COMEDY CAN BE A FORCE
The past few weeks have given Canadians much to think about concerning the nature of artistic and cultural expression, and who can say what, and how, to whom. There has been much discussion about
Robert Lepage’s missteps, which led to the cancellation of productions of two of the worldrenowned theatre artist’s shows.
At the Just for Laughs festival, too, concerns were raised — not least by comics themselves — about whether “political correctness” is curbing what can be said on stage.
Indeed, while a great deal of comedy is based on being able to laugh at the absurdities of one’s own situation, it can seem an awful lot like self-hatred when marginalized people make themselves the butt of jokes to get laughs from mainstream audiences. Perhaps what it comes down to is whether the audience is laughing with the comic, or at him or her; whether the humour attacks a power imbalance, or reinforces it; whether the humour furthers stereotypes or pokes fun at them.
That performers and audiences are increasingly sensitive to these issues is not a bad thing.
Comedy is often edgy as well as funny.
Humour has long been a way to show the absurdity of the status quo and shine a light on the daily hypocrisies built into the human experience; to make people think, not just make them laugh.
But it would be wrong to see so-called “political correctness” as a threat to the edginess of comedy. It’s a pejorative term for what is a call for comics to use their power responsibly. It should not be conflated with censorship, or a curb on freedom of expression. While people have a right to say what they want (subject only to laws about defamation and hate speech), they do not have a right to appear on any platform, to be funded, or to have an audience.
Issues of who is speaking for whom were front and centre in the controversies surrounding Lepage’s SLAV and Kanata. Certain minorities, not least black and Indigenous people, remain marginalized, and part of that marginalization involves finding their own stories told by others. In doing his research, Lepage evidently did not listen to the perspectives of those whose stories he was telling. Thus, his works appeared to presume to say something about the experiences and feelings of people whose perspectives he did not heed. That the subject matter deals with historical trauma compounded the problem, as did the use of non-black and non-indigenous performers when racialized minorities have so long found themselves with limited job opportunities.
Important conversations about these issues have been started. But they are far from over.