Phil ([info]faithlessphil) wrote,
@ 2006-07-26 20:43:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: stunned
Current music:Death Cab For Cutie - Against All Odds
Entry tags:videos

Pure Genius


On the July 25, 2006 episode of The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert interviewed Catholic League president William A. Donohue. It turned out to be one of the strangest, most surreal interviews ever conducted, as most of Colbert's comedy went straight over Donohue's head. Donohue would end up saying things like "I'm a native American. I was born in New York. They (native Americans) came over from Asia."

I have posted the video here because I believe it needs to be seen. By Catholics and non-Catholics alike. This is some hilarious and scary stuff. The despair in the genuinely Catholic Colbert is almost palpable as he finds he doesn't have to do anything to make it all absurdly funny.

(Post a new comment)

Not that bad
(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 02:16 am UTC (link)
Could you ellaborate your commentary a bit? I didn't think it a particularly remarkable interview. Donohue perhaps tried to be more entertaining than he in fact was, but aside from a few hasty slips of the tongue (including that you quote above), he aquitted himself fairly well. Unfortunately, he didn't seem to stimulate Colbert's humor all that well, as sometimes happens, and so, again, it seemed unremarkable, a little uninteresting, but certainly not embarrassing for Donohue or Colbert. Am I off-base on this?

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Not that bad
[info]faithlessphil
2006-07-27 03:08 am UTC (link)
As I said, a lot of it went over Donohue's head. Stephen didn't have to say anything particularly absurd himself, since Donohue was doing it all on his own. Here's an example:

Colbert: (The) bible doesn't say on the front "fact." Doesn't need to.
Donohue: That's right, because they...people come up to me and they ask and I say it's true.
Colbert: ...yeah.

To me, just the fact that the Colbert Persona could be shut down like that is remarkable in itself. It's like his parody of ultraconservativism seemed almost too true and alive in Donohue.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Not that bad
(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 06:06 am UTC (link)
I wouldn't think one had to be an "ultraconservative" to believe the Bible to be true.

More interesting in this context, however, is the way in which people seem to read Colbert in immensely varied fashions that reflect their own perspectives. As you probably know, Catholic web sites have been enthusiastically plugging Colbert since it was discovered he is a practicing Catholic; meanwhile, secularists seem to view him as a champion of liberalism and a critique of everything traditional. My wife is probably correct in suggesting to me that Colbert does not submit to any easy analysis.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Not that bad
[info]faithlessphil
2006-07-27 07:01 am UTC (link)
You miss my point. Believing the bible is true is one thing, but there's something patently absurd what Donohue said, which amounts to "you know the bible is true because I say so." That's exactly the worldview that Colbert's been satirizing since the start of his show. It's been the prevalent characteristic of the neo-conservative movement, from O'Reilly to Donohue all the way up to George W. Bush.

You're right that Colbert doesn't fall into any given hole, but you've misread my perspective. It seemed to me that Colbert was genuinely troubled by the end of the interview, being faced with the reality of who was representing a large segment of American Catholics: a mad, blustery, insensitive man. In many ways, the same character that Colbert's portraying. This only occurred to me because I praise Colbert for being a Catholic.

I would suggest that being a Catholic and being against the truthiness of neo-conservatism are not mutually exclusive.

I don't herald Colbert as a champion of liberalism. Like you (and your wife), I find that Colbert isn't as simple as that. What he does represent, though, is genuine examination. He parodies the partisan punditry to reveal, if nothing else, that there could be a better way to handle the issues that face society today. That it doesn't have to be all bluster and righteous indignation. That people don't have to demean others to get a point across. That maybe, we have to back things up with intelligent argument and reason instead of just saying "because I said so."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Not that bad
(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 08:18 am UTC (link)
Watch it a few more times and see if you still think Colbert was poking fun at Donohue.

Why do you jump to the conclusion that Colbert is the only one not taking the conversation too seriously? Seriously, if you think Donohue really holds the view that things are right "because I said so", you obviously have some baggage that is making you see this in a pretty distorted way.

Colbert's gift (for better or worse) is that no one really knows what he thinks. He pokes fun at people he agrees with and seems to argues topics from the perspective of people he most likely does not agree with. Just when you think you have him figured out, he reverses his tactics and...well, the point is that he isn't just pulling the wool over his guests eyes, he is mocking his audience as well.

You seem to think you have him figured out, but it seems to me that the wool is over your eyes on this one. I may be wrong, but that's really the whole point. I would suggest not sticking your neck out because he is trying to make someone appear to be an ignoramus. Who was it this time?







(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Not that bad
(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 08:31 am UTC (link)
Also, when Colbert said "Yeah", you left out his next comment:

"I've got nothing to say about that. We're totally on board together."

Do you not take him at his word?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Not that bad
[info]faithlessphil
2006-07-27 09:14 am UTC (link)
Well, anonymous person, who shall remain anonymous, apparently, all I can say is: good job.

