Use your allusion: Is it funny if you have to explain it?

What makes references on 'The Simpsons' work (why'd you use a 'Simpsons' screencap instead of an 'Arrested Development' one anyhow?) is that they're layered and sophisticated - you (especially if you're particularly young) might not know the actual detail of what's being referenced, but you'll get the general gist - the actual "aha!" moment might not come until much later, when you actually come across the original. I'm sure a lot of people don't recognize Pierre Henry's music on the 'Futurama' theme or know what a 'Turangalila-Symphonie' might be, but the concept of what people in the past thought the future (our present) might be is ingrained. Also, Groening's writers like to watch (and read, and listen) to much smarter stuff than Seth MacFarlane's writers do. 'Family Guy' always seemed to me more about patting the viewers on the back for being able to remember bad 80s commercials. It's not about making the reference fit the episode (or even the joke) in question, so much as reassuring its fanbase that they really don't need to have wasted any time on fancy book lernin'. Or even seeing any films more obscure or artsy than 'Back To The Future.'

You're totally right about the Simpsons (and I think they've been consciously influenced by Firesign Theatre for many years) but what makes Seinfeld endlessly re-watchable is the combination of a small, personal universe with several seasons of depth-accreting detail. You don't need a Rosetta Stone of New York jewishness to find the obsession with a marble rye hilarious. Their pop culture references are so completely personal and specific (or so it seems to me, on the other side of the Atlantic) as to transcend locality and timeframe.

Seinfeld dated? I'm pretty sure most of the comedy draws from basic human functions and desires. A lot of the pop culture references would've been obscure in the 90s, too (unless Joseph Cotten was famous back then).

But some comedies can go overboard with the references. "Knocked Up" is funny to me but I dunno if it'll be as funny to someone my age in fifteen years, when (I imagine) Matisyahu is no longer famous.

Of course, the title of this entry is making a pop-culture reference with "Use Your Illusion" (Guns & Roses, for those who don't know). Nothing like self-referential humor.

I think the best works of art can use pop-culture reference and still transcend them for later generations, because they have enough universal themes to overcome mere in-jokes. For instance, I loved "Penny Lane" for years before I knew what finger pies and nurses selling poppies from a tray were all about. I don't think it lessened my appreciation of the song. Same with the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies; the best ones survive despite the cultural references. Heck, I think Shakespeare used in-jokes, for that matter (don't ask me to tell you what).

I think the early Simpsons episodes will remain funny over the years for this reason. The in-jokes are priceless, though. I still remember the shock and delight I felt watching "Like Father, Like Clown" (with its JAZZ SINGER parody) when Krusty agreed to say grace. He began chanting, "Baruk Ata Adonai..." and my husband and I looked at each other and shouted, "He's Jewish!" We loved the rest of the show for all the references the Gentiles out there scratched their heads over.

A show that uses an almost heinous amount of pop culture and high brow gags is "Mystery Science Theater 3000." They never truly undermine the show, however, not only because the humor revolves around how terrible the movie of the week is, but also because they're written in such a way to give a real rush to more informed audience members. I think either Mike or Joel described it as trying to make certain audience members feel as if the guys on the show were reading their minds. So I think, in a way, gags like these can be beneficial to those more in-the-know and, in the hands of competent comedians, are written to exploit that as well as creating something that's coherent to the rest of us.

One of the major offenders in the "pop-culture-references-that-will-be-dated-and-unfunny" category are the "works" of Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. "Epic Movie" manages to reference movies like "The Da Vinci Code," "Nacho Libre," "Snakes on a Plane" and "X-Men" before the main characters have even met. Who even remembers "Nacho Libre" now? It's just one of their many sins against cinema, but it's a big one.

I think a lot of what makes the best of these comedies work, though, is simply the rhythm of their comedy. I might not know what Groucho is talking about when he's on one of his tangents, but he's hitting the notes so well that the stuff that works makes the stuff that shouldn't work, well, work. Similarly, maybe the kids-show-with-lots-of-pop-culture-references "Freakazoid" has stuff that makes no sense to a kid, like showing the main character narrating then suddenly referencing Ed Wood out of nowhere, but it's timed so well that it just works. It's the old line about a comedian who could get laughs reading the phone book: It's not the content, necessarily, but the delivery.

