Monty Python? Brilliant! A Fish Called Wanda? I larfed and larfed. But this is an accurate portrayal of what John Cleese has come to now.
John Cleese complains about wokeness pic.twitter.com/VZeeqFxXxn
— Jeremiah McDonald (@JeremiahContent) November 15, 2021
Yes, John. Learn to be at ease with your own privileged place in society, and stop whining. It’s ruining my enjoyment of your past — I emphasize, past — work.
Take heart in the fact that the Daily Mail will continue to publish your opinions.
fergl says
Miriam Margolyes in her autobiography describes Cleese as a total shit when she knew him at Cambridge. Another hero of mine bites the dust.
Susan Montgomery says
I’m willing to bet that if you looked at his past work that you love so much you’d see that this was always there.
“But it was all sadistic and vulgar” you wail. “Of course he was one of us!” Maybe you should set a higher standard for determining who is one of us?
naturalistguy says
Cancelling yourself is rather silly.
John Cleese cancels Cambridge University appearance over debate sparked by a Hitler impersonation
Well, someone was offended and we can’t have that, can we Basil?
birgerjohansson says
OT
FYI Scathing Atheist 455 has arrived; “GAM mini: Why God is a He” .
Dennis Prager says dumb stuff.
larpar says
He was always good at portraying an upper class twit. Maybe a little too good.
davidc1 says
Upper class? You are having a laugh .
Orac says
Who could have predicted that in his old age Cleese would actually become Basil Fawlty?
naturalistguy says
Was Basil Fawlty ever really funny? Let’s ask the woke about that.
seversky says
Made me laugh. So I can’t be woke.
gijoel says
@3 Minister of silly talks
Intransitive says
Everyone is willing to disappoint and throw away their body of work or credibility. Jon Stewart “defended” (read: excused) Dave Chappelle, claiming the latter’s hate speech was “never hurtful”.
https://nypost.com/2021/10/22/jon-stewart-defends-decent-dave-chappelle-amid-scandal/
I wonder if Trevor Noah had anything to say about this.
WMDKitty -- Survivor says
Regardless of class (debatable), I think we can all agree he’s turned out to be a bit of a twit.
fentex says
I personally think Cleese was correct – in this particular, not the general case.
What happened was a person was forbidden to speak at Cambridge because they once spoke in a parody of Hitler to make a point against anti-Semitism (ridiculing Nazis and their behaviour) because it has been decided it was wrong in any circumstance to have ever impersonated Hitler regardless of context – which is preposterous.
Cleese, who has often mocked being ‘woke’, made the point he has parodied Nazis in the past (and Hitler in particular) so should also be banned by such logic so he”d cancel himself rather than wait for others.
In context he is entirely correct – even though he is often wrong and boorish on the wider topic. The Cambridge Union is being ridiculous in applying a silly rule that disregards important context and deserves itself to be rediculed and parodied for that.
naturalistguy says
Do you think then that Cleese was correct to cancel himself anyway because he is wrong and boorish on the wider topic of wokeness?
ajbjasus says
#5
Whenever I saw him playing an upper class twit, he was absolutely taking the piss out of them.
flange says
@#13 fentex
I agree with you 100%.
The malodorous right-wing has for years been taking “Liberal” ideas and expressions and turning them into cudgels to beat down free thought. Cleese was mocking the right’s cynical use of ideas and phrases that meant something positive at one time.
John Cleese may not be a person I’d like to hang out with, but he has one of the quickest, most brilliant, and funniest minds of any celebrity. I doubt that he would be on the Republican side of anything.
kayden says
@fentex,
I’m with you on this. I don’t see the problem with someone dressing up as Hitler to deride and mock him and his ideology. I don’t understand how that is a bad thing. Cleese has this one right.
El Muneco says
@#16 flange
” I doubt that he would be on the Republican side of anything.”
Well, kinda sorta.
He’s anti-trans. He’s pro-Brexit. He relocated to a place where the culture/race hierarchy is somewhat more … retrograde than urban UK – he’s perfectly fine with his white privilege. He opposes TFG for the same reasons he famously lampooned upper-class twits, because they’re personally objectionable rather than necessarily what they represent.
He wouldn’t be one of the horse-dewormer-huffers storming the Capitol, but for someone who was once literally the public face of the non-conservative party he’s backslid quite a bit in the intervening years.
Jim Balter says
@18 Quite so. People defending Cleese here have no clue about the context, which is the right wing attack on “cancel culture” that Cleese buys into. Fentex says “Cleese, who has often mocked being ‘woke’”, as if that’s a good thing.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/03/is-anti-wokeness-the-new-ideology-of-the-republican-party.html
etc.
Looking into the origin of the term “woke”, one sees that, like so much from the right wing, attacks on it have their roots in racism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
Trickster Goddess says
@19
I’ve been noticing so many reviews of shows on IMDB about them being “too woke” which I figured out is code for there not being a majority of white men in the cast.
jacksprocket says
@18: he’s also conducted a long- term campaign against wind power. Not that he’s in favour of global warming, I’m sure- but please don’t let any solution inconvenience him ion any way.
fentex says
16. Flange
I don’t know what you think you were agreeing with but I wasn’t making any comment about Cleese’s mocking of anything – just agreeing with his point that if people are to be excluded from Cambridge for ever having impersonated Nazis (even if mocking them to dispute anti-semitism) then his withdrawing himself from visiting as he has mockingly impersonated Nazis in the past is a comprehensible, supportable and pointed objection to a preposterous rule.
That is a single clear and supportable position – which I don’t think is true of other objections I’ve heard Cleese voice regarding decisions about excluding people for their actions in the past.
KG says
fentex@13,
What’s your source? I don’t know if it’s so in this case, but such stories are often heavily distorted by the “anti-woke” (a few years ago it was “anti-PC”) crowd. On Cleese himself, there’s no real doubt he’s become the kind of reactionary he used to parody.