Beyond the Fringe on Oxford Philosophy
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 окт 2008
- Alan Bennett and Jonathan Miller spoof "Oxford philosophy" in a sketch from the popular West End show they did with Peter Cook and Dudley Moore. Not exactly hilarious - even for philosophers - but a bit of history, and remarkable that it should make a popular comedy revue.
Jonathan Miller is amazing in this. My first year tutors took on exactly this sort of ridiculous tone of voice and attitude. I love this sketch.
The most humourous thing is that most of what they say is entirely accurate and valid philosophical discourse.
People where educated in those days at Oxford and Cambridge . They were also brilliant humorist with awesome cognitive ability
what a funny pair of paraphilosophers
Apart from your spelling of “humorous”.
This will always be one of my favourite things ever
"They were in rather a hurry" very deep, resonates with many societies throughout history in many ways
I saw Beyond the Fringe on Broadway in the early 60s. It was sensational. Every skit was brilliant. More than a decade later I saw AJ Ayer give a lecture at Colgate. Well, I laughed out loud in a crowded lecture hall. Ayer so reminded me of Miller, when he went through Moore common sense realism “This is a chair” routine. Ayer looked straight at me. I was embarrassed. Still, Miller got Ayer perfectly right. Fond if uncomfortable memories
Wow live viewings of both Beyond the Fringe and a real Oxford philosopher!
What a loss to society, the irreplaceable Jonathan Miller. An inspirational mind who made high level thinking accessible especially to a working class generation with little hope of a university education: Just by going about his business, Jonathan Miller was a champion of distance learning. And now the culture has plummeted so low that not even the BBC realises what's been lost.
Absolute brilliance.
Imagine learning this script! Perfect execution..
The fact that this black and white clip is blue and green all over at the same time is an example of a no-sense data. Brilliant.
Farewell you phenomenal genius.
After all the why and how debate, I love the joke really landing with WHERE (re Eliot's teeth) 😂
Although obviously if you want into a philosophy department nowadays you won't see anything resembling this performance, it's hilarious if you're at all familiar with the kind of personas and dialogues being parodied. Just look up something as benign as Strawson and Evan's interviews and chats and it strikes one's funny bone. (I love both of those philosophers, btw. Some of the greatest of the 20th century.)
This doesn't have to be "in fashion", "mind-blowing", or even capable of being digested by the average person for it to be funny. Most of the reasons people think this isn't funny could be labeled against Abbott and Costello, and their act is still, in the words of the modern proletariat, "omg hilarrrrrrrrr!"
Bud and Lou were funny in their way, but as "time goes on" it becomes humour for "children".
I comment from seven years in the future: I got a PhD in philosophy about 10 years ago and certainly did see plenty of these odd physical conversational antics, both from profs and students.
@Israel Socratus - I'm a great fan of the Big Band theory. Though I can't decide between Ellington and Goodman. Of course, one should always consider Buddy Rich.
You can tell that Bennett and Miller where the most unconcerned about the whole show biz thing...they just went on and did what they wanted rather than having some regard for catering to the audiance like Cook and Moore. I am always surprised, given his notorious and much vaunted shy demeanor, how good Alan Bennett actually is on stage. Brilliant pseudo verbiage and non-sequiteuring digression. Most people talk like that...but they just use smaller words
Hmmm...not quite sure what sort of audience Peter Cook "catered" to, tbh. Stream of consciousness nutters?? :)
and extinct also is an audience's ability to appreciate it.
there's too much tuesday in my beetroot salad! hehe
@FieldHockey007 Thank you for the clarification.
Somebody throw a pie!!!!!
@WineStainedTeeth89 That what i noted on the Fry and Laurie page people can click to. The difference is that Bennett and Miller are sending up university intellectuals and the professoriate while Fry and Laurie are sending intellectual chat shows. Still this sketch and FRINGE in general was a breakthrough for British Comedy.
Both Fry and Laurie are Cambridge graduates, as are Bennett and Miller
Alan Bennett went to Oxford
"Not exactly hilarious" I disagree, its the all-time funniest lampoon of Oxbridge philosopher, imho.
