Jimmy Carr - The End?

[Tashyboy]

Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.

I cannot remember the story but he did one about a Glaswegian wrestler who fought this beast on a man and ended up biting his own Willy. We spent ages lifting the needle and going back three minutes on the Lp listening to it again and again ?

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.

By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line

 

[greenone]

By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line

Ken Bigley?

 

[HomecountiesJohn]

As funny as a dose of the clap and irritating enough to be detestable.
No loss if he vanished forever really.

My thoughts exactly.

I am getting really fed up of people who clamber for extreme punishments whenever something they don’t like happens. Whether it’s a footballer or a celebrity, some people aren’t happy until they’re broken into a million pieces and they’ve lost everything.

Whatever happened to accepting the apology and moving on with life?

 

[HomecountiesJohn]

By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line

Not quite.

Ken Bigley?

Billy Connolly is my Favourite Comedian but I must admit his Ken Bigley comment overstepped the line.He made an apology and moved on.

 

[Swango1980]

Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.

Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.

See Pastor Jack Glass and The Crucifixion...

As it happens my parents forbade me or my brother buying his Solo Concert LP, such was the upset it caused in some sections of the Scottish population and it's notoriety. But as you might expect - my brother bought it and we listened to it in secret - and wet ourselves laughing It took some time - and some nerves - for us to suggest to our parents that they had a listen...and they found themselves laughing also. Why? Because Connolly simply talked about people we knew and the things they (and we) did.

 

[RichA]

Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.

I think you're right. It is completely subjective.
Connolly has massively gone after the church, Catholicism in particular, throughout his career, but mostly poking fun at the ridiculousness of it. For sure it caused outrage and offence in some circles, but I've never heard him do it in a way that was callous. Also, it was a culture that he grew up in, not somebody else's.
Some of his comic stories have been shocking to some and while he's probably not an apologiser, I have read him saying that he's human and he's made mistakes and errors of judgement.
Personally, I don't look for people to apologise, but it's good if they can reflect on something that they possibly got wrong and make changes. Some people, in all walks of life, think that they're untouchable and just double down. It catches up with them eventually.
Jimmy Carr is sharp and extremely funny. Personally, I hope he just rethinks the more extreme material that just causes shock and offence for the sake of it. He doesn't need to join the ranks of comedians who've disappeared from view because of their obnoxious material. I think he's got the talent to stay on the edge without tumbling over it.

 

[Swango1980]

I think you're right. It is completely subjective.
Connolly has massively gone after the church, Catholicism in particular, throughout his career, but mostly poking fun at the ridiculousness of it. For sure it caused outrage and offence in some circles, but I've never heard him do it in a way that was callous. Also, it was a culture that he grew up in, not somebody else's.
Some of his comic stories have been shocking to some and while he's probably not an apologiser, I have read him saying that he's human and he's made mistakes and errors of judgement.
Personally, I don't look for people to apologise, but it's good if they can reflect on something that they possibly got wrong and make changes. Some people, in all walks of life, think that they're untouchable and just double down. It catches up with them eventually.
Jimmy Carr is sharp and extremely funny. Personally, I hope he just rethinks the more extreme material that just causes shock and offence for the sake of it. He doesn't need to join the ranks of comedians who've disappeared from view because of their obnoxious material. I think he's got the talent to stay on the edge without tumbling over it.

I'm not sure that would be an excuse to religious people who were deeply offended by Connolly? Or probably much of a get out clause. Otherwise, you could argue that the holocaust must not be joked about, unless you are Jewish? A white male comic can only joke about what a white male has experienced growing up in the UK. Billy Connolly was working class, and that provided plenty of great material. But perhaps a white middle class funny guy would be starved of material simply because they were brought up in an environment that doesn't especially provide an abundance of comic material.

But, it simply gets back to this. If topics the holocaust was taken off the table that could be included within a comics routine, there are many many more topics that would have to be excluded as well. And, even if you caveated certain subjects that could be included, but only if it was part of that comics culture, most comics would have to avoid most topics. I'd imagine it would be the end of the likes of Jimmy Carr, Ricky Gervais and Frankie Boyle, or at least as we know them. You could argue that nearly every single joke if extremely offensive if you take it literally.

