Paul Mooney on the Michael Richards Incident

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cuX2uYOi4g


This is a clip of comedian Paul Mooney on the Greta Van Susteren show discussing the Michael Richards incident from 2006. I found this clip to be especially pertinent to our class discussions on race and gender comedy. Paul Mooney is a good example of a certain kind of confrontational black comedy that was really epitomized by the late Richard Pryor. Paul Mooney was actually a close friend of Pryor’s and Paul co-wrote many of Richard’s stand-up comedy routines in the 1970s and 80s. Paul Mooney subsequently went on to write for In Living Color and made several guest appearances on Chappelle’s Show while continuing to do his own stand-up performances.

Mooney’s style of humor is a confrontational humor that manages to get blacks and whites laughing, but clearly masks resentment towards whites for their treatment of African-Americans. In an interview with Nightline on ABC, Mooney said that he hopes to make people both think and laugh at his humor. He prides himself in easing tensions between the races, but also in confronting white people with the injustice of racism. While watching this clip I made the parallel to the Zolten piece we read and the differences between the Richard Pryor brand of humor and the Bill Cosby brand. I think that both can be effective and useful. In this clip, Mooney addresses the Michael Richards comments head on using sarcasm and a certain racially charged humor that actually serves to raise the tension level on the Fox News show.

In 2006, Michael Richards was performing at the Laugh Factory in Hollywood. What started as a typical stand-up routine from the former Seinfeld star devolved into a racist rant while confronting some hecklers. The rant concluded with Richards repeatedly yelling the word “nigger.” Richards’ “meltdown” received widespread national attention and resulted in a dialogue over the use of the N-word. The Michael Richards incident followed by the potentially even more noteworthy Don Imus incident served to galvanize much of the African-American community to condemn any use of the N-word in public. What was formerly a word used as a form of oppression by whites against blacks and was later adopted by blacks as a means to remove the negative connotation, has now been criticized by blacks as inappropriate for anyone to utter. Even Paul Mooney, someone who has frequently used the N-word in his stand-up routines, has now promised to never use the word on stage again.

The clip that I found here was taken directly after the Richards incident. Van Susteren begins by noting that Mooney has known Richards for 30 years and has worked with him in the past. Mooney says that the incident was a total shock and goes on to say that he believes Richards had a total mental breakdown in which being funny no longer mattered. Mooney believed that the language used by Richards did not even have a humorous backdrop or a comedic intent, but was rather a reflection of Richards’ true feelings coming through in his fit of rage. The clip becomes funny and tense when Van Susteren asks Mooney how Richards could redeem himself. Mooney says at first that Richards could perform that same routine at the Apollo Theatre in Harlem, suggesting that Richard’s remarks would not have gone over well in front of a largely black audience. Van Susteren interrupts Mooney to point out to the audience watching at home that the Apollo Theatre is located in Harlem and presumably attempts to inform white viewers about the theatre’s ties to the black community. At this point, Mooney interrupts Van Susteren and claims that the Apollo Theatre is “world-renowned” and that everyone should know about the Apollo. I found this to be fascinating as Mooney stepped in to make a conversation about race even more tense. During this portion of the conversation he even calls Van Susteren, “sweetheart,” mocking the perceived naiveté of the television host. Mooney then goes on to say that Richards could redeem himself by hosting the BET hip-hop awards, stepping into Watts at midnight wearing red, or adopting a black baby. All of these were meant as tongue-in-cheek and sarcastic remarks as clearly none of these things were realistic or at all feasible. Mooney was instead trying to draw attention to the fact that Richards had a lot of work to do to win back black support while also trying to bring some levity to the situation.

The clip ends with Mooney describing to Van Susteren a kind of racial joke that would still qualify as being funny. The joke, about a white child putting chocolate on his face and calling himself black, is funny but still conveys a sense of black resentment and anger. I found the joke to be a good example of the kind of humor we discussed in class that someone like Richard Pryor would use to keep people laughing but also to send a message. Ultimately I thought this clip was appropriate because it touches on the use of language and its cultural usages, and also the role of racial humor. The word “nigger” is almost unique to our lexicon in that the level of inflammatory sentiment attached to it makes it almost completely off limits to the white population. But now, as the argument turns to methods for eliminating the power behind the word, it appears as though many in the African-American community wish to see the word disappear entirely and hope that blacks will stop using the word as well. This is certainly a fascinating discussion on the role of language in our culture. The role of racial humor is also interesting to note. Clearly Paul Mooney found the Michael Richards incident an opportunity to express his disappointment and anger while also sharing his own brand of socially aware humor. His humor is light-hearted enough to allow white people to laugh, while also gritty and biting enough to get his point across.