← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · kminta
Thread ID: 13692 | Posts: 43 | Started: 2004-05-14
2004-05-14 14:05 | User Profile
[I]Same old double standard. Blacks can have their own organziations, colleges, fraternities, groups, clubs, dances, etc. Whites obviously cannot have this, but even if a TV show with an explicitely non-racial agenda is too white it must change.[/I]
[B][URL=http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_193821.html]'Friends' so white it hurt to watch[/URL][/B]
By [B]Mike Seate[/B] [B]TRIBUNE-REVIEW[/B] [I]Thursday, May 13, 2004[/I]
Tonight will be an evening of withdrawal across the nation.
For nine television seasons, millions of viewers have spent their Thursday evenings immersed in a fantasy world where everyone is cute, thin, witty and more than a little quirky. Oh yeah, and white.
That was the New York City seen in the beloved situation comedy "Friends," which ended in a virtual whiteout last week. Obviously, few people cared that the show's New York looked like a Woolworth's lunch counter in Mississippi circa 1962. About 52.5 million viewers tuned in to the "Friends" finale, prompting one question: Whose friends, particularly in a place as diverse as New York, look like this, anyway?
It doesn't take a course in White Folks' TV Fantasies 101 to understand some of the appeal of the show that managed to include only one substantial African-American character in 236 episodes. It's sort of like the old racist joke about the animated series "The Jetsons" that ends by asking a viewer to name the black character on the show. Answer: There isn't one -- meaning that the future, as represented on "The Jetsons," is bright because it's white.
We can forgive George, Jane, Judy and Elroy their segregated 'hood. It's a cartoon, after all. "Friends," on the other hand, is set in Manhattan, one of the most racially diverse areas on the planet.
TV shows used to seduce viewers with fantasies involving perfect suburban communities ("Leave it to Beaver"), wealth ("Dallas") and getting away with keeping an attractive female slave who possesses supernatural powers ("I Dream of Jeannie"). The creators of "Friends" waved their magic racial wand and made all of New York's Dominicans, its Hmong, its Portuguese, its Asians and its Latinos disappear faster than you can say Aryan ratings sweep.
Even with the enormous talents of the Hollywood special effects machine, that's no easy task, especially if you study the Big Apple's latest census. The 2000 U.S. Census shows that 24.5 percent of New York's 8,008,278 residents are black, 35 percent are Hispanic and 10 percent are divided among other minority backgrounds.
Somehow, the folks at NBC were able to air a show for a decade where seldom, if ever, did the cast meet, do business with, take a cab ride from or even buy a barbecued chicken, egg roll or tortilla from an actor or actress representing that nearly 70 percent of New York's population.
No one is suggesting that the program's lousy casting makes the tens of millions of Americans who watched it racist. Some of the viewers, I'm told, are minorities.
Whoever they are, they apparently expected very little from TV.
[I]Mike Seate is a staff writer for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. He can be reached at (412) 320-7845 or e-mail him at [email]mseate@tribweb.com[/email].[/I]
2004-05-14 15:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The creators of "Friends" waved their magic racial wand and made all of New York's Dominicans, its Hmong, its Portuguese, its Asians and its Latinos disappear faster than you can say Aryan ratings sweep. [/QUOTE]
I wouldn't watch FRIENDS even if you double-dared me but if the producers did what this self-righteous Conscience Of Pittsburgh suggested they could've saved a lot of money on salaries since no one would have tuned in. People like to flatter themselves singing the [I]praises [/I] of diversity and multiculturalism, but watching it every week is second to living in it every day on the chart of Depressing Things To Do.
The mere fact that FRIENDS was a big hit for 10 years - and TWO DOMINICANS, A HMONG AND A PIZZA PLACE never made it to renewal ought to tell you something, Mike. And I think you owe the Portugese an apology - one, there ain't very many of them in NYC, and two, they're part of that White Power Structure that simultaneously scares you to death and endorses your paycheck for pretending to be a reporter.
2004-05-14 15:23 | User Profile
Obviously this guy has no problem with all Black shows. Why? When I was growing up, I watched Black shows "Good Times" and "What's Happening" along with White shows "Happy Days" and "Laverne and Shirley" and it was all good in the neighborhood. Kinda like 'separate but equal' ya know. I guess PC Hacks like this faggot Mike Seate have an ax to grind while serving his zionist masters. Maybe his mother sent him to his room for not eating his meat and he missed Fonzie. "Friends" sucked anyway.
2004-05-14 15:37 | User Profile
Friends is your typical Jews and Italtians screw pastier chicks show. As to the friends all being 'white,'--well, most whites in New York do have only white close friends.
2004-05-14 16:05 | User Profile
"Friends" isn't even white, but a mix of some faggoty metrosexuals and Jews.
2004-05-14 17:01 | User Profile
I'm surprised the writer of the article failed to mention actress Aisha Tyler, who was added to the show temporarily, if I'm not mistaken, because [B]Friends[/B] came under attack for being too White (in keeping with violating adherence to the state religion).
2004-05-14 17:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]"Friends" isn't even white, but a mix of some faggoty metrosexuals and Jews.[/QUOTE]
Albeit small, it is an accomplishment and source of pride for me to have never in my life watched one single episode of Friends or the other jew show Seinfeld.
2004-05-14 17:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Albeit small, it is an accomplishment and source of pride for me to have never in my life watched one single episode of Friends or the other jew show Seinfeld.[/QUOTE] I don't care for Friends, either, as I never found it particularly funny, and I don't think it encouraged positive behaviour. I will respectfully disagree with your grim assessment of Seinfeld, however, as I actually find it quite humourous. It did take quite a while to grow on me, but eventually it did. My theory is that in most television shows, you are supposed to identify with and root for the main characters of the show. It took me a few times to realize that this is not the case with Seinfeld. Instead, you are supposed to laugh at what completely wretched human beings these people are. In George Constanza, Seinfeld created basically the perfect stereotypical Jew character. He is cheap, dishonest, conniving, selfish, duplicitous, neurotic, and physically unattractive. For politically correct purposes, he is supposed to be an Italian on the show, but he is obviously a Jew. Once you realize that, his character is actually quite amusing.
2004-05-14 17:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]"Friends" isn't even white, but a mix of some faggoty metrosexuals and Jews.[/QUOTE]Exactly. I never actually watched more than 20 seconds of any episode, as that was all it took to discern the show's overall nature.
2004-05-14 17:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]I will respectfully disagree with your grim assessment of Seinfeld, however, as I actually find it quite humourous. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, I know some folks who love it, but it always seemed like a yankee jew show to me and not worth the effort to understand it. I'd rather tune-in Bill Dance or Jimmy Houston, personally.
2004-05-14 17:51 | User Profile
Also, let's not forget that miscegenation was a major theme on friends.
2004-05-14 17:51 | User Profile
Seinfeld is a reality show about Jews. It's therefore highly entertaining, as a freak show and as an insight into the Jew inbred psychotic personalities.
2004-05-14 17:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]A friend of mine got rid of his former girlfriend a few years ago. The reason? When they lived together, she would watch "Friends," "Seinfeld," and similar trash tv religiously. He put his foot down and said that he's not going to tolerate having that garbage on under his own roof. Good man.
I told him that he should have done what James Burnham (or was it Russell Kirk?) did. When Burnham's wife bought a TV, without saying a word, Burnham picked it up, marched up the stairs, and threw it out the window.[/QUOTE]
Throwing a TV away as a vehicle of televitz delivery - yes. As something to watch video media of your choice - be it select DVDs, home videos or movies you burn yourself after downloading off internet - no.
2004-05-14 18:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]I told him that he should have done what James Burnham (or was it Russell Kirk?) did. When Burnham's wife bought a TV, without saying a word, Burnham picked it up, marched up the stairs, and threw it out the window.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I think that was Kirk who did that.
Anyway, what's even more sickening about the Friends phenomenon is what it suggests about how improverished our sense of comedy has become.
