So, today I watched Jamie Kennedy’s documentary Heckler, taking on hecklers and critics. On the whole it was pretty good at delving into issues related to the topic.
For example, I think most of us can agree that people who interrupt live shows (or groups viewings) in order to heckle are douchebags. This is less because of what they say than because it interrupts the experience for others. They are imposing themselves on the enjoyment of others and that is simply improper.
Also, when the heckler gets physically confrontational or heckles directly to the person, or even indirect but extreme rhetoric like “they should be killed” or “made me want to kill myself” that is pretty horrible. We are talking about comedy or acting or music or sports…these things aren’t ultimately important. One does get sympathetic seeing how much these harsh words can hurt these performers.
That said, questioning harshly whether an individual belongs in an industry is probably fair game. Recently I had some harsh words about singer Duffy:
And who the fuck is Duffy? Why does anyone let her anywhere near a stage? I don’t know if the music or the dance is worse. I guess there is no accounting for taste.
A commenter called me an asshole for this and other harsh (though I would point out mostly facetious) comments. Ok, it is probably over the top, sometimes we get a little carried away trying to make things more interesting. Who wants to read someone having calm, moderate impressions of everything? And if Duffy read this, I would probably feel a little guilty at how strongly I stated my opinion. But it seemed truly bad to me, almost like lip synching. The response to this from some is “you couldn’t do it, so don’t knock me.” Now, in the case of some singers, I probably can sing better than them, but the point is, I’m not trying to be a musical star, but I do know whether I like given music or not. A critic tries to provide context for why something is good or bad, or perhaps why certain types might like or dislike something, but primarily it does come down to whether they liked it or not.
To provide a better example. I’m a worse place kicker than Aric Goodman, kicker for my Colorado Buffaloes. Yet I can safely call him a bad kicker and boo him at the most recent game against Texas when he missed three very makable field goals in the first half. Anyone who wants to be kicker for a top tier college football teams should be better than he has been. What’s more, I think he would agree he hasn’t been good enough and is more disappointed in himself than the fans are in him; we are often our harshest critics. The comparison isn’t the target of the heckle to the critic, it is the target to the expectations for that role. So when Jamie Kennedy or Carrot Top get misty about critics hating their films, they seem like whiners because the movies were terrible. And in the case of Kennedy, the stand-up shown in the documentary was not at all funny either. Ultimately I’m not going to feel bad hurting the feelings of someone who aspires to be a professional at something but isn’t any good at it, and I don’t need to be a professional myself in order to make that evaluation.
Of course, the final point is that taste is somewhat relative. A bunch of people seem to enjoy shitty torture-porn horror films. If the people responsible for that crap gain utility from making them and the people who make them profitable by seeing them gain utility from seeing them, more power to them. But that some people like it does not make it good. Ultimately, it is up to the performer to decide who their audience is. If they are satisfied with the present group of people who like them, they can go on ignoring the criticism. If they are not, they might need to listen to the criticism and adapt if they can or bail if they can’t.
