What Do You Know From Funny?
Abstract:
“What Do You Know From Funny?” is an autoethnographic mediation of stand-up comedy, humor, and theory as pedagogical mediums towards love in praxis. Through narrative prose, presented as a stand-up comedy routine accompanied by media clips from black comedians, activists, writers, and scholars, “What Do You Know From Funny?” is part documentary and part performance art. It fuses together sociological and communication theories, alongside critical race, feminist, and queer theory to address how we are conditioned by the oppressive systems we exist under to perform and express ourselves in a society where homogeneity and emotional repression is normalized. It employs the rhetoric of various black comedians, activists, writers, and scholars to inform this cultural exploration. It is a self reflection of individual growth and healing through humor, critical thinking, and community.
Introduction:
Laughter is healing, because laughter generates feelings of joy and ease. In a culture where we are constantly striving for productivity in an effort to support ourselves, it is easy to forget that we must also conceive moments that are conducive to supporting our mental health. While these moments may come as a result of the work we produce, it is more appropriately acquired from the time we spend with family and friends. Spending time with my loved ones, as well as the media I consume, nourishes my soul. But they have also provided moments that have created deep trauma. The communities we engage in can provide us with a sense of self and validity. They also provide healing from the pain and abuse inflicted on us by the systems we exist under, as well as from those who care for and love us. They may assist in our cultivation of relative morals and values. They provide us lessons that can elicit self reflection and growth. I say all of this from a place of experience and humility.
Our identities and backgrounds directly shape the way we express ourselves and interpret humor. Humor is a powerful form of communication that is often under acknowledged. Regarding this notion, humor has been identified as playing an important role in interpersonal relationships as a signal for communication. (Zeigler-Hill/Besser/Jett, 2013) This claim of humor as a signal is pertinent to the study of communication styles because humor has been employed to signal and express the plight and experience of humans for centuries. Now that we reside in a highly mediated society it is important to acknowledge how this relates to culture as a whole. Humor has been exceptionally prevalent in marginalized and oppressed communities. Humor has played an essential role in my life as a black American. It has often functioned alongside suffering in attempts to express joy. Social media presented me the opportunity to reconnect with a form of humorous expression that substantially influenced me as a child and as a teen, stand-up comedy. Social media has also enabled me to engage with rhetoric from scholars and theorists that have informed and empowered me as an adult. While I do have access to all of these mediums and rhetoric outside of social media, it was from my engagement with the various social media platforms I subscribe to that allowed me to acknowledge how impactful stand-up comedy and theory have been in my life. As a black American man I have come to accept that not all of the media I’ve consumed in my life has contributed to a positive perception of myself, my culture, and my communities. Through my engagement with theory, much of which I’ve gained access to from social media, I have become less critical of myself and the black community and more critical of the systems that oppress us as well as the media and technology we consume including social media.
The depiction of black Americans in almost all forms of media has been under the agency of white Americans since the inception of the entertainment industry. An industry that when looking at the main forms of media presentation still relevant today, radio, television, and film, is a little over one hundred years old. These forms of media were created and cultivated during a time when black Americans, and other marginalized and oppressed groups, did not have access to resources and tools that afforded us the opportunity to express our stories and narratives. (Riggs, 1991) Today we are still barely in possession of those same resources and tools. This coincides with the civil rights and social justice issues that hinder progression and notions of equality in black and other marginalized communities. The media that caters to us often depicts success and equality in American culture as adjacent to white, middle class, christian morals and values. There is no consideration of what black Americans consider successful or equal because we are rarely in positions where we can address what reflects our experiences. A study on racial identity, black history and socialization of black Americans to determine the social impact of media on black youths concluded that the imagery, narratives, and rhetoric we consume in the media directly influence how we conceive and perform our identities. (Adams-Bass/Stevenson/Slaughter/Kotzin, 2016) The reports from this study address the notion that the more we know about our history contributes to a healthier perspective of ourselves and our communities. It counters the notion of ignorance as bliss, because ignorance has always kept us in the shadows and hindered our collective growth and healing. The media that is most informative of the history of black Americans comes from the narratives and voices of black folks. Both stand-up comedians as well as black activists, writers, and scholars provided me with the rhetoric that affirmed and validated my place in American culture.
With “What Do You Know From Funny?” I juxtapose theory and humor. This intersection of intellectual cultural critique and humorous expression is both a reflection of the human experience as well as an engagement with our complex processing styles. I am presenting a body of work that depicts how these two worked in tandem to inform myself as a black American of my presence and position in society. While it is not a reflection of the collective black experience, because we are not a monolith, it is intended to exemplify the various social tools that we utilize to humanize our experiences. Radical theory and black humor are forms of communication that function to empower and affirm historically oppressed groups of people and it is pertinent that we document the influential role that black humor and expression has had on not just the black community, but on world culture as a whole. Because black expression has influenced cultures and communities around the globe. This influence was the result of work from both black intellectuals and humorists. This work is important because humor is a form of expression that provided me with the confidence and conviction to confront the discrimination and oppression I’ve experienced as a black man in America. It is important because I am not the only black American, or marginalized person, who employs humor as a defense mechanism as well as a genuine form of expression. Black humor has existed in the American cultural landscape since the inception of media. While it initially came at our expense, we’ve flipped it to our benefit as we often do and have made the subjugation of our experiences endearing. Our ability to turn pain into joy illuminates the power and influence of expression. This reflects the influence of humor and its role in shifting power dynamics that are a result of oppression.
Applicable Theory and Method:
When examining the role of media and its influence on our perceived self, the first theory to arise is cultivation theory. Cultivation theory addresses the role television, or any form of visual media, in shaping the way we view the messages we receive from them. When we engage with numerous forms of visual media we begin to form an idea of the world we live in through the storytelling presented from the various forms of media we consume. (Shrum, 2017) While specifically referencing television, this insight is applicable to the numerous forms of media we consume and digest. Storytelling isn’t just a reference to the imagined worlds of radio, film, and television, but also to the framed narratives presented in the news we watch and the podcasts we listen to. As mentioned, these stories or narratives may be perceived as diverse because of casting and themes, but the underlying message is one that often reflects the heteronormative and capitalist comportment of individualism and white centric ideals. Shrum refers to this as “dominant narrative”, in regards to American culture and media, and it is synonymous with white supremacy and capitalism. This notion is also referred to as a cultural hegemony.
Cultural hegemony manifests itself into the daily lives of all Americans. In “Black Voices, White Power: Members of the Black Press Make Meaning of Media Hegemony” Robert Redding Jr. lends further insight into cultural hegemony when referencing corporate media in stating “This dominance is illustrated in the consolidation of media ownership, which follows the pattern of White domination in society (Ball, 2014). From a historical organizational standpoint, the mainstream media are run by White men who consider themselves “super elites” who are “notoriously difficult for social scientists to study first-hand” (Bogart, 1974, p. 586). Many mainstream newsrooms are not the typical labor realm.” (Redding, 2017) With regards to the notion of hegemony, a term coined by Antonio Gramsci, Redding Jr. goes on to posit “Hegemonic dominance is evaluated as a concept that impacts these Black employees both in and outside of work and was clear in the level of participation with continuing implications and restraints. “Hegemony” is described by Antonio Gramsci as when what was once considered coercion becomes a “crisis of authority . . . [the] masks of consent slip away, revealing the fist of force” (Gouriévidis, 2014, p. 78).” (Redding, 2017) Redding Jr. is addressing how the media we consume is controlled by men who aren’t interested in telling our stories from our perspectives. They are interested in the financial profit of our characterizations and are exploiting our acquired need for consumption of stories that appeal to us. We consent to this through our indoctrination of white centric and capitalist ideals. When we become critical of this pandering gaze, we are able to absolve ourselves of our ingrained ignorance and remove the mask of the oppressive system.
Reflecting further on how we are indoctrinated with complicity to systems of oppression that do not affirm us, the sociological theory of symbolic interactionism arises. From the article “Symbolic Interactionism” Michael J Carter and Celene Fuller expound on symbolic interactionism in stating “Central to symbolic interactionist thought is the idea that individuals use language and significant symbols in their communication with others. Rather than addressing how common social institutions define and impact individuals, symbolic interactionists shift their attention to the interpretation of subjective viewpoints and how individuals make sense of their world from their unique perspective. Symbolic interactionists are often less concerned with objective structure than with subjective meaning– how repeated, meaningful interactions among individuals come to define the makeup of ‘society.’ Summarized succinctly, the basic tenets of symbolic interactionism state that: (1) individuals act based on the meanings objects have for them; (2) interaction occurs within a particular social and cultural context in which physical and social objects (persons), as well as situations, must be defined or categorized based on individual meanings; (3) meanings emerge from interactions with other individuals and with society; and (4) meanings are continuously created and recreated through interpreting processes during interaction with others (Blumer, 1969).” (Carter/Fuller, 2015) Symbolic interactionism explores the ways in which we interpret, internalize, and express the world we engage with. It focuses on individuals not as the sole purveyor of reality, but as ones engaged with a multitude of stimuli in an effort to comprehend and communicate with one another. Everything that we consume daily, and even in our dreams, influences who we are, how we see the world, how we engage with the world, and how we communicate with one another.
The media that all Americans consume contributes to how we socialize, and racialize, one another. In “From Black-ish to Blackness: An Analysis of Black Information Sources’ Influence on Black Identity Development ‘’ in referencing their study of media consumption and identity, scholars Jas M. Sullivan and Gheni N. Platenburg state “Prior research shows consumption of Black information affects the way people think. More specifically, it influences general racial group attitudes. However, the expectations about the amount of Black information and deeper understanding of its effect on racial identity development remain unclear. Using a unique survey data set, with large oversamples of Blacks, this article explores whether the amount of Black information consumed influences Black identity development. The findings show Black information sources positively affect racial identity development — creating a sense that race is a more important aspect of the individuals’ definitions of self (i.e., racial centrality). The flip side, however, is greater consumption of Black information decreases public regard, prompting Blacks to believe other groups have a more negative feeling toward them. Thus, Black media plays a dual function in racial identity development — both positive and negative.” (Sullivan/Platenburg, 2017) The study suggests that black imagery, or information, has a positive influence on the self perception of black individual Americans, but also contributes to negative perceptions of black Americans from other demographics. This relates back to the framing of identity referenced in cultivation theory, and how white men who control media narratives contribute to the way black Americans are perceived by others and subsequently how we view ourselves.
When applying both of these theories to my thesis project “What Do You Know From Funny?” I am more concerned with how we can utilize these theoretical framings in an effort to subvert systemic oppression, rather than to solely analyze what is already evident. In the process of conceptualizing how to express these theories’ connection to humor and identity, it became evident that I was drawing on lived experiences to articulate the message intended in the overall project. This led me to ponder what it means to apply theory to our lived experiences? In “Critical Rhetoric: Theory and Praxis” Raymie E. Mckerrow surmises this notion in stating “This essay sets forth a theoretical rationale for a critical rhetoric and presents eight “principles”; which, taken together, orient the critic toward the act of criticism. The theoretical rationale encompasses two forms of critique, styled as a critique of domination and as a critique of freedom. Both have in common an analysis of the discourse of power as it serves in the first case to maintain the privilege of the elite and, in the second, to maintain social relations across a broad spectrum of human activities. The principles articulate an orientation that sees critique as a transformative practice rather than as a method, recognizes the materiality of discourse, reconceptualizes rhetoric as doxastic as contrasted to epistemic, and as nominalistic as contrasted to universalistic, captures rhetoric as “influential” as contrasted to “causal,”; recognizes the importance of absence as well as presence, perceives the potential for polysemic as opposed to monosemic interpretation, and as an activity that is “performed.” (McKerrow, 1989) Much like the media we consume, our lived experience is in itself a performance. It is an effort to transform our subconscious into reality through expression and discourse. For myself, humor has always functioned as a vulnerable form of expression, and theory has provided me with discourse that validates and affirms my reality. Together, humor and theory work in tandem towards my efforts to decolonize myself of the oppressive and disempowering mentality acquired through the American education system as well as the media that I have consumed so that I am able to love and appreciate myself for who I am.
The original concept for this thesis project was for the film to be a rhetorical criticism of humor alongside theory. It was to initially focus on the various ways that black Americans express humor and how this is connected to theory. In the development of the project, I reacquired a connection to stand-up comedy. I was still intending to focus the film as a rhetorical criticism of stand-up comedy and theory until I began imagining the screenplay. In the development of the project, I decided that a stand-up performance from myself would provide an effective vantage in the narration of the project. While writing the script for the routine, it became evident that the piece was developing into a project that was self reflective and vulnerable. It was at this point it seemed appropriate to present the project as an autoethnographic piece. It is considered a mediation because each piece of media is in conversation and builds upon another towards the core message of self reflection, growth, acceptance, and love.
Humor and Theory as Pedagogical Mediums:
The initial idea of investigating how humor relates to the way we perform identity comes from the sociological theory of dramaturgy. Dramaturgy essentially surmises that an individual’s daily interactions define how they create their self image and that we are not fixed individuals. I’ve paired this with the sociology informed communication theory of cultivation which suggests that the media an individual consumes contributes to how they perceive the world and shapes their foundational interpretation of reality. In relation to dramaturgy and how black Americans perform identity, Lindsay A. Jenkins references theater art and artists in stating “Because of the inextricable nature of Blackness, Black performers wondering if they are Black enough need only examine the ways Black identity has influenced their memories, experiences and performances.” (Jenkins, 2020) They go on to state “Using the Self as a source calls attention to larger issues by focusing on one individual experience. By accessing the Self as the ultimate source on Black identity, there is more than enough room for a variety of perspectives in an Afrocentric approach. Because Black identity is a collection of repeated performances, centering the Self allows for clearer connections between past, present and future expressions.” (Jenkins, 2020) While many of the depictions of black Americans in the media are presented with stereotypes and biases catering to the predominately white, ciscentric media market, there still exists raw performances of blackness. These performances of black identities are often presented through humor that is decipherable by black Americans who share these experiences and nuances. It is a signal from black artists to our community that we hear you and see you, because we are you. It validates black folks and provides us with confirmation that we are not alone with our angst and frustration of existing while black in the temporality of American culture. Witnessing black performers express themselves unapologetically with humor and wit provided me with the language to understand what it meant to be autonomous and present with myself. It gave me the courage to express my experiences and stories in an effort to connect to those who share my plight.
The racialization I’ve experienced in American culture contributes to my sense of humor. These jokes and microaggressions used to come at my expense as a result of the antiblackness I acquired from the white supremacist system we exist under. Black Americans have a keen ability to turn an insult into a joke and this reflects our inherent humility. We should not have to function this way in our society, but it is how we have adapted. It manifests in the way we are portrayed in the media, as well as in how we express ourselves daily. When examining the role of humor and its relationship to black American identities, it is necessary to acknowledge the role of white humor and media. For years, black Americans were only presented through white narratives and displays of humor and this was a part of our socialization into American culture. We were indoctrinated with white humor, and because a lot of that humor was at the expense of black Americans and other marginalized groups it contributed to insecurity and inferiority complexes that still exist in the community today. David Gillota gives a description of this when he states “When wielded by the white majority, ethnic humor can be used to ridicule and demean marginalized groups. In the hands of ethnic minorities themselves, ethnic humor can work as a site of community building and resistance. In nearly all cases, however, ethnic humor can serve as a window through which to examine the complexities of American race relations.” (Gillota, 2013). This statement drives home my conviction to examine the ways that black American identities are shaped by media influenced race relations, and how humor is a contributing factor to the stereotypes and stigmas created by our inherently racist society. For black Americans, our ability to use humor to address and intellectualize our trauma is simultaneously daunting and rewarding. For myself, it has served as a tool that at one time separated me from myself. But through critical thinking it has unlocked knowledge and wisdom that’s reconnected me to myself and the communities that support my growth and mental health. This is where the power that is derived from self reflection and healing is used to shift the narratives that have been expressed upon us. It cultivates a healthier outlook on self and community. When expressed confidently and humorously, it can uplift and support others in our community through communication.
Many of the popular comedic tropes today revolve around self deprecating humor. Much of it directly addresses how capitalism plays a vital role in our oppression. We can examine the popularity of the Netflix series “Squid Games” as an example of this. Social media also presents comedic bits that casually addresses the oppressive and humiliating ways we navigate capitalism. In doing so, it normalizes the ills of capitalism rather than confront them. Class division becomes evident in humor because class functions as an underlying and influential role in humor styles. It is similar to how culture plays a formative role in the influence of humor. When examining British humor this notion is made evident because it is class status that influences much of the idiocratic characteristics of British humor. Sam Friedman and Giselinde Kuipers used British and Dutch interview data to examine how social classes influence comedy tastes. Regarding their research they specify that “…in particular, Dutch and British middle class audiences use their comedy taste to communicate distinction and cultural superiority. We discuss several reasons why such processes of social distancing exist in comedy taste and not other cultural areas: the traditionally low status of comedy; the strong relation between humor and personhood; the continuity between comedy tastes and humor styles in everyday life; as well as the specific position of comedy in the British and Dutch cultural fields.” (Friedman/Kuipers, 2013) This is a compelling observation because it speaks to the performance of humor in social interactions and how it is tied to class. It is relative to the black American experience and the numerous ways that we perform and express ourselves through humor. It reflects how systemic oppression, specifically capitalism, contributes to cultural and individual identities. But it is also reflective of how communities are resilient and optimistic in the face of the systems that work against us.
Along with the communication and sociological theoretical foundations that contribute to “What Do You Know From Funny?” I have researched and personally engaged with critical, feminist, and queer activists, writers, and scholars for both intellectual engagement and catharsis. While reflecting on the artistic elements that nourish the notions of growth and healing in this project, I was drawn to the work of James Baldwin. In his essay “The Creative Process” Baldwin addresses the connection between systemic oppression and emotional repression that artists, and all Americans, confront when stating “The dangers of being an American artist are not greater than those of being an artist anywhere else in the world, but they are very particular. These dangers are produced by our history. They rest on the fact that in order to conquer this continent, the particular aloneness of which I speak — the aloneness in which one discovers that life is tragic, and therefore unutterably beautiful — could not be permitted. And that this prohibition is typical of all emergent nations will be proved, I have no doubt, in many ways during the next fifty years. This continent now is conquered, but our habits and our fears remain. And, in the same way that to become a social human being one modifies and suppresses and, ultimately, without great courage, lies to oneself about all one’s interior, uncharted chaos, so have we, as a nation, modified or suppressed and lied about all the darker forces in our history.” (Baldwin, 1962) This statement is aligned with the theory of symbolic interactionism in how the individualism that is a product of American culture and the alienation that black Americans experience in America contribute to how we engage and express ourselves in society. It also contributes to how we express ourselves and communicate our feelings. We must come to accept the systems we exist under for what they are and learn to navigate it on our own terms with full acknowledgement of the history of the society we exist in and our history as an oppressed community. This leads to self acceptance and also self love, which Baldwin references by stating “Now, anyone who has ever been compelled to think about it — anyone, for example, who has ever been in love — -knows that the one face that one can never see is one’s own face. One’s lover — or one’s brother, or one’s enemy — sees the face you wear, and this face can elicit the most extraordinary reactions. We do the things we do and feel what we feel essentially because we must — -we are responsible for our actions, but we rarely understand them. It goes without saying, I believe, that if we understood ourselves better, we would damage ourselves less. But the barrier between oneself and one’s knowledge of oneself is high indeed.” (Baldwin, 1962) Many of the barriers referenced by Baldwin are ingrained in us by systemic oppression, specifically capitalism and patriarchy, neither of which loves and supports us. American culture does not support our love and growth because it is not concerned with supporting our love and growth. It is more concerned with marketing us, with commodifying us and positioning us as dependent on materialism and consumerism. We must do the work to unlearn this indoctrination, and that work will lead to loving ourselves internally instead of seeing love as solely external.
In “All About Love” bell hooks opens a chapter titled “COMMITMENT: LET LOVE BE LOVE IN ME” with the words “Commitment to truth telling lays the groundwork for the openness and honesty that is the heartbeat of love. When we can see ourselves as we truly are and accept ourselves, we build the necessary foundation for self-love. We have all heard the maxim “If you do not love yourself, you will be unable to love anyone else.” It sounds good. Yet more often than not we feel some degree of confusion when we hear this statement. The confusion arises because most people who think they are not lovable have this perception because at some point in their lives they were socialized to see themselves as unlovable by forces outside their control.” (hooks, 2000) The forces outside of our control referenced by hooks are the systemic forces that oppress all of us, namely white supremacy and patriarchy. These two subdue us into thinking that we are fixed beings with sole functional purposes rather than autonomous fluid individuals with a multitude of capabilities. Couple this with a capitalist system that conditions us to be subservient to our relationship to labor and a culture is cultivated that places less value on connection and growth, and more on production and consumption. None of this is conducive to love and healing. In a later chapter titled “HEALING: REDEMPTIVE LOVE” hooks alludes to the paradox of individualism in American culture when stating “All over the world people live in intimate daily contact with one another. They wash together, eat and sleep together, face challenges together, share joy and sorrow. The rugged individual who relies on no one else is a figure who can only exist in a culture of domination where a privileged few use more of the world’s resources than the many who must daily do without. Worship of individualism has in part led us to the unhealthy culture of narcissism that is so all pervasive in our society.” (hooks, 2000) This reflects American culture from a micro and macro lens, by looking at the individual as self-serving and then addressing that stance as a product of the exploitative capitalist system. Where we are taught survival of the fittest, when it is really our communities and loved ones who have always contributed to our sustainability and survival. While this state of existence feels functional, the communal support that is relatively afforded to us is an act of love. It is an act of love that teaches us to love ourselves and each other. When we do the work to unlearn how we’ve been conditioned to see ourselves as laborers rather than lovers we can fuse the spark that prevents us from shining bright as one of many illuminated.
When confronting the ways in which the oppressive systems we exist under corrupts how we perceive ourselves, it isn’t perverse to consider how our sexual nature influences our self perception. In “Uses of The Erotic: Erotic As Power” Audre Lorde addresses this when stating “The principal horror of any system which defines the good in terms of profit rather than in terms of human need, or which defines human need to the exclusion of the psychic and emotional components of that need — the principal horror of such a system is that it robs our work of its erotic value, its erotic power and life appeal and fulfilment. Such a system reduces work to a travesty of necessities, a duty by which we earn bread or oblivion for ourselves and those we love. But this is tantamount to blinding a painter and then telling her to improve her work, and to enjoy the act of painting. It is not only next to impossible, it is also profoundly cruel.” (Lorde, 1978) Capitalism robs us of the rightful joy that can arise from the work we put into supporting ourselves and others. It places a marketable value on our actions and interactions, which diminishes and commodifies our value as humans. It dismisses the pleasure that comes from supporting one another with genuine intent to see us flourish and prosper. Later in the essay, in addressing how to become more in tune with ourselves, Lorde exclaims “Beyond the superficial, the considered phrase, “It feels right to me,” acknowledges the strength of the erotic into a true knowledge, for what that means is the first and most powerful guiding light toward any understanding. And understanding is a handmaiden which can only wait upon, or clarify, that knowledge, deeply born. The erotic is the nurturer or nursemaid of all our deepest knowledge.” (Lorde, 1978) As a black American, none of the systems we exist under have felt right to me. I didn’t gain a true understanding of how unhealthy and disempowering they were until I learned to be critical of both myself and these systems. In doing so I was able to gain love and appreciation for not just myself, but for all of humanity.
