Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Juraj Štyrák When Jesters Do the Preaching Religious Parody and Satire in South Park Bachelor‟s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Jeffrey A. Vanderziel, B.A. 2015 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. ………………………………………… Author‟s signature I would like to thank my supervisor Jeffrey A. Vanderziel, B.A. for his wise guidance, valuable feedback, and nerves of steel. Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................. - 5 - 1. From Zeros to Heroes. History of “South Park” ...................................................... - 7 - 2. I don‟t get it! Theoretical Groundwork of Comedy ............................................... - 15 - 2.1. Parody ............................................................................................................. - 15 - 2.2. Incongruity ...................................................................................................... - 17 - 2.3. Satire ............................................................................................................... - 18 - 2.4. Intertextuality .................................................................................................. - 21 - 3. Laughing in the Face of God. Humor and Religion .............................................. - 26 - 4. Prophets, Philosophers, and Jesters. “South Park‟s” Place in Literary Tradition .. - 34 - 4.1. Waiting Is Over – Godot Found in “South Park” ........................................... - 34 - 4.2. Unintentional Prophecies ................................................................................ - 37 - 4.3. Carnival Comes to “South Park” ..................................................................... - 40 - Conclusion ................................................................................................................. - 50 - Works Cited ............................................................................................................... - 52 - Episodes Referenced .................................................................................................. - 56 - Summary .................................................................................................................... - 58 - Resumé ....................................................................................................................... - 59 - Introduction Since its pilot was first aired, South Park has steadily been causing public turmoil with its controversial content. Both praised and criticized for their uncompromising satire, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of the show, have overcome a rough start to produce a work of a cult-like status – South Park is very probably the most offensive and vulgar show broadcasted on national television, and yet one of the most popular ones. Stone and Parker do not shy away from any topics in their satire, ranging from individual, to social, to religious critique. It is the last category that seems particularly popular with South Park‟s creators on one hand, and especially unsettling within the religious groups on the other. Considering its abusive language and disturbing imagery, one could ask, if South Park is not a mere bashing of religion, using its shock-factor to gain popularity. Is that really the case, or is there something more constructive to South Park? The first chapter provides necessary background information on the cartoon, tracking its roots back to Parker and Stone‟s first collaboration. Since religious satire is one of the focal points of this work, ideological views of the two comedians are discussed. To conclude the chapter, the focus shifts to the show itself – its main formal and contentual features are examined. The next part of the thesis is significantly more theoretical, examining the crucial concepts for the proper functioning of comedy, and thus of South Park as well. Definitions of parody and satire are sought after, consulting the works of several authors devoted to this matter. To make the theoretical passages more understandable, the two terms are illustrated on particular instances from the show. Moreover, the - 5 - second chapter includes examinations of the terms incongruity and intertextuality, both utterly essential for creating and proper understanding of comedy. The next chapter deals solely with the relation between humor and religion, examining the public reception of some of South Park‟s most controversial religious satire. More specifically, the chapter includes a detailed commentary on the response of the catholic authorities of USA to South Park‟s particularly biting episode, resulting in a heated discussion. Subsequently, these happenings are compared with the show‟s controversies surrounding its depiction of the prophet Muhammad. The thesis concludes with the chapter on South Park‟s place in literary tradition. Three theories are analyzed – South Park as a secular prophecy, as a follower of the Absurd Theater, and finally, the most compelling theory, South Park as a literary form inspired by the carnival of the Middle Ages. All of these theories are essentially a defense and justification of South Park‟s unconventional and controversial rhetoric, with the main focal point being the religious satire and parody. The chapter lays down the framework of these theories and comments on them, trying to find the show‟s literary predecessors. - 6 - 1. From Zeros to Heroes History of “South Park” The year was 2006, and a widely popular television cartoon South Park just won a Peabody Awards for its “fearless lampooning of all that is self-important and hypocritical in American life” (Saunders). Fast-forward to 2015, and the show has been running for almost twenty years now, gaining a cult status in the process. However, its beginnings were far from easy. This chapter examines how the sitcom came to existence. First, its creators are introduced (including their ideological attitudes), then the light is shed upon the history and character of their collaboration, and finally, a brief description of the sitcom‟s content is provided. Note, that in this chapter, the term satire is occasionally used. As it is one of the key concepts of this work, there will be an individual chapter dealing with its examination later in the paper. For now, its simplified meaning – „a humorous critique‟ should be sufficient. The very roots of the show date back a long time before its actual premiere. Its creators, both born in Colorado, met each other as students at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “Trey [Parker] (the voice of Stan and Cartman) is the one people call the “genius” of the pair, the self-directed hustler who won a Student Academy Award […]. Matt [Stone] (who does Kyle and Kenny) is more practical and business-savvy.” (Marin 56) - 7 - Marin also promptly adds that Parker and Stone “are smart guys, who love acting stupid” (56). Indeed, Matt Stone was student of mathematics and film, fields in which he successfully majored, and Trey Parker studied music theory – he, however, never graduated, although he did create a film “Cannibal! The Musical” during his studies (Weinstock 6). Considering the main theme of this thesis, it is of relevance to mention, that Stone, even though raised Jewish, says he is not religious, and Parker “considers himself religious” but in a complicated way, and both admit they believe in God (Morris, Tapper). “I believe there‟s something going on that we don‟t know,” Parker explains what „believing in God‟ means in his case (Morris, Tapper). Despite the critical tendencies towards religion that their show undoubtedly features, Stone refutes any anti- religious accusations: “Neither one of us is anti-religious at all. I mean, I‟m fascinated by religion” (Morris, Tapper). However, they are clearly aware of malfunctioning features in religious concepts, and are quick to mock them. Parker claims: “All the religions are superfunny to me. The story of Jesus makes no sense to me. God sent his only son. Why could God only have one son and why would he have to die? It‟s just bad writing, really. And it‟s really terrible in about the second act.” (Morris, Tapper) However, as it turns out, it is not one of the world religions that Parker sees as the pinnacle of absurdity – it is atheism (even though he does call it a religion story): “Out of all the ridiculous religion stories – which are greatly, wonderfully ridiculous – the silliest one I‟ve ever heard is, „Yeah, there‟s this big, giant universe and it‟s expanding and it‟s all going to collapse on itself and we‟re all - 8 - just here, just „cuz. Just „cuz. That to me, is the most ridiculous explanation ever.” (Morris, Tapper) Granted, these are the worldviews of only of the creative duo. However, considering their long and relatively smooth collaboration, it is probably safe to assume that Matt Stone sees the issue in a similar way. Having clarified their respective (and also mutual) opinions towards religiosity and God, let us return to the beginnings of their partnership. They both went to a film class, where they got to know each other and eventually started their cooperation. Parker‟s musical caught the attention of FOX‟s executive Brian Garden, who tried to gain a producer for it, an effort, which turned out unsuccessful. The duo‟s first