January 30, 2006













  • ‘American Vertigo: Traveling America in the Footsteps of Tocqueville,’ by Bernard-Henri Lévy




    Peter Foley/European Pressphoto AgencyBernard-Henri Lévy


    January 29, 2006

    ‘American Vertigo: Traveling America in the Footsteps of Tocqueville,’ by Bernard-Henri Lévy

    On the Road Avec M. Lévy




    Correction Appended


    Any American with a big urge to write a book explaining France to the French should read this book first, to get a sense of the hazards involved. Bernard-Henri Lévy is a French writer with a spatter-paint prose style and the grandiosity of a college sophomore; he rambled around this country at the behest of The Atlantic Monthly and now has worked up his notes into a sort of book. It is the classic Freaks, Fatties, Fanatics & Faux Culture Excursion beloved of European journalists for the past 50 years, with stops at Las Vegas to visit a lap-dancing club and a brothel; Beverly Hills; Dealey Plaza in Dallas; Bourbon Street in New Orleans; Graceland; a gun show in Fort Worth; a “partner-swapping club” in San Francisco with a drag queen with mammoth silicone breasts; the Iowa State Fair (“a festival of American kitsch”); Sun City (“gilded apartheid for the old”);a stock car race; the Mall of America; Mount Rushmore; a couple of evangelical megachurches; the Mormons of Salt Lake; some Amish; the 2004 national political conventions; Alcatraz – you get the idea. (For some reason he missed the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, the adult video awards, the grave site of Warren G. Harding and the World’s Largest Ball of Twine.) You meet Sharon Stone and John Kerry and a woman who once weighed 488 pounds and an obese couple carrying rifles, but there’s nobody here whom you recognize. In more than 300 pages, nobody tells a joke. Nobody does much work. Nobody sits and eats and enjoys their food. You’ve lived all your life in America, never attended a megachurch or a brothel, don’t own guns, are non-Amish, and it dawns on you that this is a book about the French. There’s no reason for it to exist in English, except as evidence that travel need not be broadening and one should be wary of books with Tocqueville in the title.


    In New Orleans, a young woman takes off her clothes on a balcony as young men throw Mardi Gras beads up at her. We learn that much of the city is below sea level. At the stock car race, Lévy senses that the spectators “both dread and hope for an accident.” We learn that Los Angeles has no center and is one of the most polluted cities in the country. “Headed for Virginia, and for Norfolk, which is, if I’m not mistaken, one of the oldest towns in a state that was one of the original 13 in the union,” Lévy writes. Yes, indeed. He likes Savannah and gets delirious about Seattle, especially the Space Needle, which represents for him “everything that America has always made me dream of: poetry and modernity, precariousness and technical challenge, lightness of form meshed with a Babel syndrome, city lights, the haunting quality of darkness, tall trees of steel.” O.K., fine. The Eiffel Tower is quite the deal, too.


    But every 10 pages or so, Lévy walks into a wall. About Old Glory, for example. Someone has told him about the rules for proper handling of the flag, and from these (the flag must not be allowed to touch the ground, must be disposed of by burning) he has invented an American flag fetish, a national obsession, a cult of flag worship. Somebody forgot to tell him that to those of us not currently enrolled in the Boy Scouts, these rules aren’t a big part of everyday life. He blows a radiator writing about baseball – “this sport that contributes to establishing people’s identities and that has truly become part of their civic and patriotic religion, which is baseball” – and when, visiting Cooperstown (“this new Nazareth”), he finds out that Commissioner Bud Selig once laid a wreath at the tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington, where Abner Doubleday is also buried, Lévy goes out of his mind. An event important only to Selig and his immediate family becomes, to Lévy, an official proclamation “before the eyes of America and the world” of Abner as “the pope of the national religion . . . that day not just the town but the entire United States joined in a celebration that had the twofold merit of associating the national pastime with the traditional rural values that Fenimore Cooper’s town embodies and also with the patriotic grandeur that the name Doubleday bears.” Uh, actually not. Negatory on “pope” and “national” and “entire” and “most” and “embodies” and “Doubleday.”