Further, Greg pointed out something I think helps here: The "a-ha!" moment. Watching "Mystery Science Theater 3000" as a kid, I wouldn't get a joke about why a gun should go back to Hunter Thompson. But it makes it all the funnier when you're doing something else and suddenly come upon a piece of information that makes a joke work.

Great comedy can reference and lampoon fleeting crap and remain funny long after its source material has been forgotten.

Airplane is, and will long remain, a hilarious movie whether or not you've seen the terrible Airport series. Recently, I watched Airplane with my 12-year-old nephew and he laughed through the whole movie, blissfully unaware that it was ridiculing a subgenre of disaster films.

There are many great Simpsons episodes (my favorite: the German takeover of Homer's power plant), and they will likely appeal to audiences long after the show's many allusions have become esoteric. Why? Because the Simpsons is not really about pop references; it is about stupidity, greed, avarice, corruption, and all the other human frailties that are so much fun to laugh at.

The Simpsons has pop culture references, but they usually don't torpedo episodes when they get stale because they tend to exist at the edges of the writing, not the centre.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that pop culture references work well as the icing on the cake, but not as the cake itself. Include them by all means, but don't make your comedy too dependent on them.

Dennis Miller is a good example of a comedian who relied far too much on pop culture references. Many of his pop culture references were obscure even when he originally used them, during his heyday, and far too many of his jokes used a pop culture reference as the punch line. If you watch one of his old routines today, he seems more like a faded socialite than a comedian, dropping names left and right in an attempt to grab your attention.

Let's not even discuss Epic Movie and Meet the Spartans in a blog dedicated to film. There was a critic who put it best saying that they're not even practicing the same form as Scorsese, Uwe Boll, a father with a new camcorder or a bear who accidentally turns a camera on while trying to eat it.

Most episodes of Family Guy are nothing but pop culture references, but the good ones are surprisingly naturalistic and original, like "Brian and Stewie", which has no cutaways, fewer references than any Simpsons episode and entirely character driven humor. The show really challenges itself and reinvents and subverts itself sometimes where most shows are more than happy to stick in a rut for as many seasons as possible (latter Simpsons, anyone?).

Where the characters and situations on How I Met Your Mother seem to have sprung entirely from other sitcoms, Family Guy will sometimes show you something, or somebody, that you've seen in life, but never on TV. That's something that nobody's really done for me since Seinfeld, and it's why I tolerate the crap episodes, even if they do make up the bulk of the series.

Unfortunately, going into any series with preconceived notions means that all you need to see is one bad episode in order to prove yourself right, and no show generates more preconceived notions than Family Guy. If you pride yourself on your intelligence, and you weren't a fan from the start, chances are you'll never be able to see it in the right light.

The difference between The Simpsons and Family Guy is that the Simpsons uses pop culture references cleverly and serves a purpose in the story. Family Guy uses the references as a substitute for story. I believe that most of the early Simpsons episodes have held up very well whereas a show like South Park will eventually be lost on viewers ten years from now because of how timely it is. I remember watching The Simpsons when I was very young. I'm 26 now. There are tons of jokes that I never understood until recent. One of the funniest jokes that comes to mind that inspired me to do searching on the internet was from the episode "Homer's Barbershop Quartet" when Homer is trying to write a song. "There was nothing in AL Capone's vault. But it wasn't Geraldo's fault."The show was funny enough to those who didn't get the references and funnier to those who did. Either way, it's still a great show, seasons 1-10 anyway. I disagree about Seinfeld, however. There are very few references I can think that are solely a product of it's time (Keith Hernandez, anyone?). Most of the episodes revolved around everyday mundane things that we all experience and found funny ways to present them and bring it back to our attention.I am a fan of spoofs but I yearn for the days of movies like Silent Movie, Young Frankenstein, or even Space Balls for that matter. Apparently, to make a spoof now, all one needs to do is bring characters in from other movies and point and say "Hey, remember this movie. Eh? Eh?" Nothing funny or clever is needed. Just reference the movie and you're supposed to laugh. I see nothing wrong with pop culture references as long as it is funny, clever, and serves a real purpose. But with all the remakes and reboots, eventually there's not going to be anything else to reference.

