Quote from: Dr Alex on September 29, 2015, 12:37:57 PM
I just saw CO Caspar video. Is that some joke project?
Humor in noise. Can you appreciate it? The best? The worst?
I have a feeling that some people think humor should not be tolerated in noise at all. Not personally a big fan, but not on a mission against it either. I don't quite get what would be the problem. Obviously there are also occasions where the border between comedy and seriousness is blurred in a really interesting way. Let's say the best of Schimpfluch, where the comedy may seem almost sinister at points. Or maybe Hafler Trio. I guess there's also a fair amount of so called goofball-noise, which aims to be funny but often isn't unless you're aware of some inside-joke or something. Generally not that fond of this style, but for example when Crank Sturgeon performed in Finland with his self-made fish costume it was 100% gold. Absurd and funny. Of course, in generally, badly done comedy is exactly that, and often painfully boring.
There's a project in London called something like Now Wash your hands which deals with OCD in a comedic way. I haven't seen him perform so can't comment on how the comedy works but from a friend's description it sounded kind of interesting.
Yellow Tears and related projects might fall into this category, definitely absurd but I think it works really well as they have created this strange world the project lives in.
Wow, a few classics there - the Bonzos and Victor Borge. Taking me right back.
This always struck me as some light hearted noise flavoured humour -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSulycqZH-U
Quote from: Salamanauhat on September 29, 2015, 01:41:33 PM
for example when Crank Sturgeon performed in Finland with his self-made fish costume it was 100% gold. Absurd and funny.
I saw his performance in Germany last year and thought the same thing.
I think some Kind of Humor is normal like Sarcasm, Schadenfreude, Black humor (or so called British Humor), Ironical Stuff. Mostly Goofish Kind is not so often used. It depends on the Work of the Artist. Genocide Organ in Selfmade Teletubbie Costumes would look idiotic. fckng bstrds ( http://www.fcknbstrds.com/ ) in Military Uniform would also look unusual. Or think about the Residents in normal Business Suits.
Costes (http://www.costes.org/) is somekind of weird and unusual Humor, fits totaly in Noise...
Smell & Quim. Hilarious, and complete piss-takers!
The short answer is, of course, that when it's done right ANYthing can be good and there are, of course, many examples of failure here as there are in laptop noise, power electronics, HNW, psych hippie stuff and any other semi divisive little trope we have in our world. I'm a big fan of funnies personally.
I think unintentional humour is far more prevalent in noise anyway but I guess that's another story.
One thing I think is missing here though is that to laugh at or with some piece of noise or weird art is a perfectly great and valid response. A lot of the misunderstandings about these things often stem from the fact that those not 'in the know' find what they're seeing quite funny but don't feel it is allowed to express that. I remember explaining a Peter Fengler performance I saw to my Mum and she shook her head saying 'I'd just want to burst out laughing.' I wish more people WOULD do that. I know I've tried to crack a lot of jokes live that have sunk like a million lead balloons because of my crap delivery and the very serious feel that accidentally springs up in live settings.
When it's fused together with the aesthetic, it's great!
These are more plunderphonics than noise, but deserve a mention:
Culturcide
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aobQDfnRStA
V/Vm (+ his Test Records label)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2hRvSsPQqI
Negativland
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7EqYVPEq_c
Quote from: burdizzo on September 29, 2015, 06:40:31 PM
Smell & Quim. Hilarious, and complete piss-takers!
Milovan Srdenovic supporting Whitehouse many many years ago was hilarious... the 'Islam Uber Alles' cover was very well placed... So good was the whole of his set that it made the usually good Anenzephalia that followed him seem rather po faced and boring.
http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/04/john_cage_on_a_.html "I prefer laughter to tears"
Quote from: Brad on September 29, 2015, 04:12:45 PM
Quote from: Salamanauhat on September 29, 2015, 01:41:33 PM
for example when Crank Sturgeon performed in Finland with his self-made fish costume it was 100% gold. Absurd and funny.
I saw his performance in Germany last year and thought the same thing.
His last London performance was one of the greatest things i've ever seen, hilarious but also as genuinely intense and powerful as any deadly-serious PE act could ever hope to be.
I don't like humorous noise but Emil Beaulieau is unbeatable! I remember that I watched a lot his performances during my first days in noise. It's still amazing!
