Dave Chappelle is hilarious

Cafe Society
1

Ever since the nonsense of recent weeks concerning Dave Chappelle, I have watched a lot of clips of his comedy act on YouTube. I was vaguely familiar with him because he had a TV show about 15 or so years ago and some friends I used to party with were huge fans of his.

From the clips, Chappelle is absolutely hilarious and so true to life. He is somewhat crude, but crude can be great if done correctly. He doesn’t shy away especially from race, and he makes fun of all races, including his own and white people. Like most great comics, he is a good observer of life around him and doesn’t shy from that.

I think I saw some clips of this “offensive” HBO special of his and his “offending” comments about Caitlyn Jenner, something as in “She has been a woman for a month and made Woman of the Year!”
Ok. His mixed race audience was not offended and it was again, hilarious.

Chappelle also says “Nigger”. Concerning Jenner he said calling Jenner “Woman of the Year” is akin to BET network giving the “Nigger of the Year” award (Chappy’s words not mine) to Eminem. The mixed race again, laughed at it wonderfully.

Sexuality is open game. Heterosexuality is fair game. Maybe I should be “triggered” as a married man of over twenty years about what Chappelle said about marriage too! Or being white.

Chappelle is really the one carrying the torch of his comedic ancestors of Richard Pryor, Redd Foxx, George Carlin and Eddie Murphy. All of them used racial humor and racial epitaphs.

If you don’t like Chappelle, don’t watch it. Simple as that. Don’t watch it. I assure you that no one, no one at all who murders another person because of their sexuality is going to blame a cable TV comic for pushing them into it.

Thank you Dave for carrying the torch. Richard Pryor is in the next life cheering you on.

2

Caveat: I have not yet seen the Chappelle Netflix special currently causing a kerfuffle.

Chappelle, generally speaking, is hilarious and has a well-deserved reputation as a great comic. And the ability to do transgressive comedy is an important one. That doesn’t mean that everything he says is comedy gold, nor that he doesn’t say things that are genuinely offensive or harmful.

And comedy is, of course, extremely subjective. I can certainly understand why people who found Chappelle’s latest endeavor hurtful would complain to Netflix; you can say they “just shouldn’t watch it” but they are also subsidizing it, which at the very least gives them the right to complain (albeit not to demand).

Also, I’m not convinced that setting the bar at “drove someone to murder” is particularly constructive.

3

It’s a damn shame that people respond to cruelty with “that’s not funny,” because it confuses children and other folks who realize that of course cruelty can be funny, and who therefore dismiss the criticism.

It ain’t that Chappelle lacks comedy chops. It’s that he’s got a dehumanizing view of trans folk, and he uses his comedic expertise to dress that shitty view up and to make it seem more acceptable. He’s very funny while he does so, but that doesn’t make what he’s doing any less shitty.

4

I have not followed this online controversy. Because it seems like an extremely online controversy whereby the loudest participants never log off. In the case of trans people this goes to people who are unhappy at his jokes because they are hurtful and those who use his jokes as a cudgel to reason their attacks on trans people which are truly bigoted.

I saw the show. Thought it was a good performance but far from his best. And that was it. Dave Chappelle’s comedy isn’t changing my mind instantly on matters that are bigger than a throwaway joke. I think that’s how most people think.

5

Sure: opinions usually change slowly and over time, not instantly. If someone has some cultural influence and uses it, along with their rhetorical skills, to reinforce oppressive cultural norms and stereotypes, they contribute toward the slow move of opinions in that direction. Criticizing them for that is a good thing.

The OP is a great exemplifier. Having seen Chappelle’s special, our new member (Welcome, gandrews!) has decided it’s important to come onto our board and post a bunch of anti-trans posts. I won’t say that there’s a direct cause-and-effect link there, but I suspect that gandrews felt bolstered and validated in his harmful views, having seen their shittiness wrapped in the candy coating of Chappelle’s comic genius. That’s not a great thing, and although I’m glad he’s offering himself as an example of how Chappelle’s work pushes the world to a worse place, I wish he’d take a more critical view that separates the comic genius from the moral turpitude.

6

My assumption is OP is one of those extremely online culture warriors then. Probably the kind of person who hates celebrities talking about politics until it conveniently fits their politics - in which case all of a sudden they love the validation. As he might be doing here with Chappelle. It seems like he has only now got into Chappelle whereas I’ve been watching him for years. Can’t remember watching any of his comedy and thinking that was the moment where my views on an issue that contains a lot of nuance were formed or reformed based on what he said or any other entertainer says.

7

I agree, that’s not how people work. It’s more whether certain views are reinforced or undermined.

Someone with pretty transphobic views might watch his special and feel validated: the comedic candy coating makes their views taste even sweeter to them. They don’t change their minds; but the next time they encounter something that might make them less transphobic, Chappelle’s mockery might bolster their views just enough that they don’t take a moment to reflect.

