c omedy : w here are the b oundaries b etween s ubversion and s elling o ut ? by stephanie seebaran...

COMEDY: WHERE ARE THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN SUBVERSION AND SELLING OUT?

By Stephanie Seebaran and Joanne Leung

OUTLINE Introduction Comedy Then

Dick Gregory Comedy Now

Dave Chappelle Sarah Silverman Russell Peters Dichotomies in Comedy

Laughing with vs. Laughing at Social Commentary vs. Ideological Representation Responsibility: Comedian vs. Audience Offensiveness vs. Inoffensiveness

Movies: Rush Hour 2 Study Harold and Kumar vs. Rush Hour 2 Conclusions

INTRODUCTION Subversion or selling out?: Does it have to be

one or the other?

Maybe it is not that simple: dichotomies

Context of Comedy

COMEDY THEN…DICK GREGORY

One of the first popular black comics to appeal to both black and white audiences.

Laughing about inequalities Challenging the status quo Activism in comedy/comedy in activism Current issues he tackles: Clip

COMEDY NOW…DAVE CHAPPELLE

Controversial Critical statements about racism Subverting the norm

Reparations sketch clip. calling attention to racial injustices

Using the word “Niggar”. “Niggar” family clip – context Clayton Bigsby clip – social construction of race

Chappelle’s comedy allows a diverse audience to engage with traditionally stereotypical behavior “guilt-free”(Acham, 2007,

p. 330).

COMEDY NOW…DAVE CHAPPELLE “To be a black comedian necessitates a level

of political awareness” (Acham, 2007, p. 327). Chappelle began to see problematic reactions

to his comedy. Oprah clip Inside the Actor’s Studio clips

Alternative voice rather than “replication of the status quo” (Acham, p. 336).

COMEDY NOW…SARAH SILVERMAN

Controversial comedy

Joking relations Silverman as Chappelle

Controversies On Conan O’Brian – racial slur

Interview On Politically Incorrect – ridicule

transcript

Transcript from Politically Incorrect on August 22, 2001.Maher: That's implying that some joke would be of such good satire that

she could have said "chink."

Aoki: What she could have said -- what she could have said? She could have said, "I hate Chinese people. I love Chinese people." Would have gone, "Okay, funny joke, ha-ha." And that would have been over with.

Silverman: That's not the point of the joke.

Aoki: The point is you used a slur that you thought you could get away with on national television.

Silverman: That's actually not true. I used to say it was nigger, and I have said that on Conan the last time.

Silverman: That's true. Racism is so --exists, you know, and it's not gonna go away.

Aoki: It does?

Silverman: It's not gonna go away through censorship. Especially censorship with comics.

Aoki: So we should just keep bad jokes and offend people over and over again.

Silverman: You're a douchebag, man.

COMEDY NOW…SARAH SILVERMAN

COMEDY NOW…RUSSELL PETERS

Importance of context Personal perspective Parent-friendly portrayal of stereotypes “There’s no culture that’s spared”

(Winks, as cited in Eustace)

Berg: He’s not racist because he is not white. Making his race salient through comedy

Clip: Difference between racism (against South Asians) in Canada and racism in LA

DISCUSSION How can each of these comedians be seen as

subverting racial issues in their comedy?

How can they be seen as “selling out” by reinforcing racist stereotypes?

DICHOTOMIES IN COMEDY

Audience laughing at racial differences

LAUGHING WITH LAUGHING AT

Dichotomies used to determine the extent to which comedy is subversive or selling out.

Audience laughing with the comedian about race

DICHOTOMIES IN COMEDY

Jokes about racism Audience interprets the

meaning behind the words (Jenkins)

A component of the politics of representation (Park et al.)

Racist jokes Audience interprets the

actual words used (Jenkins)

Reflecting existing social relations (Park et al.)

SOCIAL COMMENTARY IDEOLOGICAL REPRODUCTION

DICHOTOMIES IN COMEDY

Social responsibility (Acham)

Work to “get” the joke (Wright)

RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMEDIAN

RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUDIENCE

DICHOTOMIES IN COMEDY

May indicate comedy is subversive (Park)

“Necessary condition for the naturalization of racial differences” (Park, et al. p. 173)

OFFENSIVENESS INOFFENSIVENESS

COMEDY NOW…MOVIES Rush Hour 2 study (Park, Gabbadon & Chernin, 2006)

Naturalizing beliefs in racial differences. Textual devices used to justify the

acceptability of racial stereotyping: Minority status of characters Racial jokes about every race Relevance of racial stereotypes to the plot Characters’ perceptions of the remarks

Another way of looking at it: Does this promotion the acceptability of

stereotypes, disrupt the racial status quo by portraying positive representations?

RUSH HOUR 2 VS. HAROLD AND KUMAR

Can these dichotomies objectively define the differences between comedy that is “selling out” and comedies that subvert racism? Why or why not?

Based on these clips and the dichotomies we presented, how are the portrayals of minorities in each of the movies different?

How are they the same? Why do audiences use the textual devices

to interpret “offensive” narratives and characters as humourous?

CONCLUSIONS There are no definitive ways in which we can

decide whether comedy is subversive or selling out because it is interpretive.

Both the comedian (actors, writers, producers, etc) and the audience must work to subvert dominant racial ideologies.

Comedian (actors, writers, producers, etc) – working through encoding.

Audience – working through decoding.