    He worships Woody Allen and Charlie Rose in terms that would make Donald Trump cringe with embarrassment. He admires Warren Beatty, though he sees Beatty at a public event “among these rich and beautiful who, as always in America . . . form a masquerade of the living dead, each one more facelifted and mummified than the next, fierce, a little mutant-looking, inhuman, ultimately disappointing.” Lévy is quite comfortable with phrases like “as always in America.” Bombast comes naturally to him. Rain falls on the crowd gathered for the dedication of the Clinton library in Little Rock, and to Lévy, it signifies the demise of the Democratic Party. As always with French writers, Lévy is short on the facts, long on conclusions. He has a brief encounter with a young man outside of Montgomery, Ala. (“I listen to him tell me, as if he were justifying himself, about his attachment to this region”), and suddenly sees that the young man has “all the reflexes of Southern culture” and the “studied nonchalance . . . so characteristic of the region.” With his X-ray vision, Lévy is able to reach tall conclusions with a single bound.


    And good Lord, the childlike love of paradox – America is magnificent but mad, greedy and modest, drunk with materialism and religiosity, puritan and outrageous, facing toward the future and yet obsessed with its memories. Americans’ party loyalty is “very strong and very pliable, extremely tenacious and in the end somewhat empty.” Existential and yet devoid of all content and direction. The partner-swapping club is both “libertine” and “conventional,” “depraved” and “proper.” And so the reader is fascinated and exhausted by Lévy’s tedious and original thinking: “A strong bond holds America together, but a minimal one. An attachment of great force, but not fiercely resolute. A place of high – extremely high – symbolic tension, but a neutral one, a nearly empty one.” And what’s with the flurries of rhetorical questions? Is this how the French talk or is it something they save for books about America? “What is a Republican? What distinguishes a Republican in the America of today from a Democrat?” Lévy writes, like a student padding out a term paper. “What does this experience tell us?” he writes about the Mall of America. “What do we learn about American civilization from this mausoleum of merchandise, this funeral accumulation of false goods and nondesires in this end-of-the-world setting? What is the effect on the Americans of today of this confined space, this aquarium, where only a semblance of life seems to subsist?” And what is one to make of the series of questions – 20 in a row – about Hillary Clinton, in which Lévy implies she is seeking the White House to erase the shame of the Lewinsky affair? Was Lévy aware of the game 20 Questions, commonly played on long car trips in America? Are we to read this passage as a metaphor of American restlessness? Does he understand how irritating this is? Does he? Do you? May I stop now?


    America is changing, he concludes, but America will endure. “I still don’t think there’s reason to despair of this country. No matter how many derangements, dysfunctions, driftings there may be . . . no matter how fragmented the political and social space may be; despite this nihilist hypertrophy of petty antiquarian memory; despite this hyperobesity – increasingly less metaphorical – of the great social bodies that form the invisible edifice of the country; despite the utter misery of the ghettos . . . I can’t manage to convince myself of the collapse, heralded in Europe, of the American model.”


    Thanks, pal. I don’t imagine France collapsing anytime soon either. Thanks for coming. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. For your next book, tell us about those riots in France, the cars burning in the suburbs of Paris. What was that all about? Were fat people involved?


    Garrison Keillor is the host and writer of “A Prairie Home Companion” and the author of 16 books. He is the editor, most recently, of an anthology titled “Good Poems for Hard Times.”

    Correction: Jan 29, 2006, Sunday:

    A note on Page 1 of the Book Review today, with the review of “American Vertigo” by Bernard-Henri Lévy, misstates the translator’s name. She is Charlotte Mandell, not Mendel.







     







    Spies. Lies and Wiretaps




    AP)

    President Bush defended anew his program of warrantless surveillance Thursday, January 26,2006, saying “there’s no doubt in my mind it is legal.” He suggested that he might resist congressional efforts to change it.

    “The program’s legal, it’s designed to protect civil liberties, and it’s necessary,” Bush told a White House news conference.

    Democrats have accused the president of breaking the law in allowing eavesdropping on overseas communications to and from U.S. residents, and even some members of his own party have questioned the practice.

    Asked if he would support efforts in Congress to give him express authority to continue the program, Bush cited what he said was the extreme delicacy of the operation.

    “It’s so sensitive that if information gets out about how the program works, it will help the enemy,” Bush said. “Why tell the enemy what we’re doing?”

    “We’ll listen to ideas. If the attempt to write law is likely to expose the nature of the program, I’ll resist it,” the president said.

    On the Middle East, Bush expressed concern that Palestinian elections had given a majority to the radical party Hamas, which has called for the elimination of Israel, although he noted that democratic elections sometimes produce unwelcome results.

    He made it clear that any organization that has an armed wing and which advocates violence against Israel “is a party with which we will not deal.”

    Bush called the election results a “wake-up call” to the old guard Palestinian leadership, many of whom are holdovers from the days of the late PLO chairmanYasser Arafat.

    Questioned about a controversy swirling about disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Bush said he would cooperate with federal prosecutors investigating Abramoff and his alleged influence peddling activities, if necessary. Otherwise, the president said he saw no reason to release pictures that he acknowledged were taken of him and Abramoff.

    “There is a serious investigation going on by federal prosecutors _ that’s their job,” the president said. “If they believe something was done inappropriately in the White House, they’ll come and look and they’re welcome to do so.”

    Otherwise, Bush said, “I’ve had my picture taken with a lot of people. Having my picture taken with somneone doesn’t mean I’m a friend with them or know them very well.”

    “I’ve had my picture taken with you,” Bush said to the reporter who asked the question.

    Bush also said that his nominee for Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, deserves to be confirmed in the Senate, where he clearly has the votes but where minority-party Democrats were speaking out against him at length.

    “The Senate needs to give him an up or down vote as soon as posible,” Bush said in opening remarks that also previewed the themes of his State of the Union address next Tuesday.

    Bush shrugged off a recent Pentagon-contracted report which concluded the Army was overextended and the United States cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency there.

    The president predicted victory in Iraq and said, “Our commanders will have the troops necessary to do that.”

    He said the military was focused on transforming itself to ensure the armed forces could meet its goals in the 21st century.

    “After five years of war, there is a need to make sure troops are balanced properly, threats are met with capabilities. That’s why we’re transforming the military,” Bush said.

    MMV The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

    January 29, 2006
    Editorial
    Spies, Lies and Wiretaps

    A bit over a week ago, President Bush and his men promised to provide the legal, constitutional and moral justifications for the sort of warrantless spying on Americans that has been illegal for nearly 30 years. Instead, we got the familiar mix of political spin, clumsy historical misinformation, contemptuous dismissals of civil liberties concerns, cynical attempts to paint dissents as anti-American and pro-terrorist, and a couple of big, dangerous lies.

    The first was that the domestic spying program is carefully aimed only at people who are actively working with Al Qaeda, when actually it has violated the rights of countless innocent Americans. And the second was that the Bush team could have prevented the 9/11 attacks if only they had thought of eavesdropping without a warrant.



    Sept. 11 could have been prevented. This is breathtakingly cynical. The nation’s guardians did not miss the 9/11 plot because it takes a few hours to get a warrant to eavesdrop on phone calls and e-mail messages. They missed the plot because they were not looking. The same officials who now say 9/11 could have been prevented said at the time that no one could possibly have foreseen the attacks. We keep hoping that Mr. Bush will finally lay down the bloody banner of 9/11, but Karl Rove, who emerged from hiding recently to talk about domestic spying, made it clear that will not happen — because the White House thinks it can make Democrats look as though they do not want to defend America. “President Bush believes if Al Qaeda is calling somebody in America, it is in our national security interest to know who they’re calling and why,” he told Republican officials. “Some important Democrats clearly disagree.”

    Mr. Rove knows perfectly well that no Democrat has ever said any such thing — and that nothing prevented American intelligence from listening to a call from Al Qaeda to the United States, or a call from the United States to Al Qaeda, before Sept. 11, 2001, or since. The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act simply required the government to obey the Constitution in doing so. And FISA was amended after 9/11 to make the job much easier.

    Only bad guys are spied on. Bush officials have said the surveillance is tightly focused only on contacts between people in this country and Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Vice President Dick Cheney claimed it saved thousands of lives by preventing attacks. But reporting in this paper has shown that the National Security Agency swept up vast quantities of e-mail messages and telephone calls and used computer searches to generate thousands of leads. F.B.I. officials said virtually all of these led to dead ends or to innocent Americans. The biggest fish the administration has claimed so far has been a crackpot who wanted to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch — a case that F.B.I. officials said was not connected to the spying operation anyway.

    The spying is legal. The secret program violates the law as currently written. It’s that simple. In fact, FISA was enacted in 1978 to avoid just this sort of abuse. It said that the government could not spy on Americans by reading their mail (or now their e-mail) or listening to their telephone conversations without obtaining a warrant from a special court created for this purpose. The court has approved tens of thousands of warrants over the years and rejected a handful.

    As amended after 9/11, the law says the government needs probable cause, the constitutional gold standard, to believe the subject of the surveillance works for a foreign power or a terrorist group, or is a lone-wolf terrorist. The attorney general can authorize electronic snooping on his own for 72 hours and seek a warrant later. But that was not good enough for Mr. Bush, who lowered the standard for spying on Americans from “probable cause” to “reasonable belief” and then cast aside the bedrock democratic principle of judicial review.