Most of us have probably seen Jim Jeffries excellent routine on US gun control. He acknowledges in that routine that about 10% of those listening in the US will be absolutely furious, knowing he'd be causing extreme offence to them and their constitutional rights. In fact, the context of his routine is that he very much is talking down towards him (whereas in Carr's routine, it is pretty clear the context has nothing to do with putting down the travelling community, but the shock of it revealing how horrific it actually was). Is that sort of offence acceptable, or should he be more considerate to the many people that love their guns and don't want their Second Amendment changed? Or, do we all need to nominate someone to speak on behalf of us all, and tell us what sort of offence is acceptable, what isn't, what topics are fine and what topics are an absolute no go area?

P.S. I probably sound like a huge Jimmy Carr fan. I'm not, I like his quips, decent on 8 out of 10 Cats, and seen a few snippets of his routines and put downs of hecklers on youTube, which I'll chuckle at. But never sat through an entire stand up routine. I'm not a huge fan of comedians who tell one line jokes generally. I much prefer the story tellers, which is why Billy Connolly is my all time favourite, Ricky Gervais is another, and and the other end of the spectrum Peter Kay. My favourite Billy Connolly moments on youtube:

• Show in America (invited by Whoopi Goldberg) where he talks about the safety of airplanes
• Parkinson interview which included Tom Cruise
• Not being allowed to use the word "dwarf"
• An Audience with Billy Connolly
• Lady falling of the bus

 

[RichA]

I'm not suggesting that anything should be taken off anyone's table, in terms of comedy material.
In the UK, comedy is governed by the same laws that affect all of us - Obscene Publications, Public Order, various Discrimination acts, etc. In our society, unless something is specifically legislated against, it is legal and I'm broadly in favour of free speech and against censorship.
However, in all aspects of society, even legal behaviour has limits which any of us will be shunned if we exceed.
I could join a golf club and take 6 hours for every round, wearing pink socks and having my Bluetooth speaker blaring out drum'n'bass as I played. It wouldn't be illegal, but pretty soon everyone would think I was a dick and I would find myself marginalised.
Surely the skill in any activity is finding balance and not only listening to people who agree with you.

 

[hovis]

Alot of people are missing the point. What is and isn't acceptable is subjective. You wouldn't have any comedians at all if they weren't allowed to use "potentially" offensive material. There will be people out there that find Ken Dodd offensive. It seems to be fashionable to be "offended" on other people's behalf. I suppose it makes the person think they are a decent human being.
If you are offended by a joke then fine. Be offended. What's wrong with being offended? You know not to watch them, be around them or buy their tickets. They'll soon be sorry when they have no friends or income.

 

[Swango1980]

I'm not suggesting that anything should be taken off anyone's table, in terms of comedy material.
In the UK, comedy is governed by the same laws that affect all of us - Obscene Publications, Public Order, various Discrimination acts, etc. In our society, unless something is specifically legislated against, it is legal and I'm broadly in favour of free speech and against censorship.
However, in all aspects of society, even legal behaviour has limits which any of us will be shunned if we exceed.
I could join a golf club and take 6 hours for every round, wearing pink socks and having my Bluetooth speaker blaring out drum'n'bass as I played. It wouldn't be illegal, but pretty soon everyone would think I was a dick and I would find myself marginalised.
Surely the skill in any activity is finding balance and not only listening to people who agree with you.

Absolutely. However, if you took 6 hours for every round and had a bluetooth speaker blaring out, I don't think ANYBODY would be a fan of you. In fact, the music alone would probably end up being against the club's etiquette policy, so although not illegal by law, it would probably be illegal in terms of the club's policies, and so I'd not be surprised if you got kicked out. Take those 2 aspects away, you'd probably get away with the pink socks, although I'm sure a few would still think you were a d*ck (for wearing the socks, not specifically talking about you).

