Here's the Chris Rock clip here. The whole thing is gold. The part I reference starts about three minutes in.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I have tried but I just cannot appreciate Chris Rock. Aside from the fact that his timing and voice seem wrong to me, I just think his jokes are both predictable and ill-conceived. The bit, for instance, about whether any white person would trade places with him is just fundamentally wrong. Clearly most people of any ethnicity would be happy to trade places with Chris Rock but more than that, one of the most pronounced cultural phenomena of the last couple decades is white people doing exactly that: attempting, quite explicitly, to assume cultural identity of black people.
Everything he says is like that to me. Its a kind of predictable joke, stated in a very loud and grating voice, which is also just flat wrong in some incredibly obvious way. When I watch most comedians I like, I laugh while thinking, thats an unusual way of looking at things but there is some truth to it.
When I hear Chappelle, for instance, joke about grape drank, I think its hysterical because while it may not be literally true that black people know nothing about juice, there is a cultural difference in beverage consumption that I am familiar with and that I had never really given much thought to before he told the joke. Rock never works on that level for me. My first thought is that the underlying point he is making is either too obvious or completely wrong.
I realize by now that I am firmly in the minority but I have never found Chris Rock to be even the least bit funny. Oh well.
Brent:
You really are firmly in the minority. Bigger and Blacker was one of the funniest comedy routines ever in my opinion.
I do agree with you however, that he was way off-base about no white people wanting to trade places with him. Rock's jokes are generally funny to both his white and black audience, but in some cases they are directed to one or the other. This one was I think clearly directed toward his black audience, amongst whom "white privilege" notions are far more accepted. Look I have what most would consider a pretty good job, but when I'm locked in my office past midnight to meet a deadline and come home to a wife and child that have been sleeping for hours, best believe I'd trade places with CR in a minute. That being said, I thought that some of the jokes that were included in the greater point about trading places (the one legged busboy) were pretty funny.
I would also say also that CR has, to a degree, fallen off a bit. I didn't really think his last special was very funny at all and came away from it really disappointed. I thought with Carlin dead (GRHS) that Rock would be the funniest dude out there, but I'm starting to think that Louis CK (a former writer for Rock I believe) is actually funnier, if far less popular.
Brent, I can't argue how clear it is that any ethnicity would change places with Chris Rock. I have no proof to back it up. However, I would suggest that though you say that white people "attempt, quite explicitly, to assume cultural identity of black people," they are doing so from the safety and security of being white. I further have no proof that should one of these who attempt to assume cultural identity were to defy god and nature and actually wake up one morning black, it would be quite an unnerving shock. What you're speaking of is not assumption but appropriation.
But by years I'm knocking on the cracker-ass-cracker door, so my view may be stilted. Just a thought.
but I'm starting to think that Louis CK (a former writer for Rock I believe) is actually funnier, if far less popular.
Yeah its interesting that Louis C.K used to write for the Chris Rock Show because I actually find Louis to be incredibly funny and I found that show to be incredibly unfunny.
I'll bite. I would trade places with Chris Rock in a minute.
I just watched that same clip, and many other CR clips last week. For some reason I had the "No Sex . . . In the Champagne room" song in my head. It's definitely true that his jokes are mainly obvious and sometimes counterfactual, but I enjoy his delivery and pacing. That cab bit is funny as hell, you expect him to talk about civil rights or something, nope, "he WAS the cab" same with the old black man thing, which works well directed to whites and blacks.
But since this is pretty dated, Many of his jokes, however, of the "white people didn't know about this" variety, well, white people do know about that now. Either we blacks don't have too many secrets left, or , pray tell, we are become more like whites. Oh noes!
Brent, I can't argue how clear it is that any ethnicity would change places with Chris Rock. I have no proof to back it up.
Chris Rock is wealthy, famous and, my opinion of him notwithstanding, incredibly well liked. There is almost nothing in the world that he could ever want that he could not have. I doubt very seriously that there are many people on Earth that wouldn't accept being black at the cost of having all of those things. You're correct that it is difficult to prove such a thing but lets just say that I would be extremely surprised if there were a whole lot of people who would consider their life to be a bad trade for his.
However, I would suggest that though you say that white people "attempt, quite explicitly, to assume cultural identity of black people," they are doing so from the safety and security of being white
To the extent that there is a topic here (cracker ass crackers?), I would not want to go too far off it (TNC is a real stickler on that ;)), but there is actually a very wide range of cultural phenomena to consider here that points to the fact that certain elements of black cultural identity have always (long before Eminem or Third Bass) considered to be highly desirable. Whether, when it absolutely comes down to it and one is actually faced with the reality of having to actually live life as a black person, they would find it everything they thought it would be is really a different issue.
I heard a joke from, I think it was Cedric the Entertainer or maybe DL Hughley, that commented that a lot of white people might like to be black in many ways but wouldn't want to trade their credit reports.
Andrew,
Next thing you know, you'll be drinking grape juice and Sunny Delight.
I know a lot of white people who would trade places with Rock as well, but this is comedy and he was trying to make a larger point by using exaggeration.
Where does Tropicana Twister fit in the juice/drink paradigm?
know a lot of white people who would trade places with Rock as well, but this is comedy and he was trying to make a larger point by using exaggeration.
What point? By exaggeration of what truth?
Brent, not yelling at you. Just agreeing with Chris Rock's point vis-a-vis your statement. I really believe that anyone white who says that they would trade places with CR in a hot minute is considering it on a superficial level...which in context to a comedy routine is appropriate. And really, a superficial level is all that can be considered since you'd actually have to be black to understand exactly what trading places entails.
