As I said - I did actually laugh. Not at the joke, but at Carr's dreadful 'Monkhouse-esque' delivery and smug self-satisfied demeanour. I hate the cliché that someone has a face you want to punch...but to be fair, he does have a face you want to punch. If it is indeed a career ender, then good - **** off. A formulaic machine engineer comedian that read a book about how to be funny and failed. Perhaps he'll be martyred by Jim Davidson's crowd or he'll appropriate the market recently vacated by Roy Chubby Brown. Because as clever as he thinks his comedy is, the irony being, the current audience that this shallow 'risqué' brand of comedy attracts (I term it Boyle's Law), is really no different to a 1970s working men's club guffawing at Bernard Manning. The upshot is the same.  

 

 

Couldn't someone find that statement totally and unreservedly offensive? Comparing a comedian to the holocaust because he doesn't make you laugh? You don't see the irony in that given the joke that's being discussed? Making such statements that can (rightfully given your own stance) be seen as totally unacceptable just undermines every other point you make. 

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

Couldn't someone find that statement totally and unreservedly offensive? 

Possibly - but the intent is not to shock or offend. 

 

Stating that the holocaust is not funny is not "unreservedly offensive". The only reason that I linked the two is because it was Carr's choice of subject matter. As I say, neither are funny. 

[MPH]

I get that if you don’t want to listen to Jimmy Carr, then don’t listen to him. He won’t be a part of your life then.

 

 

I just hope the same people who used to be outraged at Roy Chubby Brown for some of his jokes are also outraged at this.

[The Blur]

8 minutes ago, MPH said:

I get that if you don’t want to listen to Jimmy Carr, then don’t listen to him. He won’t be a part of your life then.

 

 

I just hope the same people who used to be outraged at Roy Chubby Brown for some of his jokes are also outraged at this.

 

I don't think it is that straightforward.   The joke now has made national news so everyone is exposed to it now in order to take offence if applicable.  

[MPH]

Just now, The Blur said:

 

I don't think it is that straightforward.   The joke now has made national news so everyone is exposed to it now in order to take offence if applicable.  

i see what you’re saying.

 

 

I guess really people should be asking those of the Romany Gypsy community wether it was offensive or not and crossed the line- we have no right to speak for them either way really..

[filbertway]

 just seen a headline that protestors were outside his gig demanding an apology. Absolute fruits

 

I'd invite a few of them onto the stage to have a go for 5 minutes "go on then, let's see what you've got chief". 

 

 

[SpacedX]

23 minutes ago, MPH said:

I get that if you don’t want to listen to Jimmy Carr, then don’t listen to him. He won’t be a part of your life then.

 

I didn't listen to Bernard Manning or Jimmy Jones and they weren't part of my life. That doesn't detract for the damage they did. 

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Anybody else hate cancel culture? 

This is what happens when a greater volume and diversity of people get to have their say. Otherwise the "cancelling" wouldn't happen because the bottom line wouldn't be overly affected, which is of course the most important factor.

 

Cancel culture may be many things, but undemocratic is not one of them.

 

[SpacedX]

3 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Anybody else hate cancel culture? 

Yes. Agree. I generally dislike most forms of censorship, because free speech is the noose by which people hang themselves. I do agree with curtailing dangerous disinformation and extremism, but cancel culture itself nurtures a dangerous form of revisionism. 

 

What does this have to do with Jimmy Carr's joke? 

 

 

[Innovindil]

24 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Anybody else hate cancel culture? 

Absolutely. 

 

What's passed off as new-age democracy is (usually) in reality a very vocal, organised and disruptive minority of professional victims looking for their next "holy shit we're finally part of something" fix. 

 

By all means, we should do whatever possible to cancel actual DANGEROUS people, the new nazis and antivaxers and the like, but it's past time we realised that words (especially in jokes!), in actual fact, can't hurt you. 

[Strokes]

44 minutes ago, MPH said:

i see what you’re saying.

 

 

I guess really people should be asking those of the Romany Gypsy community wether it was offensive or not and crossed the line- we have no right to speak for them either way really..

So what if it was offensive? Why should that stop it being funny?

 

Most jokes offend someone.

[Strokes]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

Possibly - but the intent is not to shock or offend. 

 

Stating that the holocaust is not funny is not "unreservedly offensive". The only reason that I linked the two is because it was Carr's choice of subject matter. As I say, neither are funny. 

So he is a comedian that you don’t watch because you don’t like or get his humour and you are somehow surprised he has told a joke that you don’t find funny or really get? Is that about the gist of it?

[SpacedX]

19 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

Bit obvious ain't it? 

No, not really. The term is quite misunderstood and has been recently appropriated by the American far right to represent their objections to perceived "libtard" political correctness. Look no further than Trump's recent comments about Joe Rogan and the clamour from far right platforms such as Rumble to sign him up. 

 

Carr himself is on a personal crusade to go down fighting against it but that being the case which is a convenient way of justifying the fact that outrage sells, but that being the case, he's going about it in a pretty cack-handed way. 

[SpacedX]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

So he is a comedian that you don’t watch because you don’t like or get his humour and you are somehow surprised he has told a joke that you don’t find funny or really get? Is that about the gist of it?

No it isn't.

 

He's a machine engineered comedian that I don't watch because I don't find him funny irrespective of his contrived material - so no, not in the least bit surprising. Regarding "the joke", "I get" exactly what his motivations were for telling it. Hardly sophisticated stuff. 

 

Out of curiosity, have you read 'Before and Laughter'? - if not, take a look at it. 

[leicsmac]

21 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Absolutely. 

 

What's passed off as new-age democracy is (usually) in reality a very vocal, organised and disruptive minority of professional victims looking for their next "holy shit we're finally part of something" fix. 

