Popular Culture Review Vol. 20, No. 1, Winter 2009 | Page 124

120 Popular Culture Review In their entry, “Orphic Persuasions and Siren Seductions: Vocal Music in South Park" Jason Boyd and Marc R. Plamondon argue that by “normalizing the often bizarre situations and improbable cause and effect in South Park's plots through the conventions of Orphic song. . . the satiric messages [in the series’s episodes] expressed through the music are driven home to viewers who would otherwise see South Park as only absurd” (59). They add later that the “function of song goes well beyond the gliding of the philosophic pill: It helps South Park challenge the viewer’s otherwise comfortable perspective on life and community” (75). Meanwhile, in his contribution to the volume, “‘Simpsons Did It!’: South Park as Differential Signifier,” editor Weinstock explores the idea of how South Park “constructs its own identity through the process of comparing itself against other animated programs and part of the pleasure of watching South Park is appreciating the program precisely as a differential signifier,” or “as an animated program that participates in and self-consciously refers to specific aspects of the tradition of animated television even as it attempts to distinguish itself within that tradition” (94). Nothing, it can be said, could be more postmodern. The three essays in Part Two of Taking South Park Seriously explore the series in relation to the highly vexed issue of identity politics. In “Freud Goes to South Park: Teaching Against Postmodern Prejudices and Equal Opportunity Hatred,” Robert Samuels critiques South Park for contributing to the “process of undermining the popular support for the welfare state while calling for tax breaks for the wealthy” (99). From this perspective, Samuels contends, “minorities are now often seen as victimizers and abusers of the welfare system, whereas the wealthy majority is positioned to be the victim of excessive taxes and reversed racism” (99). Wheth er purposefully or not, “shows such as South Park feed this rhetorical reversal that influences so many students and makes teaching about critical thinking and social change in higher education even more difficult” (99). Meanwhile, in “Cynicism and Other Postideological Half Measures in South Park," Stephen Groening situates the debut (and success) of South Park firmly within the culture wars of the last two decades of the 20,h century. Drawing on the work of Daniel Bell, Groening equates the postideological with the related notions that “political ideas have been exhausted . . . false consciousness declared nonexistent, ideology rendered obsolete, and ideology critique unnecessary” (114). Thus, postideological “subjects such as South Park viewers endeavor to adopt a kind of immateriality that avoids the commitment imposed by ideology. Lack of commitment,” furthermore, “has particular appeal in a society rhetorically dominated by the micropolitics of identity, which call attention to an overwhelming list of injustices. For South Park and its viewers, cynicism, manifesting as irony and ironic detachment, justifies withdrawal from political action” of any kind in the real world (114). According to Groening, here “lies the hidden danger of the cynicism affirmed by South Park. To have no use for ideology and declare