I'm female, but if I were to say I'd trade places with a man in a minute, can I really know what it means to have to shave my face...MY FACE...every single day? That's my superficial consideration.
Wasn't intending to try to get deep. Really. Just a thought.
Brent:
I think one could argue that the underlying truth would be that whites in general would not want to trade places with blacks because of the relatively privileged position that whites hold (no comment on the merits of this privilege argument or the extent of the privilege, in order to keep this thread on point); and the exagerration of the truth is that the most ragged-ass white trash wouldn't trade place with the world's luckiest black person.
Comedy/humor is probably the hardest thing in the world to deconstruct, so good luck if you're going to try to argue about this.
At the risk of sounding like a liberal, the truth he is pointing out is that under most circumstances, there are a lot of advantages to being part of the majority. White people have an easier time in the job market, housing market, justice system, etc. There is also the matter of the old white lady who clutches her purse when she passes a black guy, or the store security that pays extra special attention to black customers.
So the question becomes: Would the average white guy give up all the advantages his skin color carries for some fame and fortune, and if so, what would the price break point be?
Comedy/humor is probably the hardest thing in the world to deconstruct, so good luck if you're going to try to argue about this.
Thanks for wishing me luck but really I am not arguing about it. Just trying to flesh out why exactly the joke works for others and for me not at all. See you write:
I think one could argue that the underlying truth would be that whites in general would not want to trade places with blacks because of the relatively privileged position that whites hold...
And that to me is entirely the point. This is just another way of saying that the problem that anyone might have with being black isn't the skin color is the loss of privilege that one imagines might accrue to being black. So that this:
and the exagerration of the truth is that the most ragged-ass white trash wouldn't trade place with the world's luckiest black person.
is the exact opposite of the truth posited in your first sentence. If one could have all the privilege in the world, especially when they have a distinct lack of privilege themselves, they probably wouldn't mind being black as well. Part of what kills the joke for me is exactly that contradiction.
Rock once explained a similar truth in what I would consider to be a funnier way. He was talking about the fact that he was rich and all but because he was black he had to be an extraordinary individual to achieve what he had. The white guy that lived next door to him had achieved essentially the same and he was a "fucking dentist." I still hated his delivery but as a joke that plays on the same essential truth, that works a lot better for me.
This thread is beyond stupid. LL is clearly right. You can't try to deconstruct humor like this without sounding like an asshole. Funny is funny, and Brent clearly doesn't get it. Seriously, you like Cedric the Entertainer, and not Chris Rock? Who gives a fuck what works for you? Do you think you could find one comic on the planet who would say that Chris Rock has bad timing? Just one? Obviously, Chris Rock is fully aware that white people would trade places with him. Its a joke, get it? Chris Rock is really, really successful, but its still not better than being white. Sheesh...
Wow Stacy. I really sound like an asshole? Then I apologize. I thought I was merely having a discussion that at least interested me. I appreciated the feedback I got but apparently it was all beyond stupid. I am sorry my commentary offends you so.
C'mon, Brent, you didn't offend me. And I didn't mean asshole in that sense.
But seriously, you like Cedric the Entertainer?
brent, you seem to be arguing that the joke isn't funny because it isn't literally true, but I don't think anyone would agree that it is literally true, or that whether a joke is literally true is usually the standard of comedy. If Rock doesn't it do it for you, that's fine, takes all kinds, but it's not because the man's joke isn't literally true. (One can hear many of the seven dirty words on television; Carlin's routine was still funny.)
Let us not be coy. Of course most (less-rich, less-famous) white people would trade places with him. Duh.
The question is would an equally rich, white guy trade places with him? Or - would the average white guy trade places with the average or even slightly-above average black man? Appropriation of black slang, style, etc etc doesn't mean a damn thing. White Americans have been doing that since Day One, and I can't imagine Al Jolson (sp?) would have wanted to trade places with the richest black man in America at that time.
I believe there was actually a study about this -- the amount of money white folks would take to be black. I was surprised at how low it was, frankly. Something like $20,000.
But they would have to be paid.
I just spent a few minutes looking at brent's blog, and it's as close to the polar opposite of funny as anything I've ever seen. So I wonder if he really has a genuine interest in or appreciation for humor, or if there's something else going on here.
C'mon, Brent, you didn't offend me. And I didn't mean asshole in that sense.
LOL. I don't know what more gentle sense you meant it in but I was being serious in my apology not passive aggressive. Rereading my comment, I realized it may seem that way. If discussing this is so bothersome, and your comment clearly suggests it is at least to you, then I don't wish to continue discussing it. It really isn't that important to me. I just like to think about why humor works or doesn't for different individuals.
But seriously, you like Cedric the Entertainer?
Never much cared for him although I think I find him funnier more often than Chris Rock. My point above was merely that I thought the joke about the credit reports was, to me, a funnier way of saying the same thing because it got more at the truth of the matter. To me, that truth is that there are a lot of reasons that people wouldn't mind being black. There are a cultural associations that people make with being black that are actually considered highly desirable. They just wouldn't like being black and poor.
DougEMI also makes a good point above about some of the other assumed disadvantages with being black. His deconstruction of the joke actually works a little better if I think about it the way that he put it but like I said, it isn't that big a deal to me. I just think its an interesting topic.
brent, you seem to be arguing that the joke isn't funny because it isn't literally true, but I don't think anyone would agree that it is literally true, or that whether a joke is literally true is usually the standard of comedy.
