This article seems to miss the entire point of Nathan's whole shtick—human relationships are undeniably uncomfortable, but rather than suffer over them, we might as well have a laugh at them. I think anyone who's ever struggled with social interaction tends to love this show because it's a reminder that it's not all that deep.
I do disagree with that starting point. I don't find relationships undeniably uncomfortable. I've had my fair share of social struggles in my life, but my "not that deep" realization came from thinking about them less as opposed to diving into the minutiae of them. But maybe his solution works for him and those whole relate to his shows.
i keep thinking he is indicting the audience itself as complicit in the tropes of the yawning void that is modern reality television and its methods of eliciting conflict, drama and turmoil from those who perform often without realising it. ave caesar. morturi te salutant ..but yeah, thanks for putting this out there. I've not had a visceral reaction to anything like this in a long time. and i'm a huge chris morris fan here..so not exactly squeamish.
Thank you. You have perfectly encapsulated a feeling I could never quite put my finger on.
The whole spectrum of prank comedy, from its very lowest to its higher expressions (Candid Camera -> Nathan Fielder), has the same premise.
We stand and laugh at normal people, for the same reason: "Ha ha! You accepted a reality as it was presented to you! You interacted with other human beings in good faith! Ha ha! What an idiot!"
yeah.. it kind of makes objective qualities & virtues of normal people into defects
that's how psychopaths see normal people - either this guy is a clinical psychopath, either he has been giving in to their telos, because it provides him with public visibility, money, etc
To me, the main “joke” of The Rehearsal is something you touched on early in this piece: I do believe Nathan is intended to be the main butt of the show’s elaborate jokes. It’s very classically millennial self-deprecating humor: “I’m so unbelievably neurotic and have such a deep, pathological need for control that when left to my own devices, the results are absolutely absurd.” *That’s* the irony the joke hinges on — attempting to exercise an extreme need for situational control leads to ridiculous outcomes, proving that total control is impossible (and therefore Nathan is the fool).
I do agree with you partially in that there have been multiple, isolated instances in the show that bordered on being exploitative, the example commented on by someone else with the little boy actor being probably the worst. In a recent episode, Fielder pretended to be a baby Captain “Sully” breastfeeding from a giant puppet that was meant to represent Sully’s mother, and I did think how such a depiction could reasonably make the actual Captain Sully uncomfortable — it’s very NOT Boomer humor (though I wouldn’t be surprised if many, if not all, elements of that episode with Sully’s story/likeness legally had to be okayed by Sully himself).
I do disagree with you that the “Bring Me to Life” joke is pure Millennial Snot. Whether you unironically like the song or not, it’s inarguably pretty melodramatic (not a bad thing), and it’s funny to think of a serious person in a life-threatening scenario choosing such a melodramatic song as the soundtrack for the moment. Tonally, we can see why Sully might have thought it appropriate given the insights into his personality that Fielder conjectures on — it’s just a bit much; which is why it’s funnier that “Bring Me to Life” was chosen than, say, a Shania Twain song.
Yeah if that's what Fielder is going for with The Rehearsal it's just a few too many levels down the rabbit hole for me.
It seems like my read on "Bring Me To Life" and Fielder's overall irony usage might be wrong. I've seen it so many times before though, so that's where my mind went.
The style was crap, and most of us thought of it as crap way before the "millenial snot" became a thing. Same how we thought Hootie and the Blowfish, or Milli Vanilli, or Vanilla Ice, or NKOTB, or Hair Metal bands as crap.
Of course if you start from the premise that any song/band is as good as any other, and it's all just a matter of taste, then you can never arrive at why a certain band would be considered funny to drop their name as part of a joke.
As for Nathan, it's kind of obvious to me that he is an aspie - and that his way to look at people comes from that. And it's a valid way, and perhaps needed at least in moderation. It's not like we have a shortage of sentimental TV full of emphasis on connection and heartfelt sob stories.
Im someone who works in film and tv. A huge part of the show is that he wants you to feel sorry for his subjects and he wants you to think he’s an asshole. There are so many decisions made (music, editing, casting to name the biggest but not even touching the surface here) to achieve that point. I think the fact that he’s made you feel strongly and forego the thought that his subjects are just as in on it is a feat in storytelling and filmmaking. But that doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to hate it!
