Talk:Parody/Archives/2013

The Little Train Robbery

The article states "Perhaps the earliest parody was the 1922 Mud and Sand, a Stan Laurel film" but the fact is The little Train Robbery that was a parody of the Great Train Robbery, came out in 1905, long before Mud and Sand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.250.65.251 (talk) 23:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The Simpsons Ones

Surely there must be more references to the Simpsons. Their earlier series were almost completely filled with jokes and parodies of every popular movie of the last century! 80.47.238.123 20:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

adding endless examples doesn't benefit the example. A small sentence or two indicating that that is the case is acceptable, but putting in 40 or 50 examples of their paradoies would be out of place.--Crossmr 13:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Visual Example

I am not sure that the "visual example" is entirely appropriate. Certainly we could come up with a better representation of a parodied image, if one is needed at all. --134.53.215.21 04:43, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There are dozens of parodies of Grant Wood's "American Gothic"; if we can find a usable one of those, that would be an excellent example, I think. Jgm 12:20, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Seems to me that Marcel Duchamps's parody of the Mona Lisa would be a good choice for a discussion of visual parody. I've forgotten the title of it, but it's just letters that, when pronounced in French, sound like the French for "She's got a nice ass, doesn't she?" I remember the naughty meaning, rather than the letters, I'm afraid. Geogre 23:04, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The Duchamps painiting is LHOOQ, and it would be a great example. You can see it at http://www.studiolo.org/Mona/MONA11.htm. Hickoryhillster 11:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Definition

The definition is incorrect, folks. "Parodia" cannot be broken apart. It isn't a compound. The OED entry on "parody" is highly disputed (see the article itself for information that the OED flat out misses). It traces to Greek drama and, in particular, to the Homeriedes, and it doesn't seem to have component parts. It's pretty much always "parodia." No doubt the word as it is used now is all over the road. It's now used as a synonymn for "mockery," but it is vital to keep the definition literary, because that's the origin of the term. The word has slowly slipped in reference to the point where it now refers to anything and everything. Geogre 01:16, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Soap

Surely the series "Soap" should be included?

what about Parodies, the funny ones

for example, Tozz, a Parody comic book, based on some bits over movies and other things

i wanna do an article on Mortal kombat Parodies/flash animation but don't know what to call the heading of the article.

HELP PLEASE >x<ino 17:36, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed about Soap; and added. Joncnunn 21:37, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Parody...

IS NOT a "form" of satire. They are two distinct (though similar) literary devices.

All "Taurus"es are Ford vehicles. Not all Ford vehicles are Tauruses. Not all Parodys are satire, and not all satires are parodys.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.55.172 (talk) 19:47, 7 April 2006

I think this is a very important point. Literary theorist Linda Hutcheon insists on this distinction within her influential book A Theory of Parody." I'm going to go ahead and change the first sentence.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hickoryhillster (talk • contribs) 21:45, 11 August 2006

Oops--sorry for not signing that (and thanks for the reminder and for fixing it, Crossmr).Hickoryhillster 23:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Positive Parody/Negative Parody

Back then, I only saw the definition of the word parody as something being made fun of for just ridicule and stupidity, but when I saw Kappa Mikey and saw the word linked to here, that just now made me think of this. I believe that there are two types of parody in this case.

One is Positive parody, where they said "imitation is a form of flattery", where they imitate things for fun, as though people who do PP imitate what they like.

One the other hand, Negative parody is when they make fun of things for ridicule and derision. Just like in the newspapers the comics use NP to ridicule and bastardize people like President Bush or Adolf Hitler. So far, that is all I can think of in terms of different types of parodies. --Seishirou Sakurazuka 22:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Lampoon

Just a question: why does the search term "lampoon" redirect here? A lampoon is an entirely different thing from a parody. —Saposcat 17:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

How so? Corrupt one (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

A parody targets a work or kind of work, whereas a lampoon targets a person or kind of person. While the two may overlap, some sort of distinction should be made. Richard K. Carson (talk) 05:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

"Weird Al" Yankovic

I believe the sentence regarding Yankovic going to the Supreme court should be changed or removed. While Yankovic deserves a mention as one of the most successful parody creators, there is no available citation (that I was able to find) for Yankovic being taken to court, much less the Supreme Court. For one, in order to avoid such legal entanglements and to be polite, he always asks permission to parody songs. Apart from one case of miscommunication, this works well for him. (See "Weird Al" Yankovic.)

