by Carmen Van Kerckhove
If you watch anything this week, please take the time to watch these videos, a documentary done by high school media literacy and English teacher (and Racialicious reader) tstorm.
I’ve touched on the problematic aspects of racial humor quite a few times on Racialicious and on Addicted to Race, but haven’t quite managed to break it down as clearly as tstorm has done here.
couple of thoughts:
1. To say that creators, should not create or perform works because some people may not get it, is just out right censorship. While it’s understandable to say that shows like Family Guy or the Simpsons maybe misunderstood, to go so far as to debate their legitimacy because certain individuals may laugh at the wrong thing is a pretty upside down way to look at the situation. People who don’t understand the irony or the humor will find their own vehicles for racism, with or without Apu or Carlos Mencia.
2. I find it quite humorous that the narrator gives a rather didactic speach on the nature of comedy: it’s important to ridicule human folly, but not at the price of our own humanity and at the end, takes a thinly veiled parting shot at people who proport the idea that: it’s just a joke.
3. The Simpsons cast is full of racist stereotypes, they just happen to be of european decent. Is it because they don’t speak with a particular accent? So is it okay to make fun of people, just as long as they belong to the dominant culture?
I find this debate on racism in popular culture to be pretty interesting. I would prefer, though, that people wouldn’t take such a myopic view on it.
> To say that creators, should not create or perform works because some people may not get it, is just out right censorship.
Eugene, where or when exactly did anyone say this?
A blanket “thanks” to anyone who comments. I’d like to improve this video, so I welcome any discussion. I’ll try to defend against objections just to test their strength before I revisit the video and revise it.
1. Eugene: “People who don’t understand the irony or the humor will find their own vehicles for racism, with or without Apu or Carlos Mencia.” True. But what I’m trying to do is to help those people understand the irony or humor. I put together this documentary not with the idea that Comedy Central producers would watch it, but instead with the idea that various viewers of comedy programs might learn from it.
If the documentary seems didactic, it’s because it is. I’m a teacher and the goal here is to instruct people who may be unintentionally contributing to a racist culture by not thinking about their culture. Many of my students are a little apathetic about political and social issues, but if I can show them that who/what they laugh at is a political and social statement, I might engage them more. I also might prevent them from telling racist jokes or laughing at them.
2. As for the parting shot, I guess I don’t understand your complaint there, Eugene. To make a joke comparing a black man to a pizza is messing with humanity. And you think that my parting shot at people who purport “it’s just a joke,” (which isn’t veiled at all) is cruel, uncivil, racist? What’s your point exactly?
3. The Simpsons discussion is pretty interesting. But is the show really so full of racist stereotypes? It is definitely full of stereotypes, but are any of them as race-based as Apu’s?
The idea behind media literacy and criticism is not to censor or to get people to stop watching TV altogether; it’s to arm them with some critical thinking so that they can see through the messages that bombard them on a daily basis, messages like “men are supposed to handle problems on their own,” or “people who can’t speak English fluidly are silly,” or “eating fast food will ensure your life is full of meaningful relationships.”
As for my myopia, Eugene, I’d like to improve this video before I show it to my classes. Can you clarify for me what specific parts of the video are myopic? I appreciate the feedback.
The Simpons is full of stereotypes, Kristy is a self hating jew, The Mob characters are all Italian.
I always saw Apu character as mocking the stereotype and making fun of it.
hi tstorm,
my apologies for not having gotten back to you about the video as a whole! i think it’s great, and am especially interested in how your class will interpret intra-ethnic minority/POC humor. is a black man poking fun at asians and asian-americans less or more dangerous than whites doing the same? how does this form of humor affect cross-cultural interaction and community building?
great job 
My point is, you’re doing the same thing that you’re arguing against. Racsim comes down to people making judgements on people based on limited information. By suggesting that people who don’t share your views to be under utilizing their intellect, are you not doing the same thing on a micro scale? What difference is there if you apply judgemental thinking on an individual scale or against a group of people?
As for the other racial stereotypes, this is my point exactly. The simpons features racial stereotypes of the Scottish: Grounds Keeper Willy, of Italians: Fat Tony, of Austrians: Rainer Wolfecastle. They’re portrayal of Americans can also be arguably called stereotypical. But those people interested in racism in media, rarely pay attention to these portrayals. Why is that?
Certainly with Rainer, he is a a direct parody/homage of Arnold Schwerzennager.. yet consider his middle name: Luftwaffe. He is rarely portayed as anything other than as hawkish and dimwitted.
Grounds Keeper Willy is cast out from the school, works a menial job and shows sterotypical irish temper. He even speaks with an over the top accent. Given the persectuted history of the Irish in America, how is this portrayal not as hurtful and dangerous as the portayal of Apu?
While I concede that an explicit call for censorship is not made in your presentation, the end of the 3rd video has a pretty strong implicit message.
As for the myopia statment, I believe that by continually focusing on “the other” and by grouping all european or westerners into an amalgomous “white” is the great failing of the modern racial equality movement. As I have demonstrated with the various ethnic characters in the Simpsons, the same standard by which one can call the characterization of Apu to be racist can be applied to several “white” characters as well. Characters who are portayed much more 2 dimensionally and their negative attributes played up for laughs much more frequently (please note, I am not using the model minority argument, I am merely drawing a distinction in the characterization of sterotypical ethnic attributes as portayed in the Simpsons) which are routinely ignored in these discussions or even dismissed because the ethnicity being targeted happens to be “white.”
However, this view of a “white” america is very recent as we all know. Anyone who has studied immigration in America can tell you the treatment of the Irish, Italians and other Europeans as they emmigrated into the country. And it is a fallacy to say that the negative stereotypes associated with these groups have not carried on into modern popular culture. The Irish are still considered to be ill tempered drunks, Italians are portrayed as loud, oppertunists of questionable legality.
I used the word myopic specifically for this reason. The whole race debate has fallen into White versus everyone else. And this is not a view that is based on a historical context but it is a perceived reality that perpetrated and continued by the language we choose to use as well as the focus of our concentrations.
i think what’s important to consider when it comes to the purveyance of stereotypes about racial/national/ethnic minorities or “others” in the united states vs. that of whites (including white ethnics) is the issue of weight.
how do the stereotypes affect the racial group being considered?
i am not afraid to put my neck out here to say that the stereotypes of non-white ethnic minorities have considerably more weight because there is little diversity in representation in the media. whites are shown in a variety of ways, as humans who are awesome and who have flaws, who have a variety of career options, styles, and ways of life.
people of color, ethnic minorities, immigrant groups, people who identify as queer, etc have yet to reach that level in the media. they are portrayed as and expected to fulfill the stereotype, on and off-screen.
stereotypes jump from the television sets into real life because there is little else out there to which the majority of people have access to in the press and media besides these sickeningly repetetive images and portrayals. even when people are exposed to people who do NOT fit the stereotype, they are considered to merely be exceptions to the rule.
i have seen someone denied a job interview because of her last name alone, the assumption being that she would “probably not be able to speak english,” despite her resume being written entirely in english because of someone’s reliance upon tv stereotypes as truth.
the next time a white person is refused a job for being considered lazy like homer, give me a call.
tstorm: This is excellent. I’d love to use this in my ethics classes.
Eugene: Isn’t Groundskeeper Willie Scottish?
I’m very impressed. I’ve linked to this on my own blog and will do all I can to spread it around. The “just a joke” point is really important. I think the word “stupid” is used in a similar fashion. I was recently called “stupid” for my views and am very angry and hurt still. It’s unfortunately not an uncommon experience for me lately. It’s really amazing how clueless people can be and we need more things like this video to save our humanity.
I would love to help develop more teaching material like this for youth. Thanks for your effort.
Well done clips, but on a technical level, it’s hard to read any of the text passages that fade in and out while someone is speaking at the same time talking about something different. So, if this is going to be continued, dialogue or text passages, but not at the same time pls…
One thing about the “some people might not get the irony” part. Well, I think it can be a perfect tool actually if you introduce the irony or rather satirical aspect in subtle ways. I’m not talking about the 70s show, which I don’t know/ never saw. But take The Office and its racist boss in the episode where they put together a basketball team, and the bosses late realization that his black colleague can’t actually play basketball well, even though the boss figured he would. If someone shares this realization at this late point too, then it’s even more powerful, because it might cause actual reflection: you can’t “externalize” the attack on racism if you identified with the boss before. But that may be crucial, that the subtlety with which the satire may start is then slowly being taken over the top. The same in the scene where the boss mocks Chinese (or some other Asian language) in the club. It runs for a while and *then* there’s a shot of an Asian-American looking woman who’s disturbed by this. Some people may miss the boat in the first seconds of the boss’s act. Some people may miss the boat while he continues, while others in the audience are starting to get embarassed at the lack of a real joke. But it’s really hard to miss the boat during that “conclusive” shot.
tstorm: Overall, I liked the documentary a lot. I do think it would be interesting to explore some of the European stereotypes that Eugene brought up though, particularly Groundskeeper Willie. Although ginger haired people are not an issue in the U.S., in the UK, it has some serious implications. Ginger haired people are discriminated against quite seriously. It goes back at least as far as Shakespeare as he always used to give his villains red-haired wigs to wear to signify their villany when performing. Having lived with a ginger scottish flatmate in the UK, I’ve seen first hand a lot of vile insults and ridiculous bias against him from people of various ethnicities (gingers are the bottom of the comedy hierarchy in the UK). Also I’ve heard various racist chants shouted against ginger footballers when attending matches. Finally, there were recently some BBC stories about kids being bullied for being ginger. I think it would be an interesting contrast to show how racist humor can differ country to country and how one group that is no longer bothered in one place can still be discriminated against elsewhere.
I am aware of the fact that some people will laugh “with” a racist character like Peter Griffin or an Archie Bunker type instead of laughing “at” him, but there is nothing you can do about it.
I think the tone of the documentary is a bit pessimistic and just points out what people already know (that jokes can be hurtful) even though they might tell them or laugh at them anyway.
I personally don’t like the ladder part of the documentary. Many people don’t fit into one of the categories. My mother is an Italian Catholic and my father is a Black Baptist. Am I higher on the ladder because I am only half black, therefore not able to laugh as some of the Chris Rock jokes? I also went to school with many kids who had one Jewish parent and one non Jewish parent who would identify with both of their cultures who would not fit on the ladder.
As a side not the kids telling the racist “jokes” probably would not have said what they said if a black/asian/hispanic person was asking the question, but they were comfortable saying it to a white person, because they know its wrong but like showing off in front of friends(something I have witnessed). And they might have even understood what they said was hurtful if they were confronted, but unfortunately many people don’t think about the affect of the things they say.
I found myself agreeing with Wendi and Eugene. People should get upset about all stereotypes, but I think they don’t because there is a belief that whites get enough of a balanced view to override the stereotypes. I don’t think that’s right, but it is the truth. However, I would say that Italians and Jews do have some of the most prevalent stereotypes among ethnic whites and this needs to be addressed. What I find funny is that when certain white ethnic groups speak against stereotypes, as has been done repeatedly about mob stereotypes for Italians and anti-Semetism, they rarely encounter the same venom as minorities doing the same, in my opinon. Anybody have a theory on why this is? I never hear the term “race card” applied to anybody other than minorities, and typically it’s only used in regards to black people.
Eugene, thanks for the challenges. It’s helpful. People do under-utilize their intellect. Do you disagree? I’m not saying that only those who disagree with me are under-utilizing their intellect. We all do.
When I hear people defend racial humor with the “it’s just a joke” excuse, I’m hearing something that is clichéd, overused, and usually pretty knee-jerk. That’s why I label it a “no mental energy” reaction. I’m certainly not saying that everyone who disagrees with me is stupid. Nor am I judging the people who disagree with me. I’m judging their argument.
I think Wendi’s right about the difference between stereotypes of non-white ethnic minorities — they “have considerably more weight because there is little diversity in representation in the media.” As Manish Vij pointed out in one of his interviews (in a section I didn’t include), most Americans name two Indians when asked to do so: Ghandi and Apu. This relative dearth of representation is what’s at issue here with Apu.
