« the blue phase | Main | hmmm... »

SNL

Saturday Night Live is having a field day with the torture scandal. Is it just me or is it really, really wrong to find comedy gold in this? There's bad taste and then there's tasteless. [And before you go off on a rant, this is not about them making fun of Bush or whatever, it's just not a subject that should be made light of in this way]

Comments

I agree. There are some things that just aren't funny.

I know that someone will say, "What about the Producers? What about A Beautiful Life?" But those were made after many years had passed.

I read somewhere that Chaplin said that if he had really understood the extent of Nazi brutality he would not have made the Great Dictator.

Apart from the occasional exceptional sketch, Saturday Night Live has always been a poor Americanized imitation of Monty Python anyway.

Nothing is sacred.
Athiestically.

SNL has, for the past few years, pretty much just hit whatever has been at the top of the news for their skits.

I knew they were in trouble this week when I heard the guest host was Snoop Dog.

I wonder if there were any Girls Gone Wild skits featuring him?

This won't be funny until August 2026.

22.3 years is the standard, you know.

This accents the concept of "media whores" dontcha think?Be cognicent(sp?) of the fact that it is sweeps time,and I'm sure that the writers and producers(D'ya think they might be Franken fans?)are of the mind that the peeps of the great USA need sum edjamakatin'bout the great Satan/Hitler Bush?It is laughable be read how much projection can be read into these diatribes when the left is the group that has the conspiratorial tendencies,while they accuse the right of doin" the VRWC thang.

OK,I had probs in the Kings English on that last post.So bite me

Graham Lester you mean that italian comedy about life in a death camp? I think it was called "Life is Beautiful"

There is no way in the world I could stand to watch that. It's not that I think the idea is in bad taste, it's just that I'm to sensitive to that sort of thing. I'm like the little kid who'll have nightmares afterwards.

Besides, Life is Beautiful wasn't making light of the Holocaust. It was about a guy who pretended the concentration camp was a game so his son wouldn't be traumatized by it. The whole thing is sort of sweet, but there's a distinct sense of tragedy running throughout.

Your talking about it now is the only reason I regret missing it. SNL hasn't displayed any great talent or humor since Eddie Murphy and Mike Myers days. That's why I've only seen a few skits in the last ten years; as it was in the way while I channel surfed on to something entertaining.

Darn!..I missed another lame SNL.

Snoop Dogg was actually a pretty good host.

The problem with SNL is Tina Fey being head writer. Is she a partisan shrew who'd rather defeat Bush than win the war? Yes, totally. So if pretending to give Pfc. England a "Dirtbag of the Week" award will help in her mind to accomplish that, she's game.

I find Tina Fey pretty damned funny myself. But you know, I'm so exhausted with being annoyed with entertainers for showing their political biases, I'm probably too blase anymore.

The only comedian who genuinely makes me angry is Bill Maher, and that's because I find his naked cynicism so corrosive and destructive.

I don't generally care about the politcs of SNL. The only reason I watched it last is because I like Snoop. But the Abu Grhaib jokes were just wrong. War atrocities are just not something I can find humor in. Maybe it's just me.

This is pretty sad. I wonder if anyone there pointed out that many in the media are equating so-called "humiliation" of prisoners with some of the things Iraqis have done to our soldiers (like being hung, drawing and quartering etc). Talk about moral relativity. Torture (physical) has not been proven yet.

SNL-Moral relativist displaying amoral values. SNL will do anything to look 'cool'.

Our cultural society mocks and ridicules God, spirituality and morality yet, is now conveniently moral?

If the sexualize photos are considered 'torture' and not humiliation then Maplethorpe and other hard core porn 'artists' are creating works of torture and should be condemned appropiately.

Instead, our relatively moral culturalist praise such 'torture' art as a form of entertainment profound and rich in meaning.

Easy to purchase a video of 'Big Dick Fucks up the Ass(without a condom) Innocent Teenagers Blindfolded and Bound in Chains'.

Our relatively moral cultural society defines this as pure entertainment or rather a necessity for human pleasure. Somehow we believe that watching big dick fucking children up the ass will lead us to enlightenment.

I doubt the moral relativists understand the hypocrisy found in their actions.

Then again, words are cheap but a picture makes millions upon millions of hard cash.

At least the military began investigating the abuses back in January and took action to condemn the perpetrators.

