Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OT: Jon Stewart's Opening Monologue 9/20

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Pat Fleet

unread,
Sep 24, 2001, 1:20:11 PM9/24/01
to
In the 4045 posts I currently have in alt.fan.letteman, perhaps I missed
this. It is very good -- and really should be seen & *heard* if you have
RealPlayer. jon_6030_56.ram

The text, from Comedy Central Web site:
http://www.comedycentral.com/dailyshow/


JON STEWART'S OPENING MONOLOGUE
DATE: September 20, 2001

Good evening and welcome to "The Daily Show." We are back. This is our first
show since the tragedy in New York City. There is no other way really to
start this show than to ask you at home the question that we've asked the
audience here tonight and that weąve asked everybody that we know here in
New York since September 11th, and that is, "Are you okay?"

We pray that you are and that your family is. Iąm sorry to do this to you.
Itąs another entertainment show beginning with an overwrought speech of a
shaken host. TV is nothing, if not redundant. So, I apologize for that. Itąs
something that unfortunately, we do for ourselves so that we can drain
whatever abscess is in our hearts and move onto the business of making you
laugh, which we really havenąt been able to do very effectively lately.

Everyoneąs checked in already, I know weąre late. Iąm sure weąre getting in
right under the wire before the cast of "Survivor" offers their insight into
what to do in these situations.

They said to get back to work. There were no jobs available for a man in the
fetal position under his desk crying, which I would have gladly taken. So I
came back here. Tonightąs show is obviously not a regular show. We looked
through the vaults, we found some clips that we thought might make you
smile, which is really whatąs necessary, I think, right about now. A lot of
folks have asked me, "What are you going to do when you get back? What are
you going to say?" I mean, what a terrible thing to have to do. I donąt see
it as a burden at all. I see it as a privilege. I see it as a privilege and
everyone here does see it that way.

The show in general, we feel like is a privilege. Just even the idea that we
can sit in the back of the country and make wise cracks, which is really
what we do. We sit in the back and we throw spitballs, but never forgetting
the fact that is a luxury in this country that allows us to do that. This is
a country that allows for open satire, and I know that sounds basic and it
sounds as though it goes without saying - but thatąs really what this whole
situation is about. Itąs the difference between closed and open. Itąs the
difference between free and burden and we donąt take that for granted here
by any stretch of the imagination and our show has changed. I donąt doubt
that. What itąs become, I donąt know.

"Subliminable" is not a punch line anymore. One day it will become that
again, and Lord willing, it will become that again because that means we
have ridden out the storm.

But the main reason that I wanted to speak tonight is not to tell you what
the show is going to be. Not to tell you about all the incredibly brave
people that are here in New York and in Washington and around the country.
But weąve had an enduring pain here - an endurable pain. I wanted to tell
you why I grieve, but why I donąt despairŠIąm sorry. Luckily we can edit
this.

One of my first memories is of Martin Luther King being shot. I was five and
if you wonder if this feeling will passŠWhen I was five, he was shot. Hereąs
what I remember about it. I was in a school in Trenton. They shut the lights
off and we got to sit under our desks and we thought that was really cool
and they gave us cottage cheese, which was a cold lunch because there was
rioting, but we didnąt know that. We just thought that łMy god. We get to
sit under our desks and eat cottage cheese.˛ Thatąs what I remember about
it. That was a tremendous test of this countryąs fabric and this countryąs
had many tests before that and after that.

The reason I donąt despair is because this attack happened. Itąs not a
dream. But the aftermath of it, the recovery is a dream realized. And that
is Martin Luther King's dream. Whatever barriers we've put up are gone even
if it's momentary. We're judging people by not the color of their skin but
the content of their character. You know, all this talk about "These guys
are criminal masterminds. Theyąve gotten together and their extraordinary
guileŠand their wit and their skill." It's a lie. Any fool can blow
something up. Any fool can destroy. But to see these guys, these
firefighters, these policemen and people from all over the country,
literally, with buckets rebuilding. That's extraordinary. That's why we've
already won. It's light. It's democracy. We've already won. They can't shut
that down. They live in chaos and chaosŠit can't sustain itself. It never
could. It's too easy and it's too unsatisfying.

