Another perspective on “Ching Chong, Ching Chong Cha”: 名嘴嘲諷中文 華裔領袖促道歉_星島日報_加拿大多倫多中文新聞網。 Canada Toronto Chinese newspaper

名嘴嘲諷中文 華裔領袖促道歉_星島日報_加拿大多倫多中文新聞網。 Canada Toronto Chinese newspaper.

[2011-01-21] Share

本報記者任薇薇三藩市灣區報道
電台名嘴在節目中搞怪模倣胡錦濤發言和嘲諷中文語言，華裔國會議員紛紛譴責林堡（Rush Limbaugh）種族主義的言論，加州眾議員方文忠將提請州眾議院亞太裔立法黨團促林堡向華裔道歉。
聯邦眾議員趙美心(Judy Chu)稱林堡的言論令她感到「震驚和恐懼」。她發表聲明指出，「謾罵華人和嘲諷中文語言是幼稚和冒犯性的伎倆。不認同和批評一個國家的政策是一回事，妖魔化其人民是另一回事。

Comedy is a “two way street.” That is, it conveys a message, and the message is about us, our circumstances and situations. What makes comedy funny, first of all, is that it MUST address reality – the known. We cannot discuss something that cannot be known, for as the byline to this blog reads, “… there is no such thing as nothing.”

Delving into the philosophical, we understand comedy also on two levels, again, both which are firmly rooted in reality.

Now, having addressed that element, it is proper and fitting to address the other, or obverse element – that is, the opposite element – which element is not humor.

The man Rush Limbaugh has never asserted himself as a “comedian,” per se, and his raydeo show has rather been first and foremost, a forum for his personal opinions on American politics. And while his raydeo show, at various times, has contained elements of entertainment, which have often been various forms mockery and jest, he has used them to assert foist his opinion – which he openly claims to be good, just, right and proper, even to the exclusion of any other idea or thought – as the only proper, even Constitutional, and holy way to consider anything. He, in effect, makes himself out to be in unity with the Founding Fathers, as if he were there at Philadelphia when the Declaration of Independence was signed.

Though he obliquely and surreptitiously asserts invokes cites hides behind late renown comedian Sid Caesar as inspiration, the very fact of his self-identified role – again, which he has established for himself – is as factual authority (though he is not), not comedian.

In this clear instance, the man Rush Limbaugh attempts to assign himself a role among the greats of comedic routine. Any such effort to so claim fame, or establish stake in the matter, further solidifies and clearly identifies his role… absurdist.

Again, the irony of the entire ordeal of the man is that he wants his audience to believe him, and everything he says. However, everything he says is not true, nor is it believable. I suppose even his most ardent fans would not describe themselves as anything other than “fans,” and I dare say they would certainly hesitate to identify themselves as his “adherents” or disciples, and I further suppose Limbaugh would also deny he has disciples.

He, in this phenomenally rare instance, has self-identified as a theatrical role-player, the Greek root word for such being “hypokrisis,” from which we derive the modern day word “hypocrite,” though such word originally was meant to identify a stage actor – one whom wants us to believe one thing, when the reality is wholly and entirely different.

The very fact of the material nature of his existence – raydeo show, books, public appearances, etc. – speaks to the commercial existence of his nature, which is that he has a product to sell, and that product is himself. He is identified not as a capitalist (though he has capitalized upon aspects of his personality and beliefs), not as an elected official or trusted leader, but rather as a commodity.

The man Rush Limbaugh, then, is shown to be what he genuinely is – a mere entertainer, albeit a loud-mouthed, arrogantly bigoted, contemptuous and offensive one.