Another thing Manish talked about was the movie “Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle.” At one point in the film, the Kumar character shouts, “thank you, come again,” while driving away from a bunch of bad guys, thus reappropriating a popular line of dialogue that has come to be an epithet of racial ignorance in this country. Manish claims that “every Indian-American, South Asian-American [he] knows just applauds when they hear that line.” What line of Groundkeeper Willie’s could bring applause to the hands of Scottish-Americans if reappropriated in a similar way?
I’m Irish and Scottish. When people learn of my descent (they usually can’t tell just by looking) they don’t say to me, “oh, don’t you have a school ground to tend to? Where’s your kilt?” If people did say such things to me, yes, it would be racist, but I don’t think it would hurt as much as if someone said to a South Asian American, “oh, do you own a Kwik-E-Mart? Where’s your statue of Ganesh?” Why not? Because people don’t judge me based on my race with the same misguided ignorance or with the same frequency as they judge non-white ethnic minorities.
Philipp, I agree with you about the technical issues. I need to slow down some of the text, etc. You also make an excellent point about irony. Some of it can function in this sort of revelatory way; it can be pretty powerfully anti-racist, actually, to get people laughing at a stereotype and then show them how offensive such laughter is.
Mark, you bring up a really interesting point. Wendi Muse had a great post last week that focused on a more global view. (http://www.racialicious.com/2007/08/09/we-want-you-to-think-just-like-us/) I feel ill-equipped to delve into racial humor in different countries, but I’m definitely interested in learning more. I haven’t seen the same sort of anti-ginger behavior you’re describing, but I wonder: Does the Simpson’s in the UK reinforce anti-ginger sentiments? It is fascinating, and I think it also shows the superficiality of race-based discrimination, to uncover “how one group that is no longer bothered in one place can still be discriminated against elsewhere.” So that could be a great addition to my class. Thanks.
Humour has no boundary, if you refuse to laugh at something, you’re inviting it to be made assaulted.
tstorm,
Thanks so very much for the documentary. You rock for doing this.
As for any sort of commenting or suggestions, I’d like to bring up a point presented in the last featured Racialicious post “Video Games and the Usual Amount of Racism,” where Andrea Rubenstein talks about the micro vs. macro.
The pattern seems to be people like to focus more on the micro than the macro of the situation. I find that’s where much of the “it’s just a joke” argument comes in–where people are probably going to see the offense as so minute that it shouldn’t be fussed over. They only see the one joke.
This was brought up a little in the documentary, citing the South Park episode and the “N” word. People focus on the minutae, seeing someone just using the “N” word for lowbrow comic effect, when it’s actually making social commentary.
Perhaps something more on micro/macro perspective could be discussed.
Brandon, great suggestion! I’m definitely going to use that video games article in class.
Allen, a question for you: is there a difference between ethnic stereotypes and racial ones?
Georgia, you know what’s funny? I’m pretty sure the person interviewing the kids telling the racist jokes was an Asian man. Here’s the original YouTube video for that clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QFq9pg97i0
Also, just to reiterate what I said in the video: “It’s not a science, and it’s probably not even worth figuring out where each group belongs in this pop culture power ladder.” I don’t think we should necessarily try to place you and your classmates in the ladder. I’m just saying that ridiculing the people in a society who have the least power is a different thing from ridiculing those who have the most.
Hi everyone,
I’m sorry to diverge from your discussion on humor and race, but I deeply worried about the lack of news coverage of the 35-year-old Haitian woman and her 12-year-old son, in West Palm Beach, Dunbar Village, who were beaten, raped, and forced to perform sexual acts on each other at gun point by 10 teenage suspects, only three of which have been arrested. Over at http://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/ , Ann makes a poignant post about the situation and how little is done to protect black women, like myself and many others that need protecting, but are ignored, because of whatever hang ups from the past, the racial majority believe they think they have on black Americans and every other minority unlike them.
Carmen I’m so sorry for making this post, its obviously not need for this discussion. But I’m genuinely scared about myself and every other woman out there for the first time in my 22 years of living. Tears filled my eyes after reading Ann’s comments on the situation. I deeply saddened that none of the major news outlets have even picked up this story.
I my have jumped the gun here, but I guess the sooner the better. Thank you
Hi Anon,
Yes, it’s a terrible story. You’re right that we haven’t written about it extensively here but I did link to an article about it a few weeks ago.
tstorm,
Nice work. Two recommendations:
1) Lay off judgments as much as possible beyond what to present. It’s enough that you’ve done this work and added context; I’m guessing there will be plenty of opportunity in discussion afterwards to reach conclusions and make judgments. (I realize I’m the didactic one here; I’d propose simply that you replace some assertions with questions.)
2) The graphics are great — horizontal, vertical, etc. You also mention the multi-layered presentation of humor and I think this is worth putting forth graphically also. Building a bit on Philipp Lenssen and Brandon’s comments, there’s an entirely different context and impact when a) Steve Carell portrays a clueless guy trying to be funny and the show he’s on portrays reactions to his efforts, and b) a kid on a corner tells racist jokes for the benefits of his friends and a camera.
Hope this is useful…
LM, that is useful. You’re right: Questions would probably be a better way to frame some of the issues to evoke thought and discussion without evoking defensive reactions.
And I’ll work on some graphics, too.
I’m sure this discussion is winding down, so I’d just like to thank everyone once again. I will definitely be revising the video, but since school is starting soon, it will probably be a while before I get a revision done and re-posted. But I am taking the suggestions to heart.
U.S. American presidents of Scottish descent: Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, James Polk, William McKinley, Woodrow Wilson. Also 10 U.S. presidents have had Irish descent including a few listed above.
Of all the presidents we’ve had, has even one had any Asian, African, Latino, Native or any other minority heritage? Not to my knowledge.
I note this because (not to play minority olympics) because in the WHITE house it has been all white men. To say making fun of groundskeeper Willy whether he’s Irish or Scottish is the same as making fun of Apu is erroneous. POC have not risen to the same places of power & privilage as other ethnic whites. Yes they have suffered here too. My partner is part Irish American & I’ve heard stories from her family about the cruelties her folks suffered.
But (and I hate to use that word in these discussions) the key difference when we talk about racism is equality. Jokes about POC versus people of non-color is that POC still have so much to gain to be equal here whereas many an ethnic whites (except Jewish folks) have been able to rise to the top & not only dream of becoming president, but actually make it.
I point out the presidency because it’s the one place that has such monumental power & such a consistent history of POC being unable to even dream of getting there (until recently). I also point out the presidency because our presidents reside and make decisions in the WHITE house & I can’t help but at this point see the symbolic connection.
Peace!
~F
Context is a very important aspect in this discussion. It plays a role in the question on Italian and Jewish stereotypes and the global issue. tstorm you address why certain people can say something, but not really where. In a way the context is by de facto “in comedic situations,” but there could be a more complex analysis of context. Although I am not sure if this is something which can easily be added. Perhaps it can be the focus of another documentary or at least more posts/discussions?
Context is something I am exploring myself and just finished my first really post on this: My black is not your black.
…first REAL post. Sorry that’s a silly typo!
Well it took me a couple days but I finally managed to watch all of it — and I really, really liked it. It’s very straightforward and simplistic, and easy to follow without being mind-numbing. I’m considering trying to fit it in, somehow, into an upcoming dialogue I’m doing on race and ethnicity, if that’s all right with you
ps. I find it interesting (and amusing) that the first comment is “But what about the WHITE PEOPLE??” As though, you know, white people have a history of being oppressed and marginalised to any degree that poc have been — more than that, as though white people continue to be oppressed and marginalised to the degree that poc are.
Well said, Frances.
LAP, you’re getting me thinking. I would like to explore this issue of context a bit more. I’ve got some thoughts, but I need to keep batting around my ideas before I put them into words. In the meantime, I’ll keep tabs on your site; I hope to see more posts on context.
Baby221, thanks for the compliment. Of course, use and improve whatever you want from the videos.
