Thanks, but no I don't want to see another Dane Cook video

Every time I look at a new comedian, I am always nervous. I watch their set just waiting. I am waiting for the anti-woman joke, or the heterosexist joke (you know the kind I'm talking about "my wife does this...men, your wives do that too, huh?" audience laughs with recognition "why do women have to do that? I mean...men don't do that..." audience again laughs-women and men alike). It's boring humor, it's a cheap gag, and quite frankly it doesn't take a lot of thought to think about gender roles and state them in front of an audience..."why do women cry so much and why are men so into sports? Have you ever noticed that men don't like to show affection to each other? it's like whoa dude, don't put your hand on my shoulder" which leads inevitably to the next phase of horrific humor, the GAY... "dude, I'm straight," ha ha ha. Of course there is a more contemporary version of this joke that boils down to the same formula: the I'm gay routine. It's seen as "self-deprecating" and when faced with confrontation on this humor the response is "I called mySELF gay, so clearly it wasn't a homophobic joke. "

Comedy is my favorite thing in the world. It is the most important thing in my life, and I think it is the thing that will save humanity if humanity is to be saved. God? yeah, not so much. FEMA? obviously that didn't work out so well. The UN? well, as long as the inspectors don't take too long, and The League of Nations fell through with grace and dignity I'm sure. There is nothing that can stop war, hatred, bigotry, and all those things that plague this stupid species. Except for a really good laugh. That's it. So there is nothing that makes me angrier than when comedians are half-ass about their work. That is why it is always with caution that I explore new comedy. I hear people tell me all the time, "oh, you want to write about comedy? Oh, I totally know this great comedian. Yeah he did this great bit about how women cry all the time and black people dance really well-it was so funny". Sometimes I just get a reccomendation without the details, and that's even scarier.

So I wanted to take the time now to share some video experience of comedians that have been recommended to me.



So one of my adventures in intertubes comedy is this guy. His rhythm is awful. his subject matter is a bit cliche. Well, not cliche necessarily but I've already sat in front of the TV, stoned (eating oreos) and wrote this routine. Good comedian I am not. So while I like his attempt, I'm not terribly impressed with him. But I like that he hasn't made a chick, dick, or black, homo joke, so I'm going to give the dude a chance.






ALright, I think, I sure am glad I gave him a chance. He's improving. His rhythm still isn't exceptional, but his subject matter is still interesting. He still hasn't made "the" jokes. And the line "you're alive and you know you're dead" made me laugh. He is taking something and exagerating it, it is almost self-deprecating but done so with compassion (unlike ben stiller, but don't get me started on that douchebag). So I think he might be ok. This whole rhythm thing-I know he needs to work it out. But he's doing an ok job with the other stuff, so I decide to look at more of his stuff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOXqzZO8j8g

[embedding disabled by request: which is another complain of mine: why the fuck are you publishing something online if you don't want people to see it/ share it? if you wanted this to be private there are much easier ways to do that, GARGH!]

so he talks about how he has become like his mother. He talks here about how she was English and they are cold and unaffectionate, and how she was a "gargoyle with tits".

One of the reasons I love watching old Richard Pryor stuff is because he takes some seriously heavy shit and makes his entire audience piss their pants laughing. He is on that stage exorcising demons in front of us, and making us laugh at those damn demons. It's powerful. Sometimes when I watch it, I'm not sure whether to cry or laugh, but I can't help the physical, sublime reaction of "BWAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA" it's like vomiting, only really really good. I never would think of Richard Pryor and think, "I wish he wouldn't use the word tits". It just wouldn't occur to me, because he is making magic up there, and I literally mean magic. He creates this spirit between him and the audience, this monster, that looms there, almost fucking visible, and it takes my breath away.

This dude, this Drew Hastings isn't quite doing that. Of course, it's not fair at all to compare someone to a genius. It's not fair because if everyone were geniuses, we would no longer be able to breathe.

So back to Drew's routine about his mother. I'm still liking him, but still trying to figure out why he isn't working. Again, I really think it's his rhythm, he just doesn't have it. Also, there is something contrived about it. Like he really isn't exposing himself up there at all. He isn't letting himself go. He wrote the material and he's sticking to it. Which is fine, a lot of great comedians do that. However, they don't look as though they're doing that. I know I'm expecting a lot out of the poor guy when all he wanted to do was come out and have a few laughs. Still, I like his stuff ok, and I can NOT stress enough how glad I am that he is straying from the usual round of crap jokes. Here's the next one I watch:



It's not the use of the word "cunt" that I don't like about this. I don't take issue with that word. I don't have a problem with that word being used as in insult, I don't have a problem with that word being used to describe our girls, a part of our anatomy. I have a problem with this because first and foremost it's not funny. Why isn't it funny?

