We now move onto a slightly different genre of comedy sketches with this recent sketch by the comedian Tom Walker who has created a fictional character Jonathan Pie. Walker created his character by imagining what professional journalists might really think of the stories they are reporting on the TV, especially when they relate to the crazy goings on of our elected officials.

Most of his skits follow a format whereby Jonathan begins as if he is concluding his news report and then as he says the final line of his report "Jonathan Pie reporting from London" or something like this, he then goes into a massive comical rant about what he really thinks of the subject matter he has just reported on.

This sketch is a slight departure from his standard formula as here he imagines his character Jonathan, has been asked by the New York times to give a rundown for an American audience of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson's character and behaviour. One of the distinct aspect of Pie's humour is that his rants often have an almost prophetic tone to them whereby the hearer is often left with a strong desire to say Amen as one feels his anger at the corruption that currently plagues the UK ruling class.

A common joke that does the round at medical school is: "What's the difference between God and a medical student?" Answer: "God doesn't think he is a medical student!". In many ways, this sketch reminds me of this joke although here Harry and Paul are capturing godlike properties of consultants along with their strange educated upper middle class foibles which is only really found inside the English class system.

So staying with the two Ronnies for another week this sketch seems strangely appropriate given death is on everyone's mind given the sad passing of the Queen. This sketch also has quite a dark tinge to it now given the dreadful reality of one of Britain's most infamous mass murderers Harold Shipman. It is ironic to think when this sketch was made, he had probably already started murdering the many victims. As I said in my introduction to this collection, we live in a dark world where comedy gives us a powerful respite from the reality of our present existence.

This particular Youtube clip is not embedable so you can only watch it directly on Youtube by clicking here

So it has been a tumultuous week in British politics which has resulted in comedy sketches being released left, right and centre as the politician make a fool of themselves giving the comedians plenty of material that is often a little hard to parody. Nerine Skinner has been parodying Liz Truss now for some months so of course she was always going to release a spoof of Liz's final speech as PM which of course was full of all the grace and humility you might expect from such a high calibre leader.

In the spirit of Private Eye's "Separated from birth" section below I have placed Liz's final speech under Liv's final speech. You the reader will have to work out which is which.

Liz Truss Leaving Speech 25^th of October 2022

Liv Struss Leaving Speech 25^th of October 2022

Diane Morgan plays a famous character in the UK comedy scene called Philomena Cunk. While searching for funny comedy sketches for this section of my website, I came across this Youtube video of her working her craft as a stand up comedian. One of the interesting things about stand up comedy, is that comedians definitely inject their own unique characters into their routines. It is clear from Cunk and Morgan's routine in this little clip that she would be a person with an incredibly dry wit which completely permeates her whole character.

In fact, to give you a feel of Diane in a real life situation, I have also included this interview of her with her director Charlie Brooker. It is clear from some of the statements that Charlie makes, that he really doesn't have the first idea of what makes Diane tick. Sixteen minutes into this video Brooker says "Philomena is sort of on some unknowable level like or horse or something...It's hard to know what her inner life is or is that just me" To which Diane replies: I wouldn't say it was an absence of character"

Time for some more Blackadder. The last time I cited Blackadder on this website was all the way back in June when the days were warm and long. That particular set of sketches was taken from the final series of Blackadder which was set in World War I. This Blackadder is set around the time of George the 3^rd and this historical context created lots of opportunities for the very clever comedy writers of Blackadder to create a series of master sketches. These wonderful sketches have brought many people much joy over many years and have raised the spirits of those who are feeling the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune".

One of my favourite shows on TV in the 80s was Alas Smith and Jones. Thankfully I also had the pleasure of seeing them in concert when they toured Australia. This sketch goes all the way back to when the Channel Tunnel was under construction and is a classic dig at two particular weaknesses in English culture: 1) poor upper management and 2) terrible workmanship. Sadly if you spend any time living in the UK you will experience both. While there are great trades people in the UK they are sadly not in the majority. Rather a sizeable number are absolute cowboys who do terrible work if they ever complete it in the first place.

Likewise the standard of British management in my experience can also be pretty poor. I have now worked in universities and for both small and large companies and for some mysterious reason the more dysfunctional and incompetent a person is the more likely it seems that they will end up rising to a very senior position. I guess this phenomenon is so common that academics have even tried to give it a name. The Peter Principle was first proposed in 1969 in a semi-satirical book by Laurence Peter and Raymond Hull and was actually based on Peter's research into the operations of hierarchical organizations. Yet I think the modified version of this principle, first proposed by the author of the Dilbert cartoons (Scott Adams) is even closer to the truth. The Peter principle states that individuals in an organisation are promoted to the point where they reach a level of incompetence that prevents them from being promoted further while the Dilbert principle goes one step further stating that individuals are promoted because of their incompetence.