the grand finale

Hi, everyone. For your final assignment, I’d like you to write a smart, insightful 3-4 page paper on one of the following topics (yes, I've tried to make sure that you've got a lot to choose from). You should email this paper to me at erg22@cornell.edu no later than Wednesday, May 16, at 2pm (yes, I’ve given you a few more days to work on it than originally planned). As I stated in the course syllabus, I’d also like you to include a one-page assessment of your performance in our class along with the letter grade you think that you deserve. Be honest, be candid, and don’t be afraid to point out the areas--in your thinking, in your writing--in which you tried to challenge yourself this semester.

1. On October 15, 2004, Jon Stewart appeared on CNN's "Crossfire" with Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson. Although the show had aired for over a dozen years, within three months of Stewart's visit, the show was cancelled (video of Stewart's interview is here, a transcript is here). In Stewart's estimation, "Crossfire" had come to epitomize the most divisive and intellectually paralyzing aspects of post-9/11 political discourse in America, and he criticized Begala and Carlson accordingly. As of this weekend, video of Stewart's CNN appearance has been viewed almost four million times on iFilm alone. Explain why you think Stewart's criticisms have resonated so widely. What role did political satire have to play in his comments? What does this say to you about cable television, the mainstream media, and/or political debate in post-9/11 American culture?

2. On April 29, 2006, Stephen Colbert gave a controversial performance at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner (video is here, a transcript is here). Colbert's satirical humor didn't go over very well with President George Bush or the Washington press corps. What's your opinion of his performance?

3. Write a movie review of Michael Moore's 2004 film Fahrenheit 9/11, a work that Moore once described as a "satirical documentary." (Unfortunately, Cornell's library system doesn't have any copies of the DVD, so you'll have to get one on your own.)

4. Using Bill Maher as your inspiration, come up with at least eight original "New Rules" for improving post-9/11 political discourse in America.

5. Write about the most original, insightful, or provocative thought you had during our course. Make sure that your paper includes an analysis of at least one of the satirical films, memoirs, characters, graphic novels, comic strips, documentaries, television shows, or newspapers that we covered during the semester. This is your chance to make a "big statement" about our course, so don't be timid.

6. Argue why a post-9/11 satirical work that we didn't cover in class would make an excellent addition to the syllabus. Who is its target audience? What are its themes or subjects? How does it relate to other works we treated together in class?

7. Write a satire that takes either Finals Week or the English 289 writing seminar "American Political Satire Before and After 9/11" as its subject. Your paper can take the form of a television or film script, a day-in-the-life narrative, or a mock-serious sociological study, to name just a few possibilities. Don't worry about being offensive, just worry about being dull and unfunny.

8. Compare the style, techniques, and strategies of at least two different satirists or satirical works that we covered together in class. In your opinion, which one is ultimately more succesful? Why? Focus on details, not generalities.

Contact me if you have any questions. Otherwise, have fun, and good luck!

cairo. that's in egypt.

Alright, folks. Just one more. Please write on one of the following topics by 8PM Sunday night.

1. Your best friend from high school is now an up-and-coming Hollywood producer. (Who knew?) You're pushing your way through "Club Sidewalk" after a night on the town, when your friend leans over and says, "Pssst! I'm looking to make a satirical movie about post-9/11 American culture. You got any ideas?" Hmmm, interesting. How do you respond?

2. Team America: World Police has been called a right-wing satire of post-9/11 American culture. Do you think that's true? Why?

3. Describe a cliche that you noticed in Team America and talk about its significance (just think about it, there are a bunch of them).

4. What's the moral of Team America?

wot yous is supposed to be bangin on about

Jagshemash! Drawing on this week's discussions of Sacha Baron Cohen's "Da Ali G Show," write about one of the following:

1. If you were to tape your own Da Ali G-type show for Cornell, what character or persona would you create? Try to think of someone who would give you the same kind of flexibility that Bruno, Borat, and Ali G give to Sacha Baron Cohen. What local event or hot spot would you cover? What questions would you ask?

2. Borat has enjoyed the bulk of popular attention lately, but we ignore Bruno at our peril--or do we? Give us your take on this episode of "Funkyzeit mit Bruno" about Alabama, the gayest part of America (and if you have insights into this clip from an Arkansas gun show, then share those, too).

3. "Fashion saves a lot more lives than doctors"--Bruno strikes again at Fashion Week. Share your thoughts.

4. We didn't get a chance to fully explore Borat's experiment with country music. What do you think?

5. Have another Ali G, Borat, or Bruno clip that you're excited to talk about? Give us a link, and explain what the clip reveals to you about humor, satire, particular people, or particular parts of American society.

from rough to ready

Just to recap what I said on Thursday about your essay assignment:

1. Bring a final draft to class on Thursday, April 19.

2. Aim for three pages. Make them lean and mean.

3. Use an alias, nom de plume, pseudonym, instead of your real name.

Since I want to give you as much time as possible to rework your rough drafts (seriously, folks, why else would I give you so much time to work on a three page paper?), we'll do another light blog post for this weekend. Your topics are a mash-up of ideas offered by Leo and Laura on Thursday:

1. Post a link to an outrageous political website. Tell us how you know about it and what you think it says about contemporary American politics.

2. Post a link to video of a cringe-worthy political gaffe. Give us a brief description of it and what you think its impact was or will be.

3. Post a link to video of a political commercial that you can't stand. Explain who the candidate, issue, or party is, and why it gets on your nerves.

