Letters to the Editor
-
You miss the joke although Stephen did not
Jane went right to the weakness of Stephen Colbert super pundit. He is not the macho, super male selling his sperm over the internet, he is actually a very intelligent funny man. It is the one and only time I have seen him come out of character, ever. He was completely befuddled, he knew it, Jane knew it. She was perfect. Hanoi Jane, turned super sex kitten totally destroying supermacho right wing pundit. She was perfect. Her talent is amazing. I find it hard to believe you are missing the big picture here. Think about it, who won that debate? Could she have been more effective defending the environment or arguing against the war?
-
Fondling Stephen Colbert
Fonda sexually harrassed Colbert, simple as that. And it was just as uncomfortable to watch as it would have been man on woman. How rude! I've lost all respect for Ms Fonda.
-
She called his bluff
This was a comic TV moment for the ages. It was the natural culmination of what Colbert started on the baking show. The surprise and discomfort are part of the delight of it, and I thought it was up there with some of Johnny Carson's classic moments.
Fonda was being quite true to her feminist roots, showing the world that women don't lose their power once they pass a certain age. There was also a touch of masculine energy in her performance which I found quite sexy. As were Stephen's "Aw, Shucks" references to his home life, which betrayed a sweetness and loyalty that are traditionally more ascribed to the feminine.
I think this episode was a archetype-buster and I look forward to more.
-
Good on Fonda
I totally agree with Suzy Shedd. It was hilarious to see Colbert get it as hard as he gives it to some of his guests. I mean, if you're going to build a sketch around your fantasies of Jane Fonda you have to assume that she might use that to build her own sketch. It was nice to see him embarrassed and struggling to get through it, and nice to see a guest take his character by surprise. Joan, he's tough. He can take it. Don't get all pitying on us now!
Then again, I really don't get why some women get all hot and steamy for Colbert. I'd take Jon Stewart over him any day.
-
Perspective
Joan Walsh, Jane Fonda (did someone really mention Hanoi?) and Colbert are out to make a buck. As I see it, Ms. Walsh needs to stretch herself a bit more for subject matter and creativity. If they all do something a bit different then someone may watch/read their stuff. Sometimes Colbert is awesome other times, not so much. Ms. Walch, the same. Oh the bandwidth wasted here.
-
I just think Fonda couldn't "give and take."
Improv comedy, like the kind Colbert used to do, requires that every actor on stage gives and takes. There's a lot of rules about it; you never deny the reality set up by the other actors, it's better to go for cooperation than grab for a punch line; you support each other on stage.
Fonda never did improv. She followed scripts. In fact, you could extend that to her relationships with men; she took on the politics and the attitudes of her man of the moment. From her New Left squeezes to Ted Turner, she stuck with the scripts she was given. That's what she did with Colbert, not picking up on his cues - or not caring about them. It might have been good "acting" by some people's lights, but it wasn't good comedy.
By the way, Fonda's character was best represented on an old SCTV episode where Fonda (played, if memory serves, by Catherine O'Hara) was sitting with Tom Hayden on an episode of William F. Buckley's Firing Line. Her leftist views melt away under the power of Buckley's overblown words, and she finally croons to Buckley, "I want to join you in this new, exciting conservative movement."
And you know...I think it's a good thing Fonda never spent much time with George W. Bush.
-
has a vote been taken?
Cause I vote for prude. Fonda simply broke through Colbert's character with some excellent improvisation. It was an obvious, but still unexpected move that threw the talk show host off. It was great -- and fairly sexy -- television.
-
I agree with Joan
The first minute was amusing; after that Fonda seemed pushy and desperate. Her behavior towards the married Colbert was passive aggressive in the extreme and he did not seem to be enjoying it.
Colbert is too polite and classy to shove an old woman off his lap. And, comfortable or not, it certainly made train-wreck compelling television.
-
Jane Was Great; So Was Stephen!
After reading Joan's column and half a dozen postings that talked about how inappropriate Jane Fonda was, I got up and played my recording of the segment.
In my opinion, Jane was great! Instead of letting Colbert control her like he does interviews with everyone else, she decided she was going to take charge. The terrific thing about the segment was that she stayed with her act. I thought that Stephen handled himself well, too. He showed that he doesn't need to be in control to be funny. He did a great job playing along.
-
Intolerance
It is interesting in reading these posts to see the accusations, name-calling and belittling leveled at Joan for sharing her personal reaction to the Fonda/Colbert bit. I did not notice similar contempt directed at those who found the skit amusing. I am afraid I missed the memo wherein having a different opinion about what is humorous and appealing is indicative of prudishness, ageism and over-seriousness. In fact I get the sense in general when reading Broadsheet commentary that there is a prescribed "correct" viewpoint (ironically, a laissez-faire approach to personal actions that yet allows that anyone daring to analyze and critically discuss those actions is ripe for attack). Doesn't make this much of a forum, does it?
Clearly, I also found Fonda's "interview" unamusing. I thoroughly enjoyed her previous visit to the show but found her actions this time predictable and excessive. (For the record, I think she is a very attractive and compelling person whose age didn't cross my mind). If the point was to flummox Colbert or invert the traditional power balance of a talk show this was accomplished within the first minute. A return to her seat and the standard interview format with an occasional entendre or barb would have been much more entertaining to me. While we can't know whether or not Stephen was truly uncomfortable he certainly seemed to be and I rarely find someone else's discomfort hilarious. What exactly is wrong with that being my sensibility? I have no issue with anyone having enjoyed the bit and cannot for the life of me understand why there should be a problem with the fact that some of us did not.