Tuesday, October 9, 2012

The Best and Worst of Parody Accounts


They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.  Similarly, parody can be the most loving form of it.  Things are not worth parodying unless there is some sort of love there.  There’s a line between vitriol and sharp satire.  Look at This Is Spinal Tap.  At times, it’s a brutal and relentless lambasting of heavy metal and music culture but it’s also done with affection.  There’s a reason the songs of the movie became minor heavy metal classics in their own right—there is little doubt that deep down, the men behind the movie enjoy heavy metal (though obviously a part of them, possibly a larger part, finds it idiotic).

This Is Spinal Tap is the zenith of brilliant parody.  Twitter is the low point.

Now, there is such a thing as a good parody account.  The ideal parody account will take an existing person or entity, identify a few major characteristics, and exaggerate those characteristics for effect.  One of the best parody accounts for me is @FakeDanMcLaughl.  For those of you who are not St. Louis Cardinals fans, this is a parody of Dan McLaughlin, an announcer most easily identified by being an enormous homer (not only for the baseball team he covers, but for St. Louis fans and everything about St. Louis culture) and having two DUIs.  Now, an actual Dan McLaughlin Twitter account (there isn’t one) would likely be fairly boring—generally professional observations about the Cardinals or about his life and family.  But Fake Dan prospers by defining a few characteristics and running with them.  He ridicules Dan’s upward-trending speech patterns by using phraseology such as “of carse” and “gaddammit”.  He unleashes tweet frenzies during Cardinals games in which he writes in all capitals letters with excitement about how great the beloved “Cairdnals” are.  He tweets about his love of Mic Ultras.  We don’t even know that the real Dan McLaughlin likes Michelob Ultra, but it doesn’t matter, because Fake Dan became an entity unto himself.  The comedy is relentless, lacking anything resembling subtlety, but that’s not the point.  The point is humor, which Fake Dan accomplishes (for me, and it seems most people who like the Cardinals).

The next class of acceptable parodies include two of my favorites, two accounts I retweet an absurd amount because I find their niche to be brilliant—Old Hoss Radbourn and Tripping Olney.  Old Hoss (@OldHossRadbourn) works defiantly because the real man has been dead since before Babe Ruth was born.  We don’t know what Old Hoss would tweet like it.  All we really know about Old Hoss is that he won 59 games in 1884.  Theoretically, Old Hoss, whose tweets are old-timey observations about contemporary baseball (thinking something along the lines of “Bah! In my day D. Johnson wouldn’t shut down S. Strasburg unless he had conquered 50 wins or 50 harlots.”), could be any pre-World Series baseball player.  It could have been Pud Galvin and likely wouldn’t have skipped a beat.  But the combo of the nickname, being the most old-timey looking person in history, and always being able to reference the most statistically insane season in the history of baseball makes Old Hoss Radbourn work.  Tripping Olney is also, to put it lightly, a very loose parody of somebody, but this time it’s somebody we know (hell, it’s somebody who has Twitter and use to actually follow @TrippingOlney).  But he creates a distinctive personality.  Unlike, say, Faux John Madden, which is more or less a regurgitation of fairly obvious sports jokes (while maintaining absolutely no connection to the actual John Madden—too few references to the Madden Cruiser and too many references to Kim Kardashian’s appetite for black men), Tripping Olney has a style.  Besides all caps, he has a series of hashtags that I (and others) have co-opted.  Tweets like (and these are just imitations of his style) “DANIEL DESCALSO GRAND SLAM. #TRIPPING”, “NOT GIVING UP A BUNCH OF RUNS TO IMPROVE YOUR TEAM’S CHANCES AT THE PLAYOFFS IS TOO MAINSTREAM #HIPSTERCJWILSON”, or “MICHAEL BOURN COMES UP LIMPING SLIDING INTO SECOND, JOE MAUER TO GO ON DL. #JOEMAUERINJURIES” are his trademark.  They aren’t Buster Olney’s personality, but they are the parody account’s personality.  He generates his own memes rather than trying to piggyback off something fashionable.  Anyone could make a joke about being obsessed with Albert Pujols or Roy Halladay or something.  Tripping Olney obsesses with Bruce Chen.