The view from my apartment was the World Trade Center and now it's gone.
They attacked it. This symbol of American ingenuity and strength and labor
and imagination and commerce and it is gone. But you know what the view is
now? The Statue of Liberty. The view from the south of Manhattan is now the
Statue of Liberty. You can't beat that.

So we're going to take a break and I'm going to stop slobbering on myself
and on the desk. Weąre going to get back to this. It's gonna be fun and
funny and it's going to be the same as it was and I thank you. We'll be
right back.

ddr

unread,
Sep 24, 2001, 1:26:49 PM9/24/01
to
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:20:11 GMT, Pat Fleet <pfl...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>In the 4045 posts I currently have in alt.fan.letteman, perhaps I missed
>this. It is very good -- and really should be seen & *heard* if you have
>RealPlayer. jon_6030_56.ram

I'm sure I'll be universally despised for saying this, but I saw the
monolog when it aired, and it just felt like Jon was being kind of
phony.

Maybe I'm wrong, but that was how it felt to me. It was embarrassing.

diane

Brad Hill

unread,
Sep 24, 2001, 2:12:15 PM9/24/01
to
I'm a loyal Jon Stewart fan, and his monologue last week was certainly
heartfelt. Yet, I can't help observing, it was ineffective and difficult to
watch. I think if Jon had put more effort into writing his statement he
would have expressed himself better, and might not have spent so much energy
blubbering. It reads nicely, but his sobbing delivery took away much of its
power. The point about the missing towers opening up a view of the Statue of
Liberty is great, but the moment was drowned in tears. Jon is such a good
writer, I wish he had poured his feeling into a more organized statement.
Perhaps he was inspired by Dave's masterful speech, but in this way, as in
most ways, it's a mistake to try imitating Dave.

Brad
www.bradhill.com

"Pat Fleet" <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:B7D4D574.7F1B%pfl...@earthlink.net...

> you why I grieve, but why I donąt despairSIąm sorry. Luckily we can edit


> this.
>
> One of my first memories is of Martin Luther King being shot. I was five
and

> if you wonder if this feeling will passSWhen I was five, he was shot.


Hereąs
> what I remember about it. I was in a school in Trenton. They shut the
lights
> off and we got to sit under our desks and we thought that was really cool
> and they gave us cottage cheese, which was a cold lunch because there was
> rioting, but we didnąt know that. We just thought that łMy god. We get to
> sit under our desks and eat cottage cheese.˛ Thatąs what I remember about
> it. That was a tremendous test of this countryąs fabric and this countryąs
> had many tests before that and after that.
>
> The reason I donąt despair is because this attack happened. Itąs not a
> dream. But the aftermath of it, the recovery is a dream realized. And that
> is Martin Luther King's dream. Whatever barriers we've put up are gone
even
> if it's momentary. We're judging people by not the color of their skin but
> the content of their character. You know, all this talk about "These guys
> are criminal masterminds. Theyąve gotten together and their extraordinary

> guileSand their wit and their skill." It's a lie. Any fool can blow


> something up. Any fool can destroy. But to see these guys, these
> firefighters, these policemen and people from all over the country,
> literally, with buckets rebuilding. That's extraordinary. That's why we've
> already won. It's light. It's democracy. We've already won. They can't
shut

> that down. They live in chaos and chaosSit can't sustain itself. It never

ddr

unread,
Sep 24, 2001, 3:58:14 PM9/24/01
to
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 14:12:15 -0400, "Brad Hill" <br...@bradhill.com>
wrote:

>I think if Jon had put more effort into writing his statement he
>would have expressed himself better, and might not have spent so much energy
>blubbering.

>Perhaps he was inspired by Dave's masterful speech, but in this way, as in
>most ways, it's a mistake to try imitating Dave.

That's probably a more coherent expression of my feelings about his
monolog than I could have communicated.

Thanks, Brad.

diane

Jmslsu01

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 12:11:17 AM9/25/01
to
>I think if Jon had put more effort into writing his statement he
>would have expressed himself better, and might not have spent so much energy
>blubbering.

He probably thought about what he wanted to say,but when it came up to the time
to deliver his remarks,he came unglued. I can't say I blame him,even if he is a
fine performer. I'm sure you saw tonight's episode-he seemed a bit embarrassed
about Thursday night.

Jen

Jen Walton

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 4:13:53 PM9/25/01
to
Stewart's crying and his repeated "uhh, uhh"'s made him hard to watch.
I think he said "uhh" about 46 times during his speech, and it was
obvious he knew what he was going to say, but he couldn't get his
feelings out as well as Dave did.
-Jenny

MeanMary

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 4:47:23 PM9/25/01
to
Jen Walton <wal...@excite.com> wrote:
: Stewart's crying and his repeated "uhh, uhh"'s made him hard to watch.

: I think he said "uhh" about 46 times during his speech, and it was
: obvious he knew what he was going to say, but he couldn't get his
: feelings out as well as Dave did.

I tried to watch, but couldn't and ended up changing the channel.

MeanMary
--
Copyright 2001 Mary Ballard // I do not speak for Appalachian State U.
// ball...@spam.appstate.edu - remove *s* and *a* from spam to email me.
--
I'm happy. I'm feelin' glad. I've got sunshine in a bag... Gorillaz

Pat Fleet

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 5:44:39 PM9/25/01
to
Brad said (and was echoed by a few others):

> I'm a loyal Jon Stewart fan, and his monologue last week was certainly
> heartfelt. Yet, I can't help observing, it was ineffective and difficult to
> watch.

Well, I'm shocked. It seems like all responses here to Jon's comments about
the NY attacks are similar, and that is not the way I reacted *at all* to
his 8 minutes. I didn't see it broadcast on his show, but over the internet
(which for me is more similar to radio due to my pokey 28.8 connection).
The internet video portion is halting, so maybe it wasn't offensive because
of that. It not only *wasn't offensive,* in fact, it was very effective and
drew me in because he sounded very sincere and honest, not forced or
manufactured.

Again, here was a guy I cared about who was hurting and I just wanted to put
my arms around him and offer comfort.

> Perhaps he was inspired by Dave's masterful speech, but in this way, as in
> most ways, it's a mistake to try imitating Dave.

Was he as effective as Dave? No way. I don't think anyone is (personal
opinion). Of any of the TV hosts, I don't think Jon was trying to
*compete.* OK, maybe he was trying to imitate Dave. All of them were,
because Dave was first and most eloquent (again my opinion).

I'm feeling a bit like the naive, always perky, cheerleader around here
lately, but that's not really true. I'm all grown up and have experienced
some pretty black lows and genuine highs. From all our experiences, we
learn to make character & value judgements about everything and everyone
around us. That's just human nature. Jon's moment was A-OK in my book.

ddr

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 6:28:01 PM9/25/01
to
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 21:44:39 GMT, Pat Fleet <pfl...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>The internet video portion is halting, so maybe it wasn't offensive because


>of that. It not only *wasn't offensive,* in fact, it was very effective and
>drew me in because he sounded very sincere and honest, not forced or
>manufactured.

It wasn't offensive at all. I don't think anyone felt that way. And I
find it interesting that other people felt the way I felt about it. I
thought for sure I'd be the only one who could barely sit through it.

diane

Brad Hill

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 6:24:12 PM9/25/01
to
"Pat Fleet" <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:B7D664F2.8044%pfl...@earthlink.net...

> Well, I'm shocked. It seems like all responses here to Jon's comments
about
> the NY attacks are similar, and that is not the way I reacted *at all* to
> his 8 minutes. I didn't see it broadcast on his show, but over the
internet
> (which for me is more similar to radio due to my pokey 28.8 connection).
> The internet video portion is halting, so maybe it wasn't offensive
because
> of that. It not only *wasn't offensive,* in fact, it was very effective
and
> drew me in because he sounded very sincere and honest, not forced or
> manufactured.

