Is “Who’s on First?” funny?

Well, no, it is not funny, it would be too easy to relieve the dramatic tension by having Abbott explain the actual situation to Costello. One is not wrong to call the whole thing stupid.

Yet there is another reading of the skit which stands at least some chance of being funny, though it is not funny either.

You will note that Louis Costello was an Italian-American and son of an immigrant, and he had the obvious class mannerisms of such a stereotype. Bud Abbott was half Jewish and I believe half some mainstream ethnicity. He is a stand-in for the establishment, part of which was Jewish and highly commercial. You can read the skit as a commentary on how the establishment rips off the “less tutored” immigrants and refuses to apologize for that or even to explain it. The establishment simply keeps on talking rings around the lower-class immigrant, whether or not those words make sense. The immigrant has no real recourse, as he is less articulate and is also less in control and can only play the role of boob. In essence, Abbott, by not telling Costello the real names of the players, is not letting the ethnic assimilate into that most American of pasttimes, namely baseball.

Note how Costello admits, early in the skit, that he is the one with the funny name (Sebastian Dinwitty in the skit, likely a take-off on “dimwit”). And Abbott, by speaking of the players as being named Who, What, and “I don’t know,” is expressing his frustration with an America that does not sound or look the same any more. Abbott is in essence saying “Hey, what is this? I was not expecting Ted Kluszewski in my country!” He is throwing the growing presence of immigrants in the country back in the face of the ethnic and then stonewalling it.

In the skit, Abbott has the name of “Mr. Broadhurst,” very reminiscent of the establishment.

The skit does show we had an America too obsessed with names, and to no fruitful purpose. It is no accident that in addition to the “hames” for all the baseball players, we are given names for the skit characters as well, even though that might appear not necessary for the unfolding of the dialogue as it usually is understood.

Racist is not the right word, but the skit plays on ethnic prejudices in a manner which one can rightfully find somewhat uncomfortable. The back and forth dynamic reflects the prejudices of American life, though the presenters mirror and amplify those dynamics rather than merely critiquing them. And (again) while the skit is not funny, this interpretation at least opens a door to some people finding it funny.

When Larry David and Seinfeld note they were influenced by Abbott and Costello, they (especially LD) sometimes deploy ethnic stereotypes in a similar manner.

Of course I, being from northern New Jersey, would happen upon this interpretation of Abbott and Costello.

By the way, Costello grew up in Paterson, New Jersey. Abbott was born in Asbury Park, New Jersey, and he grew up in Coney Island. I wonder if they thought the skit was funny.

Elizabeth Holmes, in the recent You Can See Everything Movie, was right to say she did not understand the skit. She grew up in WDC until age nine and then Houston, plus she was born too late. Furthermore, she is used to a world where you hire a guy named “Hu,” right?

The post Is “Who’s on First?” funny? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.