No. I am not arguing that at all. I am arguing that a joke doesn't work for me when it is rings as false even from the perspective of exaggeration. In fact, the example I gave with the Chappelle joke was meant to clarify that precise point.
I just spent a few minutes looking at brent's blog, and it's as close to the polar opposite of funny as anything I've ever seen. So I wonder if he really has a genuine interest in or appreciation for humor, or if there's something else going on here.
Thats an excellent point MLJ. If my blog on transportation issues is not funny then I must have some nefarious reason for not finding Chris Rock funny and saying so. Your logic is airtight.
I'm sorry you give Chris Rock the time of day ... since his INEXCUSABLE riff on Michelle Obama and vilification of Black women (who -- according to Rock -- simply CANNOT assume the role of First Lady, versus white women "with them, you can WIN!") in his last stand-up. He's dead to me now, no matter how "funny" he may be(come again). I'm never paying such a high price for such "entertainment" again; it was verbal violence of the highest order and I felt horrible for the Black women in the audience who were sucker punched by that jerk. And please: no puzzled comments that he's married to a Black woman. As a number of misogynists date, sex, and marry women, so do ___ misogynists date, sex, amd marry ___ women (fill in the blank with the racial, ethnic, national, regional adjective of choice, e.g., Black for men like Rock).
Lever,
You and Brent need to hang out sometime. You both sound like the life of the party. He's a comedian. Get over it.
Count me as kind of ambivalent about Chris Rock, in large part because Rock can sometimes hit a sour note and because I think Chappelle does it better. But the line about how no white person would change places with him has its basis in some fairly famous studies in which white test subjects indicated that they'd be unwilling to be black even if there was a significant financial incentive to do so. So, really, it wasn't much of an exaggeration at all for Rock to say to his white audience members that they wouldn't trade places with him even though he is a rich black guy. And it was brutally funny because it's pretty darn true (after all, studies have shown!!), all self-serving protestations on the part of other commenters aside. The closest it may come to being an exaggeration is that it may not necessarily be true that the average white person would choose not to trade places with a *specific* wealthy black person if asked that specific question. But I'm tellin' ya, if they don't know which rich black guy they're going to be, a whole lot of white guys will literally say they wouldn't be black for all the money in the world.
"a whole lot of white guys will literally say they wouldn't be black for all the money in the world."
I don't have any evidence to refute this, but white people like money WAY more than being white. Its not even close. Every white person I know would trade their skin color for a sum of money.
Mildly OT, but isn't this prima facie evidence of the legitimacy of the reparations movement?
You and Brent need to hang out sometime. You both sound like the life of the party. He's a comedian. Get over it.
LOL. Not sure what my opinion has to do with Lever's and I do not agree that Rock's joke about black women was "inexcusable" (just unfunny). However, you seem to be expressing the notion that others should excuse that which they find offensive because it was stated by a comedian and intended to be funny.
Speaking personally, its pretty hard to offend me. In fact, I don't know if I can think of any joke that I have ever found offensive but I also don't take the position that others are wrong to be offended by a statement merely because it is intended to be humorous. If Lever is bothered by Rock's joke, I cannot see where its my place to tell him/her that she is wrong to be merely because I thought it was funny.
As far as "getting over it," I am not exactly sure what it is I am supposed to get over but I do think its a mistake to judge others based upon the fact that they don't share your precise sense of humor. I feel certain that there are very popular comedians that you don't find particularly funny (Carrot Top maybe?). I don't think that disqualifies you from being a fun person. In fact, I don't think it suggests anything about you at all.
Well, some people would trade their white skin for free. Seriously, I just don't think most white people associate their identity with their skin color at all. I mean, obviously, this is all part of white privilege, I'm just saying I don't agree with nolo. I'm not sure what it says about reparations.
I'm the last person to get on anyone for anything they say in pursuit of comedy, but Lever has a point on Rock's misogynistic comment in his last big HBO special. His joke, like alot of other jokes in that special regarding race and sex, was offensive without being at all funny. After watching the special, several coworkers agreed with me that Rock may be losing his shit and others suggested after watching some interviews of him promoting his act that he may have gotten into drugs (I personally think this is taking it too far but who knows. Is Chappelle back from Africa yet?).
And of course white people would change skin color for money, just like anyone else would. I think a common misperception about whites (perhaps evident in the Rock joke at issue) is that they actually give a crap their whiteness. Most of us couldn't give less of a shit. I don't know anything about the study that people are citing too and I can say with some confidence that it is bs.
And Ivanovich, I don't even know what to say about the reparations point. But please elaborate, I'd love to hear this.
It's pretty simple, really-- if white people would be willing to become black for a price, then doesn't that indicate that being white is worth at least that amount?
Given American history it seems obvious devaluation of blackness is a direct result of the actions of white people. Ergo, by saying that white people would be willing to be black for a price seems to me to say that white people agree that blackness has been devalued by that amount.
This also implies that the addition of that much money to a black man's bank account would make him "whiter-" or, more accurately, more completely "American."
BTW-- I say this not as a supporter of reparations (the practical, pragmatic aspects of such a program seem unduly daunting); but as one who sees the moral arguments for them.
Stacy, I'm just stating what the studies show. Saying you "disagree" with me when you're not in a position to say the studies don't exist is a little silly, don't you think? It doesn't mean you don't get to have a feeling about whether you or your immediate circle have thoughts or reactions that are different than what the study participants reported. But the fact your feelings don't correlate with what the studies show doesn't mean the studies -- and the reactions they reflect -- don't exist.