I wonder if AJ Ayer saw it. And did he laugh?
And by "Russell and Ayer" you mean "Ryle and Austin", of course.
Strangely very amusing
@danielearwicker Uh, yeah. Not really sure what I was on. Still; would like to retain the cardigan comment.
lmao slab i just started reading wittgenstein earnestly
I bet you're passing over a lot in silence, now!
You seem very fond of real life.
The funniest skit ever done !
How did you understand what they're saying?
@@davidcattin7006 I can’t understand about half of what they said, it’s the gesticulating & ridiculous overuse of nonsensical statements that make it so funny .
I think it is indicative of how self absorbed most philosophers in the ‘70’s were .
I should imagine in the modern Oxford this magnificent show from a long gone past of reason, discussion and humour would likely as not be shouted down by the offended mob of people, chanting and waving banners with the fixed slogans supplied to them for the particular agenda being parroted.
Funny video!
The audio is very muted, and I can't har well enough to be amused.
Actually, I think it's bloody hilarious!
How did you understand what they're saying?
Can't understand a word they're saying. Any chance of subtitles?
What is the Source of the Universe ?
Where did Existence come from?
Now we have three ( 3) sources of the Universe:
Big bang , vacuum and God.
Which of them is correct ?
About big band and God my opinion is:
the action, when the God compressed all Universe
into his palm, physicists had named -a singular point
And action, when the God opened his palm,
physicists had named - the Big Bang
And about vacuum Paul Dirac wrote:
Love the punch line. Not that it (anti)matters...
To my mind, John Cleese stole almost every line from this sketch and used it in an identical context in "Pleasure At Her Majesty's Secret Ball's '81'. Then again, genius as he was, Cleese chose much MUCH funnier cardigans.
Hallelujah.
Cleese apparently performed it with Miller here ruclips.net/video/qUvf3fOmTTk/видео.html
Stole? Cleese & co. certainly _reused_ a lot of Fringe material. The one-legged Tarzan sketch, for example. No doubt they paid the royalties.
@socratus1 That's some definite para-philosophy there...
Well, I thought it was hilarious and I thought it fit in well with a popular comedy revue, since you could say that philosophical discourses aren't much more than comedy routines in the first place, i.e. tragically bound up within their own conditions.
just better educated - less tv, more reading...
probably less youtube as well.. (guilty as charged)
Not exactly hilarious? I'd say--rather haphazardly mind you--(with the qualifier that the game of hilarity is in fact a game of language, quid pro quo), that this sketch is exactly within the set (which may in fact be a fuzzy set, rather than the typical precise non-fuzzy set which we normally think of) of things which may be (or at least often are) considered hilarious.
Nope, we just celebrated stupidity less. There were plenty of idiots about.
Yes. There were plenty of idiots about, but they weren't on the TV constantly, and we didn't give them knighthoods.
this kind of great humor is as extinct as the velowciraptooohr.
Were people more intelligent in those day?
hahah! funny accents.
Well, I studied philosophy as an undergraduate and a bit in graduate school (granted in the United States) and am oldish now, but I don't find this funny any longer. I might have when I was in my twenties. It just seems out of date. Are people still like this at Oxford? "Not exactly hilarious" is correct. I found it unbearable to watch but did just to see what it was like and what my reaction would be. Some things just pass out of fashion, intelligent as they may be.
I fail to see how humour can be "out of date." People _were_ like this in the 1950s and 1960s: the fact (if it _is_ a fact) that they are no longer so seems irrelevant. This sketch parodies the way philosophers _used_ to talk back when the sketch was made. If it was funny then - and it was - then it is still funny and will remain so until everyone who can remember those days is dead and gone. I can still remember them, and I'm not dead yet.
@@jonashjerpe7421 And simultaneously!
I know why i prefer Python more than fringe cause fringe is mainly upper class toffs and their culture and comedy of the wealthy and upper class is never as funnier as the lower classes. Rick Mayall realized this as bottom was his best and the statesman and filthy rich and catflap and other toff roles he did was never as funny as bottom or young ones.