Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Are you a magician or Jerry Sadowitz fan?

And as well as the attacks on a major world religion

If you're referring to The Satanic Verses, it isn't really an attack on a major world religion. You have to read it in a very specific way, and basically misunderstand it, to see it like that.

But so what if it had been? Are we not allowed to attack major world religions? In the case of Islam, there is a fuck of a lot to attack, is there not? It is used to attack plenty of people - gay rights anyone? As are other religions.

Also, an 'attack' on a set of ideas is very, very, very different from an attack on a set of people. I don't know where to start on that one really. First up, it's insulting and wrong to bracket all Muslims in one group and state that they have been attacked. That's playing right into the hands of those who seek to claim religious authority and speak for millions - the likes of Khomeini, who did plenty of attacking against sets of people.
 
If you're referring to The Satanic Verses, it isn't really an attack on a major world religion. You have to read it in a very specific way, and basically misunderstand it, to see it like that.

But so what if it had been? Are we not allowed to attack major world religions? In the case of Islam, there is a fuck of a lot to attack, is there not? It is used to attack plenty of people - gay rights anyone? As are other religions.

Also, an 'attack' on a set of ideas is very, very, very different from an attack on a set of people. I don't know where to start on that one really. First up, it's insulting and wrong to bracket all Muslims in one group and state that they have been attacked. That's playing right into the hands of those who seek to claim religious authority and speak for millions - the likes of Khomeini, who did plenty of attacking against sets of people.

Have you read it, by the way?
 
Have you read it, by the way?
I didn't finish it, but I have read the passages that are alleged to be offensive. It isn't the book some make it out to be. And characterising it as 'an attack on a major world religion' misses the mark imo. It misses what he was trying to do.

ETA: It also misses the point spectacularly about why he was targeted for writing it.
 
I didn't finish it, but I have read the passages that are alleged to be offensive. It isn't the book some make it out to be. And characterising it as 'an attack on a major world religion' misses the mark imo. It misses what he was trying to do.

Yeah, am aware. Was mostly trying to re-calibrate the “too mad for Urban” meter when it comes to defining disagreeable speech as in the same vein as physical attacks.

I probably moved the marker a bit too far and overcooked it.

Re: Sadowitz, his stuff goes more than a bit too far for me, but people at the Fringe really should know what he’s like. Also, I thought the Fringe was a place where you would be most expecting to run into something transgressive.

Maybe this particular venue was a bad choice, or maybe Sadowitz has turned everything up several notches for some reason.
 
He was actually protected by the State at great cost so he could continue propagating his message of hate.
As for this bit, you sound just like a reactionary Tory MP.

You think he should have been allowed to be murdered? You think he should have grovelled to Khomeini to beg forgiveness?

Fuck's sake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
I didn't finish it, but I have read the passages that are alleged to be offensive. It isn't the book some make it out to be. And characterising it as 'an attack on a major world religion' misses the mark imo. It misses what he was trying to do.

ETA: It also misses the point spectacularly about why he was targeted for writing it.
So you only read the dirty bits. Reminds me of all those stained first Penguin edition copies of "Lady Chatterley's Lover".
 
As for this bit, you sound just like a reactionary Tory MP.

You think he should have been allowed to be murdered? You think he should have grovelled to Khomeini to beg forgiveness?

Fuck's sake.

Unfortunately he's just messing about. No one who really thinks that is even a memver here, yet likely to post at whatever time it is right now.


/party poooper
 
Go back one post.
Alright fair enough.

Regarding Sadowitz, I quite liked him back in the day but he did have a tendency to spoil things. His most offensive stuff used to have a point to it mostly (as with the Canada stuff quoted earlier), but sometimes it didn't, and that let him down.
 
Alright fair enough.

Regarding Sadowitz, I quite liked him back in the day but he did have a tendency to spoil things. His most offensive stuff used to have a point to it mostly (as with the Canada stuff quoted earlier), but sometimes it didn't, and that let him down.

I always got a sense of deliberate self-sabotage about him. He could have avoided ruining things, but he wasn’t really interested in that.
 
I always got a sense of deliberate self-sabotage about him. He could have avoided ruining things, but he wasn’t really interested in that.
Yep.

And clearly still isn't. :D

But he's in the school of comics that go out on stage and deliberately try to alienate as many people as they possibly can. It's kind of admirable in a mad way.
 
Yep.

And clearly still isn't. :D

But he's in the school of comics that go out on stage and deliberately try to alienate as many people as they possibly can. It's kind of admirable in a mad way.

It’s certainly mad, and that sort of thing isn’t my cup of char, but I don’t feel comfortable about removing all places where what you could call “transgressive art” can happen (obviously particular establishments can have their rules, but who books a guy like him without knowing his rep?).

I also wonder about an element of snobbery in that imo Sadowitz has only lasted as long as he has due to being something of a “comedian’s comedian”. Roy “Chubby” Brown certainly doesn’t get this privilege.

There’s loads to unpack, frankly.
 
There is a lot to unpack, but one difference between Sadowitz and Brown that I would see is that Brown is being transgressive in a way that is calculated to please his (very loyal) audience. Sadowitz is being offensive to get people to hate him. So you think you like me? I'll show you. Bet you don't.

Agree about booking him, though. What did they expect?
 
There is a lot to unpack, but one difference between Sadowitz and Brown that I would see is that Brown is being transgressive in a way that is calculated to please his (very loyal) audience. Sadowitz is being offensive to get people to hate him. So you think you like me? I'll show you. Bet you don't.

Agree about booking him, though. What did they expect?
I think at the Fringe it´s the other way round, you go searching for a venue. And the Fringe isn´t really transgressive, it´s all very respectable nowadays.

What you could get away with as comedy 40 years ago in a CIU club on a sunday lunchtime before the strippers came on, with no women or other minorities in the audiance, may not be appropriate for the fringe now.

I think they are both ´comedians´ that time forgot.
 
Ah fair enough. I don't appreciate this having to google / learn stuff you know. It's not what I come here for... :mad:
But...

If you do start typing it into Google you also find out that...
1660541027759.jpeg
Poe's x-wing Lego is a thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom