Remove ads

The Erik Andre Show

Reader mode
Remove ads
Opening
  • Threadmarks
    • Baron Ouroboros

    Baron Ouroboros

    Emerald Leaves and Crimson Petals
    Location
    Vancouver
    Pronouns
    He/Him
    So, I've been going around the internet webs until I stumbled, yet again, on something I wanted to post: a rediscovered talk show from my younger days, then barely explored:




    I've heard many things from the show, from a few sources, some calling it absurdist, others a modern example of the trickster archetype, and others still as a fine example of existential philosophy (though I don't personally think it accurate). Granted, I think it's self-described as nihilist, but I'm not sure about that either.

    Admittedly, I'm coming at this mostly blind, having only gone into watching a few clips for the past few hours. So, SV, what can you tell me about the late night show?
     
  • Threadmarks
    • Conclusions
  • Threadmarks
    • So, from my limited experience, I have already formed my conclusions for the Erik Andre Show.

    It is a deconstructivist work for society in its entirety, featuring such behavior that breaks down societal expectations whilst simultaneously releasing a sort of respite from the subjects in observation, while also revealing its constructed nature; that is to say, he gives no shits about any shit. Clearly, the lack of Telos exhibited by the shows narrative superstructure instead serves to dive deep into the viewer's psychology and reveal the socialized behaviors experienced by said viewer as subjectively realized structures formed through continuous socialization through multiple generations and communication mediums, rather than omnipresent rules termed as 'truth.'

    Clearly, that is my thesis. Which means that Erik Andre is right to call himself a Nihilist.


    But it's more than that. Normative expectations of humor are tossed out the window by the chaotic happenings of Erik Andre; after all, the subversions of expectation that make up comedy themselves rely on certain norms; norms that help identify the viewer with the comedian, so to have both on the same page. But here's where the trickster comes in, pulling the proverbial rug from the foundation of everyone's preconceived notions.

    Then again, the irony is that with given time, a new norm is formed, and people come to expect chaos of the Erik Andre show; that is the irony, order formulating from chaos. But, but, the show, I think, anyway, cleverly does away notions of its past self, and decides to lose all structure; even, paradoxically, the structure of "chaotic behavior," whereupon moments of unsuspected calm (the general norms of common day modern life) take over. Then, the cycle continues: frankly speaking, this sort of humor has lasted for much of human history, and Andre is no pioneer. That is because he is a trickster, a fool, a troublemaker that spoils the party-- in other words, the constructed expectations of any given society (but generally, this one).
     
    Last edited:
  • Threadmarks
    • Now, here's another Erik Andre clip:


    See, the key to this talk show is the constant danger of Erik's trickery, his foollishness, his madness, his conditional departure of norms (in this show, and in his skits, that is), whereupon the viewers (and the interviewees) are constantly on the edge of their seat, asking: when will he go too far?

    As shown by many myths, legends, and bestselling novels, tricksters often end up falling on themselves.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top