I'm not black and I'm not male, and I'm a comfortably successful degreed professional who's done well enough in a comparatively non-discriminatory field. But I'd be lying if I said I hadn't occasionally envied the white males in my profession, and haven't occasionally wondered what my career would have looked like if I'd been born a white male. On the other hand, while I know extremely admirable and successful black males in my profession, I've also noted they're a *lot* less numerous than the tall white males (or TWMs for short, as we girls in the profession have been known to call them), and that they had to work a lot harder to get where they are than the white boys did. Suffice it to say, I haven't really wished I'd been born black and male. Not because there's anything inherently wrong with either (a) being black and male or (b) what I am. But I'm not delusional about the benefits that come with white maleness or the impediments that can come with black maleness.
Brent,
You completely missed the point of the joke. Ironically, your criticism of it is the exact reason why it's funny!
Of course it's absurd to suggest that a white paraplegic would not want to switch places with Chris Rock. That's why his line is funny--because it's absurd.
But underlying the absurdity is a larger truth. Chris Rock isn't just a rich, well-respected comedian. He's also a human being who has gone through his entire life as a black man in America, and it is out of that experience that he built his comedy. The average white person might love to be handed Rock's wealth and success, but that doesn't mean they would want to ever be Rock. They might think they do, but only by ignoring what he had to go through to get there.
Ivan,
That is simply ridiculous. Many black people would be willing to change their skin color for money as well. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that a lower percentage of black people would be willing to trade their skin color for money. Does that mean that being black is worth more than being white? Of course not. I'm not even speaking of reparations, I just think your point is silly.
"But I'm not delusional about the benefits that come with white maleness or the impediments that can come with black maleness."
Who's being delusional about it? I said earlier that the very fact that white people don't value their whiteness is practically proof of white privilege.
As far as your study, I've still yet to see a link on that. I'm certainly curious what year this famous study was conducted. Lisa posted earlier stating that she saw a study where white people would trade their skin color for a relatively low amount. Neither one of you provided a link, but I think I'm leaning towards Lisa on this one. I'm sure its a generational thing as well.
You make a good point Kylopod. Of course, that occurred to me but I just didn't "read" Rock as expressing exactly that and that is part of why it failed with me and that is why it worked for you. That is also why the other joke, about his dentist neighbor, worked better for me perhaps because that idea is more explicitly expressed. Interesting.
Ivan:
I still don't know what to say, so I'll quote from the classic Billy Madison:
"Mr. [Ivanovich], what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
I mean no offense Ivan and I apologize to you in advance. I just really needed to make the Billy Madison joke.
Am I the only person here who watched this video and simply thought that Rock's image of an "Indian family hanging out at Red Lobster" was absolutely hysterical?
I thought the Red Lobster thing was pretty funny as well.
Laborlibert, I love that Billy Madison line, I wish I could fit it on a bumper-sticker.
Stacy, it is likely that Lisa and I are referencing the same study. Lisa's recollection is consistent with mine -- some whites would change for a relatively small sum, some wouldn't change for anything, but the key was you'd have to pay them to do it, which means their whiteness has a value to them (and blackness has a corollary undersirableness). Which was the point Lisa made, and it's not inconsistent with mine.
As for a link to the study, I've tried my best at googling for it, but the key terms are too broad and I do not know the names of the authors of the study. Lisa and I both remember it, though, which I'd like to think counts for something.
Age may factor into this, I suppose (and, interestingly, that seemed to be one of Chris Rock's points when he was talking about old black men's attitudes). Remember, though, while young folks may be relatively free of sensitivity to racial ranking in our society, power's still handed out by old folks . . . I hope as you get older that experience with how power still works in the U.S. doesn't make you change your values, either intrinsically or cynically.
Be well, and here's to a great new year. I am looking at it with hope.
Brent,
It's not too hard to figure out. What you have to realize is that Rock's routines are usually organized as a series of statements that grow increasingly absurd. Recall his old routine about why no presidential candidate would select Colin Powell as a running mate:
"Now as you know, there's been a lot of talk about a black vice president. And I just wanna tell the world that it'll never happen. As long as you live you will never see a black vice president, you know why? Because some black guy would just kill the president. I'd do it. If Colin Powell was vice president, I'd kill the president and tell his mother about it. What would happen to me? What would they do? Put me in jail with a bunch of black guys that would treat me like a king for the rest of my life? I would be the biggest star in jail, alright, people would be coming up to me and I'd be signing autographs: "97-KY, here you go." Guys would be going: "You're the brother that shot Bush. And you told his mother about it huh? I hope my children turn out to be just like you, Man, you know I was getting ready to rape you until I realized who you were." And even if they had a death penalty, what would happen? I'd just be pardoned by the black president."
Earlier this year (come a few hours I'll have to be saying "Earlier last year"!), when we were faced with the very real prospect of a Clinton/Obama ticket, I wondered if FBI agents were going to pay Rock a visit. It should be obvious what Rock meant: not that he would ever really want to kill a president, but that on some primal level he'd be tempted. Like many performers, Rock's stage persona is essentially his id.
But notice the escalation of this routine, how it starts off with a relatively reasonable observation and gradually gets more and more ridiculous. It's like watching a photograph morph into a political cartoon. That's how most of Rock's monologues are structured.
