boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) (10/04/85)
> From: ucla-cs!reiher (Peter Reiher) >I suppose if one's taste is exclusively to Oscar Wilde, Noel Coward, and >Woody Allen, biting verbal wit, then one might not enjoy classic silent comedy. >Otherwise, I do not understand how anyone could fail to appreciate it, >and you are the first person I have ever heard say that he has actually >seen it and didn't like it. I won't argue preferences (Chaplin vs. Keaton), >nor a dislike of an individual performer, but, taken as a whole, the great >silent comedies of the 1920s are, in my opinion, the funniest films ever >made. Well, mark me down for another one who cannot appreciate the silent comedies. I like all kinds of comedy, from the slapstick of the Three Stooges to the droll, intellectual wit of Woody Allen, but for some reason I have been unable to fathom, I've never been able to warm to any of the classic film comedians (Keaton, Chaplin, etc.) or comedy teams (Laurel & Hardy, Marx Brothers, etc.). --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Acton-Nagog, MA) UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
tomczak@harvard.ARPA (Bill Tomczak) (10/05/85)
> From: boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) >Well, mark me down for another one who cannot appreciate the silent comedies. >I like all kinds of comedy, from the slapstick of the Three Stooges to the >droll, intellectual wit of Woody Allen, but for some reason I have been unable >to fathom, I've never been able to warm to any of the classic film comedians >(Keaton, Chaplin, etc.) or comedy teams (Laurel & Hardy, Marx Brothers, etc.). Wow! Someone who admits to liking the Three Stooges!! (Although I have to admit that in my sillier moments I get real charge out of the Stooges). One thing I thought of as I read this was that as I watched a bunch of Keaton films awhile back I found myself very slightly annoyed at one common theme that seemed to run through all his films. The comedy in almost every single case (I actually think is was EVERY case, but I can't be sure) revolved around someone not saying something to somebody else or making assumptions based on a lack of communication between two or more people. It also seemed to be presented as something that 'decent' people just didn't do/say. Several times it occurred to me that "if only he/she/they had said (whatever)" everything would be fine. And also the funniness would be gone. I've noticed this is many other films of the silent era and wondered how much of the comedy might be based on cultural conventions of the time (1920's). Perhaps the changes that have occurred in society since then are one reason for not being able to appreciate comedy from that era? Has anyone else had this kind of experience?? Bill Tomczak@harvard.{ARPA, UUCP}
reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (10/08/85)
In article <395@harvard.ARPA> tomczak@harvard.UUCP (Bill tomczak) writes: >> From: boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) > >One thing I thought of as I read this was that as I watched a bunch of >Keaton films awhile back I found myself very slightly annoyed at one >common theme that seemed to run through all his films. The comedy in >almost every single case (I actually think is was EVERY case, but I >can't be sure) revolved around someone not saying something to somebody >else or making assumptions based on a lack of communication between two >or more people. It also seemed to be presented as something that >'decent' people just didn't do/say. Several times it occurred to me >that "if only he/she/they had said (whatever)" everything would be >fine. And also the funniness would be gone. I've noticed this is many >other films of the silent era and wondered how much of the comedy might >be based on cultural conventions of the time (1920's). Perhaps the >changes that have occurred in society since then are one reason for not >being able to appreciate comedy from that era? Has anyone else had >this kind of experience?? No. I can't say that I have noticed silent comedy particularly based on this principle. How would you apply it to, say, "The General"? The cabin scene in "The Gold Rush"? The hurricane scene in "Steamboat Bill, Jr."? The climbing scene in "Safety Last"? The skyscraper scenes in "Liberty"? The factory scenes in "Modern Times"? The boxing scenes in "City Lights"? The destruction of the house in "Big Business"? The football game in "The Freshman"? The scene of Keaton pursued by hundreds of prospective brides in "Seven Chances"? Chaplin's unlikely subdual of the bully in "Easy Street"? In fact, what films and scenes do you base this observation on? Obviously, misunderstandings are a common basis for comedy, going back to the Greeks and forward through Shakespeare all the way up to today. I can't say that the silent comedians were any fonder of this device than any other group, though. Now, Jackie Gleason and Lucille Ball relied on this very very heavily, back in the Golden Age of TV comedy, but that isn't nearly the same thing as the Golden Age of Film Comedy. -- Peter Reiher reiher@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU {...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher
tomczak@harvard.ARPA (Bill Tomczak) (10/13/85)
In article <7022@ucla-cs.ARPA> reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (Peter Reiher) writes: >misunderstandings are a common basis for comedy, going back to the Greeks >and forward through Shakespeare all the way up to today. I can't say that >the silent comedians were any fonder of this device than any other group, >though. Now, Jackie Gleason and Lucille Ball relied on this very very >heavily, back in the Golden Age of TV comedy, but that isn't nearly the >same thing as the Golden Age of Film Comedy. Well, I've spent the last half hour trying to remember specifics. I really wanted to respond with some kind of documentation on this. Unfortunately, I saw those films over a year ago and couldn't come up with enough facts to back me up. I guess I'll have to watch more of the 20's silents a little more consciously in this regard. Sorry, I'm a lousy researcher. I was only left with some vague impressions that somehow struck me as significant. (I don't THINK I was doing any drugs.... but I forget....) Bill Tomczak@harvard.{ARPA, UUCP}
barth@tellab1.UUCP (Barth Richards) (10/21/85)
In article <395@harvard.ARPA> tomczak@harvard.UUCP (Bill tomczak) writes: >One thing I thought of as I read this was that as I watched a bunch of >Keaton films awhile back I found myself very slightly annoyed at one >common theme that seemed to run through all his films. The comedy in >almost every single case (I actually think is was EVERY case, but I >can't be sure) revolved around someone not saying something to somebody >else or making assumptions based on a lack of communication between two >or more people. It also seemed to be presented as something that >'decent' people just didn't do/say. Several times it occurred to me >that "if only he/she/they had said (whatever)" everything would be >fine. And also the funniness would be gone. I've noticed this is many >other films of the silent era and wondered how much of the comedy might >be based on cultural conventions of the time (1920's). Perhaps the >changes that have occurred in society since then are one reason for not >being able to appreciate comedy from that era? Has anyone else had >this kind of experience?? I know I have. So have others. On a radio talk show, Douglas Adams (THE HITCH- HIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY) said that when he was in school, he always looked forward to taking a Shakespeare class, particularly for the comedies. When he finally did read them, he was disappointed because they just weren't that funny, and he realized that this was because most of the jokes had to be explained to him. The subject matter of the jokes just wasn't easily grasped by someone living in the 20th century. Humor is a very fragile thing. If you have to explain a joke, it's no longer as funny. The humor depends on both the performer and the audience having similar expectations. So, differences in culture, even a handful of years separation within the same culture, can confuse or even totally obscure the point of a joke. Some jokes, of course, are more universal than others. So, in this more enlightened age (well, we like to think it is), people are not as reserved. There aren't nearly as many things that "you just don't say." (If you don't believe me listen to or watch Dr. Ruth Westheimer's "Good Sex" program. Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish! In 1925 you'd have been imprisoned for life for saying stuff like that to your doctor. Now people call into radio talk shows with this stuff!) I have had similar thoughts about Keaton films (well, ok, film...I've only seen one.) In THE GENERAL, Keaton is a young man in the South during the Civil War. He is turned down when he volunteers for the Confederate Army due to his slight build (as I remember) but his girl thinks he was too cowardly to join. Keaton's character is too polite to object, because you were suppose to be polite to the ladies. Anyway, you are not alone. Barth Richards Tellabs, Inc. Lisle, IL