You've totally got me dead to rights. I mean, Colbert did say that, didn't he? Oh man! I should take him at his word, despite the fact that he's playing a character, and that he had a funny facial expression, and that you've said yourself that you can never really tell what Colbert is thinking. I'll take Colbert at his word, too, that Bush should start supporting gay marriage so that he can get his opponents to totally quash it. It's brilliant!

You can take me for my word there. I totally agree with you.

I don't think Colbert's poking fun at Donohue, anonymous commenter. That's my entire point. He didn't need to. Or maybe he couldn't. Donohue turned out to be a greater caricature than Colbert could ever be. You've got me wrong again, anonymous person. It's not like I'm proclaiming "HOHO! Victory for Colbert! He sure nailed Donohue!" I'm just saying, Donohue was, in my opinion, horrible on the show. Even if he didn't take it too seriously, which I find suspect, it still painted a poor picture of Catholicism as a whole.

Look, anonymous person, you've got me all wrong. I'm not a crazy secular liberal who hates everything Catholic. I love Catholicism. I praise it for its progressiveness and insight into how the world could be made a better place. However, it seems to me that from this interview, Donohue does more to harm Catholicism than to aid it. His bluster and insensitivity paints a poor picture for the modern Catholic. He paints it as if there's some kind of leftist conspiracy to bring Catholicism down, when in fact, the left supported a Catholic candidate in the last election. He paints it as if Secular Jews are out to get Catholics, which to me is absurd and horribly divisive.

Vatican II did a lot to modernize the Church. It made sure that the Church would be so damn insular, secretive and so dismissive of any group of people. This interview showed a lot to prove that some Catholics just haven't moved along with the Church.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Colbert the new Catholic spokesman?
(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 01:56 pm UTC (link)

But as for Colberts constant Catholic promotions [even if done under humor]

Are people's memories this short?

Isnt this the guy who played the mean gay teacher on Strangers with Candy? [this isnt exactly pro-conservative Catholic stuff]

"Colbert has likened this to the character he played on the Daily Show, and later on the Colbert Report, claiming that he has a very specific niche in portraying "uninformed, high-status idiot" characters, who are sometimes well-intentioned, but always wrong. Colbert reprised his role for the 2006 movie adaptation.

Noblet also openly hated Jerri Blank, in subversion of the common wisdom that students often erroneously believe their teachers hate them, and was depicted as carrying on a secret homosexual affair with the school's art teacher, portrayed by Paul Dinello, throughout the course of the series."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert



(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Colbert the new Catholic spokesman?
[info]faithlessphil
2006-07-27 02:35 pm UTC (link)
Dear anonymous commenter,

You might want to help yourself to a clue.

Respectfully,
Phil

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2006-07-27 08:09 pm UTC (link)
In the first place, Donoghue's remark about "native Americans" was technically correct: a "native" of a place is someone who was born there, the word "native" referring to birth, as in "my native land", "nativity", etc. If you are born in America then you are a "native American". Donoghue was making a serious point. It would be more corect to say that American Indians are "aboriginal Americans", as they were the people here originally. However even that would be inaccurate, as they came over from Asia about 12,000 years ago, as Donoghue says, and there were probably other peoples here before that according to recent archeological discoveries. As far as Colbert making a little fun of Donoghue, he did that in the opening thing about Darwin, but most of the rest is serious. Colbert is a believing Catholic, and so the founding of the Catholic Church by Christ and the commission given by Christ to St. Peter and his successors would not be something quite serious for him, not a joke. Colbert is quite proud of being a Catholic. There was some gentle teasing of Donoghue at points, but not much.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]faithlessphil
2006-07-28 12:58 am UTC (link)
In the first place, anonymous commenter, let's break down your argument:

1) A "native" of a place is someone who was born there - yes, that's a proper definition of the word. Good job. Now, why doesn't that apply to the so-called "American Indians." I guess they weren't born in America!

2) It would be more correct to say that American Indians are "aboriginal Americans" - I was on board with you until you pointed out that it would be inaccurate. I'm glad you pointed out that mistake. So I guess that would only make them "native," right? Just like Donohue, their ancestors came to America from a different land (in Donohue's case, Europe, and in the "Indians'" case, Asia) , and then they were born in America. In fact, they've been BORN IN AMERICA for much longer than any one else has.

See, I would concede that Donohue is a "native American." I would concede that, but to dismiss the "Native Americans" as just "people who came in from Asia" is a hideous thing.

And look, I never said Colbert was making fun of Catholicism. I heartily believe that Colbert is a devout Catholic who takes his faith seriously. What I'm saying, anonymous commenter, is that Donohue made a fool out of himself even without Colbert making fun of him. He didn't even have to bait him into saying dumb things. Donohue said all the dumb things himself.

I don't even think Colbert was enjoying seeing Donohue self-destruct. I felt it truly pained him as a practicing Catholic. I felt he actually wanted to bring the discussion over to more rational things, but Donohue just wouldn't stop with his ultra-right-wing neo-con bluster.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…