The claim about Sarah Silverman's 'brilliance' seems to be this:
"Saying the word 'retarded' can only have extreme negative power if you let it and Sarah Silverman is brave, because she got on stage in front of some global minds and dropped it over and over and over."
To call Sarah Silverman 'brave' for repeating this naughty word in front of a TED audience really is retarded. If this is what it means to be a subversive comedian in 2010, Richard Pryor must be turning in his grave.
You have simultaneously missed the point of the article and demonstrated it.
From the descriptions, there is no question that Sarah used the word 'retard' in the technically correct context, and NOT as a derogatory term. Sarah's brand of humour is based on shock and blatant unabashed selfishness. It clearly shows the difference between using a 'politically incorrect' word a few times and being genuinely offensive.
Using the word 'retard' as an insult (the way you just did) doesn't just insult the person being referred to - it implies that people who are actually retarded have something to be ashamed of.
I understand why the audience may have been outraged by the jokes (i.e. adopting a vulnerable child for self-aggrandisement). YOU have also managed to be offensive.
What's subversive about it is that if she'd not used the word "retarded" her routine would not have had impact.
There is a sense in which PC language suppresses the real struggle that comes with difficult social issues, sterilizes them for us, and makes them into abstract problems that everyone can claim to care about but do nothing about.
Silverman's insight was that by breaking out of the PC mold she was able to shine the spotlight on a difficult social issue.
Is it the highest level of subversive comedy? Probably not, but it's certainly a courageous form of activism.
Comments
The claim about Sarah Silverman's 'brilliance' seems to be this:
"Saying the word 'retarded' can only have extreme negative power if you let it and Sarah Silverman is brave, because she got on stage in front of some global minds and dropped it over and over and over."
To call Sarah Silverman 'brave' for repeating this naughty word in front of a TED audience really is retarded. If this is what it means to be a subversive comedian in 2010, Richard Pryor must be turning in his grave.
You have simultaneously missed the point of the article and demonstrated it.
From the descriptions, there is no question that Sarah used the word 'retard' in the technically correct context, and NOT as a derogatory term. Sarah's brand of humour is based on shock and blatant unabashed selfishness. It clearly shows the difference between using a 'politically incorrect' word a few times and being genuinely offensive.
Using the word 'retard' as an insult (the way you just did) doesn't just insult the person being referred to - it implies that people who are actually retarded have something to be ashamed of.
I understand why the audience may have been outraged by the jokes (i.e. adopting a vulnerable child for self-aggrandisement). YOU have also managed to be offensive.
What's subversive about it is that if she'd not used the word "retarded" her routine would not have had impact.
There is a sense in which PC language suppresses the real struggle that comes with difficult social issues, sterilizes them for us, and makes them into abstract problems that everyone can claim to care about but do nothing about.
Silverman's insight was that by breaking out of the PC mold she was able to shine the spotlight on a difficult social issue.
Is it the highest level of subversive comedy? Probably not, but it's certainly a courageous form of activism.