I believe the Supreme Court case that affirms Yankovic's right to parody without permission (if he so chose), is already mentioned as Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. --AiYume 16:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Are parodies always funny?

I know sometimes songs may be sung with different lyrics - but is not always done with humor? Like, for example, a melody to a well-known rock tune may be sung with Christianized lyrics.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.18.6 (talk) 03:17, 15 July 2006

I don't believe that is a parody. --Crossmr 03:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it depends on whose definition of parody you use. For Linda Hutcheon, ironic inversion, rather than humor per se, is key to the definition of parody--and, in the example, Christianized lyrics might very well ironically invert some themes commonly associated with rock, so it could be a parody. For another critic, Simon Denith, “Parody includes any cultural practice which provides a relatively polemical allusive imitation of another cultural production or practice” (Denith, 9)--so, there again, the rock song with the Christianized lyrics could be parody, but only if it's being used "polemically," to ridicule or criticize rock, Christianity or some other party. Some other definitions, including some dictionary definitions, would specifically require humor or ridicule; others, like Gennette's, might also require that a specific work, rather than the conventions of a whole genre, be imitated--in the latter case, you could have a parody by setting Christian lyrics to a specific rock song, but not by writing a new song with typical rock beats and Christian lyrics.Hickoryhillster 23:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

No. That is the short answer. The longer one is that even if there WAS intent to be funny, it might not be pulled off. Also, look at the section latter on about pornography. Parodies include mockeries of all kinds. I have parodies of people mocking them in unfunny ways, I have pornographic parodies of icons. I have heard parodies of christmass songs that I enjoys simply because they go on about how sicking christmass songs are.

I believe your question should be Are parodies always meant to be funny? The answer is still the same. A few cases have had propaganda experts parodying the enemies of a governemt in ways designed to inflame passions against the target. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corrupt one (talk • contribs) 23:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Parody's legality in other countries

I think there needs to be a subsection in this article relating to the legality of parody artwork in countries other than the United States. After all Wikipedia isn't just for the United States, even though most articles consider it to be.

Agreed. I am therefore going to tag this in need of expert attention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.207.165.116 (talk) 03:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Pornography

Sorry, somebody had to say it. I'm not sure if it's technically a parody, but what about those millions of porno films which take the plots of real films, super-sex them up, and stick a joke of a name on it. You know, like "Edward Penishands". Here's a site talking about it: The 100 Worst Porn Movie Titles. And I promise thats not a link to porno. Robinoke 14:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

There IS Stuporman, Tazan of the apes, Sexcalliber, Wetdream on Elm street, Married with Hormones, Alice 'n wonderland, and others that I forget the name of right now. Some of them not only take the plot, but the characters, and main jokes. I say they ARE parodiesCorrupt one (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Unannounced, we were shown "Tricia Nixon's Gay Wedding" between two Marx Brothers' films at a YWCA. Was it parody? Absolutely. It was making a social commentary (...the woman behind me was earnestly explaining to her child what it was all about.) The question is whether there is anything particularly notable about parody that is porn. "Tricia Nixon's Gay Wedding" was making fun of weddings -- it could have been done any number of ways that weren't pornographic, but made some of the same points: "Tricia Nixon's Zero Gravity Wedding", "Tricia Nixon's Antarctic Wedding", "Tricia Nixon's Marijuana Wedding".

However, there is also parody *of* pornography. There's a clever example in Bored of the Rings. The teaser on an opening page has an elf-maiden opening her robe and asking Frodo, "Do you like what you doth see?". Other than that teaser, there's nothing remotely pornographic in the entire book. That is parody making a comment *about* pornography. (One which the reader is unlikely to miss, I'd say, ha, ha.) But that may just go to prove that anything can be the subject of parody. I.e., parody and pornography don't seem to be strongly connected subjects. Note that the existing "Classical music" section and visual examples of the Mona Lisa are about physical "delivery format", rather than one of dozens of styles within that format. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 16:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Non-American Copyright Law

Could someone look at adding a section on copyright law about parodies from nations other than the United States. I'm looking for information on Canada in particular, but for this to be a good article at the very least all the main English speaking countries should be mentioned, possibly more countries. Copyright Law on parodies could easily be its own article. JoeyETS 01:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Great idea. Could someone with legal knowledge outside of US law contribute? Several new articles could be written about this. But any mention here would be worthwhile! (Is my enthusiasm showing?) Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 05:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

removed uncited bull - re. copyright - parodies are treated like regular works in the Uk. (but incidentally, not in france) . i know a bit about parodies and copyright - ill fill in the page when i get bored. 163.1.99.253 (talk) 02:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

