AN ANGRY AND PROFANE ENGLISH PROFESSOR RESPONDS TO INDIVIDUAL SENTENCES FROM LIVE FROM NEW YORK: AN UNCENSORED HISTORY OF SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE (2002), BY TOM SHALES AND JAMES ANDREW MILLER

By

Matthew Sewell

Page 53: Cue music, cue announcer, cue flashing applause sign — cue America to a seismic change in television comedy, in the whole notion of What’s Funny, and especially in what you can say, and do, on television.

Response: Cue nausea. I’m definitely sure that capitalizing words in the middle of a sentence convinces everybody of The Depth Of Your Insight And The Importance Of Your Subject, you fuckwits. No, I mean, seriously, cue a seismic change in What’s In My Stomach.

Page 79-80: These were heady days, some of the headiest ever at NBC.

Response: I’m sure that in context this isn’t nearly as disgusting, or as awesome, as it seems.

Page 95: (In time, the show would break the “penis” and “vagina” barriers, among many others.)

Response: Ok, that explains that, definitely disgusting, not awesome at all. PS, I can think of, like, two or maybe three more barriers. Will you let me know if I’m missing something?

Page 180: Al Franken picked this painful moment to compose a savage piece of satire called “Limo for a Lame-O,” one of the meanest acts of character assassination in the history of — well, in the history of mean acts of character assassination.

Response: The handling of metaphor here is exquisite.

Page 244: It had the sobering impact of a biblical warning: Your parents were right after all, dammit — drugs can destroy a life, excess can be fatal, self-abuse can have severe consequences, there’s no free lunch, and all that other anti-hedonistic claptrap.

Response: Colon or dash, make up your minds, assholes! Also, are you saying that the Bible warns me that my parents are right, or just that my usual midday cocaine-masturbation-and-bacon sandwich is underpriced? Good writing is all about clarity, Hemingways. And, consarnit, exactly what percentage of your audience do you think are nineteenth-century prospectors? They don’t watch a lot of television.

Page 294: All that was on the line were his personal and professional reputation, his livelihood, and the fate of his life’s most important creation.

Response: DUN DUN DUN DUNNNN!

Page 314: Once more Saturday Night Live had teetered on the brink and once more the program was spared the unseemly ignominy of cancellation.

Response: I’m pretty sure all ignominies are unseemly. It’s like “unexpected surprise” or “natural instinct” — you know, phrases used by motherfucking imbeciles.

Page 352: Gilda was not disappointed in life, however; she did not complain about bad breaks or misfortune, no matter how misfortunate.

Response: Holy fuck this is awful. I’m going to try to construe this as arty, like maybe the form mirrors the content and I’m supposed to be experiencing a feeling of misfortune myself as I read. Um, no, doesn’t work. This sentence makes me want to vomit from my eyes.

Page 357: To one of its noblest traditions, the show remained conspicuously true: discovering and showcasing comic talent that might otherwise never have come to the nation’s attention.

Page 444: It had changed a great deal over the decades, but to its noble mandate it remained true: find apple carts and upset them, for the nation’s amusement and just because, like Mount Everest, they were there.

Response: With this construction, you are evidently enamored. By these sentences, I am appalled. For your editor, I feel sympathy. From Yoda, I quote: “you must unlearn what you have learned[, dickheads].”

Page 443: In 1996 and again to an even greater degree in 2000, Saturday Night Live returned to its richest vein of humor, American politics, and in the process the show rejuvenated itself for the umpty-umpth time.

Response: What, now you’re dragging Digital Underground into this shitpile? Leave Humpty alone!

Page 522: Saturday Night Live lives — a part of us, a reflection of us, a microcosm of us.

Response: Do you know what any of those words mean?

Page 522: One nation, under God, with liberty and laughter for all.

Response: I really like what you’re doing with the substitution of ‘laughter’ for ‘justice’ in this sentence. Alliteration is way more important than justice, and, believe me, if your style demonstrates anything, it’s that there’s no justice. Jackasses.