Quote from: Cementimental on September 30, 2015, 02:18:35 AM
Quote from: Brad on September 29, 2015, 04:12:45 PM
Quote from: Salamanauhat on September 29, 2015, 01:41:33 PM
for example when Crank Sturgeon performed in Finland with his self-made fish costume it was 100% gold. Absurd and funny.
I saw his performance in Germany last year and thought the same thing.
His last London performance was one of the greatest things i've ever seen, hilarious but also as genuinely intense and powerful as any deadly-serious PE act could ever hope to be.
Yeah, same in Finland. It was truly genuine and "real" in a rare way.
Si, i wouldn't have yellow tears fall into this category. that's like laughing at a retard - not that they are retarded at all - they are just so deranged and so extremely out there in their own wacked out world. definitely absurd in certain live settings (the yt carnival at fleshtival comes to mind, septic world, etc) but the records are so extremely dark i can't let em fall in here. 'don't cry' is a masterpiece of purely nightmarish sounds. 'the cult of yellow tears' is also just really terrifying.
humorous - emil beaulieau for sure. any 'costume noise' i find funny regardless of sound. while crank wears a costume, listening to recordings you'd never expect to see a guy dressed like a fish making it.
i'm not into comedy of any kind so can't really comment anything new... when blake performed as 'pope joanna' i gotta kick outta that... maybe the juggalo dude waves crashing piano chords? its funny till he punches you in the head... i have all the old ICP cd's tho so can't complain... i think more people should punch him the back though - guys who don't fight are pussies.
Into the cans and have given up trying to gather the assorted threads below into anything approaching coherence, so...
In "The Joke and Its Relation to the Unconscious", Freud speculates that humor is essentially a form of aggression, what one might term the psychological sodomizing - "stripping" - of the butt (of the joke). This was published in 1905, two years after Psychopathia Sexualis was first translated into English (just to offer a random time referent). One would have a very hard time persuading anyone, including your mother, that early Whitehouse (for ready example) was anything but very intentionally humorous.
Not to neglect either the recent study that suggests that the most insanely funny comedians have high level psychotic traits:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/humor-sapiens/201407/do-comedians-possess-bipolar-traitsa
"What is perhaps surprising is the very high scores comedians achieved on these scales compared to other creative people."
Given that most any sense of the humorous is largely culturally imbedded, one is certainly playing with fire when attempting the deliberately "funny" at an international festival. (When Whitehouse has played in Japan, the most common adjective used by the locals to describe net impression is "funny". Funny? Hell, yeah. And even if one were to get real po-faced about the shit what response might otherwise be expected? Some shirtless white dude, refugee from an episode of Cops*, yelling incomprehensible nonsense over a bunch of synth vomit of which the only discernible lyric is "Suck my cock!" This – again, very widely-held- impression was summarized very nicely in the Gero contribution to Extreme Music From Japan. Etc.)
Still I can see where objections may start. In general, with reference to just about anything, it is easier to dismiss the deliberately stupid or funny. "Merzbow" / lowest arts (porn) could be a viable (preemptive) response but so to Roemer-esque statements like "I have no sense of humor". A (noise) war was (is still?) being fought to establish the legitimacy of the venture. Good luck there.
At the same time, the Cementimental phrase "hilarious but (also as genuinely intense and powerful) [emphasis added]" kinda gives away the game. Why not hilarious and genuinely intense and powerful?
* proof positive that more crimes are committed by shirtless people
Flying Testicle immediately comes to mind. Many of Steven Stapleton's projects have a funny vibe to them. I've always thought of the P16.D4/Selektion crew to be smartly and sharply comedic, too. It's a smaller element within their process, but it is clearly there (to me). Smegma, LAFMS, and that whole world are formed around a comedic center. Doesn't really matter what angle on life, or a process, you take. Craftsmanship, quality, etc. It's not my favorite take on things, but I definitely acknowledge the difficulty in it. Actors talk about how much more difficult comedy is than drama. There are more variables you have to nail just right in order for comedy to rise to the top, particularly an entire performance.
I think there's some nuggets of humor in otherwise serious, or seriously presented projects. Yellow Tears was the first that came to mind, for me. Ultra is another, considering some of the lyrics (I think at one point in "Dogs Are Not People, Linda!" he actually goes "blah blah blah") and "wackier" compositional moments. Maybe not an outright comedy act, but I can't get into projects that are. Rather have little snippets of humor to take the piss out of something that is usually straight-faced. As far as "genuinely intense and powerful, still humorous," I'd have to vote for "Great White Death." ;)
"wacky" is definitely different then "humorous" .... yt wacky? for sure.
"Beyond Unknown Pleasures" is one of the funniest records ever. I can't imagine anyone not giggling with joy listening to the title track.
I'd guess most people find humor in "serious PE". I recall some older englishmen who may be present in this forum as well, talk already years ago who Americans and especially Germans missed the English humor in old power electronics. Making the later version dull. I don't share this same opinion of for example the hard-edged political PE being "dull", but of course there is a difference to screaming "you don't have to say please" with falsetto voice.
If you can distinct difference of joke and humor, I doubt most people would refuse the latter one. Noise or power electronics becomes humorous when you take one step back and look it as outsider. Intentional or not. Of course this applies to vast majority of music or things in life.
I enjoy many forms of comedy. Especially more vicious but clever forms. I enjoy clever wordplay and sheer absurdism (in the Arrabal sense). I even enjoy over-the-top-Pythonesque things (not as much in music though). What I do NOT appreciate in noise is over-the-top "this is funny"-stuff. I don't know, stuff that is more "American Pie" than anything else.
For me, comedy has to be taken seriously and preferably ACTED OUT as if taken seriously to be good. To see people doing comedy onstage (musicwise) while showing that they are playing around is not funny to me, whereas somebody doing non-comedy might just as well show they are having a good time. In that regard I absolutely see Whitehouse being humorous, even parodic maybe. Nurse With Wound, absolutely humorous.
As I said, I think the way it is acted out - meaning some kind of "suspense of disbelief", we all see it is ridicolous but the performer is treating it with absolute seriousness. That I like, as a general rule.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD2dXd4HSys
Quote from: Feber on October 02, 2015, 03:12:46 PM
What I do NOT appreciate in noise is over-the-top "this is funny"-stuff. I don't know, stuff that is more "American Pie" than anything else.
Nothing works worse on stage than forcing humour....
Broken Penis Orchestra has made me laugh heartily a number of times, but their work is not done by slouches by any stretch.
I know someone who once told me that they honestly thought Bloodyminded was a parody act.
The truth is, I think a lot of people appreciate power electronics because it caters to the 15- year old, horror movie watching, pimple face in all of us. I know that it attempts to be cerebral sometimes, but it often fails, and that's funny.
Absurdism with humor, especially as it relates to some level of surrealism, is something I celebrate, but there is so much retardo/silly shit that is half-baked and self-congratulatory, that I've become weary of it. I try to keep an open mind, but I stand behind my rule of not allowing myself to be bored.
The first time I ever heard Streicher, the Oi Terroristen tape in the mid-90s, I found it completely hilarious. I can see the humour in things like The Grey Wolves strutting round in uniform saying 'this is not your country' from the Romper Stomper movie too especially when you know what kind of people these guys really are and the fact they'd be first against the wall if any kind of ultra-right government actually came in.
Overly wacky stuff can be wearing and tedious and not enough work put into the music. As well as Crank Sturgeon I would add Monopolka/Massive Ejaculation as someone who transcends the limitations of that theatrical scene and makes great art. Kylie Minoise too.
I was a huge fan of Smell & Quim before I became a sometime member of the outfit and still am basically a fanboy. Milovan's art is exquisitely poised between humour and darkness with a merciless edge of sarcasm.
As for Whitehouse, some of the records eg Thank Your Lucky Stars are obviously comedic, some are sort of poetic and sensitive and some are quite dark and misanthropic. Having heard a story or two I think some of the Whitehouse fans especially pre-2000 were much crazier and more sinister people than the band members themselves and dragged the band down to rather darker places than their original brand of whimsical un-PC experimental music.
Intentional humor is often more casually described as "joking". And this may be important since much has been made in this discussion of intentional vs unintentional humor. With this distinction in mind we start cycling back to prior discussions on what makes or breaks a performance.
So it seems we all want the usual. Sincerity. Authenticity. Genuine artistic commitment. No bullshit... all the things that the intentional use of humor may put in question. Question the sincerity of the performance and we question its very integrity (and that of the performer).
Case in point, FreakAnimalFinland's recent review of the UNITED FORCES OF INDUSTRIAL II festival. While several comments brought a smile to my face, at only one point did I laugh out loud:
QuoteSelf mutilation, tension of vocals and experimental sounds. Only braking atmosphere by moments of man drinking beer in middle of songs. Don't really get the idea of right after moment of self mutilation and intense atmosphere to step down to moments of.... satisfying thirst for beer...?
This works especially well in the context of the review, which establishes early on the excess indulgence of alcohol as a kind of leitmotif. True comic wit there. Freud thought the only legitimately "funny" (laugh out loud) humor was "tendentious", that is to say aggressive – complete with aggressor and victim- but 18th c British satirist Henry Fielding proposed that "the only source of the true Ridiculous is affectation"; that is to say, based upon the affectation of a character that is so clearly at odds with the audience understanding of the "actual" facts of the situation as presented. Another word for affectation is hypocrisy, and like many great humorists Fielding's humor is not presented simply for its own sake. There is a fairly harsh social element at work.
"A comic writer should of all others be the least excused for deviating from nature, since it may not be always so easy for a serious poet to meet with the great and the admirable; but life every where furnishes an accurate observer with the ridiculous."
So it seems even in those days, among the humorists of the (upper class English speaking) world, they all wanted the usual. Sincerity. Authenticity. Genuine artistic commitment. Nevertheless, from the standpoint of the (often highly) critical audience, the intentional use of humor could be regarded as a risky move- particularly in an international forum where the particular sense of the humorous employed may be rather... particular... to a particular (sub-)culture. Henry Fielding was an English gentleman writing for other English gentlemen.
Relatively "safe" humor might then be of the sort that takes more "classical" risks- eg socio-political, the sort that writers like Fielding worked with.
cantle writes:
QuoteMilovan Srdenovic supporting Whitehouse many many years ago was hilarious... the 'Islam Uber Alles' cover was very well placed...
And this I think could safely fall within the classic definition of "political satire", which is, of course, political first; satirical second. At the very least it would qualify as genuine (authentic, sincere) social commentary. So safe then, from the standpoint of the (often highly) critical audience- partly because the audience may acknowledge that other (possibly more serious) risks are being taken.
I'm drunk, I just read Bloated Slutbag's post, I'm going to respond and regret this later I suppose.
Good humour has an element of surprise. You don't expect it, so when it occurs it's funny. You allow the people making the joke to have an authority.
"Political humour" is just pandering. Snide in-jokes for those in the know. I admit I often find it funny, or at least satisfying. I've appreciated Bill Hicks not because I think he's funny but because he rants against things I hate. I laughed because I laughed at the notion of what I hated being destroyed.
But Monty Python's "Life Of Brian", for example, was and is genuinely funny. They're not just propagating, they are legitimately taking the piss. It's the kind of snark that you make with your mates, writ large on the screen. That's what makes it funny. But in my case, they came up with shit I didn't expect. "How shall we fuck off, oh lord?". My mates and I could never be that funny.
Real humour takes you by surprise. That's why you laugh. Intentional, in-the-know humour - I knew there was a reason I found it grating.
I think Bloated Slutbag and Andrew McIntosh may be using the term "intentional humor" differently. For me intentional simply means with the intention of being humorous. From this understanding, then, the idea that Monty Python, a group of talented comics who were paid by the BBC to be funny, could be regarded as producing anything but intentional humor to me is frankly... funny. By contrast, the agent of unintentional humor would probably not know it until the very moment of producing – accidentally, and no doubt against their better intentions – humor. More likely they would not know it until after the fact, if ever. They may go through their entire lives denying that anything humorous ever took place (though this latter character would probably be a candidate for a Henry Fielding novel.)
As for political humor, well, this may take myriad form. For me, "How shall we fuck off, oh lord?" is very intentional very political humor. But I would – and did!- go further in suggesting that political humor is driven more by politics than the desire to have a laugh. And the "serious" audience might be willing to cut that sort of humor a little more slack because it is, at its root, not necessarily funny; or at any rate need not necessarily be. (Could this line of reasoning be accusing the politically-minded humorists of being a bunch of humor pussies? Of course not, I would never do anything like that.) But of course these lines do blur and that is kind of where I think I am coming from. Nevermind the audience. As a performer can you ever be completely sure that you are not taking the piss? And why should I believe you? Etc