Last week’s episode of Saturday Night Live, hosted by Tom Hanks, gave us two sketches that have been talked about all week on the Internet.
There was the Black Jeopardy sketch, which was written about by many, including Jamelle Bouie of Slate. NPR interviewed Bouie and they discussed how that sketch “had more to say about race than a thousand tenderly crafter portraits of the white working class.” There were also posts explaining how that sketch bridged the gap between Trump and Clinton supporters, and others who said the sketch was a clear sign that Trump supporters have been right all along.
Then, there was the Haunted Elevator sketch, which featured Tom Hanks as the now infamous David S. Pumpkins. Whether you think it’s funny or not, the truth about this sketch is that established entities have been publishing think pieces about it. Seriously.
USA Today, The Atlantic, and Vulture (of New York Magazine) all wrote crazy-long pieces on the sketch, which recaps that take longer to read than to watch. They’re all pointless articles, attempting to decipher the humor of the four-minute and thirty-second bit.
USA Today’s title for their article is: “SNL’s totally bizarre ‘David S. Pumpkins’ skit is the best thing that’s happened this year”
Is it really though? Fucking seriously? Whoever came up with that title, whether it was the author, Charlotte Wilder, or the shit-face superior who gave it the “OK,” should cry themselves to sleep each night knowing they’ve failed at life and are as useful as a garbage bag full of used condoms.
Wilder defends her claim that the skit is “the greatest thing to happen in 2016,” then proceeds to call the sketch “high art.” Without an ironic bone in her completely uninformed body, Wilder’s become a real life version of a reoccurring character on SNL’s Weekend Update, “The Girl You Wish You Hadn’t Started a Conversation With at a Party.”
The notion that Wilder is paid by a news establishment of any kind may not be The Worst Thing to Happen in 2016, but it sucks really hard. This is what journalism has become in 2016? Great job, everyone. We’ve all let this happen.
The Atlantic’s article, by David Sims, is more or less a waste of air, space, data, or whatever you want to refer to utterly inane things on the Internet. It’s relatively harmless, and brings up a comparison of the wacky humor of the Haunted Elevator sketch to previous SNL sketches involving quirky characters, including one called FBI Simulator.
At Vulture, the human-turd commonly known as Jesse David Fox ripped off most of Sims’ article, but added the sleuth discovery that FBI Simulator and Haunted Elevator were written by the same people! Fox’s think-pieces are routinely pointless, vapid, and just condensing enough to negate any failed humor he might attempt with whiffs of pretension mixed with fuck-boy attitude. The title of his Haunted Elevator think-piece (and he does really want you to think about his thoughts), is: “SNL’s David Pumpkins Sketch Works Because It Confused You”
Reading Fox’s writing is like being stuck in the closet at a Frat House, forced to listen to two jack-offs discuss the similarities between Trickle-Down Economics and their ratio of vodka to crushed Xanax for the jungle juice recipe.
Fox’s title is even more frustrating than Wilder’s overstatement of the century. Wilder’s title fits in with the rest of click-bait culture, using phrasing so exaggerated that the nature of her entire work is brought to a dumbed-down level in which the reader is more curious about the writer’s self-awareness and narcissism than they are about the actual thesis of the piece. Instead of using over-blown idiocy as a way to get people to read his shit-piece, Fox oozes smarm onto the audience, immediately attempting to “teach” them something from his pop-culture-rotted brain.
Does the sketch really work because it confused the audience? I haven’t met anyone who spoke about the skit as “confusing.” Fox’s article breaks down the humor involved in the sketch in an attempt to understand why people have reacted positively to the original work and only proves that his writing is as important as Standardized Testing.
Why does he do this to us? Why does he impose himself, the anti-joke of the human experience, onto the world? The Internet has been tortured by Fox and his shit writing for long enough. I’d like to challenge him to a fight and settle this once and for all. If he wins, I’ll tweet every single article he writes for the rest of time. If I win, he’ll do the Internet a favor and kill himself WITHOUT writing an introspective note on his life and the quirks of his daily existence.