Project Origins:
The original focus for this project was the various ways that black joy is expressed on social media. As a late stage capitalism millennial, social media has been a source of entertainment and education since I was a late teen. The two platforms that have entertained and validated me the most are Twitter and Instagram. Through text, photo, memes, clips, and skits I’ve gained access to a community of black expression that wouldn’t be afforded to me on a daily basis. Twitter specifically is a space that has informed me socially, culturally, politically, and even emotionally. Marc Lamont Hill describes the role of Black Twitter as a ““digital counterpublic” that enables critical pedagogy, political organizing, and both symbolic and material forms of resistance to anti-Black state violence within the United States. Focusing primarily on post-Ferguson events, I spotlight the ways that Black people have used Black Twitter and other digital counterpublics to engage in forms of pedagogy that reorganize relations of surveillance, reject rigid respectability politics, and contest the erasure of marginalized groups within the Black community.” (Hill, 2018) Because Twitter is a space that has provided me with both critical discourse, as well as healthy laughter, I wanted to highlight the value of the platform. In the development of the project, I found myself compiling countless clips of stand-up comedians that I discovered from Twitter, along with a comparable amount of clips from black activists, writers, and scholars. It became evident to me that stand-up comedy and the connection to black activists, writers, and scholars was where my focus for the project should pivot.
Stand up comedy has functioned as a platform for raw expression in the black community for years. Its rise and influence coincided with the evolution of black radicalism in mainstream media as we’ve attempted to gain control over our narratives and depictions in popular culture. (Gregory, 2010) After viewing various mediums that encapsulated black humor, I decided that I’d like to take a step further and tailor the entire project as a stand-up routine, performed by myself, with reflections on my experiences with black activists, theoretical framings, scholarly work, and humor. I took many cues from contemporary stand-up comedy features that employed an autobiographical narrative prose alongside additional media clips to add substance and background to the routine. As a visual artist who has completed multiple creative media projects, I utilized a few of my own aesthetic filming and editing techniques throughout the film. The atmosphere of the film is meant to reflect the inherent altruistic humility that is humor and theory. Both are communal expressions that bring joy and support to the communities they are products of. “What Do You Know From Funny?” is a contribution to that collective consciousness and pays homage to those forms of expression.
Final Project Development:
When conceptualizing the final vision for this project as a stand-up comedy routine, I originally wanted to present a narrative that juxtaposes black humor with critical theory and how these two inform black identities. In the process of sourcing the clips and developing the script it became evident that I alone can’t speak for the collective black experience. Because the so-called black experience isn’t a monolith. While the target audience for this piece and project is the black community, when writing, speaking, and performing it I am also speaking as a black man to myself and my community of black, brown, queer and radical folk. I decided to focus the film and routine on how the numerous forms of media I’ve consumed and the individuals I engaged with, through media and real life, contributed to my growth and healing. The film is split into multiple sections set up by the comedic routine, performed by myself, alongside stand-up media clips and interviews with the supporting activists, writers, and scholars. There is an accompanying monologue voiceover in between clips that weaves together the nuances of the rhetoric from each orator, with imagery that contributes to the narrative. It is a self reflective exploration of growth, healing and self love as a result of community and accountability.
Each section builds on my journey from an impressionable youth, to an adult placing a critical lens on the systems and communities I exist in. The first section focuses on the American ideal of individualism and how that indoctrinated me with a self hating, self centered, and misogynistic mentality. The second section focuses on how friendships and creative outlets encouraged me to think outside of the mental confines imposed on me by the oppressive systems we exist under. The third section focuses on familial love, abuse, and how this cultivated love, compassion, and a value for communication in all of my relationships. The fourth section focuses on romantic, platonic, and queer love and their relation to self healing and emotional intelligence. The fifth and final section focuses on how self acceptance and accountability leads to supporting a healthy relationship with myself and those in my life. The stand up routine, the media clips, and the supporting voiceover weave together a narrative that is all in communication with each other. It is a mediation of various forms of expression all in collaboration with each other. Each media clip from the comedians, activists, writers and scholars were specifically selected because these individuals all directly influenced me at one point in my life. It was when I began to take a more critical look at my past that I was able to connect the role that humor and intellectual critique played in my growth and healing. I am sharing this bit of insight and reflection with my family and friends, as well as with the black, brown, queer, and radical communities that have also provided me humorous and intellectual critique that contributed to my growth and healing.
As part of the pre-production process, the script for the stand-up routine was completely developed by myself after sourcing clips of the various comedians, activists, writers, and scholars presented in the film. The original stand-up routine would be filmed live at multiple open mic nights in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Brooklyn, New York over the winter of 2021. But due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, and the rise of the Omicron strain at that time, that plan was unfortunately canceled as a measure of safety. The final stand up routine was filmed on set in studio one at Klein College of Temple University on January 31st, 2022. It was filmed in association with the course Interactive Media, all of which was set up by my thesis committee chair, Laura Zaylea. The class of masked students, along with a few of Klein’s media faculty team, were a part of the production team and additionally made up the live audience for the set. The post-production was completed by myself. Where I wrote the script for the voiceover monologues, as well as edited and scored the final revision of the film.
Closing Reflection:
Reflecting on the influence of black humor in my life, I have primarily associated it with my identity as a black man. But in contemporary culture, and even before, black humor has transcended merely representing the black experience. Black humor has become the base that forms the language, antics, and performance of humor across our evolving media landscape. In our social media era, black women and queer folks have coined numerous words and lingo that have transitioned into mainstream culture. This is evident in how black humor is now mainstream culture. Unfortunately, black women and queer folk are often not credited for their contributions to mainstream culture. Part of this project is to give credit to black and queer humorists and creatives for the ways they’ve been able to express and influence contemporary culture amidst a system that is working against them. Black humor has evolved into the foundation of the humor of this era. The black experience has been accessible and put on display for judgment and ridicule by all people. This vulnerability contributes to the anxiety and stigmas that are projected onto members of the black community. These stigmas we share with members of other marginalized communities. Black folks use humor as a defense to address the ills we confront everyday. This intersection of oppression is an area of focus for my project. While the Black experience has been ridiculed and made the butt of jokes, we are not the only marginalized group to use humor as a form of empowerment. Across the world there exist numerous collectives of disabled comedians who employ humor in an attempt to address and confront the stigma of their experiences. In “Aesthetic as Analysis: Synthesizing Theories of Humor and Disability through Stand-up Comedy” Shawn C. Bingham and Sara E. Green interviewed 10 professional comedians from Canada, the UK, and the United States to examine the relationship between humor and disabilities and how this relates to the social experience of the disabled community. Regarding one of the participants they state “Comedian Terry Galloway, who has been deaf since early childhood, also has a clear political agenda that adds an edge to her professional work…it is not just the oppression of people with disabilities that Terry Galloway seeks to change through satire. Rather, she uses humor to combat oppression and xenophobic attitudes on all fronts.” (Bingham/Green, 2015). This presents the power of humor as not just a form of expression and storytelling, but a means to address and confront the experiences of other marginalized groups. It’s an example of how we can generate conversations and awareness on the oppression of various groups through humor. It was important that the humor and rhetoric in my project translated and was affirming to folks from all backgrounds. This is why I chose to focus each section of the film on different stages of my growth, and included an arrangement of individuals whose differing backgrounds and rhetoric all contributed to my growth and healing.
This project was cathartic in that it allowed me to explore subject matter that was deeply personal and vulnerable. The most influential works I have engaged with contained depth and vulnerability in their rhetoric. I felt the position I held in drafting a script and narrative drawn from my personal experiences would serve me, and those who engaged with my work, best if I were honest and vulnerable. It must be stated that I am not a hero in this project, because there is no singular hero in my life. It is the labor of myself, my community, and black folks with our lived experiences that have directly or indirectly influenced my growth and healing. Therefore, this project is also methectic because it was a collective effort of growth and healing through engagement with an audience and community of folks across various forms of media. I’ve chosen stand-up comedy as a medium to express and celebrate black folks and the communities we come from because it was important to me that joy and laughter is a presence in all aspects of my life. From “Now That We’ve Found Love What Are We Gonna Do With It: A Narrative Understanding of Black Identity” Patrick L. Hylton and Hugh Miller surmise their research when stating “This article claims that the shift in Black subjectivity can be understood in terms of a change in narrative from a ‘Tragic Negro’ to ‘Romantic Black’ to ‘Satirist African’. This satirist African narrative presently eclipses a comedy/harmony story that is a well-articulated account of Black subjectivity from outside the field of psychology. This comedy/harmony story works to join the conflicting subjective positions available to Black people so that they seem seamless.” (Hylton/Miller,2004) I feel this description is aligned with the historical account of the depiction of black Americans in the media, as well as my personal growth as a black American. I believe that this alludes to the notion of history repeating itself, in that we are tied to the cycles and systems we are engaged with. “What Do You Know From Funny” also follows this cycle, because I am a product of the systems and communities that I come from and subscribe to. It is from doing the work that I am able to observe and break the cycles that restrict my growth, healing, and love for myself
Without the labor of Black women, none of this would be possible. My mother and grandmother are the source of my sense of humor and confidence, as well as my love for life and community. Comedy brought out the parts of myself that were unhealthy and problematic. It was my relationships with women and queer folk that helped me confront and accept these revelations through accountability and with humility. In the film, I introduced myself by acknowledging that I am the worst, as I often do with family, friends, and partners. But I’ve learned from those that I love and loved me, from those that I’ve harmed and harmed me, and from those that I have lost. Because I know in any relationship it isn’t just about me. When people show you who they are, believe them. I believe when people are willing to listen and grow on their own through communication, vulnerability, accountability, and humility that is how love is born, fostered, and nurtured. This is one of the many life lessons I’ve learned from accountability with family, friendships, and relationships. My mother and grandmother have given me words of wisdom that always humbled and guided me towards my own light. These women are the fuel to my flames, they are the blood in my veins. They keep my heart pumping and enable me to share laughter with those I love, as I did and do with them.
