Who Wears the Dunce Cap in the Case of Hecklers vs Richards?

Who Wears the Dunce Cap in the Case of Hecklers vs Richards? by Roxanne McDonald

Now allegedly being called the “angriest”, “craziest”, “worst” [acting] star in Hollywood, Michael Richards is on the crit-chop block…again. But what does the criticism really say about our most brilliant of sit-com character actors—and more, about us?

“When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.”

While Jonathan Swift’s astute commentary is best known as the line that informs the book, A Confederacy of Dunces, by John Kennedy Toole, it may be applicable in cases like that of Michael Richards—who responded to incessant heckling by hurling extreme language out and up into the “cheap seats” where the pests, who were black, now linger in memory, relentless in their refusal to accept an apology ( I question they deserve) and “possibly” expecting compensation that will take them out of those cheap seats and into the front rows.

According to staff writers at TMZ.com, apologies were not enough; the hecklers have pushed their envelopes of obnoxiousness and have determined a public (Late Show with David Letterman) apology is not enough. They paid their few bucks to heckle a star, they were shut up in a most politically unacceptable way, and now they want exponential rewards. Maybe. TMZ writes, “They want a personal apology and possibly money.” What for? To reinforce their unacceptable behavior to begin with? To perpetuate the litigious mentality in this country that is sucking up time, energy, and hard-earned money (of those other than the undeserving haf-wits), and that worse, usurps the rights of the creative genius over the common?

I don’t recall that it was Samuel L. Jackson, James Earl Jones, Whoopie Goldberg, and Maya Angelou stooping so low as to interrupt a professional at work…. That is, it wasn’t class and culture behind the black skin that incited the great performer’s rage to begin with, now was it? Why would hecklers of any color be allowed the right to sue/be rewarded for 1) engaging in the understood protocol of the heckler/comedian dynamic, or 2) acting on invasive behaviors that interrupt one’s art?

Worse, the single incident has incited other tales of Richards’ mental instability: also according to TMZ reports, “Sam Simon, longtime producer on ‘The Simpsons’ and numerous other shows, told Howard Stern this morning that Richards’ racist rant at an L.A. comedy club, brought to you by TMZ, was a public manifestation of what TV insiders have known for years — namely, that Richards is prone to bizarre, temperamental behaviors that leave everyone shaking their heads.”

Reportedly, Richards once “threatened the life of Spike Feresten, creator of ‘The Michael Richards Show,’ saying, ‘I have a gun…. I’m going to kill you, and I’ll do the time;’” another time “quit the show in the middle of production… with a full studio audience in attendance”—refusing to return, until the network president “coaxed” him back; at a different occasion “stood on his head in the middle of a shot, inexplicably;” and yet another time was “found in a corner of a soundstage, weeping uncontrollably.”

Given how reports can of course vary and exaggerate and distort, but given how the genius that is Michael Richards made for one of the best characters of all time (on Seinfeld, as Kramer), maybe emphasis ought to be placed on something other than four moments in a long, stellar career.

And hey, consider the common understanding of the fine line between genius and madness.

Van Gogh was slurping turpentine as if it were tonic at one point in his career.

Plath repeatedly drugged and gassed herself until she one day succeeded in answering her own “is there no way out of the mind?” question.

“Had he been a stable and equable man,” wrote Anthony Storr of Winston Churchill, “he could never have inspired the nation.”

Edvard Munch, when challenged to get help, responded, “They are part of me and my art. They are indistinguishable from me and it would destroy my art. I want to keep my sufferings.”

Could we allow Richards the few slight mental/manic aberrations, accept his apology (though it would be most humane if the hecklers also apologized, ahem), and let him be his mad self, that we be entertained for many more years to come by that madness?

A confederacy of dunces…maybe the phrase applies here, then, as a most apropos summation of the issues and ills at hand.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.