The Tyranny of Humorless People
I’m
going all-in on defending Yitta Halbertsam’s non-troversial piece “Purim
and the Tyranny of Ugly Girls” (or something like that), which has been
under attack by all sorts of anti-fun Reverend of Bomont– like folks who balk
at the idea of humor.
Some
background: Halberstam wrote a brilliant satire on the yeshivish shidduch “crisis” in which she casts herself
as potential monster-in-law who expects potential suitors for her son to
undergo breast enlargement before dating him (or something like that- it’s hard
to read these things on my ipod).
The
piece is brilliant from beginning (“I know I’m going to be crucified” -comparing
herself to Yoshka in The Jewish Press!) to “It is no crime for a young woman in shidduchim to enhance her appearance; in fact, it is probably an imperative… though she may not save the Jewish people from genocide”
(as in, “Who knows, maybe she can!”).
So
let’s start with idea #1 that she presents for solving the shidduch-crisis:
Speed dates with young single girls and yeshiva boys’…mothers. In this system,
instead of girls dating boys, girls date potential mothers-in law. Forget the
awkwardness of trying to make conversation about gemara and football, we’re all
girls here! Imagine the fun! Just like the “Joy Luck Club”! My only criticism
here is that Halberstam stops short and does not flush out this idea to its
full potential: Videoing it and turning it into a reality show. (Possible
titles: “How I Met Your Mother?” “The
Mother in Law-ette?” “The Shvigger Factor?”)
She
then moves on to Idea #2 for solving the shidduch crisis: Girls should wear
more makeup. Ok, no big chiddush here. But Halberstam takes the proverbial
safflower and makes rouge, by completely putting concealer on the story of
Megillas Esther. In her character’s reading,
the heroine of the story is not Esther who, offered all the latest in Persian
beauty treatments “asked for nothing” (Esther 2:15), rather the floozies in the
harem who underwent a beauty treatment of “six months with oil of myrrh, and
six months with sweet perfumes, and with other ointments for women (Esther
2:12),” as Halberstam’s character asks “The women of the kingdom who
vied for the Queen’s throne were given twelve months to prepare for the beauty
pageant – why hadn’t some of the girls at the shidduch event taken a mere half hour?” (I believe there is now a
fifteenth unanswerable question).
Here Halberstam brings her
master stroke. No, not name-checking Georgie of Heide and Mendi fame. Rather
coming up with the best faux- holocaust story ever. This story, which satirizes
this overused genre by telling a story in which a toothless girl who saved the
Rebbe’s life is rewarded with a pair of dentures and lives happilyeverafter
would be brilliant enough even if Halberstam herself did not literally write
the book on feel-good holocaust stories. Not since Eddie Murphy in “Bowfinger”
did an artist mock themselves so ruthlessly in their own work.
After all this, Idea #3,
that parents take out loans to “invest” in a “panoply of cosmetic and surgical
procedures “
may be the tamest idea put out there. At least it feels a bit worn on the heels
of the recent Groggers
scandal. But people with no sense of humor have no sense of humor, and have
been wringing their ringless hands over this cuts-too-close-to-the-bone suggestion.
A message to all you
puritanical prigs: Satire is best done subtlety. Being able to pen a piece in
which the reader is not sure if the author is at all serious or not is what separates
mediocre writers from great ones.
Agreed. Your last paragraph is quite poignant.
ReplyDelete