Defending Lauren Laverne

I love comedy. Adore it. We Canadians are renowned for it.  I am not easily offended, and firmly believe that if it exists and it happened, it can and should be made fun of in some way. There is a tasteful way and stupid way, but nothing is off-limits.

That’s why shows like 10 O’Clock Live appeal to me. There is always a danger when live TV, politics, and witty people collide, like a high wire act on a piece of cotton thread- it’s gonna break, you just don’t have a clue when, and there is no safety net (except if you are American Idol with Steven Tyler and Fox has given you a fifteen second delay for every show lest you bombard the precious kiddies of America with the word “Fuck”, which they all already use, God forbid).

But there is something about comedy I don’t like, and that is the underlying misogyny. Jerry Lewis once proclaimed women aren’t funny, and it’s become one of those things comedians say when there are no women on a bill or on a panel. It’s a big lie, of course, as some of the funniest people alive are women. Women are quicker to laugh at comedy shows, and they put up with men, so clearly we are all born with fantastic senses of humour. ( That was a joke, men. Jesus. You’re all not that funny, you know, so we don’t laugh at you. Much.) Joan Rivers, Phyllis Diller, French and Saunders, Jo Brand, Elvira Kurt, Rosanne, Ellen DeGeneres, Ronni Ancona- these are funny women. Hell, they are just funny people.

Lauren Laverne, I concede up front, is not a trained comedian. She’s not a comedy writer. She is new to the ins and outs of the way a comedy show works. The nasty shots taken at her through the comedy world and British media are not wrong about these things. They are wrong about her not being funny. Reading the reviews for 10 O’Clock Live is unpleasant at the best of times, but the comments about Laverne are sometimes unnecessary. The worst ones are the ones who just give in to the myth and proclaim that if Laverne isn’t funny, then women aren’t funny, and the show should just be the three blokes ( although there is a group of critics who seem to think the show should just be David Mitchell and Charlie Brooker ranting for an hour and that would be it. While I’d watch that show, too, that isn’t fair to Jimmy Carr, who I think has been a great sport and truly hilarious at times. But that is a different Kirsten rant for a different day).

I know I complained early on about the tokenism, that Laverne seems to be filling a role for the Channel Four satire show that really is undefined. There still remains an aspect of this, but I think I have figured out her role. It’s not glamorous, it’s not even particularly non-misogynystic, but it’s clear to me Lauren Laverne is there to keep the show from completely going apeshit off the rails. Champion ranters Brooker and Mitchell could go on for an hour each, and all three guys are notoriously quick-witted. Laverne is acerbic and dry witted, and not everything she says hits everyone, but she is a damn fine presenter and I really like her on this show. (Her comment on Thursday’s show about being a working mother means Bailey’s on her Corn Flakes was relatable to this working mum of three girls, one who is a teenager). I chuckle a lot when she’s on-screen. She’s not laugh a minute, but she’s not supposed to be. Her job is to keep the show moving, to be the person with the eye on the clock and make sure it comes in on time, and sorry, David, if that means you don’t get to say what is a very funny witticism at 11:00 pm.

Yes, she does those taped pieces, where she is edited and it works better. The timing can be fussed with. Bugger off, everyone can be made “hilarious” with editing, that’s the explanation I come up with for Louis CK ( I don’t get it. Sorry. But glad for you if you enjoy him).

But unfunny? That’s an unfair comment.  And the idea she be replaced by someone like Holly Walsh or Miranda Hart? Also unfair. Not just to Laverne, but to Walsh and Hart, who are comedians and who would be promptly put into the role of mother hen. The complaint from the critics then would be “They aren’t presenters! THey’re comedians! Why are they doing the presenting job!” Honestly, the girls in this scenario, and ultimately the show, can’t win.

I thought that the most recent episode of 10 O’Clock Live was it’s best. The pacing issues will always be there as long as they stuff the show with so many ideas, but Mitchell is improving as a moderator/interviewer, Brooker’s dark humour is being well used, and Carr really is game for ANYTHING.  But mostly, this 33-year-old single working mother of three girls feels a kinship of a sort with the pretty blonde former rock star with the great chignon and awesome wardrobe who makes me laugh.

You know something, I don’t have much in my life. Lauren Laverne makes it a bit better once a week by making me feel as if there is a better version of myself out there making at least one person laugh. Because she’s funnier than you are.

I think that they’re actually all jealous.

