Recently, stand-up comedian Hasan Minhaj faced criticism after admitting to making up and altering stories about discrimination he faced in his past. According to an NBC news article, one story about being rejected by his prom date due to his race (a story prominently featured in his stand-up material) was one of several of Minhaj’s childhood tales that did not in fact take place[1]. Many decried his false narratives for giving an example of untrue discrimination and removing credibility and focus from honest recounts of prejudice. Others felt his dishonest comedy routines painted a false persona of the comedian, breaking trust as he misrepresented himself to the public. In my mind, whether to be outraged or indifferent to Minhaj’s actions depends on a different question: What is the purpose of comedy?
Being an aspiring stand-up comedian and a general admirer of humor, I am fascinated by (and somewhat invested in) the topic of what is and isn’t permissible content in a comedy routine. Being from a family of lawyers, whenever I find myself working within the confines of rules and regulations, I always try to remove any ambiguity between what is allowed and what is not. Living in a country with freedom of speech, the consequences of one’s words are tried by the court of public opinion; a court that in recent years has grown to be judge, jury, and executioner however divided it may be on a given verdict. In the case of Hasan Minhaj, the issue was a lack of honesty. Other comedians face public controversy over the content and topics of their jokes that viewers find offensive. Time magazine gives a comprehensive overview of the now years long issues viewers have had with comedian Dave Chapelle’s specials covering the topics of gender identity and race[2]. While Minhaj was criticized for his deceit, backlash over Chapelle’s material is focused on his stances on and irreverent discussion of sensitive political topics.
When considering my position on both these comedians, two more obvious questions come to my mind: does comedy need to be true, and does comedy need to be kind? According to Time magazine, Chappelle’s special broke into the top ten daily Netflix programs in the US shortly after its launch, and Minhaj’s controversial prom night special also achieved success, albeit years before its falsehood became public. It appears, however, that despite controversy, these two stand-up comedy routines have effectively entertained audiences – but is entertainment the sole metric that should define successful comedy? Is it also the role of comedy to be a check on politics and culture? Or does comedy have the responsibility to be consistently palatable and respect certain boundaries? Are all of these duties mutually exclusive?
As you may be able to tell from reading thus far, I don’t have many answers (although I’m sure you’re impressed with all the questions I’ve thought of). However, in a world where the social rules of free speech are completely subjective and marred with opinion, I’m happy to share an opinion of my own. We live in a country where freedom of the press and freedom of speech have served us well as checks on tyranny from the government, from the political majority, and from the political minority. In the world of comedy, I believe this dynamic presents itself as a country where anyone and everyone should be allowed to decry the latest comedic headliner on Netflix and Hulu just as their next-door neighbor speaks into their voice remote the name of the very same comedian.
Some may be concerned with my conclusion as a passive acceptance of “comedic cancel culture”. Personally, I am not keen on the practice of canceling. But as I was thinking of what to write for this article, I pondered why so many people (including myself) think today’s political polarization in the realm of free speech is so unique and concerning. Was there not just as much yelling, judgment, and canceling during the Vietnam War? Were we not just as content casting our fellow Americans out for liberal views during the age of McCarthyism, or Tories before the Revolutionary War? I think the only difference now is better Wi-Fi.
While I don’t think the connectivity of social media and streaming platforms in this day and age changes my stance of letting the political battleground of comedy controversy play out, I do have some suggestions on how we can turn down the heat of today’s political polarization in the comedy scene. When dealing with peers who drop an off-color joke or comedians whose specials make you boil with anger, however much you may disagree with their message, try to bring one new element into the conversation: forgiveness. The answer to the question of “what is the purpose of comedy” is different for everyone. And with different comedic purposes we will find ourselves stepping on toes and coming to impasses. In short, as much as I would like to, I can’t logically rationalize a free speech rulebook in which comedic cancel culture is not permissible, but I don’t think it should be taken lightly. Right now, canceling a comedian is like swiping left on a dating app: easy, repeatable, and not to be given a second thought. But blacklisting a comedian with such ease ignores the difficulty of the job of comedians to walk the line between politics and culture in a way that is funny and expresses their views on society without causing major offense. Censoring comedians left and right will lead them to censor themselves, creating a comedic world with less vibrant humor and comedy routines written with fear. Instead, I think canceling a comedian should be like trying to cancel cable. If you want to change your channel package or switch to internet TV you can, but you’re going to be on the phone with Comcast for the next two weeks. And maybe over those weeks, as you listen to hold music, and get transferred from billing, to customer service, to account management, to the person from account management’s manager and back to hold, you may realize that you don’t agree with cable. You don’t think what they said or the joke they made was right, but maybe their life experience and point of view just differs from yours in ways you can’t see. At a minimum, maybe cable just deserves a second chance.
[1] Why Hasan Minhaj’s fabrications could invalidate real accounts of racism and Islamophobia (nbcnews.com)
[2] Why Dave Chappelle’s New Netflix Special Is Controversial | Time
Leave a Reply