Monty Python

RUNNING HEAD: Monty Python Worldview

The Monty Python Worldview

Brian Berry

Dr. Seth Crowell

ID4903

Senior Seminar

April 22, 2011

 1

The Monty Python Worldview

Proposal

Monty Python was a group of six comedians, five Englishmen and one American

who took the world of comedy and television by storm between the years 1969-1974

with the release of their ground breaking television series “Monty Python’s Flying

Circus.” The idea for the series was created by Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry

Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin. “Monty Python’s Flying Circus”

treated audiences to the funny, unpredictable, and innovative antics of the six “Pythons.”

This was an affectionate nick name given to the group by executives at the British

Broadcasting Corporation (Hammill, 2005). The several short sketches one views during

the running of a thirty minute episode can vary in theme and message. The majority of

Monty Python sketches would appear to poke fun at certain aspects of life in general.

Some examples of everyday life satire which are examined by the Monty Python crew in

their sketches are the way business is conducted in the work place, amongst other

individuals as well as how the military operates. The pythons also portray the methods

surrounding a typical romance in Britain at that time. They also discuss the intricate

ways people use when attempting to get along with individuals, such as scam artists

and seemingly over worked, or frustrated individuals that a person could run into on any

given day.

This paper will examine the history of this comedy series, at the same time it will

endeavour to explain the progression which the group used in order to become familiar

to the average British television viewing audience, to the point where they would
 2

establish a form of dominance in the television comedy era of their time. This paper will

discuss the influence that the six members were able to have over their viewing

audience due to their satirical view of life in general. The question that this paper will

set out to provide evidence for is whether Monty Python was just making fun of a

plethora of different everyday life situations for the sake of comedy and giving their

viewers a good time? Or is it possible that the famed group of six is attempting to cause

the average person to think differently and more objectively of the world around them?

Literature Review

In order to accomplish the goal of providing evidence for the thesis statement this

paper will endeavour to stand on the shoulders of experts who have studied various

historical, psychological, and theological aspects of the Monty Python crew. A sampling

of these experts will be featured in the upcoming paragraphs of the literature review

section. This paper will also examine certain authors who have analyzed the history of

satire, comedy, and that of British television in general in order to more fully understand

the situation on which Monty Python would put their own spin.

Denby offers some insight into the sometimes controversial influence of Monty

Python on younger generations. Some older individuals were worried that Monty

Python films like “Life of Brian” would influence younger generations to reject

Christianity, as the film does parody certain biblical scenes for the sake of comedy.

Denby also exposes the other side of the argument that the Pythons never wanted to

make a mockery of Christianity itself (Denby, 1979). Denby does not state whether
 3

Monty Python actually cared that Life of Brian was receiving controversial reviews.

Nevertheless, this article is a good example of a worldview conflict over a

misinterpretation of a sketch and shows how Monty Python was able to influence their

new American audience, whether it was positive or negative (Denby, 1979).

Hammill discusses Monty Python’s rise to prominence, going into detail about

what the famed six pythons had been doing prior to the Monty Python Era. Hammill’s

article provides insight into the comedic influences. Hammill reveals that several

programs which ran in the 1950s would serve as the influence for Monty Python.

(Hammill, 2005) Hammill then discloses several ways in which Monty Python steered

themselves away from the conventional norm and became “something completely

different.” Due to the originality of the group, they were able to gain much viewing

support and expand their influence across the Atlantic Ocean toward North America

(Hammill, 2005).

Landy is another individual who discusses the role of Monty Python in the

entertainment world. Her book Monty Python’s Flying Circus has provided a wealth of

information as to the influential possibilities of the Pythons themselves, as in their

sketches they would tend to push the envelope in one way or another when it comes to

how a person could perceive life situations in a different manner. According to Landy,

the Pythons also pushed the limits of television censorship for that time. The Pythons

believed that certain aspects of censorship of that time would inhibit the execution of

certain points they were trying to make. The British Broadcasting Company was not

pleased with their liberal vocabulary and keen use of innuendo at first and would often

censor portions of the episodes. This would encourage the Pythons to push the
 4

envelope all the more in order to expose various ideas they would propagate toward

their viewing audience (Landy, 2005, p. 1). Landy states that their sketches would have

the ability to convince someone to think differently about how they understood many

aspects of life. According to Landy, this was a major aspect of what the Pythons set out

to do with their comedic routines. Landy also delves into the implications of their

interesting outlook on life and how the general public reacted to it (Landy, 2005).

Hardcastle and Reisch go to great lengths to discuss the philosophy that exists

behind the laughter and sketches of the Monty Python troop. According to these

authors, Britain as a nation was the king of philosophy at the time (Hardcastle & Reisch

2006) and Monty Python coincidently was five parts British and only one part American.

Therefore, due to this unique arrangement Hardcastle and Reisch believe that Monty

Python as an act would be able to combine influences from both the general American

and European worldviews and be able to come up with a wider base of philosophical

questions to bring up for the average person to think about. Throughout their weekly

instalments the group would soon wrestle with the same questions everyone else

wrestles with in life. Such questions include: What is the meaning of life? Does God

really exist? When older women ramble on, what are they really saying about

themselves? Many Python sketches revolve around the supposed mundane routine of

everyday life. Hardcastle and Reisch discuss the Monty Python view on Nihilism, which

is the belief that life is a mundane routine leading to nothing in particular. The Monty

Python view on such things as the relevance of the Monarchy is then discussed, the

subsequent opinion which to a British person could be very important to his worldview.

They also delve into the Monty Python view on Humanism. Hardcastle and Reisch also
 5

discuss aspects of society, the need for a leader to dominate over the common people.

Are heroes necessary for society to survive? It is philosophical questions like these that

underlie many Monty Python sketches, and the way the Pythons go about answering

those gives a person a deeper view into the worldview of the Pythons (Hardcastle &

Reisch, 2006).

Skynner and Cleese offer two books which will be helpful in backing up certain

aspects of the thesis question of this paper. In Families and How to Survive Them,

Skynner and Cleese, discuss their ideas about many everyday issues that occur in

families, discussing how an individual of a Western worldview can go about handling the

“challenges” of getting along with his spouse and children, and everyday stress and

emotion management, and what to expect when children become part of the picture.

Cleese and Skynner also discuss the authority needs of the husband and wife in certain

situations in life and how that can change over time, depending on the circumstances.

In their book Life and How to Survive It, Skynner and Cleese use a similar

interview style pattern as in the previous book. However, this time the focus is to delve

into their ideas about life in general. The duo exposes the reader to their thoughts on

understanding people. Skynner and Cleese attempt to come up with an idea of what

constitutes a normal human being according to a Western worldview. They then

expand this view to incorporate the “mysterious” idea of how socialization occurs

amongst individuals, how individuals become friends or lovers. How individuals act in

families is once again discussed, as well as the idea of which individual in the married

couple has authority over certain aspects of family life. As the world changes, people
 6

are forced to adapt in order to keep up. Cleese looks at how individuals cope with that

from his own worldview.