Checking In On: 10 O’Clock Live

The British satire news programme, 10 O’Clock Live, is currently hitting the midway point of its first series, and I must say, it’s been- well, interesting.  A winning on-air team of very smart, funny people has given the show instant cult status and instant critical derision. The show is an oxymoron wrapped in a question wrapped in an enigma wrapped in bacon. It both aggravates and delights me.

Basically, I’m sitting here say I love the show despite its flaws and because of its strengths. It could be my own actively political mind, my deep interest in the United Kingdom as a political and social  entity, or that I am a bit in love with each one of the Gang of Four that host the show. But I am really enjoying it.

Many of the issues I have with the show itself- Lauren Laverne’s role is still being figured out, the round tables and interviews are still feeling rushed and unfinished, pacing issues abound- are still being worked out. But the things I love- the rants by David Mitchell and Charlie Brooker, Jimmy Carr’s monologue,  Lauren’s dresses ( I WANT THAT WARDROBE)- these things are perfection.

The show is doing a nice job, however, at stirring up some trouble. Milo Yiannopoulos created a brouhaha when he proclaimed that protesting was ineffective, a large enough one for him to write a column about the fall out of his appearance ( which was more a bitchfest about mean ol’ commies taking over Twitter). Weeks after the show had a roundtable about the selling off of  government-owned forests, the plan went into “review”, or placed on the back-burner until the outcry dies down. Chances that the Royal Mail will be privatised are slim, seeing as a generation of politicians in the U.K. have tried and failed to get that idiotic idea off the ground. The show has been on during a spell of activity on the international stage has gotten the hosts plenty to work with, made easier by the delusional speeches given by horrible despots, most of them backed by an unending series of governments at home in order to keep the status quo.

Over the last few weeks, I have seen Lauren and Jimmy take on an interview with Stephen J. Dubner, one of the authors of Freakanomics. It was one of the smoothest interviews  in the shows history, as Lauren has experience in sitting back a bit and allowing the thoughts flow naturally, and Jimmy seemed to follow her lead there. I love David Mitchell to bits, but honestly I always thought Lauren should have dealt with the majority of one on ones. I still think the show is afraid to leave her on her own unless they have her in an edited piece, which is just unfair. I’m sure that’s not what is going on, but it feels like that to me as a viewer. I do particularly love David Mitchell’s pedantry. “Literally” and “figuratively” are not interchangeable, Sally Bercow.

The show is developing an easy, breezy feel, with excellent regular features. The cast is settling into their roles well, and the interviews are feeling a bit less rushed, although they still have a way to go. The roundtables are still too shouty. But when the four hosts sit together at the table and talk- its bloody brilliant. The chemistry among the four of them is wonderful. Some moments I wish it was just the four of them discussing the news for an hour at the table and nothing else.

So the good things again: the cast of Jimmy Carr, Charlie Brooker, Lauren Laverne, and David Mitchell; the rants; the four host’s at the table chatting; the monologues; David’s pedantry and history nerd ability to reference William of Orange and the fall of Sparta in one episode; Lauren’s wardrobe.

The not so good: the shouty roundtables; Charlie Brooker’s hair; Lauren’s attempt at an American accent.

Getting better: interviews.

I am delighted with the show’s current state of growth and am looking forward for the next several weeks if snark and laughs. I hope by the end of the run, we’ll have figured it all out.

 

10 O’Clock Live: What’s Right and What’s Not

As I said two weeks ago in my review of the first episode of 10 O’Clock Live, live television is the toughest gig in the world. Throw in the fact that this show is not run by trained journalists but very smart comedians and one former musician turned presenter and you can see where some of the work needs to be done. It’s first episode was uneven. The second one was a near train wreck ( as much as I adore David Mitchell, he wasn’t great up against spin meister Alistair Campbell, who clearly is great at spin even if I disagreed with nearly every word he said. And that was a highlight for me). The third one sees the show finding its rhythms a bit better. It’s far from perfect, but as I have said since the beginning, it’s got a great premise and a strong on air team.

Now, they just need to use Lauren Laverne better.

REVIEW: 10 O’Clock Live (Channel 4, UK)

Oh, for God’s sake, Twitterverse. Grow up.

Reading through what I have on the interwebs has led me to conclude that people are morons.

Live TV is the toughest gig in the world. The variables are so great, really LIVE TV is hardly even attempted anymore.  Hell, rarely is the first episode of ANYTHING  really indicative of the series as a whole. Let me introduce to the pilot of The Big Bang Theory, a show I now love despite the fact the pilot was one of the worst half hours of my life. And every season of American Idol is plagued with technical glitches, bad performances, and Ryan Seacrest.

What I am saying is that the punditry is too hard on 10 O’Clock Live.