2 Responses

1. John says:

   October 15, 2007 at 9:10 pm

   Good point about standups’ versatility. No reason to expect ironic distance just because someone is a comedian. But I’m a little thrown off by your characterization of Patton Oswalt and David Cross as comedians who would make one expect inauthenticity and ironic distance. All of Patton and David’s material is personal, from either an observational or storytelling point place, and all contain their hertfelt opinions and life stories. There is NO distance between David or Patton and the words they say on stage and this is precisely why they are such satisfying performers. Good examples of this are Patton’s bit on writing punch up on Comedy Death Ray (comedy central records) or David’s bits on growing up Jewish in the South (Shut Up You Fucking Baby, Sub Pop records) or owning a dog( Comedy Death Ray, cc records)Demetri Martin is a one liner guy and I understand how people who use that style (Demetri, Zack Galafanakis, Steven Writght, Emo Phillips, BJ Novak, Nick Thune, among others) could be singled out for ironic distance, although inauthenticity seems harsh.The only comedians I could see described as inauthentic would be ones who use other people’s material without permission, or ones who’s onstage persona is so divorced from their actual self that one suspects calculation. Neither Demetri, David, nor Patton deserve to be tarred with this brush.

   Reply
2. Brian McKim & Traci Skene says:

   October 15, 2007 at 9:57 pm

   Thanks for your comments!Perhaps naming Mr. Oswalt and Mr. Cross was slightly inaccurate.But– when we say that Oswalt and Cross might be viewed as ironic and distant from the proceedings or that their onstage personae might be somewhat “inauthentic,” we (believe it or not) didn’t mean that as an insult.So… we weren’t “tarring” anyone, with or without a brush.What we said was that the author of the Reuters piece has an idea about what a comic is, what a comic is capable of and what roles a comic is believable in.And he’s somewhat misinformed. If Cross or Oswalt don’t exactly hammer home the point or fit the description, you’ve provided a couple that do.And again, when we use the term inauthentic, it is not intended for one second to be a pejorative term, but in the strictest sense of the term. It’s used in a technical way, not in a personal attack.The Male Half, for instance, is under no illusions that the audience might believe his onstage persona to be anything like his offstage persona. This is neither a good thing nor a bad thing, it is just a thing. He is inauthentic in that an audience member might ask, “How much of what I see do I believe to be real and how much is artifice.” A comic’s authenticity is not a reflection on him personally.We all make a decision as to how much of what we reveal to the audience is real and how much is contrived. And… some of the best and most famous comic have done a splendid job of faking authenticity!

   Reply