As for George Saunders's The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil, I sort of feel like this book might have been funnier before Stephen Colbert, in joking about the President to the President's face, proved that satire is sort of dead. I mean, what role does absurdity have in an already far too absurd political landscape? We all went Ooh and Ahh and stated that, boy, that Colbert sure does have very large testicles, saying such nasty things about the President! But it's not like anybody expected him to change anything. It's not like the President woke up the next day and said, "Wow, gosh, I'm doing a shitty job, here. I better fix that." No, we weren't looking for that. Just the laughs, please.
Anyway, the book, there's humor in there, but for me, it wasn't so much about what was being depicted, because really, it's sort of all obvious. Hey! Leaders are sometimes crazy! Sometimes the media just makes noise! We're spurred to corrective action for the sake of our own pleasure! Mud is sort of gross! I don't feel like the book shed light on anything. While there were some great turns of phrase--the main source, for me, of the book's Funny Ha-Ha--nothing really new comes of the story.
That said, I didn't mind reading it. It's a short book, and when satire works for me anymore, it's when it's at it's shortest. Dive in, get the laugh, get out. (The Onion is never as funny as its headlines.) There's some mystery, here; I don't know what to make of the Creator, but I guess I also don't care to dwell on it to figure it out, either. So. I'll suggest the book's worth reading, anyway, even if for no other reason than maybe you can come back and tell me what I'm missing.
No comments:
Post a Comment