My lifelong love of comics as an art form has been well-documented in this here bloggy thing but that’s usually me going on about either superhero or indie comics. Comics can also just be funny things for kids to read and a number of said funny comics made a formative impression on me.
Asterix
Another one that likes playing around with words (and impressive that the English translators managed to convey that silliness when bringing it across from the original French). It also has an inherently funny look and feel to it that was instantly appealing to the small me.
Leo Baxendale
Most well-known for being the creator of The Bash Street Kids for The Beano amongst many others (Minnie The Minx and Sweeny Toddler to name just two), it was his creator-owned stuff that had the most impact on me. We had a copy of Willy The Kid Book 2 (never had book 1 or 3) and the sheer volume of gags packed into every pare inch of the picture of the picture is phenomenal. This being one of my favourites:-
Raymond Briggs
The Snowman is a British Christmas TV institution but, for a gross little boy, Fungus The Bogeyman was the one that did it for me. Like Leo Baxendale, it’s the sheer volume of background information crammed into the book that make it such a delight. (Mention must also go to both the book and film of When The Wind Blows, one of the most heart-wrenching stories about the perils of nucler war of the 80s - and there were a few back then too.)
Oink!
I liked comics like Whizzer And Chips and Buster (more so the The Beano which I liked but wasn’t a favourite) but the one that I was obsessed by was Oink. Created by Patrick Gallagher, Tony Husband and Mark Rodgers (with early work from writers such as Charlie Brooker), it was the grubby little cousin to comics like The Beano and a gateway into more adult stuff like Viz, featuring strips like Cowpat County, Burp The Smelly Alien, Pete And His Pimple, Psycho Gran and Tom Thug. It only lasted for two years but I loved it.
Having moved onto the theme of funny comics, it would be remiss not to talk about one which was briefly mentioned above...
Words. Words, words, words. Wordy wordingtons. Useful little blighters (especially handy when composing as blog). Used to convey sense and meaning and generally get one’s gist across. They can be great fun, however, when they’re used for absolute nonsense purposes, for nothing more than a joy in the sounds that they make.
There are several authors that I responded strongly to from a young age who fit that bill (alongside Mr Milligan as discussed in the previous post). None of these should really come as a surprise if you;ve been following so far…
Dr Seuss
Or Theodore Giesel as his mother would have known him. Responsible for getting many a generation hooked on rhyming nonsense for quite a few decades now. I also love a good comedy name and Too Many Daves has a fine selection (including but not limited to Hoofoos, Snimm, Oliver Boliver Butt and Marvin O’Gracel Balloon Face).
Interesting Fact:- Seuss actually wrote and illustrated a couple of books for adults, one of which was called The Seven Lady Godivas and features (unsurprisingly) naked ladies.
Lewis Carroll
Alice In Wonderland and Alice Through The Looking Glass were definite favourites and include one of the only poems I used to know off by heart (Jabberwocky). These weren’t his only works, though, and The Hunting Of The Snark contains some nicely sublime silliness too.
Interesting Fact:- The Hunting Of The Snark is divide into Fits (Fit The First, Fit The Second, etc.), a titling convention that Douglas Adams borrowed for the radio episodes of The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy.
Edward Lear
The king of the limerick and the progenitor of many a nonsense enthusiast, Lear loved a good illogical image and a ridiculous name. The Owl And The Pussycat has stood the test of time with its combination of charm and daftness (and I was also fond of the Quangle Wangle’s Hat)
Vague Fact:- I have a vague memory of seeing a musical based upon the works of Lear as a child featuring The Owl, The Pussycat, The Quangle Wangle, The Dong With The Luminous Nose and The Plum Pudding Flea amongst others...
Roald Dahl
During my childhood, though, this was the man who reigned supreme. I loved Roald Dahl books with a passion and devoured them all. Favourites for me included The Twits, George’s Marvellous Medicine and The Witches (although I never read a Roald Dahl book I didn't like).
Interesting Fact:- Roald Dahl’s first book was written for Disney and was called The Gremlins (based upon RAF folklore about little creatures in planes).
It wasn’t just books that had a humourous impact upon my tiny little child-like mind, however...
When it comes to silliness and wordplay, there’s one person who has loomed large throughout my comedy archeology. I had books of his ludicrous poetry, I listened to audio tapes of his decades-old radio show and I watched what few repeats there were of his TV stuff (by the time I was really into him, he was more of a staple on the chat show circuit than anything else).