Miller`s book Something Completely Different (1994) is helpful as it explains

how Monty Python comedy was different from anything that had come before it,

informing the reader of historical facts about Monty Python’s massive influence on

audiences around the world. The collective view of the Pythons as far as what was

alright to illustrate on comedy shows might have offended some viewers in the early

days of that television show, while others would flock to it. Miller`s book, Something

Completely Different shows how Monty Python brought just that to the comedy scene,

all the while influencing a generation, and generations after it with their comedic way of

looking at life. Many other sitcoms after the era of Monty Python would often form their

scripts by looking at situations in everyday life and satirizing them. Miller strives to point

out that Monty Python was a pioneer of this particular genre of comedy.

Slide`s book Some Joe You Don’t Know: An American Guide to 100 British

Television Personalities (1996) gives background information on the uprising of Monty

Python’s comedic antics and their success, and influence on their television viewing

audience. He also puts the Pythons into perspective as to what other similar comedy

and television shows there would have been available to watch.

On the more general topic of satire and how it developed as a genre, Griffin is

helpful as he discusses in detail the maturation path which satire took as it grew and

improved through different stages of development and time periods such as Classical,

Elizabethan, Renaissance, and the modern time period. Other authors who also

happen to focus on the topic of the genesis and development of satire as a comedic
 7

genre are Neale and Krutnik and their book Popular Film and Television Comedy

(1990). These are just a few of the several sources that will serve to inform the thesis

and body of the paper.

Methodology

The primary “subjects for study” were the actual sketches preformed by the

Pythons and captured on a fourteen volume D.V.D. set known as Monty Python’s Flying

Circus recorded between the years of 1969-1974. Also, biographical information that

was found on the six pythons was helpful as it would provide the potential of genuine

insights into their understanding of life based on their experience with it. This paper did

indeed rely heavily on the works of other authors and researchers who have

investigated various aspects of the Pythons’ work and legacy. A sample of such authors

and their works has been provided in the literature review.

This paper used a three pronged approach to accomplish the goal of the thesis

statement. First a historical approach was used to analyze the history of the comedy

scene which the pythons would eventually delve into and make their own. To

accomplish this, various secondary sources were used in order to analyze the history of

the development satire and comedy as well as the history of television in an effort to

give the reader a more complete understanding of the situation in which the Monty

Python crew would find themselves on one fateful day in 1969. Raw data from the series

Monty Python’s Flying Circus which displays all sketches and comedy routines

originally created by, Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry

Jones, and Michael Palin. It will serve as an excellent primary source for this

endeavour. The information gained from viewing this series will become valuable in
 8

backing up the thesis statement. After going through the fourteen volumes of the Monty

Python’s Flying Circus series a person is able to gain a great deal of understanding into

the way that the Pythons saw the world and society. Through the analysis of some of

the raw sketches along with analysis from expert sources

The second discipline which this paper features is a psychological approach. This

means it examines the psychological effects and issues which certain life situations may

provide. Monty Python would bring such issues into the light for their viewers, what with

the group’s different way of thinking about everyday situations. Close analysis of

various sketches and biological information on the group will help to bring understanding

toward this approach. It will also shed light what the Pythons thoughts about the world

around them

The third approach which was used in this study as an examination tool was a

theological one. Using the aforementioned primary and secondary sources, this paper

describes, philosophy and theology of Monty Python, exploring the ideas the group

reflected in their work on philosophical issues and their expressed thoughts of what is

wrong in the world, how to fix it, and what they believe to be right and good in the world

as they experienced it.

After consulting the range of sources noted in this proposal the paper had

sufficient information and data needed to provide an examination into the actual

question of the paper. By analyzing these primary and secondary sources from a

historical, psychological, and theological view point, proper evidence was able to be

provided to speak to the thesis statement of the paper.

 9

Analysis

Monty Python was a comedy group of six individuals who took the British comedy

scene by storm in the years, Their major television comedy show Monty Python’s Flying

Circus (BBC Productions 1969-1974) showcases the stellar comedic abilities of Graham

Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones, Eric Idle, and Michael Palin. The

group was a new comedy sensation attempting, week after week to differentiate itself

from any comedy routine that had come before it. Monty Python’s Flying Circus

provided plenty of laughs at the end of a decade of much discovery and tension

(Hardcastle & Reisch, 2005, p. 1). Another thing that the acclaimed television series

subversively accomplished was to provide a window into the collective worldview of the

six comedians. By employing the use of a three pronged approach involving History,

Psychology, and Theology, one will be able to gain a better understanding as to whether

the Monty Python crew was just trying to make people laugh in their sketches, or if there

was some sort of deeper meaning behind the sketches which Monty Python as a group

were trying to subversively bring to the consciousness of a viewer. The first approach

that will be examined will be the historical background of Monty Python.

History

Monty Python began what would become a successful run in the television

comedy scene with the airing of their first episode on October 5, 1969 (Landy, 2005, p.

4). The ever adaptable cast of six lent their specific talents to the uniqueness of their

creation which would become known as Monty Python’s Flying Circus. This half hour

comedy sketches would run for forty five episodes over the course of five years

(Hammill, 2005). As to how the creators of what would become Monty Python’s Flying
 10

Circus, that story is quite interesting. The group had a brain storming session and was

playing around with a number of suggestions as to what to name this new comedic

concept. They came up with the idea of a Flying Circus which fit the show’s rather

random plot line perfectly. One would never know what to expect next. They then

realized that this proposed circus would need a hypothetical owner in order to be

legitimate. They came up with the name Monty Python because to them it sounded

seedy, which would make it perfect for their edgy and sometimes controversial comedy

(Parker & O’Shea, 2006, p. 20).

For any circus to run properly it must have a stellar cast of performers.

Throughout the following paragraphs one will get to know some biographical information

on the six members who make up the cast of Monty Python’s Flying Circus.

Leading off the line up is John Cleese. This sensible, lawyer type personality,

was born on October 27, 1939 in Weston Super-Mare, England. Cleese originally

studied law at Downing College. (Milligan S., et al, n.d.). After Downing College, Cleese

would head to Cambridge University. While at Cambridge Cleese attempted to join the

Footlights comedy group, unfortunately he was rebuked. After that Cleese would work

on writing comedy sketches (Milligan et al, n.d.). Upon completing his studies at

Cambridge, Cleese eventually secured a job at the British Broadcasting Corporation

writing for several pilots, along with fellow future Python Graham Chapman. It was

through that connection that Cleese would become acquainted and would perform with

the other members of Monty Python’s Flying Circus. (Milligan et al, n.d.)

Eric Idle serves as the musical conscience of the group. Idle was born in

Durham, England on March 29, 1943. (Milligan et al, N.D.). Idle studied English at
 11

Penbroke College which no doubt contributed to his eloquence in his later performances

in Monty Python. Idle would graduate and then tour with various traveling acting groups

performing shows with such provocative titles as My Girl Herbert, and Oh! What A

Lovely War (Milligan, et al, n.d.). Idle became famous for his spontaneous humour, it

was during this time that he would write the manuscript for what would soon become the

famous Monty Python sketch “Nudge Nudge” where-in the Pythons explore the power of

innuendo and what it can do to a social situation between friends in conversation (Monty

Python DVD Series 1969-1974). Eric Idle would bring unique acting and writing talent to

the Python team. Interestingly enough, Idle is also cited as the composer of the song

which ushers in the closing credits to Monty Python’s controversial film, Life of Brian

(Life of Brian, 1979).

