Dominic Lawson: Jimmy Carr and the pomposity of those professing outrage
MPs have been quick to join in the confection of fury over a comedian's joke
There really should be a single word to describe people who are volubly outraged on behalf of someone they have never met. There is, I suppose, the term "busybodies", but that doesn't quite capture the noise they make.
This week's target for vicarious outrage is the comedian Jimmy Carr. He had made the following remark in last Friday night's show at the Manchester Apollo theatre: "Say what you like about servicemen amputees from Iraq and Afghanistan, but we're going to have a f-----g good Paralympic team in 2012."
If you believe the suspiciously identical reports in various different newspapers, the 2,500-strong audience were "stunned" and "gasped with shock". I'm more inclined to trust the reader who emailed one such paper to say, "I was at the Manchester Apollo that Friday and the audience was not 'stunned into silence'. The place erupted in laughter."
The reason the newspapers described the audience as reacting like dowager virgins at a strip-joint was of course to encourage their readers to be appropriately outraged. A typical headline was the Sunday Express's "Fans stunned as Jimmy Carr insults our Afghan heroes" – presumably relying on their readers not to point out that whatever Carr was trying to say, it was not an insult.
Naturally the MPs were quick to join in the confection of fury – can it ever be a mistake for a politician to rush to the defence of "our boys", even when not invited to do so? According to the Daily Mail, the defence secretary, Bob Ainsworth, let it be known that he was "furious" with the comedian, declaring that "our armed forces put their lives on the line and deserve the utmost respect". His Tory Shadow, Liam Fox, said that Carr had "gone beyond the pale". The Conservative MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Commons Terrorism sub-committee went further: "It's not funny and this man's career should end right now...it's too late for an apology."
People seldom seem more pointlessly pompous than when they declare a joke to be "not funny"; and as for Carr's career being at an end, I suspect he will still be doing successful stand-up long after everyone has forgotten who Patrick Mercer is – assuming that they knew in the first place.
Above all, I am certain that Jimmy Carr will be much more popular with the squaddies out in Iraq and Afghanistan than any of the politicians who sent them out there into harm's way. This is not least because Carr, unlike Ainsworth apparently, has been a regular visitor to the Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham and the neighbouring rehabilitation unit Headley Court, where maimed British soldiers – hundreds each year – are treated within the NHS. He will have witnessed for himself the amazing moral and physical strength required to recover from appalling injuries and trauma – and also the remarkable skills of the medical teams giving the hope of some sort of tolerable life to men who in previous wars would have had little possibility even of survival.
What Carr will also have picked up from his visits to Selly Oak is that those injured soldiers have the blackest of banter, which absolutely does not exclude jokes about their own terrible injuries and those of their colleagues. A friend of mine, whose son is now serving in Afghanistan, tells me that the black humour starts when the injured soldier is being pulled from the wreckage of some bomb blast and his rescuer says, "Can I have your watch, mate?".
Now it is certainly true that what is absolutely acceptable banter between an injured soldier and a colleague who is saving his life would not seem so amusing when uttered by someone who is not part of the regiment. The relationships forged in a regiment during battle are as close as any family tie – in many ways closer – and we all know how family members can make jokes about each other which would be regarded as abhorrent if made by outsiders.
So what do the troops think about Carr's one-liner about their injured colleagues' paralympic potential? The place to look is the Army Rumour Service, known as Arse, the website most used by squaddies to converse with each other online. When I looked yesterday there were 12 pages of comments on Carr's remark and the controversy surrounding it – and I found it very difficult to find a single one which had taken real offence.
Here is a representative cross-section: "I thought it was a cracking comment, much better than his usual 'jokes'"... "The outrage from politicians is a cynical move. Resist it."... "If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't have signed up"... "Laughing at life's pain is better than the self-pity that passes for normality these days"... "I had already heard the joke from one of the guys at the Headley Centre who left bits of his body behind in Afghanistan. Typical comedian stealing someone else's joke"... "Just told one of our lads the gag (he lost his leg in Afghan) and he thought it was funny as f---. That will do for me."
That will do for me, too. Perhaps Bob Ainsworth, who still seems rather out of his depth as Defence Secretary, should visit this website – although I fear he will also come across remarks about his Government's handling of the campaign in Afghanistan which will not make it a very enjoyable reading experience.
