David Sedaris' "SantaLand Diaries" and Stuart McLean's "Polly Anderson's Christmas Party" are perfect examples of two different styles of comedic writing. The fundamental differences between the two pieces lie in what is said, and how it is said.
Sedaris' humour comes from his descriptions. He makes his readers laugh by describing events and details in a very straight forward, matter of fact way. For example, "I tend to avoid leaflets, but it breaks my heart to see a grown man dressed as a taco." For whatever reason, just saying things as they are is funny. And Sedaris is good at that.
There are funny things that happen to him as well, such as being told "Congratulations, Mr. Sedaris. You are an elf." Of course, many of the things that happen to him in SantaLand are quite surreal, and therefore prime comedic material, but it's Sedaris' ability to describe details humourously that makes him a right cracker of a comedian.
McLean's humour, on the other hand, comes from the events in his stories. Usually, everything goes stupendously wrong from the very start for his protagonists. For example, Dave in "Polly Anderson's Christmas Party" starts the story off by receiving his drivers license renewed, but there's a hitch, of course: it says he needs to wear glasses, however he's never worn them in his life. That sets the stage for the Christmas party to spiral out of control. It finishes with Dave being pulled over while driving Bernie Schellenberger and his baby around in order to put the baby to sleep. Dave, however, obviously doesn't have his glasses, but he does have his drunk, bloodied, mono-shoed, and coatless son in the back, who proceeds to give the cop a hard time.
McLean's descriptions are far less direct, even bordering on poetic at times. For example, this funny section of poetic language uses a long metaphor, and appears towards the beginning of the story: "The star in his stomach was burning brightly now. Ahh, thought Dave, I know the name of the galaxy. It's the galaxy of bureaucratic misfortune - an abyss of swamps and labyrinths, a horror house of tunnels and mazes."
In short, McLean's humour comes from what is said, and Sedaris' humour comes from how it's said. Both, however, are absolutely hilarious, and thoroughly enjoyable to read.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
Acts of Faith
The issue of Faith v.s. Science is a perennial cringe-topic in almost every forum, but it gets the nervous looks flying fastest when it is raised with relation to medical care. People just don't want to talk about it. Mary Rogan, however, fears not the sensitive issues.
Her article tells the story of the Dueck family of Martensville, Saskatchewan. 13 year-old Tyrell Dueck and his parents, Tim and Yvonne, were referred to the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon by their family docor, who felt that Tyrell may have cancer. Upon receiving the news, rather than do what any normal parents would do - rush their child into hospital for an immediate diagnoses - Tim and Yvonne spent weeks researching alternative treatments, without even knowing for sure whether or not Tyrell had cancer. It was not until the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon called and asked them to bring their son in that they did so.
Tyrell Duecks was then diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma, a fatal and fast growing form of bone cancer.
After this diagnoses, things went downhill. His parents refused to let him have chemotherapy, partly because of chemotherapy's side-effects and the required amputation, and partly because of their religion. This resulted in a court case that gave the Provincial government guardianship over Tyrell, solely for the purpose of medical consent. Tyrell then spoke up, saying that he didn't want the treatment - more court cases, media coverage, and inaction with regards to Tyrell's medical condition ensued.
By the time it was all over, the doctors said that Tyrell's cancer had spread. His parents were now free to do what they wanted. They chose American Biologics, an alternative care facility in Tijuana, Mexico, that provides treatment that is illegal in the US and Canada.
Upon Tyrell's return to Canada the following year, his parents made it public that his condition had improved. He subsequently died on June 30th, 1999, at the age of 13.
In my opinion, if somebody refuses medical treatment for themselves, that's there choice. However, if they refuse medical treatment for minors in their custody, that is unaccetpable. This article, along with other cases, gives substantial evidence against the effectiveness of alternative treatments, and anyone who refuses a child the proven medical treatments available to them, for whatever reason, does not deserve to have custody of that child. End of story.
Her article tells the story of the Dueck family of Martensville, Saskatchewan. 13 year-old Tyrell Dueck and his parents, Tim and Yvonne, were referred to the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon by their family docor, who felt that Tyrell may have cancer. Upon receiving the news, rather than do what any normal parents would do - rush their child into hospital for an immediate diagnoses - Tim and Yvonne spent weeks researching alternative treatments, without even knowing for sure whether or not Tyrell had cancer. It was not until the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon called and asked them to bring their son in that they did so.
Tyrell Duecks was then diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma, a fatal and fast growing form of bone cancer.
After this diagnoses, things went downhill. His parents refused to let him have chemotherapy, partly because of chemotherapy's side-effects and the required amputation, and partly because of their religion. This resulted in a court case that gave the Provincial government guardianship over Tyrell, solely for the purpose of medical consent. Tyrell then spoke up, saying that he didn't want the treatment - more court cases, media coverage, and inaction with regards to Tyrell's medical condition ensued.
By the time it was all over, the doctors said that Tyrell's cancer had spread. His parents were now free to do what they wanted. They chose American Biologics, an alternative care facility in Tijuana, Mexico, that provides treatment that is illegal in the US and Canada.
Upon Tyrell's return to Canada the following year, his parents made it public that his condition had improved. He subsequently died on June 30th, 1999, at the age of 13.
In my opinion, if somebody refuses medical treatment for themselves, that's there choice. However, if they refuse medical treatment for minors in their custody, that is unaccetpable. This article, along with other cases, gives substantial evidence against the effectiveness of alternative treatments, and anyone who refuses a child the proven medical treatments available to them, for whatever reason, does not deserve to have custody of that child. End of story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)