Seth McFarlen VS Aaron McGruder

I chose to compare Seth Mcfarlens 'The Cleveland Show' (Family Guy Spin off http://www.fox.com/cleveland/) up against Aaron McGruders 'The Boondocks' for obvious reasons. They are both savage pieces of satire, but besides from this, they are both cartooons about the lives of black people. Therefore Id like to discuss which I believe to be more relevant (especially since I am black, so to speak, judging from the point of view of a black person as well as objectively).

Since Family guy cloned the plutonic family formula that has made the Simpsons, it therefore still represents the average American white family. So wouldnt it make sense for The cleveland show to follow the same formula for how America sees black people? Yes some would agree it does, but only to a certain extent. After watching the above trailer, alongside a few episodes, it seems to retain a weaker version of family guy humour, and does not tend to deal with issues directly related to the black community. Therefore family guy fans will find it boring because it could be seen a cheap rip off, and black people may find it a little boring becaue it doesnt necessarily address them or their lives that well. There I was a few years back yearning for a black cartoon which could hold the same with wit as Simspons or Family Guy and when one finally does pop up, it doesnt quite fullfill that void within me (since Boondocks didnt quite do it for me).

on the other hand:



The Boondocks is a satirical cartoon based on the lives of black people in America. It addresses the lives of the Average stereotypes of African Americans. As the creator Aaron McGruder studied African American history, it is his main goal to spread a message that makes people open their eyes and realise things with regards to society's political structure in correlation with black history. Especially since the character Riley seems to love all the negative conotations attached to the black entertainment industry. Whilst his older brother Huey has contempt for such topics, therefore is trying to create a revolution.
I do like this cartoon, but on the downside, I just beleive it lacks a certain amount of wit that cartoons like The Simpsons and Family guy hold which make them successful and long lasting. The Boondocks topic matter along with Family guys wit would make the PERFECT , long lasting black cartoon, which Seth Mcfarlen has JUST missed with The Cleveland show.


Aims objectives and main comparison points:
The Cleveland Show:
I believe the main aim of the cleveland show is to identify that cleveland is an interesting enough character in 'Family Guy' to have his own show. Since he is black, I guess Seth Mcfarlen capitalises on black stereotypes here and there to paint a little picture of some african Americans.

The Boondocks:
From what I've seen and read, The Boondocks is a social satire of American culture and race relations (or stereotypes in the world), revolving around the lives of the Freeman family. Ive seen messages of social and political Hierarchy and racial issues often addressed with important eye opening messages behind them. Even though Boondocks is not quite as witty or (arguably) funny as the cleveland show, it still holds an important message for why black people need to wake up.

Its boondocks over the cleveland show all the way in my opinion.

What is so good about Matt Groening's Satire that has kept him around till today???

Matt Groenings "The Simpsons" has been around for decades now and is by far one of the most successful Televison series in the history of animation. I decided to look up what Matt himself actually had to say. One of the things I gathered is from the video above is what my Lecturer on Character design and storyboard development also said. And its to do with how recognisable his characters are just based on the shapes of their sillouettes, making The Simpsons redundant (easily identifiable). Lets face it, The Simspns are a lovable representation of what the average plutonic American family could be like on a day to day basis. Lastly, its easily watchable for the whole family, even though its a cartoon, adults can watch it due to the adult humour, but in saying this, the type of humour is not too raw for young children.

Matt Groening VS Aaron McGruder

Matt Groening Vs Seth Mcfarlen

The Simpsons, to me satires the average American family to some extent, with its subtle, gentle approach, yet graceful delivery, touching on realistic day to day issues. Personally, I feel like The Simpsons is a prime example of a cartoon who follows Aristotles rules of narrative (having a beginning, middle and an end) and sometimes Propps seven lines of action, making it entertaining and critically acclaimable.



Intertextuality is the notion that nothing is original, therefore, alot of our work is stolen from what came before it (and maybe just remodified in some ways). Well in the case of Seth Mcfarlens family guy, this theory of intertextuality could not be further from the truth. Just when I thought it couldnt get any better than the Simpsons, up pops a rather strange new family. Hoewever, family guy differs from the Simpsons due to the fact that its definitely a SAVAGE attack of the satirical connotations of the Average American family. Yes, one could say it is a rip off of The Simspons, except Seth Mcfarlen has somehow managed to master the art of arbitrary humour, whilst unfortunately comprimising the quality of the storylines.

Matt Groening VS Parker & Stone

English Caricature (1620 To the present)

Ive been reading this book lately called "English caricature (1620 To the present)" published by the Victoria and Albert Museum. I picked it up as its mainly about Caricaturists and Satirists, their art, their purpose and their influence. It shows alot about the history of satire, Gillray and William Hogarth (who I was rather interested in, in a previous post).