I thought it was sincere and honest, too. It just didn't grip me, probably
because of the distraction of seeing Jon so upset.

> Again, here was a guy I cared about who was hurting and I just wanted to
put
> my arms around him and offer comfort.

Well, that's right. And I wanted him to stop trying to talk.

> Was he as effective as Dave? No way. I don't think anyone is (personal
> opinion). Of any of the TV hosts, I don't think Jon was trying to
> *compete.* OK, maybe he was trying to imitate Dave. All of them were,
> because Dave was first and most eloquent (again my opinion).

Jon's approach was similar, in that he seemed to have a sketchy outline for
his address, and he improvised within it. Dave had a small pice of paper on
his desk as he spoke. Dave was masterful because he spoke so eloquently
while barely managing to control his feelings. Jon spoke rather
inarticulately and couldn't control his feelings ... nothing wrong with
crying, for sure, and I appreciate his willingness to be publicly
vulnerable. I just think that if he had writeen his thoughts more formally,
the address would have been both more eloquent and delivered with less
distraction.

> Jon's moment was A-OK in my book.

I still love the guy. The first post-attack "edition" of the Daily Show
newsletter should arrive today, with the usual mail-in comments, and I'm
sure it will be filled with appreciative sentiments just like yours.

Shouldn't somebody be apologizing here within the next year or two?

Brad
www.bradhill.com

mjgr...@nospamyahoo.com

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 7:39:00 PM9/25/01
to
Pat Fleet <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Brad said (and was echoed by a few others):
> > I'm a loyal Jon Stewart fan, and his monologue last week was certainly
> > heartfelt. Yet, I can't help observing, it was ineffective and
> > difficult to watch.
>
> Well, I'm shocked. It seems like all responses here to Jon's comments
> about the NY attacks are similar, and that is not the way I reacted *at
> all* to his 8 minutes.

Me neither--I was really moved, despite the awkward moments.

> I didn't see it broadcast on his show, but over
> the internet (which for me is more similar to radio due to my pokey 28.8
> connection). The internet video portion is halting, so maybe it wasn't
> offensive because of that. It not only *wasn't offensive,* in fact, it
> was very effective and drew me in because he sounded very sincere and
> honest, not forced or manufactured.

I saw it on TV, and was drawn in as well. Yes, it was a little
uncomfortable watching him, especially at the beginning as he stammered and
choked up, but his discomfort did not strike me as forced or phony. And
as he continued to speak, he lost some of the awkwardness, making a
pretty powerful, positive statement, imo.

> > Perhaps he was inspired by Dave's masterful speech, but in this way, as
> > in most ways, it's a mistake to try imitating Dave.
>
> Was he as effective as Dave? No way. I don't think anyone is (personal
> opinion). Of any of the TV hosts, I don't think Jon was trying to
> *compete.* OK, maybe he was trying to imitate Dave. All of them were,
> because Dave was first and most eloquent (again my opinion).

Eh, I think it's a mistake to compare the other hosts to Dave. Dave has
been a broadcaster for many years--the others are neophytes in comparison.
As far as imitating--Dave was first and set the tone with an eloquent
speech. In a way, the others had no choice but to follow along the same
vein, making personal statements on their first day back--anything less
would have seemed insensitive.

So they did--Jay's remarks were well-written, but highly scripted and read
off a teleprompter. I thought he exceeded expectations and actually did a
good job. Conan, Craig and Jon's remarks were all somewhat awkward, but
also heartfelt and ultimately moving. I was touched by these guys--normally
quick, articulate and witty the tragedy rendered them a bit at a loss for
words--understandable considering the circumstances.

> I'm feeling a bit like the naive, always perky, cheerleader around here
> lately, but that's not really true. I'm all grown up and have
> experienced some pretty black lows and genuine highs. From all our
> experiences, we learn to make character & value judgements about
> everything and everyone around us. That's just human nature. Jon's
> moment was A-OK in my book.

