In recent decades, the tragic overdoses of comedians such as John Belushi and Chris Farley have cast a shadow over conversations about the union of comedy and drugs. Indeed, it might seem like comedians are disproportionately predisposed to fatal drug and alcohol abuse. However, evidence suggests that this might be untrue. Furthermore, a variety of factors point to cannabis as the intuitive drug of choice among comedians and their audiences today.
Comedy is a known vehicle for rendering political and social critique more approachable, something decidedly present in cannabis’ effect as well. Political criticism is present in almost all major humor outlets today; shows like Full Frontal with Samantha Bee, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, and Saturday Night Live or text-based sources like The Onion or MAD address serious issues in an entertaining format, potentially drawing viewers who would not otherwise spend their free time engaging with conventional political commentary.
Comedic Cannabis
It’s no deep insight that each generation is prone to the belief that it is the first to truly appreciate drugs. This phenomenon is best demonstrated by comedians, who reflect cultural, political, and social currents of the times in their performance and writing. According to Joe Raiola, Senior Editor emeritus at MAD Magazine, one of the country’s foremost humor magazines dating back to the 1950s, this has occurred as long as drugs and alcohol have existed. “It’s really not new,” Raiola told the HPR, explaining that “drug culture has always been something that comedians have been part of and made fun of.”
However, it’s relevant to consider whether comedians are really getting stoned as much as they seem to portray. Raiola argues that the grueling nature of a career in comedy makes significant drug use virtually impossible. “It’s so demanding,” he said. “I’m not saying that people [in comedy] don’t get high and things like that, but I don’t see a lot of this.” He additionally noted that drug humor can only go so far, particularly to sober audiences. Other comedians have also realized the importance of this. Notably, Pete Davidson, a young cast member with Saturday Night Live, was known until 2017 for his heavy emphasis on pot-related humor. He spoke about the importance of the drug in managing his symptoms of Crohn’s disease but, following his announcement that he had become sober, he acknowledged that he would broaden his realm of joke topics as well. Drug humor can only do so much to demonstrate a rising comedian’s breadth of skill. On the most basic level, such jokes have existed as long as the underlying substances themselves, making them weary from overuse. “[T]here’s always been comedy that’s made fun of drugs. The funny drunk is a comedy trope,” Raiola mentioned. He notes Foster Brooks, a comedian in the 1960s famous for his portrayal of drunks, as just one example of the theme’s longevity. Furthermore, the disproportionate reference to any subject in comedy, much like in everyday conversation, becomes tedious and lacks creativity.
Self Infliction for Audience Affection?
Regardless of cannabis use among comedians, it is increasingly evident that society has fallen victim to a fallacy that seems convincing enough; the instance of a troubled comedian turning to self-destructive behavior presents alluringly newsworthy headlines, conveniently buying into our collective morbid curiosity about such paradoxes. Consequently, one might suppose that addiction disproportionately affects the comedy community but, in doing so, ignores the high prevalence of addiction throughout the entire entertainment industry and general population.
Since 1995, only around eight high-profile comedians have died of overdose. Robin Williams, who many think falls into this category, died instead as a result of hanging in what is believed to be an attempt to prevent the degenerative effects of a rare form of dementia. There is no denying that high-profile individuals can bias perception and affect the public’s collective memory of cumulative history. While statistics about celebrity overdoses are difficult to find, it is likely that public perception of their frequency overestimates reasonable assumptions
From a chemical perspective, it is no surprise how well weed fits into the picture. Emma Chasen, a prominent cannabis educator and consultant in Portland, Oregon, where recreation sales have been legal since 2016, told the HPR that cannabis can also make an audience member more receptive to such political and social critiques. She explains that, “when you consume cannabis and watch comedy, […] it can be a very disarming experience. So already, you’re kind of putting yourself in a vulnerable place […] it allows you to take in and be more receptive to the ideas that the comedians are talking about.” Furthermore, the sort of free-flowing ideas often seen as emblematic of cannabis consumption can assist in comedians’ writing processes.
Among drugs, cannabis is arguably one of the most benign. While it can induce a state of compromised judgement that can lead to dangerous situations, Chasen explained that the substance itself does not affect the part of the brainstem responsible for the body’s basic functions. Given this relative lack of danger, it is not surprising that cannabis’ presence has persisted over the course decades, providing fodder both for jokes as well as some comedians’ personas. The latter has been particularly evident with the cannabis comedy community, which has seen growth with increasing legalization throughout the United States. During such shows, comedians who are known cannabis users perform for stoned audiences. Popular performers include Ron Funches, Pete Holmes, and Reggie Watts.
There are a variety of reasons why cannabis and comedy are well-matched on a chemical level. Dr. Arlene D. Hagen, MD, a child psychiatrist in the Pediatrics Department at Oregon Health & Science University, explained to the HPR that one of the ways that weed heightens humorous experiences is by disinhibiting laughter. “You could laugh all day about something but instead you inhibit it because you realize, ‘oh, I should stop because no one here socially recognizes the joke,’” she explained. “[W]ith cannabis, it decreases your recognition of the signals telling you, ‘stop laughing.’” Additionally, she acknowledged that cannabis has the potential to change individuals’ perception of humor. This would mean that “the time warp that people experience, coupled with decreased anxiety, may be just enough for people to make connections that they hadn’t made before.” Accordingly, there are clear scientific reasons for its coupling with comedy.
Can’t We All Just Have a Good Time
It is important to note that, even if comedians are not predisposed to fatal addiction, that does not rule out the possibility that the field attracts individuals with certain neurological attributes more than others. One reason might be the high-risk nature of stand up comedy. “[W]hat could explain why a person wants to stand in front of an audience? Because most people are terrified,” Dr. Hagen said. She noted that a potential explanation is neurobiological. “They might be people who need the high of having a surprise and of taking a risk,” she says, referring to the very real possibility that an audience might not laugh at a joke. “They might need to take the risk and then, even if they have just the occasional laughter and positive response, […] it would set forth a feedback loop in [certain] people,” she continued. Ultimately, she explains it has the possibility of eventually taking on characteristics similar to those of compulsive gambling; “It has to do with waiting and waiting and waiting and then one time in a thousand teaches you that you need to do it a thousand more times [to win again].” If this is indeed a commonality among many comedians, this shows that they need not all struggle with addiction to demonstrate that they might have neurological similarities.
There seem to be clear reasons why cannabis has played such a large role in the modern comedy scene. Yet, critics could argue that cannabis use lowers the bar for comedians; is it not true that intoxicated audiences are more receptive and likely to laugh at lower quality jokes? Ultimately, from the perspective of a humorist like Raiola, comedians are not bothered. Additionally, it is important to question aggressively whether the “quality” of humor is possible to measure, or if the ultimate goal of humor is to achieve a certain level of quality. It seems that the vast majority of people watching comedy do so because it is enjoyable to laugh or otherwise find humor in something; furthermore, the attempt to apply some sort of normative evaluative framework to all of humor is strikingly ludacris. It then seems that, from the perspective of an audience member seeking entertainment, an appeal to some universal standard is irrelevant and ignores that each viewer’s taste is different. And conveniently, as with any sort of art, one is under no obligation to watch something they perceive as “low quality.”
Whether one is an undergraduate busy conducting “personal research” or a botanist, it is clear that the drug shapes the way one experiences humor. It has the capacity to make individuals more open to new ideas, something that is particularly important in the face of extensive political polarization. Comedy culture’s overlap with that of cannabis is undeniable, and its inability to independently lead to fatal overdose furthers the belief that the two have implicitly supported each other’s growth and development. While this phenomenon is likely eclipsed by the more sensational, paradoxical news stories of overdose, it reveals a more accurate and nuanced picture of the comedy community.
Image Credit: Wikimedia// Edited by Erica Newman-Corre