It would be interesting to know how many people that are outraged by the joke actually like him? According to this basic poll, at the moment 14.7% claim to like him and he should apologise. Although, not sure how many of those like him just in the sense of "I see him on telly sometimes, and he is decent" and how many go out of their way to listen to his routines. 8% don't like him and think he should apologise. So, 1/5 of people potentially think he crossed the line, although it may even be smaller than that. After all, anybody offended are more likely to use this thread to voice their opinion. Many who do not care probably won't come near it and cast their vote, so maybe it is well under 1/5 of people that are outraged?

I find it interesting that many people that are offended and shocked by this joke, and are spending energy telling us he crossed a line, have not spent any energy in the past campaigning against Jimmy Carr jokes. For years he has joked about things that are probably much worse, or will certainly offend certain groups of people much worse than this joke would have offended those same people. So, to simply argue this latest joke is unacceptable, to me is a fairly limited argument. For those that object, I'd actually give more respect if they researched all of his most controversial jokes over the years, and all the controversial topics they deal with, and then list exactly which subjects he should not have gone near, and excluded from a comedy routine. At least that would then show a consistent approach to the argument, rather than isolating the debate to this one particular topic. I would still argue that no topic should be censored, because it is all about the context of how the comedian delivered the joke, and the fact that there will always be someone somewhere offended by some of the most trivial of topics.

 

[RichA]

You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.

Great post, it also seems to me some people are still confused by the difference between the words offended and offensive.

 

[Swango1980]

You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.

To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.

 

[phillarrow]

You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.

This!

I like Jimmy Carr as a game show host - apart from him irritating laugh. I used to like him as a stand up but I think he's a bit stale now. I also like comedy that shocks and makes us wince a little. However, Carr's back catalogue, or the concept of near-the-knuckle comedy wasn't in question here. The poll was only about this specific joke. Voting on this poll and expressing an opinion about this specific joke doesn't mean we have to choose a side of the comedy fence and justify our stance.

Personally, I think the holocaust should be off limits and that this particular joke was a bit OTT. Can I justify that with every other thing I have an opinion on? Of course I can't! None of us can fully justify all of our opinions, they are an eclectic mix with lots of overlaps and contradictions. That's just human nature.

P.S. If anyone wants to explore the nature of comedy and be genuinely challenged in how they feel about comedic subjects, watch Nannette by Hannah Gadsby. It's brilliant, funny, shocking, disgusting and thought provoking.

 

[RichA]

To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.

No apology needed or sought, brother. As far as I'm concerned we're having a chat over a cup of coffee - not arguing or trying to change each other's opinion.

 

[need_my_wedge]

Fitting

I've not seen the show or heard the joke, and to be honest don't really care. The clip above is perfect.

Comedy is as comedy does. I can choose to be offended by humour, that's my problem it doesn't affect anyone else. If I'm offended by a comedian, I'll normally just switch them off, and likely won't watch them again. Equally, I can choose to laugh at something that someone else may be offended at, that's entirely my own right. Black humour has been around for years, making fun out of bad situations, liking something that others find offensive does not make me a bad person, I just have a different sense of humour to them. Just because I find a comedian offensive doesn't make me want to get them cancelled or their show taken off air, it's no skin off my nose if others that like want to continue to watch. Personally comedy is a black & white situation to me, it's funny or it's not. Derek & Clive spring to mind. I'm sure that most of their act will be offensive to many today, and likely not funny to another many, but it still makes me laugh when I hear it.

If his thread hadn't been opened, I wouldn't have even know about the joke, and I still don't care about it, or who's offended by it.

 

[Hobbit]

To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.

Very interesting post. In Europe, we’re on the cusp of this being outlawed/made illegal. The country pushing this stance is Germany. It been kicked around committee for about 3 years now. Researched, analysed and stress tested, and subsequently decided upon as … I’m not sure of the definitive perspective but respect that brighter minds than mine are involved.

I’ve not followed the debate closely and, in fairness, can’t give a huge amount of detail on it apart from saying that if that much effort has been put in, it’s worth considering.

 

[Beedee]

I noticed he's playing my town this weekend. The venue have been at great pains to point out that there will be no holocaust jokes.