Someone who hasn’t made much of a decision, who hasn’t thought about trans issues all that much, might watch Chappelle and think, “Hah! Yeah, it’s pretty rich for LGBT folk to complain about him when Black folk are still getting shot. Right on, Chappelle!” And the next time they encounter an LGBT advocate upset about some bullshit law, they might think in their minds, “Wah wah wah, you think YOU got problems…”

Someone who’s pro-trans rights might watch Chappelle and think, “Shit, am I really just a whiner?” and be a little less likely to speak out.

It’s not about epiphanies, about moments of enlightenment. It’s about the slow, steady process of reinforcing or changing attitudes. Chappelle’s rhetorical skills are incredible, and when he’s using them to reinforce shitty attitudes, those shitty attitudes can get reinforced.

I wish he’d not use his skills in such a manner.

10

How is it dehumanizing?

“X is a human woman.”
“No, X is a human man.”

You can sling all sorts of slurs at someone who says that, but why the heck go with dehumanizing?

13

I recently watched the latest Netflix show with closed captions turned on. Although he says “Nigga” many times, he never says the word you accuse him of saying.

He’s a funny guy, but he could be just as funny without addressing trans issues, where he lost me.

14

Too late to edit: I know this “But did you watch it?” is a common challenge to people who criticize anything. I don’t think it’s legit, when a person has read actual quotes, not just biased summaries, of the material being challenged. Instead, it’s a bit of a gotcha: of course I’m not going to spend an hour consuming, and sending indirect royalties to the creator of, something I think is harmful.

18

It’s early and I’m not a morning person. I just wanted to say, I completely agree with everything Left Hand Of Dorkness has posted.

19

Not legit? Seriously?

I don’t take any notice of the opinions of people who have not taken the time to listen to the speech they criticise.
It is impossible for you to understand the full context of what was said without doing that pretty basic research so any opinion you have will be lacking. A comedy routine particularly is impossible to comprehend at second or third hand.
I’d recommend listening to Stewart Lee’s routine about no such as a context-free word.. Consider what he says and also which parts could be pulled out of context from that piece and used against him.

20

Moderating: This is Cafe Society, it is not the pit.

This is a great place to talk about whether Dave Chappelle is a comic genius, whether he is transphobic, and how humor is used. But it is not a place to attack other posters.

22

That’s bananas. If a politician says something out loud, and I read an article in which it’s quoted, I can’t legitimately criticize the politician, because I read it instead of listening to it?

You take whoever you want to take seriously. But your “must be listened to, not read” approach is, uh, not mainstream.

23

Posting as a poster, not a mod…

I think that you probably do need to watch the clip to be a fair judge of “is it funny?”. I think reading the words is enough to judge “is it transphobic?” Those are very different judgements.

25

That’s a very fair point. I’m completely willing to concede that he’s hilarious, based on other comedy I’ve seen from him. He’s got excellent comedic timing and gestures. Hell, Donald Trump is no Chappelle, but I’ve always said that Trump’s got really good comedic chops.

Straight up if Chappelle weren’t funny, his transphobic comments wouldn’t be such an issue. His comic skills are, as I said, the candy coating that makes the bitter pill go down so easy.

26

I recall watching television one evening roughly 20 years ago. There was Dave Chappelle playing Rick James and grinding those muddy boots into that couch. That was one of the funniest things I had ever seen on television. So yeah, Dave Chappelle can be hilarious.
But just because someone is standing on a stage holding a microphone in their role as comedian, doesn’t mean that they can’t say something hurtful. Am I right Andrew Dice Clay?

27

But then, what comedy isn’t hurtful in some manner? Isn’t all comedy at it’s basic form just making fun of one another? In your example he was making fun of Rick James - was that considered hurtful? Not to you, but what about Rick James? Where is the line drawn?

28

The answer is blowing in the wind. That, and ones best judgement. I guess at some point life becomes a crapshoot, and people are left to decide what’s to do.

32

I sort of hate this view of comedy as always having to be about mocking someone or something. It’s an unfortunately common view and style of comedy, but it’s by no means the only form of comedy. Mitch Hedberg (RIP) is an excellent example of comic who rarely made fun of anyone, but was still hilarious. Surrealist and observational comedy tends to avoid that sort of mockery pretty well.

As for where we draw the line, that’s entirely dependent on social norms. At the moment protected classes in comedy, as in law, tend to include historically oppressed groups like racial minorities, certain religious groups, and gay people. Not that you shouldn’t make fun of people who possess those characteristics, but that you shouldn’t make fun of them for that characteristic. So it’s fine to make fun of, say, Jared Kushner, but it’s not OK to mock him for his Judaism. Increasingly people are moving towards seeing trans people in this category as well, and acceptable targets will always change as society changes. Like moderation on the SDMB, there are no bright line rules, and the primary rule is don’t be a jerk.