In the case of the "ass cracker" routine, he starts off with the idea that being white is intrinsically a privileged position compared to being black. His twist is to confuse this idea with the notion that any white person is in a better position than any black person. But even then, we realize there's truth to what he's saying: a black person like Rock might have certain privileges that many whites would envy, but those are despite, not because of, his race.
brent replies: "Thats an excellent point MLJ. If my blog on transportation issues is not funny then I must have some nefarious reason for not finding Chris Rock funny and saying so. Your logic is airtight."
It's just that you seem to hate comedy, brent. You discuss it as though you're discussing mortuary fees. Your posts here are like black holes from which no humor can escape, ever.
Have you ever made anyone laugh? Intentionally, I mean.
Or to put it another way, brent - if you saw "Good Morning, Vietnam" - did you sort of agree with the Bruno Kirby character?
It's just that you seem to hate comedy, brent.
Of course, you know nothing at all about my tastes in comedy because you know very little about me. You very probably just said that because you wished to state something vaguely insulting that you thought might be funny to others. I doubt you succeeded but others will have to be the judge of that.
Your posts here are like black holes from which no humor can escape, ever.
Thanks. I think your posts are equally humorous.
Have you ever made anyone laugh? Intentionally, I mean.
Nope. Never. I have never, in my lifetime, intentionally said or did anything that made another person laugh. You sure got me there. You are a keen observer of the human condition. Good work!
Or to put it another way, brent - if you saw "Good Morning, Vietnam" - did you sort of agree with the Bruno Kirby character?
Well, I sure think that was a really witty and astute question. So I guess not!
Well, brent, all I can do is read your contributions to the discussion here and analyze them as well as I can. If you really think it is necessary to know a great deal about someone in order to for any sort of preliminary opinion about them then I really don't know why you bother with message boards.
I'm still waiting for you to show some sign that you're a genuine fan of some form of comedy and that you're not just observing it as some sort of phenomenon, Spock-fashion.
You really do remind me of that Bruno Kirby character more, though.
It's not too hard to figure out. What you have to realize is that Rock's routines are usually organized as a series of statements that grow increasingly absurd.
No, I get that for the most part. A lot of comedians work that way. I just guess that when he does it, it isn't expressed in a way that I find especially funny. I mentioned the content of a particular joke in the way of giving an example of why I don't particularly appreciate his humor but I agree with laborlibert above that humor is very difficult to deconstruct. If Richard Pryor were telling the same joke, I might find it significantly more humorous. That is to say, my mind focuses on what I see as the untruth in the joke because I otherwise don't appreciate the delivery. Not the other way around. Like I said, I realize that I am in the minority on that but I think its an interesting topic to explore. I am always as interested to find out what people find funny about say Carlos Mencia or Dane Cook who are also popular but more often disliked.
If you really think it is necessary to know a great deal about someone in order to for any sort of preliminary opinion about them then I really don't know why you bother with message boards.
I don't think its necessary. In fact, I think you can form a preliminary opinion about someone based upon nothing at all. Its also not necessary to know anything at all about someone in order to cast casual personal insults in their direction. You have decided that it is perfectly appropriate and somehow interesting to do so. I have not suggested that you don't have every right to do so. So fire away to your heart's content.
As for why I "bother" with message boards, it generally has to do with being interested in the discussion of ideas on said boards. It has nothing to do with forming opinions about the personalities of the people on the board. I am not sure why anyone should think that would be a requirement to enter into any discussion - online or otherwise.
Wow, MoeLarryAndJesus, you sound like a very happy person. I'm so glad that you have brightened everyone's day.
Here is the link to the study that nolo and Lisa are referring to:
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/blckcost.htm
Guys, don't feed the trolls (that would be MLJ).
Can we take a collective vote to vote MLJ off the island? He turned last Sunday's NFL thread into a nightmare of schoolyard-level insults, and he's jacking this thread too. And I say this as a Patriots fan.
Holdie writes: "Wow, MoeLarryAndJesus, you sound like a very happy person. I'm so glad that you have brightened everyone's day."
I am very happy. Thanks for your concern. I'm just fascinated by why someone would write thousands of words to say, "I don't think Chris Rock is funny," without ever really giving an indication that he finds anything funny. It's peculiar. The defensive attitude he takes when challenged on it is even more peculiar.
And that's funny.
Maya trolls: "Can we take a collective vote to vote MLJ off the island? He turned last Sunday's NFL thread into a nightmare of schoolyard-level insults, and he's jacking this thread too. And I say this as a Patriots fan."
Perhaps you should actually contribute to the discussion before trying to decide who gets to take part in it, Maya.
Or is that too much to ask?
I love these people who pop out of hiding just to bitch about me. What's up with that, anyway?
I'm just fascinated by why someone would write thousands of words to say, "I don't think Chris Rock is funny,"
Yeah that is strange. Even more oddly, somehow plenty of other people on the thread seemed to understand my comment just fine and responded to it as if it were completely comprehensible. Go figure huh? Whats up with those folks?
without ever really giving an indication that he finds anything funny.
I seem to have mentioned at least two and arguably three comedians that I find funny in this very thread. I even discussed particular jokes of theirs that I find funny. I guess that doesn't count as "an indication" to you but once again it seems that most of the other sentient beings here were, by some apparently strange method, able to decipher that which seem strange and incomprehensible to you.
The defensive attitude he takes when challenged on it is even more peculiar.
Yes, your well founded observation about me hating comedy was a "challenge" of some sort and I was very defensive about it. This very accurately describes my attitude towards your commentary to you as opposed to say dismissiveness or mild bemusement. You've shown your incredible astuteness again. Kudos to you!