I'm playing catch-up all weekend, so expect to hear from me soon about your last paper. See you on Tuesday!

maher mahem

Hey, everyone. After reading this last batch of essays, I'm convinced that we need to do more work with revision. So here's the plan for next week. On Tuesday, we'll continue to discuss Bill Maher's When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden (for those of you who aren't finished with it yet, here's your chance to catch up with the rest of us). On Thursday, we'll do a peer review of the rough draft of your next paper.

In that rough draft, I want you to express a strong opinion using the essays in Bill Maher's When You Ride Alone, You Ride with Bin Laden, as a guide. Begin with an observation, a personal story, a story that you've heard about in the news, or even one of your pet-peeves that relates to day-to-day life in the United States. Then explain to your readers how things would be better--more just, more fair, more meaningful--if people would make one or two changes in their lives. Be smart, be sharp, and have some fun. The paper should be 2-3 pages long. Bring three copies of it with you on Thursday for our review session.

Since you'll be writing that paper this weekend (long meaningful pause), you don't have to write a post for the blog. But I do want you to post something that you find inspiring--a link to a video, song, or picture, or perhaps the text of a speech, article, or poem. That's right, "inspiring," not "ironic" (although I suppose the two aren't mutually exclusive).

Here's my contribution. Less than two months after the 9/11 attacks, U2 appeared on "The Late Show with David Letterman," a show that's recorded in Manhattan about two miles away from Ground Zero. U2 performed two songs that night, but it's the opening number--"New York," with slightly changed lyrics--that still makes my skin tingle. Unfortunately, the picture-quality of this video isn't very good. But you do get a few close-ups of Bono puckishly trying to coax a tense, benumbed nationwide audience to start feeling again. Thankfully, the sound is rich and booming, so you can't miss the beautifully revised lyric, "Come September/a lot can change/summer love/turns to winter's pain." There is also the defiant lines, also slightly different from the original, "religious nuts and political fanatics/don't belong/New York is singing a different kind of song," underlined with an homage to Marvin Gaye--"What's going on?" Perhaps most inspiring is Bono's soaring vocals when he sings "I love New York" at the end of the song. There was a time after 9/11 when some of us really needed to hear that.

Long live U2, long live rock and roll.

(At 10:40 in the video, Bono talks to Letterman about "What's Going On?" and AIDS relief, as well as a 9/11 benefit at Madison Square Garden. Bono's lyrics for the album version of "New York" are here.)

what's the maher-ter?

Next week we'll be discussing (actually, I hope we'll be debating) the arguments Bill Maher makes in When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden, so for Tuesday's class, please read to page 85. Resist the urge to be a passive, I'll-let-someone-else-do-the-talking-in-class kind of scoundrel--um, I mean kind of reader. Instead, try to engage with what Maher has to say about post-9/11 American culture--its weaknesses, its hypocrisies, its strengths--with an alert and open mind. Come to class ready to mix it up with your seminar-mates about at least three of his arguments.

To get you in the mood, I want you to try out a Maher-style rant called "New Rules" for your blog post. Maher shares his "New Rules" at the end of his HBO show "Real Time With Bill Maher," and they're basically the New Laws Of The Universe that Maher would enact to make the world a better place to live. You can see examples here, here, and here. The format should look something like this (taken from a transcript of Maher's "New Rules"), and it can be as long or as short as you like:

New Rule: Mitt Romney–must stop using the state of Massachusetts as a punchline unless he prefaces it with, "You know, the state that is so horribly liberal I chose to live and raise my family there for the last 30 years." You don't hear Bush shitting on Texas or Cheney making fun of Transylvania.

You don't have to mimic Maher's politics, just his style, and you can post on everything from daily annoyances to political gripes to other people's bad fashion sense. Post as many rules as you like, but try to come up with at least one.

(Can't think of a "New Rule"? Okay, do a little research and explain to us the proper use of a dash. One good place to look might be The Chicago Manual of Style. If someone beats you to the dash, explain to us the proper use of the colon. Yes, I mean the punctuation mark.)

slurs and satire

(please submit your posts to the other blog!)

Alright, folks. Building on Thursday's discussion, please address your blog post to one of the following topics:

1. This film short, Tokyo Breakfast, was featured on a part of The N Word: Divided We Stand that we didn't get a chance to see. What is the film satirizing? (Need help establishing critical distance from the clip? Try thinking about the analytical words that made it onto the board today like "context," "speaker," "race," "class".)

2. The "N word" played a crucial role in last night's episode of "South Park." Randy Marsh, Stan Marsh's father, made it to the bonus round of "Wheel of Fortune," but when he tried to solve the final puzzle, he made a terrible mistake (this version is longer, if also kind of creepy; you feel like you're watching television in a stranger's living room. . .um, because you kind of are). Give us an analysis of Randy's gaffe. What are the significant factors at play here? Where do you locate the irony? What do you make of the different reactions from the camera man, the studio audience, Randy's fellow townspeople, his family?

3. You've all heard of Michael Richards' infamous tirade at a Los Angeles comedy club last November, but you might not have seen it. It's pretty jarring, even if you know what to expect. For a few seconds, it appears that Richards is trying to turn outrageous, bigoted behavior into social commentary. "Alright, you see this shocks you to see what's buried beneath," he says tauntingly to the audience, as if it is their reactions and not his that are really at issue. What do you think?

4. At last Friday's Conservative Political Action Conference, Ann Coulter used the word "faggot" when talking about Democratic Presidential candidate John Edwards. Later on the Fox opinion show Hannity and Colmes, Coulter claimed that "faggot" is nothing more than a "schoolyard taunt." “It isn’t offensive to gays,” she said. “It has nothing to do with gays. It’s a schoolyard taunt, meaning wuss. And unless you’re telling me that John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person." Do you agree or disagree? Why?