I note that Dave Chappelle has a Netflix special out which is getting praise from Tim Blair and some people at Catallaxy, and complaints from the likes of The Guardian and Slate. The criticism from the Left - especially the one at Slate - sounds far, far more compelling a guide to my reaction, should I watch it. Mind you, The Guardian's review is very similar, really.
There is something a bit weird about stand up, isn't there?, in the way audiences reaction precedes, and is independent from, thought. Take this, for example, from The Guardian:
Chappelle speaks out against Michael Jackson’s accusers, stating in no uncertain terms that “I do not believe these motherf.......s” to whistles and cheers of approval from the audience. An assortment of his hotter takes plays like an exoneration wishlist: Kevin Hart’s a good guy, Louis CK never did anything wrong, and even if the King of Pop did prey on innocent children, “I mean, it’s Michael Jackson.”I mean, really? Surely it is only due to an expectation that the guy on stage is funny that people would find that crack about Jackson's accusers a laugh-out-loud thing? It's not even a joke, as such.
Have psychologists studied this much?
10 comments:
No we know that this setup against Jackson was all lies. You haven't looked into the matter.
I told you he was innocent already. I'm not going to prove it on moderation but here is Eddie Griffin talking about the general problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvuGC-euvE0
Oh Good stuff. Eddie proved Michael innocent 5 minutes in. But elsewhere people have pointed out that the campaign to defame Michael was so big they even used Michael look-alikes showing up at Hotels with an entourage. Really disgusting stuff. Not a small operation.
Just in case anyone thinks that this story of the Gangster that Eddie and the interviewer talked about is "mere hearsay" .... Here is that self-same gangster. The gangster just came out of prison, and these monsters offered him $200 000 to say that Michael had molested his child. They did so on the basis that the gangster had a picture of his kid at Neverland in his underwear. A picture that the gangster took himself. The kid had just got out of the swimming pool. Eddie Griffins interviewer knew this was bullshit because if Michael had molested his kid, the gangster would have killed Michael himself.
Other kids hanging out at Neverland said it was bullshit. The three accusing kids later said it was bullshit. Elizabeth Taylor hung out with the kids and she knew it was bullshit. The bodyguards saw Michael out on dates, they knew it was bullshit. A friend of Michael who himself was a victim of pedophile bigshots, he knew it was bullshit. There is nothing there.
No smoke no fire no molestation, nothing there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viyD1G_WuX8
Well I just watched the Chapelle show and quite liked it! Very US-centric, inevitably, and very politically topical.
Oh, you're right about the pre-ordained laughter. That's almost inevitable in comedy. But Chapelle builds on that in my opinion - he throws in more than enough that is truly funny to keep the audience engaged.
As the only Right-ish poet left in Australia after the passing of Les Murray, Tim, I give you special dispensation out of sympathy for your loneliness for liking things I don't.
Can nothing I say offend you? *Waves fist in frustration*
But I wrote the comments I did after you had said you hadn't watched the show. I'd be curious on your feedback if you watch it.
I don't think I have ever watched a show by a black American who uses "motherf...ker" as part of the act.
You have to remember that I don't like swearing. Which makes the choice of stand up comedian I am prepared to try very, very limited. (Pretty much to Seinfeld, and that Malaysian guy that Jason said was OK. Probably Helen Degenerate too. Hehe.)
I have explained before that even guys (or girls) who I think are funny in other circumstances I find I usually can't stick with during a whole 90 min of standup. I mean, I've tried watching Alan Davies a couple of times. He seems a funny and nice enough guy on QI, but I tire of him doing stand up.
You know who I really dislike, on any show I have seen - that Jimmy Carr. He really grates with me for some reason...
I thought the vulgarity might be one thing to offend you. He's had an interesting public career, Chappelle, though - goes back at least as far as Mel Brooks's 'Men in Tights' - he opens the movie with a rap about Robin Hood (and plays one Hood's chums). I won't say he doesn't use vulgarities, he does, but maybe less than many of his peers.
But yes, stand-up is weird.
As I commented here before, it's all a bastardised form of vaudeville anyway - and instead of imitating American stand-up - which is not all that wonderful - Australians would probably do better concentrating on developing their own cultural forms.
Post a Comment