It used to be when people thought of comedy, they thought of works like Shakespeare's A Midsummer Nights Dream.
Now people think of Seinfield.
Thanks Mr. Jew -- you delivered the goods again -- as usual.
2004-05-14 18:18 | User Profile
Could you explain this?
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Also, let's not forget that miscegenation was a major theme on friends.[/QUOTE]
2004-05-14 18:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie] The problem is that all of the major channels offer almost nothing BUT televitz. Go to a "news channel" and one is fed neocon lies. Go to a "movie channel" and get either subversive political correctness or mindless and vulgar bilge. Go the an "education channel" and get lessons about the evil white man, slavery, and the "holocaust." There's a point to having a DVD player (I have one on my computer, mostly for watching old movies), but other than that the mass media has almost nothing worthwhile to offer. [/QUOTE] So the obvious answer is to never have cable or dish.
2004-05-14 18:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE]It used to be when people thought of comedy, they thought of works like Shakespeare's A Midsummer Nights Dream. [/QUOTE]
Sure, in the 16th century.
No disrespect to Shakespeare, Goethe, Brahms, etc, who have always been popular as staples of high culture, but pop culture [I]long [/I] predates the televitz. What the 'vitz ushered in was the gradual eradication of the two cultures, high and pop; the wall separating them being vital to high culture, its erosion (and eventual absence) signalled an all-clear to the groundlings to overrun the now-undefended battlements.
2004-05-14 18:32 | User Profile
Friends was a terrible show. When the finale was airing I thought "Are there really that many people who watch this show?" but of course it was all the girls in my office were talking about the next day. I didn't bother inquiring about what they found so compelling. I'm sure they consider all the characters to be white.
There is nothing on television that isn't heavily influenced by jews. I believe it is impossible to find one program that is without 1 jew (at least). Producers seem to be jewish 90% of the time. If I wanted to find anything that had a good pro-white theme, I certainly wouldn't look to the zog box.
2004-05-14 18:33 | User Profile
Since this thread has gone from Friends to the low quality of media in general, may I direct your attention to this current thread -- [url="http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=13689"]http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=13689[/url]
We are discussing much the same thing there, and I proposed a challenge for the board members. To wit -- I've got a little experiment for ya'll. Try to think of the last time you saw a mainstream movie (not some Left Behind junk) that portrayed a Southerner, a white man, or especially a Christian in a postive light. If you can think of one that portrays a Southern Christian white man in a positive light, then you have practically done the impossible.
2004-05-14 18:37 | User Profile
Hope none of you will judge me too harshly for my applauding Deborah RC's use of the Master Shake avatar. Alright, Deborah! (It ain't Puck or Bottom, but it makes me laugh. There, I said it!)
2004-05-14 18:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]Try to think of the last time you saw a mainstream movie (not some Left Behind junk) that portrayed a Southerner, a white man, or especially a Christian in a postive light. If you can think of one that portrays a Southern Christian white man in a positive light, then you have practically done the impossible.[/QUOTE]
A couple came to mind and then I realized they all starred Bobby Duvall. Gods and Generals, Secondhand Lions and some may not have cared for the theme of the movie, but The Apostle was one of the finest performances on film that I've ever seen.
2004-05-14 19:03 | User Profile
The Apostle was great, but I don't think it portrayed white males in a positive light--a honest light perhaps, but not a positive one.
The main character does, after all, cheat on his wife and (after they are separated) kills her lover with a baseball bat. He also appears to be rather an attention-hound, and there is some question of the sincerity of his religious 'vocation' by the film.
2004-05-14 19:11 | User Profile
Hope none of you will judge me too harshly for my applauding Deborah RC's use of the Master Shake avatar.
Never got into ATHF. Dunno why, but I think the intro music put me off as I wrote it off as another ooga-booga hip-hop theme. I'll have to try it one of these days, but I'm more of a Sealab 2021 fan myself, though even that one has to have the brilliant black character shagging the blond woman on a regular basis. Space Ghost CTC isn't too bad either.
2004-05-14 19:37 | User Profile
Haven't seen the Dershowitz piece so I can't address it but I can speak from personal history. I would probably have had little to no interest in lasting, permanent culture were it not for the efforts of a history teacher I had - a Jew - who relentlessly promoted them to me. This was purely his own initiative as the high-school history curriculum was forced down the throats of both teachers and students by the state; the fostering of appreciation for the great artists was delegated to the English Dept, who shirked that obligation through their sheer mediocrity of personnel and approach. I hadda 'do' JULIUS CAESAR like every other 11th-grader and slogged through it, helped greatly by the fact my English teacher had never read it either. When I got an 85 or so on the test, the Jew happened to scan my test paper as I was shunting from English to History. "You're stealing money!", he snarled at me. "What you've done is memorize the plot and the names of characters - and bluffed your way through the essay with cliches. You haven't experienced Shakespeare; you evaded him. This is the work of a con man!" He then assigned me to compose a new essay on the play - for [I]him[/I]. It was understood that my failing to comply could not negatively affect my grade in History. He had no right to ask me to do it and in hindsight, might've gotten in serious dutch with the BofE for demanding I do it. But he made it plain that if I [I]didn't [/I] do it, and show some real insight into the play this time, he could never have any respect for me. And this was in a typically decaying, zoo-like public school, back in the Albert Shanker Age!
Obviously my point here is that often the difference between appreciating or utterly ignoring the seminal works of Western Civilization is whether your instructors early in life are gifted and inspired, or barely-literate mediocrities themselves.
What I think keeps Shakespeare alive and valid through the centuries is exactly why he's so forbidding to a kid in English class: as text on a printed page, Shakespeare is stultifying, impenetrable, a tangled skein of obscure references and dead language. Even read with a simultaneous concordance as he usually is, his poetry is leaden on paper. But in [I]performance[/I]! Suddenly what was inert and ossified becomes vivid and alive and as relevant as the next breath you take. The necessity of performance for Shakespeare to truly be Shakespeare is what renews him and keeps him alive even in our current Dark Age; I have no doubt he will continue to come alive to audiences 500 years from now. But I have always been convinced that the reason he is resented and shunned by the Great Herd is that most of them first approached him as an assigned text that's "good for you" the way castor-oil or liverwurst is. And first impressions are too often set in stone.
MST, I hate those Dr Weird intros and that idiotic rap theme as well. But the rest of it's gold. Just the [I]idea [/I] of a surly, neurotic milkshake talking in an Arnold Stang voice convulses me. Give ATHF another shot.
2004-05-14 19:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill] If you can think of one that portrays a Southern Christian white man in a positive light, then you have practically done the impossible.[/QUOTE]
There are lots of movies where one courageous Southerner or Christian "awakes" to the "evil" of his or her own culture and resists it. Even the movie Brother Where art thou shows its three white Southern protagonists as sensitive misunderstood souls, The problem is that they are social deviants who are struggling against the dominant Southern culture which is presented as oppressive and comically stupid. Lots of movies like this out there; from To Kill a Mockingbird to Mississippi Burning. In fact I would say these movies are more destructive than movies that just show one southerner or Christian as a shallow caricature.
2004-05-14 19:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]I thought that most of the cast of "Friends," (just like "Seinfeld") weren't white at all but Jews.[/QUOTE]
Of the six main characters on "Friends," all three females and one male are definitely Jews. I'm not sure about the other two men. That show sucked miserably, of course.
"Seinfeld," on the other hand, was (is) frequently entertaining. Of course, I always watched it as a satire on how pathetic American culture had become, even from the perspective of a bunch of rootless, cosmopolitan Manhattanite Jews (or at least to co-producer Larry David). The idea that some people actually took the antics of Jerry, George, Kramer and Elaine as something worthy of emulation is a little creepy. In any event, I'm pretty sure Jews made up 3 of the 4 of that cast as well (4 out of 5 if you count Newman). The one who isn't a Jew (I'm pretty sure) is Jason Alexander. With a name like that, he simply must be Greek.
2004-05-14 19:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The one who isn't a Jew (I'm pretty sure) is Jason Alexander. With a name like that, he simply must be Greek.[/QUOTE]
Nope. He's a pork-ducker too. Michael Richards, I have no idea about. The rest of them are pure Tribe.
2004-05-14 19:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]I will respectfully disagree with your grim assessment of Seinfeld, however, as I actually find it quite humourous. It did take quite a while to grow on me, but eventually it did. My theory is that in most television shows, you are supposed to identify with and root for the main characters of the show. It took me a few times to realize that this is not the case with Seinfeld. Instead, you are supposed to laugh at what completely wretched human beings these people are. In George Constanza, Seinfeld created basically the perfect stereotypical Jew character. He is cheap, dishonest, conniving, selfish, duplicitous, neurotic, and physically unattractive. For politically correct purposes, he is supposed to be an Italian on the show, but he is obviously a Jew. Once you realize that, his character is actually quite amusing.[/QUOTE]
I completely agree with you about "Seinfeld." George Costanza was like a character out of a Nazi propaganda film, had Goebbels made comedies. Remember that one scene where Jerry and George are sitting in a cafe and Jerry asks, out of the blue, "So, is this it? Are we men now?" George responds by shaking his head and stating with grim seriousness the following: No, my friend, we're not men. I have no idea what we are, but there's one thing of which I am absolutely certain: We are not men." Classic!
2004-05-14 20:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=DeborahRC]I believe it is impossible to find one program that is without 1 jew (at least). Producers seem to be jewish 90% of the time. If I wanted to find anything that had a good pro-white theme, I certainly wouldn't look to the zog box.[/QUOTE]
My cousin Siobahn identifies as an Irish Catholic, but since her father was a Jew, she has the name "Cohen." She is a director in Hollywood, last I heard (I think she does commercials). If she were a fellow O'Keeffe, methinks she would not be so successful in her chosen field (despite her amusing absence of a Jewish identity).
2004-05-14 20:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]I've got a little experiment for ya'll. Try to think of the last time you saw a mainstream movie (not some Left Behind junk) that portrayed a Southerner, a white man, or especially a Christian in a postive light. If you can think of one that portrays a Southern Christian white man in a positive light, then you have practically done the impossible.[/QUOTE]
I did the impossible! "The Patriot." Of course, that was starring well-known anti-Semite and Holocaust denier (and all-around Nazi) Mel Gibson, so while the movie was great and well received, it was roundly criticized by the Jewsmedia and even given an 'R' rating for no other reason than that it showed under-age boys firing rifles (under-age boys having sex, even with each other, might well only warrant a PG-13 rating, if not too graphic). Having sex under-age is actually illegal. Its not illegal for under-age boys to fire a gun under adult supervision (in any American jurisdiction that I am aware of anyway). But you know how it is; the more people see Redcoats getting shot, the more they might think about doing a little shooting of their own....
2004-05-14 20:46 | User Profile
'Under-aged' sex is by definition illegal. So are gratutitous references to it.:)
2004-05-14 20:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]I completely agree with you about "Seinfeld." George Costanza was like a character out of a Nazi propaganda film, had Goebbels made comedies. Remember that one scene where Jerry and George are sitting in a cafe and Jerry asks, out of the blue, "So, is this it? Are we men now?" George responds by shaking his head and stating with grim seriousness the following: No, my friend, we're not men. I have no idea what we are, but there's one thing of which I am absolutely certain: We are not men." Classic![/QUOTE]I have to confess - I absolutely love "Seinfeld". If you had a Gentile make a show like that, it wouldnt fly for a minute. Youd have half the Jewish organisations at their throats with cries of "Nazi!".
The darkest piece of humour I have ever witnessed on TV is the Seinfeld episode where Jerry cant make out with his girlfriend because his mum and dad are sitting in his flat all the time. So out of frustration, he decides to book himself a ticket to "Schindler's List" which his mother had been bugging him about watching anyway. So he takes his girlfriend to the movie and theyre smooching for the full length of the movie!! (chuckle)
Newman sees all this (because hes also in the theater) and reports it to his parents and also to the Girlfriend's dad (whos a Jew!!). That was a classic! I am amazed they let him get away with that. Seinfeld takes more liberty with Jews than anything Ive ever seen on TV.
