Why We Laugh: Black Comedians on Black Comedy - 10.13.2007.1

Keep an eye out on the horizon for a new movie that will be coming out probably next year. The movie is called Why We Laugh: Black Comedians on Black Comedy.

This is not a comedy show, like The Kings of Comedy or Mr. Eddie Murphy’s RAW. This is a documentary. Now before you say well that’s too boring and I won’t see it, listen to who is involved.

Beside the fact that it is being co-produced by Mr. Robert Townsend, who is no slouch in his own right, it contains interviews with some of the top Black comedians around today. That includes D.L. Hughley, the Wayans brothers, Paul Mooney, Tommy Davison, Reynaldo Ray, Marla Gibbs, Eddie Griffin and Katt Williams.

But this documentary, like Black comedy, will also include political commentary and thoughts from the world of hip-hop from noted individuals like Dr. Cornel West, Stanley Crouch and Russell Simmons.

At just 90 minutes some of the best go from their comedy routines to the roots of what is happening in the Black community and how they transform these topical and emotional events into humor. From Don Imus, to OJ Simpson, to Jena 6 and more.

If this doesn’t sound like something you want to keep an eye out for, what else is there for you to look forward to? How often are you able to not only see where the comedy comes from but how and why it affects us all. How comedy interacts with all the facets of life in America, especially for those of us who often have no other voice to carry in the media and public.

With the people associated so far, one thing is certain. There will be quality and depth and intelligence. Insight and debate will ensue. Critical questions will be posed. And isn’t that one of the things that we expect from movies?

Reply to comment about D L Hughley Part 3 - 6.21.2007.1

This is in response to a comment made by Eddie G. Griffin who commented on my post Why protest D L Hughley Part 3 - 6.19.2007.3.

I’m glad to see you share the passion that your associate g-e-m has. It’s commendable. But I must mention that I feel neither of you have read through the various posts found on this blog, and my other (www.mvass.com).

I say this because your first statement fails to recognize what I said previously, my post was about free speech. I was not commenting on the quality or morality of what Mr. Hughley stated. My clarification on that point can be seen in my comment and the post itself, I don’t believe I need to clarify that point further.

I am glad that you felt compelled to protest Mr. Hughley. You stood for your convictions and that is something most do not do. I will not take away from that.

As for what people in California, New York, Chicago or any other portion of America and the world think or do I cannot comment. I only speak for myself. It is my understanding that the norms of behavior and speech do not change in different areas of the nation to any great degree. I say that as I have lived in several states across the nation and visited perhaps a dozen more. This is my opinion; you may have had other experiences.

Given that, I point you to a couple of things I have said that it seems you have failed to read about. The secret anti-ganst rap movement - 4.30.2007.3, Another Blackplanet poll - 3.22.2007.1, Nick Cannon's Boost Mobile ads, NBA code, Harper Hill - success vs. dmx - airport arrest, Sean Bell - 11.29.2006.1, Mrs. Elizabeth Vargas, formerly of World News Tonight, Chuck Creekmur and Rap on Fox News - 3.7.2007.2. I think you get the point.

I provided these links because this may help you understand what you seemingly have not read. My views are all available for anyone to read. I have a couple hundred posts that speak clearly to my views on women, rap music, the current state of Black culture, education, justice, drugs, media, health, and dozens of other subjects. I would suggest you read some of them, you may find that my opinions are not based on who I am speaking about but what I want to speak about.

I don’t need to say I stand up for women, African Americans, Hispanics, politicians, this nation, children, education, health, or anything else. My posts do that for me. My backbone has been visible to the entire internet since 2005, and easily found in searches on most any search engine. Put Black Entertainment into a search engine and I’m confident you’ll find me on the first page out of millions of results.

Because of my convictions I try not to make personal attacks, implied or otherwise, against anyone. That doesn’t always happen, I’m human. But when I attack gansta rap I do, when I confront an individual rapper I do that. If I speak about free speech I mean that. And I provide information, when possible and I feel needed, to back up what I say. I don’t make it personal (beyond the fact that it is my opinion) as it weakens the argument I am making.

As for the community, I’m glad you are doing things you believe will help. I do as well, this being one of those items. If you disagree, fine. If you think I am incorrect, then provide me an example of what I said and correct me with proof that ANYONE can link to. I try to do my homework, if you want to say I’m wrong in front of the internet, I expect the same as a courtesy. I’m not above saying I’m wrong, but not just because someone says so.

I will say (since you mentioned it) that if you think that Mr. Hughley, a D-list entertainer as you called him on your blog, has enough influence on your kids to cause them to idolize and emulate him then either he is more successful than you think or you don’t understand the influences on your kids in my opinion. I will further state that if you think the influence of Mr. Hughley supersedes that of rappers such as Snoop Dogg and 50 cent, or the peers of your children then I again state you may be missing something.

Lastly, you made a personal attack on me. In defense of that I will respond, and only once. You don’t know me, or my character. You haven’t bothered to read what I have written. You seem incapable of understanding what you have read. I have come to understand from your writing that you are blinded by your passion and cannot see another view. Without the ability to see other views, or to learn from what is being said to you, you become stupid.

Let me define that, ignorance is the lack of knowledge on a thing – such as your comment on my character, but stupidity is the ability to learn a thing and the failure to do so – which would be reading my blog and understanding what I write about and why which it appears abundantly obvious you have not.

I do not care where in the world you live or are from. Your views are your own, I respect that. I respect honest, courteous disagreement. These things, among others, make me the man I am.

But based on your comments, your disregard for my initial reply, and your personal attack – that was unwarranted and small-minded in my opinion, I would surmise that the children you mention disrespecting their elders (male and female alike I imagine) are not emulating Mr. Hughley but perhaps yourself. I don’t believe that has anything to do with Texas, or being Black, or the sex you were born with. I think that applies just to you.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Why protest D L Hughley Part 3 - 6.19.2007.3

Concluded from Why protest D L Hughley Part 2...

Is the line hard to draw? At times yes. But intent is the basis of the determination, as is the response. A comedian making a comment that is off-color or based on a tragic event is not necessarily the same thing as say the writing of kenneth eng.

“To call eng insane is to belittle his hate and absurdity. I will not dismiss him as those that could agree with him would find that a rallying call to defend him. I will rather address the issue at hand. Racism. It’s blatant and in this case seemingly universal. When I hear, or read, such ravings I am sorry that such small minds cannot comprehend the obvious attributes and abilities of people in front of them. It is even worse when such an individual has had the opportunity to educate themselves and failed to take the fruit of the tree.”

I also agree with Mr. Hughley in the thought that there must be better things for most people to do. Chasing comedians in their professional duties is reminicent of the persecution Mr. Lenny Bruce encountered. If people want to get change made, why not address the music industry that promotes almost single mindedly gansta rap music that advocates drugs, child abandonment, degredation of women and criminal pursuits. Why attack 1 man, doing his job with the intent to entertain and arguably does so, when there is an institution making tens of millions while influencing our youth in the most base and morally questionable barrage of content daily.

Lastly, if ANY of the women of the Rutger’s Basketball team are offended then Mr. Hughley owes them an apology. I don’t need it nor do the protesters. Funny or not, if they ask for it they deserve it. That is a private matter between him and them. No different than the apology Mr. Imus made after his bile laced commentary. I didn’t need to hear Imus apologize to them, nor would I need to hear Mr. Hughley. As such no one else can ask him to make an apology, let alone make it a national event. To think that such a demand could be made and seriously considered is either an attempt at sensationalism or arrogance.

This is what I think, what do you think?

*<Why protest D L Hughley Part 1...

**Why protest D L Hughley Part 2...

Why protest D L Hughley Part 2 - 6.19.2007.2

Continued from Why protest D L Hughley Part 1...

That said, it doesn’t mean the man isn’t funny. There are a lot of comedians and they appeal to all different tastes. There is no one way to do comedy, all are good and right. Well at least right.

But the comments made were hardly kind. Some in Jay Leno’s audience thought them harsh or rude, and Mr. Leno is obviously insecure by their being made. But it was an honest attempt at humor. Not nice but an obvious attempt all the same. [he was commenting on the looks of the women.]

Does this deserve a protest? Is it as bad as Mr. Imus? I think not.

The difference is the obvious attempt at humor, the lack of intent to degrade, and the fact that they are figures in the publics mind. I find it like humor based on 9/11 or a flood or the Nazi’s. Sometimes it’s funny, and/or the time is right for people to accept the joke. Other times not. Even the greatest fall flat on some jokes, especially when it’s spontaneous. Mr. Hughley mostly fell flat on this. But that doesn’t deserve a protest.

This was not mean-spirited, Imus was. In fact that was the job of Mr. Imus. To be mean and disrespectful. That’s the context of the show, and he went too far one time too many. Mr. Hughley is a comedian, not a commentator. His role is to make people try to laugh at things they might not normally. It’s no different than the jokes Mr. Carlos Mencia makes about the disabled, mentally disadvantaged, religion and other items.

Mr. Hughley makes this same case in an interview on the 17th of this month. He was having a press conference about the pending protest of his comedy show, and the request by protester to have him make a national apology. He flatly refused. I agree with him.


In his commentary, which I can only provide a link for, http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=19110@ktvt.dayport.com, – sorry, he remarks that as a society we have regressed. I think that is apparent. The nation is so concerned about PC statements that virtually everything must be parsed in the most neutral, and often concept changing, terms. Every remark made by a public figure is combed over by the news media, bloggers, and the internet at large for any missteps or ill intent.

I admit that there are several figures I have been critical of. Mr. Michael Richards is one that comes to mind directly.

“I do not condone the actions of Mr. Michael Richards. I do not accept the excuse that Mr. Richards is inexperienced at stand-up comedy and had little practice dealing with hecklers…”

But to be critical of individuals that express direct hate is not the same as to denounce free speech. Whether or not I like what Don Imus, Michael Richards or others have said, they do have the right to say it. We cannot fall into the trap that is PC, that is to say that any comment made by a person that a few dislike should be responded to with the harshest response possible.

Continued in Part 3...

Why protest D L Hughley - 6.19.2007.1

Free Speech. African Americans. Comedy. Each of these are parts of the United States and the world at large. Take any one of these elements away from America and you may not have a nation today, even if you did it would not be nearly as grand, powerful or free. I feel this is a fact, and there is no questioning it.

Yet, when all 3 are combined the outcome can either be extraordinary or devastating. On the positive side is Mr. Bill Cosby, Mr. Richard Pryor, Mr. Dave Chappelle, Mr. Redd Foxx, Mr. Jaime Foxx, Mr. Eddie Murphy and many others throughout the decades. There is no question that each of these men, and women as well let’s remember, have helped advance Civil Rights, helped pave the path that every Black person in America walks today, and an integral part of forging the path the youth and unborn will be walking tomorrow. Such is the power of these combined forces.


On the other end can be seen other figures. Some have been influential others just known by the populace. The were centuries where Black Americans were considered the butt of jokes, performers like Al Jolsen using the right of free speech to demean and hold back millions. While much of that kind of action lives only in the past it still has not left the nation yet. In the 21st century, nearly 500 years after the first Africans were forcibly taken to America, after Civil Rights and riots, after having African American Secretaries of State and while we have a viable candidate that may become President of the United States, we have men like Mr. Don Imus that used the right of free speech that Blacks like the Tuskegee Airmen died to protect to attack innocent, unsuspecting, private African American college students under the guise of comedy.

While these are the extremes, the expanse betwixt is vast and mired in shadows and grayscale. And this is where Mr. D.L. Hughley falls. I mention him because of the recent protest that is being made over his remarks made on the Jay Leno Show about the Rutger’s Women’s Basketball team. Part of the comments made by Pastor Kyev Tatum of Servant House Baptist Church includes

“Imus’s comment was insulting and so was DL Hughley’s. He said it’s time to stop all black performers from such vile attacks - starting with DL. ‘It’s not only that comment,’ Pastor stop all black performers from such vile attacks - starting with DL. ‘It’s not only that comment,’ Pastor Tatum said. ‘He has a history of demeaning our community in such a way that it’s not funny anymore.’ Tatum said. ‘He has a history of demeaning our community in such a way that it’s not funny anymore.’”

Let me mention that I have heard some of the comedy of Mr. Hughley, and I’m not a great fan. He is funny at points, but it’s not really my cup of tea. His television show didn’t hold appeal for me, though friends of mine loved it. His late night show had some moments but overall did not grab me. Essentially I find him a middle of the road comedian, he hits and misses about evenly for me.

Continued in Part 2...