Where Kramer Ends and Richards Begins

On a recent episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm, Michael Richards parodied his racial diatribe, blurring the lines between fiction and reality.

In his comedy series Curb Your Enthusiasm, Larry David has plenty of fun with stereotypes, just as he did with Seinfeld, and as countless other comedy writers have done and will continue to do. What sets David apart from most comedy writers though is his knack for stringing together taboos to make cringe-worthy moments that escalate exponentially.

In a recent episode featuring the cast of Seinfeld, David addressed one such taboo: Michael Richards' 2006 racial diatribe (lynching reference included) against a black heckler in an L.A. comedy club, which was caught on a video. Richards made a heartfelt apology on David Letterman, but the incident was a clear blow to his career.

My first thought was: How is Larry David going to parody that incident and cast Michael Richards to play himself? I was very curious to see how he'd attempt to pull this off as comedy.

Although the episode had many great moments, the build-up to and parody of Richards' real-life blow-up fell flat. The story played less like a masterful play on a taboo subject and more like an awkward attempt at character rehabilitation on behalf of Richards. It served to make light of an act of aggression while promoting the very aggressor.

In the episode, Richards is worried he has been diagnosed with a fictional disease. David reassures him he knows a survivor, but later finds out the “survivor” has died from the disease. David then asks his black friend Leon Black (played by J.B. Smoove) to impersonate the “survivor.”

Black shows up to meet Richards, black-suited and bow-tied a la Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, which prompts Richards to say: "Oh my God. Look, I made a mistake, it's been three years, don't hurt me! Please!" Black explains that he's the survivor and convinces Richards that wearing his hat will cure him. Richards eventually figures it out and goes on a tear that mimics the 2006 incident, as onlookers capture the moment on their mobiles.

To me, this story felt like art justifying – more than imitating – life. It did so by victimizing Richards and misguidedly evoking pathos.

After this episode, I must admit I sympathized with Richards. Not with Richards of fact, but with fictional Richards on the show. To many though, the two are indistinguishable. Richards is Kramer, Kramer is Richards. It is a messy business for David to blur these lines in Richards' favour when they surround such deplorable behaviour.