In the process of doing so, could you, if appropriate, preserve the distinction between "parody music" and "musical parody" that's developed in the discussion about Parody music? If that distinction doesn't apply in the UK, that would be interesting, too. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 21:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know anything about copyright law against parody in China? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.62.42.5 (talk) 04:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to add a few lines about copyright law in the UK, and add some country subheadings for the existing info in the article. The sources will be the 2006 Gowers Review of Intellectual Property and the 2009 update called Taking Forward The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property. Txsling (talk) 22:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

This has now been completed. References added in Harvard style. Txsling (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

"Parodious scale"

Any reason to think this isn't a hoax? No hits on Google, including usenet, Books, and Scholar, though it's supposed to be an academic thing. —JerryFriedman 03:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Who added it? Seems completely false.

This was put in by Captain Jay (talk · contribs), who has been warned previously for adding nonsense. (diff: [1]) I have removed the text and placed a warning. vlad§inger ^tlk 20:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Faith?

WHY does the word Faith direct to this article?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.234.250.71 (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't, as of August 2008. Somebody's idea of a joke? I guess I'd rate that one 3 out of 10. It's hard to see how "faith" is a parody of something. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 05:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The tense of parody?

I have removed that the past, present and future tense definitions of parody because “parodying, parodosizing, and parodoing” had been written. If I was incorrect, feel free to revert my edit. JoefromRML (talk) 08:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Contemporary examples

I think making a list of all the examples will destroy this article. After all, there are just so many of them. How about we just provide a few examples of the more important cases, stating why they were so important, and either disregard the rest, or make a list article for them. Corrupt one (talk) 23:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing "Educational aspects" section

This short section has been removed. It doesn't seem to contribute, and most is original research. (See WP:OR) The idea that there's something special about how students write or what teaches someone to be a better writer is original research. Second, the David Bartholomae reference (if appropriate) should be cited. Third, that "parody arguably sometimes makes canonical works accessible" may not be open to any real question, but it isn't necessarily significant. Making plush toys of characters will make them more accessible. The statement is original research. Fourth, writing that particular parodies are examples of an "educational" effect is original research. It is unneeded, that is...unless there's a statement from the writer of "The Simpsons" episode. (If so, it would be quite interesting, and worth including in the article.)

The section was primarily original research.

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 05:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Fan-made Parody

There has been a recent phenomenon known as “The Abridged Series” parody where fans take episodes of television shows (usually cartoons or anime), shorten them down to 5-10 minutes, rewrite the dialogue, redub the voices, and create a whole new lampoon show. They are usually posted on YouTube, but they can be found at various internet sites. If you were tally the view count of these “abridged series” parodies it goes into the ten-millions (over hundred-million if you add up the views to all the episodes).

I think this is a fascinating phenomenon because it is fan-made. With new technology we are now recycling entertainment by ourselves, without pay, and posting it up for free viewing.

I think there should be a section dedicated to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SamTheGreek (talk • contribs) 06:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

That seems worthwhile, remembering that Wiki is an encyclopedia, not a linkfarm WP:LINKFARM or for self-promotion WP:SOAP. The proposed section should not include a list of "cool videos". Examples akin to Red vs. Blue are well enough sourced and notable that they could be included. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 21:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. No names need be mentioned, just that the phenomenon exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.53.161 (talk) 02:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Monty Python

"The famous British comedy group Monty Python is also famous for its parodies, e.g. the King Arthur spoof Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1974) or the Jesus satire Life of Brian (1979)."

Python undoubtedly did parodies, but their movies are a little more complex than that. Holy Grail is not a parody of King Arthur in the same way that Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles is a parody of a Western. Brooks's films are true parodies because they have a self-consciously parodic air about them - they wink to the audience and the characters are aware that they're in a film. The knights in Holy Grail do not seem to be aware that they are only characters in a film, however. And Life of Brian is not a satire on Jesus, if only because Jesus himself is a minor and non-comedic character in it. It's a satire about organised religion and the Python team have made it clear on numerous occasions that they did not set out to make a comic film about Jesus, because they admired him too much. The most parodic film Python ever made is probably The Meaning of Life, which is arguably also their worst film. A distinction needs to be drawn between parody and satire, and this article doesn't always observe it. Lexo (talk) 01:33, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

A mess of redefinitions

There's a problem in that isolated individuals, often people with recent publishing histories, are having opinions, sometimes trivial or redefining added to article. Not every person who has ever published a statement including the word "parody" should appear here. Or even every person who has published a book on the subject. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory. In this case the authors could mostly be limited to those who *other* published authors view as authoritative. Hence, a book by John Gross that was published a couple weeks ago (by an anon IP with two Wikipedia edits) doesn't belong, because there's no third party resource claiming that work is somehow pivotal to the subject. Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Mount Rushmore image

Can someone provide a citation that identifies the top image (of a modified Mount Rushmore) as a parody? I read it as a satire, not a parody. In the first place, it can also be read as a sincere hagiography of Obama: "Obama's so great that in future he'll be added to Mount Rushmore." If it's meant to be ironic or satiric, however, it reads as "Obama and his supporters are so full of themselves that they think he belongs on Mount Rushmore." In either the case, the point is the content or message. So this is a commentary in the manner of satire, not a parody of form. Parody is a broader term that applies to the composition and form of a work; satire and irony are terms that apply to what's being expressed in the work. There are times when image selection can be OR (that is, when an image is subject to multiple viable interpretations), and this might be one of them. So an RS is needed that uses the word "parody" to describe this image. (I would still think that such a source was wrong, because the image isn't a parody per se; but with a source I'd have to let it go.) Cynwolfe (talk) 14:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Pornographic Parodies [notable section]

Jersey Score - parody of Jersey Shore [2] & [3]

•El Gordo y la Flaca (Dulce Media/LFP Video) •Family Guy: The XXX Parody (Full Spread Entertainment/LFP Video) •Batgirl XXX: An Extreme Comixxx Parody (Extreme Comixxx/Exquisite Multimedia) •Men in Black: A Hardcore Parody (Wicked Pictures) •Not Animal House XXX (X-Play/Adam & Eve) •Not The Three Stooges XXX (Will Ryder Productions/Pulse Distribution) •Official Hangover Parody (Zero Tolerance) •Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody (Axel Braun Productions/Vivid Entertainment) •This Ain’t Nurse Jackie XXX (Hustler Video) •The Godfather XXX: A DreamZone Parody (DreamZone Entertainment) •Birds of Prey XXX: A Sinister Comixxx Parody (Sinister Comixxx/Pure Play Media) •Buffy the Vampire Slayer XXX (Adam & Eve Pictures) •Fifty Shades of Grey: A XXX Adaption (Smash Pictures) •Inglorious Bitches (Video Marc Dorcel/Wicked Pictures) •Iron Man XXX: An Extreme Comixxx Parody (Extreme Comixxx/Exquisite Films) •Pretty Lady (Sweet Sinema/Mile High Media) •The Avengers XXX: A Porn Parody (Axel Braun Productions/Vivid Entertainment) •The Dark Knight XXX: A Porn Parody (Axel Braun Productions/Vivid Entertainment) •Training Day: A Pleasure Dynasty Parody (Pleasure Dynasty/Exile Distribution) •Zorro XXX: A Pleasure Dynasty Parody (Jama Entertainment/Pleasure Dynasty/Exile Distribution)

Source: http://xbizawards.xbiz.com/nominees.php

Notable enough to mention?

I'm wondering, is it notable enough to mention that parodies are popular on the internet and many memes have originated, such as parodies of the film Downfall and the Get a mac campaign. There's also many parodies online of The Room and many other things. I guess we need third party sources documenting this before it's notable. Does anyone know any? PWNGWN (talk) 16:45, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Update required

The section reading "Under existing copyright legislation (principally the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), "There is currently no exception which covers the creation of parodies, caricatures or pastiches". Parodies of works protected by copyright require the consent or permission of the copyright owner, unless they fall under existing fair use/fair dealing exceptions: the part of the underlying work is not "substantial" the use of the underlying work falls within the fair dealing exception for "criticism, review and news reporting" enforcement of copyright is contrary to the public interest." to reflect the fact that parody is now legal in the UK as of the beginning of this month (October 2013), and that the legislation states the dictionary definition of the word 'parody' should be followed, creating a broader exception than currently exists under US law. I'd do it myself, but the search for sources is kinda soul destroying on a mobile phone because of all the other information about the Hargreaves Review that comes up. Sheogorath 149.254.182.200 (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)