Hey guys,

For those of you who do the baby gag, having a baby on both sides of the paper (one dark & one white), have any of you had concerns or experiences where it was labeled as racist?

I personally think its not even slightly racist at all, but you know, these days people are getting offended by this sort of thing. What do you think?

Eg. I noticed in Bill Abbot's celebrity smart ass, he leaves out this gag. Why is that?

Because of the two choices offered, color never comes into play.

I do understand that the two choices are offered, and eliminates the need to play the dark skinned baby gag.
But the gag is still a good option for misdirection, hitting home to the audience that it could have indeed been Tiger Woods, Bill Cosby, or Barack Obama etc.
What if those celebs were in the selection of cards offered to the audience? Otherwise smart ass should be limited to only white celebrities on all the cards to choose from.

The Baby Gag is one of those things I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I've given a lot of thought to over the years. I have been told by others (both here on the Café and in the real world of actual friends) that I think too deeply on such whimsical matters... but as someone who relies on their performance as their only means of income I feel that all aspects of my performance benefit from such detailed attention and analysis. So I feel that even the Baby Gag is worth spending time, intellectual consideration and investment on if it forms part of my performing repertoire which it has done in the past.

Before I get onto the, 'can it be seen as racist', question that Scott asked, I'm going to have a bit of a rant about the Baby Gag in general.

My main issue with the Baby gag is that it is one of those items where most of the performers that I've seen use it appear to unthinkingly hand over the responsibilities of the performer directly to the prop. The performers of this item (at least the ones that I have seen) all seem to adopt the attitude that the prop itself is perceived as funny enough on it's own. Consequently they are happy to reduce themselves to being merely the person who introduces it and holds it up.

The prop/pictures might (perhaps) get a bit of a laugh on the performers behalf but in every performance I've seen of it (and I've seen a great many people do it) you can feel that the audience is left largely unsatisfied from having seen, what they obviously perceived was a rather limp, insipid gag. Those that performer the Baby Gag in this way seem to hear any laughter elicited from it in some sort of weird, grossly over amplified form.. while at the same time missing the fact that the limp and insipid nature of the what the audience perceived is actually getting reflected directly back onto the them.

Strangely then, the Baby Gag often contains a genuine magical effect... in that it often fools the magician into thinking that they have delivered a comedy gem when in fact they have more likely rather obviously exposed their lack of comedic talents to the very audience they are trying to impress.

The Baby Gag has been, and probably still is, done to death by magicians. This is because it is incorrectly see it as a short cut to injecting some comedic content into a magic show. It's also done to death by those who produce stuff for magicians to buy. This is because those that produce this stuff know that magicians have an insatiable appetite for these false promises of comedy short cuts. Amazingly there seems to be an endless supply of magicians that will buy the same thing, in marginally different forms, over and over again.

The 'Baby Gag' is a gag.... and like any gag the comedy potential contained within it is not some intrinsic value that's built into its very fabric... rather it's comedy potential as a gag is determined by how the gag enhances, comes from and reflects the performers character and this is achieved through how it is dressed, packaged, related, relayed, revealed and delivered to the audience.

I personally think the Baby Gag is best used as a punchline to a comedy routine. And by comedy routine I don't mean some trite, pedestrian preamble that leads to the reveal... I mean a series of comedic moments woven together to generate laughs that increasingly build to the gag's final reveal(s). It's through such routining that the performers character is expressed. If you are doing the Baby Gag and the only laughs you get from it are from the reveal of the baby pics then I would bet a large sum of money that you are underselling yourself, the potential of this gag and, worst of all, your audience.

Ok rant over.... Now onto Scott's point asking...is the Baby gag likely to be perceived as being racist in any way?

To decide that I think you first of all have to decide what constitutes or makes something racially charged or racist.

There are some people that seem to think that any reference to race in any form is somehow racially sensitive. This is clearly ludicrous. Just having a reference to race or colour (I will use the two interchangeably to save time and words) doesn't make what's being referenced racist. For example; 'The President of the USA is black', is not a racist statement...it's just a statement that references race. What makes something racist is when the reference to race takes on; contains within it; or is perceived as having some disparaging, discriminatory or prejudicial overtones or qualities.

Of course it's easy to spot racist content when something is clearly intended to have a racist component within it... but on other occasions an unintended racist component may exist, or be perceived to exist, within something that the perpetrator is innocently oblivious to. Regardless of whether such incidences are intended or not they can still genuinely impact one someone else's sensitivities.

There are also occasions where someone with a strong agenda may pursue or creatively invent a racist component when one doesn't exist.

As issues of racism are not necessarily clear cut (I had to stop myself from saying "black and white" rather than "clear cut" ) it can complicate matters when trying to decide whether something is (or can be considered) racially charged or not.

With all that said,... what of the Baby Gag? Well I've seen many people (too many) use it but I have never seen any overt intention to be racist by anyone performing this and I have never picked up from any audience any hint that any of them has perceived there to be a racially unpleasant content within it. In fact I believe one would have to go out of one's way and be 'inventive' with the routining of this item in order to make it come across as racially charged or inventive in how one views it in order to create a racially charged aspect to it. (see more below though)

On this basis I would say that there's nothing that is or would be racist in the Baby Gag or in the way it has usually (inevitably) presented.

It could though be suggested that the original cartoon drawing of the black baby is somewhat stereotypical and this could possibly impact some people's sensitivities. However using actual pictures rather than representational drawings does away with this potential issue.

Despite this observation though, it occurred to me while thinking about this some years ago that my caucasian, european, male, middle class sensitivities might not be the most finely tuned in matters of racially sensitive issues... and that someone else's judgement might see things differently. It was with this in mind that I once, after the show was over, asked a group of Black Rights Advocates and Lecturers that were in the audience and who had just seen me do a routine that culminated with the Baby Gag as a punchline what they really thought of it. (They'd laughed out loud through the entire routine including the picture punchlines) I was pleased to hear that they said that they thought it was very funny and they saw nothing in it to cause them the slightest concern. Likewise my wife, who is black, thinks my routine for the Baby Gag is just plain funny and it remains (almost embarrassingly for me given the other stuff do) a favourite of hers.

Now of course this sample of opinions doesn't represent all black people or indeed all or any audience that might have an opinion on whether something has a racist component or not but given what I know of the sensitivities of both the parties I'm happy to use this as my yardstick and consequently I have purged any doubts I had regarding the Baby Gag and feel ok about my routine that uses it.

But what doubts did I have about the Baby Gag in the first place? I certainly didn't think the Baby Gag might be seen as having some kind of racially charged bad form just because it used a picture of a black (and white) baby.

The reason for my concern about the Baby Gag was one that I'm sure many will shake their heads at and claim I was overly thinking or worrying about something that is just a gag. If you think that way, good for you... but personally I like to make sure the experience I'm actually giving the audience is the same as the one I intended them to have. As such I thought (and still think) that it's worth spending some time cogitating over.

My specific concern about the Baby Gag was that in order for it the pay off to be as funny as it's potential would allow, the audience, from the huge pool of racially diverse possibilities available to them, needed to name a white person.

Now I'm aware of course that a black person can be named and you can show the black baby picture first and use the white picture as the kicker... but would that be as funny? For some reason I had a nagging doubt that it wouldn't be. Now I'm not sure if it actually is the case because I have never personally had anyone choosing a black person first or seen it happen to anyone else!! (I actually find this quite amazing and very odd in and of itself.)

I have very rarely done my Baby Gag routine for some years now as it's now only a potential part of the repertoire for my second show... but I can't help feel that if a black person was named and the black baby picture shown for the first reveal that the potential impact from this and the second reveal of the white baby picture simply wouldn't be as strong. I think the picture of the white baby would somehow be, 'less unexpected' than the black baby picture is with the white baby revealed first.

It was this thought then, that caused me to be somewhat unsure of the basis of the Baby Gag and this caused me a (very) slight discomfort with it.... It is, after all, a rather horrifying thought that there might be some unspoken assumption both from the audience and the performer that only a white person would be named as the famous person and that the laugh from the punchline is depended to some degree on relying on a the fact that a black person will not being named.

I imagine some of you reading this might still be having trouble in seeing where I saw a potential issue or how I construed and then worried that there might be an unseen racist element underlying the structure of the payoff ... that being; that black people are somehow so less noteworthy that the audience will never name a black person and that the performer relies on this to get the most out of the routine.

'PC BS', I can hear some people preparing to type. Maybe it is... but one persons PC BS is another persons personal insult.

While I don't think it's PC BS I do think my concerns were (and are) unwarranted but I'm still waiting to have this verified by seeing how having a black person named for this routine actually plays out.

Going back to the odd fact that I have never had or heard a black person named during this routine.... I think there s a less sinister reason as to why than might otherwise be inferred.

Even though there is a hugely broad nationality mix within the audiences I perform for the median average demographic is nevertheless predominantly composed of white 50-70 year olds. I believe this explains why their choice of famous person (which I limit to being an actor or actress for the sake of having someone chosen that is known to the entire audience) has so far been white. The people who I have got to choose a name I believe undoubtedly tend to think back to the days when, as a younger person, they went to the cinema and they consequently choose an actor from a past era when the racial diversity seen on the silver screen was much less broad than it is today. This is born out by the fact that by far the most commonly chosen people for me have been Humphrey Bogart, Cary Grant, Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor and (of all people) Charlie Chaplin.

So my concern that a black person being named would not work as well or be a funny because the white baby picture would be 'less unexpected', I believe originates from the odd fact that I've never witnessed a black person being named. But I also think it too much of a leap to then believe that the audience has some inbuilt racial expectation, that a white person will be named, beyond the stastistical anomaly that over the history of film in the west there have simply been many more white actors than black.

As to why Bill Abbott hasn't included the black baby picture as part of his Celebrity Smart Ass... you'll have to ask him for the definitive answer (and he's an often active member here at the Café so you could PM about it if you wanted) ... But celebrity Smart Ass still has the first reveal of the baby as part of the routine he supplies. Including the second reveal wouldn't make sense given that the payoff is the picture of the actual person who's been previously selected from his Smart Ass deck and trying to crowbar this part of the Baby Gag in would step on the toes of the celebrity's picture reveal.

Thanks very much Neal, very much food for thought. A lot to digest, I appreciate your time. Where I live in Australia, it would be unheard of, a good novelty I think.

I have added the Baby Gag to Bill Abbott's Celebrity SmartAss to great effect. One of the celebrities is Tiger Woods. I say "I did this yesterday and the lady chose Tiger Woods!" Big laugh. I turn the picture round. Even bigger laugh.

It's not the slightest bit racist.

> Otherwise smart ass should be limited to only white celebrities on all the cards to choose from.

That's racist.

I think it was an idea by Marko of Panama who set me off on changing the baby gag. There is no need to use black or white - the whole race angle is taken out. There is a video of me performing this new variation, while it is in Afrikaans, I am sure you will understand the mechanics behind it regardless of the language barrier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_oqabKF3rI

The effect starts at around 2:02.

This is a great effect.And not racist by no mean's.
Unless you presenting in that fashion.I used this
a couple of week's ago at a African American reunion.
a crowd of over 300 people with the only white people
being my wife and me.And I killed with it.
Todd

How else would anyone do the Baby Gag then as-is?

Would you have a picture of a man / woman?
How about a bald guy with beard / cleanly shaven guy with hair?
Fat / Thin?
Tall / Short?
Old with wrinkles / very good looking?

In every case, someone could take it the wrong way... because there are a certain percentage of people who are argumentative, as their first reaction to anything. It's all "how it's done".

I think the only way to do the basic gag, without any offence, could be to use the binary code, so one side would be a O and the other a -
Even then, I'm sure someone could take it the wrong way..... if that's their state of mind!

You're lucky. It could have just as easily gone the other way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtuYWlh6fJ4

.

Oh well.... ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKn9kX7jp8w

Like I said. It's all in the presentation.
Todd

In my opinion it is not even the slightest bit racist.

This is an old topic and world has changed a lot since this topic was started with the whole "me too", "black lives matter" and similar.

I have done baby gag for over 15 years and I have multiple gags in the routine. Never ever before had I considered it to be any way racist! How could a picture of black person be considered racists in multicultural society where we have lots of imigrants and people from variety different cultures. But today, for the first time ever, after a gig the event planner came to me that someone in the audience had felt that the gag was racists. She herself didn't think so and I explained my point to her as well, how is a picture of person with black skintone racists when in situation where I set the expectation that if someone had named person of color like Tiger Woods, that woudnt had fit the picture of white baby. She understood my point but while driving home it made me angry as hell and now I am thinking if at 41 years old I have lost touch what is acceptable and what is not...

I've just looked back over my previous post in this thread from 10 years ago. I am embarrassed at the naivety I showed back then. Or rather I'm embarrassed at my inability, 10 years ago, to see the problems that I recognised existed with the 'Baby Gag', as not being the issue they definitely are. 10 years on, I have a completely different appreciation of how problematic the 'Baby Gag' is.

Let me point out why:
1) In the original version of the 'Baby Gag' the image of the black baby is one that clearly uses stereotypical imagery that has traditionally been used in a derogatory way. This is unacceptable.

But there are additional problems with the 'Baby Gag' and they are present even in those versions of it that use actual images of babies rather than the cartoon-like drawings of the original.

2) If/when a white person is named and the picture of the baby is revealed, at that point the audience is unaware that there's a 2nd picture of a black baby.... therefore at that moment there is a tacit, unspoken, unaware but present agreement among everyone that a black person couldn't have been considered. There isn't confusion at this point as to what would happen if a black person had been named. This doesn't occur to an audience (a white audience at least) until it is brought up by the performer. There is just the reaction to the picture being an unrecognisable baby and not the expected recognisable adult. The assumption everyone has bought into, at that moment in the 'gag', is that only a white person could have been expected to be named and that a black person couldn't have been considered as fulfilling the criteria that led to the person being chosen. Anything that adds to a zeitgeist that reinforces this stance can't be acceptable in a civilised society.

This then, is something that magicians ought to consign to the bin.