I've enjoyed that routine for years but there's one line that I've never gotten-- maybe someone can explain it to me: "When you're white, the sky's the limit. When you're black, the limit's the sky!"
Well, brent, maybe my problem with you is that you tend to express things in this sort of fashion:
"Never much cared for him although I think I find him funnier more often than Chris Rock. "
I mean, YIKES! Yeah, you're an original King of Comedy. Please let me know when you start hitting Open Mike nights. I want to be able to say I was there at the beginning.
Yeah, you're an original King of Comedy. Please let me know when you start hitting Open Mike nights.
You mean you didn't find that simple declarative sentence really, really funny? Boy, do I have egg on my face! I thought that comment in direct reply to a question from Stacy would be a real show stopper. You sure are helpful.
I guess you're right. The only possible interpretation of that sentence is that I must hate comedy. I mean, its all become so clear to me now. I said I find one comedian, that I don't like that much, funnier than another and logically speaking that entirely negates the comments that I made about other comedians that I like altogether. Once again, your logic is airtight.
brent replies: "You mean you didn't find that simple declarative sentence really, really funny?"
I did, but it wasn't because you were trying to be funny, and it wasn't a "simple declarative sentence." It was an attempt to say nothing. You THINK you find him funnier MORE OFTEN than Chris Rock. But that really means nothing, since you said previously that, "I have never found Chris Rock to be even the least bit funny."
Being funny MORE OFTEN than someone who has never been even the least bit funny. Wow, what an achievement!
My problem with your comments here is that you don't seem to know what your opinions actually are, but you use three times as many words to express nothing than people do who actually know what they THINK - or at least know so MORE OFTEN than you seem to.
Capisce?
Chris Rock is astonishingly funny. He has an active, cynical intelligence and when he's on stage he has long stretches where he revels in showing that off.
"Lieutenant Steven Hauk: I understand you're pretty funny as a dee-jay and, well, comedy is kind of a hobby of mine. Well, actually, it's a little more than just a hobby, Reader's Digest is considering publishing two of my jokes.
Adrian Cronauer: Really.
Lieutenant Steven Hauk: Yeah. And perhaps some night we could maybe get together and swap humorous stories, for fun.
Adrian Cronauer: Oh, why not? Maybe play a couple of Tennessee Ernie Ford records, that'd be a hoot.
Lieutenant Steven Hauk: That's a joke, right?
Adrian Cronauer: Maybe.
Lieutenant Steven Hauk: I get it. "
MLJ: I've got that ruler here for you and brent. Let me know when you guys are ready to drop trou.
zacksback says: "I've got that ruler here for you and brent."
What? You forgot your yardstick?
My problem with your comments here is that you don't seem to know what your opinions actually are, but you use three times as many words to express nothing than people do who actually know what they THINK - or at least know so MORE OFTEN than you seem to.
Hmm. So now my problem is totally different. It isn't that I am not funny. It isn't that I hate comedy. Or maybe it isn't JUST those very obvious things. Its that I don't know what I mean and I use WAY too many words to say so. Once again I can only admire how you managed to express this wonderful observation, and did so using so few words yourself. Probably less than a 1000 for sure.
Its a good thing for me that you are here to provide such kind advice. Otherwise I might actually still be under the illusion that I was engaged in an entirely reasonable discussion with other people who disagreed and responded to the obviously terribly unclear content of my comments rather than the much more important discussion concerning your opinion on all my shortcomings. You are a great and heroic individual. No ruler even necessary.
brent again: "So now my problem is totally different. It isn't that I am not funny. It isn't that I hate comedy. Or maybe it isn't JUST those very obvious things. Its that I don't know what I mean and I use WAY too many words to say so."
As you noted I don't know you very well, brent. So while I may have formed opinions as to why you're not funny I'm still exploring the various possibilities. I'm sorry you're not funny. Perhaps you can work on your unfunniness and achieve a moment or two of funny in the glorious new year. Stranger things have happened in this world, if not in your posts.
Shalom. Who's your favorite comedian?
Shalom. Who's your favorite comedian?
LOL. So is that to signal that your barrage of deeply incisive personal insults is over for now? I admit I was curious to see how long you might continue in that vein.
Very well then. I am not especially good at picking favorites but at gunpoint I would probably say my favorite comedian in the sense that I think he is the most consistently funny is probably Chappelle. Louis C.K. who I also mentioned above, I think is extremely funny and I think when he is really on, he probably makes me laugh harder than anyone else including Chappelle. I also appreciate a lot of the more "off-beat" acts like say Mitch Hedberg (R.I.P.) Old school: Richard Pryor and Bob Newhart.
You are probably going to lament on how education has for sure gone down the tubes but over the years I play this cut for my young adult speech students when we study oral interpretation. OK, also because I love this cut and find it freakin hilarious.
Brent doesn't know what he is talking about. First of all, the man has the most natural timing since Henny Youngman, Red Foxx or George Carlin. He may not be that naturally funny guy like Pryor who could make you belly laugh with a poppin eye glance of incredulity.
Rock sets the jokes up in the frame of a story. He drives the energy of the story with the frenetic pacing on the stage that creates energy, along with his voice, which is a roller coaster ride of emotion, and his facial expressions which he uses as the exclamation points.
All technical stuff aside, his material is funny because it's for real. The root of all comedy is a subtle hidden truth, no matter how ridiculously it's framed. There is something that is either true or believed by many to be true.
He's damn right.Adjunctly, the bit about how folks from the 30s looked down from heaven on the marchers of the 60s and said, "Damn! They got it good!" isn't meant as they had it good; it's we got lynched and nobody even pretended to give a rat's behind, and these folks get beaten, thrown in jail,their churches and homes frequently bombed and sometimes their children killed, but imagine it 1000x worse and you have the 30s. Think Rosewood."
With Rock, some people don't like having to think, My students get his energy and all that. They love the line "cracker-as cracker," and the Suzy punchline is delivered so well, but given the choice between Rock and Kat Williams, they're going for the "wait-for-it, wait-for-it" laugh first.
So Brent and others who don't get Chris Rock, it's okay. Go back to sleep. Didn't mean to wake you and make you work so hard.
Go back to sleep. Didn't mean to wake you and make you work so hard.
Thanks for your input. Your comment which states a perfectly reasonable disagreement in its first 3/4 would have been remiss not to include your personal and well-founded assessment of my intellectual laziness in its final paragraph. I think you emphasize the very important point that if someone has a different opinion from you on something the only reasonable assumption is that they lack character in some way.
Do you go around in every day life with this sort of thin skin, brent? Because if the things BG and I said to you really seem like grievous insults worth whining about you must cry yourself to sleep every night. Roll with it. It's okay to have fun and no one will end up bleeding.
Do you go around in every day life with this sort of thin skin, brent?
Your concern is very touching. Thanks. Yes. Yes I am very thin skinned. You've nailed it once again, detective. You're like one of those super geniuses aren't you?
Because if the things BG and I said to you really seem like grievous insults worth whining about you must cry yourself to sleep every night. Roll with it.
Right on the money as always sir. My point wasn't to emphasize that your insults were unnecessary, silly and irrational. That wasn't my intent at all. No, the real point of these exchanges, as you so accurately describe it, was how obviously painful your comments were to me personally. How it wounds me when you, a truly great wit whose opinion of me is very meaningful, so accurately describe all my shortcomings based upon your incredibly comprehensive knowledge of my personality. I cannot think of a single instance at the moment when I took any personal offense at your (or BG's) comments at all but my mind isn't the steel trap yours is.
No, clearly it was my inability to "roll with" something or the other that was at fault here. Not the irrefutable logic of your argument as to why my failure to find Chris Rock funny indicates my hatred of all humor everywhere.
It's okay to have fun and no one will end up bleeding.
Yeah. I am having no fun with this exchange at all. Can't get anything past you.
people saying that Rock's jokes are "obvious" or "predictable" or what have you don't understand what a subversive and revolutionary routine 'Bring the Pain' was at the time. Half of Chappelle's stand-up routine is biting from that routine (see especially his elaborated discussion of American Indians in 'For What It's Worth').
anyway point being - a lot of stuff sounds dated post 'Bring the Pain' precisely because of how influential it was. many of these things had never been said before to nearly the extent that Rock explored them. the routine was so spot-on that everything that follows in the same vein has been, so far, at least partially derivative of it.
brent admits: "Yes. Yes I am very thin skinned."
Plus you're long-winded and trite. You should consider running for office.
Chris Rock is usually funnier than this. Midway along this routine, I was wondering if it is just me. "Pure gold" it ain't.
And yes, MLJ is mighty annoying.
Another until-now-non-participant chimes in: "And yes, MLJ is mighty annoying."
Great! I've been promoted!
I'd offer an assessment of the u-n-n-p's posts as well, but I can't recall ever having seen one.
Poor Chris Rock must be losing sleep over the heavyweight criticism he's been subjected to in this thread. The horror! The horror!
QED
What da? Not one mention of the funniest comic geniuses ever to make this conservative Opie crackerboy wet his pants....the immortal Richard Pryor. The Godfather of all modern black comedy and wise truth teller. Uncle Dick Gregory is also a hoot. Love em all uncritically. The most truly intelligent stuff I ever heard was couched in humor....the best delivery system for an inspiring sermon. Please don't belittle or scold me....enlighten me. We're all pigmented by accident of nature....get over it. CR does have his brilliant hilarious moments....the clip shown here ain't one of them. Dave Chapelle also splits my sides....another deep genius and truth teller closer to Pryor than Rock.
Ranger Joe says: "What da? Not one mention of the funniest comic geniuses ever to make this conservative Opie crackerboy wet his pants....the immortal Richard Pryor. The Godfather of all modern black comedy and wise truth teller."
Several people mentioned Pryor. I'm not sure, though, that you're not shortchanging Redd Foxx.
The funny thing about this thread is that I have long heard people deride Rock as overly conventional, a hack for those unsophisticated in their comic taste. My reaction to these people has always been that I'm not trying to be sophisticated, or hip, or, dare I say, black. I just happen to find him hilarious! I can't help it. I am not "working hard" to find him funny--that's absurd. Humor is something primal, you can try to explain your reaction, but you certainly can't force it.
Rock has had occasional moments where I felt he descended into conventionality (e.g. his quip that Bush is "the first retarded president"), but for the most part he's one of the greatest comedians around today. And I find that whenever somebody takes offense at one of his remarks, I am able to defend it! Beyond this thread, one memorable example was Sean Penn's defense of Jude Law against Rock's claim that Jude is "not a star." (Rock was absolutely right. I wish he would host the Oscars again, but I know the Academy probably wouldn't stand for it.)
Humor is something primal, you can try to explain your reaction, but you certainly can't force it.
Well maybe not force it but I would argue that certain styles of humor can sometimes be an acquired taste in the same way as lots of other tastes like say, sushi or opera. If you try it often enough with an open mind, it might break through.