Terry Jones, the comedian who ended up being a director, was born in Colwyn

Bay, Wales on February 1, 1943 (Milligan et al, n.d.). Jones became interested in

comedy while at school, as was the same with many of the other Pythons. Jones

studied at the famed Oxford University, just outside of London. Jones had design

talent which he discovered while at Oxford as he was involved in editing the local

magazine known as Isis (Milligan, et al, n.d.). Jones was also involved in the creation

of several scripts which would eventually turn into plays to be performed at the Oxford

playhouse. After graduating from Oxford, Jones was employed by Angela Television as

a copywriter. After this he would move onto the British Broadcasting Corporation and

work as a writer and script editor for various pilots and programs. Jones then moved on

to begin a career as a production assistant. Terry Jones would soon meet up with future

Monty Python co-star Michael Palin and the two of them would combine to write for
 12

various shows such as The Late Show (Milligan, et al, n.d.). After this the Jones and

Palin tag team were then invited to contribute to the hit series Do Not Adjust Your Set.

This involved collaborations with Eric Idle and Terry Gilliam. The foursome would

eventually be introduced to John Cleese while writing for the British Broadcasting

Corporation’s production known as Marty. The combined talents were noticed by

producer Barry Took who was pleased with how well the five future pythons worked

together. Took then approached them about writing and performing in their own show

which would be fielded by the British Broadcasting Corporation. With the addition of

Graham Chapman in 1969 Monty Python’s Flying Circus was born. When the time

came for the Monty Python crew to make their major feature film Life of Brian, which will

be discussed later on in this paper, Jones conveniently served as director (Milligan et al,

n.d.)

Michael Palin is famously known for being “the it man.” He received that title due

to the fact that at the beginning of every episode of Monty Python’s Flying Circus the

viewer would find Palin in some sort of perilous situation such as crossing a busy

highway, or tumbling down a steep cliff, upon reaching the end of his ordeal he would

triumphantly yell that famous contraction “it’s!…” This was immediately followed by the

mentioning of the name of the show and the opening credits ( Monty Python’s Flying

Circus DVD Series).

Palin was born on May 5, 1943 in Sheffield, England. Palin had what would later

appear to be an extremely “Pythonesque” upbringing. Palin’s upbringing was

Pythonesqe in the way that Palin’s mother was the daughter of the High Sherriff of

Nottingham, as for Palin’s father, he was the manager of a toilet paper manufacturing
 13

plant. These are not typical occupations that one would see hitting it off well in a

marriage situation, it is almost as if these two were of two completely different classes,

one from the aristocracy, and another from the peasantry. Despite how humble these

beginnings sound, things worked out just fine for the Palin family in that respect

(Milligan, et al, n.d.).

Michael Palin would begin his academic career at Birkdale Prepatory School

where Palin would explore his interest in entertainment and comedy. Palin would further

his skills in this area at Shrewsbury Public School. It was at that very institution where

Palin would stumble across a radio show known as The Goons which had a profound

influence on Palin’s comedic style (Milligan, et al, n.d.). Palin wound eventually wind up

at Oxford University, where he would begin writing and performing scripts with various

classmates. His talent would eventually be borrowed by rival school Cambridge, for

their comedy series The Cambridge Footlights. This is where Palin would become

acquainted with John Cleese and Graham Chapman. Palin would get to know Eric Idle

during a performance for the Oxford Revue. Palin would graduate from Oxford with a

degree in Modern History. This would further widen the scope and variety in later Monty

Python sketches (Milligan, et al, n.d.). Palin, Jones, and Idle were then employed as

writers for the television series Do Not Adjust Your Set. After that Palin would join the

cast of what would become Monty Python’s Flying Circus.

Terry Gilliam had to travel the greatest of distances, more than any of the other

five, to be associated with the Pythons. Gilliam was born in Medicine Lake, Minnesota,

in the United States of America on November 2, 1940 (Milligan, et al, n.d.). Gilliam

attended Occidental College in California where he majored in Political Science. While

 14

at Occidental, Gilliam applied writing talent to the official college magazine that was

known as Fang. After graduating, Gilliam would spend time working for an advertising

company, after that he would work as an editor for the magazine Help! Gilliam also

involved himself in the National Guard as he was being drafted to help serve in the

Vietnam War. It was during this time that he would work on his art skills of all things.

Gilliam spent much time drawing images of various officers with whom he was training

with (Milligan, et al, n.d.). This would in turn serve him well as during many episodes of

Monty Python’s Flying Circus there were animated sketches, all of which were drawn by

Terry Gilliam. The animation method was cheap and easy to accommodate on the fly.

Most of his comedic animations would have involved cut-outs of figures with noises and

voices also provided by Gilliam. During the writing and filming of sketches for Monty

Python’s Flying Circus, Gilliam would often be paired up with Michael Palin and Terry

Jones as they would provide a good contrast to the mostly Cambridge based gang of

John Cleese, Eric Idle, and Graham Chapman. Yes, the College rivalry between Oxford

and Cambridge was alive and well at that point in time (Milligan, et al n.d.). Another

interesting, unique trait that Gilliam brought to the figurative table was that he had grown

up in the United States. According to several authors, the difference in nationality on

the part of Gilliam would broaden the Monty Python footprint as he would be able to

bring the American point of view to the Monty Python sketches and thus help appeal to a

broader audience (Milligan et al, n.d.).

Graham Chapman, the eccentric personality of the famed group of six, was born

on January 8, 1941 (Milligan, et al, n.d.) in Leicester, England. During his childhood his

family moved around quite a bit as Graham’s father was a policeman and occasionally
 15

needed to be transferred from one police station to another from time to time. During

the moves Chapman would have been able to experience various parts of England

which would serve to help him in his comedic endeavours as he would gain an

understanding of people from various parts of the country. Chapman initially went to

Emanuel College in 1959 to study medicine. However, he enjoyed a healthy dose of

comedy and acting on the side. Graham Chapman would meet up with eventual Monty

Python co star, John Cleese in 1962 when they both preformed for the sketch comedy

Double Take. Chapman, realizing that acting was much more interesting to him than

medicine would choose to pursue that route. Chapman and Cleese would write for

several other comedy series prior to Monty Python’s Flying Circus. However, it would

be that series where Graham Chapman would find the most success (Milligan, et al,

n.d.) Chapman would bring his energetic, edgy humour to the group. Chapman was

extremely flamboyant and risqué compared to the rest of the Monty Python Crew

(Milligan, et al, n.d.). However, it would serve to help Chapman stand out amongst the

other five pythons as he had no fear of playing overly exuberant, flamboyant roles,

bringing a different edge to the sketches in which he was involved (Monty Python’s

Flying Circus, 1969-1974).

Monty Python began its run on October 5, 1969. Their form of comedy was

deeply satirical to the point where they would stretch satirical conventions to the

extreme limit. To give an example of how far they would go, in some sketches requiring

elderly women, the parts of the women would be played by the pythons themselves,

complete with convincing costume. Even cross-dressing, and performing out of gender

was not out of reach for them (Landy, 2005, pp. 70-79). It should be mentioned that in
 16

sketches requiring young women, such as “The Marriage Councillor,” those roles would

be filled by Monty Python guest star Carol Cleveland (Monty Python’s Flying Circus,

1969-1974). Their desire for the absolute funny moment, no matter what the cost would

occasionally bend the rules of conventional satire, thus bringing the entire genre to a

new level of greatness (Hammill, 2005). Such satirical conventions will be discussed

later. Monty Python’s Flying Circus showed up at a pivotal time in history. The 1960s

was a decade of turmoil, filled with student protests, wars and rumours of wars. The

decade was also filled with triumph. An example of this would be the first landing of the

moon with Neil Armstrong. In music it was the uprising of the sensitive singer-

songwriter. It was an age of opportunity and ingenuity. It was a decade of trying many

new things in many different aspects of life. Monty Python’s Flying Circus would do the

same for the comedy genre, providing something new and innovative for comedy

television viewers (Hardcastle & Reisch, 2005, p. 1).