The relatively moral culturalist continue to create, sell and profit from their form of 'artistic' abuse. Hear no evil, see no evil...after all morality is all rather relative.

Syn, I think you are way off base. First of all, our cultures differe. Shaming the Iraqi prisoners is most certainly a form of torture given the reigious views on sexuality that exist in their society.

Second, if you care to look beyond the sexual abuse, there was physical torture as well.

I missed last nights, but my boyfriend taped it, so I will be sure to watch it now. I actually was pissed a few weeks ago (Trump's episode) when they did a painfully unfunny and long sketch about the 9/11 hearings...I didn't think that was a subject to be mocked. And using the torture scandal as comedic material, that's just disgusting, no matter what your political beliefs.

Michelle, by this are you saying that our culture willingly views sexual images of abuse as a form of pleasure?

I suppose your statement makes sense given the fact that our culture tends to humiliate and shame those who hold religious views.

Please note I made a specific refererence to the sexual images for the purposes of clarifying our own relatively moral hypocrisy.

When will the porn star who willingly infected a teenage female with the AIDS virus by fucking her up the ass without a condom be charged with manslaughter?

When will the guys who stood around the set of that film be held accountable for allowing the teenager to be sexually abused and infected with a death sentence?

When will the people who make billions from this form of sexual abuse be jailed for fraud?

When will the people who willingly purchase and view these forms of sexual abuse for their own personal pleasure be shamed and humiliated for their part in advocating and supporting this type of sexual abuse found in our own culture?

Instead, our culture will attack, mock and shame those in our society who hold religious views while praise the perpetrators of this exact form of sexual abuse as 'art and entertainment' available for the audience's pleasure.

I am not way off base, I am right on target.

"If the sexualize photos are considered 'torture' and not humiliation then Maplethorpe and other hard core porn 'artists' are creating works of torture and should be condemned appropiately"

Different standards for different societies. What I'm saying is that the prisoners were tortured, no matter what kind of label you want to put on it. Whether it be sexual abuse, or sexual shame, they consider that a form of torture and I believe it was done with just that in mind.

The difference between porn, Maplethorpe, et al and sexual abuse in prisoners is vast; no one is forcing you to watch porn or view sexualized art. People willingly pay for this and porn stars willingly accept money to take part in sexual acts. I don't condemn them for that. It's a choice.

Being forced to pose in sexually explicit photos by prison guards, being forced into sexual positions with other inmates - that is in no way comparable on a moral basis to art or legal pornography (note I am not talking about child pornography here - if there are teenagers being forced to act in porn movies, that's clearly abuse). I doubt that Maplethorpe ever forced anyone to have sex against their will for a piece of art. And honestly, I think most of the porn you see with TEENS! in the title do not contain teens at all, but adult women posing as such.

I just don't see how you can compare sexual art with sexual torture.

I don’t think Syn is off-base at all. Humiliation does not equal torture. especially if you continue with the cultural relativity argument. Certainly you aren't saying that simulating sex acts for some idiot’s amusement is equivalent to the treatment that Saddam's prisoners received in the same prison just months ago?

That being said, It's likely that torture of some sort did occur. It is certainly possible that photographic or video evidence of it will come out, but the photos I've seen so far are not evidence of torture. Still, the ignorant goofballs who posed for and took the pictures have brought immeasurable shame on their uniforms and all Americans. What they did, although not torture, is still abhorrent to us. If only a small portion of the attention this is getting had been given to the goings on at Abu Ghraib two years ago, maybe we wouldn’t been in the mess we’re in right now.

Is it funny? Not at all. It seems to me, that those, like SNL, who are so quick to make light of the sickness of the atrocities, are missing the gravity of the acts.

I don't agree with your premise that torture is relative to the culture. Many argue that morality is relative, and I don't agree with them either.

Ok, I'll agree with that much, Ocean.

That said, I think Syn and are misunderstanding each other. After review of all the comments, I think we are on the same side. I think.

Whatever went on is Abu Ghraib is digusting and horrid. The original point that SNL was crass to make fun of such a thing stands.

Yes, SNL was crass, and I hate Snoop Dog, and I love Tina Fey... Go figure.

Snoop was good in a couple of skits, I have to give him that, he made me laugh. Being an old fart, I fell asleep before Weekend Update.... can't comment on that.

When 'consenting' adults are drug-induced into sexual abuse 'art' perpetuated by the porn industry, they are not acting out of choice but rather under influence.

Don't women use the platform that they have no other choice but to engage in sexual abuse art 'porn' simply because no other financial means of support is available to them? Given the circumstances of their financial situation they earn a living through 'porn art' out of necessity not choice. The world oldest profession, prostitution, uses this same excuse.

Are not the reasons most young females engage in pornography is that they can make tons of money in order to pay for their college education in order to better their lives? Rather imprisoning concept to say the least.

The feminist movement advocates women can empower themselves by selling images of sexual abuse for pornographic profits then leave the industry when they have made enough money. The whole 'if you can't beat them at their game, you join their game' philosophy.

The choice to engage in creating pornography is not a matter of choice at all, it is a matter of economic stability.

The audience, however, choosing to watch sexually abusing pornography is in itself a very disturbing cultural choice. Each to his own, right?

Regarding Mapplethope, here is an example which justifies the concept that human bondage is artful. Perhaps a few of those soldiers taking photos at the prison got their ideas from Mapplethorpe's work and believed they were simply creating a work of art.

I do not excuse neither the sexual abuse perpetuated by those few soldiers or the abuse perpetuated by sexual art and the producers of such art.

We're treading way off topic here, but I'll bite.

I don't view members of the porn industry as victims.

Don't women use the platform that they have no other choice but to engage in sexual abuse art 'porn' simply because no other financial means of support is available to them?

When I had no other fincancial means of support (i.e., husband gone), I worked in fast food. Porn was never an option.

Are not the reasons most young females engage in pornography is that they can make tons of money in order to pay for their college education in order to better their lives? Rather imprisoning concept to say the least.

I call bullshit. Their engagement in the porn industry is their choice alone. Not imprisonment. Gee, how did I manage to pay for my own college education and not go into porn? Oh, yes. I worked in a record store, a take-out chicken restaurant, a deli and the local library.

The feminist movement advocates women can empower themselves by selling images of sexual abuse for pornographic profits then leave the industry when they have made enough money. The whole 'if you can't beat them at their game, you join their game' philosophy.

I think what you are doing here is victimizing women who do not want to be victimized. Again, a matter of personal choice.

Regarding Mapplethope, here is an example which justifies the concept that human bondage is artful. Perhaps a few of those soldiers taking photos at the prison got their ideas from Mapplethorpe's work and believed they were simply creating a work of art.

Odds are ten to one that most of the soldiers involved in this mess have never seen Maplethorpe art. Which is really inconsequential. These acts were not about sex, they were about power. Just like rape.

Or do you believe that rapists are just a product of their morally bankrupt society?

If torture is relative to the culture, why didn't the Saudis torture that Canadian by having women laugh at his pecker rather than use the electrodes, beatings, and cigarettes? "Confess to smuggling liquor, kufr, or we shall have to humiliate you further."

SNL tasteless and crass? Let me die of fucking shock.

Andrea Harris; Damn! You beat me to it. SNL hasn't been 'funny' for a very long time. Meanspirited and poorly written sort of sums it up for me.

I don't much like SNL these days. They tend to go for the easy sarcastic jokes. However, last night's "Scum Bag of the Week:" (Or dirt bag) on SNL's Weekend Update was classic. Rachelle Dratch playing Lynndie England was hysterical.

I'm easy. In a world of behemoth evils, the antics of the guards at Abu Ghraib are about 4.3 on the Richter Scale: the windows rattled and maybe a cup fell off the shelf, but no real damage. I don't really rate the negative PR aspects of this too highly - when they make The Protocols of the Elders of Zion into a miniseries in a soi-disant ally, this is small beer. I mean, we're already roundly despised by most of the Arab world, and I don't think the fallout from this will represent anything other than a small increment in that hatred. What happened was wrong. But it's not endemic, it's not emblematic. Policy reforms will come from this. The guilty will be punished.

And these were prisoners. Most people in prison are bad. None of these people should have been tortured. But most of them should have been shot.

"Most people in prison are bad. None of these people should have been tortured. But most of them should have been shot."

People who go to prison should be shot? Riiight, that makes sense.
Who was it up above who was saying that morality isn't relative?

As for SNL not being as funny as it used to be, I'm a little tired of this argument. I've watched whole seasons from SNL's 'golden age' and I don't think their hit-to-miss ratio has improved or worsened in the time since.