Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The golden age of satire britain
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The show South Park was first aired in August of 1997, and was similar to shows like Family Guy or The Simpsons in terms of pushing the limits of acceptable television to gain their audience. Since its creation the show is still infamous for its crude humor, vulgar language, and suggestive dialogue. Episode 2 of season 19 is the perfect example of the creators mixing satire and irony to give the audience a clear yet humorous view on immigration in America today. The episode I analyzed was Episode 2 of season 19, titled “Where my country gone?”. This episode deals with the values set by society and gives a satirical take all in the terms of immigration. The main focus of the episode is Mr. Garrison, the boys elementary school teacher who is …show more content…
This scene in the episode refers Donald Trump, who is supposed to be the Canadian president, and Trump’s idea to construct a wall between the United States and Mexico. From the viewers perspective, it seems like a ridiculous idea to build a wall just to keep people out of the country, even with such “harsh” conditions in Canada, but when you propose the idea in real life, it turns into a good one. More people are starting to support Trump’s idea of building a wall and the creators of South Park do a great job in satirizing it. To build a wall to keep out immigrants is a ridiculous idea and should not even be considered. It doesn’t seem like many people are thinking of the impact it will have on Mexico-U.S. …show more content…
Along with relationships, the episodes main focus was immigration in America. Normally, if you someone brings up immigration, most people automatically think of illegal or undocumented immigrants from Hispanic countries. Yet that’s what brings the humor to this episode, instead of Hispanics, it is Canadians who are seen as the undocumented immigrants. Most people regard immigrants as Hispanics from Mexico, but a few, due to current world issues today, classify immigrants as legal immigrants, Hispanics, refugee’s and other unsettled people. South Park takes societies issues in the world today and uses satire to create their episode. South Park mocks the immigration issue by replacing Hispanics with Canadians, and having Canada build a wall to keep immigrants out of their country, ordered by a character that looks and acts like Donald Trump. The amount of satire and irony that South Park highlighted is similar to what some Americans think about our neighbors in both the north and
In the film “Bordertown”, the protagonist, Johnny Ramirez ultimately finds solace, happiness and satisfaction in the aftermath of his own failure. If one were to believe the notion that we are all at a fixed station in both life and society, then the Mexican protagonist’s ambitions and their disastrous outcomes would only serve to bolster this opinion. This is, however, what the film “Bordertown” attempts to convey to its audience. As Johnny Ramirez ambitiously sets out, attempting to acquire material success, in the world outside of his neighborhood, he finds only offers of wickedness and corruption. His final retreat back into his barrio is where he finds goodness and love. This film, then, suggests that not only should Ramirez not have bothered in his undertaking, but that any venture outside of one’s own “station” or “place” would put that person out of his or her natural element. The results of this can be dangerous or disastrous. The film’s message is clear: Stay where you belong.
While both political cartoons indicate anti-immigration sentiments after the influx of European immigrants, “Columbia’s Unwelcome Guests” focuses on the nature of immigration due to U.S. immigration polices while “The Mortar of Assimilation” addresses the struggle of attaining Americanization.
Kyle Broflovski, Stan Marsh, and Kenny McCormick, who attend South Park Elementary School in South Park, Colorado. While much of the humor in South Park is scatological in nature, the show is well known for its political satire. That is, “no matter how nasty and scatological [South Park] gets, it’s never just dumb and dumber. Besides all the bathroom humor, the show is built on clever, equal-opportunity satire” (Johnson-Woods 25).
Only 4% of Hispanics make up the cast of prime-time television shows, a miniscule amount considering that Hispanic-Americans are the largest minority group in the US. The ways in which minorities are portrayed in the show have their good aspects as well as bad aspects. This is to be expected since showing all good points or all the bad points isn't a fair perspective of the Latino population. As a show that points out a minority, its necessary to look as the good as well as the bad to find if it is actually a optimistic view of the race or a pessimistic one.
The twelfth and thirteenth episodes of South Park’s tenth season, “Go God Go” and “Go God Go XII”, work as pieces of comedy because they effectively uses humorous triangular formats. Both episodes satirize extremist behavior involving religion and atheism. The episodes usually show situations that involve the audience watching a humorous exchange between two parties. On occasion, the audience watches one character being made fun of, but overall the jokes involve the audience observing an exchange between two parties. The creator’s also use the characters to demonstrate their own beliefs and criticisms.
The author is using personal experience to convey a problem to his or her audience. The audience of this piece is quite broad. First and foremost, Mexican-Americans just like the author. People who can relate to what the author has to say, maybe someone who has experienced something similar. The author also seems to be seeking out an audience of white Americans who find themselves unaware of the problem at our borders. The author even offers up a warning to white America when she notes, “White people traveling with brown people, however, can expect to be stopped on suspicion they work with the sanctuary movement”(125). The purpose of this writing is to pull out a problem that is hidden within or society, and let people see it for what it is and isn’t.