Also, sometimes when you think about a joke little bit, whats really funny about it can strike you a little later. But yeah I agree that, for the most part, something usually either strikes you as clever or it doesn't. Hard work is not usually a requirement for funny.
This thread reminds me of two old men arguing over a parking spot. It is that thrilling. I think I just adequately described the comments section of every site on the internet. Gold star for me!
What's fascinating to me in these comments is how TNC writes a post but then some guy named Brent seems to have named himself the leader of the discussion.
But it's also fascinating to me that anyone would deny Rock's point, that the most down-on-their-luck white people would refuse to trade places with a rich and famous black man. Doc Rivers once observed, on the topic of, ahem, urban culture being appropriated by suburban white kids and the like, that white people want everything about being black except the skin color.
I agree 100% with Hicks that appropriation of cultural identity has nothing to do with assuming that actual identity.
I disagree with those who say that, for a sum of money, most white folks would trade their skin color with a black man. Or, they might--but they would regret it almost instantly. The problem with being part of the dominant majority is that the privileges of membership are rarely recognized as such; they're just accepted as the natural state of being. As a Jew and a woman, I am acutely aware of some of the standards of normalcy from which I will forever be excluded. As a heterosexual white person, however, it took The Celluloid Closet and James Baldwin's film criticism to open my eyes to things I found normal that were not the norm to others. But the incentive for straight white Christian males to have their eyes opened are few: why on earth should they bother? The world is their oyster! They have NO IDEA what it's like to live any other way.
So, I think Rock has put his finger on an essential American racial truth. Whether you find that funny or not, of course, is a matter of taste.
What's fascinating to me in these comments is how TNC writes a post but then some guy named Brent seems to have named himself the leader of the discussion.
Not sure what you mean. I stated an opinion based on the clip and others commented on it or didn't. I think we can agree that its unlikely that I could have stopped people from changing the topic to discuss something other than the point I raised even if I wanted to. That's pretty much the way these comment sections work. What's different about this one? Do you mean that the discussion should have been focused exclusively on the "cracker ass cracker" portion of the clip and that my off topic assumption of leadership prevented that?
But the incentive for straight white Christian males to have their eyes opened are few
Really? Does that include, say, Irish Catholics? They have experienced otherness. Presumably you mean "heterosexual male WASPs."
Granted, anti-Irish and anti-Catholic sentiments have faded significantly from our society over the past hundred years, but you could say the same about anti-Jewish sentiments.
As a Jew, I can't really say I've ever wondered whether a Gentile would want to trade places with me. I have had the experience that a Gentile doesn't "get" Jewish culture, but that's another story.
Kylopod said, "As a Jew, I can't really say I've ever wondered whether a Gentile would want to trade places with me."
You're very fortunate, then. I had more than one opportunity, before moving to the east coast, to wonder exactly that.
Oh, I've had anti-Semitic experiences before, and I know Jews who have even suffered job discrimination. Furthermore, these experiences do tend to be more common in the South and the West--at least when it comes to white anti-Semites.
But is that what you mean by wondering whether Gentiles would want to trade places with Jews? A great deal of anti-Semitism, unlike anti-black racism, is based on envy. That turns Rock's whole equation upside-down. Jewish wealth and power is nowhere near as widespread as anti-Semites assume, but overall Jews are not in a socioeconomically deprived position in society--certainly not the way blacks are.
Indeed, one of the persisting brands of American anti-Semitism today is black anti-Semitism, fueled partly by resentment at Jewish success, and that hardly fits into the otherness theory.
Years ago, a good friend in high school stunned me by saying, "I hope you appreciate how lucky you are to have been born a gentile."
She'd been complaining her Hebrew School classmates at her Reform temple dances, which were generously open to all us local high schoolers, asked non-Jews like me to dance not the girls they knew. We were both too young to sense the simplest explanation was my novelty.
I said, truly, I'd never be so presumptuous as to assume I was lucky. From where I sat, the unchurched child of a broken home, her happy loving family, who had welcomed me for innumerable sleepovers, her "cool" Reform temple with its mo-town dances had me longing to convert. That felt too shallow and sappy to share with her before, and now I never could.
In due course, I married a Jew but didn't convert from a keen sense, I'd never be accepted. In old widowhood that strikes me as the pendulum swinging back too far. Sigh.
My sense, as an old white gal, is my fellow average white, wouldn't, in our hypothetical, ever want to be black, but not because whites sense white privilege. The average white necessarily lacks telling comparison and assumes the Civil Rights Act leveled us. In any case, our hypothetical is not whether whites would trade with any black soul, but whether they'd trade with a more talented, better-looking, more intelligent, and more successful black than they can conceive of themselves becoming.
What scares average American whites - and scare is the pertinent word - is not white privilege but white racism and white numbers.
Studies show most whites think they are less racist than the average white, a statistical impossibility. We "know" we're new and improved but can't vouch for all whites, especially when so many in power continue to shock us with their bad behavior. From where we sit, whites still seem capable of anything. African Americans whose lives overlap mine confide it's not pleasant being a minority, which heightens my appreciation for their position and mine, too, if you know what I mean.
In the poem, "The Albatross", an emotionally driven old man arrests a stranger with his tale. I've had more than a few old white guys do something of a less benign kind, button-holing me in lines at the DMV, Safeway, and Arby's, to comment soto voce on some individual, within our view, guilty only of being black. Maybe it's a form of "flashing" to upset an approachable smiley old lady with an ugly whispered racist ranting. Whatever. It's hurtful and frightening to hear their sh*t even while being white.