Brian Logan blogs in the UK Guardian about a gaggle of shows drawing crowds in England. Some of them are one-man shows that pay tribute to giants of comedy (Bob Golding as Eric Morecambe). Others are so-called “tributes acts” (like those “tribute bands”).

One such tribute act is Lee Lard, identified as “Britain’s number one Peter Kay tribute act.”

Peter Kay is/was a writer/producer/actor who enjoyed success on British television for the better part of a decade (no mean feat in England). Lard is promoted as, “Delivering his own hilarious ‘Peter Kay’ style of standup.”

We suspect that Lard’s show also contains lots of re-enactments from Kay’s three television series. (We don’t know, however. And our intrepid blogger Logan didn’t bother to go see the show in question, so he isn’t exactly sure, either.)

Howeve, this doesn’t stop Logan from speculating and worrying. “The very act of appropriating another comedian’s shtick makes us uncomfortable,” he frets. He wonders: Why is it that something that’s “acceptable” in music doesn’t seem right in comedy. He bobbles the question pretty good.

He then ponders the nature of standup and how a comic’s routine might be thought of as, “an extension of his or her soul.” (Commence eye-rolling here.)

(The comparison to music is bogus. Because of ASCAP and copyright laws, musical tributes benefit the artists, at least here in the states. Comedians do not have publishing houses or an ASCAP-like mechanism in place– SoundExchange notwithstanding. But the instances where anyone would either: 1) actually wish to openly mimic a comedian’s act or 2) actually pay money to see such an act, are rare… so why even make the comparison?)

Logan confuses the issue by including both the Morecambe tribute show and the Lee Lard show in his piece. Morecambe died in 1984 after an historic run on British TV. Peter Kay is still quite alive (although, as some argue in the comments, his career and his creative spark might currently be moribund), so such a “tribute” must necessarily be regarded as a different animal altogether.

We’re not quite sure how we feel about the whole Lee Lard/Peter Kay thing.

If the comedian who is being so “honored” truly wanted to squash this thing, he probably could do so easily.

And if folks wanted to stay home, they could.

So, it seems that Logan (and the gang who agree with him that this might be a pernicious and horribly crass trend) is more annoyed with the folks who flock to such shows (and less than thrilled with the comedians these throngs adore).

But isn’t such a phenomenon ultimately harmless?

We’re reminded of the folks who are obsessed with all things “Star Wars.” They see all the movies in the series, sometimes more than once. They buy the novelizations, they purchase the “Making of…” DVD, they pay good money to see “Chewbacca: The One-Man Show.” Is any of the ancillary stuff any good? Most likely not. It’s all probably just cranked out to capitalize on the popularity of the original. Does it signal the fall of our culture? No.

Of course, that’s a movie.

But we could easily imagine “Seinfeld: The Live Show!” complete with re-enactments of favorite Seinfeld scenes, all framed by a faux Jerry doing brief standup routines. (We can see faux Jerry now– the sleeves of his jacket rolled up, his modified mullet riding high!) And we wouldn’t be at all disturbed by hordes of Seinfeld fans (of the series, of the comedian) showing up in puffy shirts or Cosmo Kramer garb. Perhaps Steve Wynn should look into installing such a show into the same theater that hosted “Spamalot” (a show “lovingly ripped off from” the 1975 film “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” says their own website).

Reading the comments provides fascinating insight into the preferences and prejudices of Guardian readers– especially as they apply to comedy tastes. There also seems to be an undercurrent of class warfare and a bit of snobbery. From what we can discern, folks in the southern portion of England (Londoners, we suppose) aren’t all that thrilled with folks in the northern portion of England (anyone outside of London)– they regard their northern neighbors as rubes, as unsophisticated, as undiscriminating consumers of the dreck that is peddled by the BBC under the banner of comedy. Peter Kay seems to symbolize all that is wrong with them northern hicks.

It sounds vaguely familiar. Rather like the contempt that many folks here in America have for the folks who reside in the Southeastern U.S. or in “Flyover Country.” And there are a few comedians who are emblematic of those people. And their success is a thorn in the side of many entertainment writers and bloggers and tastemakers.

Commenter catlady141 brings some (sarcastic) sanity to the proceedings:

But it really is a bit much– all these working class northerners on the “telly.” Really, if you can’t be amused by nicely-spoken men who’ve been to Oxbridge, you haven’t a sense of humour at all. Some of us want to listen quietly and attentively to our comedy. The sort of loud laughter Kay and his ilk provoke is simply– dare I say it here– common. If comedy isn’t refined, difficult, upsetting and unfunny, it becomes mere entertainment. And that’s the last thing we want.

She’s hit the nail on the head. Logan’s whinging is merely a chance for him and his readers to marginalize a popular comedian. And, if they can elevate their favorites, and pat their fans (and himself) on the back for being so discriminating, it’s a win-win! Anyone having any doubts as to this motivation, just scope out the tiresome (and nakedly catty) comments of Stewart Lee at the end of the blog posting.

Lee’s vicious assessment of colleague Michael McIntyre is a bit embarrassing. He implies that McIntyre’s work is devoid of paranoia, menace and personality. And therefore, McIntyre has no right to perform (as he did recently) in front of tens of thousands at Wembley Stadium. Sounds familiar. (Wembley Stadium = TD Garden Fleet Center, anyone?)

Read all the comments if you want a snapshot of the British comedy scene.

H/T to Aaron Ward!