    Just trust us. Mr. Bush made himself the judge of the proper balance between national security and Americans’ rights, between the law and presidential power. He wants Americans to accept, on faith, that he is doing it right. But even if the United States had a government based on the good character of elected officials rather than law, Mr. Bush would not have earned that kind of trust. The domestic spying program is part of a well-established pattern: when Mr. Bush doesn’t like the rules, he just changes them, as he has done for the detention and treatment of prisoners and has threatened to do in other areas, like the confirmation of his judicial nominees. He has consistently shown a lack of regard for privacy, civil liberties and judicial due process in claiming his sweeping powers. The founders of our country created the system of checks and balances to avert just this sort of imperial arrogance.

    The rules needed to be changed. In 2002, a Republican senator — Mike DeWine of Ohio — introduced a bill that would have done just that, by lowering the standard for issuing a warrant from probable cause to “reasonable suspicion” for a “non-United States person.” But the Justice Department opposed it, saying the change raised “both significant legal and practical issues” and may have been unconstitutional. Now, the president and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales are telling Americans that reasonable suspicion is a perfectly fine standard for spying on Americans as well as non-Americans — and they are the sole judges of what is reasonable.

    So why oppose the DeWine bill? Perhaps because Mr. Bush had already secretly lowered the standard of proof — and dispensed with judges and warrants — for Americans and non-Americans alike, and did not want anyone to know.

    War changes everything. Mr. Bush says Congress gave him the authority to do anything he wanted when it authorized the invasion of Afghanistan. There is simply nothing in the record to support this ridiculous argument.

    The administration also says that the vote was the start of a war against terrorism and that the spying operation is what Mr. Cheney calls a “wartime measure.” That just doesn’t hold up. The Constitution does suggest expanded presidential powers in a time of war. But the men who wrote it had in mind wars with a beginning and an end. The war Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney keep trying to sell to Americans goes on forever and excuses everything.

    Other presidents did it. Mr. Gonzales, who had the incredible bad taste to begin his defense of the spying operation by talking of those who plunged to their deaths from the flaming twin towers, claimed historic precedent for a president to authorize warrantless surveillance. He mentioned George Washington, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. These precedents have no bearing on the current situation, and Mr. Gonzales’s timeline conveniently ended with F.D.R., rather than including Richard Nixon, whose surveillance of antiwar groups and other political opponents inspired FISA in the first place. Like Mr. Nixon, Mr. Bush is waging an unpopular war, and his administration has abused its powers against antiwar groups and even those that are just anti-Republican.



    The Senate Judiciary Committee is about to start hearings on the domestic spying. Congress has failed, tragically, on several occasions in the last five years to rein in Mr. Bush and restore the checks and balances that are the genius of American constitutional democracy. It is critical that it not betray the public once again on this score.

    Copyright 2006The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map Back to Top



     







    Seinfeld It Ain’t




    Keith Bedford for The New York Times

    Bobby Tisdale and Vadim Newquist during a show at Rififi


     



    Keith Bedford for The New York Times
    Livia Scott gives a dramatic reading of fan letters to O.J. Simpson.


    January 29, 2006
    Seinfeld It Ain’t
    By WARREN ST. JOHN

    IT was about halfway through a comedy show at the East Village bar Rififi when an image of Hitler appeared on a screen in front of the audience, 50 or so young people packed in a small back room on a recent Thursday night.

    “He was the most evil dictator the world had ever seen,” a narrator declared in the melodramatic tone of a movie trailer voice-over. A picture of Andrew Dice Clay flashed on the screen. “He was the most offensive comedian the world had ever seen,” the narrator said.

    Image of Hitler: “He performed crimes against humanity that until then the world had deemed unfathomable.” Image of Mr. Clay: “He told dirty nursery rhymes that shocked a nation.”

    “Hitler; Dice,” the narrator continued as the two images morphed. “The two most important people of the 20th century are about to combine as one. This summer Andrew Dice Clay is — Adolph Dice Hitler Clay!”

    At that point Brett Gelman, a 29-year-old comedian from Brooklyn, bounded onto the stage wearing a studded black leather vest and pompadour, as favored by Mr. Clay, and a Hitler moustache. He regaled his audience with a monologue that combined the thoughts of Hitler with the tough-guy, streets-of-Brooklyn accent of Mr. Clay.