So you’re saying they’re in on it?🤞🏻Because ‘the pack’ thing with that one co-pilot made me, yes, feel sorry for him. Like, it seemed that he really wanted and struggled with connection and was open to some support in that area - instead he’s led to participate in this farce under the guise of help.
I don’t hate most of the show and really love the amazingly ridiculous details and recreations of spaces - but the way he ‘helped’ that man with dating did not feel good. It was making fun - unless, of course, he was in on it…which, I doubt.
I don't think picking "Bring Me To Life" is a put-down of anything. It's the one Evanescence song everyone knows and (sometimes secretly) likes and it's just funny to imagine it as the soundtrack to that particular moment.
I don't experience Nathan Fielder's stuff as particularly critical or harsh. I tend to think the joke is more about his autistic lack of feelings. It is absurdist, but I don't think it's necessarily critical to depict things as absurd.
Yeah my read on the song might be wrong. I just saw so many of my Millennial cohort engage in that kind of humor in my 20s, so that's where my mind goes.
> Fielder presents himself as a business school grad
He actually is:
> I went to University of Victoria. I did my undergraduate in business. I have a Bachelor’s of Commerce degree, majoring in entrepreneurship and marketing.
I think what "Nathan For You" does well is show how our market economy strongly incentivizes immoral behavior, especially for small business owners trying to compete with mega-corporations. It may be mean to the owners, but it does shine an important spotlight on this side of our economy.
Yes, I meant to say his pitch is that he’s a business school grad who’s going to help them out. Semi true, since he is helping them out but is also filming it for a comedy show.
Never considered that read on it before. Makes it more interesting, but the show still just doesn’t sit right with me.
I think he’s also satirising a lot of reality tv shows like Kitchen Nightmare and the like that aimed to help business from failing and in reality never did.
I love this show, it's the most indescribably bizarre and original thing I've ever seen on TV. But I also loved "How to With John Wilson". Both riveting IMO.
You aptly describe Fielder's absurdist humor yet fail to recognize the function of absurdism in comedy. You are correct that he minimizes everyone on the show as to a data point--that's kind of the premise. Isn't that kind of what you're doing here? What our culture does, generally? The show is a critique of what happens when we try to quantify humanity. I think absurdism is a great vehicle to deliver this message.
Also, your take on the use of evanescence being "boomer humor" is another example of the point going over your head. It's objectively hilarious that Sully included a mention of them in his memoir--not because they suck like Nickleback, but because it's difficult to imagine Sully listening to evanescence on his ipod. Fielder spelling out the absurdity of this image to us isn't mean spirited--it's absurd.
I don’t know, for whatever reason absurdism doesn’t register as the main mode for me. The fact that this is all presented as “reality,” even if it is heightened, lends a weight to it that takes the fun out of it.
Comedy by nature involves discomfort. It inherently involves crossing boundaries, and saying something that might be outside of the bounds of what is usually ok to say. I can see how the pranks he orchestrates are morally grey, but likening him to a Batman villain blowing up banks is quite the reach.
What an interesting take...you know, I see him so differently and I *think* it's because, perhaps, I am an Autistic person, and he just reads as *very* Autistic to me, or at least the humor does. The taking things literally, rabbit holes, it's all a bit "off", uncanny, absurd and strange and I just deeply enjoy that.
I view him as someone that is trying to make sense of the world, but gets it completely sideways. I keep thinking how they must have given him an enormous budget and he thought of complicated and ridiculous ways to spend it- the whole baby puppet scenes were so weird.
And also, I didn't think he was making fun of the song, it's a great song, at least I didn't read it that way, more that the song is quite empowering and can psych you up.
He is connecting dots where there is none essentially in his attempt to understand human nature, which on a deep level he constantly misunderstands.
But look, I think you made your case here and different strokes for different folks!
I have the same take as you, L. I see it as a commentary on western’s society desire to overoptimize and overanalyze. We overestimate completely how much is in our control. Nathan (in The Rehearsal) seems to deeply understand that reality and deeply misunderstand it simultaneously.
I’m not sure if I’ve seen anything else like this on television, but also I’m not super well versed in TV.
I agree with you Kayla! I am very well versed in TV, which is *maybe* not a good thing lol. You might like The Curse, which he is also in, it's very weird. I read an interview with him once...at least I think it was him and he spoke about leaving the bits *in* a reality show that would usually be left *out*. So people stumbling, or those awkward moments we normally gloss over. They are awkward, but really human.
It's funny that most are probably more comfortable with a more polished, sanitised or *put together* kind of show or narrative although maybe not very surprising. It's interesting to hear about peoples reactions to it.
!!! That insight from the interview hmmm. So interesting. I have a friend who can’t watch the show because it physically hurts; she says the cringe is just that bad for her. I wonder if it’s because of those bits that are left in.
I wonder how much of folks’ disdain for the show is also a physical reaction. Yes, it’s so interesting!
Great piece! But I have to disagree a little bit. I think the point of Nathan Fielder's work is that you're supposed to dislike him. He's pointing out that everything is performative, but if everything is performative, can anything be sincere?
If Nathan were really malicious, why is he the butt of the joke as much as the people he puts on? He has final say on what gets aired, doesn't he? Surely he can anticipate you not liking his behavior, but he keeps doing it because that's the point. The joke's on him, just like it's on everyone else.
I agree that prank comedy is hard to watch because it's so relatable. We relate both to the pranker and the prankee, but I think the point is that we're each simultaneously both, all throughout our lives.
Interesting point. Sometimes I see him as on a different plane (No pun intended) than the other participants. He’s the guy behind the controls, so it’s hard for him to truly be the butt of the joke. He ultimately had too much control.
I enjoyed the lighter tone of Nathan for You. But there is a part of The Rehearsal where Nathan is practicing being a father which seemed quite bizarre and left a bad taste in my mouth. One of the child actors he’s using for the role of son who is quite young and lacks a father in real life appears to get genuinely confused about the week of father-son roleplay his mom has signed him up for. Nathan then makes a show of comforting the child and continuing to visit him in a friend / not dad capacity, reiterating to the child that he is not in fact his father. The whole thing felt like Nathan was messing with this kid to further some ironic-comedic premise. The more he tries to come of as sincere in the show the weirder it feels, because as long as it’s on camera it’s inevitably all still part of the bit. That’s why Nathan for You was less unsettling imo
I heard about this episode and I agree, it sounds horrific. It really goes to show the shortcomings of “rehearsing” life as opposed to actually living it.
What bugged me about NFY is the way he was always pushing people’s buttons, but that’s probably just my personal taste more than anything. There’s some undeniably funny stuff in that show.
I thought that aspect of the series was really unsettling too. I did think Nathan was being genuine in trying to help re-set the relationship, but the "blame" here is really on the mom. She knew her son didn't have a father and wanted a father. He was too young to understand "acting" and clearly was not a child actor. In the end it really doesn't matter. I feel for that boy so much. It was heartbreaking.
I saw that episode and agree. That was the moment when The Rehearsal flipped from being awkward to genuine evil. That little boy is a human being who is coping with having no dad. And Fiedler exploited his feelings for our amusement.
Oh you should stick with it if you have half a mind to-- both shows are actually a deep study of Nathan ( the character) and his attempts to connect with other people. These bits are sprinkled in the Nathan for You episodes, but more focused in The Rehearsal
I am actually surprised, in reading this, that the objections to this comedy do not mention what, to me, is the biggest, most glaring, problem: often the absurd behavior exhibited by the subjects in these shows is a result of their desperately trying to fulfill a function that they are being paid to perform. In some cases people are very overtly being offered money to perform ridiculous tasks, and thus look as clowns to the world.
This article seems to miss the entire point of Nathan's whole shtick—human relationships are undeniably uncomfortable, but rather than suffer over them, we might as well have a laugh at them. I think anyone who's ever struggled with social interaction tends to love this show because it's a reminder that it's not all that deep.
I do disagree with that starting point. I don't find relationships undeniably uncomfortable. I've had my fair share of social struggles in my life, but my "not that deep" realization came from thinking about them less as opposed to diving into the minutiae of them. But maybe his solution works for him and those whole relate to his shows.
i keep thinking he is indicting the audience itself as complicit in the tropes of the yawning void that is modern reality television and its methods of eliciting conflict, drama and turmoil from those who perform often without realising it. ave caesar. morturi te salutant ..but yeah, thanks for putting this out there. I've not had a visceral reaction to anything like this in a long time. and i'm a huge chris morris fan here..so not exactly squeamish.