I lurk here mostly and wasn't going to say anything until I read your post
and figured you needed some back up :). BTW over in afcob the reaction
to Jon has been mostly positive. Those folks skew younger, if that makes
any difference--not me, though--darn ;).

mj

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service

b.p. nichols

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 10:39:27 PM9/25/01
to
Wow, it takes quite a group of people to spend there time comparing the
sincere and emotional speeches given by human beings in a time of tragedy.

I imagine these people have better things to do than "imitate" one another.
I really don't think that's necessary at a time like this.

And for the record, Stewart's speech was very well thought out and eloquent.
If you didn't think so, perhaps you should just read the transcript. That
way you won't be distracted by the emotions of your fellow man.

Brandon

"Pat Fleet" <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:B7D664F2.8044%pfl...@earthlink.net...

Caroline Fortin

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 10:56:14 PM9/25/01
to
hey,

I'm looking for a copy of this show so if anyone can help me, please e-mail

Carry
"Jmslsu01" <jmsl...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message news:
20010925001117...@mb-fg.aol.com...

James Langdell

unread,
Sep 25, 2001, 11:25:59 PM9/25/01
to
Pat Fleet <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote...

> In the 4045 posts I currently have in alt.fan.letteman, perhaps I missed
> this. It is very good -- and really should be seen & *heard* if you have
> RealPlayer. jon_6030_56.ram
>
> The text, from Comedy Central Web site:
> http://www.comedycentral.com/dailyshow/

Pat, thank you for sharing this link. I watched Jon Stewart say this
last Thursday night--I was a little surprised to find a fresh Daily Show
being aired that night. Jon drew me in with this speech. I suspect some
of his determination to let a lot of passion hamper then propel his words
was from fear that the final image, if delivered too smothly, could be
perceived as a glib joke about rising property values for the upgraded
view from his New York residence. But Jon did succeed in investing the
Statue of Liberty as a potent symbol in his speech. I'm amazed to see,
after what he said was transcribed into real paragraphs, a work in words
that also hangs together quite effectively.

I don't think he tried to copy Letterman's speech as much as feel
challenged to allow himself to be as open with these thoughts and
emotions as with those that fuel his usual humor.

--James Langdell lang...@earthlink.net OR james.l...@sun.com

Pat Fleet

unread,
Sep 26, 2001, 12:58:11 PM9/26/01
to
I said:
> Jon's moment was A-OK in my book.

What a nice surprise! Some brave souls de-lurked and backed me up. Thank
you Ms. Groovy, James, Brandon (I think), and anyone else who could see past
Stewart's tears. To others who liked the message, but not the delivery,
that's okay, too.

Brad also mentioned in this thread, he noticed something from his unblocked
sight-line perch in the balcony at Late Show on 9/17:
> Dave had a small piece of paper on his desk as he spoke.

That precious little bit of paper...I hope it's (it is) not long gone/thrown
away. I asked Mikemack if he could get his hands on it and put it under
lock & key. That's something that should *never* get on eBay. Someday it
should go in the TV/Radio Museum along with "The Greatest City in the World"
Emmy winning video of the monologue. Maybe Mike will tell us the backstory
on the prep for Dave's words? They obviously weren't on cue cards,
regardless of what Tony said :), and I'd guess Mike didn't type it onto a
blue card either.

> Shouldn't somebody be apologizing here within the next year or two?

Who, little ol' me? Don't hold your breath, mister.


Brad Hill

unread,
Sep 26, 2001, 1:58:56 PM9/26/01
to
"Pat Fleet" <pfl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:B7D77341.80CD%pfl...@earthlink.net...

> That precious little bit of paper...I hope it's (it is) not long
gone/thrown
> away. I asked Mikemack if he could get his hands on it and put it under
> lock & key.

Probably best to give it to me for safe-keeping. I'd get my first-ever safe
deposit box.

Brad
www.bradhill.com


0 new messages