    “You know Eva’s always in my ear about how come we don’t make love no more,” Mr. Gelman said, cocking his head and puffing on a fake cigarette, Dice-style. ” ‘It’s Poland this and Paris that. Why don’t you make love to me?’ “

    “Shut up!” Mr. Gelman barked. “I’m conquerin’ Europe over here!”

    There’s a decent chance that Mr. Gelman’s over-the-top Hitler bit wouldn’t play well among the tourists at Manhattan’s traditional stand-up clubs, places like Caroline’s and Stand-Up New York, a universe where Seinfeldian observational humor still reigns and the only costumes comedians wear are jeans and T-shirts. But among the young comedy fans who frequent Rififi, Mr. Gelman’s gag was an unqualified hit, and he left the 10-foot-by-10-foot stage to a rousing ovation.

    Bars and back rooms in the East Village and Lower East Side are overflowing these days with the likes of Adolf Dice Hitler Clay: not spoofs of Nazis necessarily, but rather a wave of young and creative comics who are branching out from straight stand-up to eccentric sketch and character-based humor that owes more to “Da Ali G Show” than to George Carlin. They may not have created an entirely new form of humor, but collectively they form a cohesive and happening new comedy scene downtown, one with an urbane sensibility and a vibe that is different from the established stand-up joints. The rooms are small. Shows are cheap, or free. And there is almost never a two-drink minimum.

    “It’s a really prolific time right now,” said Jim Kozloff, the director of talent and creative development at VH1, which has employed a number of comics Mr. Kozloff scouted on the downtown scene. “All of a sudden there’s this great new crop of funny, articulate, smart, quick comedic talent that’s coming to the forefront downtown.”

    In an effort to get a bead on the new scene — participants call it downtown comedy or alternative comedy or, if they’re feeling especially wordy, downtown alternative comedy — I embarked on a seven-day downtown comedy binge last week, timed to include Jan. 24, a day a British researcher recently deemed the most depressing of the year, because of the convergence of holiday bills, dim sunlight and broken New Year’s resolutions.

    All told, the binge involved eight shows and cost a whopping $18, not including beer and taxis, and the laughs were nonstop, thanks to a menagerie of bizarre characters invented for the stage.

    At a Thursday night gig called simply “Thursday” at Rififi, the youthful comedian Nick Kroll played a hypochondriac 55-year-old Upper West Side widower, nursing a martini garnished with a Vienna sausage, which he called a “sausage on the beach.” At a free weekly variety show, “The Giant Tuesday Night of Amazing Inventions,” Andrés du Bouchet M.C.’d in the character of Francisco Guglioni — six-time entertainer of the year from the little-known nation of Boliviguay — and wielded an invention he called the Recordilator, which looked suspiciously like a calculator affixed to foam pool noodle.

    There was a satire of a Christian music duo, a Nascar-loving septic tank cleaner from North Carolina named Louis Harken who had come to New York to pursue his dream of becoming a slam poet, and a character named Stanley Hope, an inspirational speaker whose claim to fame was surviving 22 suicide attempts, including a leap in front of a subway train — at the Transit Museum.

    “You’re paying five bucks,” Mr. Kroll said after his show. “We can take some chances.”

    For comedians, the emergence of the alternative scene has brought a welcome surprise: packed houses. Mr. du Bouchet, 34, who works as a secretary at a bank in the daytime and who creates his weekly show in e-mail exchanges with his fellow cast members, said he used to play to five people. Last Tuesday it was standing room only.

    “I’ve been doing comedy in New York for eight years, and I’ve never seen the scene as popular as it is now,” he said.

    It’s unclear whether downtown comedy is thriving as a result of logistical and economic changes in the local comedy scene, or some broader cultural need these days for laughs. The presence and growth in the city of the Comedy Central and VH1 cable channels have given comedy writers a way to support themselves without hitting the road full time, and many regulars on the circuit write for “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” on Comedy Central and for the David Letterman and Conan O’Brien shows on the networks.

    But Mr. Gelman, who plays the Dice-Hitler character, said he thought there was a parallel between the political situation today and the post-Vietnam years that produced the often absurd character-based humor of John Belushi and Steve Martin.

    “The world is pretty messed up,” Mr. Gelman said. “People are pretty frustrated and they like to see people letting out their frustrations in an unbridled way. As far as making people feel less depressed, that in and of itself is a political act.”

