Replies

To compare Monty Python - a show that came out of the 1950s-60s Oxbridge University scene - to a Hollywood show created by a Cuban immigrant and a beautiful showgirl and actress is ridiculous.

I respectfully disagree. It is an appropriate comparison because it exposes the great inequities of the two.

There is comedy, and mindless comedy.

The brilliance of a John Cleese sketch satirizing certain professions or cultural norms contrasts greatly with the idiotic slap stick of throwing cakes down a conveyor belt. The first is hilarious because the viewer can witness truths - satire has no power if there is no truth. Slap stick and cheap laughs with no thought process.

And, I will die happy if I never have to watch a clip of Lucille Ball screaming her "WAAAAA!" catch phrase.

Interesting analysis. But. There was plenty of lighthearted satire in I Love Lucy and in The Honeymooners. And they could be understood by foreigners who didn't even speak English, as I found out. Monty Python, on the other hand, as good as it might have been, was often heavy handed, and worse, incomprehensible to residents of countries other than England. Compare to Are you being served. My opinion.