I might be the first and only person to offer kind of a dissenting opinion.There was a time in my life (mainly when I was a kid) where I couldn't wait to watch The Simpsons on sunday nights and found my entertained by its wit and jokes. I loved how you sometimes forgot that you were watching an animated show and that it was able to make its own world of characters

However, to me The Simpsons has since jumped the shark and has become tiresome institution. The stories have become more and more mindless and they seem to have far too many celebrity voiceovers. It started because as critique of the middle class but somewhere along the way I think it lost this. The humor is becoming more grotesque and puttylike. Last time I watched it recently it just wasn't funny anymore to me.

To me, the show was great in its heyday which mainly throughout all of the 1990's but as it reached the 2000's it has went downhill and is no longer worthwhile.

I was going to repeat a lot of what was said above, but most of my good examples were covered. (Warner Bros. cartoons, especially.)

I will say, though, that when I assess a comedy, I scratch out all the references I can and look at what's left. Yes, I usually "get it", but for sake of argument, I imagine that I don't. Maybe that's a spoilsport attitude, but it's kept me from even trying to watch things like Epic Movie.

As as early supporter, I still watch "Family Guy", but the other MacFarlane shows that actually, you know, have stories and characters are much better. "The Cleveland Show" has really grown on me of late.

Jim, thank you for posting this. Reminds me of later Shrek installments when compared to the best of the Pixar films. I suspect the latter group is more likely to withstand the test of time, simply because they don't rely on heavy pop culture references to drive or populate the story.

As for the Simpsons, if you look back to the first half of the nineties, you'll find episodes driven more by characters than by gimmicky references. Those were the days.

Pop culture references can be a funny indeed, but I'd rather tv shows and movies not overly abuse them.

Firesign Theatre is a good example. I used to obsessively listen to "How Can You Be In Two Places At Once When You're Not Anywhere At All" back in high school -- in 1995. I thought it was hilarious and admittedly didn't get half the jokes (or more than half). But, it works on multiple levels. For example, the "Nick Danger" segment is an obvious film noir parody and can be enjoyed on that level even if you don't get all the 60s references, drug slang, etc. The thing is, the Firesign Theatre guys (and "Mystery Science Theater", which was mentioned above, and I guess "Simpsons" to an extent, though I got sick of them about a decade ago) cram so many jokes into such a short running time that 1) no one can be expected to understand all of them after one or two listens no matter the context and 2) if you laugh at 1 out of 5, you're still laughing pretty much the whole time.

As a writer, I've found that the more specific something is, the more universal it is. The reverse is also true -- the more general something is, the less accessible and truthful it is to an audience. This is counter-intuitive but proven time and time again. I often use "High Fidelity" as an example -- it transcends the normal romantic comedy genre by having very specific music references and characters who have very clear likes and dislikes and who discuss specific artists, etc. People don't like this movie in SPITE of that -- they like it BECAUSE of that. Even if you don't know who John Cusack is talking about in the movie, you get the point that he's a very dedicated music fanatic much better than you would if he just said, "I like music" and left it at that. If the makers of the film had stopped to worry what bands the audience would have heard of, that would have killed what makes the screenplay great.

Anyway, that's a roundabout way of saying comedy is kind of the same way -- the more specific it is, the funnier it is, whether or not you know what the hell the comedian is talking about. Boring comedians try to appeal to everyone and forget to be funny. Smart, funny ones just say what they think is funny and a smart, funny audience fills in the gaps.

All that said, I'm still not sure the pop culture references in "Family Guy" really work as actual jokes, but if they're not funny the first time, they likely won't be funny 30 years from now, regardless of context.

You can decide whether this is off-topic or not ...

One of the shows often mentioned in the many links is NBC's Community, a series much-loved by critics for its many Pop-cultural references.

I watch it regularly myself, although I find it repetitive and often tiresome, and the characters in the main not very likable.

So why do I watch?

Because one of my all-time favorite movie-TV character actors has a recurring (not even a regular) role.

Richard Erdman has been appearing in films since the '40s. His many appearances include Jimmy Cagney's film of Saroyan's The Time Of Their Lives (he was the guy playing the pinball machine), The Men, Stalag 17 (the barracks chief who closed the film with the line "Everybody back in their bunks - like nothing happened."), and a little heralded noir called Cry Danger, in which he plays a boozy pal of the star, Dick Powell.

Erdman's TV appearances are also numerous, highlighted by one of the best-remembered Twilight Zone episodes: Erdman was the guy who had the stopwatch that could actually stop time all over the world.("You think about that now!") There was also a commercial in which Erdman drives liquor store clerk Jesse White crazy trying to remember "Italian Swiss Colony Napa Sonoma Mendocino Premium Table Wine".

The point of all this: Richard Erdman is now 85 years old, and it's nice to know that he's still active.
But I keep waiting for the Community writers to reference any or all of the above references that I've made during one of Erdman's all-too-brief scenes (He rarely gets more than one scene in any given episode, and usually not more than one line in that).

I'm 60, which means that I passed demographic desirability more than a decade ago.
Still, every so often I think they ought to throw us oldsters a bone, pop-culture-wise.

Oh, about the actual subject of this post:
I actually get a kind of kick out of a topical reference that dates a show; it proves i've been paying attention.
So there too. :-P

"And the problem I have with the show is that they do quick "Simpsons"-style references that are nothing but references. "

This is EXACTLY the problem I have with "Family Guy". Its style of humor is frequently nothing more than a Friedberg and Seltzer movie.

Eli Katz' post highlights the key difference: "The Simpsons" and movies like "Airplane" don't use references as a crutch, and when they do reference pop culture, it's usually part of a larger joke. "Family Guy" frequently slaps a pop culture reference on screen, without a hint of parody or any other context, and expects (and, well, gets) laughs.

This scene is a primary example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXuSWUXDnuo

There's not a hint of actual comedic writing going on there. It's just Stewie re-enacting the infamous William Shatner "Rocket Man" video. No subtext, no commentary, no parody, nothing. It's about as original and funny as the thousands of Youtube cover videos of any given song.

Is a blog post about the validity of obscure/dated allusion worth reading if the post ends its own discussion to become an allusion to an obscure/dated reference point?

The Simpsons is a great show. It may not last past its expiration date (which may have been 4 years ago or so, that's still to be determined).
But the show will always remain relevant to those of us who learned pop-culture as we experienced that culture and the dismantling of that culture offered by the Simpsons.

Often the effectiveness of any work (drama, comedy, whatever) is tied directly to the viewer's understanding of the culture that informs the work. I'm not sure this issue has to apply specifically to comedy or popular culture.

Look at a movie like "Young Mister Lincoln". If you're going to understand that movie and appreciate it, you need to know at least some basics about Lincoln and his role in American history. If you don't, the movie might be a bit of a bore. The film is 70 years old, and when it was released it was referencing events that were 70 years old. Cultures change, history is behind us. We can't know history unless we look into it.

Is "I Love Lucy" as funny as it once was? Cultural references might block the laughter to a point, and what's funny can change over the years. Future generations might look at a show like "The Simpsons" or "South Park" and be left wanting more. But, if they go back and look into the situations and culture that surrounded those shows, they'll be rewarded for their efforts, just as I've been rewarded for understanding something about Abraham Lincoln.

A work of art has to exist on it's own terms. If that means that the artist intends to examine issues that are relevant to a specific time and place, so be it. If that hinders the longevity of the work, then so be it.

A couple of people have mentioned the classic Warner Brothers cartoons, but I think they didn't mention an improtant point about them. Growing up, I rarely (if ever) got their topical references. All the WWII stuff ("Turn out that light!", "Is this trip really necessary?" etc.), the then contemporary slang... I hadn't a clue that these were nothing but just crazy jokes piled in with all the rest. The self-referencing humor in these cartoons became part of their own language and you don't need to know where they came from to laugh at them. Just as Tex Avery's deconstruction of the cartoon form itself, these references became a part of a stylistic canon that delights many people to this day. I think shows like SEINFELD and the first ten seasons (or so) of THE SIMPSONS will stand the test of time as well because they used topical points as sidebars rather than the focus of their comedy. Even MST3K should have a lasting value because the aim of the comedy is to make jokes at the expense of the timeless bad films they lampoon, not to simply show off the writers expansive esoteric knowledge (ala Dennis Miller).

South Park is going to have real problems with this. Way more than the Simpsons.

Personally, I love "I Love Lucy". Considering how dated it is, it's amazing how NOT dated it is, if you get what I mean. They're using the same sitcom storytelling techniques they're using today, just (in most cases) a heck of a lot better, with vastly more talented comedians. (It's not a nostalgia thing for me, either...I'm 25.)

And that's why a lot of movies and TV shows with pop-culture references will survive. Because they're not *only* pop culture references, they're also inherently funny. Airplane! -- which somebody already mentioned -- is the prototypical example, a spoof of a specific movie that's hilarious even if you have no idea (as my friends and I didn't for years) that it's a spoof of a specific movie.

Also, Austin Powers. Of the zillions of dollars that series made, most of it was from teenagers whose exposure to James Bond stopped at Pierce Brosnan. They got the jokes, even if they didn't know the specific reference.

"(I think the term "ask the musical question" is a pop culture reference, but I'll be darned if I can find out where it originated.)"

Off the top of my head, sounds like one of Casey Kasem's idioms. Does that ring a bell?

Another great (and rare) example of the phenomenon of incessant pop-culture references actually working is the Beastie Boys album, Paul's Boutique. The record is a patchwork of samples that are both musical and non-musical combined with raps that are fired like bullets from an uzi. The samples come so fast that you can barely keep up in trying to identify them. The Beasties then spend a lot of the time rapping in an equally pieced-together style where each member says only a single word (with the collective words forming the entire sentence) or where one will start a phrase while the other two say only the last word. Much like the musical samples, a lot of the lyrics are simply pop-culture references thrown at you like a stream of non sequiturs (in some cases, these references all form a story for the song, in others... not so much). The most amazing thing about it is that it works beautifully. Even if you don't know the reference or sample, they are assembled so artfully that they create their own piece. Then, a lot of lyrics and sound bites become pop culture references all over again only this time stemming from the a listener's experience with the album rather than from their original source. I'm still discovering where some of those sounds and sound bites came from a good 20 years after I heard the record for the first time. And at no time have I ever felt like I needed to know the original source to enjoy the album. It's a complete masterpiece.

AllMusic has a great review of the record here:
http://allmusic.com/album/pauls-boutique-r27627

If any of you are already fans of the record, I highly recommend this book on it:
http://www.amazon.com/Beastie-Boys-Pauls-Boutique-33/dp/0826417418/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300485212&sr=8-1

Since my favourite reference in Krusty Gets Kancelled has been left out, allow me to quote it. As Smithers drives Mr. Burns, they see a giant "Gabbo is Coming!" sign. And Burns says with excitement, "Smithers, Garbo is coming!"

When I first saw the episode at the tender age of...I'm thinking 7 or so, I certainly didn't know who Garbo was. But there was still a joke in here, about Mr. Burns' poor eyesight and senility, as well as simply that it was amusing to see Mr. Burns' uncharacteristic enthusiasm. But since then it's become much richer, because then we have the (actual) joke layered on top, which is that Mr. Burns thinks that Greta Garbo is a) still alive, b) still touring, c) still a popular enough star for Smithers to be excited to see her, d) still a big enough star news for her to be the subject of a massive billboard. And it references the craze surrounding Garbo in her heydey ("Garbo Talks!"). And somehow it's funny that Burns is a Garbo fan. And this is one line, frequently edited out in syndication.

The point is that The Simpsons in its prime (the 90's, basically) wrote pop culture references that were funny in and of themselves, and then the references themselves were densely revealing of character.

(Though I will quote my favourite wicked film parody from The Simpsons as well. Bart entered the bank to cause high junks and calls out that the bank is out of money, so that the entire crowd demands to have their money returned. Jimmy Stewart ala George Bailey comes out and declares, "Your money isn't here! It's in Bill's house, and Fred's house!" To which ever-surly Moe turns to a man beside him, and yells out: "What the hell are you doing with my money in your house, Fred?" and punches his lights out. This one is not so revealing of character--except for Moe's hotheadedness--but I'll be damned if I don't still giggle watching the scene being parodied in It's a Wonderful Life.)