2004-05-14 21:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=LlenLleawc]There are lots of movies where one courageous Southerner or Christian "awakes" to the "evil" of his or her own culture and resists it.[/QUOTE] You are absolutely right, LlenLleawc. But in these cases, these characters are noble or good exactly to the extent that they reject their "Southern-ness" or their Christianity. So, I agree with you that they are as bad as those that show white Southern Christians as evil.
2004-05-14 21:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]I did the impossible! "The Patriot."[/QUOTE] True, that is a good pick. Ragno also came up with "Signs" from a couple years ago, which had (who else?) Mel Gibson playing a white Christian, although not Southern.
One thing, however, is that although Gibson's Patriot character was Southern, he just seemed more colonial American. So he was shown in a positive way, but only because he was supposed to exemplify American values, not Southern ones.
2004-05-14 22:41 | User Profile
If memory serves correctly, there was an episode where Seinfeld explains that his father consistently and refexively accuses everyone who disagrees with him of being an antiSemite. "There's a hair in my soup: the cook's an antiSemite!!"
And there is another amusing episode where Jerry makes a wisecrack about dentists and is accused of being an "anti-dendite". The whole episode is sprinkled with Seinfeld being catigated as an evil anti-dendite.
2004-05-14 23:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=SupremeSpirit]If memory serves correctly, there was an episode where Seinfeld explains that his father consistently and refexively accuses everyone who disagrees with him of being an antiSemite. "There's a hair in my soup: the cook's an antiSemite!!"
And there is another amusing episode where Jerry makes a wisecrack about dentists and is accused of being an "anti-dendite". The whole episode is sprinkled with Seinfeld being catigated as an evil anti-dendite.[/QUOTE] Actually the one who shrieks "Anti Semite!!" is his Uncle Leo (who he absolutely detests). Leo is the archetypal New York Jew: he is cunning, slimy, full of himself and a pain in the arse. Leo and Jerry go to the Cafe where Leo wants his Burger served to him "Medium-Rare" and instead the waiter serves him "Medium".
Leo says, "They dont just Overcook a Hamburger Jerry". Jerry looks at him and says, "So Uncle Leo as I was saying before Goebbels overcooked your Hamburger.....". (chuckle)
There is another one in which he appears on Jay Leno and talks about his Uncle Leo openly - says, "someone overcooked the Hamburger, antisemite", "someone honked the horn, antisemite". Its outrageously funny. He makes these people look like loons completely obsessed with their hallucinations of anti-semitism (in NY where half the population is Jews!!!).
So yeah, Seinfeld gets my vote. The funniest stuff Ive seen on TV. I dont watch TV much usually but if theres Seinfeld Ive got to watch it.
I think another thing that Seinfeld brings out which is really hitting below the belt to Jews is how these Jewish men are sexually obsessed with Gentile women. It gets to the point of stupidity. The entire series is absolutely hilarious.
2004-05-14 23:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]Could you explain this?[/QUOTE]
Sure. In one of the last few seasons, maybe the most recent one, there a major plot line that depicted Ross and Joey competing for the affections of a negro model.
Do you not find miscegenation loathesome and morally objectionable?
2004-05-14 23:39 | User Profile
It's pretty funny to watch such a difference of opinions over Seinfeld.
2004-05-15 00:01 | User Profile
Shakespeare is stultifying, impenetrable, a tangled skein of obscure references and dead language. Even read with a simultaneous concordance as he usually is, his poetry is leaden on paper.
What a strange comment, IR.
Is this your idea of "leaden" poetry
"All that lives must die, passing through nature to eternity"
"If music be the food of love, play on"
"I wasted time, and now doth time waste me."