Spike Milligan
Spike Milligna, the well-known typing error (as he often referred to himself), definitely came from a similar mold to that of Groucho Marx as he probably wouldn't belong to a club that would have him as a member either.* Everything could be viewed through the lense of the silly as far as Spike was concerned. Let’s look at some of the things that have had an impact for me.
Poetry - Silly Verse For Kids & A Book Of Milliganimals
These two were particularly well-thumbed, pretty much to the point of disintegration. Not only were they full of flights of extremely daft mental fancy, they were also accompanied by a selection of wonderfully scratchy and bizarrely annotated Spike Milligan drawings. In fact, both Spike and Leo Baxendale (creator of The Bash Street Kids form The Beano amongst others) are responsible for my love of a comedy annotation in a drawing. I you can find somewhere else to stick a gag, do so.
The Goon Show
The BBC started releasing these on cassette in the late eighties/early nineties and I was hooked. The advantage of radio comedy is that the pictures are always better. Radio was an ideal medium for Milligan in that it allowed his conceptually odd humour to be given full reign. Yes, OK, I always used to fast forward the musical interludes but the comedy still stands up.
Q
Milligan’s jump to stream-of-consciousness TV sketch show (just prior to Monty Python launching with the same) contains some absolute gems but does have much that is problematic today. His ideas on race and gender are very much a product of the World War II era (combined with an upbringing in colonial India) and make for some, quite frankly, racist and sexist material (one of the reasons it doesn’t get shown today). However, when it delivers the goods, it really delivers the goods; particular favourites of mine being the Raspberry Song and the Jehovah’s Burglars sketch (“We’re being persecuted for beliefs.” “What are your beliefs?” “We’ve believe you’ve got a lot of money on the premises.”)
So, I’ve been trying to let these flow one into the other but we have reached a branching point where I could talk about audio comedy (as prompted by The Goon Show) or focus more on a love of silly language and the written word. Let’s follow one of those tomorrow and come back to the other...
* In fact, that is true - he was refused a British passport as he wouldn't swear an Oath of Allegiance. Fortunately, due to his ancestry, Ireland stepped in and snapped him up instead.
The preceding stuff was all comedy that was viewed with the whole family - parents and grandparents (Grandad was always happy to watch a good cartoon) - and today’s entry is no exception. It’s not only formative comedy for me but formative screen comedy in general…
Harold Lloyd, Laurel & Hardy, The Marx Brothers
From silent to silent plus talkie to really very talkie indeed, these iconic stars of the black and white era were and continue to be an influence. “Not Chaplin, Keaton or The Three Stooges then?” Nope, none of those really did it for me. With Chaplin and Keaton, I can see that they are technically very impressive and they have certainly put in an incredible amount of thought and effort into what they do but they don’t make me care about them. There’s something about both of them that just leaves me cold. Not so with these.
Harold Lloyd
There’s a charm and likeability to Lloyd that’s not present for me with Chaplin or Keaton. There’s also a genuinely thrilling element to his films with the knowledge that he performs all his own stunts, the most memorable of these being hanging off a clock face on the side of a building for Safety Last*.
Laurel & Hardy
The original comedy double act** and proof once again that characterisation is one of the cornerstones of comedy. It’s a time-honoured tradition - the two buffoons; one of whom is, in his mind, higher status than the other but is still a buffoon nonetheless. As with most of the other comedians of the era that have endured, Laurel & Hardy were always pushing the boundaries of what was technically possible and producing some good results. And, much like Bugs Bunny, there’s the occasional moment of cross-dressing.
The Marx Brothers
I loved Laurel & Hardy and Harold Lloyd but these were my favourite. They covered a number of bases - wordless slapstick from Harpo, the buffoons of differing status (Grouch over Chico over Harpo but not always like that) and very silly, conceptual wordplay. That, for me, was the kicker - combining surreal with silly and a love of language. Groucho Marx has always counted as one of my comedy heroes and was an influence of other people whose comedy I would come to admire...
* While it both impressive and dangerous, it’s not quite as dangerous as it looks. The part of the building that he’s hanging off was built on the rooftop of another building to create the impression of great height. He is still a couple of storeys up without a harness, though, so not exactly “safe”...
** I’m sure someone more versed in classic film comedy will probably point out that there was an obscure double act well before they came to popularity but, let’s face it, if you have to go and look them up, they haven’t exactly stood the test of time, have they?
If you happen to have spared a glance at the assorted brain run-off cluttering up this tiny corner of the internet, this next entry in the unpicking of comedic influences should comes as no real surprise…
Jim Henson
Three things entered into the brain at a very young age and have been firmly lodged there ever since - Sesame Street, The Muppet Show and Fraggle Rock. Sesame Street and The Muppet Show were there from day one for me with Fraggle Rock emerging as I hit about seven but all of them have had a lasting impact. What’s so good about all this Henson stuff then? Let’s break some of it down a little bit.
