https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12001961/Dame-Edna-Everage-dead-Barry-Humphries-dies-hospital-aged-89-surrounded-family.html

Madge must be distraught!

fsm said:

Madge must be distraught!

Madge left us in 2008, aged 100.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Perry_%28English_actress%29

I once waved a gladiola stalk in a Dame Edna show in Sydney.

I thought that it didn’t sound too good for him from the supposedly incorrect hospital reports.

I once saw him give a talk as himself.. very funny bugger

Vale

He had some lines.
As Sir Les, discussing Lady Gwen.

“She’s nice but she’s boring. She could bore the arse-hole in a wooden horse, my wife. :

Ian said:

I thought that it didn’t sound too good for him from the supposedly incorrect hospital reports.

I once saw him give a talk as himself.. very funny bugger

Vale

Yes. he was funnier as himself.

roughbarked said:

Ian said:

I thought that it didn’t sound too good for him from the supposedly incorrect hospital reports.

I once saw him give a talk as himself.. very funny bugger

Vale

Yes. he was funnier as himself.

Did not like Les Patterson. Too unhygienic.

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

It’s ironic that he turned into the same rich entitled conservative twat that he so abhorred in his younger days.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

It’s ironic that he turned into the same rich entitled conservative twat that he so abhorred in his younger days.

Money can do that for you.

roughbarked said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

It’s ironic that he turned into the same rich entitled conservative twat that he so abhorred in his younger days.

Money can do that for you.

You can take the boy out of Camberwell but you can never take the Camberwell out of the boy.

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

I will four with you all day

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

and to be fair he did say:

“But I don’t think I’m right to pontificate. I’m really an actor.”

which seems a fairish comment.

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

and to be fair he did say:

“But I don’t think I’m right to pontificate. I’m really an actor.”

which seems a fairish comment.

and to be fair he did say:

“But I don’t think I’m right to pontificate. I’m really an actor.”

which seems a fairish comment.

Must be agreeance Sunday or something.

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

I thought it was only used in relation to religious persons.

Tamb said:

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

I thought it was only used in relation to religious persons.

Well probably not appropriate for Barry.

Peak Warming Man said:

Tamb said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

I thought it was only used in relation to religious persons.

Well probably not appropriate for Barry.

Everyone has their worshippers.

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

Pete was always interested to hear of people’s nautical activities.

SCIENCE said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Tamb said:

I thought it was only used in relation to religious persons.

Well probably not appropriate for Barry.

Everyone has their worshippers.

Titanic was one of the worst shippers.

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

His comment on Trump in context.

“I ask about his favourite character, the sybaritic diplomat Sir Les Patterson, whose boorish and sexist conduct carries a powerful echo of Donald Trump. Has the President stolen your act? ‘No, I don’t think so,’ he says. ‘I’m grateful to Trump for stirring up politics. And I won’t be joining any marches against him.’ His hope is to create a new show consisting entirely of Sir Les. ‘He has very fresh visions for England and he’s wonderful to perform because you can say whatever you like.’ Does he see an opportunity in the new climate of puritanism? ‘Yes! An opportunity to cause maximum offence.’”

Peak Warming Man said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

His comment on Trump in context.

“I ask about his favourite character, the sybaritic diplomat Sir Les Patterson, whose boorish and sexist conduct carries a powerful echo of Donald Trump. Has the President stolen your act? ‘No, I don’t think so,’ he says. ‘I’m grateful to Trump for stirring up politics. And I won’t be joining any marches against him.’ His hope is to create a new show consisting entirely of Sir Les. ‘He has very fresh visions for England and he’s wonderful to perform because you can say whatever you like.’ Does he see an opportunity in the new climate of puritanism? ‘Yes! An opportunity to cause maximum offence.’”

So call it art or satire or role play and suddenly bigotry and hatred and bullying is all good¡

Arts said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

I will four with you all day

Frightened you might be pushed off. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=ggWQWExRpn4

Sandy Stone isn’t his most hilarious character but the performance still brings a smile.

SCIENCE said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

His comment on Trump in context.

“I ask about his favourite character, the sybaritic diplomat Sir Les Patterson, whose boorish and sexist conduct carries a powerful echo of Donald Trump. Has the President stolen your act? ‘No, I don’t think so,’ he says. ‘I’m grateful to Trump for stirring up politics. And I won’t be joining any marches against him.’ His hope is to create a new show consisting entirely of Sir Les. ‘He has very fresh visions for England and he’s wonderful to perform because you can say whatever you like.’ Does he see an opportunity in the new climate of puritanism? ‘Yes! An opportunity to cause maximum offence.’”

So call it art or satire or role play and suddenly bigotry and hatred and bullying is all good¡

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

Peak Warming Man said:

His comment on Trump in context.

“I ask about his favourite character, the sybaritic diplomat Sir Les Patterson, whose boorish and sexist conduct carries a powerful echo of Donald Trump. Has the President stolen your act? ‘No, I don’t think so,’ he says. ‘I’m grateful to Trump for stirring up politics. And I won’t be joining any marches against him.’ His hope is to create a new show consisting entirely of Sir Les. ‘He has very fresh visions for England and he’s wonderful to perform because you can say whatever you like.’ Does he see an opportunity in the new climate of puritanism? ‘Yes! An opportunity to cause maximum offence.’”

So call it art or satire or role play and suddenly bigotry and hatred and bullying is all good¡

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

So call it art or satire or role play and suddenly bigotry and hatred and bullying is all good¡

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble his characters, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the person.

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Humphries was a Trump-supporting transphobe

But you know, everyone’s hagiographied after death.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

and to be fair he did say:

“But I don’t think I’m right to pontificate. I’m really an actor.”

which seems a fairish comment.

I think that in art and acting, he was very open and honest.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree, and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

Hagiographied is my learning for today.

Pete was always interested to hear of people’s nautical activities.

That was because he actually had a boat?

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

So call it art or satire or role play and suddenly bigotry and hatred and bullying is all good¡

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I think you have that wrong. If people laugh and come back for more. Then you can call it acceptable comedy.

Look at Kevin Bloody Wilson. That’s not his real name but he made millions without ever having a song of his played on the standard media.

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I think you have that wrong. If people laugh and come back for more. Then you can call it acceptable comedy.

Look at Kevin Bloody Wilson. That’s not his real name but he made millions without ever having a song of his played on the standard media.

We owned a manual telephone exchange and his Operator 42 was just about our theme song.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I think you have that wrong. If people laugh and come back for more. Then you can call it acceptable comedy.

Look at Kevin Bloody Wilson. That’s not his real name but he made millions without ever having a song of his played on the standard media.

We owned a manual telephone exchange and his Operator 42 was just about our theme song.

Hey Santa, where’s me fucking bike?

I don’t think one could call Barry Humphries a transphobe. He didn’t fear or loathe transgender people, he just thought the concept itself was ridiculous (and potentially harmful for vulnerable young people), a view likely shared by most people.

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

I think you have that wrong. If people laugh and come back for more. Then you can call it acceptable comedy.

Look at Kevin Bloody Wilson. That’s not his real name but he made millions without ever having a song of his played on the standard media.

We owned a manual telephone exchange and his Operator 42 was just about our theme song.

Hey Santa, where’s me fucking bike?

If I’d a’ wanted a pair of bloody thongs, I would have bloody asked
And this cowboy suit and ping pong set you can shove right up your arse
You’ve stuffed me bloody order up, it’s enough to make you spew
But it’s not just me who’s snakey, me sister’s dirty too

Bubblecar said:

I don’t think one could call Barry Humphries a transphobe. He didn’t fear or loathe transgender people, he just thought the concept itself was ridiculous (and potentially harmful for vulnerable young people), a view likely shared by most people.

Nods.

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

Barry Humphries was a great artist with an original quick wit. His satire was aimed at the pretentious especially those in high places, and to be able to take over a personality of an imaginary character for prolonged periods and still make piquant comment takes a very talented actor with great imagination.

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble his characters, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the person.

We don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble SCIENCE, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the contributor that said the following.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree (with Divine Angel), and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble his characters, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the person.