Monty Python was unashamed to push the envelope as far as censorship was

concerned at the time. As one would find when viewing the half hour comedic

instalments, after a sketch that could be deemed offensive to the general public, one of

the Pythons pretending to be a British Broadcasting Corporation executive would come

“on the air” and voice over an apology for the offensive content. If one uses his gift of

discernment, one can quickly figure out that this apology is indeed fake. After the

apology is given, the “announcer” will often provide a completely ridiculous address for a

person to send complaints to. Following this, fake letters from “viewers” are then read

aloud claiming the complete disgust and anger of the viewer for having to put up with

such a silly or offensive sketch (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974). The truth
 17

of the matter was that the Pythons absolutely despised censorship as they found it to be

inhibiting to their work so they would do anything to fight against the censorship of their

program (Landy, 2005, p. 1). The episode which aired that premier night is an example

of their nonchalance toward censorship.

The episode was titled “The Funniest Joke in the World.” In this episode the

group of six write an engaging storyline taking place in the time of World War II, the very

same time period where the Nazis were getting away with their gruesome acts against

humanity. At this point it had been approximately thirty years since the start of World

War II, therefore making a parody of such an event when it was still a relatively recent

occurrence could have been offensive to some. The sketch begins when a young man

writes what is apparently the funniest joke in the world, so much so that he actually dies

from it. Hearing all the noise from the laughter, a family member comes into the man’s

study to see exactly what is going on. She is shocked when she finds her relative dead

at his desk. She picks up the piece of paper and reads the joke and her fate is the same

as that of her relative who composed it in the first place. Subsequently, an inquest is

held where a policeman who supposedly has the entire case figured out. He must go

into the house and remove the joke so that it will no longer affect anyone else. The

presumptuously smart officer strategizes that if he infiltrates the house with the

accompaniment of sad music and mourners then he will be able to go in and remove the

joke. This strategy fails because the joke is just that funny.

At this point the British Army realizes the great utilitarian and military potential of

the joke itself and has it rushed under top security to a meeting held by the top generals

of the army. The joke is then translated into German. To avoid the possibility of death
 18

during the translation process, a group of translators worked on one word each in order

to avoid complete joke comprehension and the subsequent reactions of laughter and

death. After a successful translation the joke is then used to attack the German forces

in order to fend off the attempted conquest of Hitler. The joke worked excellently as far

as the British army was concerned. German military officers happen to kidnap a British

army marine in order to interrogate him and find out the joke. At first the prisoner of war

refuses to tell them the joke for their own safety, but after some time he does indeed tell

it. Finding all of his captors had died from laughing around him, the individual is now

granted his freedom. The reason that the captured soldier has not died himself is

because with the joke translated into German, it does not have the same affect on

English ears. In the end of this skit, the German army attempts to come up with a lethal

joke that will supersede the potency of the English war joke. Unfortunately for the

German Army, the best joke they could come up with was not good enough to do any

sort of damage to the British public, let alone the army (Monty Python’s Flying Circus

D.V.D. Series, Episode 1).

This type of random, unexpected, spontaneous comedy was to become the norm

for the next five years. Monty Python would continue to stretch the limits of their

comedy. Their comedy material was meant to be disconcerting to those individuals who

were expecting typical television of the day (Hammill, 2005). The disconcerting nature

of some of their sketches was the reason for all the uproar about censorship (Landy,

2005, p. 1). Another side effect of this controversy would be the fact that North America

would refuse to air any Monty Python’s Flying Circus episodes until the concluding year

of the phenomenon in 1974. The reason for the ban was that the comedy was perceived
 19

to be too progressive and edgy for the time period (Slide, 1996, p. 188). The winds of

change would eventually blow across the Atlantic as far as broadcasting standards were

concerned. With the passing of time, the show would gain success in both the United

States and Canada as it influenced many viewers in a new and exciting way which they

had never quite been exposed to before. (Miller, 1994, p. 162).

Other television shows that would have been available to watch at that time

would include Current Release which was a show about an executor of an office

enterprise and his secretary and the typical events that would occur in that sort of setting

(Holmes, 2005, 65-70). Other television specials featured on British television included

The Fall of Berlin. This television special was a documentary in style and it focused on

the understanding of historical events and how they would compare with current events

in England in that era (Holmes, 2005, p. 87). Television was seen as an eyesore for

some who still enjoyed going to the cinema due to the fact that there was not as much

variety in television as they were looking for at that time. (Holmes, 2005, p. 107)

According to Turner & Tay, a person can only watch so many documentaries and drab,

predictable soap operas. Monty Python came into this sort of television desert to

provide an oasis of unpredictability within their comedy while also attempting to allow

their viewers to think differently about the world around them rather than to be jaded by

the television trends previous to their inception. Monty Python crafted their Flying

Circus sketches especially for television. In doing so Monty Python would aid the genre

of satire and help bring it once again to the forefront as a reasonable medium of

communication with which to understand life and world events (Turner & Tay, 2009, p.

28).
 20

The next historical aspect that will be analyzed will be the history of satire and

comedy itself. In order to understand the impact that Monty Python had on the comedy

scene, a person must understand where satire and comedy originated, as well as the

ways in which both have been built upon over time up until the inception of Monty

Python. Over the years satire has occupied various forms of media depending on the

popular forms of communication at the time. In essence, satire is a comedic way of

communicating ideas to an audience. In its earliest stages of development one could

see satire in narrative poems, stage plays, novels, and short stories. With the advent of

cinema and television it would seem only natural that satire would begin to progress into

those forms of media as well (Neale & Krutnik, 1990, p. 10). Satire first became critically

regarded as a legitimate means of communication of ideas in the Renaissance period

(Griffin, 1994, p. 6).

There are several theories as to how to approach satire. The classical theory of

satire shows that the satirist, that is the one who is speaking or writing the satirical act,

must speak freely and “laugh men out of their follies” (Griffin, 1994 p. 7). However,

there is more to the classical theory of satire than just laughing at people for silly

mistakes they might make, even though that is part of it, there is more to it. It would also

include moral advice for those who are listening (Griffin, 1994, p. 8). Various acts of

stupidity, or hilarity, depending on the kind of person one was and how he looked at the

particular situation, would often be held up for ridicule by the audience. Satire in the

form of literature or being acted out on stage was used to point out folly, wrong doing, or

injustice within a certain situation. Satire was often spoken in free form on a variety of

topics (Hodgart & Connery, 2010, pp. 1-12). Often satire was used to point out certain
 21

view points of issues of the time which were unpopular as far as the majority of people

were concerned. Rarely was it used to build anyone up or encourage them at this point

in the development of satire (Carpenter, 2000, p. 42). Satire in the middle ages would

often consist of making fun of the political system of the time.