Characterisation
It’s pretty much rule number one so this is going to come up a lot but Henson absolutely nails characterisation. You only have to watch a single sketch / scene to understand not only the individual characters’ motivations but also the dynamics between them. Kermit is in charge of a madhouse and just barely hanging in there by a thread. Miss Piggy is a trucker who thinks she’s a superstar (Frank Oz’s description in the excellent documentary Muppet Guys Talking). Fozzie desperately wants to be funny and liked. Cookie Monster really, really likes cookies.
Timing
All of the Muppet performers have great comic timing but the best results are often when Jim Henson and Frank Oz are sharing the screen (well, just underneath the screen with their arms in the air but you get the idea with that one). For me, the epitome of this is a sketch from the first series of The Muppet Show (episode 110 with Harvey Korman if you want to be nerdy about it and I do) in which Fozzie enlists the unrehearsed help of Kermit to deliver a joke with increasingly exasperating results and all to deliver the cheesiest of punchlines. It’s the sort of thing that would sit comfortably with Morecambe and Wise at their prime and has a back and forth that many a double act would kill for.
Silliness And Weirdness
This is also going to be a big theme throughout these. I like it when things get weird. From nonsense songs like Hugga Wugga and Mahna Mahna through to Angus McGonagall the Argyle Gargoyle (who gargles Gershwin gorgeously), silly and strange is always going to be a winner for me.
A love of all thing Henson has not faded. The Muppet Movie (original one from 1979 although I do like the most recent ones too) is the filmic equivalent of comfort food; something that always provoke a warm and fuzzy feeling inside thanks to the warm and fuzzy characters onscreen. We’re not done with early influences yet and the next early influences are really very early indeed...
While American cartoons largely dominate the world of animation, they’re not the only ones out there. If I’m going through this in an archeological sense then there is definitely British cartoon that stands tall amongst those early influences. It’s the fastest, it’s the greatest, it’s the best (to paraphrase the theme tune)....
Danger Mouse
A product of the British animation company Cosgrove Hall (sadly no longer around) who also gave us such 70s kids TV classics as Chorlton And The Wheelies and Jime And The Magic Torch*, Danger Mouse was a programme that made its way all throughout my childhood. In fact, the original series ran for a surprisingly long time - 1981 to 1992 - meaning that it ran through well into my teenage years.
What’s so good about it then? It’s very, very silly. Lots of daft wordplay, groan-inducing puns, breaking of the fourth wall and a very British sensibility. In a way, it’s an inheritor of that anarchic streak that’s present in Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry but leavened by two things - a much more British tendency towards understatement and a minuscule budget which certainly limits the capabilities of the animators (the series contains a high number of scenes either in the dark where there are only eyes visible - eye in the case of DM himself - or in DM’s car where the dashboard obscures their mouths thus meaning lots of shots can be reused!).
It’s one of those series which strikes a humor balance that appeals to both kids and adults. It’s worth noting that, at the height of its popularity in 1983, it racked up an astonishing 21 million viewers even beating out Coronation Street (a feat that has yet to be rivaled by any other children’s programme in the UK). This would be helped largely by the calibre of the voice talent with David Jason as Danger Mouse and Terry Scott as Penfold. Both of them were already household names by this point, especially when you reach the highs of those 1983 ratings as both Only Fools And Horses and Terry And June were well into their runs by then. It also helps that they’re both great in the roles as are Edward Kelsey and Brian Trueman rounding out the regular cast as Baron Greenback, Colonel K and Stiletto between them (as well a providing most of the supporting cast).
It’s been successful enough to spawn both a spin-off (Count Duckula also starring David Jason in the title role) and a reboot a couple of years with moved from ITV to CBBC (and starred Alexander Armstrong, Kevin Eldon and Stephen Fry in the main roles - keeping the tradition of using established comedians going).
I absolutely loved it and was appropriately obsessed with it as a small spotty herbert. Danger Mouse, along with the Looney Tunes/Tom & Jerry, seeped into the general mulch that was becoming my sense of humor (such as it is) but it wasn’t just cartoons that were imprinting upon my tiny little mind….
* To any non-UK readers out there:- Yes, these do sound like I’ve made them up but they are genuine programmes.
Having been thoroughly enjoying the Rule Of Three podcast in which comedy writers Joel Morris and Jason Hazeley invite a guest on to dissect a piece of comedy which they love, it’s made my think about the many, many forms of comedy which have come together over the years to form the backbone of my sense of humour. Being someone who is never afraid to nick ideas from other people in order to generate words to fill up posts on this here blog, I’ve decided to do a bit of an archeological dig through the comedy which has influenced me over the years.
I’m toying with the idea of following it roughly though in order while trying to theme it at the same time. This could be biting off more than I can chew and may well collapse under the weight of its own ambition / pretension but let’s give it a try and see how far it gets.
Taking it back to my earliest influences, let’s kick off with cartoons. Specifically, two types of cartoon in particular…
Looney Tunes, Tex Avery & Tom And Jerry
“Hmm, those are all well and good but aren’t they just for kids?” A statement that is wrong in almost every conceivable way. Something that’s often forgotten these days is that cartoons were just a part of the cinematic experience alongside the film as well as newsreels and episodic adventure serials. They were just another form of entertainment. In fact, if anything they were seen as disposable (as evidenced by the fact that the studios used to wipe the original animation cels after use in order to be able to reuse them) which worked in their favour as the animators were largely left to their own devices. Conversely, this has created entertainment far more enduring than a lot of the films they were created to support. Let’s cherry pick a few examples to illustrate why they’re great.
What’s Opera, Doc? & The Rabbit Of Seville
Both of these are classic examples of what can be done with sparse / no dialogue (unless you count singing), a stunning combination of character and background and character work and a use of music as part of the action (which music always is in a Looney Tunes cartoon) rather than just an incidental afterthought. What’s Opera, Doc? Is often hailed as the best of the bunch but I have a real love for The Rabbit Of Seville. Both contain some standard elements - Elmer chasing Bugs, an escalation of efforts and Bugs in drag.
Duck Amuck
An early example of meta humour as this involves breaking the fourth wall almost all the way through as Daffy is tormented by an unseen (until the very end) animator. It’s a selection of gags about the process of making a cartoon, highlighting the artificial nature of the medium itself and not the sort of thing you found in film at the time. It’s both an in-joke for creators and invitation to the audience to come inside that world. It’s also very funny.
The Cat Concerto
Another example of the overlap between music and comedy (something that will crop up time and time again throughout these given the importance of rhythm and timing to both) and also shows how, once you’ve fully established the character dynamic, you can transplant those characters into pretty much any situation; in this case, Tom being the concert pianist disturbing Jerry’s attempts to sleep in the piano.
Northwest Hounded Police & Red Hot Riding Hood
Tex Avery was another big influence and another director producing fourth-wall-breaking material such as the wolf running off the edge of the film at one point in Northwest Hounded Police. Also, you can't talk about classic cartoons without mentioning the wolf’s reaction to Red Riding Hood (as recreated by Jim Carrey in The Mask).
And that’s not even mentioning Duck Dodgers In The 24 1/2th Century; Rabbit Fire, Rabbit Seasoning, and Duck! Rabbit! Duck! (the “Rabbit season! Duck Season!’ ones); Fast And Furry-ous (the template for Wile E Coyote and Road Runner cartoons); One Froggy Evening (the one with the singing frog who keeps refusing to sing in front of an audience); and a good few hundred more. Cartoons were definitely a formative influence as well as continuing to be one to this day. It wasn’t just Bugs, Daffy, Droopy, Tom and Jerry that had a formative impact, though...
Beginnings are easy when it comes to stories. All that potential is out there. The possibilities are endless and the characters and the plot could take you anywhere. You might have an idea (vague or concrete) of the destination you're heading for or you might even be freewheeling it completely to see where it all takes you but the world is your oyster at this point.
Endings are tricky. You’ve got to bring it all together to provide something that is satisfying narratively and/or emotionally for the characters and the story they are a part of. It may not be the ending you want or one that you necessarily like but it should be the ending that fits (whether you knew you were getting there all along or not).
Ending an epic, and a popular one at that, is even trickier. There’s a greater weight of expectation given the longer duration and wider scope of the journey and the chances are higher that it’s going to have to work harder to give you that satisfaction of a deserved finale. Add in to that an avid fanbase who has been poring over the most minute of details in the hopes of clues towards that ending and the risk of dissatisfaction increases.
All of which brings us to the conclusion of Game Of Thrones.
(And, as always, I will try to be general; however, you may want to look away now if you don’t want any hints at all as to how it could all be finishing up.)
There have been articles expressing a certain amount of fan displeasure with this season, leading to a certain element starting a petition to have the entire final season rewritten and reshot (which is a frankly ludicrous position and one of the most recent examples of what is being dubbed “fantitlement”). Here’s why I think the writers were never going to be able to please everyone with this.
Outstripping The Adaptation
Some complaints have focussed on the fact that the series has overtaken the books has lead to a decline - that they are “terrible” writers when left to it on their own. I would disagree with this. This isn’t evidence of them being terrible writers but it is evidence of them being forced to write differently. George RR Martin himself has spent five books laying out plot threads and seeds that he’s allowed to grow and is now struggling to bring those together. TV show runners don’t have the luxury of waiting a few more years for the story to come to an end; the practicalities of production have meant that they had to make the choice to keep going and also when to end it - you can bet that people would have started complaining had the show gone on and on at the same pace as the early seasons without an end in sight. So they made the hard choice and this meant they would have to bring a lot of threads together to get to an ending.
Sometimes, People Don’t Pay Enough Attention
What was deemed a “sudden” character turn in the penultimate episode has also been criticised for making a beloved character into a figure of hate. It is sudden in the sense that the turn itself happened frighteningly quickly within the episode but the show has been signaling this for years (even as far back as season two which shows one of the main scenes of the last episode). It’s just that people didn't want to see that of a character that they liked.
Leading You Down A Visible Narrative Path
Given the above, this leads to me to my only real complaint (overall, I’ve enjoyed the series as much as I enjoyed previous ones - good stuff in some places, less good stuff in others):- it played out exactly the way that I thought i would with only two or three exceptions in the last series. The overall thrust of the story and the way in which it would have to end was pretty clear to me and that’s where it went. That’s not necessarily a bad thing as, from a story perspective, it payed off what had been set up but it makes things a little frustrating as there are no real surprises. It also means that, in order to hit the remaining key plot points, sometimes characters are doing things driven by the plot instead being borne out of their characterisation.
Some People Are Never Going To Be Satisfied
When you have a fervent fanbase, hardly any ending is going to satisfy them. Some people just don’t want it to end and are going to be unhappy with whatever you serve up.
So in conclusion, it was an ending that was unlikely to satisfy everyone and that looks to have been the case. Was it a bad ending then? No, definitely not - it brought the series to a close in a way that satisfied the demands of the plot. The drawback to that has been that, in order to service the plot, some characters have suffered as a result of that. And so, in that spirit, I’m going to draw this blog to a close because it has reached its end point. Right….here. (See? Endings are tricky.)
In days gone by, the truest indication that you were watching a comedy was the ever-present sound of an audience’s enjoyment punctuating all the funny bits for you. While still around, it’s definitely no longer something that could be described as being popular or the default setting. In fact, if anything the opposite is true. A quick squint at the majority of modern comedies, both British and American, will reveal very little in the way of audience laughter accompanying the soundtrack. Fleabag, Home, Back To Life, Don’t Forget The Driver, The Detectorists, Friday Night Dinner, Alan Partridge, Modern Family, Brooklyn Nine-Nine, The Good Place - not a titter to be heard.
So Why Do We Need It?
As an audience, arguably we don’t and never did. The true intent of an audience laughing is not to make less than funny comedies seem funnier (although it had undoubtedly been used that way - I went to the taping of a music-based BBC panel show many years ago and, from my subjective point of view of course, the audience laughter was more prominent in the edit than in person…). No, the value to be had in an audience responding to the comedy unfolding in front of them is the same one that is provided to a stand up comedian - it’s an immediate reaction to what is funny and what is working and can enhance a performance. Monty python, Fawlty Towers, Blackadder, Only Fools And Horses, Red Dwarf, Frasier - all shows that clearly benefit from the audience response and can impact the timing of delivery.
Should We Have It Back On Everything Then?
Absolutely not. Those comedies that don’t have a laugh track do so for a reason. Whether it be to maintain the illusion of truth (the documentary style of The Office, Parks And Recreation and Modern Family) or because the subtlety of the performance wouldn't be enhanced by audience interaction in this instance (Fleabag definitely.)
So What’s The Problem Here?
There’s a perceived wisdom at work that seems to indicate that comedy with a laugh track is old-fashioned or worse false and therefore rubbish. I don’t agree - the right sort of comedy can benefit from the enhanced performances you get from the audience interaction. It would be refreshing to see something new made (other than a panel show, of course) that fits that mold - the last one I can think that consciously went down this route was The IT Crowd.
Much like a Spike Milligan sketch, this blog doesn’t have a strong ending so I’m just going to shuffle off sideways repeating the phrase, “What are we going to do now?” (Hmmm, actually, maybe that gives me idea for another one of these….)