Specifically, one of those was the insecurity felt by the children as they traveled through Mexico. At one point in the film, the boys talked about how they were robbed and abused by Mexican authorities. One of them spoke briefly about how it took several Mexican officials to take his watch off his arm, because he refused to hand it over. This issue leads back to one that was described earlier in this paper, the influence organized crime has on the Mexican government. The major issue that was cited in this documentary however, is the growing number of unaccompanied children traveling to the United States. This issue has two sides to it, the social side and the political side. The first side of this issue starts at the home country of each of these children. Their government is not able or not willing to help them, and as a result they live in poverty and without access the basic human needs; water, food, shelter. This leads the children to want better for themselves and ultimately to take the decision to travel to the U.S. On the political side, the unaccompanied children are causing Mexico and the United States to spend more money on Immigration. This because they have to create more detention centers for minors, they have to house and feed them until they are deported to their country of origin. Throughout the film these issues are put into the perspective of the children. The reason the directors did this, was to show the challenges the children face as they made their journey. The reason they used that perspective is because it is a unique one. It is not every day that you hear about a 12 year old who traveled across Mexico and into the United States
South Park contains adult language, animated violence, and very suggestive material (episode titles such as "Merry Christmas, Charlie Manson", "Not without My Anus" or "Cartman's Mom is Still a Dirty Slut" are just the tip of the iceberg). Every race, religion or culture is made fun of or stereotyped. One viewing, and the watcher will either love it or want it taken off the air. Many viewers think that these rude boys are worth their time.
He explains how, compared to other immigrant groups (like in Shih’s story that depicts her immigrant group as a “model minority”) certain immigrant groups are not equally valued and treated in the United States. Similar to the Criminal Justice system that indirectly targets a particular group of individuals, Immigration laws and policies in the United States treat certain racial groups differently, targeting those who are not “valuable” to society through the federal and state laws, some immigrants who cross the border are criminalized and subjected to discrimination and exploitation. Similar to the issue presented in “The New Jim Crow,” the criminalization of certain racial groups (in this case Latin American immigrants) who cross the border without papers proves that there continues to be an ethic hierarchy where particular groups (because of their race) are excluded from having equal opportunity, forced to live in ghettos and barrios where they often face inhumane treatment as well as the constant fear of being deported by law
Immigrants have been a vital part of the U.S. ever since the day the country was founded. But perspectives on immigrants have varied through time and one of the most popular ways of presenting them was through political cartoons. From the 1860s-1910s one of the biggest issues the U.S. was facing was how to properly regulate the flow of immigrants into the country. We also see this tying of Americanness and whiteness, where even certain Europeans weren’t considered full American even though they were white. White Americans wanted more white seeming migrants which would help further establish the American identity as white. The political cartoons show the shifting perspective placed on immigrants, from a universal fear of them, to a more divided
In Eduardo’s conversation with an illegal immigrant, he explains that he is working to get his family across the border
The film is concentrated on Mexican-American nationalism and immigration. In the beginning of the film, the main character sees himself more of an American rather than Mexican. He speaks fluently in English but does not know how to speak or comprehend proper Spanish. This is an example of involuntary language loss. Rudy, the main character, who was born and raised in Los Angeles, California, does not see himself as a white man but does not see himself as a pure Mexican either and is stuck in the in-betweens of both ‘Mexican’ and ‘American’ culture. Because of this, he is not of specific origin or descent but rather a Chicano. A mix between both cultures instead of just one.
"Teens Who Crossed US-Mexico Border Alone Entering Schools." Fox News. FOX News Network, 29 Sept. 2014. Web. 07 Oct. 2014.
Something that I think that defines cartoon villains’ is that how a villain looks really defines their character. They always have some sort of dramatic feature that draws the audience’s attention to them, whether that is their sharp stare or their odd hair or dress. Something odd about their appearance (like having some mechanical limb, an eye patch, or crazy colorization). Their mannerisms (especially in cartoons or older shows and movies) are often much more exaggerated and dramatic, the way they speak is very specific.
The show displays three different unconventional yet “all-American” families’ go through trials and tributes in a comedic way. The show takes three different families and address’s the social issues surrounding interracial marriage, gay marriage, and traditional marriage while using humor to get the point across. Some of the characters can and do perpetuate the stereotypes associated with being part of their class. Then show does highlight interracial marriage and what challenges come with it, including language barriers, and cultural differences. These cultural differences vary based on where the individual was raised and what values where taught to them as children. When bringing together two individuals who are from very different backgrounds and race it can be a recipe for disaster. Interracial couples undergo scrutiny