I have a friend who tries to pull the "it's all subjective" card on me all the time. Whenever I start to talk about why I don't like a certain band, or artist, or comedian, that is his response. First of all, it's a dismissal of my discussion. "oh it's all subjective, so don't talk about it." I take issue with that. Even if something is subjective doesn't mean it shouldn't be argued. In fact, the idea of subjectivity v. objectivity is ridiculous anyway. Everything is subjective. Let's pause a moment and look at basic grammar.

John kicked the ball.

the ball is the object. Kicked is the verb-the action.

Now change the subject:

Sarah kicked the ball. A whole new set of ideas has entered our mind now. A GIRL kicked the ball.

OK I'll try a different set of subjects to make this more obvious, and less about gender, for those of you who get annoyed at my insistance that the world we live in is a terribly sexist arena. Try this:

Queen Elizabeth kicked the ball.

Bill Clinton kicked the ball.

Chingis Kahn kicked the ball.

Louis XIV kicked the ball.

All of these various subjects change the nature of this sentence. I'll complicate it some more.

Bill Clinton wrote a story about human history.

Chinggis Kahn wrote a story about human history.

Human history doesn't change. The writer of human history has changed.

Don't tell me that subjectivity isn't important, or that it should mean that we dismiss telling the story of human history because it's all subjective. OF FUCKING COURSE IT IS. Stating the obvious doesn't change the fact that we should argue about this.

So back to comedy damn it! SO why isn't dude's PSA about women being cunts funny? I think the attempt was to do something different with it. Taking a Public Service Announcement and tweaking it. That is a recipe for comedy. People have been tweaking PSA's since PSA's came about. The use of the word cunt is supposed to be shocking and daring. Because very few people, particularly women, can stand that word. This can be a recipe for comedy. However, he falls very short on two accounts. One he doesn't tweak the word. He doesn't use it in a way that has not been used before. If it was about dogs being cunts, and how we need to stop dog cuntery or something (I'm not a comedian, so piss off if you expect *me* to be funny. I'm a critic, it's what I do). Next, not only does he use the word in the same tired fashion that we've already heard a million times, it's totally directed at women-also tired, and cliche. Finally, when you put all of this together, it becomes either lazy or trite. I'll give Drew Hastings the benefit of the doubt and say it's trite. He attempted to do something really clever and fell completely short.

And so it's back to the drawing board. Let's see how Dane Cook is doing. He's really popular. I have a tendency to think that comedy needs to come from the bowels of suffering. I know how trite that is, so I try to avoid that. The problem with avoiding that is that the best comedy comes from people laughing at how fucked up we are. And the only way to make that truly funny is to be fucked up too. Because if you're just standing on stage pointing your finger at all the fucked up people out there, you are essentially making fun of your audience. And no one wants to be made fun of. (again, someone out there is thinking Ben Stiller, and I will get to his epic douchebaggery in a minute, give me a break man). So let's check in on Dane Cook and see how he holds water. Let's test him out on the woman thing first, since we're already there:



His timing is really good in this. I really like how he uses the space around him in this, he uses the entire stage, he totally fills it up. He does a really good job of making it appear to be the first time he's ever told this story. That's a combination of the timing and his use of the stage (that was redundant, shit. I need more coffee). I also like that when he's talking about the woman who's giving him head she's not a bitch or a whore. And I like that it's sexuality without degradation. When he says the most beautiful sound is "uh-huh" that's great. I'm all for it. However, having given him that, I now intend to take it allllll back. Note his impression of the woman trying to get out of the car. Now watch this clip:




So in spite of the ending of this, where he almost redeems himself of the ridiculous posturing of this partial person who can't complete a sentence at all... in spite of that, his women and his fags are the same thing. At least his women are allowed to complete their sentences. So this boils down to one of two things: laziness, or lack of bothering to come up with better material, OR he thinks it's funny and OK to portray women and fags this way. I don't think he's lazy. He's the MYSPACE comedian, for god's sake. That wasn't laziness that made that happen.

Then there's this classic argument, with which I agree (for the most part) in spite of my above comments:



Not that I'm a huge fan of Eddie Murphy, but I think he makes some good points in this clip.

The next argument is this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h67k9eEw9AY&feature=related

[embedding not allowed-the stinking bastards]

George Carlin here discusses language and how it has evolved. It's pretty funny. Some of the words he uses are not accurate.

OK so if the above two clips are faves of mine, doesn't that make my criticism of Dane Cook and Drew Hastings null and void because I've now seemingly contradicted myself? Well, actually I have not contradicted myself at all.

I'm not arguing that the words Cook and Hastings use are bad. I'm not arguing that they shouldn't be heard. I'm merely saying that they aren't funny, and I'm stating why. I think there is a fine line, and a good comedian walks that fine line. A bad comedian stomps all over that line jumping up and down shouting and throwing their arms around:



exactly. He has no actual material.

I feel as though I should include in this discourse at least one example of sublime comedy. OK so I'll try: