Tell Them, Game Called On Account of Nobel! - Macleans.ca
 

Tell Them, Game Called On Account of Nobel!


 

I have been trying to think of something to say about the Nobel thing, and can’t. It’s too weird. The only observation I can make is that the award probably makes more sense if you think of it as a way of thanking the U.S. for electing somebody the committee likes (at least at the moment). The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein compared it, on his Twitter feed, to the year Time magazine named “You” as the Person of the Year, and I think that is the closest comparison. But even then, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

Also, as Salon’s Glenn Greenwald points out (and contradicting my statement that liberals/Democrats now tend toward “soft” messaging), the Democratic National Committee’s press flack’s statement is pretty sleazy. He says that the Republicans have “thrown their lot in with the terrorists” in criticizing the prize. Now, the Republican/conservative freakout is fun to watch but criticizing the president or saying he didn’t deserve an award is obviously not “throwing their lot in with the terrorists”; it’s like saying that Vegetarians throw their lot in with Hitler.

On another media-related note, I will say that I object to the Marisa Tomei jokes that have been made by everyone from Time’s Mark Halperin to MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. Tomei was a perfectly good choice for the Oscar the year she won for My Cousin Vinny. She used to be the butt of jokes because she didn’t do much in the years following her Oscar, and because she beat out four Brits and won for a light comedy (albeit a good one). But she was good in that movie, and she’s had a good career, and it’s time to find someone else to hold up as the gold standard for undeserved awards.

I was also trying to find SCTV’s sketch “The Nobel,” but it’s not online. So here are some highlights from the legendarily terrible movie that sketch was parodying, The Oscar. It’s actually a lot funnier than the SCTV sketch, and at least it can teach us all about the proper reaction when someone loses an award he really wanted: undisguised joy.

The other Nobel Prize comedy sketch I remember, oddly enough, is also Canadian: it was a Wayne and Shuster sketch I saw as a kid, where they imagine a glitzy Oscars-style Nobel ceremony, with musical numbers about Alfred Nobel (“With what he had done/He was the one/Who could blow the whole world to hell…/So he created a prize that was for/People who laboured for peace not for war/Let’s hear it for Alfred Nobel”). The only other thing I remember from that sketch was that the winner of the Peace Prize was the guy who invented the button that turns off the TV.


 
Filed under:

Tell Them, Game Called On Account of Nobel!

  1. It reminds of the time Chatelaine chose Mike Duffy as one of Canada's ten sexiest men.

  2. The Nobel committee has really denigrated themselves and insulted a lot of people with this award.
    -people who have done great things in the advancement of peace
    -people who have actually accomplished something
    -people who previously received the Nobel awards
    I didn't know Nobels came for free these days. I didn't know that celebrity status was a consideration.

    Gore and Arafat were veyr poor choices as well, but even if you make the claim that they were undeserving (gore for being wrong about global warming, arafat for killing people and prolonging war), at least you could say they had done a lot of stuff.

    Now we have an award for someone who actually has not accomplished anything except for a stimulus package which has yielded very poor results.

    Shocking.

  3. Marisa Tomei deserves the peace prize more than Obama. The movie "My cousin Vinny" has done more for peace than Obama.

  4. Far more than Tomei, this is more like when Pia Zadora won the 1982 Golden Globe Award for "Best New Star" for her work in "Butterfly", an award people suspected her sugar daddy husband, Meshulam Riklis, bought for her. Nobody bought this award for Obama, but the grounds for it are so weak that for people who oppose his policies, it's more a subject for laughter than anger (if you're a liberal, try to imagine George W. Bush winning some sort of award for public speaking, and you'll get the idea of how silly today's honor for the president sounds).

  5. You forgot to mention the best part.

    Nominations for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize closed on February 1st. So he had been nominated either while still a senator/candidate or, assuming they waited to see him get elected, they would have had 12 days to observe Bold Presidential Action before the nominations closed.

    Got to love those crazy Norwegians.

  6. Uh, Jaime, Limbaugh has actually said he is agreeing with the Taliban and Iran.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/09/limbaugh
    The Dems response may be sleazy but entirely deserved and still about the gutter level politics of the Repugs.

    • Yeah, source Huffpo, that's like almost as good as wiki.

  7. Guess I used a forbidden word or something, so I'll try again:

    – High-level talks with Iran, after 30 years of no diplomatic contact, and 8 years of Neocons saying we should nuke them
    – Pressure on Israel, and high-level talks there after years of support for the hawks there
    – The U.S. being on the right side of a Latin American coup for the first time, like, ever
    – The missile shield–which was nothing but a boondoggle for contractors, a sop to the right, and a deliberate provocation toward Russia–withdrawn from Poland

    I don't think that adds up to nothing; and it certainly doesn't look that way to the rest of the world, who see the U.S. making a major, and welcome shift.

  8. No one in authority ever suggested nuking Iran – bs #1
    Pressure on Israel, the only free democracy in the region that respects everyones religion, speech, gender, sexual orientation etc. No pressure on the other side. Do you think all the accords signed by Arafat contained no compromise from tee Israeli's? – bs#2
    There was no coup, the countries supreme court found him guilty of trying to become a dictator against the constitution, and the current leaders are only in place until a new election. bs#3
    The missle shield has been proven to work, and the Russians right now could use a little kick. Plus Bush offered to give the Russians their own site – bs #4

  9. Facts at nobelpeaceprize.org

    So what is it that the commenters above are saying? The nobel peace price committee are in the tank for Obama? Well yeah but is that a bad thing? I guess it is for some people for reasons known only to themselves.

  10. Facts at nobelpeaceprize.org

    So what is it that the commenters above are saying? The nobel peace price committee are in the tank for Obama? Well yeah but is that a bad thing? I guess it is for some people for reasons known only to themselves.

  11. Facts at nobelpeaceprize.org

    So what is it that the commenters above are saying? The nobel peace price committee are in the tank for Obama? Well yeah but is that a bad thing? I guess it is for some people for reasons known only to themselves.

    The PM congratulated Prez O yet you are still upset?

  12. Inauguration Day. Nomination Deadline. None of that was accomplished between those two dates, even under the generous interpretation that these are accomplishments, and they had a generally positive effect on the likelihood of world peace. He won because the committee wanted to get another poke in Bush's eye, and if that's now the primary criteria for a Nobel Prize, it's not going to do much for their prestige or credibility.

  13. Facts at nobelpeaceprize.org

    So what is it that the commenters above are saying? The nobel peace price committee members are in the tank for Obama? Well yeah but is that a bad thing? I guess it is for some people for reasons known only to themselves.

    The PM congratulated Prez O yet you are still upset?

    And more Liberal media indeed.

    • They can be in the tank for Obama. Whether or not that is a bad thing depends on one's political ideology. That doesn't change the fact that Obama satisfied precious few of the Nobel Peace Prize criteria from the point where the nomination process opened in October '08 to its end in February '09.

      Especially when compared against past winners who fought actual domestic tyranny or helped manage actual demobilisation of standing armies.

    • who cares if BO won the NP? what really matters to people in the long run is if a person DOES something in their life. for BO not to wind up like any other burned out celebrity, he is actually going to have to get something accomplished one of these days, maybe before he retires…ya think?