Monty Python was especially good at accomplishing the modern version of this

type of satire in particular. In one episode, during what is supposed to be a political

news broadcast the leader of the Conservative party dances around while explaining his

party’s accomplishments over the last term and why they should be re-elected. Dancing

is not typical in serious political broadcasts and debates. Nevertheless, Monty Python

does pick up on the sometimes funny and desperate efforts politicians will go through

just to get more votes and spend more time in office. (Larsen, 2003, p. 113) During the

middle ages the Clergy had a massive stake in the political system. Thus, clergy would

often appear in early satire as there were attacks on the church and its doctrine as there

was issues between the Protestants and Catholics during the time of the reformation.

Monty Python would pay homage to this satirical theme with “The Bishop” sketch in

which a certain Bishop of high authority goes around to various Catholic churches and

polices the priests on how they are to run their services in order to avoid certain

disaster. Unfortunately, the Bishop’s timing is slightly off, causing him to arrive just late

enough for his response to be heard, but nothing is able to be done to prevent certain

disaster from happening. For example, during one church service which this Bishop is

called to police, there is a wedding going on and the Bishop crashes the Church and

commands the priest not to touch the ring. Unfortunately it is too late, the priest does

not heed the Bishop’s words of warning, and the priest is then struck on the head with a
 22

16 tonne weight as punishment for touching the wedding rings (Monty Python’s Flying

Circus, 1969-1974).

Another example of this occurs in the Pythons’ “Spanish Inquisition” sketch where

three cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church would hunt down Protestants and others

who were speaking heresy against the Roman Catholic Church. Once they had hunted

down such a perpetrator, they would take this person and imprison them in a dungeon,

where they would then be subjected to torture. This is where the satire comes in,

Instead of the traditional burning at the stake, these heretics of the Roman Catholic

Church would have to sit in a comfortable chair and be tortured with feathers and

pillows, then the supposed heretic would be left in said comfortable chair in silence,

“with a cup of coffee” until he or she confessed the Roman Catholic Church to be the

one true church (Monty Python’s Flying Circus DVD Series 1969-1974). Other themes

would include the French Revolution (Hodgart & Connery, 2010, p. 42).

The second theory of Satire is that of Elizabethan Theory. In Elizabethan Theory

of satire, the main topics up for discussion were those that one could complain about in

order to inform his audience that there needed to be a change in their current behaviour

toward a certain situation that was happening at a given time. Some of these could be

considered rude or harsh for the time depending on the way that the satirist felt about

the particular issue he was talking about, and making fun of it at the same time so that

his audience would think on a new level about what they might be doing or allowing to

happen. Such issues made fun of in this time could be the practices of lawyers and

doctors (Griffin, 1994, p. 10).

 23

A third theory of satire is that of Renaissance satire. Renaissance satire involved the

concept of satirical concepts, not just single ideas as the other theories would focus on

(Griffin, 1994, p.12-13). Satire in drama or stage shows in the classical period of time

was not seen as just a string of good performances over and over again. The main

focus of satire was not on those acting it out, but primarily the audience members

making discoveries about various concepts for themselves (Hodgart & Connery, 2010,

p. 188). Some of these discoveries which would be in need of an attentive audience

member would be the verbal pun and innuendo, in which a satirist would use a word that

could mean one thing but for the purposes of the sketch, could mean something

completely different. A well trained satirist will be able to play off the verbal puns of

another and be flexible with his wording leaving many places for his satirical partner to

take the bit when it is his turn once again (Simpson, 2003, p. 21). A keen observer of

this type of satire will be able to discover meaning in such puns, thus creating an

excellent sketch for all involved. As satire began to modernize, a new conception of

expectations came about. This concept, known as the Twin Modernist Elusion guide to

steer satirists who were focusing more on the structure of their material rather than the

laughs, or vice versa, back to a point of balance between structure and humour in satire.

The outcome of this would lead to well written sketches with great moments for laughs

interspersed throughout (Hokenson, 2006, p. 171). From these classical forms of

Satire Monty Python uses many aspects of these theories in their comedic sketches.

Monty Python would commonly use these satirical methods to show their viewers

a different way of psychologically perceiving a given event in their sketches. The

 24

psychological aspect of the worldview of Monty Python will be discussed in the next

section.

Psychological Lens

In their comedic sketches, Monty Python would often use subjects that were

thought provoking in one way or another. Throughout the series Monty Python would

use topics that would happen commonly enough to any person, in order to cause people

to think about what they are doing in life. Psychological issues which Monty Python

would discuss by way of making a subtle mockery of them in their sketches were, first,

the confrontation of authority. There are two major authority figures which Monty Python

tends to make fun of for their perceived authority over the feelings of the entire human

race. In a decade of confusion and many new, exciting ventures of the early and mid

1960s people were looking for authority figures. The two groups which Monty Python

tends to satirise throughout their episodes would be news anchors, those who sit behind

desks and decide what kinds of information are deemed important enough for the public

to hear every night, and policemen. In the beginning of most every episode, the camera

would pan across some sort of nature scene, such as a meadow or beach scene. After

about thirty seconds one will notice a desk, as crazy as the idea might seem, after all no

one would set up a desk at a beach or in a meadow, (Monty Python’s Flying Circus,

1969-1974) by which a tuxedo clad John Cleese would declare “and now for something

completely different.” This famous line and scene dictated at the beginning of every

episode was a parody of the typical line used at the British Broadcasting Corporation

(Hardcastle & Reisch, 2005 p.1). This notion of the expectation of authority figures to be
 25

powerful is noted, and made fun of, very much throughout various Monty Python

sketches.

In sketches such as “The Funniest Joke In The World,” which was explained in

detail earlier in this paper, the policeman from Scotland Yard believes that he has all the

authority to go in and subdue the lethal joke, however, even with all his training,

planning and intellect, this Scotland Yard detective is no match for the most deadly of

jokes and he also, would succumb to the deadly laughter even after he had planned so

many strategies to combat it. This police officer, who seems to have good intentions

and strategy, but as much as a person might plan to avoid failure, sometimes things still

happen differently than one would have originally expected (Monty Python’s Flying

Circus D.V.D. Series).

Another frequent psychological issue that comes up at least occasionally

throughout life for anyone is that of conflict, and argument. In the famous Monty Python

Sketch “The Argument Clinic,” the pythons attempt to graphically show how irrelevant

arguing can be sometimes. In this sketch an individual comes into the reception office

of the Argument Clinic in order to purchase a round of arguments. Judging from the

laughter that ensues after the request to purchase an argument, it can be assumed that

the point which the Monty Python crew is attempting to get across to the audience is that

the act of arguing for no particular reason, much less paying for a pointless argument, is

ridiculous. The individual who paid for the argument, which would last five minutes, will

then proceed down a hallway, which is lined with offices. He accidently walks into a

clinic on verbal abuse, however, once that instructor realizes that the individual has

come to the wrong room he cordially directs the man to the next room, where the
 26

argument would commence. Quite soon into the affair the individual realizes that his

argument counsellor is merely contradicting his every “yes” with a “no,” or vice versa.

The two gentlemen switch topics quickly and begin to argue as to whether or not

contradiction constitutes as a legitimate argument. Once the five minutes has ended,

there is a discrepancy as to whether the argument actually lasted the full five minutes or

not. In the end, the two come to the realization that arguing over trivial matters such as

those listed above is truly ridiculous and a waste of good time (Monty Python’s Flying

Circus DVD Series).