But the laughs are at the people not in on the joke, not about relationships which is a very large basket by definition.
Thank you. You have perfectly encapsulated a feeling I could never quite put my finger on.
The whole spectrum of prank comedy, from its very lowest to its higher expressions (Candid Camera -> Nathan Fielder), has the same premise.
We stand and laugh at normal people, for the same reason: "Ha ha! You accepted a reality as it was presented to you! You interacted with other human beings in good faith! Ha ha! What an idiot!"
It's not pleasant.
"It's not pleasant" is a pretty succinct summary of why I don't like it. I get no enjoyment out of these shows.
yeah.. it kind of makes objective qualities & virtues of normal people into defects
that's how psychopaths see normal people - either this guy is a clinical psychopath, either he has been giving in to their telos, because it provides him with public visibility, money, etc
To me, the main “joke” of The Rehearsal is something you touched on early in this piece: I do believe Nathan is intended to be the main butt of the show’s elaborate jokes. It’s very classically millennial self-deprecating humor: “I’m so unbelievably neurotic and have such a deep, pathological need for control that when left to my own devices, the results are absolutely absurd.” *That’s* the irony the joke hinges on — attempting to exercise an extreme need for situational control leads to ridiculous outcomes, proving that total control is impossible (and therefore Nathan is the fool).
I do agree with you partially in that there have been multiple, isolated instances in the show that bordered on being exploitative, the example commented on by someone else with the little boy actor being probably the worst. In a recent episode, Fielder pretended to be a baby Captain “Sully” breastfeeding from a giant puppet that was meant to represent Sully’s mother, and I did think how such a depiction could reasonably make the actual Captain Sully uncomfortable — it’s very NOT Boomer humor (though I wouldn’t be surprised if many, if not all, elements of that episode with Sully’s story/likeness legally had to be okayed by Sully himself).
I do disagree with you that the “Bring Me to Life” joke is pure Millennial Snot. Whether you unironically like the song or not, it’s inarguably pretty melodramatic (not a bad thing), and it’s funny to think of a serious person in a life-threatening scenario choosing such a melodramatic song as the soundtrack for the moment. Tonally, we can see why Sully might have thought it appropriate given the insights into his personality that Fielder conjectures on — it’s just a bit much; which is why it’s funnier that “Bring Me to Life” was chosen than, say, a Shania Twain song.
Yeah if that's what Fielder is going for with The Rehearsal it's just a few too many levels down the rabbit hole for me.
It seems like my read on "Bring Me To Life" and Fielder's overall irony usage might be wrong. I've seen it so many times before though, so that's where my mind went.
I like the song too, but it’s hilarious to think of someone listening to it and saying ‘you know what this needs? A white guy rapping’
As was the style at the time
The style was crap, and most of us thought of it as crap way before the "millenial snot" became a thing. Same how we thought Hootie and the Blowfish, or Milli Vanilli, or Vanilla Ice, or NKOTB, or Hair Metal bands as crap.
Of course if you start from the premise that any song/band is as good as any other, and it's all just a matter of taste, then you can never arrive at why a certain band would be considered funny to drop their name as part of a joke.
As for Nathan, it's kind of obvious to me that he is an aspie - and that his way to look at people comes from that. And it's a valid way, and perhaps needed at least in moderation. It's not like we have a shortage of sentimental TV full of emphasis on connection and heartfelt sob stories.
iirc that was infamously a music exec who refused to believe that the album would sell unless it had more male vocals
Im someone who works in film and tv. A huge part of the show is that he wants you to feel sorry for his subjects and he wants you to think he’s an asshole. There are so many decisions made (music, editing, casting to name the biggest but not even touching the surface here) to achieve that point. I think the fact that he’s made you feel strongly and forego the thought that his subjects are just as in on it is a feat in storytelling and filmmaking. But that doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to hate it!
Fair! It’s very obvious how talented he is. I just don’t care for the end result.
So you’re saying they’re in on it?🤞🏻Because ‘the pack’ thing with that one co-pilot made me, yes, feel sorry for him. Like, it seemed that he really wanted and struggled with connection and was open to some support in that area - instead he’s led to participate in this farce under the guise of help.
