Keeping it Classy at Reed
Reedies have never exactly been renowned for anything at all except for being rich, pompous and insufferable. Sadly, they can now add to that list “have a worse student publication than the Comic Press.” For a long time, I was convinced that student-run publications couldn’t get any worse than the UO’s own Student Insurgent. Then the Comic Press (neè The Weekly Enema) started putting out issues and the bar was really and truly lowered.* Alas, my attention has now been drawn to “The Pamphlette“, a student publication at Reed College that has been embroiled in controversy after running an article charmingly entitled “LC [Lewis & Clark -ed.] students kill Jewish people” after swastika graffiti was discovered in Lewis and Clark’s library.
The article adopted the time-tested formula of “trying really hard to be The Onion“. The results were… err, “all too predictable“:
The parody begins: “In what is being called a ‘tragic, but all too predictable’ event, the staff of The Leaphlette, a student humor publication at Lewis & Clark College, have been accused of rounding up and gassing all of the Jews on their Portland, OR campus.”
The article describes students asking the chemistry department for a chemical to conduct “Jewsperiments” and “a towering crematorium” where the library once stood.
When the Comic Press kids tried to rip off The Onion a few years ago, they failed pretty miserably. If rumors of their incipient return are true, we can all look forward to another year of ham-fisted satire and feeble jokes courtesy of the scions of the erstwhile Enema. Such is wont to happen when basically un-funny college kids with no ideas try to put out a self-described “humor magazine.”
Similarly, taking a glance at the The Pamphlette, whose bare-bones website** is nearly as bland as their content, is an exercise in nearly paralyzing boredom and desperate attempts to find something to chuckle at — only with jokes about “towering crematoria” resting uneasily alongside such other hilarious fare as “Product Placement Patrick”, who drops product placements into everyday scenarios like asking girls out on dates and sexual intercourse.
The Oregon Commentator, of course, fully supports The Pamphlette‘s First Amendment right to make “Jewsperiment” jokes whenever they please — lord knows we’ve published tasteless articles in the past and will almost assuredly do so again in the near-ish future. Indeed, when one reads the publication’s err… “justification” for running the article, one finds that
…the satirical article was in response to a commentary published in Reed’s regular student paper. A previous Pamphlette spoof of historical events said the Holocaust never happened, which triggered a criticism in the regular student paper that satirizing the Holocaust “enables real genocide…”
Putting aside the questionable wisdom of running a “spoof of historical events” denying the Holocaust, one can at least find common cause with The Pamphlette in rejecting the utterly spurious accusation that “satirizing the Holocaust” somehow “enables” genocide. Such claims are similar to those deployed in efforts to legalize laws against so-called “hate speech”, which inevitably fall back on the underlying assumption that some speech is dangerous even in the absence of any “intent to provoke.” No doubt the editorial staff of The Pamphlette, in all their towering and self-evident brilliance (and all Reedies are, by definition, brilliant, right?), could’ve made short work of the “enabling” argument and made a convincing case against the flawed notion of “hate speech”, all carried out with wit and aplomb.
What a shame it is, then, that all we got was “crematoria” jokes and sub-Comic Press attempts at playing dress-up and pretending to be The Onion.
—
* One wonders what the Comic Press’ claim to be “the second largest newspaper on the University of Oregon campus” is actually supposed to mean. Surely they can’t be talking about their volume of content, since most of it consists of recycled comic strips from the Internet, recycled Oregon Commentator stories, and limp-wristed attempts at bashing former Oregon Commentator editors — when it isn’t busy recycling its own articles, of course.
** No really… great blog, guys. Seriously.
When Satire is such that it could have appeared as humor in the “Der Sturmer”, it becomes obvious that indulgent parents are enabling their children to be primitive jerks. The lack of sensitivity is such that one wants to build a fence about the state of Oregon .
Presumably the Phamphlette will next be doing lynching satires, on how all the non white students were murdered on their campus for amusement.
You guys just don’t get it.
Sort of like some screwed up version of Johnny Appleseed?
I agree with Luke. It
Now who
I agree with Luke. It’s a shame that you begin your post by slagging off Reed in such an unfair and offhand manner, which destroys your credibility. It’s also a shame that you rely on the Oregonian, which mangled the background. You act as if that’s Luke’s problem– but YOU are the one basing your opinion on a faulty account!
In a blinding flash of insight, you finally grasp that the piece was in fact a satire; a satire poking fun at a proposition you, too, reject. But you’re disappointed that they missed “a golden opportunity” to deal with the issue in a substantive way. Dude, the Pamphlette is a humorous broadsheet; a popsicle stick on paper. You want deep thoughts, read Plato!
Finally, I thought Luke took a civil and even tone, despite your provocation. And what did he get in return? Mockery. Now who’s being insufferable?
Well, I guess I’m terribly sorry that you’ve “taken serious issue”.* I must confess, however, that I’m more than a bit confused about your comments regarding my supposed “rage” against “some amorphous liberal educational establishment”, especially considering that no part of my post actually deals with any of that.
Mostly I was registering my disappointment that The Pamphlette missed a golden opportunity to deal in any substantive way with the ludicrous contention that jokes can “enable genocide.” Instead, their refutation was “Jewsperiments.” Is that what “taking someone down a notch” consists of, up at Reed?
In any case, feel free to contact The Oregonian if you feel their characterization of The Pamphlette’s original piece as being a “spoof of historical events” was incorrect. Their contact information can be found here. Indeed, I see that they even have a handy web form, which I’m sure will greatly expedite the process.
—-
* Did you really “take serious issue”? Really, dude?
As a Reed student who is not rich and (I hope) not pompous or insufferable, I take serious issue with this piece. Your rage seems to be directed more generally at some amorphous liberal educational establishment than to have any kind of relationship to the Pamphlette — unless satire that you don’t find funny is truly cause for outrage. In actuality, the Pamphlette article that has sparked all this outrage is in fact the opposite of pompous. It puts everything on the table to be made fun of and takes people who take themselves too seriously down a notch, especially the Reedies you have such disdain for.
Also, great job completely misrepresenting the context. The Pamphlette ran a piece making fun of Holocaust denial, which provoked an editorial claiming that this enables real genocide. It was not a “spoof of historical events.”