Monday, September 18, 2006


Ryan's got a new post up that is either a sort-of apology, a further twist of the nipple, or something in between – the maintaining of hipster plausible deniability.

Read it here.

By the way, I reviewed Mark Haddon's new one in the Star yesterday, and though it made me wince a little to read it (the review, that is), I at least got the title right this time. It could have used another read-through – there are some crucial words missing, a few unswept corners, and I don't really know what I meant by "comically understated overstatement." Too late now.

Read it here, if you like.


pmmtoronto6 said...

I was going to ask you about understated overstatement. In comparing British, American and Canadian humour, I go back to the old staples of Monty Python vs. SNL vs. Kids in the Hall, and I figure the Kids do have some kind of "understated overstatement", but with a paradox like that you can find truth in anything.

nathan said...

I swear it was clear in my head when I wrote the review, but when I read it in the paper, I realized it needed an essay unto itself.

I like the Monty Python vs SNL vs Kids construct - that makes what I was trying to say a little clearer.

Kids in the Hall was always better when they didn't lean too much toward either Python or SNL, but nailed something weirdly Canadian, which usually meant comedy that came out of character, as opposed to, as they put it themselves, "premise beach."