I don’t hate most of the show and really love the amazingly ridiculous details and recreations of spaces - but the way he ‘helped’ that man with dating did not feel good. It was making fun - unless, of course, he was in on it…which, I doubt.
I don't think picking "Bring Me To Life" is a put-down of anything. It's the one Evanescence song everyone knows and (sometimes secretly) likes and it's just funny to imagine it as the soundtrack to that particular moment.
I don't experience Nathan Fielder's stuff as particularly critical or harsh. I tend to think the joke is more about his autistic lack of feelings. It is absurdist, but I don't think it's necessarily critical to depict things as absurd.
Yeah my read on the song might be wrong. I just saw so many of my Millennial cohort engage in that kind of humor in my 20s, so that's where my mind goes.
Yeh, I’m not sure the author here needed to debunk that Sully didn’t actually achieve the miracle on the Hudson by listening to it on his iPod…
Bring Me To Life in what could have been a catastrophic moment isn't ironic or funny.
There’s something very Nathan Fielder about the mocking use of Evanescence being a bridge too far for you.
I’ve always thought that all criticism is really just projection 🤔
> Fielder presents himself as a business school grad
He actually is:
> I went to University of Victoria. I did my undergraduate in business. I have a Bachelor’s of Commerce degree, majoring in entrepreneurship and marketing.
I think what "Nathan For You" does well is show how our market economy strongly incentivizes immoral behavior, especially for small business owners trying to compete with mega-corporations. It may be mean to the owners, but it does shine an important spotlight on this side of our economy.
Yes, I meant to say his pitch is that he’s a business school grad who’s going to help them out. Semi true, since he is helping them out but is also filming it for a comedy show.
Never considered that read on it before. Makes it more interesting, but the show still just doesn’t sit right with me.
I think he’s also satirising a lot of reality tv shows like Kitchen Nightmare and the like that aimed to help business from failing and in reality never did.
I love this show, it's the most indescribably bizarre and original thing I've ever seen on TV. But I also loved "How to With John Wilson". Both riveting IMO.
It’s definitely incredible television. I just can’t enjoy it nor do I have any innate desire to watch it.
Ditto.
You aptly describe Fielder's absurdist humor yet fail to recognize the function of absurdism in comedy. You are correct that he minimizes everyone on the show as to a data point--that's kind of the premise. Isn't that kind of what you're doing here? What our culture does, generally? The show is a critique of what happens when we try to quantify humanity. I think absurdism is a great vehicle to deliver this message.
Also, your take on the use of evanescence being "boomer humor" is another example of the point going over your head. It's objectively hilarious that Sully included a mention of them in his memoir--not because they suck like Nickleback, but because it's difficult to imagine Sully listening to evanescence on his ipod. Fielder spelling out the absurdity of this image to us isn't mean spirited--it's absurd.
I don’t know, for whatever reason absurdism doesn’t register as the main mode for me. The fact that this is all presented as “reality,” even if it is heightened, lends a weight to it that takes the fun out of it.
Comedy by nature involves discomfort. It inherently involves crossing boundaries, and saying something that might be outside of the bounds of what is usually ok to say. I can see how the pranks he orchestrates are morally grey, but likening him to a Batman villain blowing up banks is quite the reach.
I mostly meant it in that he’s a demented genius.
What an interesting take...you know, I see him so differently and I *think* it's because, perhaps, I am an Autistic person, and he just reads as *very* Autistic to me, or at least the humor does. The taking things literally, rabbit holes, it's all a bit "off", uncanny, absurd and strange and I just deeply enjoy that.
I view him as someone that is trying to make sense of the world, but gets it completely sideways. I keep thinking how they must have given him an enormous budget and he thought of complicated and ridiculous ways to spend it- the whole baby puppet scenes were so weird.
And also, I didn't think he was making fun of the song, it's a great song, at least I didn't read it that way, more that the song is quite empowering and can psych you up.
He is connecting dots where there is none essentially in his attempt to understand human nature, which on a deep level he constantly misunderstands.
But look, I think you made your case here and different strokes for different folks!
