web
counter
 

In Appreciation of Stephen Colbert, Not Just as a Comedian, But As a Humanist

By Michael Murray | Posted Under Think Pieces | Comments (25)



stephen-colbert-takes-part-hou.jpg

You know, sometimes I just wanna watch ‘The Daily Show’ without him entering me.”

I thought that this line, sprung from the movie Bridesmaids, was a funny description of the repetitive and mechanical sex life of a weary married couple, but beyond that it also really illustrated just what an impressive degree of cultural penetration Jon Stewart has achieved. Easily the most influential and perhaps even the only relevant late night talk show host, he’s the man now, the guy that everybody pays attention to.

It used to be that news was delivered to the public by talking heads who, ignoring all the compromises and impositions imposed upon them by their corporate masters, assumed a haughty air of impartiality. What they proudly mistook for journalistic objectivity was actually just an absence of context, and it was into this dissonant chasm that Jon Stewart, an expert satirist, stepped, revolutionizing the delivery system by which populist news is now disseminated to the public.

This is a good thing, a heroic thing, even, and against all expectation, Stewart has become one of the most trusted men in America, a modern Walter Cronkite. He’s just as smart as hell, and watching him step off his own show and allowing the tables to be turned and be interviewed by another host— usually an ideological enemy— is to see genius at work. His evisceration of the smug Tucker Carlson and manhandling of Chris Wallace was almost embarrassing to watch. Stewart just ran circles around them.

Beyond all this though, Stewart’s show has also served as the launching pad for much of the top comedic talent now entering the mainstream. 
”The Daily Show” is a writers rather than performers program really, and the comics that come out of it tend to the cerebral rather than the more visual work produced by the “SNL” comedy factory.

My favorite talent that beamed down from “The Daily Show” Mother ship is the brilliant and utterly fearless Stephen Colbert. Boyish despite his age, he’s just as charming, likeable and good-natured a person as you can imagine. A former Sunday school teacher, Colbert was the youngest of 11 children and was raised by devout Catholic parents who encouraged their children to think critically and continually question their faith. At the age of 10, Colbert lost two of his brothers and his father to a plane crash. It’s an unusual background, I think, and one that’s helped shape a man who’s unusually attuned to the dissonances and tragedies implicit in American culture and the human condition at large.

Looking back, you can see the rudiments of the character he plays on the “Colbert Report” in “Strangers With Candy.” In this cult classic (that plays out like a David Lynch directed After School Special) starring Amy Sedaris, Colbert plays a pitifully misinformed history teacher who mistakenly thinks his gay life is a secret.

In one scene, while about to go at it with another teacher in a broom closet, Colbert leapt up and smashed the ceiling light as prelude to an explosion of unbridled passion. In this improvisational flash, Colbert displayed an incredible physical wit and a kind of genius in explicating the characters obsessive kink with secrecy and repression. It was a small moment, but a brilliant one.

Of course it’s the “Colbert Report,” where he plays a “well-intentioned, poorly-informed, high status idiot” where he’s made his mark. As if pulling a pole out of a pool and showing us the difference between the refracted, perceived image and the reality of that image, he performs a kind of magical trick of deconstruction on each episode. It’s been on for 7 seasons now, expertly lampooning the punditry spinning so furiously out of the American right and it’s gathered as many awards as conceivably be given to a show in the process. It’s been a beautiful ride, but I think it’s finally time for the show to make its final report.

It’s an amazing feat to produce such satire every night, a huge testimony to Colbert, his writing team and the culture we live in, but what was fresh and exciting is starting to feel predictable, even mailed in. The bits in which Colbert advertizes products on the show— an ironic way of trying to work both within and without the system—just feels like irritating, even embarrassing product placement instead of experimentation, now. And I would love to see Colbert, a man of great talent and curiosity, branch out into other endeavours. The show hasn’t diminished significantly in quality, but it’s own success and prominence in our political culture has forced it to work from the inside, and once politicians start trying to be hip and in-on-the-joke, the joke has to change.

No matter, Colbert has more than earned the right to do whatever he wants, and if that’s to continue with the “Colbert Report” for another 30 years, God bless him. He has given us moments of utter brilliance in this guise, including his assault on Wikipedia when he got viewers to write in declaring that the elephant population in Africa had tripled in the last six months. This act, which clarified the nature of Wikipedia reality, and that of news reportage in general, shamed the entity into changing the nature of it’s editorial policy.

