![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
poliphiloThe new Channel More4 (or Mofo as I think they'd like us to call it) kicked off last night with a brilliant comedy drama about the Blair government. It was lotsa fun and Bernard Hill (Theoden in LOTR) was amazingly good as former Home Secretary David Blunkett.
But does satire change anything? Has a government ever been brought down by it?
Britain has a robust tradition of political satire going back to the 18th century and in all that time we haven't had a single revolution. Instead of hanging politicians from lamp posts we point the finger at them and snigger.
So satire acts as a safety valve, protecting those in power.
But does satire change anything? Has a government ever been brought down by it?
Britain has a robust tradition of political satire going back to the 18th century and in all that time we haven't had a single revolution. Instead of hanging politicians from lamp posts we point the finger at them and snigger.
So satire acts as a safety valve, protecting those in power.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 02:16 am (UTC)Does it really? Can something not be subversive without inducing a revolution? Satire on its own will, of course, not bring down a government, but if one sees the satire as merely one element in a greater public discourse, then surely it does have some merit and one might even say that this humorous element to politics is one of the defining characteristics of the modern, Western democracy. I'm sure this could be more eloquently put, but not by me right now... :-(
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:16 am (UTC)I mean Tony Blair is still there in spite of everything....
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 03:18 am (UTC)love
shullie - a Sheffielder born and bred!
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 04:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:32 am (UTC)I'd say (but not with any great confidence) that the first great satirists were Pope and Swift.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 07:07 am (UTC)I guess satire is better than nothing. :-) At least then everyone doesn't take the politicians so seriously and persist in thinking that they really will do what is good and they are worthy of our faith and optimism. My mom still thinks that way, and it's almost heartbreaking to watch. But then maybe I'm just a jaded bleeding-heart who hangs out with too many wannabe-hippies.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:39 am (UTC)A lot better.
And, hey, don't forget Mark Twain was one of your fellow countrymen!
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 12:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 12:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 12:33 pm (UTC)In fact I could be watching it... this very instant......
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 09:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:43 am (UTC)I was playing devil's advocate. Or perhaps, more accurately, expressing my distress about Bush and Blair still being there in spite of all our mockery.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:31 am (UTC)Also, in a police state, satire isn't allowed, so it's nice to remind ourselves that we can stick out our tongues and throw bananas at the Monkey Men we elected.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-11 11:45 am (UTC)The fact that this play was broadcast, in spite of David Blunkett threatening a libel action, indicates that our liberties are still in place.