'Snarking' in the Loop.

Great article published two weeks ago in The Times Saturday Mag on the rise of the 'Snark' in our cultural landscape. It was largely condemning the media commentators, political hacks and Private Eye satirists for their snidey, sarcastic brand of humor as well as their constant diatribe of 'in-jokes' that people outside of London's media-centric circles supposedly don't understand. One example cited was The Eye's referral to individuals involved in extra-marital shenanigans as being "engaged with 'Ugandan Affairs" though I thought this was a poor choice on the part of Hugo Rifkind who penned the essay.
Now personally I'm a great believer in 'Snark,' it is rightly the leading style of rhetoric in the condemnation of public personalities and erring politicos in this country and is a far more interesting and vibrant form of glib public discourse than the usual guff cooked up by the red Tops and Lads magazines that presuppose a level of knowing on the reader's part that would embarrass a nine year old from Burnley. (Sorry but I hate that glorified BNP voting town/Alistair Cambell supported football club right now for obvious reasons.)
I find that the magazines/writers I most enjoy reading: The Spectator, Private Eye, Red Issue Football Fanzine, United We Stand, Charlie Brooker, Craig Brown, James Delingpole ect employ large smatterings of 'Snark' in their musings on the world and its insanities and this not only makes them enjoyably rude but also gives one an agreeable sense of separation from a world where people actually think Richard Curtis writes funny films and that Sky Sports has had a positive impact on English football. I would argue that instead of alienating the reader 'Snark' actually allows them to nod their fatigued head with happiness; safe in the knowledge that at least some brave souls haven't subscribed to this bizarre, bland culture of free-sheet newspapers, Danny Dyer films and Tracy Emin beds.
As well as all this it was a fascinating article because it highlighted just how powerful the use of 'Snark' can be when used correctly. (See Sir Alan Sugar's litigation against Quentin Letts another serial abuser of 'Snark.') Someone somewhere once said the 'pen is mightier than the sword' or something along those lines. Now tell that to a disgruntled Iraqi poet or a whimsical drug dealer on the streets of Baltimore (a la The Wire) and they would tell you to shove your pen back up you're metaphorical 'sword' and fuck off. Lets face it that's one phrase that's about as realistic as Burley beating United in a competitive fixture. On the other hand a quote such as: 'The Snark is mightier than reasoned argument or balanced judgment' makes much more sense and underlines everything I've been trying to explain.
One writer who loves a bit of Snark is Armando Ianucci (is that how you spell it I'm lazy today?) From Partridge to The Thick of It he presupposes the viewer's encyclopedic knowledge of everything from politics to popular culture, Norwich to shit rock bands and Julie Andrews to Bond Films. And he does it fucking well. Having just ordered 'In the Loop' his scathing satire on Blair's decision to invade Iraq with White House hawks, I'm looking forward to watching Malcom Tucker, Armando's fictional Scottish spin doctor and general cunt, tell someone he is going to 'Punch them into a prolapse.' Or something similar. What a character and what a film, it almost makes me want to become a 'Spinner' or failing that a useless 'Civil Servant' just so I can enter this strange labyrinth of political intrigue, bumbling ineptitude and inventive use of swearing.
You see, this film is a great example of 'Snarking' and its positive influence. It subtly and poignantly ridicules the incredible idiosyncrasies of modern Britain, a country effectively run by the editor of the Daily Mail, Rupert Murdoch and a couple of slimy political spinners ie. Mandleson, by delving into areas of political and popular life that have hitherto been ignored. I know precisely fuck all about English government, the electoral process ect. but I still 'get' Armando's humor. It's as much about the delivery as the content which is why 'Snark' is good and 'Snark' is right. End of. Till next time.

P.S Check my review of 'Inglorious Basterds' over the weekend.