2004-05-15 02:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Peter Phillips]The darkest piece of humour I have ever witnessed on TV is the Seinfeld episode where Jerry cant make out with his girlfriend because his mum and dad are sitting in his flat all the time. So out of frustration, he decides to book himself a ticket to "Schindler's List" which his mother had been bugging him about watching anyway. So he takes his girlfriend to the movie and theyre smooching for the full length of the movie!! (chuckle)
Newman sees all this (because hes also in the theater) and reports it to his parents and also to the Girlfriend's dad (whos a Jew!!). That was a classic! I am amazed they let him get away with that. Seinfeld takes more liberty with Jews than anything Ive ever seen on TV.[/QUOTE]
That was a great episode. I suggest you check out "Curb Your Enthusiasm," on HBO, which stars and is produced by Larry David, the co-producer and real brains (as is evident from watching "Curb Your Enthusiasm") behind "Seinfeld." I don't know how to describe that show, other than as blatant anti-Semitic humour. Needless to say, its a hoot.
2004-05-15 03:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=SupremeSpirit]If memory serves correctly, there was an episode where Seinfeld explains that his father consistently and refexively accuses everyone who disagrees with him of being an antiSemite. "There's a hair in my soup: the cook's an antiSemite!!"
And there is another amusing episode where Jerry makes a wisecrack about dentists and is accused of being an "anti-dendite". The whole episode is sprinkled with Seinfeld being catigated as an evil anti-dendite.[/QUOTE]
That's a great episode - "Jerry, you're a raving anti-dentite!" Jerry is being drummed out of polite society for his anti-dentite views, when he meets this hot blonde lady at a wedding who shares them. They exchange wisecracks and Jerry asks, "Dentists? Who needs 'em?" To which she responds, "Or, for that matter, the Blacks and the Jews." The episode abrubtly ends after she says that.
It was Jerry's Uncle Leo who accused the chef of being an anti-Semite for giving him a medium burger, when he'd asked for medium-rare. Jerry refers to how they must have Goebbels working behind the counter....
2004-05-15 03:40 | User Profile
If you're talking about pulling single sentences out of context, no. So much of Shakespeare has entered common English usage that you can do that all day and call it SHAKESPEARE'S GREATEST HITS. But that's not how a text is read, that's how "Bartlett's Familiar Quotes" is read. The Shakespeare plays are also [I]narratives[/I], and while the then-contemporary and historical references in it (and of course the Elizabethean English) were easily grasped by 17th-century audiences, to a newcomer approaching the plays as texts in our time they will appear obtuse and impentrable and hinder a clear understanding. There's a reason schoolchildren are assigned Shakespeare texts with the Cliff's Notes built into them, so to speak. In performance, this type of detail - forbidding on the page - is illuminated and made not only understandable but vital to the flavor and the forward momentum of the narrative. Hell, most Shakespearephobes are so intimidated by the language they never realize how much low comedy is in the plays, let alone how timeless and universal his protagonists are. Now, you might say that one can [I]return [/I] to the texts on second or fifth or fiftieth reading and cherish every line in it: I agree. But that's not what I was speaking of - I referred exclusvely to young people approaching Willie the Shake for the first time in a classroom setting.
There's a further reason that Shakespeare needs performance to rise to his full measure and meaning and that is of course that he wrote them [I]intending [/I] them to be performed. That Shakespeare, even now, remains the actor's greatest challenge and richest reward ought to tell you something.
2004-05-15 06:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]That's a great episode - "Jerry, you're a raving anti-dentite!" Jerry is being drummed out of polite society for his anti-dentite views, when he meets this hot blonde lady at a wedding who shares them. They exchange wisecracks and Jerry asks, "Dentists? Who needs 'em?" To which she responds, "Or, for that matter, the Blacks and the Jews." The episode abrubtly ends after she says that[/QUOTE] Actually that was another classic. Kremer and Jerry are talking and Jerry cracks a joke about Dentists. And Kremer says, "Jerry. Youre an Anti-Dentite. This is how it starts. It starts with a few jokes. Then youll say they should have their own schools......". Jerry says "THEY DO HAVE THEIR OWN SCHOOLS!!". (chuckle)