The Monty Python crew is well aware from life experience that there is more to

conflict than just mere argument. Conflict is bound to come up in one’s life. John

Cleese himself, in his book Life and How to Survive it, mentions that he would be

“envious of anyone who would be able to sail through life with ease, doing everything

they enjoy without getting constantly sidetracked by some sort of personal difficulty”

(Skynner & Cleese, 1994, p. 3). This could be an underlying reason as to why Monty

Python would include many different types of conflicts, some more bizarre than others,

possibly so that anyone watching could relate to at least one issue raised in their

sketches. For example, in the “Airplane Hijack” Sketch, two confident pilots of a British

Airways jet must deal with an individual who claims that he wishes to hijack the aircraft

and take it to a destination which is contrary to the present route of the plane. After a

series of tense negotiations in the cockpit of the plane, the pilots deduce that the best

method for solving this conflict and reducing the psychological stress on the other

passengers, while also maintaining their current schedule is to throw this hijacker out of

the plane. This solution would reduce any panic, stress, homesickness, or lonlieness
 27

felt by passengers who are forced to endure the possibility of a hijacked airplane (Bor,

pp.6-8 The former hijacker lands on a bale of hay and somehow walks away unscathed.

The Pythons do not explain the physical abnormalities of this part of the sketch as it

would negate the sheer comedy of the moment. As for the plane, it kept flying as per

usual (Monty Python’s Flying Circus DVD Series).

Many Monty Python episodes would deal with the act of getting along with other

people. Monty Python sketches often cite situations where a group of people are forced

to get along with others whether they are friends, lovers, sales people, or anyone else a

person might come across on the street. For example, some Monty Python sketches

center on the mysteries of love and relationships. The main reasons for this, according

to Skynner and Cleese are the psychological envy of those who are not involved in such

great relationships, and their vision of what is perceived to happen in normal

relationships between family members, particularly those who are married (Skynner &

Cleese, 1994, p. 10). The members of Monty Python were fascinated with the way a

normal relationship worked amongst the average British couple. In one Monty Python

sketch, “The Ant, An Introduction,” a young man and woman are enjoying a quiet night

together. The young man decides to confess his love to his girlfriend. Their evening full

of bliss was about to be cut short when an intoxicated man whom the young man had

met in a bar a few days earlier appears at his door. This man had somehow managed

to find the home of the young man while he was utterly intoxicated out of his mind. The

acquaintance of the young man then has the audacity to enter the home of the young

man and cause his quiet evening with his girlfriend to come to an abrupt end. He comes

in and demands to have a drink. As inappropriate as this situation has already become,
 28

the intoxicated individual has brought along many of their friends, who also crash the

alleged party. All of the intruders now want drinks and they gather around a piano for an

impromptu sing along. The man of the house continues to deny their requests for

drinks, as he had not invited any of them over in the first place. At this point, all hope of

a romantic evening with his girlfriend has been lost due to the excessive amount of

intruders with completely random personalities. The evening reaches a climax when the

man of the house attempts to assert his right to remove the intruders from his property.

At this point, one individual becomes upset with the man’s tone of voice in particular and

proceeds with what he thinks is the logical end of the situation at hand, which would be

to shoot the owner of the home and continue the party. All this to say that if lovers are

expecting a quiet evening alone together where everything goes just as planned, it

probably will not work out quite as one expects, albeit, the situation would hopefully

never be quite that absurd in real life (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974).

Along with the examination of young love prior to marriage, Monty Python also

explores the other side of the spectrum of a love and marriage relationship, the part

which occurs when a couple neglects to take the effort to cultivate their marriage and

care for each other’s needs. (Goddard & Marshall, 2010, p. 58) Ignorance of these

principals can possibly lead to communication problems which may require intervention

by a professional third party. In Monty Python’s “Marriage Councillor” sketch, the viewer

is subjected to such a scene. The married couple who are having issues step into the

office of the marriage councillor, whose job it is to help them solve their marital

problems. Unfortunately, this particular marriage councillor ends up causing more

problems for the couple. The reason for this is the fact that the wife in this relationship
 29

happens to be extremely attractive as far as the marriage councillor is concerned. As

the sketch plays itself out, it becomes evident that this woman has had certain needs of

hers neglected by her husband. Her husband seems to be oblivious to this fact even as

he watches the two of them take advantage of each other (Monty Python’s Flying

Circus, 1969-1974). Being oblivious to the needs of his spouse would be

counterproductive to the keys to marriage fruitfulness suggested in Goddard & Marshall.

The marriage councillor and the wife quickly develop a strictly physical relationship right

in front of her husband in the office! (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974)

This assumption of a strictly physical relationship can be made because there

are no outright confessions of actual love between the two. The situation escalates to

the point where the husband actually gets kicked out of the office (Monty Python’s Flying

Circus DVD Series 1969-1974). At this instance the husband has now entered a

psychological war zone (Skynner & Cleese, 1983, p. 16) as he now has to figure out

what would be the best way to handle the situation. His marriage is clearly in shambles.

does he leave his wife in there with a man whom she is obviously much happier with?

Or does he assert his right to lay down the law as her husband which would involve

running back in the office. Adams states that a good husband and wife pair should

provide good influence over each other so that both would do the right thing. Evil

influences will corrupt a marriage (Adams, 1983, pp. 62-63). During his “exile” the

husband gets some encouragement from another man who happens to be out in the

hallway. The husband then realizes that he can gain control of the situation by providing

good influence. He is aware that he has been pushed around too much by the Marriage

councillor who has now taken full advantage of his wife. The husband returns to the
 30

room to assertively lay down the law in order to attempt to win his wife back. After a

courageous effort he is unsuccessful and is promptly escorted from the office by security

(Monty Python’s Flying Circus DVD Series 1969-1974). Quite obviously the, chemistry,

intimacy, motivation, and self discipline needed to keep a marriage in good standing has

left the marriage all but entirely (Skynner & Cleese, 1983, p. 24). “The Marriage

councillor” sketch could give good insight into John Cleese’s own views on the problems

that can come up within marriage if all the aspects of a good marriage are not in

existence. John Cleese himself went through three of his own marriages (Milligan, et al,

n.d.) and he admittedly still struggles with certain aspects of the ritual (Skynner &

Cleese, 1983, p. 16). After viewing this sketch, a person could think more about the

standing of their own marriage, if they are involved in one, and how well it is going.

Adams, 1983, p. 63-67) If it needs work in certain areas, this sketch can serve as a

reminder to people to continue to work on their marriages (Goddard & Marshall, 2010, p.

58) lest they become as dysfunctional as the one portrayed in “The Marriage

Councillor” sketch (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974). When a person has a

good stable marriage, the exact same psychological problems faced by the husband in

said sketch will not have to happen and he can focus on maintaining fruitfulness in his

marriage (Goddard & Marshall, 2010, p. 58).

