Illustration Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
Note: The views expressed in the Opinion pages are those of the writers. They are not necessarily representative of the opinions and values of
The
Spectator
Editorial Board.
For stand-up comedians, rising concerns about student reactions to potentially sensitive material are no joke. Popular comedians, including Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock, have said that they avoid shows on college campuses because the audiences are too easily offended.
Comedy and politics have always had a tense and complicated relationship; some of the most successful comedians make jokes exploring race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation while touching on the delicate border of acceptability.
Comedians and satirists build careers off of their fearlessness. They all want to cross the line in order to touch a nerve with their audience, yet remain within the bounds of cultural sensitivity.
But that line is a dangerous one; it is uncertain and constantly shifting. What qualifies as offensive for some may not for others, although comedians often feel like they cannot afford to play it safe.
For the Campus Activities Board’s (CAB) selection of this year’s FebFest comedian, it is vital that we dig deep to better understand how comedy can make use of sensitive social and political commentaries without crossing the line into bigotry.
A simple test of whether a joke should be told on a college campus comes down to its target. Good comedy holds up a mirror to its audience, forcing them to confront realities that they would often prefer to ignore. It gets under people’s skin through critiquing stereotypes rather than perpetuating them.
What makes a comedy show legitimately funny lies in its ability to punch up rather than punch down. Instead of going after people who are typically in the minority, they focus on those with tangible power and the ways in which that power is abused.
To some, it may seem surprising that something as lighthearted as a joke can betray stereotypes that we may not be aware of, in addition to deeply ingrained biases. Such jokes allow us to hold these stereotypes, even laugh at them, while still maintaining that we are in the right. Because, it is only a joke, right?
In today’s political climate, however, it is difficult to create a division between humor and politics. When people joke about rape or sexual assault, for example, there can be unintended consequences. By blurring the distinction between a culture of sexual assault and humor, rape jokes contribute to the normalization of such abuse.
Humor that in any way denigrates or belittles a social group acts as a reflection of our existing prejudices. These kinds of jokes only serve to expose the biases, stereotypes, and attitudes that we have unconsciously determined to be funny.
There is nothing funny about punching below your weight.
Comedy inherently requires a shift of power. It is about poking fun, creating discomfort, and destabilizing beliefs. Risk is at the core of good comedy, but there is no risk in making fun of the already mocked.
As pointed out by critics of “political correctness” on college campuses, it might seem overly sensitive to evaluate potential campus comedians through a political lens. But ultimately, it is better to nitpick than to contribute towards an environment where unequal power dynamics are emphasized rather than overturned.
While free speech is important to maintain, being selective with which speakers are brought to campus does not endanger the culture of open intellectualism. Free speech gives comedians and other speakers the right to say whatever they want on stage; it does not protect them from criticism. An institution like Hamilton has both the right and obligation to select a comedian whose work reflects the College’s values.
It is CAB’s responsibility to select a comedian that can give respectful social critique and instigate change in a way that leaves audience members wanting more. At its core, comedy is about creating discomfort. We need our comedians to start provocative conversations about difficult subjects without relying on existing institutional and social prejudices. This is a difficult task, but an imperative one.
While comedy will likely always maintain an ambiguous moral code when it comes to humor, it is our duty as an institution to define our standards for acceptable comedians on campus.
