Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Brussels Post, 1978-10-25, Page 18IIIMUINELS CIPITA1‘10 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 1.7 1978 Serving Brussels and the surrounding community. Published each 'Wednesday afternoon at Brussels. Ontario. by McLean Oros„Poblishers Limited, • •CNA Subscriptions•(in advance) Canada $9.00 a Year. . • Others $17,00 a Year. Single Copies 20 cents each. Evelyn Kennedy Editor Pat Langlois - Advertising Member Canadian Community Newspaper Association and Ontario Weekly Newspaper Association gBrussels Post A good race . With a lot of council members in neighbouring townships getting in by acclamation it is interesting to note that the people in Brussels are not so apathetic. In fact with a race on for positions of reeve, councillors and PUC the people of Brussels have shown that they're definitely interested in what is happening to their village, and what elected officials do with the positions they were entrusted with. The people presently running for council have done a service to the Brussels Community by letting their names stand as candidates so that people now have a choice. We can vote in whoever we think will do the best job for the village'. But let's not stop there. Now that those people have offered their, names as: candidates for the November 13 election it's up to the people of Brussl",y) get oOland vote for' the people they**ant "to run the, village's afifa'irs.''Ddn't jtist let theotheiguy do your for you. If'. you want village operations to run' smoothly then it's up to you to cast your ballot come election .day. Council candidates have proven they're not apathetic to the village situation, Now it's up :to the voters to do the same. If ever there was a time when we needed a few laughs in this country now would seem to be it. The problem is, I'm not sure people know what's funny anymore, One of the great mysteries in life has always •been what makes people laugh. There's no hard and fast rule about humour. Comedy is a matter of instinct, usually; either you've got it or you haven't. Unfortunately even those who haven't got it try to fake their way through often with excruciating results. No one without talent would try to reproduce a painting of one of the great masters and show it to the public, but womehow a lot of people think they should try to imitate Bob Hope as soon as they stand up to say something. One of the things one gets in this business ofjournalism is a lot of evenings out to cover banquets and such. Unfortunately nearly every banquet comes with after dinner speakers many of whom seem to do their best to ruin the hard work of the ladies who prepared the excellent meals in the first place. Somewhere along the line a lot of people decided that if they were going to say "a few words" at a meeting of any sort, they had better add "a little humour". Unfortunately too often there is indeed little humour in' what they have to say. You know how it goes. The speaker gets up and says thank you for the invitation, remarks then says-"That reminds me of a little story." What reminded him of the little story I've never yet figured out because 99 time out of 100 there is absolutely no connection between what he was talking about before to What the story is about.4 Now it's a very traumatic experience getting up in front of an audience as anyone who's ever tried it knows. You can ramble on and get what you have to say said as quickly as possible so you can sit down or you can try to imitate all those , good speakers you've seen over the years. They look so relaxed, like they're almost enjoying it..They make the audience enjoy it 'too,. coming up with witty comments well delivered. Most of us amateurs want to be like those old pros but we haven't got either the , experience or the talent to do so. I know the - feeling of terror getting up before 'people.. My own urge is to write out -the whole speech before hand then read• it off as quickly: as possible all the time looking down at the paper so I won't see anybody out there. Bin being conscientious, we usually try to giVe that little extra. That means, of course throwing in that famous "little it of humour" to lighten - the situation. But if there's one thing worse than getting up in front of a crowd in the first place, it's giving your little joke and either not having people - laugh or hearing that hesitant nervous little la ugh that tells you everybody' just being polite. When that happens, you want to suddenly develop an instant case of laryngitis and have to go immediately home to bed. A lot of people have come up with a somewhat sure fire answer to the whole mess, They're not going to take a chance on their jokes bombing so they decide to do the one thing that will always get a response from the audience: they tell a slightly off colour joke...or maybe more than slightly off colour. At least half the audience will laugh at a dirty joke even if they won't laugh at a clean one. The other half will go along because they don't want anybody to think they didn't get the joke, even if they're secretly appalled. Then of course there's the joke that is adapted to fit someone prominent in the audience, often the chairman for the evening, Half the time i by the time the tenuous connection between the victim of the joke and, the circumstance of the joke is explained, I couldn't care less about the rest of the joke. And there's the other old standy-by, the ethnic joke. Some speakers make a habit of these following a Jewish joke with an Irish joke with a Newfie joke with a Paki joke etc. I guess I'm just too sensitive but they leave me a little uncomfortable. There's nothing funnier than listening to an Irishman tell jokes on fellow Irishmen, or a Scot on Other Scots of a Jew on his own race, but somehow they don't seem funny when told by members outside the race. You can't really blame people for trying hard to be funny and not really knowing what's funny anymore. The biggest source of humour (?) these days is television and that's enough to make anyone wonder what's funny. I've sat through some shows that were supposed to be riotously funny and found perhaps one good line in a half hour. But the audience is supposed to be loving it. That "audience" of course, consists of taped laugh track that laughs, whenever the producer of the show wants a laugh. It must be great to be a writer on one of those shows: no matter how bad the joke you can always get a laugh by simply writing instructions in the script where the laughs should come. These tricks of the trade are undermining our whole sense of humour just when we need it most. Laugh tracks should be banned in television and if people want laughter in the sound tracks of shows, they should tape all shows in front of live audiences. If the writers and actors can make real people laugh then they've earned their money. If they have to resort to a laugh track then they're' just encouraging non-funny people tothink they can do as good as what they see • on television. Behind the scenes. We need a few laughs By Keith Boylston -1Sugar and Spice by Bill Smiley by pill Smiley .If you have ever bought, or borrowed, a copy of Maclean's magazine, you have probably been subjected, in the past month or so, to the .same treatment I have, a variation on the Chinese water torture, Every second day I have received a card, or a phony-looking certificate, or a sincere letter, telling me 'of the fabulous bargains in subscriptions I can receive if I sign up right now, Heck, for only $19,95 ($52.50 at news- stand), 1 can receive 70 issues of Maclean's, PLUS a 10 per cent guaranteed lifetime savings, PLUS a full-color 78/79 calendar. It's a great piece of hucksterism, And with a good reason. If you don't get them Subscribers, you don't get ads, and ads is what a magazine gets rich on, not readers, And i can understand the slight note of desperation in the mail campaign. The first few issues of "Canada's Weekly Newsmag- itie " were not exactly swollen with advertising, There were Six to eight lull-page ads, mostly liquor and cigarettes; a few half and quarter-pages, a couple Or three seft•promotional pages all this out Of 57 pages total. Not enough money thereto pay 'for the coffee breaks of about 40-odd 8ditors, a gaggle of researchers, correspondentS, photographers and editorial assistaiits, it is 'to tremor with fear. Not that is would bother me for more than ' one minute and a half if Maclean's went belly up. It's a fat, rich corporation, with many irons in the fire, most of them highly profitable. Through a judicious combination of whining and poisonous nationalism, Maclean's managed to convince the Cana- dian government of the necessity to kirk out of the country its only real competition, Time magazine and Readers' Digest. Not have I any reason to wish the new weekly newsmagazine ill. I have an old and honorable association with the Magazine and its sister, buxom with advertising, Chatelaine The latter has become, from tenuous, wispy beginnings, about as good a magazine- as a women's magazine can get, My association with this pair began at a tender age, about 10, when I received a contract to go Out and hustle up subscribers to either or both of theSe mags. 1 was a, lousy salesman then, and still am ; and it was Depression years, but as I recall, I sold two subscriptions to Chatelaine and one to Maclean's, to friends of my mother. I received $1,50 in cenitnissionS, and that was the end of a potentially great career in publishing: Of eourse, in those days, a kid didn't have a chance against the pros. Maclean's, and other publishing chains, would send into a small town a highly- trained team of hustlers to sell subscriptions. They were fait talking, much like the encyclopedia salesmen of a couple of decades later. They'd hit the town like a hurricane. about Tuesday, and depart Friday afternoon , laughing like open drains, with alot of loot, leaving behind them a host of housewives wondering vaguely why they had signed up for eight years of Maclean's and sixteen years of Chatelaine, even though it hadn't cost them a cent, ha' ha. However, I am willing to let old business animosities lie. If Maclean's leave me alone, I'll do the same for them; Let's take an objective look at' their newsmagazine, the non-pareil, according to them: It's not bad, really. There is a strong tendency to be smartass, as in this opening sentence, "The CBC is the oldest whore on the block," Somebody trying to imitate Time magazine's style. But, on the whole, the mag isn't bad. Considering the tribulations of putting out a weekly magazine in an age in Which everything is instant dead two minutes after it's been seen on 'DV, there is a fairly good analysis of provincial and federal neWS and adequate coverage of international new, and a few good features. One of them is interesting enough, visually and verbally, but bears the dreadful cliche "People" 'as its heading. There's a lot of cutesy business of printing over yellow and purple and orange, which is juvenile and slightly annoying. But there is some first-class writing. People like Barbara Atniel and Mordecai Richler and Allan Fotheringham seldom put a foot wrong. The last of those is an abrasive columnist from Vancouver who recently suggested that the Toronto Argonauts and the Federal Liberals were utterly interchang- eable, and that if the Argos backfield were running the country, nobody would notice the difference—a nice commentary on bOth. Perhaps the magazine is happiest, so far, in its comments on the arts and entertain- ment. Thisis where Canadians shine; we are a nation of critics, whether we know anything about the subject or not. It is rather weak on sports, but then sports 'are awfully dead, except for color. stories, once the burly-burly's o'er, On the Whole, let's give the thing a chance, for a month or two. But no way am I going to sign up for 70 issues. How do I get my money back if I die be they go broke in the next two weeks.