As I noted at the outset, Jimmy Carr is only the latest to fall foul of those who want to be outraged on behalf of the very people who fail to see what the fuss is all about. Two weeks ago their hate-figure was the X-Factor judge Dannii Minogue. When a male performer, Darryl Johnson, changed the text of a song to make it appear that he was singing a love song to a woman, Minogue remarked, " If we are to believe everything we read in the paper maybe you didn't need to change the gender reference in that song". This was apparently a reference to stories that Mr Johnson is bisexual.
Whoosh! Within days the media watchdog Ofcom had received close to 4,000 complaints on Mr Johnson's behalf. Ms Minogue duly offered a series of grovelling apologies; but the alleged victim of her supposedly deeply hurtful remarks insisted that "I was not at all offended by Dannii's comment. We're completely cool about it and chatted after the show". And again, if you look at the comments on the Pink News website, you will discover that gay readers are much less scandalised than the mainstream tabloid press want them to be.
It is not only the press that is guilty of this misplaced vicarious outrage. It is increasingly the mission of the police to bring the full force of the law against those who might possibly have offended someone, somewhere. For example, it was reported yesterday that a 67-year-old evangelical Christian, Pauline Howe, had been visited and questioned by two police officers, on the grounds that she might have committed a "hate crime".
This was their response to a letter she had written to Norwich City Council, objecting to a local gay pride march, on the admittedly odd grounds that "gay sex is a major cause of sexually transmitted infections". The Norfolk constabulary continued to intone self-righteously that "We will investigate all alleged hate incidents", even after the chief of the gay pressure group Stonewall, Ben Summerskill, had described their knock-on-the-door response to Mrs Howe's letter as "disproportionate."
I don't know about you, but I'm beginning to find the behaviour of those always finding reasons to be outraged on behalf of others to be offensive in itself. It is they who should be made to apologise – for the great crime of pointlessness.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited





Comments
Isuppose it depends on your definintion of humour,not so funny if your a triple amputee from Helmand having to listen to Mr Carr trying to get a quick laugh....I never heard people making jokes at the expense of WW2 disabled veterens,suppose it just shows modern Britian where anything goes as long as it does not affect me me me me me...............
You feel sorry for "poor old" Mr Sachs just as many are outraged that wounded Britih Serviceman should be the target of Mr Carrs performance......
Yes, I think what you say is true, unless you're an ex-boyband member six foot under, you may need all the support you can get against the vile Jan Moir.
Gately's family are hardly gonna find the courage to log-on to the PCC website.
Looking forward to seeing whether Paul Dacre gets made to drop his pants for the cane in front of all his colleagues.
Is he talking about an MP who was caught fiddling expenses and avoiding capital gains tax?
If so, which one? There are so many of them.
My company is currently struggling like crazy to survive - and my son in law
redundant for the seconf time in 18 months - because the highly paid ( "highly talented " )
bankers and politicians screwed the economy up.
No shortgae of bonuses - but lots of shortages of equipment for the squaddies.
But I really could do with sitting on my arse and earning a small fortune for being a
pompous, know-nothing , quango tart !
Mike4626 - I endorse your outraged demand for an enquiry - such enquiries are the
conerstone of democracy - the mainstay of freedom - the bedrock of our society -
and it is unthinkable that your demand should fall of deaf ears.
Please remember who your friends are when they form the committee.
The weird thing for me about this affair is that I cannot for the life of me see why this comment could be seen as insulting to injured servicemen - unless, that is, one starts with the assumption that being injured makes one less of a person. If one believes this, on ewould presumably feel that by bringing attention to it Carr is thereby indicating this to the world.
If this is the case, then it speaks volumes about the prejudices of those doing the complaining.
Humour in the face of adversity is a great thing, and is to be celebrated. And on a more serious note, it might help to give an injured soldier a spur to go on to find new meaning and direction in their life.
"The weird thing for me about this affair is that I cannot for the life of me see why this comment could be seen as insulting to injured servicemen - unless, that is, one starts with the assumption that being injured makes one less of a person. If one believes this, on ewould presumably feel that by bringing attention to it Carr is thereby indicating this to the world.
