Satire could change the world

By Alice Chen

​

Steven Patterson is a well-regarded stand-up comedian, starring in CBC Radio One’s The Debaters, but he’s got a strong opinion on how impactful on society his work really is.

“Comedy’s main job is to be funny…I think any organization would say ‘Oh we don’t care what these people say,’ and the comedians would say ‘we’re not trying to change the world singlehandedly,” he says.

But others, like comedy writer and teacher Anne Fenn, would disagree.

Fenn believes that satire’s overarching goal is “to reveal the truth.”

“I think this about humour in general, [that] it’s actually aggressive but the laughter helps to make it feel like it’s not,” Fenn says. “Laughter helps to relieve the discomfort that comes with satire that comes with truth-telling.”

In her 20-plus years in the industry, she’s seen how much more diverse the field has become.

Fenn illustrates this growth by describing the shift from 16 years ago, when she tried and failed to pitch an Asian sitcom, to today, where popular shows like the predominantly Korean Kim’s Convenience can feature on networks like the CBC.

She argues that this trend gives power in comedy to marginalized groups, allowing their voices to be heard.

“Samantha Bee for instance…she does not apologize for being a woman or for criticizing men harshly and calling out sexism where she sees it,” Fenn says, pointing to the comedian as an example of the way people’s views can be challenged.

“[Comedy] goes hand in hand with free speech,” she says.

Andrew Clark, director of Humber College’s comedy program and columnist with The Globe and Mail, also thinks it’s apparent that satire and comedy can have an impact on society.

“There are a lot of societies where you cannot perform satire because of the regime in place. It doesn’t mean that the culture is devoid of humour, it means that that society doesn’t allow that kind of exchange of ideas,” Clark says.

But he questions whether it’s always accomplishing the goals it intends to, specifically citing Dead Funny, written by Rudolph Herzog, and its description of humour in Nazi Germany.

“There were people satirizing Hitler and making fun of Hitler and calling him a buffoon but also highlighting the danger that he posed,” Clark says. “But the question is whether the satirists, rather than firing the people up, kind of calmed them down and almost became a release valve that allowed the fascists to get in power.”

Clark also points to how the social media outrage that sometimes follows American president Trump’s comments can achieve the opposite of its intended effect.

“If everybody who is against him goes mad on social media, well his base looks at everybody else getting mad and go ‘great, he’s doing a good job, I like that guy.’”

In that vein, Clark highlights how easily comedy can be used for negative effect as well, such as alt-right twitter accounts sharing “frat-boy humour.”

Fenn acknowledges another limit on the effects of satire and progressive comedy, in that it often “preaches to the choir.”

Despite this, she still thinks that it’s vital to a healthy society.

“It’s like a way of keeping things in balance. Even though the people laughing are only the ones who get it, it doesn’t mean it’s not helpful,” Fenn says.

Meanwhile, Clark accepts that these echo chambers are an inevitable consequence of the current media landscape. He says it has been splintered by technologies like the internet that make it possible to only seek out things that are tailored to a person’s individual preferences.

“Everything preaches to choir. I mean how much alt-right propaganda do you read?”

Clark also emphasizes that anything can be used for bad or good and that “it is the way it is.”

Neither Fenn nor Clark think that the importance of comedy and satire will be going down in the near future.

“I think it’s like a fissure in a vase or something…once certain people are given permission [to speak] then other people start to come out of the woodwork and they start to be heard,” Fenn says.

Clark thinks that people have become increasingly more reliant on comedians and humorists for their news as viewers have become disillusioned with information sources like politicians.

And Patterson comments on the difference between the acknowledgement of comics’ importance in America as compared to Canada.

Specifically, he points at how comedians in America will often be seated in news panels to give their opinions. He additionally criticizes the lack of funding attributed to comedians by groups like the Canada Council for the Arts, especially when compared to dance and theatre companies.

“Canada doesn’t treat their comedians with the respect or opportunity they should…We don’t have a lot of support from the government, we don’t have a lot of support even from the other entertainment industries,” Patterson says.

Support or no, Clark expects that comedy and satire will stick around, if only for the uniquely funny way it can portray issues.

“I think it’s beautifully obscene, what comedy can be.”