Chris Farley vs. the Comic Antagonist

Matthew Cribbs

Elmer Blistein outlines the aspects of the comic antagonist in his chapter “The object of scorn: an aspect of the comic antagonist”. Blistein compares the comic antagonist or comic villain to the comic butt and marks a distinct difference between the two. The comic villain is a constant source of contempt. We laugh when he fails or is unmasked for his true self. We laugh at the comic antagonist and are completely unsympathetic towards him. The sympathetic comic character is entirely different. We feel he is in an unjustified circumstance and we feel pity for him. While reading this chapter, two movies continuously came to mind, Chris Farley’s Tommy Boy and Black Sheep. In both movies, the audience repeatedly laughs at Farley’s misfortune. Despite his undeserving position we still feel pity toward him. Both of Farley’s characters defy Blistein’s definition of what a comic butt or a comic villain should be.

Blistein defines the sympathetic comic character. We laugh with the sympathetic comic character. We laugh with him because we view him as either better than we are, or at least better than the situation he has been placed in. These characters hint towards a “world of respectability” (Blistein 22). We sympathize because we can relate to being in situations beyond our control, situations that are unfair. We laugh at the way the situation is handled. The circumstances never seem to get the best of the character. They remain the same “respectable” person they always were.

Blistein then shifts focus to the comic butt. The comic butt is the character we laugh at. We don’t sympathize. We merely adhere to our, as Blistein puts it, “latent sadism” (23). Comedy involving the comic butt is usually slapstick. A pie in the face, a slip on a banana peel, a fall down a hole are all calamities of the comic butt. Rarely does the comic butt understand what has happened to him. Rarely does he understand even himself (Blistein 26). Blistein then focuses on a specific type of comic butt. Not the simple clown, but rather a complex, subtle character, the comic antagonist.

The comic antagonist is still the butt of the joke. We laugh at him. He is in a position undeserving of a person of his character. We constantly wish to see him foiled, to be revealed for his true identity. Blistein cites three examples of the comic antagonist, Parolles in All’s Well that Ends Well, Mr. Applegate in Damn Yankees, and Harry Brock in Born Yesterday. In All’s Well that Ends Well Parolles masquerades as a great warrior and sophisticate. Many see him for his deception, but those who are younger and less experienced need more convincing. Parolles is finally unmasked to all. Parolles has always known what he truly is. We laugh at him for pretending to be something he is not (Blistein 23-26). Mr. Applegate in Damn Yankees is a modern day devil. He attempts to trap victims throughout the entire play and is continuously thwarted. The audience sympathizes with his victims, not him. That’s why it is so satisfying when Applegate traps himself in the end (Blistein 26-29). Harry Brock in Born Yesterday illustrates a cutthroat businessman. Through lying, cheating, stealing, and force he obtains the things he wants. He has no problem with stepping on someone to reach his goals. Harry Brock remains the same throughout the entire play. He never reforms and is ultimately beaten. If he had reformed, it would make the audience’s enjoyment of his dethroning less enjoyable (Blistein 29-33). All of these characters exemplify the comic antagonist. We laugh at them. They all wish to deceive, through unsavory methods. They lie to others as well as themselves. They cheat others, but ultimately cheat themselves. Blistein ultimately feels that the audience undergoes a catharsis when the comic antagonist is foiled. They undergo catharsis through scorn and mockery. He states that the sympathetic comic character cannot undergo this scorn. Finally, Blistein notes that the audience does not want to see the comic villain beaten rather than destroyed (39-40).

Blistein overlooks the true source of this scorn and mockery. It comes from dishonesty. Being in a position too good for them and their negative affects on others can cause some of this scorn, but ultimately, it lies with the characters dishonest tactics. Even when these comic villains are honest with themselves, they deceive others. A character can possess many of the characteristics of a comic villain. He can be in an undeserving position, and even cause grave misfortune for innocent people. However, if he remains honest, we cannot scorn or mock him. Also, we can sympathize, even if the character has no hint of a “world of respectability”. He remains a sympathetic comic character, even though we have no feelings of him being better than we are, or even better than he appears to be. Chris Farley has epitomized this character in his movies Tommy Boy and Black Sheep.

In Tommy Boy, Farley plays the son of a successful business owner. After seven years of college, Tommy is brought in to the company and given a corporate job complete with and office and a mini fridge. His father is grooming him to take over the company, despite his less-than-average intelligence. Many notice this gross display of nepotism. David Spade plays Richard, a childhood friend of Tommy, who is now in a high position within the company. Richard immediately notices the position that Tommy has given to him by his father. On Tommy’s first day of work, Richard states, “Oh good, you have and office, and why not?….. you’ve been here ten minutes”. Tommy’s father dies, and to save the company, Tommy and Richard must go on a cross-country sales trip to keep the business alive. Throughout the trip, Tommy constantly terrorizes Richard. Richard’s pride and joy, a classic convertible, is reduced to a tarp and duct tape covered piece of junk. In one scene, Tommy completely bends the door back the wrong way. It is an accident, but when Richard inherently notices the damage, Tommy responds “What’d you do??!!!” Richard also has a coat ruined by Tommy’s “Fat Guy in a Little Coat” dance routine. Tommy also repeatedly mocks Richard’s sensitivities. A string of jokes ensues when Tommy catches Richard in a “private” moment. “Alphalpha, or Spanky??…….Sinner”. Another scene uncovers one of Richard’s darkest secrets, he wears a toupee. Tommy doesn’t instantly start joking, but Richard immediately fears that he will. Thus we see Tommy, in a high position undeservingly handed to him, causing Richard mayhem throughout the entire movie. He is a buffoon, unknowingly foiling himself and others repeatedly.

Black Sheep has many striking parallels to Tommy Boy. Not only are the duo of Farley and Spade present in this film as well, but also they essentially play the same characters. Farley plays an idiot in position to good for him, and Spade plays the insecure “straight” man. In this film, Farley plays Mike Donnelly, the younger brother of a politician running for Governor of Washington state. While trying to help in his brother’s campaign, Mike continuously gives his brother bad publicity. He crashes a campaign rally, gets “stoned” at a television spot his brother is to appear on, hits an elderly woman in the face with a football, and even takes the current state governor hostage. Mike’s shenanigans ultimately force his brother to try to get rid of him. He assigns Steve Dodds (David Spade) the task of “babysitting” his brother until the campaign race is over. Mike’s sub-par intellect gets him and Steve into much more trouble along the way. Once again, Farley is in a position too good for him, causing havoc (while unintentional) among all those around him. Both of these films place Farley in the position of the comic butt. We laugh directly at him. He also shares a few characteristics with Blistein’s comic villain. He is in a position too good for him, and causes misfortune in those around him. But we still sympathize. We still love Farley, and want him to succeed. He’s the butt, but a sympathetic butt.

While Farley’s characters continuously frustrate those around him, he remains honest. Never does he try to appear to be anything other than the overweight, idiotic “kid” that he is. He never lies to himself. His honesty makes us incapable of scorning him. Farley does disrupt the lives and destroy the possessions of others, but he does so unintentionally. Throughout both movies, Farley’s intentions are good. He wants to do what is right, but is too dumb to know what that is. His tomfoolery hurts Spade repeatedly, but also hurts himself. Farley’s biggest victim is himself. We are incapable of scorning Farley, for he doesn’t understand his actions (yet another parallel of the comic villain). But all the while, Farley is the butt of the joke. Blistein would argue that the sympathetic comic character hints at respectability, hints towards a better position in life. Farley does none of this. He is the embodiment of the comic butt, but remains an object of sympathy. Somehow, Farley is able to succeed in the end. This is evidence that the audience does not scorn Farley, but loves him, despite his boorishness.

An important aspect that cannot be overlooked is the fact that in both films, Farley is a victim of traditional comic villains. Tommy Boy’s “brother” repeatedly tries to foil his attempts at salesmanship. Also, the current governor sets Mike up to appear as though he has burned down a government building. Farley is victimized in both films. True, these characters better illustrate Blistein’s comic antagonist. They are dishonest, and ultimately are defeated in the end. However, Farley defies all of Blistein’s conventions of a sympathetic comic character. In both films, Farley is in a position much more important than he deserves. He causes grief to his friends and family. He is at times crude, childish, rowdy, reckless, and rude. He is no better than he appears to be. There is no mistaking Farley’s characters as possibly being better than we are. He possesses many of Blistein’s comic villain’s traits, but he is always honest, always funny. Farley does have respectability, but it is a respectability for being a good person, not a respectability for his acting abilities. It would almost be impossible to see Chris Farley in a serious role. He is eternally the lovable idiot. We laugh at him, and love him for it.

Blistein does a wonderful job of describing the comic villain. He cites excellent examples and explores why we are pleased when the villain is defeated. Perhaps at the time, his definition of the sympathetic comic character was accurate, but film has changed. Chris Farley’s movies give a strong counterargument to what a sympathetic comic character or even a comic butt could be. Whether you like it or not, ”junior high” humor has a large place in today’s movies. Audiences of the sixties might not have been able to handle a Chris Farley. Farley and Spade have been called “the comedy team of the 90’s”. I don’t think the world would have been ready for them before then.

“You can get a pretty good look at your butcher by sticking you head up there, but would you rather take his word for it?……..Wait…..it’s gotta be your bull.” Chris Farley “Tommy Boy”

Works Cited

Black Sheep. Perf. Chris Farley, David Spade. 1996.

Blistein, Elmer M. Comedy in Action. Durham: Duke University Press, 1964.

Tommy Boy. Perf. Chris Farley, David Spade. 1994.