I have the same take as you, L. I see it as a commentary on western’s society desire to overoptimize and overanalyze. We overestimate completely how much is in our control. Nathan (in The Rehearsal) seems to deeply understand that reality and deeply misunderstand it simultaneously.
I’m not sure if I’ve seen anything else like this on television, but also I’m not super well versed in TV.
I agree with you Kayla! I am very well versed in TV, which is *maybe* not a good thing lol. You might like The Curse, which he is also in, it's very weird. I read an interview with him once...at least I think it was him and he spoke about leaving the bits *in* a reality show that would usually be left *out*. So people stumbling, or those awkward moments we normally gloss over. They are awkward, but really human.
It's funny that most are probably more comfortable with a more polished, sanitised or *put together* kind of show or narrative although maybe not very surprising. It's interesting to hear about peoples reactions to it.
!!! That insight from the interview hmmm. So interesting. I have a friend who can’t watch the show because it physically hurts; she says the cringe is just that bad for her. I wonder if it’s because of those bits that are left in.
I wonder how much of folks’ disdain for the show is also a physical reaction. Yes, it’s so interesting!
Great piece! But I have to disagree a little bit. I think the point of Nathan Fielder's work is that you're supposed to dislike him. He's pointing out that everything is performative, but if everything is performative, can anything be sincere?
If Nathan were really malicious, why is he the butt of the joke as much as the people he puts on? He has final say on what gets aired, doesn't he? Surely he can anticipate you not liking his behavior, but he keeps doing it because that's the point. The joke's on him, just like it's on everyone else.
I agree that prank comedy is hard to watch because it's so relatable. We relate both to the pranker and the prankee, but I think the point is that we're each simultaneously both, all throughout our lives.
Interesting point. Sometimes I see him as on a different plane (No pun intended) than the other participants. He’s the guy behind the controls, so it’s hard for him to truly be the butt of the joke. He ultimately had too much control.
I enjoyed the lighter tone of Nathan for You. But there is a part of The Rehearsal where Nathan is practicing being a father which seemed quite bizarre and left a bad taste in my mouth. One of the child actors he’s using for the role of son who is quite young and lacks a father in real life appears to get genuinely confused about the week of father-son roleplay his mom has signed him up for. Nathan then makes a show of comforting the child and continuing to visit him in a friend / not dad capacity, reiterating to the child that he is not in fact his father. The whole thing felt like Nathan was messing with this kid to further some ironic-comedic premise. The more he tries to come of as sincere in the show the weirder it feels, because as long as it’s on camera it’s inevitably all still part of the bit. That’s why Nathan for You was less unsettling imo
I heard about this episode and I agree, it sounds horrific. It really goes to show the shortcomings of “rehearsing” life as opposed to actually living it.
What bugged me about NFY is the way he was always pushing people’s buttons, but that’s probably just my personal taste more than anything. There’s some undeniably funny stuff in that show.
I thought that aspect of the series was really unsettling too. I did think Nathan was being genuine in trying to help re-set the relationship, but the "blame" here is really on the mom. She knew her son didn't have a father and wanted a father. He was too young to understand "acting" and clearly was not a child actor. In the end it really doesn't matter. I feel for that boy so much. It was heartbreaking.
I agree, except Fiedler could have chosen not to air the episodes with the boy.
I saw that episode and agree. That was the moment when The Rehearsal flipped from being awkward to genuine evil. That little boy is a human being who is coping with having no dad. And Fiedler exploited his feelings for our amusement.
Literally the same as every other child actor out there.
That is the coolest gym if they play "Dragula" somewhat regularly.
Oh you should stick with it if you have half a mind to-- both shows are actually a deep study of Nathan ( the character) and his attempts to connect with other people. These bits are sprinkled in the Nathan for You episodes, but more focused in The Rehearsal
It’s gonna take a lot of willpower on my part to finish. Every episode I watch, I never want to be exposed to that show ever again.
I am actually surprised, in reading this, that the objections to this comedy do not mention what, to me, is the biggest, most glaring, problem: often the absurd behavior exhibited by the subjects in these shows is a result of their desperately trying to fulfill a function that they are being paid to perform. In some cases people are very overtly being offered money to perform ridiculous tasks, and thus look as clowns to the world.
True! Or they’re just doing their literal jobs, and this guy with a TV camera is bothering them.