Aside from the psychology of maintaining a good relationship, and avoiding a bad

one, Monty Python also looks at the psychology of taking advantage of the vulnerable

people of society. In several Monty Python sketches there are instances where

salespeople will come to a person’s home and trick them into selling them something

they really did not need or want by using reverse psychological methods.
 31

Reverse Psychology happens when a person disguises what is sure to be a

negative outcome by explaining all of the positives which could be associated with said

outcome. This is most often used in marketing in order to close a specific deal. The

object of this operation is to get a customer to let down their defences and buy a specific

product. If a person is easily trusting then the pitch will work as planned (Pickens, 1988

p. 89). Monty Python explores the repercussions of reverse psychology on those who

are vulnerable in the “Burglar” sketch, a man comes to the apartment of an elderly

woman. He identifies himself as a burglar right from the beginning, which is an odd

thing for an actual burglar to do. Right away the woman knows that the man at her door

is up to something. She assumes he is actually some sort of encyclopaedia salesman,

a type of person this woman despises more so than burglars. The man must repeatedly

assure her that he is not such a salesman, thus providing a positive image for himself

Finally, the woman makes the unwise decision to actually let the man into her apartment

where he then proceeds to attempt to sell her encyclopaedias, much to the pleasure of

the viewing audience, and much to the disgust of the woman herself because she has

been fooled by the methods of reverse psychology in the text book fashion discussed by

Pickens (p. 89) (Monty Python’s Flying Circus DVD Series 1969-1974).

Monty Python takes their psychological view of the world and applies it to their

philosophy and theological views of the way life is and how they believe it should be

play out. They point out issues that occur in society which are not quite right as far as

they are concerned. The way that they take a stand against these particular issues

would be to make fun of them in a way so that they might be able to convince viewers

that these events which occur in society are unnecessary and really quite silly. That is
 32

to say that some social situations that currently occur, do not need to exist as far as the

Pythons are concerned. Some of these social issues which Monty Python chose to

examine in their sketches will be discussed in the following section.

Philosophy Theology Lens

Monty Python would often make fun of certain controversial social issues they felt

deserved to be brought out into the light and discussed. How they felt about certain

social issues would often manifest itself in the outcome of a particular sketch for a

particular character involved. Monty Python had a sort of theological and philosophical

point of view on life and their purpose in it. Monty Python appear to have an

appreciation for Christianity or at least the existence of God in general. In the sketch

“The Epilogue—A Question of Belief” the cast of Monty Python allow for a boxing match

between a well respected pastor and a somewhat equally well respected humanist.

They have decided that this is a much more entertaining way to answer that question.

In the beginning of the match, things look bleak for the one who is fighting with God on

his side, but as the camera cuts away and the credits roll, viewers are then notified that

the Pastor has made a tremendous comeback and has won the match, thus proving well

enough for the Pythons that God does indeed exist, although, if one were to read his

Bible, he would find the same thing (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974).

Controversy would arise with the release of the Monty Python Film Life of Brian.

This film was released in 1979 and directed by Monty Python’s very own Terry Jones.

(Denby, 1979) The basic plot of the film takes place in the same biblical era of Jesus
 33

Christ. In the opening scene of the movie three wise men are portrayed following the

star toward Bethlehem. They coincidently arrive at a manger. This is where the plot

deviates from the biblical plot. The three wise men accidently travel to a manger other

than the one in which the Messiah was laid in, they give their gifts of gold, frankincense

and myrrh to an angry woman who irately asks the wise men to leave after proclaiming

that the name of her son is Brian. The wise men then proceed to the manger across the

street where they have the opportunity to worship the real Messiah (Life Of Brian, 1979).

According to Denby, many Christian denominations, including Catholics and Lutherans

voiced their extreme disapproval at the work. Orthodox Jews were upset as well.

These religious groups saw this film as a direct mockery of Jesus Christ himself.

However, Denby states that the Pythons never wanted to make a mockery of

Christianity in general (Denby, 1979). On this issue, Hardcastle & Reisch state that in

the planning process for the movie the Pythons read much of the Bible in their research

in order to find possible funny situations with which to form a movie around. While

reading through the gospels, the group discovered that they collectively respected

everything Jesus Christ had to say within the gospels. Upon that realization, the group

decided that they wished not to make fun of Christ. Instead they would form a storyline

around a character whose life would intersect with that of Christ from time to time.

Production crews would originally decline to fund the project due to the possibility of

blasphemy. However, Monty Python was able to secure funding for the film through a

good friend of theirs, George Harrison (Hardcastle & Reisch, 2005, p. 13-14).

Another Church related theological issue, in their sketch “Crack-pot Religions

Ltd.” the joke is on those who form their own religions in order to make money and those
 34

who seek to convert just for the sake of numbers and cash flow. The representatives of

these “churches” would explain exactly who they wanted to convert, most of these

“churches” end up looking for one kind of person, for each individual “church” that they

can “cater” to, such as rich individuals, upper middle class, those who are inclined to

idolatry or “bashing two bricks together” and otherwise naughty individuals as well as

the insane. These religions would be categorized biblically as false religions as they do

not ever mention anything about the eternal salvation of these individuals whom each

individual “church” would “cater” to.(Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974). These

types of churches would be considered Non-Inclusive churches. This type of church

practice is unjust seeing as Jesus Christ died so that whoever believed in him would

have eternal life (John 3:16) therefore no one should be turned away from church if they

have the desire to attend. However, according to some authors, certain denominations,

particularly the Presbyterians had been denying African Americans access and input in

their services over the years. Due to the colour of their skin, it was perceived that

African Americans were apparently less intellectually inclined than their English or

American counterparts and therefore would have nothing decent to add to a Church

service of any kind (Hopper, 2000, p. 131). Three things which God requires for those

who take following him seriously are outlined in the last words of the book of Micah.

These three requirements for God’s people are that they seek justice, love mercy and

walk humbly with God (Micah 6:8) The merciful thing to do in this case would be to

include everyone who wishes to attend a church service instead of filtering out certain

individuals who do not fit a certain mould (Hopper, 2000, p. 131).

 35

Other philosophical ideas which Monthy Python present to their viewers in order

to have them do battle with these concepts in their own minds would include the idea of

Humanism. This is also portrayed most blatantly in Life of Brian when Brian is mistaken

to be the Messiah by a large group of people and consequently is asked to do miracles

and provide healing to those in need. (Life of Brian, Python Monty Pictures, 1979). The

character Brian then tells them that they must look to themselves in order to work their

situations out. He points out the common belief of humanism that there is power in the

individual and that these people must not look to him to be their hero (Hardcastle &

Reisch, 2005, p. 16).

Other moral issues discussed in Monty Python would be that of stealing. In “The

Audit” sketch a business meeting is called in a typical company. The accountant is

called to give a statement of the company’s financial gains over the past year. It is then

discovered that the company made an entire profit of a shilling. It had been an

extremely rough year financially for this particular company. The majority of said shilling

was eaten up in taxes, leaving an actual net profit of one penny. The problem is that

this. When the corporate high rollers ask the accountant what happened to the final

penny, he claims to have embezzled it and asks for mercy. The accountant is promptly

fired, as according to this particular company, “there is no room for sentiment in big

business.” The moral in this sketch, stealing is wrong and participating in the act of

stealing can get one in to very much trouble no matter who one is and what their

situation is (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969-1974).

Another philosophy which Monty Python expressed in one of their sketches was

their disdain for gang violence. Naturally, satire was used to get the point across to the
 36

masses. In their sketch “Hell’s Grannies” Monty Python portrays a news caster who

discusses the issue of gang violence the town of Bolton, England in a state of total fear

due to the massive problem of gang violence caused by the least likely group of

individuals, elderly women! The main target of these street gangs of elderly women is

healthy, fit, young men. The role change is meant for shock value so that viewers might

pay attention to the message presented in the sketch. The majority of gang violence is

committed by young men or young women who are less connected to school or family

and thus feel the need to prove themselves and take up some role of power in society.