Tstorm….
I hope you are still reading at this point. And you won’t find anything helpful in my post because I thought that your piece was really excellent.
I read many of your post regarding Apu so I have a little bit of the context of what you were thinking. I believe that you distilled many of the questions and the conversations into a really excellent educational tool.
This is for teenaged students, correct? Then I thought that your tone was pitch perfect. If there was a bit of didactism (which I didn’t see) then I felt that coming to certain conclusions within your piece was appropriate. This is a learning tool and without a moral I think the tool could become an excuse for a your students to perhaps, miss the point.
Your models, the vertical and horizontal models of race and humor, were genius. Obviously, you were working with broad groups, and not including the bi-sexual, multi-ethnic woman is not an oversight, but to me, is an unimportant distinction to make. Keep your models, they are great tools to get your point across.
I loved it, in short….improve it on a technical level but I would say please don’t mess with the overall content too much because you have created something poignant and thought provoking and it could actually shape a young mind in a positive and constructive manner.
By the way…I learned a great deal about the complexities of the Apu issue. As a non-Indian, South East Asian person, I feel that I have been given a valuable education on the history of stereotypes of Indian people within Western media. Putting Apu in that context sheds light on a whole host of reasons why the character is problematic.
Ethnic whites are lumped in under the white label because they’re all phenotypically white. American racism is based on a Western European normative standard - the idea that only White Anglo Saxons are definitive Americans. Witness ethnography and eugenics extolling the supremacy of the White Anglo Saxon, or laws dividing the American population into whites and colored categories. That’s why first generation Irish immigrants could band together and form trade unions to deny jobs to third generation Chinese Americans.
It’s a misrepresentation of how race and racism work in America to portray people of color as the creators and extollers of the “white” label. American society has a race-based hiearchy, people of color are only describing the situation.
Michelle, thanks so much. I was hoping to get your input since you had some great comments on the Apu/7-Eleven thread.
friedfishribs: “It’s a misrepresentation of how race and racism work in America to portray people of color as the creators and extollers of the ‘white’ label.” Well-said!
Eugene sees the “grouping all european or westerners into an amalgomous ‘white’ [as] the great failing of the modern racial equality movement,” but that’s not the failure of modern anti-racists. It’s part and parcel of marginalizing the other of color.
that documentary was quite interesting and couldn’t find any flaws in it. it reminds me if a 9-series documentary that Bell Hooks did on blacks entertainers in the media and controversial films of that time such as Kids. concerning the racial humor presented in the media as of recently, for every South Park ‘N* gger Guy’ episode ( that I believe wasn’t making fun of the irony of the Michael Richards incident to the point that it didn’t end up with an important message) ,there is about 50 Carlos Mencias that over shadow it.
Tstorm….
I am really, really curious about how your students respond.
How are you adding this to your cirriculum? Are you are a public school or charter school? I just read an article on NCLB and one of the critiques of the program is that there is no room for teachers to focus on anything other than the mandatory testing.
Anyway….please, keep us posted. I really, really love the work that you have done.
Yay! Tstorm, your videos are made of GOOD and WIN. There are probably a few things I would change if I watched again, but I want to commend you on emphasizing the complexity of the issue, especially the importance of CONTEXT.
tstorm: I hope I’m not too late to the party to offer useful commentary.
First off, I’d like to say that I find the video series a great introduction to the concept of racial versus racist humour. Definitely something that would belong in a Racism 101 discussion.
My only issue is with your section about competing oppressions. It comes too close to Oppression Olympics in my opinion, and your disclaimers trying not to make it so come off as disjointed and confusing. Your visual for the vertical ladder adds to that, as it tries to tackle too many different kinds of oppression (race, gender, orientation) and ends up doing none of them justice. Er, that sounds more harsh than I mean it. o.o;
So, beyond complaining, here’s what I suggest:
Race is only one factor when it comes to privilege and oppression, and beyond that it’s an umbrella term that we use to reference all the different kinds of oppression people face because of their individual race and ethnicity.
