Freberg and the Postmodernist
Responsibility
Astral
Facts, April 2015
Astral: (Theosophy) Consisting of, belonging to, or designating,
a kind of supersensible substance alleged to be next above the tangible world
in refinement; as, astral spirits; astral bodies of persons; astral current.
Freberg and the
Postmodernist Responsibility
In 1962, syndicated columnist and social critic Marya
Mannes asked the question “How Do You Know It’s Good?” as the title of an
article. Mannes was in the midst of the
shift from the “modern” to “postmodern” ages.
She began by voicing the concerns that many felt in this transition
time:
Suppose there were no critics to tell us how to react to
a picture, a play, or a new composition of music. Suppose we wandered innocent as the dawn into
an art exhibition of unsigned paintings.
By what standards, by what values would we decide whether they were good
or bad, talented or untalented, successes or failures? How can we ever know that what we think is
right?
Dating back to the times of the early Greeks, the
definitions of “acceptable” cultural and literary standards were established
and revised through the generations with a general consensus emerging from the
dominant culture of the time. These had
an authoritative “voice” such as Plato, Aristotle, Wordsworth, [Matthew] Arnold,
etc. as the spokesperson.
In the early 1900’s the “Modern” critical view
dominated. Also referred to as “New
Criticism” or “Formalism,” this continued this view of the “tradition” of good
literature conforming to “formal rules” of structure, elements, and
organization. The major difference was
that this involved a variety of voices with none seen as the focal point.
In her article from over 50 years ago, Mannes notes that
this multitude of voices caused a shift from the modern approach to the “postmodern”
era where we firmly stand situate ourselves these days. Mannes points out that the period after WWII
introduced a just because it’s old doesn't mean it’s good / just because it’s
new doesn't make it bad approach that was transforming even further
in jettisoning the “old ways.” As she
says, “The word ‘new’ – in our country
especially – has magical connotations.
What is new must be good; what is old is probably bad.”
The global shift in post WWII culture offered the
opportunity to review and enhance past traditional approaches. Self-reflection and self-confession became the
norm as a pathway to self-knowledge and self-improvement. The shift was
intended to improve the individual within the community and improve the
community for the individual.
Thus, satire became a useful tool to disarm harsh
criticism if we could laugh at ourselves and with ourselves. This would then be a avenue for understanding
ourselves and our culture as a means to recognize the cultural reality while
taking individual responsibility for our role in it.
One of the great masters of such self-reflective satire
passed away during the month of April in the person of Stan Freberg. It only seems appropriate to reflect upon his
creative genius at getting us to look at ourselves through the lens of satire
and to reflect upon how this helped us see ourselves, individually and
culturally, in a humorous and non-threatening
way.
Freberg did this through his comedy monologues. Corporate powers recognized that he had his
finger on the pulse of the American consumer, and they harnessed his talents.
Before the “reality TV” rooted in the daytime soaps was
probably even a concept for prime time television, Freberg came up with a “reality
TV commercial” series playing upon the recognition that the commercials used
paid actors purporting to be users of the products. Freberg asked - Why not use that apparent weakness
as a strength? Here’s an example done
for Cheerios:
Before
diversity and multicultural awareness became buzzwords, Freberg was on it:
Freberg
made us aware of the hype used in our culture:
Probably one of his most famous creations was the “St.
George and the Dragonet” story, updated here with Claymation on YouTube:
Freberg’s genius was in getting people to react to the
humor on the surface as a means to reflect on the reality below it.
Unfortunately, these days most people don’t have time to
get very far below the surface. We have the
technique but not the skill honed by responsibility.
As technology has changed the culture and old technology
speeds up the shift to new technology, we have morphed into a type of
Postmodern society with the focus on self for self’s benefit. In this approach, the emphasis is on finding
fault and problems with any general status quo, which is then exposed through satire
as ridicule. Somehow knowing how messed
up things are around us is supposed to help our own self-esteem in a sort of “My
life isn't so bad after all” epiphany.
I often observe my children watching some pointless “reality”
show (usually with people in dysfunctional relationships agonizing over how
dysfunctional other people are), and I point out that this “reality” is scripted,
offering nothing of substance to apply to the lives of the viewers.
“But Dad, It’s hilarious!” is how my children respond,
having been well-schooled in the current Postmodern techniques used to answer
Mannes’ original question, “How do you know it’s good?”
As for me, I still prefer to watch the commercials.
Walter Lowe
Astral Facts is a somewhat regular presentation of Humanities Science, produced in the bowels of the Humanities Science offices during the academic year.
Astral Facts is a somewhat regular presentation of Humanities Science, produced in the bowels of the Humanities Science offices during the academic year.