Sources:
Adams-Bass, V. N., Stevenson, H. C., & Kotzin, D. S. (2014). Measuring the Meaning of Black Media Stereotypes and Their Relationship to the Racial Identity, Black History Knowledge, and Racial Socialization of African American Youth. Journal of Black Studies, 45(5), 367–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/002193471453039
Baldwin, J. (1962) The Creative Process. Ridge Press
Bingham, S. C., & Green, S. E. (2016). Aesthetic as analysis: Synthesizing theories of humor and disability through stand-up comedy. Humanity & Society, 40(3), 278–305.
Carter, M. J., & Fuller, C. (2015). Symbolic interactionism. Sociopedia. isa, 1(1), 1–17.
Sullivan, J. M., & Platenburg, G. N. (2017). From Black-ish to Blackness: An Analysis of Black Information Sources’ Influence on Black Identity Development. Journal of Black Studies, 48(3), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934716685845
Gillota, D. (2013). Ethnic humor in multiethnic America. Rutgers University Press.
Friedman, S., & Kuipers, G. (2013). The divisive power of humour: Comedy, taste and symbolic boundaries. Cultural sociology, 7(2), 179–195.
hooks, bell, 1952–2021. ( 2000). All about love : new visions. New York :William Morrow
Hill, M. L. (2018). “Thank You, Black Twitter”: State Violence, Digital Counterpublics, and Pedagogies of Resistance. Urban Education, 53(2), 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085917747124
Hylton, P. L., & Miller, H. (2004). Now that we’ve found love what are we gonna do with it? A narrative understanding of Black identity. Theory & Psychology, 14(3), 373–408.
Jenkins, L. A. (2020). Contextualizing the self: meanings and possibilities for Afrocentric dramaturgy (Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Northridge).
Lorde, Audre. (1978). Uses of the erotic : the erotic as power. Crossing Press
McKerrow, R. E. (1989). Critical rhetoric: Theory and praxis. Communications Monographs, 56(2), 91–111.
Redding, R. (2017). Black Voices, White Power: Members of the Black Press Make Meaning of Media Hegemony. Journal of Black Studies, 48(2), 143–164.https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934716681152
Riggs, M. T., Kleiman, V., Dee, R., Rolle, E., Carroll, D., Nicholas, D., Reid, T., … Signifyin’ Works (Firm). (1991). Color adjustment. San Francisco, Calif: California Newsreel.
Shrum, L.. (2017). Cultivation Theory: Effects and Underlying Processes. 10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0040.
Zeigler-Hill, V., Besser, A., & Jett, S. E. (2013). Laughing at the Looking Glass: Does Humor Style Serve as an Interpersonal Signal? Evolutionary Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491301100118
Media Sources:
Adele Givens Loves Being A Lady | Def Comedy Jam. LOL Network Stand-Up! (No Date) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/a6Ka0a_lkeI
Audre Lorde reads Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic As Power. Growbean (Aug 2, 2019) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/aWmq9gw4Rq0
bell hooks and Kevin Powell: Black Masculinity, Threat or Threatened.The New School (Oct 6, 2015) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/FoXNzyK70Bk
Coming To America… “Where’s the Spoon”… Eddie Murphy as Saul the Jewish Guy. Nebiyou Essayas (Dec 8, 2013) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/N3jx4WIUYy4
Dave Chappelle Def Comedy Jam 1993. Truth Be Told (No Date) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/9wovbnOGXGM
Def Comedy Jam — Martin Lawrence, Show 1, Opening. Project Mind (Feb 26, 2019) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/eKwB364GfxM
Dick Gregory: The Difference Between Humor and Comedy. Visionaryproject (Mar 19, 2010) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/zsaFcEYREbM
James Baldwin — Meeting the man. Oncleo (Feb 6, 2021) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/cs1D32dFnoQ
Malcolm X — Black Celebrities Are Not Leaders Of The Black Community. Dr. Oya Adwoa Maat (No Date) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/h5usO1TGm24
Malcolm X : Media Manipulation. Malcolm Disciples (No Date) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/HRWMhj7u-e0
Monique “I Love Black Men” Queens of Comedy. Walter Latham Comedy (Feb 6, 2016) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/2sbMiOnFW2w
OUR FEATURE PRESENTATION — 1970s movie intro. Hollydogfilms (Feb 19, 2011) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/rmSK1imravY
The Paul Mooney Awards. reelback (2004) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/BWaTUPqD7dM
VHS Glitch — Volume 3 — Stock Footage. Strange Footage (Mar 7, 2021) Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/AQsXbJSYj6o
