Moore, Remy, & Fortune

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Thu May 21 05:56:49 PDT 1998



>Humor is central to US political discourse -- right and less right. Not so
>here, where the last preseident Sanchez de Lozada, caused QUITE a stri by
>being publicly funny and president at the same time. Notabley, his humor
>was VERY gringo -- he was raised in the US; U Chicago grad. Makes me
>wonder: was humor always central to political discourse in the US? Or is
>this a new (say, post WWII) thing?
>
>Tom
>
>Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia

This is a good question. I suspect that the overwhelming presence of popular culture in the United States has a lot to do with this. As disgusting as Reagan was, he did have his witty moments. This talent clearly was sharpened over years and years in the entertainment industry. One of the reasons he did so well against both Mondale and Dukakis, I speculate, is that these opponents were so drab and humorless.

The other thing to keep in mind is that people like Mark Twain, Charlie Chaplin and Will Rogers had absolutely immense followings. I still contend that Moore belongs to this tradition more than any other. Speaking of mixed messages, does anybody think that Twain wrote 100% "progressive" novels? The jury is still out on Huckleberry Finn.

The role of humor in society is a very complex one. At some point, I plan to get to Eleanor Leacock's collection of articles on hunting-gathering bands. She observes that teasing is almost universal to these social formations. What's going on there?

Louis Proyect

(http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list