> On 27-Apr-2007, smacked up and reeling, m...@sawfish.com blindly formulated
> the following incoherence:
>

>> Stand-ups tend to lance festering sensibilities, and you feel better
>> afterwards, like having a boil lanced (or is it a lance boiled--I'm
>> not sure now)

>
> LOL! A bit of a comedian yourself, Sawdude.
>

>> Now, in my view, you will likely always have more Mort Sahls than
>> Dennis Millers, merely because the left side of the political spectrum
>> tends to view itself as vitimized more than the right side--although
>> the right does their share of whining, too. But to members of the
>> traditional right, whining is a shame and a disgrace, and while you
>> may in fact indulge in it, it is a weakness to be resisted. Like
>> drinking before noon.

>

>> The left, on the other hand, seems to been much more tolerant of
>> whining (and really pretty much anything else that an avowed liberal
>> indivdual can do/express), and hence there is more whining from that
>> side of the spectrum.

>

>> And whining is an indicator that a stand-up is needed...

>
> Interesting analysis, and I see a lot of truth there. But I think the
> dearth of conservative comedians is a specific instance of a larger
> tendency. As Ive observed here many times, conservatives in general arent
> particularly interested in art and culture (with the possible exception of
> cultural education as a mark of good breeding), and I think there are
> several reason why this is true. Your observation about whining is a big
> part of it. Conservative tend to value not only confrontation, but action.
> Art in many forms, especially modern art (and I use that term in it's most
> general sense, not to refer to any specific movement...'cause I dont know
> about tat stuff... but simply to describe art conceived in the present and
> recent past), tends to lead to questions rather than answers and
> conclusions. For most conservatives, this may strike them as a waste of
> time and energy. They dont see value in introspection and analysis unless
> it is part of a credible effort to solve a concrete problem. In fact it's a
> quite sensible view to consider most art to be of little practical value.
>
> Along those same lines, conservatives by nature tend to make (or encourage
> thier kids to make) career choices and decisions that are safe and
> practical. "Dad, I wanna be a comedian." would be less welcome to a
> conservative than to a liberal. So conservative comedians are less likely
> to appear in the first place, and must play to a smaller potential audience
> if they do.
>
> Liberals, on the other hand, seem to feel that art is a powerful force for
> social change. I tend to fall somewhere between the two extremes, because I
> think art has practical (albeit mostly personal) value and can effect some
> small degree of social change. But I dont see it as a powerful social
> force, at least not in the US. The manner in which this country was
> populated, i.e. risk takers seeking a better life, favors those who choose
> action over introspection. For most americans, art is merely entertainment
> and distraction.
>
> As for liberals...I nearly drove off the road one day when I was listening
> to a discussion on NPR about the supposed dangers of nuclear power. A
> caller proudly proclaimed that she had been "writing a lot of anti-nuclear
> poetry, lately". The host responded with an enthusiastic "That's
> wonderful."
>
> steve
> --
> "The accused will now make a bogus statement."
> James Joyce