[It's a sign of extraordinary social decline and devolution in political consciousness that Borat has gotten such fav notices.]
November 10, 2006
How "Borat" Lowers the Bar of Political Satire; The Joke is On Us
By MEGAN BOLER
... why is Borat getting classed as political satire? The "man who invented Borat is a courageous political satirist ... Borat makes you laugh but Baron Cohen forced you to think" (J. Hoberman City Pages Minneapolis Nov 1 p45).
"The brilliance of "Borat" is that its comedy is as pitiless as its social satire, and as brainy." The International Herald Tribune, Manohla Dargis, Nov 2)
Then there's Claudia Puig in USA Today "shockingly hilarious satire ... Cohen's genius lies in his ease with provocative material. What ends up on the screen feels almost revolutionary, even subversive." (Nov 3)
Sadly, Borat has lowered the quality of satire from five-star political savvy to slapstick that traffics in audacious racism and sexism without biting that hand that feeds. Don't get me wrong, I love to laugh-especially at razor sharp political satire that shows the world's absurdities. I tolerate cringe moments watching Jon Stewart ("I felt Condi up the other nite") and Colbert who also resort to sexist jokes and toilet humor, because at least one finds a consistent satirical bite that demands accountability from media and Washington. Political satirists speak truth to power.
In contrast, What exactly are Borat audiences laughing at? When Sasha Boren Cohen appeared on The Daily Show a few nights ago, Stewart should have asked the real Cohen to stand up and offer some answers. Instead, Borat (apparently Cohen is too "publicly shy" to grant any press interviews) discovers Stewart is a Jew, asks where his horns are and begins backing off stage.
Granted people are laughing at different things. Certainly screwed up American cultural politics are a worthy target. But Cohen is not able to expose these vulnerabilities without himself engaging in performances that traffic in atrocious jokes. As a result, the film sets us audiences to laugh not only at the admittedly complex aspects of Borat but at straightforward racist and sexist material. Fat jokes? Come on. While Cohen deserves credit as comedian who has some political dimension in his performance, Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan cannot be classed with the top-notch political satire that has flourished in the wake of post-9/11 media muzzling. Is Cohen profiting from the deadly political and social ethnic tensions? $8.9 million already at this box office, and his next movie already contracted at $42 million. The fact that Cohen is devoutly Jewish does not let him off the hook. The fact that he performs equal opportunity humor, taking punches at everyone, doesn't change the fact that he has stooped to the low common denominator of rude and audacious transgression of every possible social more. Sometimes his rude and audacious comedy reveals American racism, often trafficking in stereotypes himself, and often using toilet humor-a mockumentary that relies on candid camera suckers who for some reason signed a release.
Why are critics so quick to call this "political comedy"? If ever there was a time for savvy political humor to raise the sophistication of awareness about Middle Eastern cultural and ethnic tensions-gee, now would be a good time. Will the real Cohen please stand up and explain what must be a complicated answer to how anti-Semitism, racism and hating women is the best vehicle for his cultural comedy? I'm not convinced the guffawing audiences are thinking new thoughts that critics claim. What insight is gained while laughing at drunk frat boys solemnly wish slavery would return? Or laughing at "the Running of the Jew" holiday? "But people get that, it's absurd and over the top!" So what? Once you get the joke "Americans are over the top," where's the savvy cultural commentary? The only moment in the film that can readily be called satire (as opposed to slapstick spoof that uses candid camera to make people look idiotic and reveal sad realities) is when Borat, dressed in an American flag shirt, wades into a rodeo ring and shouts out his support for the "War of Terror", and "hopes Bush will drink the blood of every Iraqi man woman and child". There is great irony in this candid moment with the Rodeo audience trying to grasp his meaning, for once in the 90 minutes.
In the Saturday Globe and Mail (November 4) Camilla Gibb concludes that Borat is getting away with this because we "need this provocation," that such "freedom of expression" is the "sign of democracy." While by no means advocating censorship of the film, am I alone in my hope for a higher level of democratic debate?
I am not shocked by Borat but by the dozens of international reviews reporting that people are laughing for 90 minutes without asking why. The bottom lime is that Cohen, Larry Charles, marketing staff and god knows how many corporate interests, has figured out a multi-million dollar, lowest-common denominator pleasure that rakes in millions. Just don't call it politically courageous satire.
(Megan Boler is an associate professor at the University of Toronto conducting a three-year funded study of political multimedia, satire, and digital dissent. She can be reached at: mboler at oise.utoronto.ca)
<http://www.counterpunch.org/boler11102006.html>
Carl
_________________________________________________________________ Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from Microsoft Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/