Because someone bought up Seinfeld, I have to say this: I don't get what makes him so special. It's definately humorus, but his comedy is no different from any other sit-com about day-to-day activities. Just like Cheers or The Brady Bunch before them, all their episodes are generally the same; some mundane concern is blown up to comically over-the-top level (Marsha can't find a date, Jerry wants to break up with his girlfriend, Sam wants to get laid".

As a fan of the show, I honestly don't see why Seinfeld's material shines above any other sit-com.

You do know that the bad guys in "Billy Jack" were shooting wild horses to use in dog food, right? Presumably dog food that Billy Jack would like is akin to dolphin-friendly tuna.

I ask the musical question "What is this thing called love?" But not, "What is THIS thing called?, luv."

It's funny because I was a Simpsons fan since the very beginning and I always hated that episode, "Krusty gets Canceled." I was always irritated by celebrity appearances on the show as they always seemed not to jibe with the show's internal logic. There's no Superman but "Radioactive Man." There's no Arnold Schwarzenegger, but Reneir Wolfcastle (SP?), and so on. The Simpsons was a satire of the real world. Having real celebs seemed always like a ploy to bolster ratings, and a distraction. The worst offense of all was the Nysnc episode. I stopped watching the show shortly after that one.

Looks like 'Community' is still keeping the flame alive. I gotta wonder how many people are gonna make the effort to see 'My Dinner With Andre' after last night's episode? (the optimist in me can't help but think "a lot") That's some sophisticated high-falutin' movin'-pitchur referencing right there, that is. And not just mentioning that it exists, but actually making the comedy character-specific and working the concept into the plot. There once was a time when I might have been suspicious that pop-culture references were just writers being lazy, but no more.

Wait, is 'My Dinner With Andre' really a "pop"-culture reference? My need a more intellectual term than "pop" for such things.

I'm going to reminisce more than add insight to these comments, but this entire thread reminded me of several fun moments that I wanted to share.

As many people have mentioned, the best topical humor is funny without being topical. The effect is doubled when--often years later--you hear the original reference, suddenly make the connection, and finally get the complete joke. I loved Firesign Theater in college. The comedy worked on its own loopy level, nonsequiturs and all. It wasn't until afterward that I got many of the jokes or even layers of the jokes I did get.

I listened to them before I spent interminable hours in language labs ("Say three words in Turkish," and the first one is "Delight!" I still giggle.) or before I fully appreciate the similarities between WWII and Viet Nam. (In "Don't Crush That Dwarf; Hand Me the Pliers.") I loved the changing identity of the girlfriend in Nick Danger, but didn't really appreciate it until I finally listened all the way through the Beatles' Rocky Raccoon. And then I got the identity of the villain.

I'm going to date myself here, but the treasure trove of this sort of thing was Rocky and Bullwinkle. To this day, you still find people giggling when they first understand that there is an opera out there named Boris Gudenov. I remember one of the stories took place in the little kingdom of Applesauce Lorraine. I thought that was just deliciously weird until that day in high school history classs, when the teacher started talking about the lead up to WWI. I had seen Alsace Lorraine written but never heard it pronounced properly until that day and promptly fell out of my seat literally ROFL.

Might it be more appropriate to suggest that such references lack vitality instead of durability or longevity, or am I merely suggesting a different word that means basically the same thing? I'm only asking because when I watch shows like "Family Guy" or "The Simpsons" my enjoyment on an episode-to-episode/joke-to-joke basis depends not so much on the reception & identification of pop culture memes as it relies on my assurance that the show's jokes- allusions or otherwise- are genuinely inspired and worth parodying. Since I am not an entertainment magazine I should not be thinking about how clever or appropriate a reference it is while I'm watching it. I should be laughing with a sense of identification that transcends trivial acknowledgment. Like great satire, allusions that contain vitality should become culturally significant events in and of themselves. If a winking reference is made solely because it is timely and a lot of people will "get it" but it lacks any free-standing comic energy of its own, then said reference is going to collapse on its own two legs no matter how culturally relevant it happens to be at the given time.