Another golden moment came when Colbert was invited to give a speech at the 2006 White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. In front of George W. Bush and an array of privileged and entitled beltway types, Colbert, staying in character, gave one of the most lacerating and penetrating critiques of the administration and the media that marketed for them, imaginable. In what was supposed to be a gentle festival of self-congratulation and inside jokes, Colbert dropped an atomic bomb. It was jaw-dropping stuff, an incredibly courageous and even selfless thing to have done.

A graduate of Northwestern University, Colbert was asked to deliver the commencement address there earlier this summer. After the requisite comedy, Colbert once again revealed what a lovely man he truly appears to be. Speaking from his experience, he advocated a humanist approach to a life that whether we wanted it to be or not, was going to be a work of improvisation, reminding students that they were destined to serve that which they loved— so take care to be true in your love— and that they could not “win” their lives.

It was beautiful, simple, wise and kind.

The thing about Stephen Colbert is that in spite of the invective that can come from him, he doesn’t seem to have a mean bone in his body. He loves life and the people who inhabit it, and in him we see an innocence and purity that’s matched by intelligence and talent. And in him, we see not just the best of ourselves, but the best expression of American principles, too.

Michael Murray is a freelance writer. He presently lives in Toronto. You can find more of his musings on his blog, or check out his Facebook page.










Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Watch This Trailer or Jab a Pencil in Your Ear? Colin Firth, Orlando Bloom and Patricia Clarkson Will Make You Wish You Chose the Latter | Nailing Down The Greasy Line Between High Fashion Photography And Smut









Comments

Michael Murray, as usual, you kicked the ass out of this piece. That Colbert "It Gets Better" video broke my heart and then pasted it back together.

Posted by: coveredinbees at July 25, 2011 2:07 PM

"Stewart’s show has also served as the launching pad for much of the top comedic talent now entering the mainstream."

NOT. SO. fast Ms. Munn

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at July 25, 2011 2:11 PM

Colbert rules. That is all.

Posted by: Fredo at July 25, 2011 2:32 PM

Very nice piece. Stephen's decency being so perceptible through the character is often cited as the reason why the character works so well in the first place.

(Though Colbert had its 5th anniversary last fall, and is now in its 6th season. Nitpick.)

Posted by: Sharilyn at July 25, 2011 2:38 PM

TDS/TCR one of the best hours of television.

Posted by: John W at July 25, 2011 2:40 PM

You had me. You had me totally until the very last line. I don't understand why Americans constantly take concepts such as "fairness" and "wit" and intelligence" and "humanism" and appropriate them? Surely these principles are espoused and practiced in many other countries just as often (maybe even sometimes more so) as they are in the US? Or North America if that's what you meant by "American".

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 25, 2011 2:43 PM

The "It Gets Better" video was pretty amazing. Him being in character so much just makes it all the more affecting when he steps out of it to say something serious. It's like "Wow. He cares enough about getting this message across that he dropped the shtick." I mean the guy didn't even drop character to testify to friggin' Congress!

Posted by: Socrates_Johnson at July 25, 2011 2:45 PM

You have encapsulated all that I love about Colbert in a very well-written piece. I admire him and hope that he never loses the characteristics that make him a very special person.

Posted by: Spender at July 25, 2011 2:49 PM

Great piece, but I gotta nitpick this one thing:

"He has given us moments of utter brilliance in this guise, including his assault on Wikipedia when he got viewers to write in declaring that the elephant population in Africa had tripled in the last six months. This act, which clarified the nature of Wikipedia reality, and that of news reportage in general, shamed the entity into changing the nature of it’s editorial policy."

They temporarily "protected" the page, restricting it to edits from people who had already done a certain number of edits already, but I don't think that was any change in policy, they'd long done that with pages that became frequent targets for vandalism (it looks like the ability to protect pages in this way goes back to December 2003, and keep in mind wikipedia was only launched in 2001). This article argues that the prank didn't really work, and actually shows that wikipedia's policy on vandalism works pretty well.

Posted by: Jesse M. at July 25, 2011 3:27 PM

Socrates_Johnson, I observed that he dropped character once for his congressional testimony, and that was when they asked him why he had taken interest in that particular cause. He paused before answering, and stated in his regular, non-character voice that he just always has a tendency to route for the underdog, and there aren't many greater underdogs than those immigrants he had observed working first hand. I thought it was a very moving moment. It was such bullshit that he was chided for testifying the way he did.

Posted by: katy at July 25, 2011 3:32 PM

Funny how people nitpick when they basically agree with you about Colbert! I love both Stewart and Colbert because they give another perspective to the news and our own political/economic/social existence in the world. Everything is questioned and that's how it should be, why accept the spoon-fed conservative bullshit media? Also, it's not about two sides (conservative vs. liberal), but there are so many different sides to a situation. Stewart and Colbert are outside these labels and don't hang on to a liberal label to just be in opposition to conservative ideology. It is refreshing commentary aside from being great comedy. I appreciate that Colbert is humanist, that is a perspective that does not come up enough but inherently part of the U.S. political history.

Posted by: Gigi at July 25, 2011 3:58 PM

Very well put. I shudder to think where North America as a whole would be without the influence of these two men over the last decade.

I would LOVE to see either of them duke it out with Rick Mercer (Canada's reigning King of political comedy) somewhere, though hilarity of that magnitude may cause the set to implode.

Posted by: Bert at July 25, 2011 4:06 PM

@ Jesse--thanks for that clarification and that article. It's pretty easy to get caught up in Colbert Nation and attribute perhaps more glory on the man than is warranted and to imagine that he or anybody would have a dramatic impact on as snaky an enterprise as Wikipedia, is to go a little too far.

@paddydog--I give American principles a category separate from many nations ( I'm Canadian) on the basis of it's founding, which was almost as a rebel state free from the shackles of religion and monarchy. Obviously, other nations share equally in these sentiments, but I've always imagined a particular kind of skepticsm that informs the constitution and American patriotism, and in that I see Colbert as a kind of exemplum.

Posted by: Michael Murray at July 25, 2011 4:07 PM

I have seen both Colbert's and Stewart's shows live, and this article rang very true to me. While I was of course impressed with Jon Stewart when I saw him- he absolutely crackled with electric indignation, it was truly awesome to watch- it was Colbert the person who bowled me over the most. He was kind and fun and radiated joy and warmth from minute one to the end. You could just tell how much he loved doing what he did and life in general from being in his presence for a short time. It was amazing.

Also he did an elaborate lip sync / dance to the entirety of Neutral Milk Hotel's "Holland, 1945" and gave everyone sitting near the stairs (INCLUDING ME, thankfully) a high five after the show. It was possibly the best moment of my life (and definitely the best high five.)

Posted by: Kaylasn at July 25, 2011 4:18 PM

A very good friend of mine is a freelance journalist with a focus on the Middle East. He once told me that the biggest mistake the people there make (Iran in particular for that conversation) is that they project THEIR way of thinking on the US, and we do the same back at them. When you live a life that is a constant attack on others, you live on the constant defensive, and when you just want to get along, you assume others do too. Both extremes are equally perilously naive. So it is no surprise that the defensive and conspiracy minded media (and Fox is main stream media, regardless of what they call themselves) see nothing but conspiracy and evil intent from Stewart and Colbert. They have been poisoned by the toxic materials of their trade, and like the Mad Hatter, they no longer have the ability to distinguish reality from fantasy. Stewart repeatedly points this out in the linked interview, as well as others. Many of the accusations leveled at him might as well be delivered into a mirror, for they seem to be more accurate of the accuser than the accused.

Posted by: Lindsey with an 'e' at July 25, 2011 4:59 PM

they no longer have the ability to distinguish reality from fantasy

Which is why they keep comparing themselves to a fucking comedy channel.

Posted by: Socrates_Johnson at July 25, 2011 5:22 PM

To me your points on the humanity of Colbert touches on why I consider myself a huge fan of Colbert but would describe my feelings towards Stewart as mixed. I used to watch the Daily Show regularly, and I always enjoyed it. But I found that more and more I was getting overwhelmed by Stewart's anger and joylessness. Maybe he's right to be angry because there are a lot of things that are messed up in the world, but I just found it too hard to watch it.

I remember that it really crystalized for me when I was watching an interview he had with that bald stock market guy (Kramer???) sometime in the aftermath of the economic collapse. Stewart was very aggressive in his questions and really laid into the guy. Now maybe that was deserved but it was just too much for me. I'd much rather watch Colbert tear a guy apart with a smile and a laugh.

Posted by: Tyler at July 25, 2011 6:15 PM

I agree with the point that what makes "Colbert" (the character) work is that you can see that Stephen Colbert the person is an exceptional person who cares about other human beings. (And really does use his blowhard might to raise money for charities and generally do good in the world.)

The fact that he still considers himself a real, bona fide Catholic continuously floors me, but also reminds me that there are still rational, compassionate people who consider themselves Christian. It's good to be reminded of this.

Posted by: MM at July 25, 2011 9:33 PM

By Stewart’s own admission, his Cronkite-esque status has as much to do with the paucity of such operators within the mainstream media. Leaving the job of critically addressing the state of the world to the court jester is hardly a healthy: laughter can be a subversive vehicle, but given the choice between a joke and the whole truth, a comedian is expected to provide laughs first and jokes tend to fall over when you attach qualifiers. That Stewart routinely does a fine job of mining the yawning deficit between politics, media and reality is proof of the craftsmanship of him and his team, but it’s an approach with limits.

Take the rallies: my issue with the Rally To Restore Sanity was that it felt too much like explaining the joke- explanations which subsequently got Stewart on the defensive with everyone BUT those who might have been prime targets for the message (exhibit A: Glenn Fucking Beck). Could a “Rally to Restore Fear” have made the same rhetorical points while avoiding much of the unnecessary butthurt?

Even though he wears a satirist’s veil, in one respect Colbert’s approach more artistically honest*: unlike Stewart, he doesn’t have to occasionally remind the world that he is a comedian. It isn’t Ali G/Borat style shock satire: he aligns himself with his target and has them either confirm or deny the absurdity of their positions through their reaction. It’s a remarkable feat of role-playing, it takes considerable wit to pull off and even if it doesn’t always work, damn if he still doesn’t win more than he loses.

TDR and TCR are a great one-two punch and long may they continue, it’s just a shame they don’t have more people in influential positions to back them up.

*not to be confused with “sincere” without which neither act would have lasted so long. Stewart can bring down the sky with the best of them, his 911-Republican breakup screed on the NY firefighters bill was one of his finest post-Bush moments.

Posted by: Dave Shepherd at July 25, 2011 10:20 PM

It is nice to be reminded of that yes. Despite how it may sometimes seem, reason and religion aren't antithetical and it does us no good to maintain such generalizations if we ever wish to find common ground or dialogue.

It is a pity that the extremists who are the most fringe in ideology are also the most likely speak loudly, to reach for an audience and inflict harm. Which is why I find Colbert's willingness to speak both seriously and subversively to be so important. The fact that he can be funny while he does it makes it that much better.

Posted by: Snobbish Font Zombie at July 25, 2011 10:26 PM

Posted by: BierceAmbrose at July 25, 2011 10:33 PM

I'm sorry, but you can't write a piece like this about him without including a link to possibly the best thing he's ever aired.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/148029/january-22-2008/it-s-all-about-stephen

Posted by: growler at July 26, 2011 2:08 PM

Very nice tribute!

Posted by: DarthCorleone at July 26, 2011 6:32 PM

I enjoyed your review, Michael, but I disagree with your suggestion that Stephen should move on. While some aspects of his show are vecoming a little stale (I'll see you in health, the occasionally OTT self-aggrandisement, the inability to let his more interesting guests outline their views), the show's writing and Stephen's performance are outstanding (and he does it every night in character, which is akin to Ginger Rogers doing everything that Fred Astaire did but backwards and in heels). In a world where the media are becoming lazier, more superficial, less accountable, more shrill and more partisan, Stephen's incisive, impartial and humane analyses are critical. Would you similarly urge a sportsman at his peak to retire in a sea of mediocre, nay corrupt, rivals? I only wish Australia had something even approximating TDS and TCR.

Posted by: XiuFetish at July 27, 2011 1:52 AM

Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is a really well written article. I will make sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful info. Thanks for the post. I’ll certainly return.

Posted by: wardrobe storage at September 6, 2011 9:42 AM