According to Variety, Kevin Hart’s unexpected Oscars departure has left the Academy “scrambling” to find a replacement, with no contingency plans in place.
After Hart’s undeniably offensive Tweets were uncovered, it was assumed that the shamed comedian would immediately apologize and go on to host the gig, as is tradition. But, in an unusual show of defiance, Hart outright refused to apologize, stating in an Instagram video that:
The same energy that went into finding those old tweets could be the same energy put into finding the response to the questions that have been asked years after years after years. We feed the internet trolls and we reward them. I’m not gonna do that.
This isn’t what shamed celebrities are supposed to do - they’re expected to apologize through a heartfelt statement, carefully crafted by their PR department, and then we all pretend it never happened.
Hart did eventually make a formal apology, but only after it was too late and too controversial to host the Oscars. Now, it’s tempting to oversimplify this situation as either an overreaction or justified takedown, but the truth is kind of murky. Hart’s Tweets, after all, didn’t really sound like jokes, but genuine homophobic statements.
Nor were they confined to Twitter - the comedian used to perform a bit in 2010, when he would joke about having a violent reaction to finding out his son is gay. Hilarious right? Yeah, not really. Hart later reflects on the bit in an interview with Rolling Stone, explaining his intention behind the performance:
It’s about my fear. I’m thinking about what I did as a dad, did I do something wrong, and if I did, what was it? Not that I’m not gonna love my son or think about him any differently. The funny thing within that joke is it’s me getting mad at my son because of my own insecurities — I panicked. It has nothing to do with him, it’s about me. That’s the difference between bringing a joke across that’s well thought-out and saying something just to ruffle feathers.
While Hart explains that the joke is meant to be self-deprecating, intended to satirize his own insecurities, the problem is that it just wasn’t that great a joke to begin with. At worst, it sounds like thinly-veiled homophobia, exposing itself in a comedy routine.
But that’s the thing about stand-up comedy; the comedian's job is not to preach equality for all, but to explore the darkest depths of their own psyche, laying out their worst fears, insecurities and humiliations for the audience to chuckle at. And sometimes, they really miss the mark.
When standing on stage and hurling out untested material, the comedian is taking a massive risk, one that the majority of sane human beings would never dare to do. While refining a performance, the comedian is trying to tune into the audience’s funny bone, and sometimes all they get back is static. Sometimes, they even provoke anger - it’s inevitable.
Comedy, especially shock comedy, is built around bad taste. Boundaries are pushed, lines overstepped, and sometimes, the audience laughs. Funny? Tasteless? Hateful? You don’t really know until you’ve tried it (and if you believe that comedians should simply know better, than I implore you to try performing ten minutes of stand-up and see how straightforward it is).
It should also be noted that Hart didn’t repeat the homophobic stand-up routine after 2010, and the offensive Tweets stopped appearing around 2012. Either Hart grew up, or he reckoned that those jokes weren’t hitting the mark anymore, if they ever did. But that wasn’t really the issue - the problem is that he refused to apologize.
And in a strange way, I actually admire his (initial) refusal to apologize. The trend of scrolling through years worth of Tweets in order to uncover a smocking gun, is kind of alarming. For one thing, who in their right mind has the inclination (or the time) to scroll through a decade’s worth of Tweets? Is this a vital public service?
And seeing as Twitter is a platform designed to reward impulsivity, isn’t it strange that we take Tweets so seriously in the first place? Tweets make for terrible public statements (even if the President of the United States believes otherwise).
The social media giant allows a teensy 280 characters per Tweet - does that sound like a platform that lends itself to reasonable debate and discussion? Outbursts of anger and emotion are greatly encouraged on Twitter, rewarded with instant notification validation.
Hollywood, spawning ground of Harvey Weinstein (and goodness knows who else), certainly has no moral high ground here. And I’d wager that anyone who has been on Twitter for more than a year has thoughtlessly shot out offensive Tweets into the ether at some point, Tweets that they are now deeply ashamed of.
The rule is fairly simple - don’t be nasty, and if you do, say sorry. But is our hunger for public apology actually contributing to our moral growth as a society? I’m not sure it is.
I am reminded of a thought-provoking quote from the marvelous Louis Theroux, regarding the unexpected electoral success of Donald Trump:
Trump saw through so much. For all his awfulness, I can’t but help admire his shamelessness, in an odd way. In a shame culture, he seems to have figured out that if you refuse to be shamed, it gives you enormous power.
