Shame on Mr Seinfeld

    All I ask is: "What would it happen if that in the last episode of
Seinfeld the Old Glory gets burned and stepped on?" How would you feel?
    What you think should be done? I hope you agree with me that the scene
should have been avoided. And, I think an apology from Mr. Seinfeld and NBC
is in order

On Sun, 10 May 1998 18:50:36 -0400, "Francisco J Isern" wrote:

Actually, if it had been a 4th of July parade, and Kramer accidentaly set fire to the US flag, it would have been even funnier (then we could enjoy listening to the Republicans kvetch and krechtz).

This may well have been an indirect and less obvious take on that very question. Besides which, it's abundantly clear that it's the stupidity and obtuseness of the central characters that gets them into this mess, not malice...and it's equally clear that their conduct is hardly to be held up as a positive example. The whole episode was designed to point up the insensitivity and shallowness, not only of the "Fab Four", but of their entire generation of affluent and self-indulgent baby boomers. Just like the whole series.

NBC already has apologized for any offense given and taken. However, it's pretty clear that Seinfeld, Elaine, Kramer and George were intended to be the targets of the episode, not the people who their clumsy and self-centered conduct offended. And they got their just desserts (pushed around, cuffed around, car trashed, and the final insult from the VW driver) as a result of their insensitivity. When the VW Golf driver laughs and screams "Jackass" he's making the final editorial comment on their behavior...and frankly it's clear the audience is supposed to agree with him.

The scene might well have been handled more subtly to make the same point about these folks...and that may be a sign of Jerry's burnout and the wisdom of his decision to retire. But what this was, if a little heavy-handed, was a con- tinuation of what has been a nine-season long skewering of a generation of self-indulgent, immature people...as repre- sented by Jerry and friends.

Bob Smith, afternoons WXXI-AM 1370, Rochester NY

Absolutely, positively NO apology is in order. If you can't take a joke, then that's too bad. Anything out there can, in some way, offend someone. Do you know how boring this world would be if everything that was ever produced was made so that no one would be offended.

What is more important than a piece of cloth (the flag) is in what way it was being portrayed and what the characters did with it. Kramer draped himself in the flag and was celebrating with the Puerto Ricans. Then he ACCIDENTALLY set it on fire and had to put it out someone. In his STUPID way, he stomps on it. That is sooo funny!!!

• Don Jaun

Francisco J Isern wrote in message ...

I could give a rat's ass, but if it was done in the same way I would have laughed just like I did originally.

He'd say, "Well, at least we have our health. And what's the deal with these American flags..."

Did you say American fags?

----------------------------------

----------------------------------

Melissa "Budgie" Dirmeyer wrote:

Well actually Francisco most American's don't have a giant hair up their ass about a little ethnic humor. If you are so sensitive, watch Friends. It will make you all warm and cozy and you won't have to think.

On Sun, 10 May 1998 18:50:36 -0400, "Francisco J Isern" wrote:

Come on. This is the show that had Jerry mug an old lady for her bread. They killed off Susan and had George out dating again before the body was cold. I would have laughed my ass of if it was a 4th of July day parade or a Veterans day parade and Kramer accidently burned an American flag. It was funny because Kramer was having fun and getting into the parade and festivities and then, being the idiot that he is, accidently starts his flag on fire. The only problem I had with it is it didn't go far enough. I wanted to see news crews and reporters run over to cover Kramer's "protest" and have a huge race riot break out, bigger then the one in LA, all because Kramer is a dufus.

Once again, someone who can't perceive the difference between symbolism and substance.

B.

On Sun, 10 May 1998 18:50:36 -0400, "Francisco J Isern" wrote: