5 Responses

1. Guy MacPherson says:

   April 15, 2009 at 5:13 pm

   I always took you for a blond, Brian.

   But the Boston Phoenix isn’t alone. In her act, Chelsea Handler calls redheaded men “ridiculous”.

   Reply
2. Brian McKim & Traci Skene says:

   April 15, 2009 at 5:30 pm

   The Male Half responds:

   Of course, I have blond hair… but when I was a kid the old men in the neighborhood would refer to me as “Red.” Because I was a freckled, Irish kid with fair skin. And red hair.

   Then it changed in color. But I still have that fair skin… and the freckles. So I shall always see a redhead in the mirror and shall always be perceived as such.

   Reply
3. myq says:

   April 15, 2009 at 10:07 pm

   Sounds like the Phoenix is consistently pro-comedy, in that they seem to clearly be making a joke here.

   When stating what their low tolerance is for, “unfunny comedians” fulfills the classic rule of three joke structure… in addition, why is it BAD to have a low tolerance for unfunny comedians?

   Not to mention, when discussing comedians on the list that they DON’T find unfunny, like Patton Oswalt, they say so.

   So they’re not attacking comedians entirely. They’re attacking people that they think are ugly OR unfunny.

   It’s superficial, and perhaps worth attacking on grounds of “why should our society be concerned with who is unsexy and famous?”

   But given that this list DOES exist, and comedians are a full 10% of it, arguably, isn’t that good exposure?

   Plus, again, the whole thing is obviously meant to be funny. You know, jokes? Made by people who clearly do care about good comedy and support it.

   (Also I believe Sara Faith Alterman’s name does not have an “H” at the end of it.
   And Brian Regan’s last name isn’t Reagan, from another post.
   This concludes my top two sexiest irrelevant comedy spelling errors.)

   Reply
4. Brian McKim & Traci Skene says:

   April 15, 2009 at 11:21 pm

   Myq:

   Actually, we weren’t all that upset about the article in the first place.

   Why is it BAD for a major Boston publication to have a low tolerance for unfunny comedians? Because, since “funny” is subjective, we are all vulnerable to the “charge.”

   How funny would it be to see Myq Kaplan’s photo alongside a headline that proclaims him to be “unfunny” and consqequently “unsexy.”

   No matter how funny you are, do not for one minute think that you’re immune, Mr. Myq.

   P.S.: We corrected the spelling of Regan’s name earlier in the day. And we took the unnecessary H off of Alterman’s name as soon as you pointed it out.

   Here’s the paragraph on Oswalt:

   “Funny guy. And laudably self-deprecating about his gnome-ish stature and ever-mutating paunch. But would it be unsporting to wonder if this schlub has partaken in a few too many of those KFC entrées that he derides as “failure piles in sadness bowls”? It’s not just that starchy, sodium-rich, light brown “hillocks of glop” are bad for one’s physique. It’s that poor, lumpy Oswalt is starting to look like the dish itself.”

   This about a man who is already self-deprecating! (Note: That exclamation point is still not evidence that we’re upset.) That is cold! The tepid “Funny guy” disclaimer at the outset hardly gets them off the hook for such a diss. A diss of a man who has made it one of his life missions to ferret out and mock the “unfunny” among his colleagues.

   If they have such a love for standup, they would have at least laid off of Oswalt!

   In the case of Norton, he’s funny, too, but he wrote a book that isn’t. So, he’s “fat, bald and repulsive.”

   We got no problem with “snark” or superficial. We took David Denby to task recently for insisting that humorous writing be “consciously aligned with civic virtues and literary standards.” In fact, we called him a “bloated, fussy douchebag.” But I suppose we expected something that falls between “consciously aligned with civic virtue and litereary standards” and outright dreck.

   Is that asking too much? Does that make us fussy douchebags? We think not.

   To put it another way, if you’re going to make fun of the funny, you better bring the funny!

   Reply
5. myq says:

   April 16, 2009 at 4:34 am

   I agree with your last statement whole-heartedly.

   Except for your earlier point that “the funny” is subjective. So maybe what they’re bringing IS the funny to some.

   I also agree that it’s not necessary to (sadness) pile on Oswalt’s own self-deprecation.

   But I just didn’t think that the Phoenix was at all targeting comedians as a whole, so much as specific comedians for being ugly or not to their liking in certain ways.

   Which seems no bigger a deal than anything any comedian might say–which you would defend whether it was funny or not, no? Due to the subjectivity of humor?

   *And it’s really more the whole concept of an “unsexiest” list that I would have a problem with here. An unnecessarily superficial society and what not.

   But I think an unsexiest list is at least funnier and less boring than a sexiest list is.

   PS I also didn’t think you were all that upset about it. And I’m not all that upset about it.

   Just wanted to point out that the Phoenix has done a lot in the way of supporting local and national comedy acts, with reviews and interviews and just good coverage in general. So if they make jokes about some specific very famous comedians who are all doing just fine and won’t be affected in the least by said jokes, I don’t really think that conflicts with their pro-comedy agenda in general.
   That’s all.

   Plus farts.
   I’m sexy.

   Reply