>It is striking that what was
>acceptable thirty years ago -- Lenny Bruce, or some
>of Mel Brooks' films (Blazing Saddles, the Producers)--
>is deeply problematic today. Is this because the
>early stuff enjoyed an atmosphere of greater
>intolerance, or less?
How "acceptable" was Lenny Bruce thirty years ago? The man was put on trial for using obscenities. As for Mel Brooks, he has the most successful Broadway play right now. Put Eminem and "South Park" ontop of that, and you have a culture which can accept "outrage." Granted that there is also a very strong backlash, but I don't think we are less tolerant of such things than thirty years ago.
On the issue of what is acceptable within one's "tribe" -- there was an interesting essay in "The New Republic" about comedians Chris Tucker and Chris Rock. The writer noted that both of them use elements from minstrel shows in their acts such as high-pitched voices and bug-eyes. Let us not forget Rock's sneering attitude toward "n-words on welfare."
-- David