Racism is embedded in language not DNA. Although new words were not created to express the sentiments of race and nationality, existing words had their meanings changed through something known in the linguistics world as semantic shift. The current hegemonic conception of race was constructed in order to empower a select group of white Western Europeans who marginalized multiple cultures based on the color of their skin. Stand-up comedy routines show the ability to counter dominant interpretations of race. Some would argue that comedy could perpetuate racism, but the Michael Richards incident at the Laugh Factory proves contrary. Richards was chastised after he screamed racial slurs at heckling fans. This is because Richards stepped out of character and portrayed his actual feelings. Stand-up comedy is a text in which the performer assumes a persona and a narrative voice. Jokes are not to be taken at face value. The fact that Richards insulted a member of the audience had nothing to do with the reaction. Several comedians actually make audience directed insults part of their routine. In the world of comedy, a roast, which is an event where several people take turns doing a short routine is done to pay tribute to an honory. Although the routine could include jokes about various topics, the emphasis is put on making jokes about the honoree. One must achieve significant status before earning the opportunity to be roasted.

            Although some may disagree that race is inherent, I believe that it is a construct. In the essay News-Surfing the Race Question: Of Bell Curves, Words, and Rhetorical Metaphors Meta Carstarphen argues that race as we know it today did not initially exist. He explains that people “had strong sensibilities for family, clan and kinship ties…Apparently, the ever combative…Germanic tribes did not see themselves as all part of one ‘racial’ heritage, although there were some similarities among them” (Gilyard 23). Despite their appearance and cultural similarities, these so called “races” did not feel a sense of “Anglo-Saxon” nor “’English’ national identity” until the stronger Normans invaded exposing that national identity and more grandiose definitions  of race arose as a means of preservation and not pride (23). Race is not an inborn part of humanity nor is it embedded in our DNA. Humans are not born with a predisposition of race but are rather taught how to feel about “race” by those surrounding them directly or indirectly.

            Race was constructed out of convenience. Our current conception of race was created to unite multiple cultures and serve as a survival tactic. It was later implemented to empower certain cultures and exploit others. According to Carstarphen, “without the cataclysmic, history-changing consequences of the African slave trade, the need to define race [as we know it] would never have existed” because the shift was used to convince detractors of slavery that the practice was a justifiable one (25).  Once the practice of slavery became a norm, the new found concept of race was used to further serve those who were empowered. As Keith Gilyard mentions in his essay Higher Learning: Composition’s Racialized Reflection, not all Europeans were believed to “outrank” the marginalized Africans in America because many of them also lacked freedom (50). This led to a fear of joint rebellions as was the case in Bacon’s Rebellion where underclass blacks and whites united. The ruling class believed the underclass could join forces to end unfair working conditions. In response to this growing fear, ruling class whites “promoted” whites in servitude “to the white race.” This was perhaps the first time a “system of ‘race’ privileges” was implemented in America. This created a divide between the lower class and subdued the struggle for upward mobility (Allen qtd. in Gilyard 50). Although the intent of this tactic was to maintain the economic hierarchy it also created a racial hierarchy in which white was seen dominant and all other colors were marginalized.

            In her essay, Terrorists, Madmen, and Religious Fanatics  which discusses the treatment of Arabs, another marginalized group, in the American media, Anissa J. Wardi writes, “hate speech…creates a climate of acceptable racism” (37). When race rhetoric is ingrained in the language as well as the media, “the narratives attached to people of color are so stable that they appear to many as normative, not cultural productions at all” (39). Stand-up comedy is often transmitted through the same medium, television, as the news media which Wardi is referring to. This enables comedians to transmit an alternate view of race to the misled masses. Carstarphen further reveals that the two main words in the dialectic of race, “black” and “white”, were synonymous “in the early Anglo-Saxon languages” (19). Initially, the two words conveyed nothing more than the“absence of color” (19).  However, these words became polarized and politicized to signify a new concept of “race.”  Historically, Carstarphen believed that labels of race were determined both by the region a person associated with as well as their skin color (20). An example of this particular type of racial labeling is Albion. Albion which is now England, was etymologically linked to the word “albus,” meanng “’white; light-colored, light-skinned, [and] fair’” (20-1). This not only described a physical trait of the people of Albion, but was also a reflection of the regions geography which contained “’white caps of the sea’” and “’white cliffs’” (20-1). This polarity between the terms “black” and “white” seems absurd after realizing that the terms were once interchangeable.

            Comedian George Carlin further points out the absurdity of stratifying races and making some subordinate to others. He expresses that he does not understand the concept of having “pride” for ones nation or ethnicity. In his most recent comedy special, It’s Bad for Ya, Carlin reflects this sentiment saying that being a member of a certain race “isn’t a skill. It’s a fucking genetic accident. You wouldn’t say I’m proud to be 5’11.” I’m proud to have a predisposition for colon cancer” (Carlin). Furthermore, to Carlin, pride should be reserved for actual merits or things that one achieves through hard work. Since ethnicity is circumstantial and dependent on ones parents, there is no basis for pride. As Carlin says, you could find pins that say “proud to be…” anything whether it is black, white, gay, male, female, or an alumnus of a certain school. Besides appearance nothing special or unique comes about from being born into a certain race or nationality. In fact, in his comedy special Know Your History: Jesus Is Black....So Was Cleopatra comedian Paul Mooney conveys the results of a History Channel documentary that used DNA evidence to support that all humans have one common ancestor. The perception that ones race makes them superior or inferior to others depending where they fall in the “racial hierarchy” has no biological or scientific basis and is nothing more than a social construct.

            Many people may argue that stand-up comedy routines like the one mentioned above are merely forms of entertainment which are unable to create any meaningful change because they have been commodified.  However, Herbert Marcuse points out in One Dimensional Man, that “entertainment and learning are not opposites” (66-7). Comedians’ routines can help fight racism in several ways. First of all Rod Martin explains that “humor is fundamentally a social phenomenon” which brings the masses together in the book The Psychology of Humor (5). The meeting of masses is a crucial step towards enacting change on a large scale. As George Lopez states in his book Why You Crying, which is based on his life and hit stand-up routine, “Yes, I’m putting my own people down. But it’s true, and I’m also pushing empowerment,” by breaking the sense of inferiority common in many people belonging to marginalized races (16). This meeting of the masses also unites multiple races, rather than perpetuating racial division. One of Lopez’ biggest comedic influences is Richard Pryor. While reminiscing on his idol, Lopez reveals that when he saw Pryor perform he “didn’t hear black” because when it comes to comedy “people want to invest emotionally in stories and characters” (61). Ones race does not matter on the stage “as long as you connect with your audience” (103). This effect allows people to see humanity as one race instead of labeling race defined by color, language, or cultural values.

            Furthermore, “humor is a way of refusing to be overcome by the people and situations, both large and small, that threaten our well-being” (Martin 19). Laughter is a coping mechanism that can be used to confront threatening situations which people are usually too scared of encountering. Avner Ziv furthers the notion that humor is a coping mechanism saying that “when carried into the public domain, iconoclasts form of humor…can be used to challenge widely held assumptions, expose social ills, and bring about social change” (qtd. in Martin 118). More importantly Martin notes that humor has a psychological effect on the brain which is conducive to persuasion.  Martin reveals that “the pattern of humor-related persuasion effects” in past studies “was due to the induction of positive emotion rather than the more cognitive aspects of humor” (138). Although the persuasion of comedy stems more from a pathetic appeal than a logical one, which is more befitting of an academic discourse, humor still shows the capability of being able to fight racism, an ideology which completely lacks logic.

            In his hour long stand-up special Bring the Pain, Chris Rock displays the ability to not only unite the masses but create a semantic shift as well as blur the color lines. In a segment of the special, Rock opens up by asking the audience, “Who’s more racist; black people or white people?” adding a dramatic pause to give the audience a chance to think it over. Rock proceeds to answer “black people. You know why? Because they hate black people too,” to the audiences surprise. Rock justifies the statement by saying that there is a civil war going on between two sects: black people and “niggas.” The set-up was not intended to perpetuate the current racist ideology in America. Instead, Rock creates a greater bond between humans and shows the unlikable flaws in peoples’ character which could apply to anyone regardless of race.

            According to Rock, “niggas” are lazy, immoral, and ignorant. This allows for blacks and whites, often seen as binary opposites, to share a common ground and see similarities between themselves. The argument is enhanced when Rock reveals that the people of color who contain those negative character traits are not the only “niggas.” White people could be “niggas” too since many share the same traits including a dependency on welfare. The color line is broken when Rock uses semantic shift to take the racially charged word “nigga” and apply to people based on character rather than their heritage or color of their skin. Furthermore, Rock turns his attention from insulting a group to pushing empowerment. As he points out, it is “nigga” behavior to point out other peoples’ faults in order to be content with their own faults and situation in regards to having a poor standard of living. People have to strive for success and not allow themselves to be brought down by media perception. Rock realizes that the media does play a role in the public perception of black people, but conveys that people should not be victimized saying, “When I go to the money machine at night, I ain’t looking over my back for the media, I’m looking for ‘niggas’” (Rock).  Although language and the media have the power to emit racists ideology, Rock realizes that people must take pride in who they are and pull themselves out of their poor living conditions rather than allowing themselves to be victimized.

            Comedian Paul Mooney believes that the word “nigga” has already gone through a semantic shift which has diminished the power of the word. He reveals, “look I’ve been a ‘nigga’ for a very long time. When it was important nobody said nothing…now it don’t mean shit and everybody has something to say about it” (Know Your History). What we see here is that language is constantly in flux. Humanity has experienced the death as well as evolution of languages as a whole. The English we speak now is not the English that was spoken a few centuries ago. Furthermore, we have seen the definitions and connotations change as well as new words being formed. Who knew what blogging was as little as fifteen years ago? The definition of the word “gay” shifted from joyful to a word used to define homosexuality. “Nigga” can and has gone through semantic shift, although the new definition may not be accepted on a large scale, this can be attributed to the history of violence behind the word. Those who are skeptic of this change can look at the history of derogatory words used to define African-Americans. “Nigga” or “nigger,” a distinction which already shows that semantic shift has taken place, were not the only words aimed at the African-American community. Mooney says, “I’ve been colored, I been negro, I’ve been so many[…] things, and it’s not true…we’re not any of those things” (Know Your History). Mooney goes on to state that he defines himself as a “stolen African” once again showing how the slave trade created the need to define “race.”

            Racism is a social construct which is embedded in our language and transmitted to the masses through mediums such as the media. Fortunately, language is under our control and can be changed. The dialectic of racism as we know it, for example, was not a part of English until about the 15^th century (Carstarphen 22).  Stand up comedy routines show effectiveness in blurring the “color lines” and transforming racist language in our society.  Some may argue that stand up comedy routines do not belong in the academic discourse because comedians undermine their own message with the use of profanity and persona which sheds seriousness. Despite this contention I assert that stand-up comedians could dampen the severity of racism in America with their routines although they are not the end all solution and require others to stand up and combat racist ideology.

Works Cited

Carstarphen, Meta G. "News-Surfing the Race Question: of Bell Curves, Words, and Rhetorical Metaphors." Race Rhetoric and Composition. Ed. Keith Gilyard. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1999. 17-29.

Gilyard, Keith. "Higher Learning" Composition's Racialized Reflection." Race Rhetoric and Composition. Ed. Keith Gilyard. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1999. 44-52.

It's Bad for Ya. By George Carlin. Dir. Rocco Urbisci. Santa Rosa, Ca. 1 Mar. 2008.

Jesus is Black - So Was Cleopatra...Know Your History. By Paul Mooney. Dir. Bart Phillips. Laugh Factory, Hollywood, Ca. 6 Feb. 2007.

Limon, John. Stand-Up Comedy in Theory, or, Abjection in America. Durham: Duke University, 2000.

Lopez, George, and Armen Keteyian. Why You Crying? New York: Touchstone, 2004.

Marcuse, Herbert. One-Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon P, 1964.

Martin, Rod A. The Psychology of Humor. London: Elsevier Academic P, 2007.

Bring the Pain. Dir. Kieth Truesdell. Perf. Chris Rock. 1996. Youtube. 20 Feb. 2008 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDfSDuKzbvs>.

Wardi, Anissa J. "Terrorists, Madmen, and Religious Fanatics?: Revisiting Orientalism and Racist Rhetoric." Race Rhetoric and Composition. Ed. Keith Gilyard. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1999. 31-42.