We don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble SCIENCE, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the contributor that said the following.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree (with Divine Angel), and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

It is the lowest form of wit and though I acknowledge it. I’d prefer not to confuse the issue the way you do.

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

Exactly¡ You can be as big an arsehole as you want, the moment you call it comedy it becomes acceptable¡

I don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble his characters, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the person.

We don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble SCIENCE, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the contributor that said the following.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree (with Divine Angel), and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

One: Talent is the vessel that has been nurtured and refined over a long period of time.
Two: That is a fine sentiment, only don’t shit all over them in the process.
Three: They sure can and character assassination is at the top of the list.
Four: Except too many people place themselves at the top of the pedestal and from their advantage point shit over everyone else.

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

PermeateFree said:

I don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble his characters, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the person.

We don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble SCIENCE, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the contributor that said the following.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree (with Divine Angel), and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

One: Talent is the vessel that has been nurtured and refined over a long period of time.
Two: That is a fine sentiment, only don’t shit all over them in the process.
Three: They sure can and character assassination is at the top of the list.
Four: Except too many people place themselves at the top of the pedestal and from their advantage point shit over everyone else.

I see that you have made a study of it.

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

SCIENCE said:

We don’t think you understand satire or have met or heard of people that resemble SCIENCE, because you need to see things in perspective to understand the genius of the contributor that said the following.

One, it’s still reasonable to consider talent separately from its vessel.

Two, it’s still reasonable to disagree with other people.

Three, people can be wrong.

Four, we agree (with Divine Angel), and think putting people on pedestals is stupid.

One: Talent is the vessel that has been nurtured and refined over a long period of time.
Two: That is a fine sentiment, only don’t shit all over them in the process.
Three: They sure can and character assassination is at the top of the list.
Four: Except too many people place themselves at the top of the pedestal and from their advantage point shit over everyone else.

I see that you have made a study of it.

Very Clever

In defence of Barry Humphries’ legacy, and the art of comedy itself
Julie Szego

Author and freelance journalist
April 25, 2023 — 7.45pm

The only time I worry about bursting a pipe is when I’m on the couch in front of Ricky Gervais. I recently rewatched last year’s Netflix show, SuperNature. Gervais starts by explaining the nature of stand-up: “a bloke talking,” which, he swiftly points out, is “sexist.”

“What about all the funny female comedians? Like, um…”

(Audience laughing.) “That was irony, OK?… When I say something I don’t really mean for comic effect, and you, as an audience laugh at the wrong thing ’cause you know what the right thing is … I used the old-fashioned sexist trope that women aren’t funny. Now, in real life, I know there are loads of funny women. Like, um…”

(More laughing.)

“No, but there are. Um… Dame Edna Everage.”

I’ll return soon to Gervais’ suggestion that stand-up is a boys’ own art-form.

First, I bow my head at the passing of the undisputed grand dame of Australian comedy. Second, I metaphorically cuff the heads of Barry Humphries’ ungrateful professional offspring at the Melbourne International Comedy Festival; after profiting from his trailblazing legacy, they officially disowned him.

As we’ve been reminded in recent days, he came to be associated with the Barry Award for best show until it was renamed in 2019. Humphries had made remarks about “transgenderism”, calling it a “fashion” comprising “self mutilation.”

Not even Australia’s handful of cultural elders – those who prised open the windows of our stultifying mid-century suburbia to let in fresh air – are spared cancellation. The year before Germaine Greer had been disinvited from the Brisbane Writers Festival for her comments on trans and other issues.

In a statement to the ABC, the director of Melbourne’s comedy festival, Susan Provan, eulogised Humphries as “an incredible artist and provocateur”, but said many in the industry were baffled by his apparent lack of “empathy”. Provocateurs being by definition low on empathy I’m not sure what was “baffling” about Humphries’ words. Otherwise, I’ll throw to the still venerable Miriam Margolyes, indignant at her friend’s treatment.

“He’d had more talent in his little finger than they did in their whole bodies, all of them,” she said.