The first thing that caught my attention was this painting that was One of the first major satires, which was designed by an English Preacher Samuel Ward. In a tent, sit the Devil, the Pope the King of spain and others, plotting against England.

Aims, objectives and Type of satire:

It celebrates the deliverence of England from the Spanish Armarda and the fail of Guy Fawkes attempt to blow up Parliament. The fact that the Pope is juxtaposed with the devil actually sitting down with him, suggests to me this is a SAVAGE piece of satire, which indeed got him in a bit of trouble. Once again reflecting the current affairs of society (I think Im noticing a pattern here).

Steve Bell Award winning cartoonist

In this cartoon, award winning cartoonist, Steve Bell touches on current affairs of how high hopes for postal strike peace deal turned into all-out war.
It seems to illustrate royal mail and post union finding themselves even further apart after talks fail – with less room for compromise than ever.

Some people blame Adam Crozier for employing and paying a high wage to management staff (sven) also for replacing existing infrastructure with expensive new infrastructure (wembley).

Lastly, I particularly love the way the back ground reminds me of the famous Edvard Munch The Scream impressionism. Interesting, but at the same time a lttle spooky.

Aims and Type of Satire:
The fact that Mandy and Adam Crozier are both sticking up their fingers at a post box (which hilariously resembles a garbage can), to me is a SAVAGE attack on the way bell feels the postal service has been treated by management. These are perhaps the types of thoughts he is attempting to provoke within the mind of viewer.

Chris Riddel on Nick Griffin and other political caricatures

Another caricaturist Im quite fond of is Chris Riddell. He is a cartoonist for the observer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/series/cartoon) with great backlog of caricaturist work. Here are his views on BNP Party Leader Nick Griffin and his interview on question time. I think Id classify Chriss Riddells work as reasonably savage satire, but it differs from Jonathans Swifts, because it seems apparent that he may want to bring about some form of improvement (which is more what I am about).


In the next image, Chriss riddle portrays the Conservative Party as right wing wolves in sheeps clothing. I think its safe to identify what he means by summing up the tories as capitalist crooks in disguise. This is what Margeret Thatchers rule mat have seemed like, since she had such capitalist policies (even though they placed England in a good position at the time).
He even depicts them as racist in the next image.

AIM:
Politcal satire Id say is quite important in bringing about improvement, because even though the people who run the country are being mocked, its a way of making some members of our society step back and pay more attention to the exact types of individuals who impose laws on us. Hopefully encouraging one to vote more carefully (or even just VOTE IN THE FIRST PLACE) in next elections and for the right reasons.

Savage Indignation

Adresssing the more savage side of satire, Johnanthan Swifts "Gullivers Travels" (written in 1726) made amazing observations of society at the time, including Gulliver's observations on the Court of Lilliput, which is intended to satirize the court of George I (King of England at the time). The book was not only a parody of the travellers tales genre, but also an indirect reflection of human nature and his life with reguards to his experiences in Politics of the preceeding decade. For instance, the episode in which the giant Gulliver puts out the Lilliputian palace fire by urinating on it can be seen as a metaphor for the Tories' illegal peace treaty; having done a good thing in an unfortunate manner.
Gulliver travels to four different remote worlds and on his final return home, he cannot bare to face his family or even normal human beings in general. The fact that he ended up spending alot more time speaking to his horses as a result of his travels, to me seems like a savage attack on the human race and our seemingly unreasonable nature.

One of the main satirical observations I shall take from this story is The horses he met in Houyhnhnms who depict humans (or as they call them "Yahoos") as cannibalistic animals who seldom have any sense of reasoning, therefore simply end up exacerbating the vices that God (or nature if you like) gave them. This is quite a harsh attack. Especially since those horses represented "the perfection of nature." Therefore I classify Johnathans Swifts work here as Savage satire. Its quite cynical and Im not sure if his intentions were at all to bring about improvement (as my definition of satire at the top of this blogg page states), or to simply say, we have no hope as a human race, as history will just continue to repeat itself (just as Solomon observed in the biblical sripture of Ecclesiastes). After all, he could seldom even speak to humans in the end.

Different types of satire

The difference between what determines good and bad satire can only depend on the aims and objectives of the particular satirist we are talking about. Satire is such a vast field to explore (Dating back centuries ago to the days of Aristotle, all the way till now where we have people like Parker and stone creating extreme content for their take on current affairs). Lets face it, there are many parodies , all which are created for different purposes, some being more savage and vulger (with more direct and hard hitting attacks) than others.

Therefore I feel like I have to grab a focus and try to explore:

• The aims and methods of satire
• The different traditions of satire and how these have been adopted and or modified by animators (since I myself am an animator)
• The different purposes and intentions behind both cynical and savage satire