UK Twitter character-comedians

[poodlefaker]

Inspired by this article https://lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/april/funny-voice-videos

A certain style of comedy video has become prominent on social media over the past year. A young actor plays a generic, bumbling or morally compromised (although usually affable-seeming) posh person with a connection to a topical event. The videos are described by the actors and their fans as 'satirical', although the target of the satire is often unclear, and the performers appear to punch down (or at least sideways) as often as up. The acting is deliberately hammy, derivative and reliant on stereotypes, and the humour seems to come primarily from the theatrical emphasis placed on the fact that a person is making a joke. I've come to think of them as 'funny voice videos'.

I haven't seen much discussion of these types here - yer Josh Berrys and Rosie Holts, Harry Trevaldwyn etc. Sometimes quite well observed but pretty inconsequential and lacking the mad energy that Bob Mortimer or Limmy bring to this sort of thing. That article is a bit annoying though, criticising them for not being properly satirical. Like having a go at Victoria Wood for not nailing Thatcher. I've managed to avoid Will (son of Ian) and Fleur (daughter or Clive) Anderson, though.

[petril]

saying it in a etc

[Brundle-Fly]

It's just one-dimensional character (or caricature) comedy on Twitter.  I can't see anything new brought to the table here other than the platform.

[Jerzy Bondov]

Some of these videos are quite funny but I think it's fair to use them to point out how completely toothless and dead satire is, even if that's not the real intent of the videos, since they're probably some of the most popular comedy going.

I really like Alistair Green's videos because there is an edge of hatred that you don't get with some of the others. Some of them are quite uncomfortable to watch. Also I was enjoying laughing at his characters like racially insensitive older women and unfunny improv comedians, and then he did one which is basically exactly me and it's very funny but also painful.

[notjosh]

Seems a pretty strange target to me, in a world where Have I Got News For You and The Mash Report exist. A bit like doing an article about British stand-up which is entirely built around analysis of three 5-minute spots at an open mic gig. If you're going to have a pop at these videos at least do some of the more high-profile ones like Alistair Green or Michael Spicer who actually have Patreons for this stuff.

[dissolute ocelot]

Some of these videos are quite funny but I think it's fair to use them to point out how completely toothless and dead satire is, even if that's not the real intent of the videos, since they're probably some of the most popular comedy going.

I really like Alistair Green's videos because there is an edge of hatred that you don't get with some of the others. Some of them are quite uncomfortable to watch. Also I was enjoying laughing at his characters like racially insensitive older women and unfunny improv comedians, and then he did one which is basically exactly me and it's very funny but also painful.

This Alistair Green pub quiz one is quite funny, mainly because it's well-observed. As to the general topic, I think character comedy in general (e.g. on stage) tends to be frowned upon as opposed to straight standup for various reasons, which include the fact that it's often not very funny, the disdain for observational comedy, a disdain for drama school graduates who like making up funny characters who bear no resemblance to real human beings, a lack of risk-taking or danger, and more. Even when done well (e.g. Harry Enfield or Victoria Wood) it's often treated with condescension. And a lot of the Twitter stuff isn't well-observed or psychologically penetrating: it's no more than making a silly voice and being dim, and that's why God invented Made In Chelsea.

[The Roofdog]

I think most of these are tedious low-hanging fruit but hardly any of them punch down do they? They're almost all piss-takes of ex-public school boys or upper middle class Waitrose Mums and Dads.

[poodlefaker]

Josh Berry does a posh stoner Bristol Uni student character - in one recent bit he'd been at the Kill the Bill protest, which earned him a load of flak on Twitter. He was accused of punching down at the protesters.

[Cuellar]

I never really thought these things were meant to be satirical as such. They're just meant to be shit.

[Gurke and Hare]

I think most of these are tedious low-hanging fruit but hardly any of them punch down do they? They're almost all piss-takes of ex-public school boys or upper middle class Waitrose Mums and Dads.

Yeah - the suggestion that they punch sideways is maybe fairer, because most of them seem to be posh boys doing impressions of other posh boys, but when you're a posh boy sideways is the only way to punch without punching down.

[idunnosomename]

That Darren Grimes one is funny. Real commitment to a bit.

[dead-ced-dead]

I think most of these are tedious low-hanging fruit but hardly any of them punch down do they? They're almost all piss-takes of ex-public school boys or upper middle class Waitrose Mums and Dads.

I agree. From the few I've seen they mainly take sideways swipes, as others say. They're not particularly funny, but they're not particularly vicious or nasty or anything.

[mippy]

From the title of this thread, I thought this was going to be about the in-character Twitter accounts like Charol-Annn Dhuffy, Alan Stoob: Nazi Hunter, or Galactic Keegan. (Does Big Sam still exist? TheQueenUK?)

[lankyguy95]

(Does Big Sam still exist?)

Oh the Big Sam one really used to make me laugh. That must have been about nine years ago or something though. I remember wondering whether the writer behind it had changed as it started to feel a stale after a while but maybe that was just me.

I'll have to try and search out my favourite tweets from it.

[j_u_d_a_s]

Josh Berry does a posh stoner Bristol Uni student character - in one recent bit he'd been at the Kill the Bill protest, which earned him a load of flak on Twitter. He was accused of punching down at the protesters.

That one in particular has a nasty reactionary current and just relies on that old right wing dismissal tactic that all protesters are just bored students from rich families. And considering the climate, it's an amazingly tone deaf choice to make when the past couple of months have seen clear examples of heavy handed and unaccountable police brutality. It's the sort of tedious shit you hear from right wing grifters.

On a related tangent, this sketch from a couple of youtube performers is hilariously ill observed bollocks. The recent Lindsay Ellis video skewered the more aggressive parts of the twitter left brilliantly while this just attributes sensible moderate centrist mantras to... the left. The premise alone is nonsense too... Larry and Paul: joining the left wing

[Ignatius_S]

Inspired by this article https://lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/april/funny-voice-videos

I haven't seen much discussion of these types here - yer Josh Berrys and Rosie Holts, Harry Trevaldwyn etc. Sometimes quite well observed but pretty inconsequential and lacking the mad energy that Bob Mortimer or Limmy bring to this sort of thing. That article is a bit annoying though, criticising them for not being properly satirical. Like having a go at Victoria Wood for not nailing Thatcher. I've managed to avoid Will (son of Ian) and Fleur (daughter or Clive) Anderson, though.

Thanks for posting that - found it an interesting read.

As the article set up that such content is being described  as 'satirical' by creators and fans, feel the writer was spot on assessing it as such.  Certainly, when I've seen Berry describe his work, satirical credentials are at the forefront  e.g.:

/JBFN/ is a sort of bizarro news show, as mock-anchorman Berry interviews politicians and the like - also played by him - about made-up stories that are "vulgar and fanciful, but have enough elements of truth that it allows you to see the satirical mirror being held up to specific aspects of society," he explains.

"A lot of satire at the moment seems to be about mocking public figures and 'the establishment', but this is very often done by an establishment figure in an establishment voice. Ironically you end up with someone failing to critique arguably the thing in greatest need of critique: the voice of the establishment and the way discourse is framed (I think as a satirist you're always looking for where power truly lies, and we often forget that that is with the media far more so than politicians.)"

And so Berry the mock anchorman "doesn't actually represent what I think, he's more a mockery of journalists. I think having an anchor who often is the joke and not above criticism gets around the issue that sometimes satire shows suffer from, where the hosts think they are God. Incidentally, I do think I'm God, but I at least have the decency to pretend I don't."
https://www.comedy.co.uk/live/random8/josh-berry/

Something that I particularly liked about the article is Connolly being clear in their criteria, which I find often isn't the case when satire is discussed.

The Frayn quote is something I tend to side with - I remember first reading about this point in the sleeve notes of a Beyond The Fringe boxset and it stuck with me. Human nature is a driving force of satire, but feel that for a lot of people seem to think that it's only the flaws of others that are funny.

[AllisonSays]

Oh the Big Sam one really used to make me laugh. That must have been about nine years ago or something though. I remember wondering whether the writer behind it had changed as it started to feel a stale after a while but maybe that was just me.

I'll have to try and search out my favourite tweets from it.

I used to love that one. There was also a guy who pretended to be a scotch egg.

[idunnosomename]

the shippam's paste account is my all-time favourite. doesnt tweet much now

[Sebastian Cobb]

@blokeiworkwith was my favourite.

[Chedney Honks]

None of these are funny, and I don't respect their tame contributions to the noise.

[dozybugcarrot]

I think if satire is going to challenge or change anything, it needs to attack systems, not individuals. And to do that you have to have some kind of knowledge of the systems you're mocking. Either by working in them (eg in law or politics) or by being fucked over by them (going through the benefit system or accused of a crime.) Most of the people in the article are young and appear to come from cosseted environments, so how can they know any more than the average Joe? And how can they be angry enough to attack with claws?

[BritishHobo]

Some of these videos are quite funny but I think it's fair to use them to point out how completely toothless and dead satire is, even if that's not the real intent of the videos, since they're probably some of the most popular comedy going.

I really like Alistair Green's videos because there is an edge of hatred that you don't get with some of the others. Some of them are quite uncomfortable to watch. Also I was enjoying laughing at his characters like racially insensitive older women and unfunny improv comedians, and then he did one which is basically exactly me and it's very funny but also painful.

Thanks for the recommendation. Beef really took me surprise. The delivery of

Spoiler alert

the 'joke' about Communication Studies unexpectedly gave me a horrible little twist of anxiety.

[close]

[mippy]

I think if satire is going to challenge or change anything, it needs to attack systems, not individuals. And to do that you have to have some kind of knowledge of the systems you're mocking. Either by working in them (eg in law or politics) or by being fucked over by them (going through the benefit system or accused of a crime.) Most of the people in the article are young and appear to come from cosseted environments, so how can they know any more than the average Joe? And how can they be angry enough to attack with claws?

This is the issue with a lot of the essay collections by "relatable" Millennial women that have been a thing for the past few years - commentary on life/work/love by people who have experienced it mostly on easy mode. Not to say that priviledge means that you automatically don't have something to say, but your struggles will be very different from the majority of people and so there's no insight to be gleaned there.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I think if satire is going to challenge or change anything, it needs to attack systems, not individuals. And to do that you have to have some kind of knowledge of the systems you're mocking. Either by working in them (eg in law or politics) or by being fucked over by them (going through the benefit system or accused of a crime.) Most of the people in the article are young and appear to come from cosseted environments, so how can they know any more than the average Joe? And how can they be angry enough to attack with claws?

Most satirists don't want change, they want to poke fun at the system that is making them massively wealthy.

You know, like Armando Iannucci for instance.