Is British political Satire Superior?

I just listed 3 tv shows. Heres a few examples of political and media satire.

John Stewart seems a bit shit in comparison.

british comedy > american comedy

British wit is superior to american comedies. However, American comedians are better at stand up.

Lol not at all...

Colbert's satire is much sharper than Stewart's, who I agree is very tame and generally not all that funny.

True,but there is some decent american stand-up comedians like Louis CK, Bill Hicks and Doug Stanhope and I do enjoy Arrested Development, Always sunny and South Park. But the quality of American comedy is really inconsistent. Like for the 95% that's crap, there is 5% that's decent.

Nope.

I never understood the appeal of British comedy. A lot of it, to me, is more annoying than funny. Maybe you have to have an understanding of that culture to appreciate it.

For the record, I dislike the "daily show" and most sit-coms that are aired nowadays. It just seems like the writers are trying too hard to make people laugh and putting a "laugh track" to lame shows is not going to make me like it any more.

it's a cultural thing, you can't really be an objective observer for something like humor

While I acknowledge the reality of cultural relativism and overall subjectivity of the senses and individuals, I still believe one can give a considerably objective opinion/verdict on the quality of comedy works and anything humor-related, which would be something entirely dependent on how "refined" one's sense of humor is to begin with. For example I'm not American but I still believe that Friends and HIMYM are objectively unfunny and crappy humor all around. The fact that some people find them funny shouldn't be solely related to subjectivity as it could be the case that whoever finds them funny is just easily entertained with a pretty "flat" sense of humor. Humor as an abstraction can be possessed to different proportions by different individuals and according to how much someone possesses of humor the abstract quality his ability to perceive humor varies in turn. What I'm trying to say here is that subjectivity often stems from the possession of some quality pertaining to some domain in different proportions and in such cases subjectivity wouldn't necessarily be expressive of neutral or impartial dissent, the kind of dissent that has no bearing to what is deemed desirable or undesirable, advantageous or disadvantageous...etc.

I tried my best to explain myself as clearly as possible but I still feel that I'm not getting my idea through...

Comedy is the most subjective genre of film/television because it exists entirely within a vacuum. Very very very few people watch comedies for the directing, shot composition, music, and some even ignore the characters. The success of a comedy whether or not it is "good" does indeed depend on the individual's success with regards to understanding the jokes and/or satire itself. Let's say even if the aesthetic and cinematic qualities in a comedy is solid, if the jokes fall flat or it just isn't funny it is considered a failure. That doesn't happen as often in other genres.

I'd also agree with comp_atkins in that it's indeed a cultural thing. Each area have their own idioms and expressions; trying to watch a British comedy of manners would go over most people's heads unless they have a firm grasp on etiquette and affectations of the British high class. Another example is that comedy can very easily be lost in translation due to these same idioms and expressions not working outside their own language.

but if someone dislikes Veep then they can **** off

I assent to the notion that subjectivity does exist within the comedy genre or humor more generally. If one is not familiar with the cultural background of a work of comedy then he most assuredly cannot be a judge on the humorousness of that work. And of course different folks have different strokes so what makes people laugh varies just as much as people vary in personalities, backgrounds, experiences...etc. The point that I was trying to make pertains to that statement though. It is fairly obvious that people differ in their sense of humor and their perception of what is and is not funny, but that is not necessarily due to mere subjectivity as it could have something to do with something like "unpolished" sense of humor or a simplistic one which would be something irrelevant to subjectivity. Words are failing me here but I'm trying my best to convey my point. In essence, subjectivity exists in pretty much every domain or sphere in life. Part of it is legitimate, meaning that it would only be natural that people's reaction to and perception of something vary just like people themselves vary. But a big part of subjectivity is not about diversity or unsystematic or natural variation, but it rather has to do with lacking in a certain department or not possessing enough of some quality or concept in its abstraction in which case subjectivity wouldn't be a "benign" occurrence but it would be an expression of a more serious condition of being.

Just to give an example of all of that, I personally find Middle Eastern comedy to be utter shit almost in its entirety even though I'm Middle Eastern myself and I do possess the cultural background to conceive the work itself. I just find it terrible and I'd rather watch Seinfeld for the 100th time than watch some of the most renowned and celebrated comedy shows and plays you would normally hear people around here raving about.

This is as clear as I can explain my idea. And funny that you bring up Veep as I was just about to watch an episode of it but decided to reply to your post first :3

imo it if makes a person laugh, it's funny to that person. you can argue that the comedy that made that person laugh was not "refined" or that they only found it funny because their sense of humor is "flat" but what does that even mean? to say something like friends or himym or some other generic comedy is objectively unfunny is impossible given that there is objective evidence ( millions of fans who laugh at these shows ) to the contrary. also, a person could just as easily laugh at fart jokes as more "refined" forms of humor. to judge them on the former says nothing about their taste in the latter.

it's similar to things like taste in food, music, etc.. the value of it is in the individual. if a person legitimately enjoys the taste of ramen noodles over foi gras who is anyone to say that their taste is wrong or less refined? it's just taste.

as an aside, in my opinion whenever people start judging others on their tastes, especially as a negative, or to imply that their taste is more "refined" than the other people's, those people come off sounding like douche bags.

I honestly don't think The Daily Show is much of a satire compared to Colbert Report.

I guess we'll agree to [partially] disagree on this. I tried my best to convey the idea without making it seems like a "your music of choice sucks and mine is superior to yours" instance as I know that would make me come off as a pompous douche bag and its not my disposition on the subject matter anyway.

I don't think it is generally better. It depends on what specific shows/satirists you're comparing. The Daily Show is boring to anyone with a taste for good comedy. I've never met anyone who actually enjoys watching it.

I guess they exist somewhere though because it's still on the air. Maybe I just don't surround myself with enough idiots.

Try Stephen Colbert.

@Gaza. see. ^ perfect example

lol

To be fair, I was simply stating my opinion on the sense of humor of those who enjoy The Daily Show. Obviously I realize there is no way to prove that people who like to watch it are idiots or that they appreciate objectively worse comedy than I do.

However, to continue in fairness, it did make me come off as a douche bag.

Which, in a culmination of all this fairness, I probably am.

Not sure I agree. The Office has been directly copy pasted from the British version with entire skits and character listed. It's been imported across multiple countries with much of the hunour, pretty much ripped from the original British incarnation.

From what I understand, it's hugely popular in the USA.

Likewise over here, we get Fraiser. It's very traditional but I fucking love that show.

"Friends" and "The Big Bang Theory" are also (in the case of friends use to be) a big hit over here. Don't like them personally though. And (as an example with Fraiser) I generally don't have a problem with very traditional sitcoms as long as it's funny, like cheers, or mash.