The Hypocrisy of Dave Chappelle’s Power Play

December 3, 2020 8:14 AM

“He convinced Netflix to pull his old sketch show from streaming by saying it made him feel bad. Funny how that works.” (Medium)
posted by girlmightlive (31 comments total)

Another problem with his reaction in this situation is its profound self-absorption. As the article points out, he signed a contract, and later decided he didn't like it. It'd be a lot more interesting and praiseworthy if he announced he was going to work on ways to improve industry contracts and get more effective representation for performers who are earlier in their careers.
posted by PhineasGage at 8:40 AM on December 3, 2020 [10 favorites]

I missed the memo on Chappelle; did he become really awful in his late career or something? I tried to watch one of this things on Netflix and the anti-trans jokes weren't just offensive, they also weren't funny. Is this his shtick now, he's the new shock offensive comedian? How tedious.
posted by Nelson at 8:47 AM on December 3, 2020 [12 favorites]

So a guy who now gets $20,000,000 per show is upset that the entity that funded his big break is still making money off of his big break?
posted by a complicated history at 9:04 AM on December 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

Chapelle is, of course, a particularly acute case in the ocean of self-absorption where we all live. Much as he’s trying to position this as a triumph of decency over cold business calculus, everybody with the possible exception of Dave Chapelle knows it’s exactly the opposite: the cold business calculus spit out the conclusion that Dave Chapelle is too big a deal not to give him his way. I get that he’s been fucked over in the past, and that not getting fucked over must genuinely seem like a refreshing change, but it’s certainly not because a giant corporation suddenly started making business decisions out of the goodness of their desiccated hearts.

Chapelle is just taking his place in the fundamental social hierarchy of our society, and it’s all about power. Deference flows up the ladder and abuse flows down. “Pull the show in which I have no ownership stake or we will no longer be in business for new projects,” even as an implicit threat, is not an exchange based on decency. It just feels like that to the guy who gets his way effortlessly when that threat hangs in the air.

We live in a toxic environment defined by who gets to kick whom, and the incentive structure is to be able to kick more people and to be kicked by fewer. Good for Dave, I guess, that he’s finally in the position to buy a really nice pair of kicking boots, but let’s not pretend “decency” has anything to do with it.
posted by gelfin at 9:16 AM on December 3, 2020 [36 favorites]

So I violated Internet Rule #2 and read some of the article comments, but I thought this one by Winter Writes was spot on:

Someone said they don't feel like these are related topics, but I feel like they are. Trans people are actively discriminated against and murdered because they are trans. They are a vulnerable group. And yet Chapelle defiantly continued to make jokes about this group of vulnerable people even when they said "hey this hurts! we're vulnerable and you're making us more vulnerable by allowing the majority of people who don't understand us feel empowered to remain socially unaware and make jokes about us and discriminate against us more".

Chapelle has said that he left the Chapelle show because it made him feel bad bc he realized that his jokes were socially irresponsible, and left black people vulnerable when he became aware that racists were laughing TOO hard at his jokes. Dave has always understood the power of jokes and how they could lead to the destruction of groups of vulnerable people. He's always been a hypocrite in this sense.

posted by el gran combo at 9:20 AM on December 3, 2020 [43 favorites]

Yeah, Chapelle mocked not just Trans people but LGBT folks in general.
posted by Chrysopoeia at 9:35 AM on December 3, 2020 [8 favorites]

Mod note: One comment deleted. Please be aware this is an intersection of several extremely charged topics, so it's not the place for questions starting from zero knowledge or anything like devil's advocacy; you're going to put your foot in your mouth at best. People from dominant groups should take extra care to consider the potential impact of their comments.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:00 AM on December 3, 2020 [15 favorites]

How is that not based on decency? A person stated his terms for doing business and a corporation decided whether those terms were agreeable or not. It's like as decent a business transaction as you'll come across.

I think the implication of the comment is that "decency" is here defined as something that's just done based on feelings outside of the context of a business transaction, the baseline of which will always be money.

Dave's exact words, as the article points out, were: "I told them that this makes me feel bad ... They agreed that they would take it off their platform just so I could feel better."

The implication of Dave's own words is that it's the right, decent thing to do outside of business even if it would make Netflix much more money. But of course, the truth is that it's a business call to remove it, since they have *other* business with Dave that could be jeopardized.

tl;dr: capitalism has nothing to do with decency
posted by knownassociate at 10:14 AM on December 3, 2020 [11 favorites]

“Pull the show in which I have no ownership stake or we will no longer be in business for new projects,” even as an implicit threat, is not an exchange based on decency.

Can't say I take the side of the corporate rentiers in this equation, no matter how offensive Chapelle's jokes may be. As an artist your only asset is your work and your only leverage, generally, is to walk away. Doesn't matter how famous or rich you are. If a giant corporation wants to collect rent on his work in perpetuity, then yes, it's in their business interest to keep him at least publicly saying nice things while he's still breathing.

Implying that renegotiating a contract is somehow akin to violence seems a little weird even if Chapelle is a shithead.
posted by bradbane at 10:14 AM on December 3, 2020 [5 favorites]

Implying that renegotiating a contract is somehow akin to violence seems a little weird even if Chapelle is a shithead.

I don't see where that implication was. The article was about how if Dave says he's walking away and negotiating his contract based on "feelings," that he damn well understands how much power "feelings" have in his art -- where he does punch down.
posted by knownassociate at 10:19 AM on December 3, 2020 [2 favorites]

God damn it, I liked Dave Chappelle! I thought he was hilarious! And now not only does he continue to insult people like me, but he makes that new material even more prominent by keeping people from seeing his old, good stuff anymore. Why do people like him and J.K. Rowling decide that what they're going to do with their newfound power and influence is caricature and dehumanize vulnerable people who have done nothing more than live their convictions?
posted by J.K. Seazer at 10:19 AM on December 3, 2020 [15 favorites]

New comics: Endlessly A/B test their material in front of new audiences, discarding material that alienates or angers audiences or that isn’t funny

Millionaire comics: Spend the first 10-15 minutes of multiple Netflix comedy specials boohooing and punching down because they got an angry email once
posted by Skwirl at 10:33 AM on December 3, 2020 [28 favorites]

It is beyond disappointing that so many once funny, insightful comics have turned into grouchy, lazy assholes who can't be bothered to give a shit about people being abused and murdered on a daily basis.
posted by Saxon Kane at 11:06 AM on December 3, 2020 [13 favorites]

It's the culture in comedy - soft bigotry is acceptable because it gets laughs, and if that bothers you, then you need to get a thicker skin, because demanding that comics not use it is censorship. It's odious, and it's what has enabled the careers of a number of abusers in the comedy circuit.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:22 AM on December 3, 2020 [5 favorites]

It is beyond disappointing that so many once funny, insightful comics have turned into grouchy, lazy assholes

This. Beyond the offensiveness of much of Chappelle’s new material, what is most noticeable to me is how shockingly lazy his writing is, especially compared to his earlier work. I guess if you’re successful at talking into a microphone in front of crowds for long enough, you forget how much work it takes to get to things worth saying. These days he just kind rambles draft material and extemporizes freely, as if every thought or idea he has is gold, in its first version, and that we all should care about his personal rich-dude-comic concerns for some reason. Even if his new shows don’t offend, how does a viewer get past their tedium and banal self-absorption?
posted by LooseFilter at 12:01 PM on December 3, 2020 [3 favorites]

Speaking of hypocrisy: I find it interesting the "but you signed a contract!" reactions to Chappelle vs literally the exact same situation happening with Taylor Swift and her masters.

I wonder what's different between the two of them that causes people to have these two different reactions?
posted by sideshow at 12:37 PM on December 3, 2020 [5 favorites]

bradbane: “Implying that renegotiating a contract is somehow akin to violence seems a little weird even if Chapelle is a shithead.”

Coercion is coercion whether one is literally twisting someone's arm or only figuratively.

Saxon Kane: “It is beyond disappointing that so many once funny, insightful comics have turned into grouchy, lazy assholes who can't be bothered to give a shit about people being abused and murdered on a daily basis.”

I've been thinking about this a lot since I watched the first couple of minutes of Chappelle's SNL monologue a few weeks ago before turning it off and removing my series recording for the show. Why do so many comics — especially men known for polticial-observational humor who were considered "liberal" at some point — turn into reactionary cranks in middle age? Is it just that many men do?
posted by ob1quixote at 12:49 PM on December 3, 2020 [2 favorites]

These days he just kind rambles draft material and extemporizes freely, as if every thought or idea he has is gold, in its first version, and that we all should care about his personal rich-dude-comic concerns for some reason.

Even more hypocrisy from Dave, whose classic joke about Ja Rule and 9/11 perfectly highlighted the absurdity of caring about the opinions of celebrities on important issues. Yet the vibe he puts forward in his recent specials is that of a philosopher-comic. "Listen to me, I've THOUGHT about these things."

It's frustrating because he really does put in the work of incorporating the history* of struggle for Black folks in America in his sets to educate people. But then he simply refuses to even acknowledge the history* of struggle of trans folks (and LGBT folks generally), instead opting for the laziest possible jokes - jokes I've honestly seen made a million times by random jerkoffs on reddit or whatever. Just maddening.

*ongoing history, to be clear
posted by thebots at 1:29 PM on December 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

he simply refuses to even acknowledge the history* of struggle of trans folks

It is really mind-boggling that someone like Chappelle can't make the connection between anti-trans humor and racist humor. I wonder what his reaction would be to an hour of super racist n-bomb jokes (told by a white trans comic for extra irony) -- would the fucking OBVIOUS parallels sink in?
posted by Saxon Kane at 1:48 PM on December 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

I've made this point before but I think there's something about comedians/comedy, especially the successful ones, that somehow breaks their minds in this really sui generis way.

I literally cannot conceive of how any black comedian (but especially one as talented and insightful as Chappelle once was), can be OK with trans jokes, and I similarly cannot conceive of how Louis C.K. can make a really good insightful joke about how it's crazy the species survives b/c men are THE WORST (he analogizes a woman dating a man to a woman dating a bear) while also nonconsensually jerking off in front of women comics and writers. I can appreciate that comedy is about identifying boundaries and pushing them, but somehow that sometimes makes individuals completely incapable of respecting boundaries at all. I imagine money and concomitant power do nothing to help the situation.
posted by axiom at 2:20 PM on December 3, 2020 [3 favorites]

Louis C.K. can make a really good insightful joke about how it's crazy the species survives b/c men are THE WORST ... while also nonconsensually jerking off in front of women comics and writers

Well as they say, "write what you know"...
posted by Saxon Kane at 2:49 PM on December 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

Why do people like him and J.K. Rowling decide that what they're going to do with their newfound power and influence is caricature and dehumanize vulnerable people who have done nothing more than live their convictions?

I suspect getting a lot of power and money corrupts. I seem to recall there is a quote about that, even, which my high school teachers would trot out at every possible opportunity. Which also explains why a good chunk of people may turn into arseholes later in life when they have power and money. They also don't necessarily live in the same "real world" a lot of us live in. (That said, I still don't get the whole transphobia thing.)

Good thing I'll never have either and stay a total saint :P
posted by jenfullmoon at 3:14 PM on December 3, 2020

As the decades marched on, the Hippies didn't really like Bob Hope. But at least Bob didn't fucking whine about it.
posted by SoberHighland at 4:57 PM on December 3, 2020 [2 favorites]

Count me among those disappointed with Chappelle's work in recent years.

Losing the funny as they enter middle age seems a hazard of comedy profession.
posted by Pouteria at 5:11 PM on December 3, 2020

It is really mind-boggling that someone like Chappelle can't make the connection between anti-trans humor and racist humor.

I literally cannot conceive of how any black comedian (but especially one as talented and insightful as Chappelle once was), can be OK with trans jokes

Even though I just went off on Chappelle for being transphobic, I want to push back on this a bit. Racist humor and transphobic humor, just like racism and transphobia, are very different. They're expressed differently and they work differently. Furthermore, there's a big difference between recognizing and fighting oppression that's targeting you versus oppression that's targeting someone else. I think it's problematic to expect someone to be an especially good ally toward other marginalized groups just because they themself are marginalized. It's literally holding marginalized people to a higher standard than privileged people. I'm upset with Dave Chappelle for being transphobic, but neither the fact that he is black, nor even the fact that he at one time made insightful observations about racism, gives me the right to be especially upset with him.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 5:15 PM on December 3, 2020 [17 favorites]

I'm upset with Dave Chappelle for being transphobic, but neither the fact that he is black, nor even the fact that he at one time made insightful observations about racism, gives me the right to be especially upset with him.

I'm especially disappointed with him, though. One of his bits, the one where he's on a plane and being offered a choice of meals, really spoke to me. Chappelle-as-character wanted to choose the fried chicken he was offered, but he was hyper-conscious of the racist association of fried chicken with Black stereotypes. So you had this little debate going on between miniaturised imaginary figures of angel-Chappelle and devil-Chappelle, the way you do in some cartoons, with all the right being on the side of devil-Chappelle... but devil-Chappelle was himself offensively racist and degrading and rejoicing in the fact that he could degrade Chappelle-as-character by getting him to choose fried chicken over protecting his dignity and by extension, I suppose, Black Americans who are the subject of racist scrutiny.

And I've been there, sort of, with that internalised hyper-scrutiny and tearing myself into knots over the way I might be perceived by an imaginary external critic and the effect it might have on my community. I imagine many of us have. So to find Chappelle engaging in lazy misogyny and homophobia just disappoints me more than if it came from some other random comedian. I felt that Chappelle got it, and that he had something important to say. Some of his old stuff still does that for me, but I don't think I'd be able to take any new material so seriously.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:42 PM on December 3, 2020 [11 favorites]

And I've been there, sort of, with that internalised hyper-scrutiny and tearing myself into knots over the way I might be perceived by an imaginary external critic and the effect it might have on my community. I imagine many of us have. So to find Chappelle engaging in lazy misogyny and homophobia just disappoints me more than if it came from some other random comedian.

That's totally fair.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 6:04 PM on December 3, 2020

I think it's problematic to expect someone to be an especially good ally toward other marginalized groups just because they themself are marginalized.

You're correct, but I'm referring to the issue, as mentioned in the article, that Chappelle left Chappelle's Show because he didn't like that racists enjoyed (and were emboldened in their racism by) a lot of his jokes about racism (particularly his use of the N-bomb as/in punchlines). So Chappelle the comedian clearly knows 1) that jokes have real world consequences and 2) that bigoted people will twist humor to reinforce their own biases.
posted by Saxon Kane at 6:25 PM on December 3, 2020 [6 favorites]

Agreeing with the FPP, and adding that he’s also offensive about women. I can’t even call his commentary jokes. If I recall correctly he just calls women bitches and then says if you have a problem with it you’re too pc.
posted by anshuman at 7:15 PM on December 3, 2020 [1 favorite]

I'm not deeply versed in intersectionality, so it may be that this is a core aspect of the study, but it does seem like, along with the positive effect of mutuality of goals among marginalized groups, there's also a negative effect of stepping on the heads of peer groups while scrambling up the ladder. This isn't a new phenomenon by any means, e.g. typically the most stalwart allies of anti-Black racism in America were the second most despised ethnic group around (typically Irish, occasionally Italians; in the twentieth century east Asians got in on the game a bit but never quite with the enthusiasm of their European forebears). What is kind of new I guess is that it's spreading out into non-ethnic prejudice, and I think because it's on a different basis, it's less obvious to the practitioners of it that they're recapitulating the same attitudes keeping them down (i.e. someone can be stridently anti-racist, and then when called to account for their behavior towards people marginalized on the basis of sexuality and nonethnic identity can come up with some "oh, but that's totally different" handwave around it).
posted by jackbishop at 5:31 AM on December 4, 2020

Thinking back, I guess I really shouldn't be surprised at any human being's ability to dismiss the suffering of others...

When people compare complaints about anti-trans humor to Stalinist oppression and Maoist reeducation camps, I'm immediately reminded of one of Rush Limbaugh's favorite words: Feminazi. As if the demand by a marginalized group for respect and equality from the dominant group were somehow akin to the genocide of a marginalized group by a dominant group.
posted by Saxon Kane at 10:42 AM on December 5, 2020