 

By all means, we should do whatever possible to cancel actual DANGEROUS people, the new nazis and antivaxers and the like, but it's past time we realised that words (especially in jokes!), in actual fact, can't hurt you. 

I'm not saying that this isn't true...but if it is, why would the powers that be listen to them at all when not listening to them probably won't hurt the bottom line as much?

 

What power, exactly, do this vocal minority actually have?

[String fellow]

36 minutes ago, Line-X said:

No, not really. The term is quite misunderstood and has been recently appropriated by the American far right to represent their objections to perceived "libtard" political correctness. Look no further than Trump's recent comments about Joe Rogan and the clamour from far right platforms such as Rumble to sign him up. 

 

Carr himself is on a personal crusade to go down fighting against it but that being the case which is a convenient way of justifying the fact that outrage sells, but that being the case, he's going about it in a pretty cack-handed way. 

As a left-hander, I thought it would be interesting to research 'cack-handed'. Not too surprisingly, one of its meanings is/was left-handed. It's derived from the latin verb 'cacare', to crap! Other non-too-polite expressions for being left-handed include, of course, Leicestershire's very own cocky dobber, and elsewhere can be found expressions such as cuddy wifter, molly dooker, gollie hander,  taggy hander, corrie fister, port sider and scrammy person. Sinister and gauche are pejorative words also related to left-handedness. And in Albania, being left-handed was once a criminal offence! 

[Innovindil]

59 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm not saying that this isn't true...but if it is, why would the powers that be listen to them at all when not listening to them probably won't hurt the bottom line as much?

 

What power, exactly, do this vocal minority actually have?

Eh? You've seen a fraction of a fraction of people bring major London roads to a standstill. You've seen a fraction of a fraction of truckers shut down canada's capital city. You've seen single individuals come up with ideas that literally shape the world we live in. Kingdoms and governments throughout history have been toppled by small factions. 

 

But you don't see minorities can have power? 

[leicsmac]

16 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Eh? You've seen a fraction of a fraction of people bring major London roads to a standstill. You've seen a fraction of a fraction of truckers shut down canada's capital city. You've seen single individuals come up with ideas that literally shape the world we live in. Kingdoms and governments throughout history have been toppled by small factions. 

 

But you don't see minorities can have power? 

...and all of those things happened because the "majority" either consented to, were afraid enough of, or were apathetic enough to them happening (among other reasons, but all involving that majority). 

 

I'm not saying that minority groups can never have power (look at apartheid South Africa and also the way that a few rich and therefore influential individuals and groups shape we way we do things today) because the above proves it can happen, I'm saying that in this particular case the "cancellers", if they are a minority, have much less power than perceived because in this particular field of entertainment money and the market is king and therefore the highest bidder (which should be the majority who choose to consume the entertainment product as opposed to the minority that don't in this case) usually wins.

 

In short, if the "cancellers" are a minority and the majority chose to ignore them here, then their viewpoint really wouldn't have much power at all.

Edited 9 February 2022 by leicsmac

[Innovindil]

39 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...and all of those things happened because the "majority" either consented to, were afraid enough of, or were apathetic enough to them happening (among other reasons, but all involving that majority). 

 

I'm not saying that minority groups can never have power (look at apartheid South Africa and also the way that a few rich and therefore influential individuals and groups shape we way we do things today) because the above proves it can happen, I'm saying that in this particular case the "cancellers", if they are a minority, have much less power than perceived because in this particular field of entertainment money and the market is king and therefore the highest bidder (which should be the majority who choose to consume the entertainment product as opposed to the minority that don't in this case) usually wins.

 

In short, if the "cancellers" are a minority and the majority chose to ignore them here, then their viewpoint really wouldn't have much power at all.

Unless they decide to hound and harass and protest outside Netflix offices of course... Wait, isn't that exactly what *some* have been doing? 

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

This really is the definition of a storm in a teacup to me. It's a joke, he's said far worse things in the past and will again in the future. This show had been out for 6 weeks before anyone even noticed or cared to take offence (you might not like him but he is popular and hundreds of thousands if not millions will have watched it by then). Frankie Boyle has said things much worse on terrestrial TV and has a show on the BBC and often presents documentaries for them. Nothing has really happened beyond a snowball of popular opinion and people wanting to appear to be on the cusp of humanity. It's a non entity. 

[David Hankey]

Jimmy Carr has always come across as a bit of a pillock. He might grow up one day.

[MPH]

3 hours ago, Line-X said:

I didn't listen to Bernard Manning or Jimmy Jones and they weren't part of my life. That doesn't detract for the damage they did. 

 

i really just mean that there has to be consistency.

[MPH]

3 hours ago, Strokes said:

So what if it was offensive? Why should that stop it being funny?

 

Most jokes offend someone.

 I see there are some conversations where there won’t be a middle ground found.  So I’ll pass on replying 

[HighPeakFox]

This is difficult, for me anyway. On the one hand it's appallingly bad taste at best, whilst it being obviously not a genuine point of view. And yet I am very much against the whole 'get offended on behalf of/because I can/because I can avoid dealing with my own issues' mentality. 

 

Context is everything. Had Johnson said this, it would be very different, and rightly so. 

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

54 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

This is difficult, for me anyway. On the one hand it's appallingly bad taste at best, whilst it being obviously not a genuine point of view. And yet I am very much against the whole 'get offended on behalf of/because I can/because I can avoid dealing with my own issues' mentality. 

 

Context is everything. Had Johnson said this, it would be very different, and rightly so. 

Might be the only middle ground post I've seen in this thread! Not to hide or ignore the obvious fact I'm very much in the all jokes should be okay camp.