Race exists alongside a whole host of other similar dynamics, such as gender and sexual orientation, which are similar to it insofar as there is a divide between groups who overall have institutional power and groups that do not. Since most people simultaneously have certain privileges and lack them, it creates a murky situation where people are constantly crossing the boundary between being the one with power and being the one without. (I’ve written a bit more on it in my post, “Check my WHAT?” which is a treatise on privilege that is sorely in need of an update.)
From that point you can launch into your discussion about the current trend you’ve noticed where the media has ascribed a “racial hierarchy” which further muddies the waters of racial humour.
In terms of visuals, unless you want to make a chart that represents the ways that privileges intersect, I would stick to illustrating the racial flow chart and putting some text to the effect that you’re only looking at racial dynamics, not the dynamics of race as a whole. In that sense, I would also recommend making it more flow chart style than a rigid latter, to illustrate that the power can and does change hands depending on the situation.
Anyway, I hope the suggestion helps. And don’t let the criticism make you think that I didn’t like your take on things, because overall the video was great. I wouldn’t have said anything except that you specifically asked for crits, so… o.o;
tstorm, interesting documentary, I enjoyed your point of view.
In full disclosure, I’m white, female and a comedian. I wonder about your choice to avoid the part of the discussion about what’s funny. While I agree that humor can be subjective, I also think comedy done well is not subjective. Like books and literature, there are good, bad and indifferent comics. A lot of folks may not laugh out loud, but they can judge satire, irony and clear writing, all of which contribute to funny.
For example, to me Carlos Mencia is lazy as a performer, and his “insights” seem to come from repeating stereotypes and then saying “see, that’s a joke.” Whereas, David Chappelle takes time to deconstruct the stereotypes. From a writing point of view, if good writing is “Show me, don’t tell me,” Mencia fails, Chappelle excels. I think most students would get that and could judge who’s funnier.
From endless hours in the back of comedy clubs, coffee houses and bars, my opinion is that bad comedy dealing with racial issues is often racist. Good, thought-provoking and funny comedy about race is original, even if employing irony, conventional thought and stereotypes.
Also, I agree with the idea about the power structure and the notion that there’s a world of difference between comedy employed as speaking truth to power versus kicking someone who’s down. But, I found the ladder and the linear chart distracting and a bit inaccurate from a comedy perspective. That kind of outline always reminds me of the scene in “The Dead Poet’s Society” when Robin Williams rips the pages out of the text book where the author tries to graph poetry. I’m not sure it furthers your discussion, since there is no magic formula for what’s allowed and by whom and when. Louis CK is a white, male comedian with incredibly intelligent commentary on race. Racialicious has mentioned Steve Perry’s character doing bad Chinese schtick. Where would each fit on the ladder?
You may be interested in this website, if you haven’t seen what they are up to — http://www.entertainingdiversity.com/CrossingTheLine/
I know one of the guys involved. Although, we aren’t really in agreement on either what’s funny or politics.
Hope you don’t mind two cents from a total stranger who had previously been lurking on this site.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of New Demographic, an anti-racism training company. She hosts the podcast Addicted to Race and blogs at Racialicious, Anti-Racist Parent, and Race in the Workplace.
Racialicious! is a production of New Demographic.
© 2004-2007 New Demographic. All rights reserved.
blog.txt theme by Scott
Must see documentary on race and humor « latin american princesa {LAP} on 13 Aug 2007 at 10:38 am
[…] Racialicious: Documentary exploring race and humor. The predictable retort to all this is that those who take offense at jokes are over-sensitive, as […]
links for 2007-08-14 | The Bloggable on 14 Aug 2007 at 2:25 am
[…] Documentary exploring race and humor at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture (tags: toblog) […]
you’ve gotta see this « Sara Speaking on 14 Aug 2007 at 5:22 pm
[…] hat tip racialicious […]
documentary on race and humor at A Collage of Citations on 24 Nov 2007 at 6:08 pm
[…] Megan at Intent/Effect linked to a low-budget documentary hosted on YouTube about race and humor, shown on Racilicious. The video was put together by a high school teacher wanting to teach media literacy surrounding […]