I never really “got” most of Kauffman’s stuff, either. At the same time a lot of entertainment people respected him and his work. So I defer to them. What they saw I may one day get around to seeing.
Maybe.
Andy Kaufman was a master at manipulating te expectations of an audience. Was it “funny”? Sometimes. Was it sublime? Almost always. But to “get the joke” you have to not only understand what he was soing, you have to appreciate why he was doing it. (note: I do not mean read his mind. I mean "be able to map a template of expectation onto the symbols he is selecting. More hermenuetical babble to follow.) Essentially, as was noted above, he was a performance artist not a comedian, though the tropes he manipulated were those of humor. Liek most performance artists, he was most appreciated by those who shared an essential sympathy for the message embodied in his work. I mean, I personally have no interest in Karen finley shoving vegetables into her anus, but I know women who defend her as one of the great artists of the last 20 years. (I know some men who like her, too. But I suspect not for the same reasons.)
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
I agree with Face, who says that he was probably insane. Some of the things he pulled (like creating aliases that he refused to acknowledge WERE aliases), signal a psychological disturbance.
According to one writer who wrote an article on him, Kaufman was after gut reactions. Initially, they had a comedic quality to them. He was quirky and funny. As time went by, he found it harder to shock people. It’s like Gallagher with a sledge hammer. Eventually you run out of things to hammer. So Kaufman created these aliases (e.g. a misogynist), characters that tried to get people to react. He apparently brought more than one woman to tears with his “character.” He began to offend and anger a lot of people. Towards the end, he became darker and darker to where all comedic elements were lost. He was just an asshole with a microphone.
When you get to the point where fellow actors FEAR you, you’ve gone over the line. And I think somewhere along the road, Kaufman went over the line and into the abyss.
Huh. You know, some people are still pretty convinced that Ed Zotti and Cecil Adams are the same person.
“Come on, Phonics Monkey–drum!”
Yes,pl,I read that in the Biggest Secrets book by William Poundstone. It says just that. Let’s see some proof,Will!
I am prettyneutral on Kaufman…but I do want to point out the similarities between him and Garth “Chris Gaines” Brooks.
Anyone catch him ‘thanking’ Chris Gaines on SNL…he IS Chris -freakin-Gaines!!!
He too is at the top of his field, and totally off hisnut.
Just my opinion.
Oh yes,kell,I agree. I saw a snippet of him"Garth,"in concert,saying how “chris’ mother died when he was 9”.and I’m thinking,okay this is too weird.
It irks me when people say things like “You’re not intelligent enough to get the humor of Andy Kauffman.” or “If you don’t get it, the joke’s on you.” People, there is nothing sophisticated or intelligent about the humor of Andy Kauffman. The man ran around trying to piss off or disturb as many people as possible. He was kind of like that kid you knew in grade school who would eat anything just for the attention and reaction it would get. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. If the man makes you laugh, more power to you. Just don’t try and say that I’m some kind of moron because I don’t think it’s funny.
Bite your tongue, Pl! I’ve been an avid reader of Cecil for years. I have posted on his message board. And let me tell, you, Phil: Ed Zotti is NO CECIL ADAMS!
(The SDers in the audience stand up and cheer.)
Are you comparing Ed Zotti to Dan Quayle?
Chief Crunch, I would never say that someone is not intelligent enough to “get” a particular brand of humor. Humor does not equal intelligence. Don’t we all know very brilliant people who wouldn’t get a joke if it bit them on the leg? And likewise, don’t you know people who are as dumb as a box of monkey wrenches who can crack up a room full of morticians?
That being said, I still say there’s more to Andy Kaufman than shock value. Sometimes he did use shock to reach the audience. But for me, the humor and entertainment was in thinking about why what Andy had done shocked, offended, annoyed or otherwise had some emotional effect on me. Often the reasons I discovered were funny or revealing.
All that being said, humor is a matter of taste. Don’t like Andy? Fine, that’s your business. I love comedy and comedians, but I have my dislikes as well (Paul Reiser, for instance, sets my teeth on edge). So, each to his own.
But the OP of this thread asks for an explanation of Andy. That’s what we’ve been trying to provide. Of course, it’s kind of like trying to explain the appeal of the Three Stooges to a female…
Plunging like stones from a slingshot on Mars.
Hmmmm…someone who tries to instigate people into reacting to his words or actions? Someone who wants us to buy into his put-ons? Sounds a lot like lovrock, (who I found annoying as all hell) I understood the humor there, but like Kauffman, the people didn’t know when the joke wasn’t funny and just irritated everyone.
Not trying to hijack the thread, just pointing it out. I don’t know much of Kauffmans work, and I like Jim Carrey, so I’ll likely see the movie. I DO know that the episodes of Taxi I saw him on gave me the creeps.
When Kaufman was alive, I thought he was a little nuts. Sometimes cute, often silly, rarely funny. Always intriguing, though. I didn’t realize until recently that he may have ultimately become the biggest butt of his own joke.
I’m also in the “just don’t get Andy Kauffman” camp. I saw the bio where several actors and comedians raved about what a “genius” he was and was scratching my head. People paid money expecting to hear jokes and didn’t? And that was the funny part?
Maybe so many people have copied his shtick that it just doesn’t hit me like when it was “fresh”, but it just doesn’t work for me.
I think R.E.M. already commented on Andy’s possible mental illness.
Andy did ya hear about this one/mumble mumble/Andy are ya trippin on Elvis/Hey Baby/Andy are ya losin touch?/If you believe/etc. etc.
–Tim
We are the children of the Eighties. We are not the first “lost generation” nor today’s lost generation; in fact, we think we know just where we stand - or are discovering it as we speak.
I was reading the piece on Andy in THE NEW YORKER a couple of issues back (probably an excerpt from one or another of the upcoming Andy books).
One of his sure-fire knee-slappers included careering down icy Long Island roads with his manager and the interviewer in the car with him, both his hands off the steering wheel so he could clap along with the radio.
Kaufman’s career peaked during my college years, when teevee watching was rather low on my must-do list. I don’t consider myself as having missed a whole hell of a lot.
Uke
Kaufman was initialy an irritating bore who transmuted into a creepy bore, and thence into something disturbing, and not quite right. So I think I’ll join GirlFace in her camp.
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
–Einstein
I dunno. I kind of view Andy the same way I do those huge canvases painted all one color that were shown in my art history text book - it was a concept that had to be addressed so we could all say “Hmmm, okay”, and move on to other things.
I did like the milk and cookies thing though.
Will work for sig line.
Well put, phouka.
I liked the milk and cookies thing, too.
Oh, and on “getting things” in general:
Whether you are talking about visual art, music, comedy, theatre, whatever…I think that if someone has to explain it to you, you will probably still never “get it.” I don’t mean this as a put-down at all. What I mean is that art, by its very nature, will affect each of us differently: I may like something for an entirely different reason than you like it. Others may dislike something for reasons I don’t “get.” Still others may be unaffected either way by the same thing.
Hence the saying “there’s no accounting for taste.”
Reminds me of Yoko Ono’s “art.” One piece in one of her shows had a ladder that you climbed. On the ceiling, printed very small, was the word “yes.” Personally, I’d be asking for my money yet, but apparently John Lennon was impressed. (I wonder what would have happened had the word been “no”…)
Genius or nut? Maybe a bit of both. Though for the record I’m leaning towards the latter on both Ono and Kaufmann.