Ick.
Reading the news media and entertainment websites, one would think that Louis C.K.’s return to stand-up comedy after nearly a year in exile or rehab or something raises ethics conundrums that would stump Plato, Kant and Mill. It’s not that hard. The fact that everyone, especially those in the entertainment field, are displaying such confusion and angst just tells us something useful about them. They don’t know how to figure out what’s right and wrong.
In case you have forgotten, cult comedy star Louis C.K. admitted last November at the peak of the #MeToo rush that he had masturbed in front of at least five women without their consent. Ick. His cable show and other projects were cancelled, and he disappeared from the public eye. Then, last weekend, he returned to the stage at the Comedy Cellar in New York, performed for about 15 minutes, and received a standing ovation. This apparently alternately shocked or confused people. I’ll make it simple.
Does the comedian have a right to practice his art after the revelation of his disgusting conduct?
Of course he does. He wasn’t sentenced to prison. He has a right to try to make a living at what he does well. In fact, he has a First Amendment right to tell jokes any where others will listen to him.
OK, he technically has a right. But is it right for him to come back like nothing has happened?
What? The man was publicly shamed and humiliated. He can’t come back as if nothing has happened, because everyone knows that something has happened. Nevertheless, his art does not require the public trust. It does not demand good character, or even the absence of a criminal record. Does a great singer sound worse because he was abusive to women? No. Is there a law that says men who are abusive to women should never be able to work again? No, and there shouldn’t be. I wouldn’t hire C.K. to work in an office, because I see no reason to trust him around others. But he’s not a worker, he’s an artist. He never engaged in inappropriate conduct on stage. He can be trusted as an artist,at least when he’s performing solo.
Comedian Michael Ian Black tweeted regarding Louis C.K.that “Will take heat for this, but people have to be allowed to serve their time and move on with their lives.I don’t know if it’s been long enough, or his career will recover, or if people will have him back, but I’m happy to see him try.” For this he apologized, saying this position was “ultimately, not defensible.” after he was broiled on social media. Should he have apologized?
No. Black’s a coward and a weenie, and if you won’t stand up for your opinions and will cave to any criticism, then don’t say anything at all. If C.K. literally served time for a crime, the statement would still be correct. All Black was saying is that C.K. may not have an audience any more, but he wishes him good luck finding out. What’s “not defensible? ”
It’s really, really simple. If enough people find the man’s humor entertaining and are willing to pay to laugh at him, then Louis C.K. is doing nothing wrong to permit them that choice. Personally, I wouldn’t cross the street to hear him riff, just as I wouldn’t pay a cup of spit to watch Bill Cosby, or a Woody Allen movie, but that’s my choice, my values, and my taste. I don’t blame C.K., or Woody, or even the Coz for giving people a choice. I have my dark opinions about anyone who can find Bill Cosby funny, knowing the jokes are coming from a rapist, but that how my cognitive dissonance works.
Harvey Weinstein abused women in the workplace, while he and they were supposedly working together. Kevin Spacey abused fellow artists in the workplace, and as talented as he is, he has no right to be permitted back in the workplace until he is deemed worthy of trust. I would question whether C.K. should be permitted on a stage if he had masturbated there (Ick); similarly, I don’t think Michael Richards has any right to be trusted on a comedy stage after the inexplicable outburst of racist epithets at audience members that crashed his career. Louis C.K’s disgusting conduct didn’t involve his art at all. Is he still funny? Can he still make people laugh? Will people who employ him profit? Those are the only questions that matter, and they aren’t ethics questions.
A chef may have been a serial killer and a Nazi, but if he cooks a wonderful meal, I might pay for it, and I might love the meal. There is nothing wrong with me eating it, and nothing wrong with the chef giving me the chance to do so.
This isn’t as hard as all the tortured commentary would have us believe.
Ethics Alarms 
If a chef was a former serial killer, I’d be worried about what’s IN the meals he serves.
Particularly if he had also been a Nazi and was cooking with gas.
I’m here all week, folks. Try the veal. It might actually be veal, but you never know.
Serial killers typically don’t change their MOs. If he was a poisoner, yes. If he were Jack the Ripper, I wouldn’t worry.
Zero interest in Louis C.K. heard of him. Barely knew anything about him.
But, have small children. Was incredibly annoyed when I learned that MeToo might derail the sequel to The Secret Life of Pets.
As for Kevin Spacey, House of cards has gotten old. So, whatever ..,
-Jut
Michael Ian Black is an aging z-list mediocrity whom I had only ever heard of because I was one of about 17 fans of the obscure MTV sketch show “The State” back in high school. He is exactly the kind of person who would benefit from the tiny boost in name-recognition he gains by his EXTREMELY dumb hot takes about politics on Twitter.
Of course he thinks that every Republican, libertarian, and centrist on Earth is a Nazi…and of course he put in an appearance at John McCain’s funeral. Complete phony.
I think you accidentally labeled Michael Ian Black as a comedian in your article.
I don’t know his standup, but Richards was incredibly talented at physical comedy.
One of Jerry’s “Comedians in Cars getting Coffee” episodes is actually him and Michael Richards and is interesting to hear them discuss the incident. It does seem like he works better in a routine than something like standup where the audience can provide feedback at you.
I’ll go further than that. Richards is one of the top 10 physical comedians of the post-silent movie era, maybe even top five. In no particular order, I’d list them as…
Richards
Red Skelton
Danny Kaye
Lucille Ball
Dick Van Dyke
Jerry Lewis
Jim Carrey
Lou Costello
Carol Burnett
Steve Martin
John Belushi would make the list, but I’m mad at him for dying so young. Why isn’t there a great black physical comedian on the list?
He took more serious roles than comedic ones, but if you ever saw “A Fish Called Wanda” you’d realize Kevin Kline might belong on this list. Chris Tucker and Damon Wayons are both pretty impressive physical comedians who happen to be black. And while truly physical comedy wasn’t in his wheelhouse. Bernie Mac could do amazingly hilarious things with his face.
Yup. He absolutely has all the moves (as did John Cleese.) I left him off because he seldom accessed that skill, and can’t really be called a comic or a comedian. I agree that the Wayons brothers are the best black physical comics I can think of.
Ok, you put Red Skelton on there so I know it’s a solid list. I’ll have to look up Danny kaye.
I’m trying to think of a good black physical comedian. I don’t think many of them bother with that style. Dave Chapelle? Kevin Hart? He does some great moments in his movies (especially if he’s with the Rock).
Here’s Danny. He was so brilliant at so many things that there’s really nobody to compare him too.
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/up-in-arms-melody-in-4-f-1944/83702588/
Dang he was good. And so help me he could pass as Michael Richards father couldn’t he? (I laughed at the moment he flipped off the audience – guess it wasn’t a rude gesture at the time.)
I guarantee that Richards studied Danny, and he’s old enough to remember him. My favorite story about the elite “club” that is those physical comics is when Jim Carrey was brought to a meeting about playing Kaye in a one-man show. Carrey reprimanded his agent, saying: I can do Andy Kauufman, because I’m better than Kaufman was. I can’t do Danny Kaye. Nobody can. Nobody’s good enough. Are you trying to ruin me?”
Interesting. I learned something today. (and I didn’t just mean mannerism, even in their faces they looked similar)
I never made the connection, but you are right. They were similar physical types: athletic ectomorphs with long, rubber faces.
So an offtopic question. Do you ever read the webcomic freefall? I get the feeling it would occasion much laughter from you.
i.e. http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff3200/fc03170.htm
And not long after you introduce me to Danny, i watch a video where Jeff Goldblum mentions him. Hah! (Thx again)
If the left cannot allow anyone to be ‘rehabilitated,’ they will have a problem keeping any depth in their bench. Even ‘1984’ deals with this necessity for a fascist regime.