I was fooled the whole time.
And by “the whole time”, I mean ever since I started watching
comedians, discovering that the better the comedian, the more I am fooled.
Why is that? Because
I see a comedian like Lewis Black at the concert I recently
attended standing on stage, talking to the audience. Yes, he’s animated. Because he’s exasperated. Louis Black is incredulous about what he sees
happening in the world, and it inevitably makes him cranky. The thing is, though he’s up there on stage,
Black appears entirely natural in his
presentation – a fellow-human at his wit’s end, venting his spleen.
With his conversationally written material and his everyday
speech patterns – in contrast to a less skillful comedian who has memorized his
act and has practiced in front of a mirror – you can almost forget that Lewis
Black is performing. He just seems to be
talking. But not just talking. He
appears to be talking…
Directly to me.
During the show, Black asserts that his generation’s
greatest contribution is their ability to “hang out.” That’s exactly what it feels like, Lewis Black,
hanging out in his dorm room, the funniest guy in college, cracking up his fellow-students
who have gathered to hear him sound off, riffing – hilariously and accurately – on cafeteria cuisine
and the less than pure derivation of the institution of cheerleading.
Comedians of Old told jokes, though they tried to keep them
relatable, sticking to identifiable subject matter, like marriage. Henny Youngman, the iconic joke spritzer, would
abruptly interrupt his violin ramblings and say,
My wife demanded that
I take her someplace that she‘s never been before. So I took her to the kitchen.
The audiences roared.
Did Youngman’s delivery sound natural?
Not really. The audience knew it
was jokes. They just wanted them to be
funny.
Comedians, like Alan King, railed against the airlines,
fuming – on the audience’s behalf – about lost luggage. But even though the situation was
conventional in its nature, there was a detectable joke rhythm underlying the
material. Still, you laughed, because it
was funny. And because the airlines lost
your luggage too.
Funnymen that followed, like Bob Newhart and Shelly Berman,
offered comedic psychodramas, frequently conducted over the telephone. The situations and their reactions felt refreshingly (and laugh-inducingly) real. But you still knew it was a “bit.” The telephones weren’t even plugged in.
Less in the spotlight, starting with Lenny Bruce, a
revolution was emerging, and I enthusiastically took notice. The comedians were up there, appearing not to
be performing at all, but just talking to the audience, sharing, in a original
and humorous manner, what currently happened to be on their minds. Candidly.
Naturalistically. Often dangerously
– sometimes law-breakingly – uncensored.
Lenny’s stylistic offspring?
George Carlin, Robert Klein, Richard Pryor, and, more tamely, though more
successfully than anyone else, Bill Cosby.
All were telling the truth in a conversational rhythm. And it was explosively funny. Funnier, to me at least, than anything I had
ever heard.
It made me want to be a comedian.
I wanted to stand on stage – as myself – and talk directly to
the audience. Issues that interested
me. In an entertaining manner. Basically, I wanted to do what I do every day on this
blog. But “Live And In Person”, in front
of a paying, hopefully appreciative, audience.
Unfortunately, that is not what “being a comedian” is about.
That’s being something that does not exist.
A week or so before his appearance, Lewis Black did a
promotional interview for our local newspaper.
It was generally standard stuff.
But then something Black said in that interview came at me like a neon
thumb. (Don’t ask me what that
means. It’s bright, and it’s
penetrating. That’s all I know.)
Discussing why Twitter
was not for him, Black explained that he was unable to hold forth in a hundred
and forty-four characters, because “the character I present on stage is me
stumbling along to get to the point.”
Do you see what he said there? First, of all, what he presents on stage is
not himself, but a “character”, unquestionably “him” – which allows him to present
it so comfortably – but not entirely
“him.”
I had never seen that spelled out before. Black was saying in that interview that he’s fundamentally
an actor. Playing the part of “Lewis
Black”, the character – “The Apoplectic Blusterer” – being his public
persona.
Black maintains that character, on stage, and – because that’s
what his audience expects – on Twitter,
which he consequently can’t do, because his “character” is not sufficiently
short-winded.
The message is: Performing
anywhere in public, Lewis Black, the comedian, is never entirely himself.
Which, when you think about it, makes irrefutable sense. Parts of Black, he has determined, perhaps
through the punishing process of “trial and error”, are not entertaining.
Sometimes, he is grumpy, but not funny. Sometimes, he’s tired, lacking the necessary oomph to elevate his material. Sometimes, maybe, he’s distracted, or depressed,
or not feeling so hot. Nobody wants to
see any negative stuff onstage. They
came there to laugh.
There are many personal elements in the bag of clowns that
is Lewis Black – or any of us – that are either, not appealingly presentable, or, from his standpoint as a comedian, are
inconsistent with what he has discovered is the most effective “character” for
“carrying the mail.”
Lewis Black has found his. I never found one, because I did not go
onstage enough to figure out what it was, and,
perhaps naively – or maybe not
perhaps – I did not know that that’s what you were supposed to do. I thought you went out there, fully and every
bit yourself, you just said stuff, and people laughed.
No.
It is a masterful illusion.
It seems like them, but it
isn’t. It’s the “them” they deliberately
carved out for the audience to see. And
by the way, they are not “just talking.” They are re-presenting virtually the same tried-and-true
material, show after show. And making it
sound like they’re “just talking.”
I wanted to be a comedian, but I had no idea what that`
meant. I thought it was something
else. Something I do all the time in my
head.
4 comments:
This same notion hit me a few years ago when I looked at the bios for the cast of "The Office." Creed Bratton really is Creed Bratton, but on the show he plays a character named Creed Bratton. If you've seen the show, you probably join me in the hope that the "Office" Creed is substantially more wigged-out than the real-life Creed. But since both claim to have been a member of the 60s pop-rock group "The Grass Roots" - a true fact - (as opposed to a false fact? but I digress) and that fact is indisputable, it is left to the viewer to discern just how much of the TV Creed is the real Creed and vice-versa. This is not as true about Bill Cosby. He's Bill Cosby, not Cliff Huxtable. Ray Romano is Ray Romano, not Ray Barone. And so on... It's all very meta and hard to follow, but it beats watching the Kardashians, who should only exist in drunken nightmares.
Doug
That very observation was used in an interesting article I read recently by Steve Heisler on his website, called "Why heckling is never right." Very well-written article if you want to check it out. His point is that a heckler has no more right to heckle a stand-up than a theatre-goer has to heckle an actor, because the stand-up is an actor. He or she is making their solo performance appear to be a conversation, and pretending things are just occurring to them - but they're not - and it's that illusion which gives the impression that, as it's a conversation, it's OK to contribute - which is wrong.
I would like to know more about the less than pure derivation of the institution of cheerleading
Earl -- It's been many years, but I remember you doing audience warm-ups and you were hilarious. Warm and natural, just talking to the audience like normal people. I don't remember any jokes, just a lot of laughs. You were a treat to watch. Anytime you wanna try a stand-up set, I'd come watch.
Post a Comment