It is only a week to go until Ricky Gervais's newest stand-up special releases on Netflix (for whatever reason Armageddon (Spencer, 2023) is coming on Christmas Day, which has a lot of implications into what the comedian thinks he is on level with). Ahead of this occasion, I thought it best to revisit last year's special, SuperNature (Spencer, 2022). Unlike other posts, this is an actual essay, which will be detailing whether Gervais' viewpoint that he can make jokes about anyone (including trans and non-binary individuals) is actually appropriate, or whether the "wokists" should cancel him forever.
Ricky Gervais is known for his annoyed and judgemental persona, but has he taken it too far [Copyright: Netflix]
-----------------------------------------------------------
There is an often-circulated rule of stand-up comedy which states “you can’t joke about it unless you are it”. This rule dictates that to make jokes about sensitive personal issues (being gay, trans, Black, female, Jewish, etc.) that you must yourself identify that way, otherwise it would be deemed inappropriate. However, many comedians take issue with this rule for various reasons. One such opposer of this is Ricky Gervais, a British, straight, cisgender, white, atheist man who regularly makes jokes regarding the holocaust, religion, and the LGBTQ+ community, specifically trans individuals. Gervais claims in his infamous stand-up special SuperNature (Spencer, 2022) that he “supports trans rights [as] trans rights are human rights” in real life. Although this is most likely true, his overall standpoint, persona, and use of comedy in SuperNature reinforces many stereotypes and perpetuates an anti-trans ideology in the audience’s mind. Therefore, this places into contention whether the "don’t joke about it unless you are it rule” should apply to Gervais’ comedy.Ricky Gervais is defined as a subversive comedian, someone who ‘can joke about subjects which are difficult or impossible to discuss in everyday conversation or the broadcast media’ (Double, 2005: 164). This is achieved using observational comedy. As Double explains, the comedy ‘derives its power from the fact that the comedian has noticed something which the audience previously haven’t’ (2005: 164). Gervais mainly specialises in comedy which is meant to offend a minority in a ridiculous way. He specifically has a distaste towards the “cancel culture” ideology, one ‘initially meant to call out the wrong doings of the people in powerful positions and hold them accountable for their actions’ (Lokhande and Natu, 2022: 252). Gervais has received lots of backlashes regarding jokes made about trans people, an issue he spent his 2022 Netflix Special, SuperNature, discussing, whilst continuing to make more offensive jokes. Such comments include: saying old-fashioned woman have wombs, whilst new ones have “beards and cocks” (which undermines gender dysmorphia, whereby trans woman may not feel comfortable having those features), saying that self ID can be used “to get shit” such as saying to his mum he is “either trans or needs a new bike“ (undermining the difficulty of coming out), and stating that trans lesbian woman would regret bottom surgery as soon as they put on a strap-on (perpetuating the idea that trans people regret transitioning, an excuse used to block gender affirming health care in the majority of the world). Despite the attempts for these to just be ironically funny, the subsequent effects these jokes have cause many issues.
The issue that occurs when comedians joke about a minority they themselves are not a part of is often the reinforcing of stereotypes as the main reliance on comedy. Stereotypes are defined as ‘generalities, patternings and ‘typifications’’ used to make sense of ‘the mass of complex and inchoate data that we receive from the world’ (Dyer, 1993: 12). They can be used effectively in comedy, as an understanding of common stereotypes allows for a “short cut” that audiences use to understand the joke and make inferences based on their own experiences. As Francisco Yus states: ‘How strongly the audience support certain assumptions intentionally communicated by the comedian depends upon the identification of the comedian’s underlying intentions (and attitudes), and also on the specific quality of the store of representations shared by the audience, some of which will match the comedian’s input (strengthening previously held representations) while others will clash with this input (contradiction and in some cases eventual erasure of background representations)’ (2016: 156). In this case, both matching the comedian’s input can be seen as funny through understanding their comedic viewpoint, and clashing with the input can be seen as funny through understanding the comedian is taking a negative outlook, one they themselves may not agree with but use to give a basis to a joke. However, what Gervais fails to do in his routine is create a clear separation between his transphobic input and his intentions and attitudes towards the trans community, making the input feel like a personal opinion. In the example stated previously, Gervais claims he “supports trans rights [as] trans rights are human rights”. However, this was immediately followed by the line “but meet me halfway ladies, loose the cock”. This juxtaposes a heart-warming defence with a punchline that can be seen in poor taste due to the difficulty and high expense for trans-women to get surgery. Therefore, the standpoint Gervais appears to take is one of insincerity, as it is just another set-up for a joke that erases the background representation.
The issue with perpetuating stereotypes occurs when the audience already has this belief, and their belief becomes reinforced. Lippmann explains that stereotypes are ‘highly charged with feelings that are attached to them’ (1956: 96), and therefore, are often unchanging. Francisco Yus explains, ‘As a consequence, a mutual cognitive environment is created which includes, among other assumptions, the ones made highly manifest by the comedian’s words (becoming mutually manifest assumptions)’ (2016: 158). This shows that the authority of a comedian can reinforce unconscious ideologies and create an understanding those views are supported. For example, imagine an audience member who dislikes identity politics, watching Ricky Gervais, a comedian they respect and have chosen to watch. If Gervais also claims that he believes it is ridiculous as he “could have his legs removed, have wheels put on, identify as a pram, and if you say I’m mental, you’re a bigot”, then the audience member will feel validated. This reinforces the idea that having an identity outside the binary is just a “syndrome” or “preference”, the words Gervais uses to preface the joke after discussing that people are too tolerant of identity politics. Despite this maybe not being Gervais’ intention, as he claims to support people identifying how they chose, the ridiculous comparison has been made that transphobic audience members will subconsciously use to reinforce their opinions.
Although, these simplistic and ridiculous offenses allow Gervais to achieve his comedic aims, initiating a laugh. As Yus states, comedy relies on ‘the audience’s realisation that many thought-to-be privately stored representations about the world we live in, are actually collective cultural representations shared by a number of people in the audience. Laughter is, perhaps, the most evident signal of this “shock of mutual cultural awareness”’ (2016: 165). Therefore, jokes using offensive stereotypes as the comedic punchline are only funny due to shock, agreement, or a combination of the two. As Gervais has an understanding that these jokes create laughter, he understands the laughter is at the expense of the minority being stereotyped, and as many already expect Gervais to say such jokes, the laughter occurs from having views reinforced. Nothing positive occurs for a wider audience by the continued use of the stereotypes. The only positive gains occur for those with prejudice views feeling supported, and the own selfish desires of Gervais wanting simplistic comedy and publicity.
This publicity is the effect on people that Gervais wants, both in angering the trans audiences and reinforcing the views of the transphobic audiences. In the example about identifying as a pram, a joke Gervais followed by claiming it is “a bit hack [and] old-fashioned”, he then states, “I am going to leave it in to annoy people”. As a comedian who uses offensive and shock comedy, the backlash to his routine further proves his recurring point that “cancel culture” has become too prevalent, and that you can’t joke about anything anymore without offending someone. When a defence is required, ‘Gervais's reaction to critics was to accuse them of attempts at "censorship" […] as a means of shielding him from accountability’ (Wolkink, 2022: 930). This, in turn, generates publicity and more support from likeminded individuals, many of whom take a more extreme prejudice view towards the support of freedom of speech and the hatred of “cancel culture” than Gervais. Furthermore, as the backlash becomes more widespread, the story then becomes more twisted. Deen cites, ‘when his jokes were removed from a comedic context and only read in the news media or shared on social media, they appear far more serious than intended’ (2020: 511). This is most notable by the participation of Piers Morgan, another advocate against “cancel culture” and “wokeness”, who interviewed trans individuals annoyed at the joke before shutting them down. Deen further explains: ‘while transgender people and their allies have moral expertise on this issue, it is not clear if they are familiar with comedy and the expected suspension of our serious, real-world commitments when listening to it’ (2020, 510-511). This is evident in the Piers Morgan interview following SuperNature where the trans interviewee claims to have not watched the whole show, only seeing the out of context lines spread around social media. This adds more credence to the stereotype that trans individuals are offended at Gervais spontaneously and without reason. As the popular idiom states: “all publicity is good publicity” and Gervais is aware that by offending individuals who will immediately protest his jokes, he can increase his audience and social media relevancy.
Despite this, the idea that someone should not joke about something unless they are it should not be completely forbidden. Stand-up is a space for free expression and can be used positively to bring sensitive subjects into a broader audience’s mind. As Rebecca Krefting states: ‘Comics exercising their positions as cultural citizens will opt to use their comic material to negotiate a respected space for themselves and their community in the national imagination. They do this by identifying the cultural attitudes and beliefs contributing to their subordinated statis’ (2014: 84). Therefore, as Krefting further analyses: ‘One does not need to be queer to advocate on behalf of LGBTQ communities; in fact, many heterosexual comics vocalise support for gay civil liberties, just as there are White comics who speak out against racism’ (2014: 83). This shows that bringing attention to the issues of minorities, whether you are part of that group or not, can be used to make fun of the systems that result in harmful stereotypes and situations. Consequently, this can identify and expose such systems to an audience who may be unfamiliar with other people’s struggles. Gervais may claim he respects and supports minorities, but then by using harmful connotations instead of using the stereotype to challenge the system, it shows Gervais does not actually care about the minorities he offends, or the valid arguments they possess. Instead, he uses his position as a cishet white man for his own personal gain, knowing it is at the expense of others.
Overall, as Gervais fails to challenge the stereotypes, instead using their apparent truth to create his jokes, it reiterates that the negative views have veracity, and therefore, would be absorbed by those already tempted to disfavour trans people, or any other minority Gervais also jokes about with no attempted resolution. As explored, when the joke defines stereotypes unironically, and then creates comedy from the fact the untrue idea exists, respectable comedy can be achieved. However, when the joke is at the minority, using the stereotype as an accusing factor, problematic representation is reinforced. Comedians should be able to “joke about it”, and even those “who aren’t it”, but it must be respectful, something Ricky Gervais blatantly fails to achieve, regardless of his own views.
Bibliography
Deen, Philip (2020) ‘What Could It Mean to Say That Today's Stand-Up Audiences Are Too Sensitive?’, Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism, Vol. 78 Issue 4
Double, Oliver (2005) ‘Getting the Joke: The Inner Workings of Stand-Up Comedy’, London: Methuen
Dyer, Richard (1993) ‘The Matter of Images: Essays on Representation’, London, Routledge
Krefting, Rebecca (2014) ‘All Joking Aside: American Humor and Its Discontents’, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press
Lippmann, Walter (1956) ‘Public Opinion’, New York: Macmillan: 96
Lokhande, Gayatri, and Natu, Sadhana (2022) ‘You are Cancelled: Emergence of Cancel Culture in the Digital Age’, IAHRW International Journal of Social Sciences Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2
Wolfink, Alena (2022) ‘Navigating the 'Darkness': Feminist, Trans, and Queer Comedy Against Ideology’, Theory & Event, vol. 25 no. 4
Yus, Francisco (2016) ‘Humour and Relevance’, Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company
Filmography
Ricky Gervais: SuperNature (John L. Spencer, 2022)
Ricky Gervais: Armageddon (John L. Spencer, 2023)
No comments:
Post a Comment