If this is the case, then it speaks volumes about the prejudices of those doing the complaining."
Now, that is the point that needed to be made. Well Said That Man indeed!
"pomposity of outrage"!! Nearly as pompus as "The Audacity of hope"
Trouble is, the whole circus has moved up a notch and now involves other 'players', almost all of whom have greed at the core of their motivations. There's money and/or career in it.
And they are mutually dependent, if often at diverse ends of various scales, from professional outrage groups to outrage-stirring news media and dedicated sub (in ever sense of the word) -editors.
But what is truly sad is, indeed, the spectacle of our 'leaders' waiting to see how the scraps that fall of the table from these groups smell, and then leap in to try and gain some sorry personal reflected outrage empathy.
It seems to me to be another furore trumped up by the political-media complex to fill column inches and airtime and to get their fizzogs on the tv. We should treat it with the contempt it deserves.
It is the sending of these young men and women into a war where they suffer such horrendous injuries.
Never forget that this ridiculous war was based on the whim of a few vile leaders out to micro-manage the world.
Jimmy Carr isn't taking the p#ss out of the soldiers.
SHAME ON YOU ALL
All of them are responsible that the troops are over there in the first place. Ainsworth voted 'very strongly in favour of the Iraq war, and very strongly against an investigation into said war, and very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/bob_a
The Daily Express endorsed the Iraq war in the following terms on 12 March 2003: "Leaving Saddam to build up his secret hoard of weapons of mass destruction is a deadly time bomb, which would merely feed the ambitions of the ‘axis of evil’ and give succour to the terrorists who want to bring their war to these shores. Mr Blair is the one on high moral ground . . . the Prime Minister must take the country -- kicking and screaming, if necessary -- into war if we are to save ourselves from a far worse fate." (http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publis
We are always told that our soldiers are there to combat terrorism. However, what I would like to hear from politicians is - or any knowledgeable person about the issues come to that - just why are terrorists attacking us in the first place. Instead of worrying about a joke, just tell us what led up to e.g. 911. You will always have religeous fanatics but seems to me if you walk quietly walk past the hornets nest they will take little interest in you, however, if you jab a stick in it and shake it around then the hornets will come after you! Therefore, what did we do to them to make them come after us - seems a sensible question requiring a sensible answer.
Yes, it's a bit gallows humour, but when people deal with life and death situations every day, like the troops do, you get this wry kind of humour, to make day to day things more bearable. My father used to work in the emergency services, and they too often have a wry sense of humour. I expect Carr noticed this when entertaining the troops.
The joke is also funny as it's a jibe at Britain's often unspectacular performance in global sporting events - so if anything it's an insult to all of us able bodied!!
I wasn't offended by Ross-Brandgate, I was upset by Dannii Minogue until I realised she hadn't outed Danyl on live TV and I'm not offended by this. I'd like to put forward a motion that the newspapers ranting over this get down from the moral high ground before they get picked off by a hostile. All those in favour?
Moral outrage and self-rightousness as a means for self advancement: standard fare of journalism and politics.
Jimmy Carr's quip was no different to the kind of thing that squaddies themselves have been saying. Black humour is part of the survival mechanism of the fighting man.
And as for Patrick Mercer - a politician who approves whole-heartedly of epithets such as "ginger bastard" and "black bastard" as part of the necessary rough-and-tumble of military life - the less exposure that hypocritical tosser gets, the better.
We should never have sent our military to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. That's the real obscenity.
Support our troops! Bring them home now!
Soldiers do have a dark sense of humour but they keep it among themselves. No soldier would make such statement in the presence of their families, particularly mothers, fathers, wives or sisters because they realise the stress close family is under when their loved out is out in Afghanistan.
Until you're in that position then you cannot call anyone a busybody.
I'm all for free speech but there's a time and place to say something. At least Carr has recognised quoting a military 'joke' in the public arena wasn't the smartest thing to do. Perhaps he'll put his hand in his pocket now and produce some hard cash for Help for Heroes instead of handing out copies of his last book, as he did during his last visit to Headley Court. Not one of the lads was able to sell their copy on ebay.