The
play falls into two halves: set up and punchline, if you will.
In the first half, Chris is grappling with the dilemma in front
of the live audience, he is pulled this way and that. The material
is sexual in nature since this mirrors exactly the majority of
stand-up comedians' 'lowest common denominator' material. But
the tone continues to darken and, like a comic suicide bomber,
destroying himself to be reborn, he takes it to its logical extreme
into the wholly reprehensible. It is only then that the debate
can become real and present for the audience who are (hopefully)
no longer merely passive observers but active participants. How
far is too far? How low is too low? What is comedy for? Simple
entertainment or something more? And finally (and perhaps most
importantly), who is responsible for the content of the entertainment
we receive? Is it the comedian or is it the audience? Which comes
first - market or product? Chicken or egg?
So within this structure the first half of the play sets out to
offend, to stimulate, to infuriate, to embarrass - the second
half then questions, demands, rages and pleads. The purpose of
the play is to inspire debate. Plain and simple. And you cannot
inspire debate without challenging opinions. And you cannot challenge
opinions without forcing people to look at things they would rather
not see. If an audience member leaves Hitting Funny and
they are angry or appalled, invigorated or disgusted - but they
talk about the play for the next hours, days, weeks - debating
whether it was right or wrong - then I consider that a success.
If they get in their cars and wonder where they can pick up some
chips then I have failed. As someone said to me after a recent
performance: 'Rather this than apathy.' This is what I set out
to do and I believe the piece succeeds on these terms. Anybody
is entitled to disagree with me, of course, since that is the
nature of debate. But, if they disagree, I hope they will recognise
that this doesn't mean that my argument is without validity. To
quote a line that has now been cut from the script: "I may be
wrong … but that doesn't make you right."
So much for the explanation - what about the apology? The material
in Hitting Funny is offensive. I know it's offensive and
any right thinking person should know it's offensive. But it is
so for a clear purpose - as I hope I've articulated above. Because
the material is offensive the company have taken the step of billing
the show as being 'For Adults Only' meaning that the play is unsuitable
for anyone under the age of eighteen. Beyond this point, how far
should we show our hand? Should we, as cinemas are now forced
to do, give a detailed breakdown of the show's content? "If you
are offended by jokes about paedophilia and coprophilia then please
stay away"? Perhaps the notice should read: "If you don't understand
irony, then this isn't the show for you"? Our society is now so
litigious and 'blame obsessed' that it would seem that every eventuality
of what a person may feel must be guarded against. "Warning! You
may feel several emotions whilst watching this show!" Also, were
we to provide a more detailed warning of the show's content, then
we would have the same problem as when theatres are forced to
put up signs saying: "There will be a gunshot during this performance."
The audience would be waiting for the offensive moments in exactly
the same way that we wait with our fingers hovering over our ears
for the gunshot. This would completely neuter the purpose of the
play. Debate comes when people's beliefs and ideas are challenged
and the only way to challenge is to surprise. I want people to
experience this play - to feel raw and exhausted at the end of
it, I want to take them on a journey and give them food for thought
and the only way to do this is if it's a 'Magical Mystery Tour'
- if they know where we're going then it'll spoil the surprise.
This leads me on to a wider point: the very nature of what is
or is not offensive - something of an obsession in the country
in recent times. Offence is subjective. How can it not be? What's
offensive to you is not necessarily offensive to me. For example,
I am not offended by coprophilia. I don't practice it and have
no desire to but what two (or more) consenting adults choose to
do in the privacy of their own homes is entirely their concern.
And if they choose to display their activity on the Internet then
that too is entirely their concern. I am not offended in any way.
Provided that no one is forced to do anything against their will
and that all the participants are adults then, in my opinion,
they are free to do whatever they please for pleasure. I am also
not offended by the notion of a comedian (or anyone else for that
matter) describing such an act to me in graphic detail. I might
find it distasteful and shocking but I would not be offended.
Because they are words and I am not offended by words. I am not
offended by swear words or any form of derogatory language, I
am not offended by racial abuse or the bastardisation of language
in any way. Words don't offend me and nor should they you. It
is only in the intention behind a word that the offence occurs.
The suppression of a word is where the offence occurs. The sweeping
under the carpet of words or notions that we don't like is where
the offence occurs. As the old children's taunt proclaims: "Sticks
and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."
So what does offend me? Well, just off the top of my head…
I'm offended that I live in a society that values people by their
financial worth and nothing else. I'm offended that I can't walk
into a newsagent or turn on the television without having my sexuality
manipulated to try and sell me something I neither want nor need.
I'm offended that our politicians complain of voter apathy when
our political system of 'first past the post' won't allow the
voter's true voice to be heard. I'm offended that what passes
for entertainment in this country is simply a badly made, ill-thought-out
marketing tool. I'm offended that my telephone rings ten times
a day with people trying to sell me things I don't want. I'm offended
that the word 'choice' is thrown in my face day in day out whilst
more small shops close and more supermarkets open. I'm offended
at the way the news media and journalists in general boil down
complex information to 'we're the good guys and these are the
bad guys'. I'm offended that we continue to believe that we are
the good guys when we've systematically raped the developing world
to prop up our lifestyles. I'm offended that we are unable to
understand why someone who is desperately poor and disenfranchised,
who believes their religious beliefs are being flouted by the
West and has watched their culture be utterly destroyed might
want to take some kind of revenge. I'm offended that I live in
a country that trumpets its human rights record whilst holding
people without charge or trial. I'm offended that my government
should seek to erode the human rights of any person, regardless
of their views or opinions. I'm offended that I live in a country
that is still unable to provide a decent level of sexual education
to its young people, leading to STDs, the spread of HIV and the
highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe, whilst Page Three girls
smile at me from the newsagent's shelf. I'm offended that the
so-called 'moral majority' can dictate what I may or may not watch
on my television. I'm offended that I live in a country that sanctioned
an illegal war, didn't keep count of the number of civilians it
killed, is in bed with one of the most insidious, imperialist
regimes the world has ever seen, and claims to have done it all
in the name of freedom. I'm offended that one single person has
more than their fair share when one other person has less. I'm
offended that I live in a country where people care more about
the minutiae of a celebrity's sex life than they do about their
next door neighbour's well being. I'm offended that I live in
a country that is systematically selling off its public utilities
to the private sector when we know categorically that profits
always come before people. I'm offended that we had to invent
the term 'compassion fatigue'. And I'm offended that we blame
so much and understand so little.
All these things and many more offend me daily. But there's one
other thing that offends me … That anybody should think I respect
people so little that I would write and perform a piece of theatre
with the deliberate intention of offending them simply for its
own sake. That really offends me. In fact, it makes me incredibly
angry.
And to anybody who thinks that - I'd like an apology.