Among those who had led the charge against Humphries was comedian Hannah Gadsby. In a 2018 tweet she labelled him “irrelevant and inhumane,” someone who “loves those who hold power, hates vulnerable minorities and has completely lost the ability to read the room”. Note the emphatic overstatement in “loves”, “hates”, “completely”. Then again, a lesser accusation – “insensitive”, say, or even “cruel” – would lack the force to unseat a national treasure. You have to go big or not at all.

Gadsby has similarly accused other comedians of abusing their power to punch down. Most notably, Gervais, along with Dave Chappelle whose gags likewise target women, child sex abuse survivors, Jews, blacks, and trans people. Chappelle’s response to Gadsby’s critique resembles Gervais’ digs at female comedians. He said he’d meet with members of the trans community provided they “admit Hannah Gadsby is not funny”.

I’m in awe of Gadsby’s gifts as a storyteller. Her 2018 show Nanette deserved its many accolades. Her portrait of growing up in small-town bigoted Tasmania is hilarious and devastating. She brilliantly deconstructs the gendered conventions of stand-up itself. How she’s expected to funnel her experience of pain and trauma into a punchline lest she destabilise her audience thought of as white, straight and male. “I have a responsibility to make you laugh,” she concedes. “But I’m not in the mood.”

She did make me laugh, before confronting me with the emotional toll the joke exacts on the joker. So this isn’t a case of either/or: either Gadsby, or Chappelle and Gervais. But those male comedians are funnier. Gadsby attributes their popularity to Netflix’s “amoral algorithm cult”, implying that punching down on marginalised groups pays off.

No doubt we feel a guilty thrill at humour that breaks taboos around being kind. Gervais’ theory on irony is also true, namely that we laugh at the “wrong thing,” knowing what the right thing is.

Yet what most draws me to Gervais and Chappelle is they’re willing to explore power and politics in all its messy contradictions. Chappelle is a black man unafraid to call out violent black racism against Asians. Gervais’ reference to Humphries as a woman is part of an extended satire on trans activism.

Meanwhile, “empathy”, that most feminine trait, can serve totalitarian ends, concealing abuses of power on behalf of groups deemed to be victims.

When Gadsby said of Humphries that he loves “those” who hold power who exactly was she referring to? She is so powerful— her allies and fellow travellers so powerful— they expunged the legacy of an 80-something giant of Australian culture from the festival with which he was involved from its birth because he had an old-fashioned, ignorant take on a contemporary social cause.

It is an episode of hypocrisy, sanctimony and self-delusion worthy of Humphries’ savage eye.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/in-defence-of-barry-humphries-legacy-and-the-art-of-comedy-itself-20230425-p5d36k.html

That author sounds a lot like she’s defending “jokes” made at the expense of other people. In fact, it is entirely possible to be funny without belittling others. And let’s not get into the “contemporary social issue” of sexuality and transgenderism. Both of those things existed long before Bazza, or the award, or the festival, were born. It’s the old white men of the world who make it much more of an issue than it is. Live and let live ✌🏼

Divine Angel said:

That author sounds a lot like she’s defending “jokes” made at the expense of other people. In fact, it is entirely possible to be funny without belittling others. And let’s not get into the “contemporary social issue” of sexuality and transgenderism. Both of those things existed long before Bazza, or the award, or the festival, were born. It’s the old white men of the world who make it much more of an issue than it is. Live and let live ✌🏼

Yes, because we can all agree that only old white men make fun of people based on age and sex stereotypes.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Divine Angel said:

That author sounds a lot like she’s defending “jokes” made at the expense of other people. In fact, it is entirely possible to be funny without belittling others. And let’s not get into the “contemporary social issue” of sexuality and transgenderism. Both of those things existed long before Bazza, or the award, or the festival, were born. It’s the old white men of the world who make it much more of an issue than it is. Live and let live ✌🏼

Yes, because we can all agree that only old white men make fun of people based on age and sex stereotypes.

Don’t know about all that but the fact that it is entirely possible to be funny without belittling others does not exclude the possibility that it is entirely possible to be funny by belittling others.