Comparing Burr to Dice Clay is a level of so completely fucking wrong I didn’t even know it existed so kudos I guess for that
Andrew Dice Clay might as well have been an “Mens Rights” activist. His material’s only goal was to attract as many angry and alienated men and provide them with a “safe space” that reaffirmed their beliefs on WHO was the culprit of their alienation. He got as many laughs as he did men cheering, shouting, and generally expressing anger as a reaction to his jokes.
Bill attracted a similar kind of group, not because he was actively courting them, but because he WAS an angry white dude, and that anger was reflected in his act. His jokes about arguing with girlfriends or his frustration with the social “pass” he perceived women to have resonated with these folks and often it’s the only part of the act they recall. Even to this day they still show up in his orbit. In the last couple of episodes of his podcast, a fan wrote in with this long-winded story about his girlfriend and something she did that was driving him crazy, and how she never would hear him out or change her ways. It was clear he was fishing for Bill to tell him he was right, but his only response to the email was “Eh… Maybe you should take a look at yourself here, and figure out why you react that way to what she’s doing. Work on your own issues dude.”
Do you really believe in identity politics, and reject materialism so strongly you actually cannot see past “white man”? You’re probably not alone in that I guess.
Almost all mainstream comedy is rooted in Identity with rare exceptions. From the Redneck Comedy Tour to Silverman’s Jewish comedy, to the comedians with sets about the black experience. The degree to which they lean into their identity might vary from comedian to comedian but it is an ever-constant aspect of comedy. The population by and large is wrapped up in identity politics, so it is no wonder why when a comedian is speaking about their identity it attracts an audience that aligns with it.
The interesting thing with Bill, and he admits this regularly, is that early in his life and career he was very angry, and that anger was misdirected and would manifest in his sets. Over time his sets became less about what he was angry about and more about his anger and where it came from. Along the road of his own self-reflection, his political worldview became more solidified. In recent years his sets have become about putting people in uncomfortable situations and forcing them to laugh at their own contradictions.
So it’s not a matter of me “rejecting materialism” or not being able to “see past the white man”, materialism isn’t always the right lens to look at a given subject. There is a dialectical relationship between a comedian’s identity that they project through their set and the demographics that make up their audience. When that identity within their set changes, it can become incongruous with the expectations of the audience if that demographic hasn’t shifted along with the identity.
A prime example of this would be the return of Dave Chappelle. His set had no evolution over time, it just had a many-year gap, and when he returned with this wildly different perspective from the one he had when he was younger, most of his audience rejected it. There wasn’t a graceful adaptation to this reaction on his part, and now I’m sure the demographic has realigned with his set, but not without much public scrutiny.
I think what makes Bill such a master craftsman is it seems clear to me that he understands this relationship between his comedy and his audience and regularly uses it against them with setups that betray the audience’s expectations, which in turn gets a laugh because now the audience is the butt of the joke.
Andrew Dice Clay might as well have been an “Mens Rights” activist. His material’s only goal was to attract as many angry and alienated men and provide them with a “safe space” that reaffirmed their beliefs on WHO was the culprit of their alienation. He got as many laughs as he did men cheering, shouting, and generally expressing anger as a reaction to his jokes.
Bill attracted a similar kind of group, not because he was actively courting them, but because he WAS an angry white dude, and that anger was reflected in his act. His jokes about arguing with girlfriends or his frustration with the social “pass” he perceived women to have resonated with these folks and often it’s the only part of the act they recall. Even to this day they still show up in his orbit. In the last couple of episodes of his podcast, a fan wrote in with this long-winded story about his girlfriend and something she did that was driving him crazy, and how she never would hear him out or change her ways. It was clear he was fishing for Bill to tell him he was right, but his only response to the email was “Eh… Maybe you should take a look at yourself here, and figure out why you react that way to what she’s doing. Work on your own issues dude.”
Almost all mainstream comedy is rooted in Identity with rare exceptions. From the Redneck Comedy Tour to Silverman’s Jewish comedy, to the comedians with sets about the black experience. The degree to which they lean into their identity might vary from comedian to comedian but it is an ever-constant aspect of comedy. The population by and large is wrapped up in identity politics, so it is no wonder why when a comedian is speaking about their identity it attracts an audience that aligns with it.
The interesting thing with Bill, and he admits this regularly, is that early in his life and career he was very angry, and that anger was misdirected and would manifest in his sets. Over time his sets became less about what he was angry about and more about his anger and where it came from. Along the road of his own self-reflection, his political worldview became more solidified. In recent years his sets have become about putting people in uncomfortable situations and forcing them to laugh at their own contradictions.
So it’s not a matter of me “rejecting materialism” or not being able to “see past the white man”, materialism isn’t always the right lens to look at a given subject. There is a dialectical relationship between a comedian’s identity that they project through their set and the demographics that make up their audience. When that identity within their set changes, it can become incongruous with the expectations of the audience if that demographic hasn’t shifted along with the identity.
A prime example of this would be the return of Dave Chappelle. His set had no evolution over time, it just had a many-year gap, and when he returned with this wildly different perspective from the one he had when he was younger, most of his audience rejected it. There wasn’t a graceful adaptation to this reaction on his part, and now I’m sure the demographic has realigned with his set, but not without much public scrutiny.
I think what makes Bill such a master craftsman is it seems clear to me that he understands this relationship between his comedy and his audience and regularly uses it against them with setups that betray the audience’s expectations, which in turn gets a laugh because now the audience is the butt of the joke.