Drug distribution is another way besides general violence for gang members to obtain

financial capital in order to increase their power (Tonry, pp. 117-118) These gangs

perform seemingly continuous acts of violence against the city, because of this the men

of the town are now afraid to even leave their homes. People all over town cringe in fear

every time these ladies come near them, the old women seem to have run of the entire

city. One police officer cites the woman’s lust for money in order to buy bread and milk,

and to support their crocheting habits, crocheting being the “drug” these elderly ladies

are addicted to, as the reason these women strike out in the ways that they do. Monty

Python points out in a comedic way that a city run by gang violence, especially of this

kind, cannot be productive when the citizens are paralyzed by fear, thus gang violence

is most certainly unacceptable and unnessary (Monty Python’s Flying Circus, DVD

Series 1969-1974).

The theology and philosophy of Monty Python is discretely hidden behind a veil of

satire. One must pay close attention in order to read between the lines of the jokes so
 37

that he or he might be able to understand the philosophical messages that the Pythons

are trying to explain to their captive audience.

Conclusion

Monty Python was a group of six individuals consisting of Graham Chapman,

John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones, Eric Idle, and Michael Palin, who combined

their diverse fields of study along with their common love for comedy into a ground

breaking series that would take the comedy world to another level. Monty Python’s

Flying Circus would air for the first time on October 5, 1969. Monty Python had a style

of performing that could be considered edgy for the time. One of the most basic, yet

extremely important elements of comedy is satire. Satire in its truest definition is the act

of conveying ideas toward an audience in a comedic way. Satire has been around

since the middle ages. In its earliest forms satire took on the form of narratives, and

plays. Once novels became popular, satire became a legitimate genre for books. With

the advent of cinema and television, satire would make its entrance into those forms of

communication as well. Popular topics of early satire were to make fun of those in high

positions of authority or even the monarchy. Satire based around complaint was also

popular depending on what type of issue the satirist was attempting to explain to his

audience. Monty Python would use such forms of satire in a twofold manner. First and

foremost their goal was to be funny, as is the goal for all comics, second of all, in their

45 episodes. Monty Python as a group despised censorship as they believed it

hindered their creative freedom to get their satirical messages out to their viewers.

Monty Python sketches would centre on everyday situations. These sketches offer

great insight into how the Pythons saw the world through their own eyes. These
 38

sketches would often involving some sort of conflict which would be necessary to

resolve in order to restore the psychological health of those involved in said conflict,

back to a normal level so that life may proceed as usual. Monty Python would also use

their comedic platform to speak out about moral issues on which they did not agree, as

well as things that happen in life that are just silly. Examples of this would include,

arguing with another person over nothing in particular, using a married man’s wife for

one’s own personal gain, only inviting certain types of people to one’s Church, and war.

Monty Python would present these issues in a way so that a person could get a good

laugh. However, if the viewer pays close enough attention to the plots of sketches which

centre on these types of themes then the viewer could experience something completely

different, the collective worldview of Monty Python.

This worldview shows itself in a variety of ways in the individual sketches of

Monty Python’s Flying Circus as Monty Python raises historical, psychological, and

theological questions for their viewers to ponder. As the viewers ponder these various

questions stated in the sketches such as the question of the necessity for argument and

heroism, the concepts of marriage and humanism, and the practices of certain

churches, and the necessity for stealing and gang violence, the possibility of influence

becomes more prevalent as the viewers begin to think about their own lives and similar

situations and conflicts they might face from time to time and how they face them.

Monty Python’s televised attitude toward various psychological, philosophical, moral and

theological issues serves to show the silliness of certain situations so that viewers might

avoid getting into similar situations or at least they might think about how to solve them

in a more productive or accommodating manner thus benefitting everyone involved.

 39

Bibliography

Adams, J., (1983) Solving Marriage Problems, Phillipsberg N.J., Zondervan Publishing

Bor, R. (2003) Passenger Behaviour, Burlington V.T., Ashgate Publishing Company

Briggs, A. Burke P. (2009) A Social History of the Media: from Gutenberg to the Internet,
Great Britain, Polity Press.

Carpenter, H. (2000) A Great Silly Grin, New York, Perseus Books Group

Chapman, G., Cleese, J., Gilliam, T., Idle, E., Jones, T., Palin, M. (1969-1998) Monty
Python’s Flying Circus, Great Britain, Python (Monty) Pictures Ltd., A&E
Television Networks, Volumes 1-14.

Chapman, G. Cleese, J., Gilliam, T., Idle, E., Jones, T., Palin, M. (1979) Life of Brian,
United Kingdom, Orion Pictures

Denby, D. (December, 1979) “Oh, Bug Off”, New York Magazine, New York, p. 98.

Goddard, H. Marshall, J. (2010) The Marriage Garden: Cultivating Your Relationship So

It Grows and Flourishes, San Francisco C.A., University of Arkansas Press.

Griffin, D. (1994) Satire: A Critical Reintroduction, Lexington, K.Y. University of

Kentucky Press.

Hammill, G. (2005) Monty Python’s Flying Circus, The Museum of Broadcast

Communications, Chicago, I.L.

Hardcastle G., Reisch, G. (2006). Monty Python And Philosophy: Nudge, Nudge, Think,
Think, Peru, I.L., Carish Publishing Company.

Hokenson, J. (2006) The Idea of Comedy, Cranbury N.J., Rosemont Publishing.

Hogart, M. (2010) Satire: Origins and Principles, Piscataway, N.J., Transaction

Publishers.

Holmes, S. (2005) British TV and Film Culture of the 1950s, Portland, O.R., Intellect
Books

Hopper, W. (2000) Authentic Congregations, Louisville K.Y., Geneva Press

Landy, M. (2005) Monty Python’s Flying Circus, Detroit, Michigan, Wayne State
University Press.
 40

Larson, D. (2003) Monty Python, Shakespeare, and English Renaissance Drama,

Jefferson, N.C., McFarland and Company Inc. Publishers.

Miller, Jeffery S. (2000) Something Completely Different, Minneapolis, M.N., University

of Minnesota Press.

Neale, S., Krutnik, F. (1990) Popular Film and Television Comedy, London, Great
Britain, Routledge Publishing.

NIV Study Bible, (2002) Grand Rapids M.I., Zondervan Publishing.

Parker, A., O’Shea, M. (2006), And Now For Something Completely Digital, New York,
The Disinformation Company Ltd.

Pickens, J. (1988) The Closers, Placerville C.A., Hampton House Publishing Company.

Skynner, R., Cleese, J. (1983) Families and How To Survive Them, New York, Methuen
London Publishing Ltd.

Skynner, R., Cleese, J. (1994) Life and How To Survive It, New York, W.M. Norton &
Company.

Slide, A., (1996) Some Joe You Don’t Know: An American Guide to 100 British
Television Personalities, Westport, C.T., Greenwood Press, p. 187-188

Simpson, P. (2003) On The Discourse of Satire, Amsterdam, John Benjamin’s

Publishing Co.

Tonry, M. (1988) The Handbook of Crime and Punishment, New York, Oxford University
Press.

Turner, G. Tay, J. (2009) Television Studies After TV, New York, Routlage Publishing.