Andrew J. Lederer

and now i think i can more clearly express what i was talking about --

"i'm dark and i'm outraged about things any thinking person would already be outraged about and we all feel better and special for sharing this outrage though this shared feeling isn't going to change anything and i'm not half as funny as a laurel and hardy movie or an episode of 'fawlty towers'."

now, i have nothing against darkness or outrage in comedy but there is a perhaps unintentional disingenuousness here. as in "i'm, shocked, shocked that government lies to us and corporations aren't our friends." (yes, i know i also used the inspector renault template in my last screed on disingenuousness. it fits.)

i remember last year in edinburgh, critics mentioned excitedly how doug stanhope seemed positively on the verge of destroying himself.

this is comedy? watching a guy destroy himself?

i guess it is if you're the type of person who finds people being thrown to lions funny or finds risible a guy collapsing with a heart attack in the street. (yes, it would be funny if he fell into mud.)

oh, yeah -- i forgot -- stanhope was throwing himself to the lions because he couldn't stand the pain of all the truth he had to bear because of his inability to shield himself like we mere mortals in the audience.

"ah, but my sacrifice is worth it as you may be able to benefit from what i'm forcing you to face, even if i go under."

come on, do any of you really believe doug stanhope was/is "destroying himself" (if, indeed, he was or is) because of the world? self-destruction is more personal than that. it comes from within. the societal commentary, true or otherwise, is just something you hang on your pain.

(this is as far as i got with these thoughts.)