The Jefferson’s were a family

Below are two discussion post base on the previous readingings I have send please reply to them with words. I will attached the readings again.

Comedians can be very funny and they can also be very brutal. As I was reading, I thought about how, I used to watch two shows that were hilarious. The Jefferson’s were a family, that rose from the bottom of the pole to the top, In other words they became rich. One character who was called George, would often criticize his neighbor’s Tom and Helen. The character George portrayed, was that of bigotry and prejudice. George would target, Tom and Helen who were a biracial couple. George always made jokes about Tom, by calling him ” hunky.” This open my eyes about charge Comedians. George character could care less about any bodies feelings. George’s character was unique for his time.

Unlike the characters of the Jefferson, Good-times portrayed a poor black family in the seventies, that often talked about inequality through their jokes, there was an episode were Florida, went to the store for groceries and the meat was spoiled meat. Another episode an old lady who was so poor she diverted to eating dog for, it was cheaper than buying meat. Good-times was a source of relief valve for the African culture at that time. There were many poor people trying to make it, when there was so much racism in the world. This show opened up the doors for a reality check for many of its viewers. Yes, inequality was happening but, this show captured the culture in a way like no other show, because it brought laughter and hope in hard times.

Cultural citizenship and cosmic shaman are closely related, because comedians often talk about what they have see and many have been shaped by their cultural beliefs and norms. Comedians speak, and act out what they have seen through others, there family and the world around. Comedians from the past have paved the way for the Comedians of the future, a they follow the pattern of the past to get to the future and they are not afraid to speak loud.

Reply to the above discussion post 100 words.

Second discussion

Both Krefting and Mintz had interesting takes on how the culture of standup comedy becomes subversive while also affirming. These comedians are able to challenge the notions of equality, intentionally rendering their own defects, whether socially, culturally, or economically and bringing these faults front and center stage to either be ridiculed or laughed at. Both Krefting and Mintz shared commonalities on how exerting one’s shortcomings in their compositions to bring awareness of inequality for the sake of the audience enjoyment.

“Jokesters unmask inequality by identifying the legal arrangements and cultural attitudes and beliefs contributing to their subordinated status—joking about it, challenging that which has become normalized and compulsory, and offering new solutions and strategies.” (Krefting, 3)

As Krefting describes it, this enables comedians to enact cultural citizenship by using humor to challenge the inequalities that some demographics face in society, referring to it as “charged humor.” (Krefting, 3) By identifying presumed stereotypes and cultural beliefs, comedians are able to generate that laughter from the audience and, in turn, offer resolutions to the supposed problem.

Mintz also has a comparable take to Kreftings’ approaches.

“Traditionally, the comedian is defective in some way, but his natural weaknesses generate pity, and more important, exemption from the expectation of normal behavior. He is thus presented to his audience as marginal. Because he is physically and mentally incapable of proper action, we forgive and even bless his “mistakes.” This marginality, however, also allows for a fascinating ambiguity and ambivalence. In his role as a negative exemplar, we laugh at him. ” (Mintz, 74)

Mintz refers to the comedian as the “shaman” due to the comedian’s capability to harmonize with the audience through laughter. In this case, the audience becomes superior as they find humor in the comics’ physical, cultural, or social mistakes leading to either judgment or understanding.

The correspondence here is that Krefting and Mintz identifies the ways that the standup comedians can apprehend these complex social factors as a way to directly engage with the audience, all while bringing awareness.

Reply to the above discussion post 100 words.