    Any attempt to define the term alternative comedy was doomed, Mr. du Bouchet said before his Tuesday night show, but he gave it a shot anyway.

    “Alternative is a catchall phrase for ‘not stand-up,’ ” he said.

    Aziz Ansari, 22 and an up-and-coming comic on the scene, elaborated. “The alternative rooms give you an outlet to explore something other than straight stand-up,” he said. “You can do characters. I can bring a girl on stage that I got rejected by and interview her, or do a PowerPoint presentation or show a short film. The nature of the venues allows you to experiment.”

    The original inspiration for the downtown scene is the Upright Citizens Brigade, the Chelsea improv theater that for the last 10 years has churned out and educated legions of improvisational comics, along with several “Saturday Night Live” cast members including Amy Poehler and Rachel Dratch.

    For years, though, there were few other places for these comics to perform. Then in 2002 two aspiring comedians, Bobby Tisdale and Eugene Mirman, decided to start “Invite Them Up,” a show they named after their habit of having parties on the rooftop of their Ludlow Street apartment building. The idea, said Mr. Tisdale — an exuberant 35-year-old from small-town North Carolina who speaks with a twang— was to have an intimate comedy show more akin to an improv night at the Upright Citizens Brigade than a traditional stand-up club.

    “Our goal was to have a show where you could be very experimental and where the audience knew what was going on and accepted it,” Mr. Tisdale said, adding that there was but one requirement: do something new each week.

    The show gradually built an audience, and spawned similar gigs. Sometime in 2004, Mr. Tisdale said, he noticed that small shows were popping up all over the place: a Friday night show called “Hot Tub” at the People’s Improv Theater in Chelsea; various shows at Mo Pitkin’s, including an all-women’s comedy show called “Chicks & Giggles”; Mr. Ansari is the host of a regular Monday show at the Upright Citizens Brigade called “Crash Test”; Mr. Kroll, in addition to “Thursday,” serves as host of the monthly variety show “Bar Mitzvah Disco.”

    Because the shows are mostly free and comedy zealots can afford to traipse from show to show, audiences can bond with the characters they are seeing regularly, adding an intimacy that is hard to come by in the constant churn of stand-up clubs.

    The downtown scene now even has its own Boswell, in the form of a blog, www.theApiary.org, which tracks shows, comedians and comedy-world gossip.

    In the week of nightly shows I encountered only one comic twice. Only a couple bombed, but the crowds were so forgiving, it hardly mattered; there are apparently no hecklers on the alternative comedy circuit. That doesn’t stop the comedians from occasionally making fun of the crowd.

    At Mr. du Bouchet’s show, a character known as the Downtown Hipster Vampire Alternative Comic appeared onstage wearing expensive-looking denim, a Ramones T-shirt and a set of plastic vampire choppers. As he mumbled through intentionally lifeless jokes about MySpace.com, the Strokes and Evite etiquette — “I have E.R.A.: Evite response anxiety,” the comic intoned. “When I get an Evite, I never know if it’s cool to respond or not.” — Mr. du Bouchet declared that Hipster Vampire Comic “will suck the life out of any show.” The crowd, many in expensive denim and rocker T-shirts, went along with the gag.

    For all the eccentric character-based comedy, there were still plenty of straight-ahead laughs as well, a few of which are even fit for a family newspaper. Erin Foley, a comedian at Hot Tub, riffed on the most depressing book she’d ever seen: “Vegan Cooking for One.”

    “No meat, no eggs, no friends,” Ms. Foley said.

    At the same show Josh Comers, who has written jokes for “The Late Late Show,” told the crowd: “My roommate’s gay, but I’m not. Unless I’m short on rent.”

    At “Thursday,” Liam McEneaney explained his reasons for pursuing romance in Internet chat rooms: “I was tired of women rejecting me for the way I looked. I wanted them to reject me for who I really am.”

    And at “Invite Them Up,” Demetri Martin, who recently began doing occasional comedy segments on “The Daily Show,” gave the audience advice on how to speed-read autobiographies. “I just go to the ‘about the author’ section,” he said.

    Yuks notwithstanding, perhaps the most uplifting aspect of a weeklong midwinter comedy binge was the pleasure of seeing dozens of people so enthusiastic about their work that they were willing to practically give it away. That could change. As the crowd moseyed out of his Tuesday night variety show, Mr. du Bouchet said he could see himself selling tickets someday.

    “I bet we could charge five bucks,” he said.

    Copyright 2006The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map Back to Top

Post a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *