It seems like a mistake to me to presume any positive impact for comedy. Satirising those things that you disapprove of generally sounds just shrill and forced.
In the 1980s 'alternative comedy' was big in the UK. Some of it was good, but lots of it was just rubbish and it is a common complaint that comics expected a congratulatory laugh amongst liberal-left audiences for reinforcing their existing beliefs. What a yawn.
I seem to recall Judith Butler made a serious attempt to say that comedy, specifically ridicule was reactionary (a reaction to the effective hoax Alan Sokal pulled on her friends at Social Text). It seemed a bit defensive to me, but there might be a point to it. Laughter is not revolutionary, it is more often a release of tension. Some of the greatest satire - Swift, say - is pretty reactionary, condescending to the world from its high Tory redoubt. That said, it's the best thing on earth. Who knows why things are funny.
I like the story about Richard Pryor making everyone laugh at some ghetto stereotypes, and then making the audience feel bad. Not because it is a moral point, but because it is top notch comedy.
So let's not burden comedy with doing good - that's our job.
In message <000501c12c01$b4621200$ddf28318 at mw.mediaone.net>, Dennis
<dperrin13 at mediaone.net> writes
>> again, the reasoning against this response might be that such usage
>> and satire is intended exactly to parody and delegitimize the
>> racism of those who do use the term in a serious racist sense. but
>> the problem with such reasoning is that you then make an implicit
>> claim that you know what is best for chinese americans and solving
>> their problems than they do, or so it seems to me.
>>
>> all "you"s above are hypothetical, of course.
>>
>> --ravi
>
>Of course.
>
>I don't think that Silverman was trying to help Asian-Americans at all. I
>think she was making fun of whites who casually use racism to get out of
>social obligations. They might not even be "racist" per se, but they have
>little trouble with using the nasty words that define racism. Again, how do
>you satirize racism without using the words?
>
>When "All in the Family" premiered in 1970, a lot of people, liberal whites
>especially (like John Leonard in Life magazine), worried that Archie
>Bunker's coarse language might seem too literal to some, that the show was
>tacitly endorsing the use of words like "spade," "chink," and "hebe" solely
>to get a laugh. And I'm sure there were bigots who thought Archie spoke for
>them. But again, does one alter the usage in order to mollify a certain
>group of people? And do these people, like Aoki, speak for everyone in their
>tribe?
>
>DP
>
-- James Heartfield