And now on the other end…

I mentioned Faux John Madden earlier and criticized him but I’ll at least give him credit for often having funny jokes.  Twitter is full of parody accounts similar to this but with less humor.  I refuse to give specific handles for these clowns (and also because I don’t recall them because I don’t follow them because I choose not to waste my attention on Twitter), but here’s a few examples.    There is a “parody” account of Happy Gilmore which never mentions golf, never mentions Shooter McGavin (except in its bio), and never mentions being a former hockey player.  This parody of a hockey player turned golfer with anger management issues mostly posts NFL-related pictures on Lockerdome.  In what way is that parodying Happy Gilmore?  Though to Happy’s credit, though he isn’t funny, he’s sporadically original in the same way that John Madden is original—jokes which are generic but not direct theft.  For those, look at the countless parodies of Ted (as in the Mark Wahlberg movie character) which mostly just tweets jokes you can find literally all over the internet.  Though I guess there are some redeeming qualities here—nobody is following Ted thinking “Oh shit, I can follow a talking teddy bear.”  Maybe they think Seth MacFarlane is running it or something (in which case they might just want to follow the actual goddamned Seth MacFarlane) but it’s obviously a joke.

The worst kind of parody account is one in which literally the ONLY mark of the celebrity namesake is the name itself.  These accounts seem to be run by the same people, making the same set of bad jokes over and over.  The most common seems to be Will Ferrell, tweeting unfunny and unclever jokes that the real Will Ferrell wouldn’t do (he might come up with something original and funny and then proceed to beat it into the ground over five movies but that’s a different issue altogether).  Also seen several of Daniel Tosh.  Now, Daniel Tosh has a VERY distinctive comedy style, whether you like it or not.  It’s very confrontational and politically incorrect—it’s not THAT hard to parody.  Yet the parody accounts have him telling the kind of jokes you hear people make up in middle school.  You remember when Michael Richards went on that horrific, racist rant doing standup comedy and then, shortly thereafter, when Jerry Seinfeld was on Letterman, Richards gave a sincere, heartfelt apology?  And the audience LAUGHED?  This is the way we as people are trained—to see what we identify as a comedian (Will Ferrell, Daniel Tosh, Michael Richards) and laugh.  It’s easier said than done—you have to say genuinely funny things to build up that rapport.  Ferrell and Tosh did this on their own.  Screw the people who let them do the hard work and just repeat the benefits.

The absolute low point of low points, though, are parody accounts which do inspirational quotes.  Now, if Michael Jordan had Twitter, let’s be honest—he’d be whoring out for Nike.  If he had fewer followers, he’d be that celebrity who retweets anyone who asks for a retweet.  Yet apparently, in a “parody” of him, he just tweets quotes from Eleanor Roosevelt and Mahatma Gandhi because THAT’S TOTALLY WHAT MICHAEL JORDAN TALKS ABOUT ON TWITTER.  Probably the most common I’ve seen is Will Smith.  Like, why is Will Smith the one giving advice about self-confidence and other bullshit on Twitter?  What specifically did he do to justify this reverence where people are willing to just fucking accept him as some kind of guidance counselor?  Was it Men in Black 2?  Did someone see Men in Black 2 and think “The black guy should be a philosopher”?

But I go on plenty of rants against Will Smith, who I have explained already I think is a cowardly actor with absolutely no range who is clearly in it 100% for the money and not at all for anything resembling artistic credibility (if he decided he wanted to make an MLK biopic, they’d start filming it tomorrow, but that would be way too “controversial” for Will).  That’s not the point.  Whether you like him or not, most people like him.  He has a generally good reputation.  Racist old people like Will Smith.  The people who parody him are piggybacking off of Will Smith’s sterling reputation.  The bio of one of these accounts, whose title will be “The Will Smith” or something like that, will generally be something along the lines of “Actor and rapper, star of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, film actor, parody”.  Like, parody is just thrown in.  You’d be a fool to not think many of the hundreds of thousands of people following “parody” Will Smith accounts think they are actually following Will Smith.  And they’re following boring, run of the mill accounts because they think they’re actually following Will Smith.

As for me, I’m sure I’d get more followers if I changed my account to “Stan Musial” and quoted a bunch of safe quotes of inspiration (or if I put #TeamFollowBack in my bio).  But what’s the point?  Of my 170 some odd followers, some are legitimately entertained by my insane ramblings (not most, but some).  Some may legitimately be entertained by the same moronic jokes said ad nauseum by people riding the goodwill of established celebrities, and I’m sure they have more truly loyal fans (just by the numbers game), but those people suck so who cares?


No comments:

Post a Comment